REPORT 2.6 Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

Project co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through Operational Program for Technical Assistance 2007-2013

October 2015

This report relates to the deliverable “Output 2.6 – Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)” under the Agreement for Technical Assistance with regard to the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy between the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration of Romania (MRDPA) and the World Bank for Reconstruction and Development, concluded on 4 September 2013.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 GENERAL INFORMATION ...... 14 2 INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS SUBJECT OF APPROVAL ...... 16

2.1 GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS ...... 16

2.2 GEOGRAPHIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE LOCATION ...... 21

2.3 PHYSICAL MODIFICATIONS RESULTED FROM THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION ...... 26

2.4 NATURAL RESOURCES NECESSARY FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION ...... 27

2.5 NATURAL RESOURCES WHICH WILL BE EXPLOITED FROM THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY IMPORTANCE IN ORDER TO BE USED FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION ...... 27

2.6 EMISSIONS AND WASTE GENERATED BY THE DDISDS AND THE METHODS FOR THEIR ELIMINATION ...... 27

2.7 REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO LAND USE, NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DDISDS ...... 40

2.8 SUPPLEMENTARY SERVICES REQUIRED BY THE DDISDS IMPLMENTATION ...... 43

2.9 DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION, FUNCTIONING, DISMANTLING AND THE SCHEDULING OF THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD ...... 43

2.10 ACTIVITIES THAT WILL BE GENERATED AS RESULT OF THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION ...... 44

3.1 DATA CONCERNING THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS ...... 55

3.4 CONSERVATION STATUS OF SPECIES AND HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST ...... 121

3.6 STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS THAT CREATE AND MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST ...... 137

3.7 THE CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES, WHERE WERE ESTABLISHED THROUGH MANAGEMENT PLANS ...... 138

3.8 DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES, INCLUDING EVOLUTIONS/ CHANGES THAT MAY OCCUR IN THE FUTURE ...... 139 4 IDENTIFICATION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 156

4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF CURRENT THREATS, PRESSURES AND ACTIVITIES WITH IMPACT ON NATURA 2000 SITES IN THE DANUBE DELTA REGION ...... 156

4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL FORMS OF IMPACTS OF DDISDS ...... 168

4.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 198 5 MEASURES TO REDUCE IMPACT ON SPECIES AND HABITATS FROM PROTECTED NATURAL AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST ...... 247

5.1 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 247

5.2 MONITORING ...... 252 6 METHODS USED TO COLLECT INFORMATION ON POTENTIALLY AFFECTED SPECIES OF COMMUNITY INTEREST ...... 255

6.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ...... 255

6.2 LIMITATIONS ...... 256 7 CONCLUSIONS ...... 258 8 REFERENCES ...... 260

INDEX OF TABLES Table no. 2-1 List of administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy...... 21 Table no. 2-2 Land occupied, permanently or temporarily, depending on the code and land use category ...... 42 Table no. 2-3 Types of possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS (2030) ...... 45 Table no. 3-1 List of Natura 2000 sites in the study area ...... 58 Table no. 3-2 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SCIs for each sector ...... 71 Table no. 3-3 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SPAs for each sector ...... 71 Table no. 3-4 The community interest habitats included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area ...... 84 Table no. 3-5 The community interest plant species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area ...... 91 Table no. 3-6 The community interest invertebrate species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area ...... 94 Table no. 3-7 Fish species of community interest included in the Natura 2000 factsheets of the SCIs located in the study area ...... 103 Table no. 3-8 The community interest amphibian and reptile species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area ...... 108 Table no. 3-9 The community interest mammal species (including bat species) included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area ...... 111 Table no. 3-10 The community interest bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/ EC, included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from the study area ...... 115 Table no. 3-11 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta Region ...... 122

Table no. 3-12 Conservation status of the species of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta Region ...... 125 Table no. 3-13 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from Danube Delta Region ...... 129 Table no. 3-14 Number of SCIs that hosts the habitats of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms ...... 147 Table no. 3-15 Number of SCIs that hosts flora and fauna species of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms ...... 149 Table no. 3-16 Number of SPAs that hosts bird species of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms ...... 152 Table no. 4-1 Preliminary analysis of the potential forms of impact of the types of interventions / projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region ...... 171 Table no. 4-2 Matrix used to assess the significance of the potential effects of the DDISDS implementation ...... 198 Table no. 4-3 Buffers used to create the polygons that were subsequently used to calculate the affected areas ...... 216 Table no. 4-4 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Sites of Community Importance (SCI)...... 221 Table no. 4-5 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Special Protection Areas (SPA) ...... 221 Table no. 4-6 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within Sites of Community Importance (SCI) ...... 221 Table no. 4-7 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within Special Protection Areas (SPA) ...... 221 Table no. 4-8 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by disturbance within Sites of Community Importance (SCI) ...... 222 Table no. 4-9 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by disturbance within Special Protection Areas (SPA) ...... 222 Table no. 4-10 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected within Sites of Community Importance (SCI) .... 222 Table no. 4-11 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected within Special Protection Areas (SPA) ...... 222 Table no. 4-12 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects ...... 223 Table no. 4-13 Number of unique habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects ...... 224

Table no. 4-14 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel – Land surfaces (ha) within Sites of Community Interest (SCI) which might be affected by the implementation of the project ...... 224 Table no. 4-15 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel – Land surfaces (ha) within Special Protection Areas (SPA) which might be affected by the implementation of the project ...... 224 Table no. 4-16 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be affected by the implementation of Type D projects ...... 225 Table no. 4-17 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha) within Sites of Community Interest (SCI) on which positive effects may appear ...... 227 Table no. 4-18 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha) within Special Protection Areas (SPA) on which positive effects may appear ...... 227 Table no. 4-19 The analysis of the impact significance of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region ...... 234 Table no. 4-20 Reconsidered scores for the assessment of residual impact ...... 246 Table no. 5-1 Avoidance and mitigation measures proposed for DDISDS interventions/ projects related to Natura 2000 habitats and species ...... 249 Table no. 5-2 Monitoring indicators proposed for DDISDS ...... 252

INDEX OF FIGURES Figure no. 2-1 DDISDS structure (2030) ...... 20 Figure no. 2-2 Location of the study area – Danube Delta region – within the national territory ...... 24 Figure no. 2-3 Administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy...... 25 Figure no. 2-4 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the major geographical units ...... 25 Figure no. 2-5 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the development regions...... 26 Figure no. 2-6 Contribution of acidifying pollutants in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013) ...... 30

Figure no. 2-7 Share of SO2 emissions by sector ...... 30

Figure no. 2-8 Evolution of SO2 emissions in Tulcea County ...... 31

Figure no. 2-9 Share of NH3 emissions by sector ...... 31

Figure no. 2-10 Evolution of NH3 emissions in Tulcea County ...... 32 Figure no. 2-11 Share of NOx emissions by sector ...... 32 Figure no. 2-12 Evolution of NOx emissions in Tulcea County ...... 33 Figure no. 2-13 Contribution of GHG in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013) ...... 33

Figure no. 2-14 Total annual emissions of GHG in Tulcea County (expressed in thousands of tonnes CO2 equivalent) ...... 34

Figure no. 2-15 Total emissions of GHG per capita in Tulcea County (expressed in tonnes CO2 Eq per capita) ...... 34 Figure no. 2-16 Land use in the study area according to Corine Land Cover 2006 ...... 41 Figure no. 3-1 Location of the natural protected areas of national interest in relation with the study area ...... 60 Figure no. 3-2 Location of the Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) in relation with the study area..... 61 Figure no. 3-3 Location of the Special Protection Areas (SPAs) in relation with the study area ...... 62 Figure no. 3-4 Location of the study area in relation with the biogeographical regions ...... 63 Figure no. 3-5 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 72 Figure no. 3-5 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 73 Figure no. 3-6 Location of the project/ type of intervention “Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 74 Figure no. 3-7 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from DRM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region. A- project detail “Works for protection against floods”, B - project detail “Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency Situations (IES)” ...... 75 Figure no. 3-8 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Implementation of a region-wide program for beautification of settlements” (Tourism sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 76 Figure no. 3-9 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions “Improve fish habitat. Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks. Dredge major lakes to restore water depth.” (Fisheries and aquaculture sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 77 Figure no. 3-9 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions “Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc)” (ARD sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 78 Figure no. 3-10 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from Transport sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 79

Figure no. 3-11 The location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions from WSS and IWM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 80 Figure no. 3-12 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from SWM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 81 Figure no. 3-13 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from Health sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ...... 82 Figure no. 3-14 Numerical distribution of habitats of community interest in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ...... 87 Figure no. 3-15 Numerical distribution of community interest plant species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ...... 93 Figure no. 3-16 Numerical distribution of community interest invertebrate species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ...... 96 Figure no. 3-17 Numerical distribution of fish species of community interest in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ...... 104 Figure no. 3-18 Numerical distribution of community interest amphibian and reptile species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) 109 Figure no. 3-19 Numerical distribution of community interest mammal species (including bat species) in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ...... 112 Figure no. 3-20 Numerical distribution of community interest bird species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal) ...... 118 Figure no. 3-21 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest within the 8 SCIs ...... 141 Figure no. 3-22 Conservation status of flora and fauna species of community interest within the 8 SCIs ...... 143 Figure no. 3-23 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest within the 12 SPAs ...... 145 Figure no. 4-1 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SCIs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts ...... 158 Figure no. 4-2 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts ...... 159 Figure no. 4-3 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SPAs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts ...... 160 Figure no. 4-4 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SPAs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts ...... 161 Figure no. 4-5 Number of potential impacts (negative values indicates potential negative impacts) .... 170 Figure no. 4-6 Percentage of each type of impact ...... 170 Figure no. 4-7 Identification scheme for the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS based on their location and the possibility to define their area of impact ...... 201 Figure no. 4-8 Number and percentage of types of interventions / projects of DDISDS based on their location and the possibility to define their area of impact ...... 202

Figure no. 4-9 Sensitivity classes in the DDISDS implementation area ...... 203 Figure no. 4-10 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 205 Figure no. 4-10 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ..... 206 Figure no. 4-11 Location of the project/type of intervention “Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ..... 207 Figure no. 4-12 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the DRM sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region...... 208 Figure no. 4-13 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “A region-wide program for beautification of settlements” (Tourism sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 209 Figure no. 4-14 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 210 Figure no. 4-14 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 211 Figure no. 4-15 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Transport sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 212 Figure no. 4-16 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/type of interventions from the Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM) sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 213 Figure no. 4-17 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the SWM sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 214 Figure no. 4-18 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Health sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...... 215 Figure no. 4-19 Share of the total areas within the Sites of Community Importance (SCI) intersected by projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) ...... 220 Figure no. 4-20 Share of the total areas within the Special Protection Areas (SPA) intersected by projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) .. 220 Figure no. 4-21 The share of the assessment notes granted for each taxonomic group ...... 231 Figure no. 4-22 The positive and negative effects associated to each taxonomic group ...... 232

Figure no. 4-23 The share of the total positive and negative effects generated by the implementation of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components ...... 233 Figure no. 4-24 The estimated impact and the residual impact, after the implementation of the A&M measures ...... 245 Figure no. 5-1 Proposed hierarchy for prioritisation of DDISDS interventions/projects ...... 248

ANNEXES Annex no. I List of types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030) Annex no. II Correlation of ITI projects fiches (structured according to the Operational Programmes that will finance them) in relation to the types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within Danube Delta Integrated Sustainanble Development Strategy (2030) Annex no. III Lists of habitats and species of community interest potentially affected by the implementation of the types of interventions/ projects proposed within DDISDS Annex no. IV List of types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within DDISDS and the intersected Natura 2000 sites Annex no. V The lists of Natura 2000 sites crossed by the types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within DDISDS

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AA Appropriate Assessment A & M Avoidance and mitigation ARD Agriculture and Rural Development ATU Administrative territorial unit Buffer Used exclusively with the meaning of the ArcGIS tool; no implications in terms of protected natural areas management CC Climate change CLC Corine Land Cover DD Danube Delta DDBRA Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Administration DDISDS Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy DDNIRD Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development DRM Disaster Risk Management DWTP Drinking Water Treatment Plant EC European Commission EEA European Environment Agency EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EU European Union FF Fishing facility GD no. 1076/ 2004 Government Decision no. 1076/ 2004, for setting up the environmental assessment procedure of certain plans and programmes GEO no. 57/ 2007 Government Emergency Ordinance no. 57/2007 on the regime of the protected natural areas, the preservation of natural habitats, of the wild flora and fauna, approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011, with subsequent modifications and completions GHG Greenhouse gases GTMP Romania's General Transport Master Plan HWB Hot water boiler IBA Important Bird Areas ICT Information and Communication Technology IES Inspectorate for Emergency Situations ITI Integrated Territorial Investments IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

IWM Integrated Water Management LIOP Large Infrastructure Operational Programme MEWF Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests MMNP Măcin Mountains National Park MRDPA Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration Ord. no. 19/ 2010 Order no. 19/2010 regarding the appropriate assessment of the potential effects of plans or projects on protected natural areas of community interest PP Plans or projects ROP Regional Operational Programme SCI Site of Community Importance (part of the Natura 2000 network) SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SOR Romanian Ornithological Society SPA Special Protection Area (part of the Natura 2000 network) SWM Solid Waste Management VET Vocational education and training USGS United States Geological Survey WSS Water Supply and Sanitation WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant

1 GENERAL INFORMATION This report represents the Appropriate Assessment Study on the potential effects of the implementation of the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (DDISDS, 2030) that may be generated on natural protected areas of community interest in the Danube Delta region. According to Decision no. 349/19.01.2015 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests (MEWF), the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030) shall follow the environmental assessment procedure, according to the provisions of GD 1076/2004 for setting up the environmental assessment procedure of certain plans and programmes, including the appropriate assessment procedure, according to the provisions of GEO no. 57/2007 on the regime of the protected natural areas, the preservation of natural habitats, of the wild flora and fauna, approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011, with subsequent modifications and completions (Government Ordinance no. 20/2014, Law no. 73/ 2015). The Appropriate Assessment Study is developed within the Strategic Environmental Assessment procedure (SEA), which was started in February 2015, the conclusions of the appropriate assessment study to be undertaken in the Environmental Report The Appropriate Assessment Study is prepared according to the requirements of the Methodological guidelines regarding the appropriate assessment of plans and projects potential effects on natural protected areas of community interest (Order no. 19/ 2010). The elaboration of the Appropriate Assessment Study was based on public information that were available at the moment, as following: Strategic documents made available by the beneficiary: Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030), report 2.2, June 2015, Formulation of ITI proposal for the Danube Delta (for the 2014-2020 programming period), report 2.5, May 2015, Project fiches that are proposed for ITI funding, October 2015 (their correlation with the types of interventions is shown in Annex no. II of the present study), as well as the Action Plan including priority projects to implement the Strategy (http://www.mdrap.ro/dezvoltare-teritoriala/-9749/-3558); Information and data collected and published by World Bank Group, involved in the elaboration of the DDISDS, which contains 3 reports that are published on the beneficiary website: Diagnostic Report, Danube Delta Visioning Report and Needs Assessment Report (http://www.mdrap.ro/dezvoltare-teritoriala/-9749/-3558); Relevant information and data collected about the implementation area of the DDISDS from the main stakeholders (mainly institutions like: Tulcea County Council, Constanţa County Council, Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Administration (DDBRA), Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development (DDNIRD), Environment Protection Agencies, Public Health District Authority, Directorate of Statistics etc.); Geospatial coordinates of the types of interventions/ projects proposed to be implemented in DDISDS, known during the elaboration of the DDISDS and the Appropriate Assessment Study; Database available on the European Environment Agency website (EEA - http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/natura-5) regarding the natural protected areas that are included in the Natura 2000 ecological network (SCI and SPA) nationally designated, including protected components within them;

Natura 2000 factsheets (updated according to Decision 2011/484/EU concerning a site information format for Natura 2000 sites and published on the Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests website on 17 February 2015), http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/natura-2000/435; Limits of the Sites of Community Importance and Special Protection Areas, în Stereo 70 projection (updated in 2012), available on the website of the Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests on 17 February 2015 (http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/date-gis/434); Romania’s reporting to the European Union under Article 12 of the Birds Directive and Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, that aim to produce inventories and maps for habitats and species from Natura 2000 sites, available in SHP format (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal, http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal); Geospatial data regarding the types of land use at a national level, according to Corine Land Cover 2006, available on European Environment Agency website (http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and- maps/data/corine-land-cover-2006-raster-3); Specialized literature.

2 INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS SUBJECT OF APPROVAL 2.1 GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS 2.1.1 Name, description and objectives of the DDISDS The Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030) which is subject of the assessment and approval is promoted by the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration (MRDPA), as the holder of the strategy. DDISDS was developed based on a systematic technical analysis and a participatory process by the World Bank Group, who was appointed in 2013 by the Romanian Government, through MRDPA for providing consultancy services in order to develop a strategy for the Danube Delta and its surrounding areas (Danube Delta Region)1, with 2030 timeframe, and to identify action plans to implement such a strategy. DDISDS represents an important step in the process of planning interventions that will take place in the Danube Delta, presenting themes and future development directions. The elaboration of the Strategy for the study area (Danube Delta Region) started with creating a Diagnostic Report, which analyzed the situation, including the current opportunities and constraints. The report revealed the dual challenge of protecting both livelihood and the environment in the Danube Delta, and included the results of the initial public consultations, which took place between September and December 2013, regarding the problems and concerns of local communities. The evaluation was completed by the findings of participatory consultations with local residents and stakeholders, on their “preferences” about how the future would look like in the Danube Delta. Subsequently, following extensive consultations and a diagnostic process, resulted the Danube Delta Visioning Report. All these have provided the motivation to identify physical investment needs, political and legislative reforms, technical assistance and institutional development needs, materialized in a Needs Assessment Report. The report identifies measures and interventions for achieving the objectives of the Strategy. The strategy identifies key projects in each sector based on criteria related to the expected impact on fulfilling strategic objectives, level of training, and financial and administrative viability, connecting most of them with the financial resources allocated through 2014-2020 EU funds - ITI tool (Integrated Territorial Investments). After the consultations with all stakeholders, the Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030) has been defined, which was derived from the visions defined for the two sub-areas of the region (biosphere reserve and its surrounding areas) due to their different characteristics: Vision for the Danube Delta (the Biosphere Reserve area): a „living Delta” (an area where people live and work) with balanced support for the environment and the community; a

1 Danube Delta (DD) is the area referred to as the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR). This covers: (i) the Core Delta (the area between the Sf. Gheorghe and the Chilia branches of the Danube River); (ii) the Razim-Sinoe- Babadag lake system and adjacent land areas; and (iii) the area along the Danube River west of Tulcea City towards Galaţi. The Study Area – also called the Danube Delta Region - covers DDBR and its Neighboring Area. The Study Area consists of Tulcea City, four towns (Babadag, Isaccea, Măcin, and Sulina), and thirty three communes (the total number of communes in Tulcea county is 46). Four communes (Corbu, Istria, Mihai Viteazu, and Săcele) are in Constanţa County, all four bordering the bay area of the Razim-Sinoe lake system.

healthy, sustainable local economy - mainly based on nature and culture tourism; and with an inclusive planning process (residents, governments, businesses); Vision for the Neighboring Area: a vibrant agricultural and business area, with a network of urban service centers and a tourism sector that is integrated with the attractions of the area and the Delta; as following: „An attractive area – with precious biodiversity and vibrant business environment, with small/medium scale economic activities both in traditional and modern fields - where people live in harmony with nature; integrating economies of tourism, farming and fishery; and supported by urban service centers”. DDISDS has two strategic objectives derived from the Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030): Conserve the unique environmental assets through scientifically-guided environmental management, and through empowering local communities to be proactive guardians of this unique global heritage; Develop a green and inclusive local economy, based on sustainable consumption and protection, resource efficient, capitalizing on the area’s comparative advantages, supported by improved public services. These two strategic objectives alongside with the Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030) were the basis for the preparation of the Strategy Report, being based on the holistic approach of the needs assessment on each sector that defined the needs of physical investments, policy and legislative reforms, institutional development and technical assistance. The strategy is structured around five pillars that reinforce each other and are closely interlinked, and derives from the two aforementioned objectives (environmental protection and economic development). Sectorial analyzes results from previous needs assessments were grouped as the five pillars2 (Figure no. 2-1): Pillar I: Protecting the environmental and natural resource assets; Pillar II: Improving the economy; Pillar III: Improving connectivity; Pillar IV: Providing public services; Pillar V: Promoting Efficiency, Affordability and Sustainability. Pillar I: Protecting the environmental and natural resource assets This pillar refers to the sustainability of natural resources and environmental protection in the long term that will depend on how the locals will play an active role of protectors and administrators of cultural and environmental assets in the Delta, in partnership with DDBRA. Among the main types of interventions are: hydrological modeling; desilting; ecological restoration; dredging; flood protection; signs; energy-efficiency initiatives; monitoring systems; and institutional strengthening etc. Pillar II: Improving the economy

2 A fifth pillar "Ensuring Efficiency, Affordability and Financial and Administrative Sustainability" is transversal, and was adopted as one of the guiding principles for the development of the strategy.

Pillar II refers to the generation of economic opportunities and jobs, with support ranging from skills development and workplace training, to small grants schemes for micro businesses, including small agricultural and fish processing units that will support tourism, in order to address accessibility constraints. It is intended a conservation of movable and immovable cultural heritage of the region (traditions, art, local cuisine, cultural sites and events) that can bring added value to the distinct positioning of the area. Examples of interventions: infrastructure for visitors; beautification efforts; small grants; touristic training; destination management; rural infrastructure; supporting the modernization of infrastructure in agriculture; support aquaculture, sport fishing, and small-scale fish processing (preservation, smoking), etc. Pillar III: Improving connectivity Ensuring connectivity is needed to narrow the gap between cities and remote locations, between the developed and undeveloped regions (e.g. Constanţa, one of the growth poles of the country) and in the region (e.g. between the Core Danube Delta and surrounding areas), with the aim of increasing the circulation of people, goods and information. Health and education sectors are also targeted, by creating opportunities for offering innovative services, as well as the tourism sector, by improving business opportunities by connecting sellers with markets and information and communication technology infrastructure (ICT) and movement. Examples of interventions: upgrading roads (linking Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin – Brăila; and various county roads); Tulcea port and airport modernization; improvement of inland waterway transport; increasing access to broadband internet etc. Pillar IV: Providing public servicesPillar IV aims to reduce the gap between underdeveloped and developed regions in terms of access and quality of basic urban services (water, sewage, waste disposal), to health clinics and education in the region. Improving these services and resolving the gaps between them, will implicitly lead to the development of tourism and their partially improvement by using ICT, will result in the improving of health and social mobility. Examples of action: rehabilitation of water supply systems; wastewater collection and treatment at low costs; improving waste management, with the support of separation/sorting of waste; improving access and response capacity in the health sector; telemedicine; support lifelong learning, creating links between vocational schools and labor markets and preschool education and care; distance learning etc. Pillar V: Promoting Efficiency, Affordability and Sustainability. Pillar V refers to empowering local authorities to develop and oversee the provision of public services, being a key factor that would help the development the study area. Local capacity is not the only one that needs to be strengthened, but also the capacity of all institutions to manage the type and level of planned projects. Examples of interventions: technical assistance to improve the administrative capacity, technical assistance for program management, creation of subsidies on households, etc. Among the most frequent words in the documents drafts available on the MRDPA website (http://www.mdrt.ro/dezvoltare-teritoriala/-9749/-3558) are “precarious”, “low”, “limited”, “inappropriate”, illustrating, unfortunately, the current challenges faced by local communities (“poor living conditions”, “poor accessibility and low population density”, “limited access to knowledge, innovation and research results”, “inadequate condition of rural infrastructure”, etc.). Therefore, it is important to emphasize that the strategy is looking for a balance between protecting the unique natural and cultural values of DDBR, meeting the aspirations of the inhabitants of the region to improve living conditions and to identify better economic opportunities.

DDISDS owns the premises to be a truly sustainable strategy in order to strengthen the foundation for sustainable communities: “natural capital that provides goods and services for the development of local communities”. The strategy defines the type of key interventions/ projects in each sector and how they complement and add their value to the territorial development. Projects are also related to the financial resources allocated by government ITI instruments and from other sources of funding. The focus is on providing directions for an economic development without having a significant negative impact on the environment, particularly in the Delta (ex. The creation of facilities in tourism, fishing and shipping through dredging and other works, while protecting biodiversity in wetland; the rehabilitation of existing roads, not building new ones, to improve access for the population of the Delta; searching and finding affordable solutions to water and sewage facilities, that local authorities will operate and maintain, for residents with financial possibilities; limited strategic focus for commercial fishing versus the transition to a recreational fishing with a higher value; supporting the improvement of current accommodation structures, not building new ones, as part of the proposal to develop a small-scale tourism, based on nature and culture, until the demand will guarantee the extension). All areas of the region will be represented in the organization / management mechanism for ongoing development of tourism. However, any development comes with some definite changes of the land and, for this reason, the most challenging part of a strategic environmental assessment is to identify and propose alternatives with the lowest impact on natural habitats. Such challenges may arise for the transport, fishing, agriculture and even tourism projects.

Vision for the Danube Delta Diagnostic Report Needs Assessment Report Region (2030)

DDISDS (2030) Strategic objective 1 Strategic objective 2

Pillar I Pillar II Pillar III Pillar IV Pillar V

Sectorial objectives: Sectorial objectives: Sectorial Sectorial objectives: Sectorial Biodiversity and ecosystem management; Tourism; objectives: objectives: WSS and IWM; Energy efficiency; Fishery and Transport; Administrative aquaculture; SWM; Climate changes; Capacity and ICT. Agriculture and Healthcare; Program Disaster Risk Management; Management. Rural Education; Pollution emergency. Development. Social Inclusion and Protection.

Types of interventions / projects

Figure no. 2-1 DDISDS structure (2030)

2.1.2 Information regarding the raw materials and the chemical substances or compounds Estimated quantities of raw materials, substances or chemicals to be used to implement all types of interventions/ projects proposed by DDISDS (2030) is not possible at this stage of the analysis, given the level of detail of the strategy and that it covers a wide range of investments in various sectors (biodiversity and ecosystem management; energy efficiency; climate change; disaster risk management; emergencies associated to risk of pollution; agriculture and rural development; tourism; fishing and aquaculture; transport; information and communications technology; water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM); solid waste management; health; education; social inclusion and protection; administrative and program management). This information will be detailed at a later stage, for each type of intervention / project, during the environmental proceedings (EIA and AA). It can be mentioned that for the types of interventions/ projects involving construction works, significant quantities of earth, sand, crushed stone, ballast, mineral aggregates, concrete, asphalt mixture, paints, wood, fuels, fuels etc., will be used, according to their specificities. Depending on the development pillar, the types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within DDISDS involving construction works belong mainly to the following sectors: Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management; Disaster Risk Management; Tourism; Fishery and aquaculture; Agriculture and Rural Development; Transport; Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM); Solid Waste Management. 2.2 GEOGRAPHIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE LOCATION DDISDS (2030) ensures the development framework for a number of types of interventions/ projects in the study area, the Danube Delta Region, which occupies an area of approximately 730,461.50 hectares and includes the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR) and its neighboring areas. Danube Delta (DD) is the area referred to as the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR). This covers: (i) the Core Delta (the area between the Sf. Gheorghe and the Chilia branches of the Danube River); (ii) the Razim-Sinoe-Babadag lake system and adjacent land areas; and (iii) the area along the Danube River west of Tulcea City towards Galaţi. It is the only delta of a river that is contained entirely within a Biosphere Reserve. The Study Area – also called the Danube Delta Region - covers DDBR and its Neighboring Area. The Study Area consists of Tulcea City, four towns (Babadag, Isaccea, Măcin, and Sulina), and thirty three communes. Four communes (Corbu, Istria, Mihai Viteazu, and Săcele) are located in Constanţa County, all four bordering the bay area of the Razim-Sinoe lake system.

Table no. 2-1 List of administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy No. crt. Locality Type County

No. crt. Locality Type County 1 Babadag Town Tulcea 2 Baia Commune Tulcea 3 Beştepe Commune Tulcea 4 C.A. Rosetti Commune Tulcea 5 Ceamurlia De Jos Commune Tulcea 6 Ceatalchioi Commune Tulcea 7 Chilia Veche Commune Tulcea 8 Corbu Commune Constanţa 9 Crişan Commune Tulcea 10 Frecăţei Commune Tulcea 11 Greci Commune Tulcea 12 Grindu Commune Tulcea 13 I.C.Brătianu Commune Tulcea 14 Isaccea Town Tulcea 15 Istria Commune Constanţa 16 Jijila Commune Tulcea 17 Jurilovca Commune Tulcea 18 Luncaviţa Commune Tulcea 19 Măcin Town Tulcea 20 Mahmudia Commune Tulcea 21 Maliuc Commune Tulcea 22 Mihai Bravu Commune Tulcea 23 Mihai Viteazu Commune Constanţa 24 Mihail Kogălniceanu Commune Tulcea 25 Murighiol Commune Tulcea 26 Niculiţel Commune Tulcea 27 Nufăru Commune Tulcea 28 Pardina Commune Tulcea 29 Săcele Commune Constanţa 30 Sarichioi Commune Tulcea 31 Sfântu Gheorghe Commune Tulcea 32 Slava Cercheză Commune Tulcea 33 Smârdan Commune Tulcea 34 Somova Commune Tulcea 35 Sulina Town Tulcea 36 Tulcea County Capital City Tulcea 37 Văcăreni Commune Tulcea 38 Valea Nucarilor Commune Tulcea

The geographical position of the DDBR is bounded by the following coordinates3:

3 http://www.ddbra.ro/rezervatia/delta-dunarii/localizare

28º 10’ 50’’ eastern longitude (Cotul Pisicii); 29º 42’ 45’’ eastern longitude (Sulina); 45º 27’ northern latitude (Chilia arm, km 43); 44º 20’ 40’’ northern latitude (Cape Midia). The reservation is crossed by the 45º parallel, which marks the halfway between the Equator and the North Pole. In terms of component physical-geographical units, in accordance with Law no. 82/1993, with subsequent completions ans modifications, the DDBR, an area of national and international ecological importance, contains the following: Danube Delta; Maritime Danube until Cotul Pisicii; Isaccea – Tulcea sector with its floodplain; Murighiol – Plopu saltings; Razim-Sinoe lake system; Black Sea coast from the Chilia arm to Cape Midia; Internal maritime waters and territorial sea up to the 20 m isobath. The climate of the Danube Delta corresponds to a temperate continental climate with sea influences. Air temperature shows moderate values with a slight increase from west to east, and the large amount of heat is given by the average annual duration of sunshine, which is approx. 2.300 – 2.500 hours, annual global solar radiation summing to 125-135 kcal/ cm2, being among the highest in the country4. The Danube is the longest river that crosses the EU and the second largest river in Europe after the Volga, with a length of 2.8405 kilometers, of which 2.415 km are navigable, providing a link between Central Europe and the Black Sea and, thereby, to the Transcaucasian area and Central Asia6. The Danube Region's economic growth potential is still insufficiently unexploited. Danube was declared part of the EU Pan-European Transport corridor VII, representing an important waterway, which connects through the Rhine - Main - Danube the Constanţa port, the industrial centers of Western Europe and the port of Rotterdam. In Romania, the Danube has a length of 1075 km and includes four distinct sectors, with the following characteristics7: Baziaş – Porţile de Fier II sector: 212 km length; Porţile de Fier II – Călăraşi sector: 488 km length; Călăraşi – Brăila sector: 200 km length;

4 http://www.ddbra.ro/rezervatia/delta-dunarii/prezentare-generala/clima-a18

5 http://www.ddbra.ro/dunarea.php

6 First national contribution to the elaboration of the European Union Strategy for the Danube region.

7 First national contribution to the elaboration of the European Union Strategy for the Danube region

Brăila – Black Sea sector, on the Sulina channel: 175 km length. The link between the Danube River and the Black Sea is made through two navigable channels:  Danube – Black Sea channel – located between Constanţa-South Harbor – Agigea, and the 293 km of the Danube;  Poarta Albă – Midia – Năvodari Channel – has a length of 27.5 km, being located between Midia harbor, the 0 km of the channel, and the confluence with the Danube – Black Sea channel, at the km 29 + 41 of the last one, including the 5.5 km length junction, part of the Poarta Albă – Midia – Năvodari channel, which links Luminiţa harbor from its 3 km. The study area, Danube Delta region, is located in the south-eastern part of the country, consisting of the DDBR and its surrounding areas (Figure no. 2-2). In terms of location in relation to major geographical units, the study area is located in the north-east Dobrogea Plateau and all over the Danube Delta (Figure no. 2-4), and in relation to developing regions, the study area is located in the south-east (Figure no. 2-5).

Figure no. 2-2 Location of the study area – Danube Delta region – within the national territory

Figure no. 2-3 Administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy

Figure no. 2-4 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the major geographical units

Figure no. 2-5 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the development regions 2.3 PHYSICAL MODIFICATIONS RESULTED FROM THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION Physical changes that could result from implementing the DDISDS are related to the implementation of the types of interventions/ projects provided for each development sector addressed by the strategy. The nature of the DDISDS types of interventions/ projects is very diverse, belonging to different sectors depending on the pillar of development (see Section 2.1.1). Projects that could lead to physical changes are, generally, those which involve construction works. More detailed information about the types of work performed can be exemplified for the transport sector (more precisely the road transport), from development pillar III, namely “Improving connectivity”. Thus, for the construction of a km of express road (2x2 lanes, plain topography) and for the rehabilitation of a km of national road, the usual necessary main categories of works that can create physical changes are: embankments; scraping, digging, filling; road superstructure; water drainage; works for traffic safety; consolidation works; hydraulic works; environmental protection works etc. Given the diversity of the types of interventions / projects listed by the five development pillars of DDISDS and the current level of detail, at this point of the analysis a detailed description of the physical changes that will occur as a result of implementation all these types of interventions / projects cannot be performed. They will be further detailed in the environmental procedures (EIA / AA) for each type of intervention / project. The main types of physical changes that can be generated by the types of interventions / projects from the DDISDS, which include construction works, are both reversible and irreversible changes in the short or long term, and that can directly or indirectly affect the physical environment (hydrogeomorphological) as well as the biological one. In this assessment, to be relevant, all physical changes were grouped based on the main forms of impact analyzed as follows:

Loss of habitat: any activities which may lead to long-term or irreversible changes of Natura 2000 habitats and habitats of species of community interest (mainly occupied with building surfaces); Alteration of habitats: all activities that may affect the short or medium term, reversible, population parameters of a species of community interest or the optimum conditions of their habitats; Disturbance of the activity / natural processes - from animal disturbance caused by performed activities (human presence, noise) or altering natural processes that ensures the integrity of habitats. Further details on the physical changes considered in this appropriate assessment study can be found in Section 4.3.3. 2.4 NATURAL RESOURCES NECESSARY FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION The implementation of the types of interventions / projects that will be promoted by DDISDS will require the use of natural resources (water, renewable resources, non-renewable resources, etc.) depending on the nature of each type of intervention / project. At the time of analysis, the natural resources needed to implement the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS cannot be estimated, nor their quantities, but knowing the sectors of development, we can list some of the resources that might be used for the types of interventions / projects that require construction works: sand, mineral aggregates, soils, water, crushed stone, wood etc. Detailed information will be provided in the environmental procedures (EIA and AA) at project level, regarding the type of natural resources to be used and quantities required, as these can vary significantly from one type of project to another. It is important to note, however, that there will be types of interventions / projects in the DDISDS aimed at protecting natural resources, including resources within natural protected areas of community interest and ecosystem restoration projects that are not located in natural protected areas. 2.5 NATURAL RESOURCES WHICH WILL BE EXPLOITED FROM THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY IMPORTANCE IN ORDER TO BE USED FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION As regarding the natural resources that will be used to implement the types of interventions / projects proposed by SDDIDD, within natural protected areas included in the Natura 2000 ecological network, the main resource is represented by the soil surfaces, which will be occupied temporarily during the planning and construction activities (e.g.: land occupied by site organization, warehouses for working materials and machinery etc.) or permanently due to the construction of new infrastructure elements (buildings, energy facilities, etc.). It is recommended that work sites, borrow pits, materials warehouses, etc., to be located outside Natura 2000 sites to minimize the areas affected during the construction works. 2.6 EMISSIONS AND WASTE GENERATED BY THE DDISDS AND THE METHODS FOR THEIR ELIMINATION The DDISDS Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030) has 2030 as the target year, providing a framework for the implementation of the ITI proposals and the Action Plan (which will include interventions that are not eligible for ITI financing), whose effects (depending on the specific of each type of intervention / project) starting from the operating period, will be reflected on extended periods of time.

The provided types of interventions / projects aim a broad range of sectors (listed in Section 2.1.2) and will consist of both investments that involve construction works and that will generate different emissions and waste in water, air and on ground (e.g. dredging the large lakes to restore water depth, rehabilitation and modernization of DN 22 Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin - Brăila, including the construction of a bridge over the Danube at Brăila, modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Măcin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports, development and modernization of airport infrastructure in Tulcea, Mihail Kogălniceanu commune, rehabilitation of county roads etc.) and investments with positive effects on the natural environment, impacting over human health and environmental quality (e.g. reforestation of areas where the natural vegetation has disappeared or deteriorated; development and implementation of measures to reduce the discharge of solid waste in natural areas; investments to support local actions to reduce nitrate pollution of waterways from agriculture or livestock rearing activities; protect and improve natural resources (soil, water); support for organic farming in Natura 2000 areas; types of investments / projects related to water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management; types of investments / projects related to solid waste management etc.). 2.6.1 Emissions The main types of emissions that might be generated as a result of implementing the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS are: Emissions in water bodies; Atmospheric emissions; Emissions on the ground. Emissions in water bodies The main source of pollution of surface water and groundwater in the Danube Delta region is represented by untreated or poorly treated wastewater from human agglomerations (city, towns and villages - most concentrated residential areas), the main deficiencies of the wastewater collection and treatment system being8: the existence of a large number of undersized channels with depositions, damage / subsidence of channel, important infiltrations and exfiltration; leaky pipes in the branching connections area, which generate leaks of wastewater; lack of waste water treatment plants for municipal wastewater; insufficient human and material resources to ensure proper functioning; problems due to the impossibility of rapid and complete discharge of storm water during floods caused by heavy rain conditions which exceed the sizing of the network flow, which leads to the flooding of streets and adjacent spaces, as well as the deteriorated storm water pumping stations. According to the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, the largest impact on surface waters, especially in terms of pollution with organic matter and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), which usually come from household and agricultural wastewater, is caused by the 4 companies that capture, treat and distribute water in the towns of Isaccea, Măcin, Babadag and Tulcea

8 Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apm- tulcea/rapoarte-anuale1

City, as well as other three types of economic activities from Tulcea: construction and ship repairs, aluminum production and pig breeding. Thus, it can be observed that, according to the mentioned source, the activity which has the largest share in the discharge of poorly treated or untreated wastewater is represented by the water catchment, treatment and distribution activity. According to the Needs Assessment Report, the needs of water supply, sewerage and wastewater treatment of the population in the study area, the Danube Delta region, are numerous and can be divided into the following domains: New water treatment stations with transport network and distribution for communities that do not have potable water; Improving water supply / equipment used in water treatment plants to improve the quality of the supplied potable water; Improving the water distribution network by replacing old pipes in order to reduce leaks and interruptions in the water supply activity; The collection and treatment of wastewater for communities larger than 2000 inhabitants; Local solutions for the collection and treatment of wastewater in smaller communities. Prioritization of the types of interventions / projects was conducted according to several criteria that take into account the degree of water supply of communities, the existing state of water treatment plants, the readiness to launch the investment, as well as the local economy and the touristic potential of the area. Based on these criteria, a score was calculated, communities being divided hierarchically into two classes: i) communities with a population greater than 2000 inhabitants (to be financed by LIOP) and ii) communities with a population lower than 2000 inhabitants (to be financed by OP Rural Development). Many other types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS include components for generating and managing wastewater as well as rainwater collected from the transport infrastructure or rainwater (leachate) collected in waste management systems; investments to support local actions to reduce nitrate pollution of waterways in agricultural or livestock rearing activities. Measures for proper management were provided for all of the previous mentioned types of interventions / projects both in the DDISDS and the environmental report. In conclusion, DDISDS presents a significant positive contribution to reducing emissions of pollutants into water bodies in the Danube Delta region.

Atmospheric emissions The main sectors proposed for development within the DDISDS that represent the most significant sources of pollutants in the atmosphere (particulates - PM10 and PM2,5, nitrogen oxides - NOx, sulfur dioxide - SO2, carbon monoxide – CO, ammonia - NH3, volatile organic compounds - VOC, benzene and other unburned hydrocarbons) and emissions of greenhouse gases - GHG (carbon dioxide - CO2, methane - CH4, nitrous oxide - N2O, hydrofluorocarbons - HFCs, perfluorocarbons - PFC, sulfur hexafluoride - SF6, aerosols, ozone - O3, water vapor etc.) are transport sector, agriculture and rural development and management of solid waste. According to the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013 in Tulcea County in 2013, according to the inventory of emissions, the share of acidifying substances emitted into the atmosphere is as follows: SO2 - 0.67%, NH3 - 37.96% and NOx - 61.37% (Figure no. 2-6).

0.67%

37.96%

61.37%

NOx NH3 SO2

Figure no. 2-6 Contribution of acidifying pollutants in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013) Sulphur dioxide is a highly toxic gas, which can have direct negative effects on biodiversity, human health (e.g. can lead to soil acidification, degradation of buildings). In 2013, in Tulcea, the main sectors contributing to the SO2 emissions in the atmosphere and the share of their contributions are shown in

Figure no. 2-7. It can be observed that the sector that had the highest contribution in terms of SO2 emissions belongs to non-industrial combustion plants.9

5.31% 4.51% non-industrial combustion plants

combustions in energy industry and processing industry 26.73% combustions in processing industry 63.45% production processes

Figure no. 2-7 Share of SO2 emissions by sector

Regarding the evolution of SO2, in Tulcea County, during 2005-2013, there is a clear decrease since 2007, mainly due to decreasing in the use of natural gas instead of liquid fuels (Figure no. 2-8).

9 Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apm- tulcea/rapoarte-anuale1

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 SO2 (tons)

Figure no. 2-8 Evolution of SO2 emissions in Tulcea County Ammonia produces negative effects that translate into the acidification and eutrophication of natural ecosystems. The major contribution in 2013, in Tulcea County, is owned by the livestock rearing activities sector (especially manure management) representing approx. 68% of total emissions of NH3, followed by waste treatment and storage activities with a share of 32%10 (Figure no. 2-9).

31.76% agriculture (zootechnics)

waste treatment and disposal 68.24%

Figure no. 2-9 Share of NH3 emissions by sector

Regarding the evolution of NH3 emissions, in Tulcea County, between 2005 and 2013, it can be noted that the NH3 emissions fluctuate from year to year, depending on the quantities of manure produced and the quantities of fertilizers used, meaning that it depends on the development of agricultural sector (Figure no. 2-10).

10 Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apm- tulcea/rapoarte-anuale1

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 NH3 (tons)

Figure no. 2-10 Evolution of NH3 emissions in Tulcea County

Nitrogen oxides are formed due to the use of conventional fuels, the basic substance that contribute to the generation of fuels being the nitrogen (which is found in the atmosphere in large quantities), the high temperatures during the combustion stimulating the reaction that forms the oxide, respectively the nitrogen dioxide. In 2013, in Tulcea, the main sectors that contributed to the emissions of NOx in the atmosphere and the share of their contributions are shown in Figure no. 2-11. It can be noted that the sector that had the highest contribution in terms of NOx emissions is the road transport, closely followed by the non-industrial combustion plants sector11.

6.86% road transport

non-industrial combustion 14.76% 32.03% plants combustions in energy industry and processing industry 19.17% other mobile sources and machineries combustions in processing 27.18% industry

Figure no. 2-11 Share of NOx emissions by sector

Regarding the evolution of NOx emissions, in Tulcea County, between 2005 and 2013, there is a clear drop since 2007, in 2013 the decrease in NOx emissions being by 3.3% below the previous year. One reason for this decline is the use of low NOx burners in the HWB from SC Energoterm SA Tulcea (Figure no. 2-12).

11 Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apm- tulcea/rapoarte-anuale1

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 NOx (tons)

Figure no. 2-12 Evolution of NOx emissions in Tulcea County From the data presented above we can deduce that in Tulcea County, among the most common pollutants emitted into the atmosphere are nitrogen oxides and the main sector contributing to their emission is the road transport sector. Also, it can be noticed that the quantities of NH3 increased considerably in the recent years due to the development of the agricultural sector (increasing amounts of manure produced and increasing quantities of fertilizers used). In terms of GHG emissions in Tulcea County in 2013, the share of GHG emissions in the atmosphere was 12 as follows: CO2 – 99.37 %, CH4 – 0.57 % and N2O – 0.06 % .

0.57% 0.06%

99.37%

CO2 CH4 N2O

Figure no. 2-13 Contribution of GHG in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013)

The main sources of GHG in the atmosphere are:

12 Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apm- tulcea/rapoarte-anuale1

Industrial combustion processes; Production of thermal energy through thermal power stations; Production of thermal energy in stations for commercial, institutional and residential buildings; Livestock; Landfilling. Figure no. 2-14 presents the evolution of annual GHG emissions expressed in thousands of tonnes CO2 eq., at county level, between 2005 and 2013. Total annual GHG emissions are an indicator of trends in anthropogenic GHG emissions expressed as CO2 equivalent, transformation achieved based on the coefficients of global warming.

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total emissions of CO2 Eq (thousand tons)

Figure no. 2-14 Total annual emissions of GHG in Tulcea County (expressed in thousands of tonnes CO2 equivalent) Regarding the annual GHG emissions (thousands of tonnes CO2 eq.) per capita, i.e. the ratio between the total annual GHG emissions, expressed as CO2 equivalent, and total population of Tulcea County in the period 2005-2013, these are presented in Figure no. 2-15.

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 tonnes CO2 Eq / per inhabitant

Figure no. 2-15 Total emissions of GHG per capita in Tulcea County (expressed in tonnes CO2 Eq per capita)

From the data presented above on GHG, we find that the greenhouse gas that presents a major contribution to the greenhouse effect is the CO2. Approximately 75% of anthropogenic emissions of CO2 in the atmosphere over the last 20 years, are caused by burning fossil fuels. The main measures identified in the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013 to decrease CO2 emissions are:

 increasing the efficiency of energy facilities;  developing alternative forms of energy generation;

 modernization of thermal points;

 modernization and rehabilitation of secondary thermal networks;  modernization and rehabilitation of hot water transport network;

 improvement of thermal insulation;  control and measuring of the delivered heat;

 structural changes (reduction of the share of energy-intensive consumer industries);  modernization and rehabilitation of existing technologies;

 improving energy management;

 increasing the efficiency of agricultural machinery;  modernization of livestock farms;

 changing the forest policy by preventing deforestation and expansion of green areas;  increasing the performance of road vehicles;

 development of urban and interurban public transport;  use of alternative fuels.

Also, the main measures proposed to reduce emissions of N2O are:  extension of woodland areas;  establishment of young forests, with faster growth, which absorb greater amounts of emissions compared with aging forests;  use of biomass as a renewable energy source. According to the same report, policies and measures for reducing GHG emissions plotted for Romania should be implemented also at local level: Promotion of energy production from renewable sources; Promoting energy efficiency at the energy end users; Promoting cogeneration systems and energy efficiency in district heating systems; Managing emissions of greenhouse gases from transport; Land use, land use change and forestry.

Among the actions that have the effect of reducing GHG emissions, implemented in Tulcea so far, we mention13:  21 wind farms were approved until the end of 2013 for obtaining electricity, using Tulcea County’s wind as a renewable source, available due to climate conditions;  carbon-rich fossil fuels (fuel oil, light fuel) were replaced with low-carbon fuel or natural gas thermal plants belonging to operators in Tulcea: ENERGOTERM SA, ALUM SA and SC DALKIA SA, and to a significant proportion of households in Tulcea;  during 2013 afforestation and reforestation were carried out on an area of 231 ha and natural regeneration on an area of 634 ha;  modernization of the vehicle fleet owned by TRANSPORT PUBLIC SA by replacing polluting buses, which led firstly to a reduction of the pollution and a more attractive public transport for citizens, thus may give up using their personal cars. Types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS concern a range of actions that directly or indirectly contribute to reducing emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere, respectively GHG, mainly those belonging to the following development sectors addressed by DDISDS: biodiversity and ecosystem management; energy efficiency; climate change; disaster risk management; emergency situations associated with pollution risk; agriculture and rural development; water supply systems and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM); solid waste management; health. Some of these activities belonging to the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS coincide with measures identified in the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea

County, 2013 on reducing CO2 emissions. Emissions on the ground According to the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, the main types of pressure on soil quality condition identified in Tulcea County are: applying fertilizers without taking into account the nature of the soil, weather conditions and plant needs, which can cause a disruption of the ecological balance (especially through nitrate accumulation); application of plant protection products (phytosanitary); the precarious situation of land / agricultural improvement; natural processes that determine critical areas of land in terms of soil degradation (landslides, salinization); accidental pollutions / major environmental accidents. Regarding the state of the forests, the main human activities that are harmful to forest habitats at Tulcea County level are: constructions, illegal logging, disorganized tourism, uncontrolled waste storage

13 Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apm- tulcea/rapoarte-anuale1

and arson. In 2013 an amount of 1323 cubic meters of removed timber was recorded, and 1363 ha of forest have been affected by drought and floods, the damage couldn’t be estimated14. Types of interventions / projects proposed by SDDIDD consist of a range of actions that reduce the impact on the soil, belonging to the following areas of development: biodiversity and ecosystem management; climate change; disaster risk management; emergency situations associated with pollution risk; tourism; agriculture and rural development; solid waste management. Some examples of these types of interventions / projects: reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded; development and implementation of measures to reduce solid waste in natural areas; works for protection against floods in Babadag, Ceatalchioi, Beştepe, Greci, Vulturu, Ilganii de Jos, Nufăru, Ilganii de Sus, Luncaviţa, Sulina, Sarichioi, Pardina, Săcele, Sf. Gheorghe; implementation of a mechanism for innovative and sustainable nature-based tourism MSME’s and social tourism enterprises for a green local economy; protection and improvement of natural resources (soil, water); completion of land restitution and land book registration for land/farms consolidation; support for environment-friendly agricultural activities within Natura 2000 sites; investments in SWM Systems for handling separated waste (waste separation at source, collection, sorting and transportation facilities); composting bins for rural households to process organic waste; collection of floating waste in river channels; investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition waste; public education and awareness program on waste management. On the other hand, we note that there are other types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS which, by their nature, can generate emissions on the ground, namely those that require the construction works, or in the event of accidental pollution. Please note, however, that these can be avoided by complying with Waste / emissions management plans, respectively Plans for preventing and control of accidental pollution. 2.6.2 Waste As a result of the implementation of the DDISDS, waste (in water, in air, on the surface where wastes are stored) could be generated especially after the implementation of types of interventions / projects involving construction works (related to the sectors listed in section 2.1.2). The amounts and types of waste generated as a result of implementing the types of interventions / projects mentioned in DDISDS cannot be estimated at this time of the evaluation, knowing the current level of detailing of the DDISDS (2030) and the fact that it covers a wide range of investments in various sectors (see section 2.1.2). This information will be detailed later for each type of intervention / project as a part of the environmental proceedings (EIA and AA).

14 Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apm- tulcea/rapoarte-anuale1

It should be mentioned, however, that DDISDS provides a number of types of interventions / projects in the solid waste management sector that will improve the current waste management situation in the Danube Delta region as: Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at source, collection, sorting and transportation facilities); Composting bins for rural households to process organic waste; Collection of Floating Waste in River Channels; Investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition waste; Public education and awareness program on waste management. Sectorial objectives established for this sector are:  Improving the recycling rate in order to achieve the EU objective of 50%, to which Romania committed;  Effective implementation of waste reduction, reuse and recycling of waste in local communities ensuring an effective and sustainable management, resource conservation, environmental protection and development of touristic destinations;  Floating waste management. By achieving these strategic objectives for the Danube Delta Region, it is expected:

 a significantly improvement of the collection rate, especially in rural areas by providing efficient collection and transportation services in the next budget cycle;  an increase of the separation of waste at source, through public awareness and changes in the behavior of locals and tourists;

 a decrease of the volume of waste disposed in landfills by promoting recycling and through other methods of treatment. 2.6.3 Noise Noise is a significant stress factor for the wild species. By implementing the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS, noise can be generated both in execution phases and in periods of operation of different types of interventions / projects. Given their diversity and the actual level of detail of the DDISDS, it should be mentioned that at this time of evaluation is not possible to estimate noise levels for each type of intervention / project proposed to be conducted. However, this analysis will be performed in environmental studies (AA and EIA) for each individual project. All activities that involve the existence of noise sources located within or in the neighborhood of Natura 2000 sites may generate negative impact on fauna. Types of interventions / projects proposed by SDISDS that might represent the most significant noise source belong to the transport sector, whose negative effects can be experienced over distances up to 700 m (e.g. affecting the reproduction and nesting areas of bird species). There are quite little information in literature on the effects of noise on species of community interest, and in general on Natura 2000 sites in Romania, but in recent years useful information appeared on urban noise monitoring in the main agglomerations and on some sources of noise such as road and rail sectors. This information was taken and used in this study.

Among the main effects that can occur regarding the fauna as a result of a higher noise level, are mentioned: increase of the noise level (as compared to the natural background noise) from 3 up to 10 dB (A) may cause a decrease in the warning distances of wild animals by 30 up to 90%15; decline of grassland birds living in meadows occurs at overruns above 48 dB (A) and for forest species at noise levels over 42 dB (A)16; behavioral changes when emitting sounds of mating for amphibians and in some cases, a complete loss of vocalization; disturbance of the species of reptiles by affecting daily activity patterns and reproduction. Most of the data underlying the above comes from investigations of the noise generated by roads, the effects of intermittent noises deployed for short periods of time or generated by actual operation of energy facilities, stations treatment etc., being lesser known. In general, recommended distances to avoid such disturbances are 200 meters for environmental impact activities and can reach up to 500 m for high impact activities17. It is recommended that the same distances to be maintained towards hibernacula. Noise sources are often vibration generators. In fact, almost all field activities involving human presence are generating vibrations, most of which can be felt and animals, depending on the species and the distance towards the generating source. At the moment, according to EEA18 (European Environment Agency), at the sites of community interest in the Danube Delta region, the main existing pressures / threats (inside the sites or in their vicinity) that generate noise are: transport corridors: roads, highways; industrial or commercial zones; port areas; urbanized areas, human presence; other industrial / commercial areas; campsites and parking areas for campers; outdoor sports and recreational activities, leisure activities; structures for sport and recreation. DDISDS proposes a number of types of interventions / projects in the tourism sector, having as main goal the development of the Danube Delta Region as an integrated tourism destination with a rich portfolio of sustainable products and services, based on natural and cultural attractions, along with relevant marketing activities. It also proposes the institutionalization of a Destination Management

15 The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms, 2010

16 Roads and their major ecological effects, 1998

17 Canadian Wildlife Service, 2009

18 http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/natura-5

Organizations (DMO) in the Danube Delta, whose main role will be to coordinate relations with other public, private and non-governmental organizations operating in important socio-economic areas. 2.7 REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO LAND USE, NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DDISDS DDISDS aims to implement projects / types of interventions proposed to be located in the whole territory of DDBR and surrounding area, having the role to address, manage and solve the problems identified in several activity sectors. Land use in the study area, according to Corine Land Cover 2006, is shown in Figure no. 2-16.

Figure no. 2-16 Land use in the study area according to Corine Land Cover 2006

The following table shows the land areas that will be permanently and temporarily occupied by projects / types of interventions proposed for implementation, based on the code and land use category, according to Corine Land Cover 2006. The methodology based on which they were calculated is presented in section 4.3.3.1. Table no. 2-2 Land occupied, permanently or temporarily, depending on the code and land use category Land occupied Land occupied temporarily Code and land use category permanently (ha) (ha) 112 - Discontinuous urban fabric 0.04 1446.86 121 - Industrial or commercial units 3.84 608.50 123 - Port areas - 206.15 131 - Mineral extraction sites 0.02 1.56 132 - Dump sites - 21.49 133 - Construction sites - - 141 - Green urban areas - 0.38 142 - Sport and leisure facilities - 37.16 211 - Non-irrigated arable land 509.43 470.72 221 - Vineyards 18.34 17.38 222 - Fruit trees and berry plantations 16.45 9.87 231 - Pastures 27.47 89.70 242 - Complex cultivation patterns 8.87 38.96 243 - Land principally occupied by agriculture. with significant areas of natural 15.15 10.32 vegetation 311 - Broad-leaved forest 39.06 96.85 321 - Natural grasslands 30.45 36.49 324 - Transitional woodland-shrub 8.31 10.65 331 – Beaches, dunes, sands - 9.64 411 - Inland marshes 9.11 96.21 421 - Salt marshes - 1.71 511 - Water courses - 184.37 512 - Water bodies 1.67 30.90 523 - Sea and ocean - 0.03 Total 688.21 3425.88

2.8 SUPPLEMENTARY SERVICES REQUIRED BY THE DDISDS IMPLMENTATION The implementation of the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS may involve the development of additional services, which requires identifying ways in which accessing these additional services could affect the integrity of natural protected areas of community interest, in case they overlap or they are located in their immediate neighborhood. Potential additional services are those related to: dismantling / relocation of pipelines, objectives, power lines, construction / development of related facilities, occupying additional land areas larger than the ones required by the investment, etc., and may occur mainly in those types of interventions / projects involving construction works (see section 2.1.2). Given the diversity and the current degree of detail of the types of interventions / projects that are proposed by DDISDS, the estimation of the additional services required to implement all of these types of interventions / projects is difficult to perform at this time of evaluation. These additional services could occur within those types of interventions / projects involving the rehabilitation / expansion of road infrastructure works, expanding the operating capacity of ports, construction of passenger terminals in the airports, modernization or construction works on water and sewage networks, where it may be necessary to decommission existing buildings, to build power lines etc. We believe that this aspect should be looked at by type of intervention / project on a case by case basis in environmental procedures (AA or EIA). Regarding the potential impact on the Natura 2000 network we consider the necessity for any additional activities deriving from the implementation of the types of interventions / projects proposed, to be rigorously analyzed their opportunity or their location within the immediate vicinity of protected natural areas of community interest. It is preferable that all possible additional services necessary for the types of interventions / projects not to be placed / located inside or in the immediate vicinity of protected natural areas of community interest. 2.9 DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION, FUNCTIONING, DISMANTLING AND THE SCHEDULING OF THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030) is based on five pillars and aims the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and its surrounding areas (a total of 38 administrative-territorial units). The Development Vision for the Danube Delta Region and DDISDS, having 2030 as target year, provide a framework for the ITI proposal and Action Plan until 2020 (possibly by 2022, if the EC will grant a similar extension to the one granted in the previous programming period)19, but not all the needs identified in the Needs Assessment Report can be solved by 2020. Thus, while the Development Vision for the Delta Region and the outlined DDISDS has 2030 as the time horizon, they will be initially used as a result for a proposed ITI investment program and a wider Action Plan by 2020. To be harnessed, DDISDS role is to provide implementable solutions to problems and requirements identified in the Needs Assessment Report. The term of the projects proposed for implementation within DDISDS is 15 years. Currently, not all the types of interventions / projects to be implemented by DDISDS (2030) are known with certainty, nor how they will be implemented, their exact location or their timetable for implementation. The Action Plan will describe the future prioritized types of interventions / projects and will help to operationalize their implementation, together with other specifications on their order,

19 Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030), Report 2.2

preparations for implementation and monitoring and evaluation systems. We mention that in the absence of a detailed timetable for the implementation of all types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS, we could not take into account the temporal dynamics of impacts in this study. 2.10 ACTIVITIES THAT WILL BE GENERATED AS RESULT OF THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION The types of activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of the types of investments / projects proposed by DDISDS can be very different, depending on the development sector. Possible types of activities that can be generated as a result of implementing the types of investment / proposed projects structured by the sector that they address and the development pillar to which each sector belongs are presented in Table no. 2-3.

Table no. 2-3 Types of possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS (2030) Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects Pillar I - Protecting the environmental and natural resource assets Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management Development and implementation of measures to reduce solid waste in natural areas;  decontamination activities and general ecological recovery of degraded or Border demarcation and signage of strictly protected areas and their buffer areas, abandoned land, with emphasis on those areas that are located near sport fishing areas, touristic routes, camping, parking areas, etc. with development protected areas; and implementation of a monitoring and information system, including  establishment of collection centers and infrastructure required for recycling appropriate technology such as motion-activated cameras, watchtowers, etc.; solid waste;

Improve evidence-based management by developing and implementing a  signaling activities for strictly protected areas; modern/efficient monitoring system and predictive model for sedimentation  access monitoring activities in strictly protected areas as a result of dynamics in the Danube Delta; implementing the signaling system; An in-depth institutional analysis (functional review) of DDBRA and the associated  monitoring and forecasting activities of the dynamics of the sedimentation administrative reforms with the aim of improving its managerial performances, process in the Danube Delta; and the legislative framework governing the management of DDBR area to allow  information and promotion activities concerning the importance of local residents to become active participants in guarding and managing the natural protecting and management of the natural resources; resource. Capacity building measures for the communities and DDBRA;  maintenance work on the channels (dredging / desilting); Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water  mapping and inventorying activities of Natura 2000 species and habitats; circulation and key habitat areas;  inventorying activities for livestock in the Danube Delta region; Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000”  activities of monitoring and evaluation of the conservation status of species network for species of European conservation concern, together with and habitats belonging to the Natura 2000 network; development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area  (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and ecological reconstruction works; community participation.;  scientific research and monitoring of the processes related to river-delta sea Studies and TA for biodiversity conservation and restoration of ecosystems and systems; natural habitats within “Natura 2000” network affected by anthropic impact;  pest management activities; Identify additional poldered areas eligible for ecological restoration. This will  reed harvest activities. include feasibility studies and technical projects for the restoration of natural

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects habitats affected by non-ecological activities in agricultural, fishery and forestry polders - integral or partial ecological restoration works; Natural capital accounting studies to determine the highest value uses of land and natural resources for optimal management; Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded; Investments to support local action to reduce nitrate pollution of the waterways from agricultural and livestock rearing activities; Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation; Integrated pest management – develop and implement an integrated pest management strategy for mosquitoes; Integrated reed management strategy. Energy efficiency Promoting the use of renewable energy sources. Investments in pilot projects promoting the use of renewable energy sources (wind, solar energy, heat pumps, biomass, micro-hydro etc.) and non-pollutant technologies, including the  monitoring activities of the projects aiming the use of the renewable sources development and introduction of environmentally friendly propulsion systems in of energy; the Delta;  maintenance activities of public buildings; Improving the energy efficiency of public buildings (schools, hospitals,  maintenance activities for some equipment; administrative buildings, etc.);  maintenance works for overhead and underground lines. Extending and improving the energy efficiency of public lighting; Support for improving energy efficiency of households. Climate change Create a CC partnership platform, including a community-driven climate  monitoring activities of the proper functioning of the CC partnership adaptation fund targeted at low income families; a micro grant or loan mechanism platform; to support SMEs; and a partnership facility to promote private - public  local governments and private sector staff training activities on the use of the collaboration for innovative climate actions; CC partnership platform. Designate a unit with a clear mandate to address climate change issues, with a

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects small number of dedicated and knowledgeable staff, and capable of working cross- sector; Develop clear and easy to use local guidelines for climate change and energy efficiency programs. Disaster risk management Provision of special machinery and equipment for interventions by IES and SMURD  developing a training system of the IES and SMURD staff concerning the in disaster situations; proper use of the special machineries and equipments for interventions; Works for protection against floods in fourteen (14) towns/communes;  maintenance activities for equipment and for special vehicles that are used; Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency  bed regulation, reshaping creek, bank consolidation, wall protection works Situations (IES) infrastructure facilities in TULCEA + Măcin + Crişan + Babadag + etc.; Topolog;  monitoring activities to ensure the success of the implemented measures. Create and maintain an inter-institutional risk factor database. Pollution emergency Complete coherent and comprehensive pollution emergency response and prevention plans, covering both water and land, and both mobile and fixed sources of pollution;  inter-institutional intervention staff training activities in cases of pollution Create an inter-institutional Pollution Emergency Response Team; incidents; Purchase of equipment to enable the first response team to quickly access  maintenance activities for equipment and for special vehicles that are used; pollution incident sites in the Core Delta;  monitoring activities to ensure the success of the implemented measures. Create and maintain an inter-institutional environmental liability data-base for data sharing and better coordination across agencies. Pillar II - Improving the Economy Tourism The establishment and development of tourism infrastructure;  ecotourism activities; The institutionalization of a Danube Delta Destination Management Organization  intensification of activities such as hiking, cycling, horse riding, water sports (DMO); etc.; Design and implementation of a destination-wide program for product and  signaling activities for important places for tourists; attraction development;  developing a local management and yield management in tourism Support mechanism for innovative and sustainable nature-based tourism MSMEs development policy;

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects & social tourism enterprises for green local economy;  detailed assessment activities for existing locations and tourist attractions A region-wide program for beautification of settlements; that can be converted into new travel offers; Program for improved quality of accommodation facilities and services;  maintenance activities of public buildings, accommodation facilities, historical Cultural heritage interventions (rehabilitation, preservation, etc.); monuments etc.; Development of a destination interpretation (learning) program;  creation and growth of micro, small and medium companies that offer Develop and roll out program for emergency and first aid for tourism workers, natural touristic services to build a green local economy; service providers;  entrepreneurship activities; Develop a specialized tourism research observatory.  intensification of commercial activities;  intensification of related activities. Fishery and aquaculture Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks; Dredge major lakes to restore water depth; Support transition from artisanal capture to recreational fishing (Improve ecotourism venues to accommodate the needs of recreational fishers; Promote and provide training in sustainable recreational fishing (catch-and-release fishing etc.); Support artificial reproduction of valuable species like pike and zander and construct simple landing facilities in places of fisher concentrations;  intensification of tourism activities; Improve fish habitat;  intensification of commercial activities; Regulate or eliminate uncontrolled fish camping;  enhancing research and development activities within research institutes, Consider some tax incentives, like the elimination of the water tax; public institutions and associations of fishermen. Improve fisheries data collection and analysis; Replace or modify cherhana based system; Strengthen analytical capacity at DDNRI; Improve fisheries research and development activities in research institutes, public institutions and fishermen associations; Improve Aquaculture; Support small scale fish processing. Diversify home and village level fish processing by introducing small scale canning units (for Gibel carp and other low value fish

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects like roach and bream) and improve smoking systems (smoking bags or small electric smokers); mainly to produce delicacies to visiting tourists. Agriculture and rural development Modernization of facilities for collection / processing / marketing of agricultural produce; Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, dispensaries etc.); Jobs creation; Protection and improvement of natural resources (soil, water); Completion of land restitution and land book registration for land/farms consolidation; Support for environment-friendly agricultural activities within Natura 2000 sites; Enlarge the access to vocational education for agriculture;  intensification tourism activities; Modernization of quality control systems for agricultural products;  intensification of commercial activities; Improved information on local and European financing, including projects  creation of new jobs in non-agricultural sectors such as tourism, services, preparation; crafts, logistics, etc.; Improvement of Advisory/consulting and training activity for farmers / rural labor;  vocational education training activities for agriculture; Fostering organic farming activities;  development of tourist centers supplying activities; Take-up of farming activities by young generations;  consultancy and training activities for farmers / rural workforce. Modernization/rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure; Consolidation and modernization of small farms; Creation of small businesses outside agriculture; Modernization of technical endowment of farms; Bottom-up initiatives for local development; Afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural land in the Danube Delta region; Conservation of local patrimony and traditions (including handicrafts); Release of land through concessions by Tulcea County Council; Exit of old farmers and transfer of assets; Foster establishment of producer groups/organizations;

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects Stimulate creation of short supply chains for the benefit of tourism activities; Support branding/certification of agricultural products and their marketing on international markets; Provide incentives to maintain agricultural activities in core Delta; Support rehabilitation of flood protection infrastructure; Enable participation of farmers and processors to risk management tools; Educational infrastructure upgrade (especially for primary and secondary education). Pillar III - Improving connectivity Transport Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin – Brăila; Modernization of County Road DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL – ZEBIL – SARICHIOI;  service areas (including gas stations); Modernization of County Road DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia Veche;  intensification of road transport of passengers and freight; Modernization of County Road DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-Săcele-Istria-  intensification of water transport of passengers and freight; MihaiViteazu;  intensification of air transport of passengers and freight; Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Măcin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports;  intensification of commercial activities; Development and modernization of airport infrastructure;  intensification of related activities; Modernization of county roads (regional transport infrastructure):  intensification of ways of transport between several types of transport (road, • DJ222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus; rail, air); • DJ222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus;  • DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798; intensification of tourism activities. • route Cetatea Histria - DN22/ Tariverde. Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel. Information and communication technology Internet / ultra-fast internet for green tourism;  intensification of tourism activities; Improvement of e-government services and local public monitoring systems;  intensification of commercial activities; Support of ICT for businesses through e-portal and grant facility;  intensification of related activities. Formulating and implementing open data policies;

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects Increasing vertical integration of ICT innovation solutions in the local economy; Increasing private investments in RDI and encouraging the demand for RDI; Increasing knowledge, technology and staff transfer with RDI skills by means of partnerships between private and research environment; Increasing the excellence of scientific basis as engine for innovation, by developing RD infrastructure; Increasing the involvement in EU level research by unlocking the excellence potential in RDI, such as within the framework program Horizon 2020 and by attracting talents and advanced skills to the RDI national system; Developing ITC infrastructure and systems and digital skills to support education, health, online culture and digital inclusion. Pillar IV - Providing basic services Water supply and sanitation and integrated water management  collection, treatment and disposal of wastewater; Types of interventions / projects that aim water supply and sanitation and  sludge management in the wastewater treatment process; integrated water management in areas with an equivalent population greater than  potable water treatment and monitoring of the substances that are 2000 inhabitants; discharged into waters; Types of interventions / projects that aim water supply and sanitation and  rehabilitation and expansion of transport and distribution systems for potable integrated water management in areas with an equivalent population greater water; lower 2000 inhabitants.  maintenance and repairs of equipment that is used in the activities. Solid waste management Collection of Floating Waste in River Channels;  floating waste collection activities on river channels; Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at  collection and transport activities of waste from the localities located in the source, collection, sorting and transportation facilities); DD; Public education and awareness program on waste management;  MBT activities for waste; Composting bins for rural households to process organic waste;  information and promoting activities, at non-formal or educational level, of a Investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition proper management of waste, both to locals and tourists; waste;  composting of biodegradable waste activities in rural areas; Recovering waste collected from households and economic agents.

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects  treatment and disposal activities of construction and demolition waste, with focus on recycling and reuse;  waste valorification activities. Healthcare Consolidate the response capacity of Public Health Directorate (PHD) by designing and implementing an environmental health surveillance system; Rehabilitation/modernization of facilities, and IT equipment; Modernization and equipment, and organize a functional building block at Tulcea Emergency Hospital (including for integrated ambulatory department), and for Macin Hospital;  appropriate maintenance activities for IT and laboratory equipment, as well Rehabilitation /transformation of TB pavilion at Tulcea Emergency Hospital to a as for auto vehicles; social accommodation center (residential care shelter);  medical staff training activities in order to strengthen the capacity of public Create public ambulatory centers by rehabilitating closed hospital buildings in health surveillance, as well as the capacity of early warning and coordinated Babadag and Sulina; response to public health emergencies, natural and human disasters; Ensure interoperability of medical information systems at health care level  monitoring activities to ensure the success of the implemented measures; (telemedicine and e-health);  information, education and communication activities on a healthy and Reforms to increase cost-effectiveness of sector governance/management hygienic living environment; (hospital payment mechanism to incentivize public ambulatory, family doctor, and  intensification of commercial activities; telemedicine systems);  intensification of related activities. Information, education and communication campaigns on healthy and hygienic environment; Ambulances for emergency care and rehabilitation civil works; Provide area specific training for medical professionals; Increase the prevalence of health programs focused on prevention and screening. Education Provision of relevant, accessible and incentivized LLL programmes in sustainable  activities that will include counseling services, support for partnerships with tourism, agriculture and fishery in Community Centers for Permanent Learning; companies through internships and apprenticeships, training mechanisms Creating an Education & Training Network for students living in remote areas or and incentives, provision of spaces for workshops in VET schools; with less than 2000 population to provide access to primary and lower secondary  intensification of commercial activities;

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects quality education for all;  intensification of related activities. Provide support for creating VET schools that are relevant, attractive and inclusive, and which produce a workforce with knowledge & skills of international standard and relevance to the global demands of the nature-based tourism and recreational fishing market; Enhance kindergartens and nursery services through development, support, rehabilitation and provision of equipment to increase access to early childhood education and care (ECEC); Bring Early school leavers back to school through school after school and second chance programs; Create partnerships between employers, E&T providers and research bodies to ensure better performance of education system in addressing labor market needs. Social inclusion and protection Develop early childhood (0-6 years) institutional infrastructure in communities with high share of Roma; Scaling up school mediators in schools with high percentage of Roma; Implementing community grants for educational intervention;  creating new jobs for mediators; Facilitate regularization of property rights;  counseling activities. Other social protection interventions; SME subsidies for job placement for NEETs in relevant fields; Improve digital literacy among the Roma and vulnerable groups; Increase the access to as well as the efficiency of social service provision. Pillar V - Promoting efficiency, affordability and sustainability Administrative capacity and program management Strengthening local administrative capacity for strategic planning and budgeting, decision making, human resource management and monitoring and evaluation;  capacity and support strengthening activities offered through technical Identification, development and implementation of measures to increase assistance for the development of government entities in the DD region; transparency, inclusiveness, ethics and integrity, and reduce corruption in public  creation of new administrative spaces. authorities and institutions;

Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of Types of interventions / projects the proposed interventions / projects Technical Assistance (TA) for ITI program management; Revise regulations to improve the design of household subsidies to improve affordability of services, and a more efficient targeting and use of financial and natural resources; Improving access and quality of services provided by the judicial system; Actions intended to ensure the coordination between the public institutions dealing with the conservation of biodiversity and the ecological reconstruction of the Danube Delta; The development and implementation of online services. Other categories  modernization activities of local roads/ streets, community and sports units and other community facilities;  working to improve public spaces; Urban Renewal Interventions.  rehabilitation measures;  intensification of tourism activities;  intensification of commercial activities;  intensification of related activities.

2.11 CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTENT, PROPOSED OR APPROVED PP, WHICH MAY GENERATE CUMULATIVE IMPACT WITH DDISDS AND WHICH MAY AFFECT THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY IMPORTANCE DDISDS (2030) provides the development framework for a number of types of interventions / projects planned in the Danube Delta region. The types of interventions / projects cover several activity sectors (see section 2.1.2), but those that can potentially generate cumulative impact with other existing, proposed or approved PP, and that may affect natural protected areas of the Danube Delta region are those that require the construction works. An analysis in order to quantify the cumulative impact of DDISDS with other proposed / existing or approved plans or projects, it is impossible to perform at this time due to the current spatial details for both types of interventions / projects provided for DDISDS as well as the fairly vague spatial information about the location of other proposed PP in the Danube Delta region. In the actual form of DDISDS, project which may generate cumulative impacts with existinting activities or proposed plans and projects are represented by:

 All transport interventions;

 Interventions for flood risk management;  Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Macin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports;

 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel. Whitout avoidance and mitigation measures, this projects may generate moderate to significant impacts in areas where several other pressures are already existing (see section 4.1). The most important examples are:  Cummulative impacts on fishes, particularly on sturgeon species by the interventions for ports modernisation and Sulina Chennel rehabilitation. Species like Acipenser gueldenstaedtii, Huso huso or Acipenser stellatus, which are critically endangered are still facing a decline despite the prohibition established in 2006, mainly due to the illegal fishing. This species may be supplementary affected by the above mentioned interventions;

 Transportation projects, particularly the extention of national road 22, may add significant contribution to the impact on steppe habitats and one of the few forests in Dobrogea region: Babadag forest. Such impact will add to the process of wind parks and quarries (with their additional infrastructure) expansions of the last decade. DDISDS projects mentioned above have to implement adequate measures at the project level, based on appropriate assessments in order to avoid and mitigate potential impacts on Natura 2000 components. Such measures should avoid potential cumulative impacts generated by the implementation of the Strategy. 3 INFORMATION ABOUT THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS 3.1 DATA CONCERNING THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS 3.1.1 General information regarding Natura 2000 network from Danube Delta Region General information on Natura 2000 network and its legal framework

The Natura 2000 network was established in 1992 and is the largest ecological network of protected areas in the world, comprising Sites of Community Importance (SCIs, designated for protection of habitats and species from Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs, designated for protection of bird species from Annex I of the Birds Directive). By creating Natura 2000 network a special regime for the protection of the natural habitats and wild species of flora and fauna was established, as well as for the wild bird species, present on the European Union territory, that are considered rare, have a restricted range or highly fragmented or are threatened with extinction, protecting, in the same time, other species and natural habitats that are not found in Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive or Annex I of the Birds Directive. The Natura 2000 ecological network was established not only for the protection of the wild species of flora and fauna and natural habitats, but also for their conservation, preserving the diversity of natural capital, promoting traditional activities and long-term sustainable development. Two European Union directives were the cornerstone of the Natura 2000 network, governing the selection, designation and protection of habitats, species and sites: Birds Directive - Council Directive 79/409 EEC on the conservation of wild birds, abrogated and amended in 30 November 2009 with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conservation of wild birds, comprises 7 Annexes, in Annex I being listed species for which are required special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their survival and reproduction in their area of distribution; Habitats Directive – Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, comprises 6 Annexes, in Annex I being listed the types of natural habitats of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation, while in Annex II are listed animal and plant species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation. The two European Directives were transposed into the Romanian legislation through Government Emergency Ordinance no. 57/ 2007 on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural habitats, wild flora and fauna, approved with amendments and supplements by Law no. 49/ 2011, as amended and supplemented subsequent by Law no. 73/ 2015 approving Government Ordinance no. 20/ 2014 for amending GEO no. 57/ 2007 on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural habitats, wild flora and fauna, which contains in addition to the species listed in Directives, which are found in our country's territory, those species considered important for Romania, requiring a special protection regime. Also, GEO no. 57/ 2007 contains an additional annex (Annex 4B) in which are presented species of national interest requiring strict protection. Protected natural areas and Natura 2000 network in Danube Delta Region The study area is represented by DDBR (the area between the Sf. Gheorghe and the Chilia branches of the Danube River; the Razim-Sinoe-Babadag lake system and adjacent land areas; and the area along the Danube River west of Tulcea City towards Galati) and its neighboring area, which together form the so- called „Danube Delta Region”. The Danube Delta Region consists of Tulcea City, four towns (Babadag, Isaccea, Măcin, and Sulina) and thirty three communes, respectively a total number of 38 territorial administrative units (see section 2.2 - Table no. 2-1). On the territory of the study area, Danube Delta Region, the following types of natural protected areas are present, with differentiated regime of protection, conservation and use:

Of international interest: Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, natural heritage site of universal value (included in List of World Natural and Cultural Heritage), wetland area of international importance (RAMSAR site); Of national interest: Danube Delta National Park (according to the IUCN international taxonomy, category II), Munţii Măcinului National Park and 29 scientific and natural reserves: Arinişul Erenciuc, Capul Doloşman, Cetatea Histria, Complexul Periteasca-Leahova, Complexul Sacalin Zătoana , Complexul Vătafu Lungule, Corbu-Nuntaşi-Histria, Dealul Deniz tepe, Dealurile Beştepe, Grindul Chituc, Grindul Lupilor, Grindul şi Lacul Răducu, Insula Ceaplacea, Insula Popina, Insula Prundul cu Păsări, Lacul Belciug, Lacul Nebunu, Lacul Potcoava, Lacul Rotundu, Ostrovul Prut, Pădurea Babadag-Codru, Pădurea Caraorman, Pădurea Letea, Rezervaţia botanică Korum Tarla, Rezervaţia de liliac Fântâna Mare, Rezervaţia Geologică Agighiol, Roşca Buhaiova, Sărăturile Murighiol, Valea Fagilor, of which 6 are located outside the DDBR (Dealul Deniz Tepe, Dealurile Beştepe, Pădurea Babadag-Codru, Rezervaţia botanică Korum Tarla, Rezervaţia Geologică Agighiol and Valea Fagilor) (Figure no. 3-1); Of community interest (Natura 2000 sites): on the study area are overlapping, partly or fully, 8 Sites of Community Importance: ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin, ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină, ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe, ROSCI0105 Lunca Joasă a Prutului, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului and ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean (Figure no. 3-2) and 12 Special Protection Areas: ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia, ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei, ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoie, ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe, ROSPA0040 Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin, ROSPA0052 Lacul Beibugeac, ROSPA0060 Lacul Taşaul – Corbu, ROSPA0073 Măcin – Niculiţel, ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră, ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag, ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea and ROSPA0121 Lacul Brateş (Figure no. 3-3). DDBR is the unique delta in the world which has been declared a biosphere reserve (in September 1990), being one of the largest wetlands (including freshwater marshes, lakes and ponds, streams and canals) in terms of habitats for waterfowl, having a largest area of reed beds, 30 types of ecosystems, with a surface area of 580,000 ha, representing approx. 2 % of Romania's territory (22nd place among the deltas of the world and 3rd in Europe, after the Volga and Kuban)20. Only 9 % of the area is permanently above water 21. The universal value of DDBR was recognized by its inclusion in the international network of biosphere reserves, in 1990, within the programme „Man and biosphere” (MAB) launched by UNESCO. The natural heritage universal value of DDBR was recognized by its inclusion in List of World Natural and Cultural Heritage, in December 1990. DDBR was recognized, in September 1991, as Wetland area of international importance, especially as Waterfowl Habitat – RAMSAR Convention. In 1999 RBDD was included together with Danube Biosphere Reserve in Ukraine in the international network of transboundary biosphere reserves Romania - Ukraine.

20 http://www.ddbra.ro/rezervatia/delta-dunarii/prezentare-generala/valoare-universala-a15

21 Raport de diagnostic - Strategie Integrată de Dezvoltare Durabilă pentru Delta Dunării, 3 Martie 2014

The natural heritage value and the effectiveness of the ecological Management plan, applied on DDBR territory, were recognized through the granting in 2000 of the European Diploma of Protected Areas, renewed in 2005 and 2010. The European Diploma of Protected Areas it is granted by the European Council for those regions which are of particular importance for the conservation of biological diversity, geological and landscape in Europe. Also, Danube Delta has a "national park" status in the IUCN international taxonomy, and is overlapping with Sites of Community Importance (SCIs): ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării and ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării – zona marină, as well as with Special Protection Areas (SPAs): ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoie. On DDBR territory are, also, present 22 scientific and natural reserves. The protected natural areas present present throughout the territory of the study area are presented in Section 3.1.1 of the present study. The Administration of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (ADDBR) was established in 1990 as being the administrative organization responsible for the conservation and management of biodiversity, ecosystems and natural resources of the Danube Delta. This role was legalized by the law enacted in 1993 (Law no. 83/1993)22. The list of Natura 2000 sites which overlap, partly or fully, on the study area, as well as the percentage from each site located in the Danube Delta Region are shown in Table no. 3-1.

Table no. 3-1 List of Natura 2000 sites in the study area Site surface in % located in Site code Site name Site surface (ha) the study area the study (ha) area ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin 10235.433 651.557 6.37 ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului 1433.287 1433.287 100.00 ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării 453076.127 451661.178 99.69 ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină 123320.544 2560.772 2.08 ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe 413.701 413.701 100.00 ROSCI0105 Lunca Joasă a Prutului 5806.456 283.618 4.88 ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului 16893.877 7315.358 43.30 ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean 84799.223 31445.429 37.08 ROSPA0009 Beştepe - Mahmudia 3662.603 3662.603 100.00 ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei 10932.553 168.883 1.54 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim ROSPA0031 508688.204 506598.165 99.59 - Sinoie ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe 1899.766 1899.766 100.00 ROSPA0040 Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin 18759.248 604.434 3.22 ROSPA0052 Lacul Beibugeac 470.394 470.394 100.00 ROSPA0060 Lacul Taşaul 2701.108 524.817 19.43 ROSPA0073 Măcin - Niculiţel 67361.073 34014.558 50.50 ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră 148846.695 2569.417 1.73 ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag 58473.223 27225.050 46.56

22 http://www.ddbra.ro/administratia/despre-noi

Site surface in % located in Site code Site name Site surface (ha) the study area the study (ha) area ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea 22202.407 175.745 0.79 ROSPA0121 Lacul Brateş 15801.043 296.365 1.88

Out of the 8 SCIs present on the Danube Delta Region, 2 are located entirely on the territory of the study area: ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului and ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe, while ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării is located in proportion of 99.7 % on the study area’s territory. Out of the 12 SPAs, 3 are located entirely on the territory of the study area: ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia, ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe and ROSPA0052 Lacul Beibugeac, while ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoe is situated in proportion of 99.6 % on the study area’s territory. Regarding the biogeographical regions, on the Danube Delta Region, are encountered 3 out of 6 biogeographical regions present on the national territory (Figure no. 3-4): Pontic – lies on the western shores of the Black Sea and the East part of the Danube Delta – 94.5 % of this biogeographical region is encountered in the study area; Steppic – comprises the lowland landscape from the south-eastern part and, partial, Danube Delta and Black Sea – 13.7 % of this biogeographical region is encountered in the study area; Black Sea - only 0.1 % of the Black Sea surface is included in the study area.

Figure no. 3-1 Location of the natural protected areas of national interest in relation with the study area

Figure no. 3-2 Location of the Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) in relation with the study area

Figure no. 3-3 Location of the Special Protection Areas (SPAs) in relation with the study area

Figure no. 3-4 Location of the study area in relation with the biogeographical regions

3.1.2 Information regarding the natural protected areas of community interest potentially affected by the implementation of the DDISDS In this section are briefly presented some relevant information regarding the Natura 2000 sites present on the study area, the Danube Delta Region, in accordance with the Natura 2000 Standard Forms23. Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) 1. ROSCI0012 – Braţul Măcin The site is located within the territories of three counties: Brăila (44 %), Constanţa (14 %) and Tulcea (44 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 10,235 hectares, comprising altitudes between 0 and 94 meters above sea level, with an average of 8 meters. The site is important in the first place for the habitat conservation: 92A0 Zăvoaie cu Salix alba şi Populus alba, occupying approximately 19.41 % of site surface, respectively 4 % of the habitat surface at national level. Also, the site represents the northern part of the migration corridor of the plant species from Balkan Peninsula to the Northern Dobrogea and Danube Delta. Moreover this represents an important migration route for bird species (being also proposed as SPA), and for certain species of fish, including sturgeon. The site was designated for the protection of 8 habitat types, 1 species of plants, 11 species of fish, 4 species of amphibians and reptiles and 2 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts 3 other important species of plants. 2. ROSCI0060 - Dealurile Agighiolului The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 1,433 hectare, comprising altitudes between 32 and 218 meters above sea level, with an average of 124 meters. The site includes the priority habitat 62C0* Stepe ponto-sarmatice, occupying approximately 61 % of site surface, respectively 0.9 % of the habitat surface at national level. Within this habitat the association Agropyro brandzae – Thymetum zygioidi is present, which has a remarkable value, being endemic for Dobrogea, and occupies large surfaces here, hundreds of hectares. Within the Agropyro brandzae – Thymetum zygioidi association are found important populations of Euphorbia myrsinites species, included in the National Red List, very rare in Dobrogea, being the only region in the country where it is encountered this taxon. The site was designated for the protection of 3 habitat types, 1 species of plants, 1 species of reptiles and 2 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts another one important species of plants. 3. ROSCI0065 - Delta Dunării The site is located within the territories of two counties: Tulcea (93 %) and Constanţa (7 %), belonging to the biogeographical regions: steppic (51.98 %) and pontic (48.02 %). The site’s surface is about 453,076 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 229 meters above sea level, with an average of 1 meter. This site covers a wide area and comprises a great diversity of aquatic, swamp, land, river, river-marine and coastal ecosystems, creating the possibility to populate the region with a high diversity of ecotypes

23 http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/natura-2000/435

of the species from the Quaternary post-glacial retreats, mainly the Mediterranean and eastern species. Among the endemic plants are mentioned Centaurea pontica and Centaurea jankae, the orchids (Orchis elegans, Platantera bifolia, Anacamptis pyramidalis), the Silk vine (Periploca graeca), the sand bindweed (Convolvulus persicus), among the insects - the iris butterflies (Apatura metis, Rhiparioides metelkana, Catocala elocata, Arctia villica, Thersamonia dispar), the beetles - the European rhinoceros beetle (Oryctes nasicornis), the praying mantis (Empusa fasciata) and the orthoptera (Saga pedo), and among amphibians - the European tree frog (Hyla arborea) it is very numerous here. Also, the birds are well represented in this site, some of them being protected (the great white pelican and the Dalmatian pelican, the mute swan, the great egret and the little egret, the squacco heron, the Eurasian Spoonbill, the pied avocet, the black-winged stilt, the red-crested Pochard, the red-breasted goose etc.), most of them nesting in the area. The site was designated for the protection of 29 habitat types, 5 species of plants, 11 species of invertebrates, 15 species of fish, 5 species of amphibians and reptiles and 5 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 101 important species of flora and fauna, belonging to taxonomic groups: plants, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, fish and mammals. 4. ROSCI0066 – Delta Dunării – zona marină The site is located in the marine area, belonging entirely to the Black Sea biogeographical region (100 %). The site’s surface is about 123,321 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 14 meters above sea level, with an average of 0 meter. The site corresponds with the geographical unit with the same name, component of DDBR (Black Sea coastal area from the mouth of the Cape Midia to the Chilia branch, with an extent on offshore to water depths of ~20m), and main classes of habitats being represented by: marine areas and islands, estuaries and lagoons, sandy beaches, marshes and bogs. The marine area of the Danube Delta has certain specific features resulting as a major influence of the Danube waters and of the silt deposited by the waters, being present here unique sedimentary habitats, at the Romanian seaside. The site was designated for the protection of 4 habitat types, 2 species of fish and 2 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 34 important species of flora and fauna (plants, invertebrates, fish and mammals). 5. ROSCI0067 - Deniz Tepe The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 414 hectare, comprising altitudes between 42 and 258 meters above sea level, with an average of 118 meter. The site is constituted 99 % of grasslands and 1 % of thickets, the main classes of habitats are represented by: natural grasslands, steppes and crops (arable land). The site was designated for the protection of 2 habitat types, 1 species of plants, 1 species of reptiles and 1 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 3 important species of plants. 6. ROSCI0105 - Lunca Joasă a Prutului The site is located entirely within the Galaţi County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 5,807 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 31 meters above sea level, with an average of 7 meter.

Lunca Prutului Inferior it is characterized by absolute altitudes ranging from 8 m in the northern part and 3-4 m in the southern part, the floodplain topography is, generally, plane, with a continuous gradient from north to south, and transversal the land is tilted toward the Prut River (east), general appearance of the floodplain being that of a large depressions. The microrelief is represented by accumulation forms (grinds) and negative forms (former lakes, ponds, puddles and swamps). The site was designated for the protection of 8 habitat types, 1 species of invertebrates, 9 species of fish, 3 species of amphibians and 1 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 8 important species of flora and fauna. 7. ROSCI0123 - Munţii Măcinului The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 16,894 hectare, comprising altitudes between 4 and 466 meters above sea level, with an average of 214 meter. Măcin Mountains, formed during the hercinic orogenesis (between Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras), are some of the oldest mountains in Romania, with a surface of 50,000 ha and are localized in the south- eastern part of Romania. These mountains presents characteristic ecosystems Ponto-Balkan steppe, sub-mediterranean and Balkan forests, as well as a great diversity of flora and fauna. The number of superior plants that are found at this area represents over 19 % of European flora, being comparable with the rich flora of Crete and Corsica islands. Măcin Mountains and their surroundings are the only parts of Romania where there are still significant areas of natural vegetation steppe, which is not found in other parts of Romania or elsewhere in the Balkans. The site was designated for the protection of 10 habitat types, 5 species of plants, 8 species of invertebrates, 3 species of amphibians and reptiles and 5 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 86 important species of flora and fauna (plants, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles and mammals). 8. ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 84,799 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 411 meters above sea level, with an average of 201 meters. The main classes of habitats of this site are represented by: rivers, lakes, natural meadows, steppes, crops (arable land), grassland, other arable land, deciduous forests, coniferous forests, vineyards, orchards and other artificial land and forest habitats (forests in transition). At national level, the site is one of the largest and most representative for the Steppic biogeographical region, being constituted in proportion of 95.5 % (85,046 ha) of community interest habitats, of which steppe habitats occupies an area of approx. 24,807 ha (27.85 %). The site was designated for the protection of 10 habitat types, 7 species of plants, 5 species of invertebrates, 3 species of amphibians and reptiles and 6 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 52 important species of flora and fauna (plants, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles and mammals). Special Protection Areas (SPAs) 1. ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia

The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 3,663 hectare, comprising altitudes between 4 and 229 meters above sea level, with an average of 80 meters. The site is located in a hilly area, at DDBR boundary, component part of Tulcea Hills geographical unit, Beştepe Hills being a peisagistic reservation, representative for the steppe and silvosteppe vegetation. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Burhinus oedicnemus, Caprimulgus europaeus, Calandrella brachydactyla and Oenanthe pleschanka. Also, the site is important during the migration period for prey bird species, and during the winter, in particular, for the following species: Branta ruficollis and Circus cyaneus. The site was designated for the protection of 30 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 32 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 2. ROSPA0019 - Cheile Dobrogei The site is located entirely within the Constanţa County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 10,933 hectare, comprising altitudes between 4 and 200 meters above sea level, with an average of 86 meters. The site is important not only from the point of view of the geomorphological, paleontological, botanical and landscape characteristics, but also through the elements of fauna, reptiles, birds and bat species being very well represented, within the site perimeter being two caves important in what concern the speleological and paleontological terms.. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Burhinus oedicnemus, Circaetus gallicus, Circus pygargus, Coracias garullus, Melanocorypha calandra, Calandrella brachydactyla and Anthus campestris. Also, the site is important during the migration period for prey bird species, and during the winter, in particular, for Branta ruficollis. The site was designated for the protection of 42 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 21 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 3. ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoie The site is located within the territories of two counties: Tulcea (89 %) and Constanţa (9 %), belonging to the biogeographical regions: steppic (57.21 %) and pontic (42.79 %). The site’s surface is about 508,688 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 137 meters above sea level, with an average of 3 meters. This site is represented by the territory between the first bifurcation of the Danube (Ceatalul Chiliei), bordered to the east by the Black Sea littoral, Chilia branch at the north and Razim Sinoie Complex at south. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Pelecanus crispus, Pelecanus onocrotalus, Aythya nyroca, Falco vespertinus, Phalacrocorax pygmeus, Plegadis falcinellus, Egretta garzetta, Nycticorax nycticorax, Egretta alba, Recurvirostra avosetta, Ardeola ralloides, Sterna albifrons, Porzana porzana, Haliaeetus albicilla, Sterna hirundo, Larus melanocephalus, Himantopus himantopus, Glareola pratincola, Platalea leucorodia, Ixobrychus minutus, Charadrius alexandrinus, Chlidonias hybridus, Circus aeruginosus, Ardea purpurea, Botaurus stellaris, Coracias garrulus, Alcedo atthis, Gelochelidon nilotica. Also, the site is important during the migration period for prey bird species.

The site was designated for the protection of 89 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 134 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 4. ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 1,900 hectare, comprising altitudes between 11 and 258 meters above sea level, with an average of 56 meters. The site is located in the hilly area from the Dobrudjan forest steppe vegetation, being important for nesting populations of some species characteristic to steppe areas such as: Burhinus oedicnemus, Calandrella brachydactyla, Melanocorypha calandra, Anthus campestris and Buteo rufinus. Also, the area is an important feeding area for some of the nesting pairs from the neighboring site ROSPA0091 Pădudea Babadag: Circaetus gallicus and Hieraaetus pennatus. The site was designated for the protection of 25 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 16 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 5. ROSPA0040 - Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin The site is located within the territories of three counties: Brăila (33 %), Constanţa (22 %) and Tulcea (45 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 18,759 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 198 meters above sea level, with an average of 17 meters. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Coracias garrulus, Falco vespertinus, Aythya nyroca, Accipiter brevipes, Anthus campestris, Lanius minor, Lanius collurio and Calandrella brachydactyla. Also, the site is important during the migration period for prey birds species: Pelecanus crispus, Accipiter brevipes, Branta ruficollis, Pelecanus onocrotalus şi Phalacrocorax pygmaeus, and during the winter, in particular, for two species: Phalacrocorax pygmaeus and Anser albifrons. The site was designated for the protection of 58 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 3 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 6. ROSPA52 - Lacul Beicugeac The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 470 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 24 meters above sea level, with an average of 5 meters. Beibugeac – Plopu Lake is a wetland area located near the DDBR, with a lake surface that varies from year to year, depending on the rainfall and temperatures levels that are recorded during the summer. Over the time, the lake bottom was covered with a fine silt, rich in invertebrate species, which attracts many wader species, ducks, shelducks and swans. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Glareola pratincola, Falco vespertinus, Recurvirostra avosetta and Himantopus himantopus. During migration the site hosts more than 20,000 copies of aquatic birds, being possible candidate as a Ramsar site, and during the winter, in particular, for the species: Phalacrocorax pygmaeus, Branta ruficollis, Anser albifrons and Cygnus cygnus. The SPA is also

designated as an IBA, according SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2, C3, C4. The site was designated for the protection of 36 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 49 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 7. ROSPA0060 - Lacurile Taşăul – Corbu The site is located entirely within the Constanţa County territory (100 %), belonging to the pontic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 2,701 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 16 meters above sea level, with an average of 2 meters. Taşaul Lake form together with Gargalâc Lake (known as Corbu Lake) a lake complex. Taşaul Lake is a typical maritime shore, having no direct connection to the Black Sea, its shores having the shape of a sea wall, the hydrographic basin being formed, mostly, by the Casimcea River. Corbu Lake's shores are constituted mostly from loess, in the form of a sea wall with small heights. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being also a possible candidate as a Ramsar site, and during the winter is important, in particular, for the species: Pelecanus crispus, Aythya ferina, Fulica atra, Larus ridibundus and Larus cachinnans. The SPA is also designated as an IBA, according SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2, C4 and C6. The site was designated for the protection of 34 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 30 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 8. ROSPA0073 - Măcin – Niculiţel The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 67,361 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 466 meters above sea level, with an average of 154 meters. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Falco cherrug, Coracias garrulus, Ciconia ciconia, Accipiter brevipes, Burhinus oedicnemus, Oenanthe pleschanka, Circaetus gallicus, Buteo rufinus, Emberiza hortulana, Caprimulgus europaeus, Hieraaetus pennatus and Lullula arborea. Also, represents an important area for the migrating birds, being designated, according SOR, as an IBA based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2, C5 and C6. The site was designated for the protection of 56 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 24 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 9. ROSPA0076 - Marea Neagră The site’s surface is about 148,847 ha, comprising altitudes between 0 and 22 meters above sea level, belonging to the biogeographical regions: pontic (0.03 %) and Black Sea (99.97 %). The main classes of habitats being represented by: marine areas and islands, estuaries, lagoons, sandy beaches, marshes, peatlands and other artificial lands, the physicochemical and biological particularities of the Black Sea, confering the status of an unique site. The site is important during the migration and the winter periods for a number of bird species, protected at national and international level, during migration hosting more than 20,000 copies of

aquatic birds, being possible candidate as RAMSAR site. The SPA is also designated as an IBA, according SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2, C3, C4 and C6. The site was designated for the protection of 18 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 20 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 10. ROSPA0091 - Pădurea Babadag The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 58,473 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 400 meters above sea level, with an average of 191 meters. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Falco vespertinus, Falco cherrug, Coracias garrulus, Hieraaetus pennatus, Accipiter brevipes, Circaetus gallicus, Circus pygargus, Oenanthe pleschanka, Picus canus, Milvus migrans and Dendrocopos medius. Also, represents an important area for the migrating birds: Haliaeetus albicilla, Ficedula parva and Ciconia ciconia, and during the winter for the species: Circus macrourus and Circus cyaneus. The SPA is also designated as an IBA, according SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2 and C6. The site was designated for the protection of 36 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 28 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 11. ROSPA0100 - Stepa Casimcea The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 22,202 hectares, comprising altitudes between 33 and 333 meters above sea level, with an average of 216 meters. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Coracias garrulus, Falco cherrug, Falco vespertinus, Aquila heliaca, Anthus campestris, Accipiter brevipes, Calandrella brachydactyla, Buteo rufinus, Milvus migrans, Pernis apivorus, Lanius collurio, Lullula arborea, Oenanthe pleschanka, Lanius minor, Melanocorypha calandra, Burhinus oedicnemus, Circaetus gallicus, Galerida cristata, Aquila pomarina, Dendrocopos syriacus and Emberiza hortulana. Also, represents an important area for the migrating birds: Falco vespertinus, Accipiter brevipes, Hieraaetus pennatus, Falco peregrinus, Circus cyaneus, Aquila pomarina, Ficedula albicollis, Circus macrourus and Circus pygargus. The SPA is also designated as an IBA, according SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1 and C6. The site was designated for the protection of 30 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 25 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. 12. ROSPA0121 - Lacul Brateş The site is located entirely within the Galaţi County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 15,801 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 54 meters above sea level, with an average of 1 meter. The site comprises agricultural lands, water bodies, swamps and floodplain forests, the current lake being only a small part of the old Brateş Lake, which was mostly drained. The site qualifies for the IBA area owed to the species populations: Anser albifrons – C3, Branta ruficollis – C1, Chlidonias hybridus –

C2, C6, Chlidonias niger – C6, Falco vespertinus – C1, C6, Pelecanus onocrotalus – C2, C6. Also, the site qualifies under C4 criterion for the concentrations of waterfowls during the migration. The site was designated for the protection of 5 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 7 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC. In the following figures are presented the locations of the projects/ types of interventions in relation to Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta region, for some projects/ types of interventions for which the vector data (SHP format) were made available, received from the beneficiary or from other parties directly concerned (specific locations), as well as for those projects/ types of interventions for which the spatial location was performed based on the digitization using satellite images on Google Earth Pro, according to the information available in the projects titles (incomplete or approximate locations; for example „approximate” for the projects like WSS and IWM where the buildable settlements limits were considered referred in projects titles, respectively „incomplete” for the projects like „Improve fish habitat”, within the sector „Fisheries and aquaculture”, where are mentioned, in a first phase, only 2 lakes, after which shall be identified a series of other interventions on other lakes whose location is not specified at this stage). 19 types of interventions / projects belonging to 8 sectors intersect sites of community interest, while 20 types of interventions / projects belonging to 8 sectors intersect special protection areas (Table no. 3-2 and Table no. 3-3). A complete list of the types of interventions / projects that intersect Natura 2000 sites can be found in Annex no. IV. Table no. 3-2 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SCIs for each sector No. of types of interventions / projects that intersect SCIs Biodiversity and Ecosystem Fishery and WSS and DRM Tourism Transport SWM Health Management Aquaculture IWM 3 2 1 3 6 2 1 1

Table no. 3-3 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SPAs for each sector No. of types of interventions / projects that intersect SPAs Biodiversity and Ecosystem Fishery and WSS and DRM Tourism Transport SWM Health Management Aquaculture IWM 3 2 1 3 7 2 1 1

A number of 2 sites of community interest and 5 special protection areas overlap with components of the types of interventions/projects of DDISDS. A complete list of the Natura 2000 sites intersected by types of interventions / projects of DDISDS can be found in Annex no. V.

Figure no. 3-5 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-6 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-7 Location of the project/ type of intervention “Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-8 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from DRM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region. A- project detail “Works for protection against floods”, B - project detail “Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency Situations (IES)”

Figure no. 3-9 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Implementation of a region-wide program for beautification of settlements” (Tourism sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-10 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions “Improve fish habitat. Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks. Dredge major lakes to restore water depth.” (Fisheries and aquaculture sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-11 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions “Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc)” (ARD sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-12 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from Transport sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-13 The location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions from WSS and IWM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-14 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from SWM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 3-15 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from Health sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region

3.2 DATA ABOUT THE PRESENCE, LOCATION, POPULATION AND ECOLOGY OF SPECIES AND/ OR HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST PRESENT ON THE SURFACE AND IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DDISDS, MENTIONED IN THE STANDARD DATA FORMS OF THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST Relevant data regarding the presence, location, population and ecology of the species and/ or habitats of community interest, were collected from the scientific literature, being carried out researches on the history of the studies conducted over time for each taxonomic group in part, from the study region. This information are presented below, in the following sections, for each analyzed taxonomic group being presented also maps (Figure no. 3-16 - Figure no. 3-22) concerning the numerical distribution of habitats and species of community interest protected in SCIs/ SPAs from the Danube Delta Region, extracted according to the reporting of Romania to the European Union, under Article 12 of the Birds Directive and Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, regarding the habitats mapping and the inventory of the species of community interest 24. 3.2.1 Habitats and vegetation The researches regarding the geographical area of the Danube Delta (including the shedding area of the Danube River to the Black Sea and the associated marine littoral) started since ancient times by Herodotus, Eratosthenes, Strabon and Ptolemais, who described the mouths of the Danube and the northwest shore of the Black Sea. There followed a long period, until the second half of the XIXth century (when it was raised the question to create a waterway on Danube, with extensions from the Black Sea to the central Europe), when appeared sporadic and less consistent information (Gâştescu and Ştiucă, 2008). Dobrudja was always a special attraction for botanists, and later for phytocoenologists, having a rich and diversified flora, in terms of component geo elements, but also a diversified vegetation of forests, xerofile meadows, halophilous, psammophile, helofile and aquatic communities. Although there is a rich literature regarding the flora species and the vegetation types present in the Danube Delta, some regions of Dobrudja were less investigated, still being gaps concerning their characteristic vegetation. The first records of the Danube Delta flora occurred in ”Prodromul florei Române” by Brândză (1883), which includes many species of vascular plants, as well as in the first published determinator in Romanian language, ”Flora descriptivă a Dobrogei” (1891) and then in Grecescu’s monograph (1898), ”Conspectul florei României”. Over the course of approximately 50-60 years since these botanical studies appeared, for this area sporadic data were published, but important in different works: Grinţescu G. (1927), Georgescu C.C. (1928, 1940), Pop Em., (1878-1928), Panţu Z. (1902-1935), Popovici I. (1913), Prodan I. (1914-1939), Petrescu C. (1916), Borza Al. (1931-1963) and Zahariadi C. (1940, 1963). Also, it is stated that in the first half of the XXth century, an important contribution to the knowledge of the Danube Delta was brought by Antipa Gr. through his works: Regiunea inundabilă a Dunării. Starea ei actuală şi mijloace de a o pune în valoare (1910), Delta Dunării (1914) and Valorificarea stufăriilor Deltei Dunării (1942).

24 http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal

After the 50s of the XXth century, when the studies on flora and vegetation were intensified, several researchers have contributed to complete the inventory of flora and to the vegetation studies in the Danube Delta. Among these researchers we mentioned:: Săvulescu Tr. (1952-1976), Beldie Al. (1959- 1979), Burduja C. (1954-1971), Puşcariu V. (1958-1978), Dihoru Gh. (1962-1976), Paşcovschi S. (1962- 1967), Andrei M. (1963-1967), Doniţă N. (1966-1992), Horeanu Cl. (1970-1976), Ştefureac Tr. (1970- 1980), Negrean G. (1976-1980), who filled in with new data to the scientific literature, bringing a significant contribution in the knowledge of flora and vegetation in the Danube Delta. Considerable contributions to the studies on flora and vegetation from Danube Delta were brought also by: Sanda V. (1964-2013), Popescu A. (1976-2013), Ciocârlan V. (1988-2009), Hanganu J. (1992-2002) and Petrescu M. (1994-2007). Please note that the studies conducted by M. Petrescu were performed in the Dobrudja Plateau, predominantly in Tulcea County and less in Constanta County, in the surrounding areas of the Danube, being identified 34 natural sites for which were developed projects for designation as protected areas (researches on flora and vegetation). Also, important contributions to Danube Delta characterization, regarding the floristic and phytocenologic terms, was carried out also by: Lupe (1954), Morariu (1957, 1970), Puşcariu et al. (1958, 1978), Puşcaru-Soroceanu (1959, 1963), Jakucs et al. (1959), Ţucra (1960), Şerbănescu (1962, 1967, 1971), Dămăceanu et al. (1964), Mihai et al. (1964), Rudescu (1965), Zanoschi (1966), Clonaru (1967), Nyárády (1967), Cristurean (1970), Ţopa (1976), Chiriţă (1977), Munteanu (1977), Viţalariu (1977), Chihaia (1979), Ivan (1979), Dinu (1987, 1990), Boşcaiu (1989), Roman (1992), Mohan et al. (1993), Oltean et al. (1994, 2002), Ştefan et al. (1995), Coldea et al. (1997), Sârbu I. (1997, 2003), Oprea (1998, 2005), Rákosy et al. (2000), Făgăraş et al. (2001), Sârbu A. (2003, 2006), Greavu (2006 şi 2007), Filat et al. (2009) and Petcu (2011, 2012). In addition to the aforementioned authors contributions, several institutions such as the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Administration in Tulcea, Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development in Tulcea, "Gavrilă Simion" Eco-Museum Research Institute - Tulcea, and the Institute of Biology - Romanian Academy, have initiated various projects over the years having as main business field to perform fundamental and applicative research in ecology and environmental protection, in order to develop DDBR'S management for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. In Table no. 3-4 are presented the 38 habitats of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015). Table no. 3-4 The community interest habitats included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of

the SCIs from the study area

N o Habitats code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

1110 – Bancuri de nisip acoperite permanent de un strat mic de apă 1 x x de mare 2 1130 – Estuare x

1140 – Nisipuri şi zone mlăştinoase neacoperite de apă de mare la 3 x reflux 4 1150* – Lagune costiere x

5 1160 – Melele şi golfuri x

6 1210 – Vegetaţie anuală de-a lungul liniei ţărmului x

N o Habitats code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

1310 – Comunităţi cu Salicornia şi alte specii anuale care 7 x colonizează terenurile umede şi nisipoase 8 1410 – Pajişti sărăturate de tip mediteranean (Juncetalia maritimi) x

9 1530* – Pajişti şi mlaştini sărăturate panonice şi ponto-sarmatice x x

1 2110 – Dune mobile embrionare (în formare) x 0 1 2130* – Dune fixate cu vegetaţie herbacee peren (dune gri) x 1 1 2160 – Dune cu Hippophae rhamnoides x 2 1 2190 – Depresiuni umede intradunale x 3 1 3130 – Ape stătătoare oligotrofe până la mezotrofe cu vegetaţie x x x 4 din Littorelletea uniflorae şi/sau Isoëto-Nanojuncetea 1 3140 – Ape puternic oligo-mezotrofe cu vegetaţie bentonic de x x 5 specii de Chara 1 3150 – Lacuri eutrofe naturale cu vegetaţie tip Magnopotamion sau x x 6 Hydrocharition 1 3160 – Lacuri distrofice şi iazuri x x 7 1 3260 – Cursuri de apă din zonele de câmpie, până la cele montane, x 8 cu vegetaţie din Ranunculion fluitantis şi Callitricho-Batrachion 1 3270 – Râuri cu maluri nămoloase cu vegetaţie de Chenopodion x x x 9 rubri şi Bidention 2 40C0* – Tufărişuri de foioase ponto-sarmatice x x x x x 0 2 6120* – Pajişti xerice pe substrat calcaros x 1 2 62C0* – Stepe ponto-sarmatice x x x x x x 2 2 6410 – Pajişti cu Molinia pe soluri calcaroase, turboase sau x 3 argiloase (Molinion caeruleae) 2 6420 – Pajişti mediteraneene umede cu ierburi înalte din Molinio- x 4 Holoschoenion 2 6430 – Comunităţi de lizieră cu ierburi înalte higrofile de la nivelul x x x 5 câmpiilor, până la cel montan şi alpin 2 6440 – Pajişti aluviale din Cnidion dubii x x 6 2 6510 – Pajişti de altitudine joasă (Alopecurus pratensis, Sanguisorba x x x 7 officinalis) 2 7210* – Mlaştini calcaroase cu Cladium mariscus x

N o Habitats code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

8 2 8230 – Comunităţi pioniere din Sedo-Scleranthion sau din Sedo albi- x x 9 Veronicion dilleni pe stâncării silicioase 3 8310 – Peşteri în care accesul publicului este interzis x x 0 3 91M0 – Păduri balcano-panonice de cer şi gorun x x 1 3 91AA – Vegetaţie forestieră ponto-sarmatică cu stejar pufos x x x x 2 91F0 – Păduri ripariene mixte cu Quercus robur, Ulmus laevis, 3 Fraxinus excelsior sau Fraxinus angustifolia, din lungul marilor râuri x x 3 (Ulmenion minoris) 3 91I0* – Vegetaţie de silvostepă eurosiberiană cu Quercus spp. x x 4 3 91X0 – Păduri dobrogene de fag x x 5 3 91Y0 – Păduri dacice de stejar şi carpen x x 6 3 92A0 – Zăvoaie cu Salix alba şi Populus alba x x x x 7 3 92D0 – Galerii ripariene şi tufărişuri (Nerio-Tamaricetea şi x 8 Securinegion tinctoriae) x – habitats mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms

Figure no. 3-16 Numerical distribution of habitats of community interest in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)

3.2.2 Plants Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve – marine area, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării – zona marină The DDBR territory is characterized by a particularly high diversity concerning the geographical distribution of the plant species areals, which inhabits the region. In biogeographical terms, the DDBR territory is located in the Palearctic region, the Mediterranean subregion, the pontic and steppic biogeographical regions. In phytogeographical terms, Danube Delta falls within the Danubian-Pontic province, Danube Delta district (Ciocârlan 2009). Prior to the period when human intervention has played a major role in changing the appearance of the geomorphological and structural characteristics of the deltaic territory, this space included mostly lakes, ponds, low hollows, reedbeds expanses, willow riverside coppices, along with the marine sandbanks: Letea, Caraorman, Sărăturile, Câmpia Bugeacului, Chilia and Stipoc, all these landforms ensuring an aquatic, paludous, land, river, river-marine and coastal ecosystems complex, characterized by a mosaic of habitats and an impressive number of plant species for such a reduced space (in comparison with the entire country's surface). Since the second half of the last century, extensive interventions occurred in Danube Delta, which can be grouped into several temporary periods, very distinct in terms of the performed works, in which both arms of the Danube and the terrestrial areas were modified. Vegetation and flora species have thus been directly affected, in early 1990 was estimated that about 30 % (approx. 1,000 km2) of the Danube Delta surface was removed from the natural regime (Gâştescu et Ştiucă 2008). The changes on habitats, vegetation and flora from the Danube Delta have generated in time negative effects, which led to the necessity to protect them, before the first half of the last century, within some reserves with a special status of protection for elements of flora, vegetation and habitats (especially the forest ones). Thus, many nature reserves have been established (Letea Forest and Roşca-Buhaiova area, being the firsts), followed in the 1990 with the appointment of the status of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (1990) and RAMSAR site (1991), and since 2007 have been designated the natural protected areas included in the Natura 2000 ecological network. The cormophitic flora of the Danube Delta has preoccupied many researchers over the time, so that in his work „Flora Deltei Dunării” (1994) Ciocârlan mention the existence of over 300 papers on different groups of plants (species of water, marshes, meadows, woody, important for fisheries, sandy etc.). Although the literature mainly treated vegetation issues, they provided also lists of species, having as subjects of interest both spontaneous species and those introduced cultures. With the occasion of these researches were reported also numerous endemic species for the Danubian-Pontic space. Synthesis floristic works containing also references about the Danube Delta flora were developed already two centuries now, starting with D. Brândză – Flora Dobrogei 1898, D. Grecescu – Conspectul florei României 1989, Supliment la conspectul florei României 1909, I. Prodan – Conspectul Florei Dobrogei 1935-1939, Flora pentru determinarea şi descrierea plantelor care cresc în România 1939, Flora României – T. Săvulescu (edit.) 1952-1976. Other authors that refers in their works at Danube Delta flora are Kanitz A. (1879-1881), Pallis M. (1916), Panţu Z. et al. (1935), Borza Al. (1947, 1949), Beldie Al. (1977, 1979), Ivan D. Et Dihoru G. 1991-1992, Sanda et Popescu 1992, Roman N. 1992, Hanganu et al. 1994 (has described and mapped Danube Delta flora) etc. A special work belongs to the authors Gh. Dihoru and G. Negrean – Flora of the Danube Delta 1976, in which it is presented an enumeration of the vascular species, based on the existing literature at that time (being mentioned 1,100 plant species, both native and cultivated, from Razim-Sinoie Complex,

Babadag Lake, to Grindul Chituc, Tulcea hills and the neighboring localities. In the paper of the authors Şeliag-Sosonco and Dubîna, regarding the flora and vegetation from the secondary delta of Chilia, are mentioned 563 species of cormophytae. In his paper since 1994, Ciocârlan mention 955 species of spontaneous cormophytae, number about which stated that „may increase through the introducing of other species by man, (...), or may decrease by profound modifications on biotopes”, what actually happened during the years before or after the publication of this work. Including in the mentioned paper, at the closure of the manuscript drafting, the author adds other 8 taxa to the list of the 955. In the paper, 10 new taxa for Romania's flora are located on the map (inclusive Delta's flora) and 7 new taxa for Delta's flora (many of species being allochthonous), and for about 150 species taken from ancient literature and not found in the field, argue their absence due to changes on the habitats, especially in what regards the wet meadows. Owing to the natural or anthropogenic driven evolutions, the deltaic area is in a constant formation and modification, while the interest for the Danube Delta flora is continuously growing – studies conducted in this regard were performed by National Institute for Research and Development in Environmental Protection and Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, the results being included in „Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” 2010-2011 – the study provides a comprehensive historic regarding the research developed in Danube Delta in the period 1995-2010 (as well as lists concerning species and habitats protected in DDBR area). Along with the Delta's natural changes, evolves also its flora, in recent years continue the reporting of many new species, for this space, some of them being even new for the country's flora. Recent researches on the Romania's flora, extensive papers of synthesis, have conducted also the authors Ciocârlan V. 2000, 2009 (Flora ilustrată a României), Dihoru et Negrean 2009 (Cartea Roşie a Plantelor Vasculare din România), Sârbu et al 2013 (Plante vasculare din România), in the second paper were included the rare plants of the national flora (548 taxa), which include also species from Danube Delta and the northern area of Dobrudja (respectively 6 of the species mentioned in the Standard Data Forms of the sites of community interest targeted by DDISDS – Aldrovanda veiculosa, Campanula romanica, Centaurea jankae, C. pontica, Moehringia jankae, Potentilla emilii-popii), being provided very important data regarding the distribution of the presented taxa at national level. Studies and surveys conducted after 2000 (articles and summaries), dedicated to flora (spontaneous, but also allochthonous) and the vegetation of the Danube Delta, entirely or partially, have published also Sârbu et al. 2001, Strat 2005, 2012, Covaliov et al. 2010, Oprea et al. 2011, Făgăraş 2013, 2014, Voichiţa et al. 2014. In the study „Ecological gradients in the Danube Delta Lakes: present state and man-induced changes”– Oosterberg W. et al. 2000, the authors noted that following the records from the Danube Delta, carried out between 1991-1997, Delta's flora counted 1,615 species, respectively one third of the total number of species known in Romania at that time. In 2002, have been published the results of a cross-border collaboration between three parties involved, respectively Romania, Ukraine and Germany, through which was continued the research on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems of the Delta. The researches were conducted on three fronts – the river area, the marine area and the transition zone between these two, being offered new data regarding the composition, description and the distribution of the vegetation types from Danube Delta, on the Romanian and Ukrainian territories. Following the researches and analyzes performed, the authors have classified and mapped the vegetation types identified (coastal vegetation, halophilous vegetation, sandy steppe vegetation, river banks vegetation, marshy, paludous and aquatic vegetation, sand dunes forestry vegetation, forests vegetation and meadow scrublands, psammophilous vegetation (sand

dunes), aquatic, submerged and emerged vegetation). The number of flora species (in this case representing an aggregate of the data from the Romanian part and the Ukrainian part) is of 1,460 taxa (vascular plants), the subject of rare plants from the Danube Delta not being treated in particular, but rather the groups of interest industrial plants (melliferous, alimentary, technical and fodder plant) or decorative plants (here are mentioned also several species of orchids, species considered rare in Romania's flora), as well as toxic or phyto alimentary plants. At the end of the paper are presented „Red List of vascular plants from Danube Delta”, list made based on Ciocârlan's researches (1994, 2000), for the Romanian area, and Dubyna (1990, 1999) and Mosyakin (1999), for the Ukrainian area, thereby resulting a total of 518 taxa, representing 35.5% of the total deltaic flora (1,460 species) – only 3 of the taxa targeted by DDISDS (only the taxa within the limits OF DDBR: Aldrovanda vesiculosa, Centaurea jankae, Centaurea pontica) are listed and valued in terms of the sozological category. The threat factors that contributed and still produce effects on the natural areas are underlined (naturale habitats) – the construction of the upstream dams, the development of the agricultural polders and fishponds, increasing of the water eutrophication, extension and excavation of the navigation channels, are causes of decline and extinction of the rare species. Centaurea pontica (taxon specific to psammophile flora, endemic to the deltaic area) and Aldrovanda vesiculosa (cosmopolitan taxon), are mentioned as rare and endangered species. In the paper „Reasesement of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and management proposal of the core areas in Danube Biosphere Reserve” (2010), the specialists team, botanists, has conducted researches on the vegetation and fauna of the Danube Delta, thus are listed 7 plant species of conservation interest of which only 4 are concerned by the implementation of DDISDS, being established an evolutive trend for them, during the 1990-2008 period, respectively Marsilea quadrifolia was slightly increasing, Echium russicum, Centaurea jankae, C. pontica, Aldrovanda vesiculosa are shown stable populations. For 2008-2010 period, M. quadrifolia, C. jankae, C. pontica and Aldrovanda vesiculosa are mentioned as present, while Echium russicum is identified as a rare species. The floristic inventory of the delta area is in a permanent upgrade through the deployment of the scientific research developed by the Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, in collaboration with many researchers in the field of botany. However, we notice the differences between the reporting of the total number of the Danube Delta species – in 2008 was indicated a number of 1,016 floristic species (Gâştescu et Ştiucă 2008), in 2011 Doroftei et al. mentioned 1,215 taxons (native and allochthonous), while in the DDBR Management Plan are mentioned 1,466 taxons (native and allochthonous). Thus, we conclude that the number of flora species in the Danube Delta area grows on short periods of time, due to rapid and highly diverse dynamic of the ecosystems from Danube Delta, as well as of the permanent anthropogenic impact. Măcinului Mountains National Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului, ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin; ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean, ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului, ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe. The northern Dobrudja Plateau includes predominantly peaks and valleys, differently oriented following the orogenesis, in Măcinului Mountains and Niculiţel Plateau the directions being NW-SE, while in Tulcei Hills and Babadag Plateau these being less arranged. From north to south-east (350-400 m in the west) the altitudes decrease gradually until the southeastern limit (15-20 m towards Razelm Lake). Thus, in this highly varied space, both morphostructural and climate, can be found peaks and plateaus with an "alpine" appearance, some of them affected by erosion, alternating with lowland areas, thus providing a favorable development over time of a very diverse cover vegetation comprising steppe, silvosteppe and woodland, sometimes with extra-zonal vegetation.

The flora of this geographical area, included entirely within the steppic bioregion, comprises submediterranean, mediterranean-balkans and eastern, tauric-caucasian, european-medium elements (Popovici et colab. 1984). In the northern area are characteristics: common oak, linden and hornbeam, that constitute a Balkan-type mesophilic floor (Doniţă 1969), in the central area (Casimcea Plateau) appear the linden and gray oak alongside with the ash and the hornbeam, forming dense forests disposed in a second floor of vegetation, xerotem with mediterranean influences. The silvosteppe and steppe comprising most of the Dobrudja Plateau – the silvosteppe occupies higher ridges and interfluvial bridges (100 – 150 m) from the northern half of Dobrudja (Babadag Plateau, Tulcei Hills, south of Niculiţel Plateau and Casimcea Plateau), being formed of downy oak, gray oak and maple Tartarians. The steppe vegetation is currently arranged on small areas, characterized by vegetal associations with twitch, stipa, and wormwood. The Dobrudja vegetation, generally, is very diverse and includes 252 coenotaxons, representing 36.8 % of the total identified in Romania (Petrescu 2007), many of them being also found in the area of interest for DDISDS (North and Central Dobrudja). It should be noted also that many of these coenotaxons are specific (endemic) for Dobrudja. As Danube Delta, of interest for botanists was also Dobrudja, representing a specific territory in terms of the mosaic of the habitat types and the flora richness. The researches on Dobrudja largely overlap, as period of development, with those concerning the deltaic flora. Among the researchers that have paid attention to this territory, very diverse and rich in botanical species (many of which are endemic or at the limit of the complex), we mentioned: D. Brândză – Flora Dobrogei 1898, D. Grecescu – Conspectul florei României 1989, Supliment la conspectul florei României 1909, I. Prodan – Conspectul Florei Dobrogei 1935-1939, Flora pentru determinarea şi descrierea plantelor care cresc în România 1939, T. Săvulescu (edit.) 1952-1976 – Flora României, Puşcaru-Soroceanu 1966, Sârbu et al. 2001, Petrescu 2004, 2007, Petrescu et al. 2011, Oprea et al 2011, Negrean 2011 etc. The latest information on the North Dobrudja area are contained in the Management Plan of Măcinului Mountains National Park, stating that currently the Măcin Mountains flora comprises over 1,700 plant species, representing approximately 50 % of Romania's flora, of which 72 are considered rare taxa for our country's flora, and 27 species are endemic to this region. In Table no. 3-5 are presented the 11 plant species of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).

Table no. 3-5 The community interest plant species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms

of the SCIs from the study area

No. Plant species code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

1 1428 – Marsilea quadrifolia x x

2 1516 – Aldrovanda vesiculosa x

3 1939 – Agrimonia pilosa x

4 2079 – Moehringia jankae x x

5 2125 – Potentilla emilii-popii x

6 2236 – Campanula romanica x x x x

7 2253 – Centaurea jankae x x

No. Plant species code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

8 2255 – Centaurea pontica x

9 2327 – Himantoglossum caprinum x x

10 4067 – Echium russicum x x x

11 4097 – Iris aphylla ssp. hungarica x x – species mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms

Figure no. 3-17 Numerical distribution of community interest plant species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)

3.2.3 Invertebrates The oldest data on Danube Delta's entomofauna refers to several species of butterflies collected by A. L. Montandon at Sf. Gheorghe, subsequently published by Aristide Caradja in 1902, or to those collected by Frantz Salay at Sulina and published also by Aristide Caradja in 1905. In the following years (1904 and 1905) Edmund Fleck indicates some coleopterans from Sulina, after which A. L. Montandon published in 1905 six species of Myrmeleonide, and in 1906-1908 also some coleopteran collected at Sulina and Letea. In 1912, Ion Borcea also publishes some Hymenoptera from the Danube Delta (S. Levente, 2006). In the following period A. Muller published some data on Hymenoptera and Diptera (1929-1930) following that only in 1952 (after malaria eradication) to be published new works related to Coleoptera: S. Panin, M.A. Ieniştea, N. Săvulescu, Odonate: Fr. Por, Himenoptere: V. Iuga, X Scolobia-Palade (S. Levente, 2006). A particularly important contribution to the entomofauna study of Danube Delta had the entomology department's team of the „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, led by A. Popescu-Gorj. They conducted thorough researches on entomofauna of different river-marine sand banks from Danube Delta, during the period 1962-1966, focusing attention on a total of 13 orders: Odonata, Montodea, Orthoptera, Coleoptera, Raphidioptera, Neuroptera, Plannipennia, Heteroptera, Homoptera, Hymenoptera, Trichoptera, Lepidoptera and Diptera (S. Levente, 2006). Along with the team of „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, it is noted also Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi who undertook studies especially on ichneumonidae fauna (1968-1985). These studies were carried out by M.I. Constantineanu, R. Constantineanu, D.I. Constantineanu and I. Andriescu (S. Levente, 2006). The knowledge of Danube Delta's entomofauna is also possible by the results of the works of C.V. Mândru, Gh. Mustaţă, I Andriescu, V. Ciochia, C. Pisică, M. Varvara, I. Moglan, K. Fabritius, J. Papp, I. Weiss, E. Schneider, G. Uhl, O. Klaus (S. Levente, 2006). After 1991, Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development in Tulcea has been affirmed by the contributions of N. Vasiliu, M. Huţu, O. Ivan, A. Călugăr and L. Fabian. Thus, over the period 1992- 1995 were published a series of papers regarding the edaphic mites from DDBR area. Through the effort Danube Delta NIRD have been identified, in 2003, 143 species of edaphic mites including seven species and a subspecies new to science (S. Levente, 2006). The study on insects from Danube Delta has continued also in recent years, thus in 2013, Deltaica periodical No. 2 was intended to the Orthoptera, being presented 79 species (Lupu, 2013). In the same year, G. Lupu publishes in the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta, a paper that deals with the distribution and habitat preferences of Orthoptera species from the Danube Delta (Lupu, 2013). Also in 2013, E. Bulankova, P. Beracko and T. Derka have reported the presence of species Gomphus flavipes and Palingenia longicauda. In Table no. 3-6 are presented the 19 invertebrate species of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015). Table no. 3-6 The community interest invertebrate species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data

Forms of the SCIs from the study area

No. Invertebrate species code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

No. Invertebrate species code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201 1 1037 – Ophiogomphus cecilia x

2 1052 – Euphydryas maturna x

3 1060 – Lycaena dispar x x x

4 1078 – Callimorpha quadripunctaria x x

5 1082 – Graphoderus bilineatus x

6 1083 – Lucanus cervus x

7 1084 – Osmoderma eremita x

8 1088 – Cerambyx cerdo x x

9 1089 – Morimus funereus x x x

10 4011 – Bolbelasmus unicornis x

11 4027 – Arytrura musculus x

12 4028 – Catopta thrips x

13 4030 – Colias myrmidone x

14 4036 – Leptidea morsei x

15 4045 – Coenagrion ornatum x

16 4053 – Paracaloptenus caloptenoides x

17 4054 – Pholidoptera transsylvanica x

18 4056 – Anisus vorticulus x

19 4064 – Theodoxus transversalis x x – species mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms

Figure no. 3-18 Numerical distribution of community interest invertebrate species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)

3.2.4 Fish Fish is one of the best represented components in terms of fauna in the DDBR territory. Both cartilaginous-bony fish species, represented by the order Acipenseriformes (sturgeon) and species with completely ossified skeleton can be encountered here. About 135 of the 300 fish species in Europe were recorded in DDBR waters, respectively 188 species in Romania, which basically fall into two categories, in terms of salinity, stenohaline species (that support limited thresholds of water salinity) and euryhaline species (which support higher variations of water salinity): 44 exclusively freshwater species, 58 exclusively marine species and 31 euryhaline species, found both in freshwater and in the brackish waters or even in the Black Sea25. Ichtyofauna of lake complexes in the Danube Delta was studied over time, being published both articles aimed at describing the current state of lakes ichtyofauna from the entire Danube Delta and articles aimed at a single lake complex status. Mainly, the methods used were: electrofishing and gillnet fishing. The main authors who have studied aspects of fish communities in the Danube Delta lakes were Nastase Aurel and Năvodaru Ion, for the lake complexes: Somova-Parcheş, Şontea-Furtuna, Gorgova-Uzlina, Merhei-Matiţa, Roşu-Puiu and Gârla Pasărea. According to the study „Study of ichthyodiversity from Gorgova – Uzlina lake-complex”, published in 2006, which describes ichtyofauna communities from Gorgova - Uzlina complex in 2004, among the analyzed fish species 6 species of fish of community importance were identified: Alosa caspia nordmanni Antipa 1906, Aspius aspius L.1758, Cobitis spp. L.1758, Misgurnus fossilis L.1758, Rhodeus amarus Bloch 1782 and Umbra krameri Walbaum 1792. Another study, „Fish fauna from Gârla Pasărea, a heavy modified former floodplain watercourse”, published in 2008, conducted in 2007 in a former floodplain area, Gârla Pasărea, transformed and dammed to become an agricultural polder (Vedea River being redirected to discharge directly into the Danube River), being divided into several sections connected by underground tubes, reveals the existence of the following 2 fish species of community interest: Aspius aspius and Misgurnus fossilis. According to the article „Ichthyofauna of Danube delta lakes” published in 2008, in the period from 2003 to 2005, using two complementary methods of sampling, namely electric fishing and gillnets fishing sets, 34 distinct fish species were identified in the Danube Delta lakes (of which about half are commercial species): 20 species in the lake-complex Somova-Parcheş - 2003 (avandelta - flooded area of the delta), 24 species Şontea-Furtuna – 2004, 24 species in Matiţa-Merhei - 2004, 27 species in Gorgova-Uzlina - 2005 (all 3 are located at the mouth of the river in the sea) and 29 species in the Roşu-Puiu complex - 2005 (marine delta). The situation concerning species from the mentioned lake-complexes was analyzed based on species richness, relative abundance, relative biomass, ecological indices and biodiversity index, the main purpose being to compare ichthyofauna of lakes in the context of major human interventions. The main results on the fish species of community interest that were found in the mentioned lake complexes are: Species richness: Misgurnus fossilis species was not encountered in Matiţa-Merhei and Roşu- Puiu complexes; Umbra krameri species was not encountered in Somova-Parcheş and Matiţa- Merhei complexes; Alosa tanaica species was encountered in all investigated lake complexes, except for Şontea-Furtuna; and Aspius aspius, Cobitis spp and Rhodeus amarus were encountered in all 5 lake complexes;

25 Delta Dunării Rezervaţie a Biosferei, 2008, Petre Gâştescu, Romulus Ştiucă, Editura CD Press

Relative biomass (expressed in CPUE - Catch per Unit Effort: g/ h for electrofishing and g/ 100 m for gillnet fishing): Alosa tanaica: 100 – 1000 g/ 100 m; Aspius aspius: 10 - 100 g/ h, and 100 – 1000 g/ 100 m; Cobitis spp: approx. 10 g/ h and 1 - 10 g/ 100 m; Misgurnus fossilis: 10 - 100 g/ h; Rhodeus amarus: 10 - 100 g/ h and 10– 100 g/ 100 m; Umbra krameri: approx. 1 g/ h; Umbra krameri and Cobitis spp species are on the last ranks; Ecological indices (frequency, abundance and ecological significance):

Electric Gillnets No. Species C class D class W class C class D class W class 1 A. tanaica - - - C3 D1 W2 2 A. aspius C1 D1 W1 C3 D1 W2 3 Cobitis spp. C2 D1 W2 C2 D1 W1 4 M. fossilis C3 D2 W3 C1 D1 W1 5 R. amarus C4 D4 W4 C3 D4 W3 6 U. krameri C2 D1 W1 - - -

Where, C – constance/ frequency (%) D – dominance/ abundance (%) W - ecological significance (%) Euconstante: 75,1 – 100 -> C4; Eudominante: > 10,1 -> D5; Leading: > 20-> W6; Constancy: 50,1 – 75 -> C3; Dominant: 5,1 – 10 -> D4; Characteristic: 10 – 20 -> W5; Accessory: 25,1 – 50 -> C2; Subdominant: 2,5 - 5-> D3; Accompanying: 5 – 10 -> W4; Accidental: 1 – 25 -> C1. Recedent: 1,2 – 2 -> D2; Associated: 1 – 5 -> W3; Subrecedent: < 1,1 -> D1. Accessory: 0,1 – 1 -> W2; Accidental: < 0,1-> W1. Biodiversity index: per total, for the entire Danube Delta region, indicate a stable ecosystem or a stable environment, due to values that are closer to 1 and more distant to 0. For all 5 studied lake complexes from the Danube Delta it was observed that the number of fish species increases from the upstream area of the Danube Delta, the predeltaic area (Somova-Parcheş lake complex) to the maritime area (Roşu-Puiu lake complex), the area of where the Danube discharges into the Black Sea. Another article also aimed at the ichtyofauna situation for the same 5 lake complexes, called „What fish and how many there are in Danube Delta?”, published in 2011, covering the 2006-2008 period, reveals in the Danube Delta lakes using the same two methods, 40 fish species, of which 36 species were captured using the electric fishing method and 31 through gillnets fishing method. The main results on the fish species of community interest that were found in the mentioned lake complexes, for the 2006 - 2008 period, are: Species richness: Species of community interest Alosa tanaica, Aspius aspius, Cobitis taenia danubialis, Misgurnus fossilis, Rhodeus amarus and Umbra krameri, were encountered through both sampling methods, lesser through the electrofishing method in the case of Alosa tanaica species and through gillnets fishing in the case of Umbra krameri species; Relative biomass (expressed in CPUE - Catch per Unit Effort: individual and/ or biomass per 1 electrofishing hour, and individuals and biomass per 100 m2 net per night for gillnets fishing): Umbra krameri species is one of the species with a very low biomass;  Ecological indices: the frequency of appearance for the species Alosa tanaica: 19,48 % - rare species, Aspius asapius: 20,22 % - rare species, Cobitis taenia danubialis: 25,84 % - rare species,

Misgurnus fossilis: 11,61 % - rare species, R. amarus: 66,67 % - frequent species and Umbra krameri: 0,37 % - very rare species; species abundance: R. amarus is amongst the small and medium size fish species with a very high abundance (third of the 40 identified species), being followed by Alosa tanaica (15 out of 40), Cobitis taenia danubialis (16 out of 40), Misgurnus fossilis (18 out of 40), Aspius asapius (20 din 40) and Umbra krameri (32 out of 40). Overall, this second study shows the fact that eurytopic and opportunist fish species are dominant in the Danube Delta lakes, favored by eutrophication. In this second study, in addition to describing the current state of the ichtyofauna from the lakes in the entire Danube Delta reflected by the results of the scientific sampling of ichtyofauna, an analysis of the statistics on catches was also carried out, in order to compare the obtained results. Long data series of statistics on commercial catches in the Danube Delta reflects two main trends in the evolution of the stocks of freshwater fish: first, a steady decline in catches and, secondly, changes in the structure of the fish species, being dominated by Gibel carp exotic species (since 1970). At the same time, in addition to decline of freshwater species, migratory sturgeon catches in the Danube Delta arms were almost exhausted, while the shad (Alosa immaculata) catches fell slightly. Commercial fisheries catches show a completely different picture of the delta ichtyofauna compared to the results of the ichtyofauna scientific sampling. This totally different structure of the ichtyofauna is caused by fishing targeted on large species and also due to their high market value, and especially due to failures to report from the black market. Fisheries statistics on catches from 1920 to 2010 show a continuous downward trend of ichthyofauna, the composition of ichtyofauna being balanced until 1972, and after 1972 to 2010 it shows the dominance of the carp, followed by far by the roach category (roach + rudd) and the bream category (bream + white bream). Both analyzes, the results from the ichtyofauna scientific sampling - showing the recent status of ichtyofauna, and the analysis based on catch statistics - showing the evolution of the trend in catch size and changes in species composition influenced by environmental factors pressures, are valuable tools in the sustainable management of fish resources and to promote conservation of fish diversity in the Danube Delta. Two other articles, „Fish community studies from riverine Danube Delta (Romania) area in 2007: Sontea - Furtuna and Gorgova - Uzlina lake-complexes”, published in 2009, and „New data concerning fish fauna from lakes of the fluvial Danube Delta (Gorgova-Uzlina and Sontea-Furtuna lakecomplexes, Romania) in 2010”, published in 2012, also made by the authors Năvodaru Ion, Nastase Aurel and Irina Cernisencu, and Nastase Aurel in the case of the second article, study the structure of fish communities in Gorgova- Uzlina and Şontea-Furtuna lake complexes, that are part of the river delta. The following fish species of community interest were also encountered in the two aforementioned complex: Alosa tanaica, Aspius aspius, Cobitis sp (only in 2010), Misgurnus fossilis, Rhodeus amarus and Umbra krameri. Among other important articles on the ichtyofauna research on lake complexes of the Danube Delta, we mention: „Ihtiofauna lagunei Sinoie” – 1993, „Studiu comparativ privind exploatarea populaţiilor de caras (Carassius auratus gibelio) din lacurile Razim şi Puiu – Roşu” - 1994 and „Data on abiotic (nutrients) and biotic (phytoplankton) quality elements in Fortuna ecologically reconstructed area (Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve - Romania)” – 2013. A number of other relevant articles on the presence and population trends of fish species of community interest, in the Danube Delta region, are presented below. V. Oţel deals in the article „Prezenţa speciei Gymnocephalus baloni Holcik et Hensel 1974 (Pisces: Percidae) în Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării”, published in 1998, with the presence of species

Gymnocephalus baloni in DDBR balloon between 1991 and 1998. According to the author, Gymnocephalus baloni species was recorded in most of the cases in the Danube fairway and very rarely in stagnogley environment (mouth of deep channels – e.g. Tulcea shipyard channel). In this period there were captured 113 individuals of the Gymnocephalus baloni species. This species is endemic to the Danube basin, having the smallest area in its genus, being frequent and abundant all along the Danube in the DDBR territory. Habitat preferences overlap with those of Gymnocephalus schraetser species, to which is much larger. According to the author, in the period between 1991 and 1998, the species was not threatened on DDBR territory. According to „Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve”, published in November 2010, 17 fish species of conservation interest were recorded in DDBR. The article presents the population trend in DDBR in the period 1990 – 2008, for the 17 species. Among the species with only one record or very few records in DDBR during that period, are: Gobio kessleri kessleri/ antipai – the only record is based on the capturing of an individual on the Sulina Channel; in the past, antipai subspecies was recorded in all three branches of the Danube; Alosa tanaica – in DDBR the species is relatively common in the marine area. In some years, during migration, species occur in large numbers in the Razim-Sinoe Complex, Danube arms and several lakes. Considerable population fluctuations are registered during certain years and seasons. It is a commercial species. Even if several records of the species are present in the area, there are no real quantitative assessments on the species distribution in DDBR. For these species, population trend evolution during 1990 - 2008 could not be assessed due to insufficient data. For one species, trend during 1990-2008, was evaluated as fluctuating: Alosa immaculata - in RBDD this species is present in all marine areas, and during the breeding period adults migrate upstream along the main arms of the Danube and, more rarely, isolated individuals migrate to Razim-Sinoe Complex. It is an important commercial species. The population of this species presents great natural fluctuations. For one species, trend during 1990-2008, was evaluated as decreasing: Umbra krameri – due to the high occurrence of algal blooming process in the second half of the '80s, favorable habitats for this species were deteriorated. As a consequence of this phenomenon, the population of this species of fish has decreased in DDBR. The decline of this species was also recorded in the 90s. The population of Plecus cultratus in RBDD registered an increasing trend during 1990-2008. The trend on the populations of 10 other species of conservation interest in DDBR was assessed as stable, including species: Aspius aspiu, Gobio albipinnatus, Rhodeus amarus, Cobitis taenia, Sabanejewia aurata, Misgurnus fossilis, Gymnocephalus baloni, Gymnocephalus schraetzer, Zingel streber and Zingel zingel. Also, this article presents a table for the 17 fish species of conservation interest from the DDBR, which shows the current environmental status of these species in DDBR. It also presents proposals for long- term monitoring protocols for fish species of European conservation interest, whose presence was reconfirmed since 1990 to present in the DDBR.

„The spatial and temporal distribution of the shads in Black Sea - marine zone of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve”, published in 2014 by Năvodaru Ion and Maximov Valodea analyzes shad species in the maritime area of the Danube Delta. The analysis was conducted in 2012 and presents the appearance and distribution of species of shad in the Black Sea, Natura 2000 site ROSCI0066 Danube Delta – zona marină (10 sectors were chosen to investigate shad species: Vadu, Chituc, Periboina, Portiţa, Periteasca, Perişor, Zaton, Sahalin, Sf. Gheorghe and Sulina) using two methods: fixed gill nets during the night and daytime trawlers. The main results of the study are: only two species of shad were found, namely A. immaculata and A. tanaica that are present in ROSCI0066 throughout the year; spatial distribution increases from southwest to northeast and from great depth - 20 m isobath - towards shore, with a maximum aggregation near the mouth of the Danube River; the presence of shads decreases from spring to autumn. In the last 50 years, A. maeotica, who lives in the Azov Sea and occasionally reaches the Romanian coast, was cited as present in the Romanian marine waters. According to the authors, conservation status of the shads seems appropriate, but under the pressures of fishing, habitat loss and degradation. Sustainable fishing, monitoring and appropriate research are recommended for the conservation of shad of the Danube - Black Sea complex. Among other important items on shad we mention: „The changes in the character of reproduction of the Danube hering (Alosa pontica pontica Eichwald) as a result of anthropogen deformation of its ecology” – 1994 and „Comportamentul migraţiei scrumbiei de Dunăre (Alosa pontica pontica Eichwald), pe sectorul de Dunăre Mm 52 – Mm 50” – 1995. Numerous articles published both in Romanian and in English, study the sturgeon species in the Danube Delta region: „Evoluţia elementelor critice pentru menţinerea sturionilor în Dunărea inferioară”, 1994; „Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în Dunăre (I) Date recente privind hrana sturionilor în zona Gurilor Dunării”, 1995; „Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în Dunăre (II) Malformaţii ale înotătoarelor la exemplarele cantonate în faţa Gurilor Dunării”, 1995; „Distribution and genetic diversity of sturgeons feeding in the marine area of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve”, 2013; „Heavy metal bio-accumulation in tissues of sturgeon species of the Lower Danube River, Romania”, 2013; „Management applications of genetic structure of anadromous sturgeon populations in the Lower Danube River (LDR), Romania”, 2013. A number of relevant data on dynamics and trend of fish catches in the Danube Delta region, are presented in the following articles: „Facts and remarks on the Danube Delta” study, written by Marian-Traian Gomoiu and published in 1996, provides basic information on the ecological status of the Danube Delta, review of the general characteristics of this unique biome, changes in the deltaic ecosystem and their causes, as well as current efforts for a better understanding and management of the DDBR. According to the author, in terms of biological resources represented by the fish in the Danube Delta (annual fluctuations and dynamic trends) in the 1960-1990 period, dynamics and trend of fish catches declined greatly; less valuable species (carp, bream, perch and other species) increased from 4,000 tonnes in 1960 to 6,000 tons in 1990; sturgeon species have declined from approx. 250 tonnes in 1960 to 0 in 1990;

Status assessment, development and diversification of fishing-dependent communities in the Danube Delta were analyzed in a study called „Assessment of the status, development and diversification of fisheries-dependent communities- Danube Delta case study report, Romania”, published in 2006. According to the article, Danube Delta fish fauna has about 136 species, most of them being freshwater and migratory species. The total volume of catches of shad is 4 times higher than the MSY - "Maximum Sustainable Yield". For species of community interest like Aspius aspius and Pelecus cultratus, the state of fish stocks is as follows: MSY according to DDBRA - 4.8 tonnes and 0.4 tonnes; stock condition in relation to MSY - sustainable; the main management regulations affecting the stock - fishing ban during the April 5-June 3; mesh sizing restrictions; Natura 2000 protected species; The article „Conservation of fish stocks in the Danube Delta, Romania: Present status, constraints, and recommendation”, published in 2009 in the Italian Journal of Zoology by Ion Năvodaru and Mircea Staraş, analyzes the state of fish stocks, the main constraints and recommendations on their preservation in the Danube Delta, in the year 1998. The introduction of "Total allowable Catch" (TAC) was the first adopted strategy for sustainable use of fishery resources. However, the poor quality of catch data, lack of data on fishing effort and failure in fulfilling the model assumptions in estimating the "Maximum Sustainable Yield" are the main constraints to achieve this goal. Limiting fishing to 1,000 individual fishing licenses should be a practical regulation for the conservation of fish stocks. Another study dealing with the status of fish stocks in the Danube Delta is Propuneri de exploatare a resurselor pescăreşti din RBDD în anul 2010” conducted by DDBRA and containing recommendations on the sustainable exploitation of fish species. This article presents the dynamics in fish catches (tonnes) in DDBR from 1996 to 2008. In the article there are proposals on sustainable catches of commercial fisheries resources DDBR, for 2010, among which are found species of community interest: Pelecus cultratus, Aspius aspius, Alosa tanaica and Alosa imaculata. Other important articles on the fish species of economic interest, the condition and exploitation of fish stocks in DDBR or on fisheries in the area are: „Cercetări privind prolificitatea unor specii de peşti de interes economic din Delta Dunării” – 1993„ Aprecieri privind starea şi exploatarea unor stocuri de peşte din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării” – 1994 and „Evoluţia, cercetarea şi administrarea pescăriilor din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării” – 1995. Cultural changes arising from changes in fishing practices as a consequence of environmental protection and tourism, were studied in a doctoral thesis „Cultural change in a fishing village in the Danube Delta: the consequences of environmental protection and tourism”, by Oana Ivan. The main purpose of the study was to analyze and explain local communities’ responses on fishing prohibition and other environmental restrictions that have been imposed in the last decade, focusing mainly on torusim development and implied consequences on social and cultural life of Sf. Gheorghe, a fishing village within DDBR. This study revealed that western institutions and "green" speeches play an extremely important role in shaping a culture, while addressing critical issues that must be addressed effectively by DDBRA, in order to prevent future cultural and environmental disruptions. A series of articles study the effects of climate change on protected habitats, including fish species in the Danube Delta. Among them we mention: „Schimbări în structura ihtiofaunei ca efect al modificării caracteristicilor biotopului” - 1995, „Draft River Basin Management Plans - Adapting the Plans to Climate Change Final Report” – 2008; „Approaches to habitat disturbances in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” – 2011; „Climate change adapted management plan for Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” –

2013 and „Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan for Danube Delta Region – România – Ukraine – Moldova” – 2014. There were also carried out a series of studies that analyze issues related to fish species diseases: „Rezultatele investigaţiilor ihtiopatologice din teritoriul Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării în anul 1992” – 1993, „Pseudomonas aeruginosa, agent patogen la Acipenser stellatus” – 1993, and „Cercetări privind parazitofauna unor specii de peşti exploataţi comercial din complexul de lacuri Roşu - Puiu” – 1995. According to Natura 2000 factsheets (updated on February 17, 2015), in the study area, the Danube Delta Region (DDBR and surrounding areas), fish species of community interest are found in 4 of the 8 Sites of Community Importance: ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării – zona marină and in ROSCI0105 Lunca Joasă a Prutului. Table no. 3-7 presents the 15 fish species of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs in the study area, according to the Natura 2000 factsheets (updated on February 17, 2015).

Table no. 3-7 Fish species of community interest included in the Natura 2000 factsheets of the SCIs

located in the study area

No. Code and fish species name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201 1 1124 – Gobio albipinnatus x

2 1130 – Aspius aspius x x x

3 1134 – Rhodeus sericeus amarus x x x

4 1145 – Misgurnus fossilis x x x

5 1146 – Sabanejewia aurata x x

6 1149 – Cobitis taenia x x x

7 1157 – Gymnocephalus schraetzer x x x

8 1159 – Zingel zingel x x x

9 1160 – Zingel streber x x x

10 2011 – Umbra krameri x

11 2511 – Gobio kessleri x x x

12 2522 – Pelecus cultratus x x x

13 2555 – Gymnocephalus baloni x

14 4125 – Alosa immaculata x x

15 4127 – Alosa tanaica x x x x – species mentioned in Natura 2000 factsheets

Figure no. 3-19 Numerical distribution of fish species of community interest in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)

3.2.5 Amphibians and reptiles According to Gâştescu and Ştiucă26, on DDBR territory, the amphibian class is represented by a small number of species belonging to 2 orders: 2 species of newts and 8 species of frogs. Thus, in Danube Delta are present only 10 amphibian species out of the 17 existing across the country, respectively out of 45 species existing across Europe. The small number of species is offset by the very high density of 3 aquatic species: Rana ridibunda (marsh frog), Bombina bombina (European fire-bellied toad) and Hyla arborea (European tree frog). Other 2 frog species are also frequent: Pelobates fuscus (European spadefoot toad), especially on the fluvial grinds, and Pelobates syriacus balcanicus (eastern spadefoot toad), in sandy coastal areas. Bufo bufo (common toad) although generally frequent across the country, on DDBR territory is rare, being reported currently only between the Danube river branches, while Bufo viridis (European green toad) is frequent in human settlements ecosystems. Regarding the newts, Triturus dobrogicus and Triturus vulgaris are present in Danube Delta Region, the first being more widespread than the second. According to the same authors, the reptile class on DDBR territory is represented by: Testudines order – turtles, Sauria order - lizards and Serpentes order - snakes. Thus, in Danube Delta are present only 11 reptile species out of the 23 existing across the country, respectively out of 83 species existing across Europe. All 11 species are protected by Bern Convention, 9 of them being strictly protected. The 11 species encountered on Danube Delta Region are: 2 turtle species:  Emys orbicularis – European pond turtle – frequent in all the aquatic areas;  Testudo graeca ibera - spur-thighed tortoise – very rare in some steppe areas (Iancina and Doloşman), also still quite numerous in Istria fortress area; it was declared a natural monument species at national level; 4 lizard species:  Lacerta agilis – sand lizard – in sandy areas, especially in Letea and Caraorman forests, and the entire coastal area, large populations of Lacerta agilis euxinica;  Eremias arguta deserti – steppe runner – present in the same habitat type as the sand lizard, but is much less numerous;  Lacerta trilineata donrogica – Balkan green lizard – on rocky areas and hills with highest grasses and bushes in the vicinity of Razim Lake, with relatively numerous populations;  Podarcis taurica – Balkan wall lizard – on hilly steppe areas, with relatively numerous populations; 5 snake species:  Natrix natrix – grass snake – aquatic species, numerous, common in all the aquatic areas;  Natrix tesselata – dice snake – prefers rocky shores, being very rare within the delta and extremely numerous in Razim - Sinoe lagoon complex (Iancina, Doloşman, Popina and Bisericuţa islands etc.);  Coluber caspius – caspian whipsnake – is the largest and the most aggressive snake in Europe (exceeding 2 m long) being relatively frequently encountered in many extradeltaic steppe areas, but difficult to observe, preferring to stay near the colonies of the ground squirrels or rich in lizards;

26 Delta Dunării Rezervaţie a Biosferei, 2008, Petre Gâştescu, Romulus Ştiucă, Editura CD Press

 Coronella austriaca – smooth snake – it is very rare and is found as isolated specimens in Letea forest and Chituc grind (sand bank);  Vipera ursinii – meadow viper – it is the only poisonous snake on DDBR territory, nearly extinct in its European area; in Danube Delta occurs in large populations in the forest planted near St. Gheorghe town and on Perişor grind (sand bank). According to „Ecological gradients in the Danube Delta lakes: present state and man-induced changes” article, published in 2000, by Oosterberg, W. et al., in Danube Delta fauna were observed, during 1991 - 1997, 3.491 species, of which 9 species of amphibians and 12 species of reptiles. Another study, published in 2006, by Török, examines the use of GIS technology for data management of the Natura 2000 sites and the importance of this tool in the selection process of the potential Natura 2000 sites and the establishment of their limits, if the policy makers take into account information related on the biology, habitat requirements of target species and the results of the field studies from the target zones. Case study: Elaphe quatorlineata – „GIS technique used for managing data on potential Natura 2000 sites. Case study: areas inhabited by Elaphe quatorlineata”. This paper presents a history of Elaphe quatorlineata records (with exact summoning of the works) before 1990 and between 1990 and 2006. According to this article, in the last two centuries, the number of copies of Elaphe quatorlineata recorded in Romania ranged between 42 and 45 copies (of which approx. 20 copies were registered before 1990 and 22 specimens between 1990 and 2006, mostly in Dobrudja). 2 important studies on populations of Vipera ursinii in Danube Delta Region are: „Vipera ursinii moldavica populations of the Romanian Danube-Delta” and „Information technology used in preparing the national reports on Species of Community Interest. Study case: Vipera ursinii in Pontic bioregion”, published in 2006, respectively in 2013, in the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Tulcea. The first analyzes and compares the populations of Vipera ursinii moldavica in 2 locations from Danube Delta: Periteaşca and Sfântu Gheorghe, while the second study represents a contribution to the preliminary version of the national report on the status of Vipera ursinii in Pontic biogeographical region. „On a record of largest specimen of Triturus dobrogicus (Kiritzescu 1903) from the Danube Delta, Romania”, 2009, brings a new contribution to the knowledge of the morphology and ecology of the species. According to this article, the presence of large specimens may indicate optimal habitat conditions, essential for the establishment of a favorable conservation status, and given that the species has suffered a severe decline, represents a very important contribution in this regard. „Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve”, published in November 2010, indicates the population trend of the amphibians and reptiles species, in DDBR, during 1990 - 2008. Thus, according to the study, on DDBR territory were recorded during the period referred, 6 species of reptiles and amphibians of conservation interest. 5 species out of the 6 mentioned in the study, are found also in the protected natural areas of community interest that overlap with our study region, namely the Danube Delta Region (DDBR and the surrounding areas): Bombina bombina, Triturus dobrogicus, Emys orbicularis, Testudo graeca and Vipera ursinii. During 1990 – 2008, the population trend of the species mentioned was assessed as stable. Within the same study it is presented also the current environmental status of these species in DDBR, being assessed as „secure” for Bombina bombina, Triturus dobrogicus, Emys orbicularis and Testudo graeca, respectively „localized” for Vipera ursinii, due to the fact that the populations of this species are closely concentrated in only three areas on DDBR territory. The study also presents proposals regarding the long-term monitoring protocols of the amphibian and reptile species of European conservation interest, whose presence was reconfirmed in 1990 and till today, on DDBR territory.

„Preliminary data on carapace health of Testudo graeca from cetatea Histria, Dobrudja county”, 2011, analyzes the population of Testudo graeca in Histria fortress, based on the health of their shells. According to this article, Testudo graeca is one of the endangered species from Dobrogea, heavily threatened by the destruction and fragmentation of the habitats as a result of the human activities. The area investigated, in the vicinity of Histria fortress, holds a large population of the species, 54 specimens being investigated in order to assess the general health of the shells and the anthropogenic impact depending on the erosion zone, injuries and scars caused by humans, genetic malformations. The results revealed that the population of this species is healthy, rarely impacted by the anthropogenic causes. „Doubtful records of reptile species in some areas of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (Romania)”, published in 2012, by Török, provide details of the doubtful records (sources published between 1863 and 2011) of some reptile species reported from different parts of DDBR: Testudo graeca, Elaphe (quatorlineata) sauromates and Vipera ursinii. 2 studies: Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve. Part I. Amphibians and Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve. Part II. Reptiles, published in 2013, respectively in 2014, in the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta, by Török Zsolt Csaba, brings contributions to the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, for amphibian and reptile species. According to the first study, targeting the amphibian species on DDBR territory, the first Red List of wild species from DDBR was developed in 1999 and published in 2000. So far, in DDBR were recorded 11 native species of amphibians (respectively 10 native species and one hybrid). The paper provides details on proposals to consider the conservation status assessed for the amphibian species encountered on DDBR territory, based on the results of investigations carried out since 2000 and taking into account the developments related to criteria for granting the status of preservation for the wildlife species (worldwide, European, EU and national level). Thus, for the 2 amphibian species of community interest, referred in the analysis, arising the following: Triturus dobrogicus (widespread species, but not frequent) – Vulnerable and Bombina bombina (widespread and frequent species) –Least Concern. Also, within the study are presented also maps of the areas of records (before 1990, after 1990 and also continuous data) on DDBR territory and the neighboring regions, for the 2 species mentioned above, overlapped on the grid of 10 x 10 km UTM. It was noted that for Bombina bombina are present much more records, both on DDBR territory and in the neighboring regions. As regards the second study, provides details on proposals to consider the conservation status assessed for the reptile species encountered on DDBR territory, based on the results of investigations carried out since 2000 and taking into account the developments related to criteria for granting the status of preservation for the wildlife species (worldwide, european, EU and national level). So far, in DDBR were recorded 12 native species of reptile. Thus, for the 3 reptile species of community interest, referred in the analysis, arising the following: Testudo graeca (rare species in DDBR) – Vulnerable; Emys orbicularis (relatively common species) - Vulnerable; Vipera ursinii (rare species in DDBR) – Critically endangered species. Also, within the study are presented also maps regarding the administrative territories where there are reliable records on natural populations of the species, as well as the main threats considered in the Danube Delta region on the species of community interest. In what concern the specie Elaphe (quatuorlineata) sauromates, was not included in the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, because until the submission of the paper there were no published information regarding the species presence in DDBR, even if one of the areas targeted by the current national monitoring project of the species of community interest, where was planned the assessment of Elaphe (quatuorlineata) sauromates populations, cover a part of DDBR (Histria plot), due to the fact that in the area, in places close to the Histria, were present recent records of Elaphe (quatuorlineata) sauromates.

The same author, Török Zsolt Csaba, has published in 2014 „Setting-up a medium term plan for risk- assessment in aquatic and semiaquatic reptiles from the site “ROSCI0065” (Danube Delta) – Romaniaan, an article aimed also to the impact of human activities on the populations of 3 species of aquatic and semi-aquatic reptiles (Emys orbicularis, Natrix natrix and Natrix tessellata), carried out in ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării. The key findings that emerged from the study, conducted between January-August 2013, are: road accidents, deliberate killing of snake species and trap systems. Based on these preliminary results, a medium-term plan was planned for the period March-October 2014, weekly, in order to collect data concerning the impact of human activities on populations of reptiles. A series of other articles reveals the effects of climate change on the protected habitats, including on the amphibian and reptile species from the Danube Delta. Among them, we mention: „Schimbări în structura ihtiofaunei ca efect al modificării caracteristicilor biotopului” – 1995; „Draft River Basin Management Plans - Adapting the Plans to Climate Change Final Report” – 2008; „Approaches to habitat disturbances in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” – 2011; „Climate change adapted management plan for Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” – 2013 and „Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan for Danube Delta Region – România – Ukraine – Moldova” – 2014. According to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015), on the study area, the Danube Delta Region (DDBR and the surrounding areas), the amphibian and reptile species of community interest are found in 7 of the 8 sites of community importance, except for ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină. Also, in other 2 sites is encountered only one of the 6 species of community interest, respectively in ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului may be encountered only Testudo graeca, while in ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe may be encountered only Elaphe quatuorlineata. In Table no. 3-8 are presented the 6 amphibian and reptile species of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).

Table no. 3-8 The community interest amphibian and reptile species included in the Natura 2000

Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area

Amphibian and reptile species code and No.

name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0060 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

1 1188 – Bombina bombina x x x x x

2 1219 – Testudo graeca x x x x x

3 1220 – Emys orbicularis x x x

4 1279 – Elaphe quatuorlineata x x x

5 1298 – Vipera ursinii x

6 1993 – Triturus dobrogicus x x x x – species mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms

Figure no. 3-20 Numerical distribution of community interest amphibian and reptile species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)

3.2.6 Mammals (including bat species) Although extremely important both scientifically and economically, the mammals fauna has not been the subject of scientific studies dedicated to this biotic compartment in the Danube Delta until 1931 when was published the scientific monography ”Mamiferele României. Repartiţia şi problemele lor biogeografice-economice” by Raul I. Călinescu, standing out however for this deltaic area, a faunistical and cynegetical bibliography rich in systematic and zoogeographical data on mammals in Romania. Considerations regarding the valorification of the cynegetic resources of the Danube Delta were brought by Cotta V. and Andone Gh. (1969), Inaşcu M. (1971), Dragomir N.I. şi Kiss, J.B. (1972), Almăşan H. (1985, 1993), Filat M. Condac M. and Greavu M. (1995). The most important researches concerning the distribution and the importance of the mammals from Danube Delta have been achieved by Bunesco A. (1959), Hamar M. (1960), Barbu P. (1969), Marches G. (1970), Popescu A., Suciu M. şi Chiriac E. (1974), Murariu D. (1981), Murariu D. (1996), Popescu A. and Murariu D. (2001), Cuzic M. and Murariu D. (2008) and Stanc S.M. (2009). As regards the knowledge of the beaver from Danube Delta, the researches were focused more in paleozoology terms, because by the end of the XXth century, Danube Delta territory was considered inappropriate for beaver’s habitat preferences, due to large fluctuations of the Danube water level (thus considering that the beaver is not present). Despite this, the paleozoology researches (Bălăşescu, 2000) confirmed the beaver's presence in the lower area of the Danube up to Isaccea and near the Dobruja Plateau next to Murighiol (the latest paleozoology evidence on the beaver presence are originating from the early medieval period). The most important contributions regarding the presence of the beaver populations from Danube Delta were brought by Călinescu (1931, 1934), Vasiuliu and Şova (1968), Necrasov O. and Stirbu M. (1975), Rudescu and Godeanu (1980), Ionescu and colab. (2010), Although almost disappeared from Romania in the last two centuries, the beaver (Castor fiber) was reintroduced in some areas of the country in old habitats from which disappeared, in particular due to the effect of the human pressures (Kiss and colab., 2011, 2012). Since 1998, many projects concerning the reintegration and monitoring of this specie's populations in Romania have been started (Ionescu and Troidl, 1997, Ionescu, 2010), especially in some areas of the Danube Delta. Regarding the knowledge of Mustela lutreola populations from Danube Delta, specie of conservation interest, significant contributions were brought by Youngman P.M. (1982), Palazon S. and Ruiz-Olmo J. (1998), Gotea V. and Kranz A. (2000), Kranz A., Polednik L., Gotea V. (2001), Cuzic M., Marinov M. and Cuzic V. (2002), Kranz A., Toman A. and Kiss J.B. (2003), Kranz A., Toman A., Polednikova K., Polednik L. and Kiss J.B. (2004), Lode T., Cormier J.P., and Jacques D. (2001), Marinov M.E., Kiss J.B., Toman A., Polednik L., Alexe V., Doroftei M., Doroşencu A. and Kranz A. (2012), Michaux J.R., Hardy O.J., Justy F., Fournier P., Kranz A. and Cabia M. (2005). It is important to mention that, in 1993 was reported for the first time the jackal presence (Canis aureaus L.) in Danube Delta, on Chituc and Sinoe hunting areas, while in 1994 the species was observed also in Sf. Gheorghe hunting area (Filat and colab., 1995). Since then it was considered that the specie's area expands to the north and was especially important that the population’s evolution to be monitored. The studies regarding the bats fauna from the Danube Delta have started after the middle of the XXth century, focusing mainly on the researches concerning the underground shelters (Călinescu, 1931, Cerveny, 1982, Dumitrescu et al., 1962-1963, Dumitrescu et al., 1958, Dumitrescu, 1969, Răduleţ, 1994,

Răduleţ and Stănescu, 1966, Valenciuc and Ion, 1971). Since the XXI century have appeared also publications that had, besides the researches on favorable habitats of the bat species, important contributions to the inventorying / monitoring of the bat's populations from the Dobrudjan carstic environment (Răduleţ, 2005, Done, 2007, Ifrim and Pocora, 2007, Murariu et al., 2009, Nagy and Postawa, 2010, Pocora and Pocora, 2011). Nagy and Postawa (2010) based on observations from 2003, have rated the conservation degree of the underground shelters of bats, assigning a conservation value, on a scale of 1-4, for the caves in Romania (Mitchell-Jones et al., 2000). Contributions concerning the dynamic and migration of the bat populations from Danube Delta have been brought also by Măntoiu Dragoş (performs monitoring activities on bat fauna of Dobruja since 2012), the partial results of the monitoring being disseminated within the oral presentations at various International Scientific Conferences and Symposiums. In Table no. 3-9 are presented the 10 mammals species (including one bat species) of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).

Table no. 3-9 The community interest mammal species (including bat species) included in the Natura

2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area

060

No. Mammal species code and name

ROSCI0012 ROSCI0 ROSCI0065 ROSCI0066 ROSCI0067 ROSCI0105 ROSCI0123 ROSCI0201

1 1304 – Rhinolophus ferrumequinum x x

2 1335 – Spermophilus citellus x x x x x x

3 1349 – Tursiops truncatus x

4 1351 – Phocoena phocoena x

5 1355 – Lutra lutra x x

6 1356 – Mustela lutreola x

7 2021 – Sicista subtilis x x

8 2609 – Mesocricetus newtoni x x x

9 2633 – Mustela eversmannii x x x

10 2635 – Vormela peregusna x x x x – species mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms

Figure no. 3-21 Numerical distribution of community interest mammal species (including bat species) in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)

3.2.7 Birds The study on bird species in Danube Delta began relatively late, compared to other country regions (M, Marinov, 2012). First researches on bird species from Danube Delta dates from the second half of the XIXth century (O. Finsch, H. W. Simpson, A. Pelzeln). In the following period stood out Dombrowski, Dionisie Linţia, E. Nadra, C. Rosetti – Bălănescu, S. Pascovschi, I. Cătuneanu, G. D. Vasiliu, L. Rodewald (Rudescu), M. Băcescu, D. Radu, A. Papadopol, M. Tălpeanu, Maria Paspaleva, Dan Munteanu, G. Andone, H. Almăsan and others. Subsequently, J. B. Kiss, L. Manolache, M. Măties, D. Stănescu, V. Ciochia, K. P. Zsivanovits and many others. Although extremely important for science, the early researches conducted on birds in Danube Delta are difficult to consult. On the other hand, the changes made in Danube Delta in the last 100 or even 50 years (both natural and anthropogenic) make that those papers not to be entirely updated. Due to the wide diversity of the bird species in Danube Delta, 1000 works have been published over time. In this regard, we consider it is necessary to mention that the studies on bird species from Danube Delta and the surrounding areas do not consist only in the papers presented here. In the last 50 years, many researchers have focused on the study of bird species from Danube Delta and the neighboring areas. An important contribution to the study of bird species from Danube Delta was the establishment of some researches centers, among which we mention: „Danube Delta” Cynegetic Station (1954), Museum of Natural Sciences – Danube Delta (1964), Danube Delta Research and Design Institute - Tulcea (1970), Romanian Ornithological Society (1990) and „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, established since 1834. The study conducted during 1978 - 1979, published in 1981, by Aurel Papadopol – „Considerations sur l'ecologie des oiseaux du secteur Murighiol-Tulcea-Babadag-Lunca (Jurilovca) dans le contexte de la dynamique de l'avifaune du complexe lagunaire de Razelm-Sinoe (Dobrogea, Roumanie)”, contains ecological considerations related to the peripheral sectors of Danube Delta and Razelm-Sinoe lagoon complex, regarding 137 species of birds. The data presented summarizes the researches made by the author during 1978 - 1979, and for comparison are presented also historical data, from 1956 - 1973. The main bird species identified at the time, on the sector located between Babadag lake and Enisala, are: Fulica atra, Gallinula chloropus, Anas querquedula, Aythya ferina, Anas platyrhynchos, Ardeola ralloides, Ardea cinerea, Ardea purpurea, Ixobrychus minutus, Egretta garzetta, Cygnus olor, Larus ridibundus, Sterna hirundo, Chlidonias niger, Chlidonias hybrida, Larus argentatus cachinnans, Larus argentatus, Merops apiaster, Falco tinnunculus, Passer rnontanus, Corvus monedula, Oenanthe oenanthe. The papers that have as study object only a small number of bird species from Danube Delta are numerous, among their authors we mention: Botond J. Kiss, Vasile Alexe, Alexandru Doroşencu, Mihai Marinov, Attila Sándor, Dan Hulea, Viorel Pocora, Elena Irina Pocora, Kalocsa Béla, Tamás Enikő Anna, Reed Mike, Alexandru Doroşencu, Constantin Ion, Michael Schmitz, Christoph Sudfeldt, Harald Legge, Kristian Mantel, Peter Weber, Laurenţiu Petrencu, Emanuel Baltag, Domsa Cristian, Aurel Papadopol, Gabriel Chişamera, Mircea Gogu-Bogdan, Costică Adam. Among the interesting discoveries made in the Danube Delta we can cite the Egyptian goose (Alopochen aegyptiacus) reporting, near Tulcea (J.B. Kiss, 1994). In 1990, at Somova, an unknown hunter shot a goose that has been naturalized by an amateur, but over time it began to deteriorate. Entering into its possession, J.B. Kiss recognized the specie and described it as being an adult exemplary of the Egyptian goose (Alopochen aegyptiacus), brown-red version. In 1998, another unusual occurrence was reported in Danube Delta by Mihai Marinov and Dan Hulea. They reported the nesting presence of the cattle egret (Bulbucus ibis). The specie's observations occurred in 1993 (4 reporting of the species, non-

breeding) and 1994 (1 reporting, non-breeding), while in 1996 was identified the first nest of the cattle egret in the colony of Chiril Lake. Subsequently, in 1997 another two nests were identified in the colony from the vicinity of Nebunu Lake, while in 1998 were identified another 3 nests. The authors explain the appearance of the specie in Danube Delta at nesting, as a possible extension of its areal toward north. The locations of colonial bird species, and not only, have been the subject of several studies concerning the bird species from Danube Delta. Thus, in 2004 was published a paper having as study topic: 13 birds species belonging to Pelecaniformes and Ciconiiformes rrders, as well as the habitats preferences (Platteeuw et all, Colonial waterbirds and their habitat use in the Danube Delta, 2004). This paper presents the results of a study conducted in 2001-2002 in Danube Delta, both in Romania territory and Ukraine, where have been identified over 100 colonies, respectively 48,000 nesting pairs. In 2006, Sandor D. Attila, Moldovan Istvan and Sebastian Bugariu have observed what may represent the first evidence of nesting for the citrine wagtail (Motacilla citreola), in Romania. The observation took place during an annular bird campaign in Danube Delta, on Grindul Chituc. In the paper, the authors point to a possible extension of the species nesting's territory toward south, thus including also Romania, in a manner similar to Poland or Latvia. Also in 2006, the authors Cuzic and Petrescu, in „Studiul avifaunei şi habitatelor din Podişul Dobrogean în scopul dezvoltării reţelei de arii protejate”, have inventoried in Deniz Tepe Hill nature reserve, 11 bird species of Annex I of the Birds Directive (respectively Annex 3 of GEO 57/ 2007) and 8 species of Annex 4b of GEO 57/ 2007, the main major habitat types identified being represented by meadows, thickets and also rocky regions. In 2009, the authors Baczó Zoltán, Kovács Szabolcs, Szabó Attila have conducted a review of the major ornithological observations made in Romania in 2004, 2006 and 2007. Of the nine species and one subspecies listed, only three have been seen outside of Dobrogea and Danube Delta territories. Thus, the authors mentioned the presence of: the lesser kestrel (Falco naumanni) and the bluethroat (Luscinia svecica magna) in the vicinity of the Tătaru Channel from the Danube Delta, the aquatic warbler (Acrocephalus paludicola) and the demoiselle crane (Antropoides virgo) in the vicinity of Histria, the sardinian warbler (Sylvia melanocephala) on Sahalin island, the eastern orphean warbler (Sylvia crassirostris) near Murighiol and the pallas' leaf warbler (Phylloscopus proregulus) in Chituc area. Milvus Group Association has identified within the project „Studiul migraţiei de toamnă a păsărilor răpitoare din Dobrogea – 2010, 2011”, the migration routes of the raptor bird species in Dobrudja, the main observation points being located in Northern Dobrudja, in 2010. The results revealed that the total number of migratory bird species observed in Dobrudja, at the observation point located on the Deniz Tepe hill, was of 313 migratory raptor species and 92 other large size species, such as the white stork (Ciconia ciconia), the black stork (Ciconia nigra), the great white pelican (Pelecanus onocrotalus), the Dalmatian pelican (Pelecanus crispus), geese, cormorants, etc. Another important article can be found in the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta - “Preliminary data concerning ornithofauna of the Babadag lake area”, Tulcea – Romania, 2011. This article presents ornithological observations made in Babadag lake area and its surroundings, in 2008 and 2009. The aim of this study was to update the data concerning the quantitative analyzes of the ornithological fauna present in Babadag lake area. Overall, 91 species of birds have been identified, of which 80 are nesting in the area. The identified birds belong to 12 orders, 36 families and 65 genera. Also, one of the largest colonies of Riparia riparia, from Dobrudja area and also from Romania, was identified, respectively over 2,000 pairs.

The birds are one of the biggest attractions of the Danube Delta and the neighboring areas, drawing attention both researchers and tourists. In this paper we have presented only a part of the studies concerning the avifauna from Danube Delta. In Table no. 3-10 are presented the 100 bird species of community interest protected in the 12 SPAs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).

Table no. 3-10 The community interest bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive

2009/147/ EC, included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from the study area

No Birds species code and name

ROSPA0009 ROSPA0019 ROSPA0031 ROSPA0032 ROSPA0040 ROSPA0052 ROSPA0060 ROSPA0073 ROSPA0076 ROSPA0091 ROSPA0100 ROSPA0121

1 A001 – Gavia stellata x x

2 A002 – Gavia arctica x x x

3 A019 – Pelecanus onocrotalus x x x x x x x x

4 A020 – Pelecanus crispus x x x x x

5 A021 – Botaurus stellaris x x

6 A022 – Ixobrychus minutus x x x

7 A023 – Nycticorax nycticorax x x x x x

8 A024 – Ardeola ralloides x x x

9 A026 – Egretta garzetta x x x x

10 A027 – Egretta alba x x x x

11 A029 – Ardea purpurea x x x x

12 A030 – Ciconia nigra x x x x x x x

13 A031 – Ciconia ciconia x x x x x x x x x x

14 A032 – Plegadis falcinellus x x x

15 A034 – Platalea leucorodia x x x x x

A037 – Cygnus columbianus 16 x bewickii 17 A038 – Cygnus cygnus x x x x

18 A042 – Anser erythropus x x

19 A060 – Aythya nyroca x x x x

20 A068 – Mergus albellus x x

21 A071 – Oxyura leucocephala x x

22 A072 – Pernis apivorus x x x x x x

23 A073 – Milvus migrans x x x x x x

24 A075 – Haliaeetus albicilla x x x x x x x

25 A077 – Neophron percnopterus x x

26 A078 – Gyps fulvus x

27 A080 – Circaetus gallicus x x x x x x x x x

28 A081 – Circus aeruginosus x x x x x x x x x

29 A082 – Circus cyaneus x x x x x x x x x

30 A083 – Circus macrourus x x x x x x x x

31 A084 – Circus pygargus x x x x x x x x

No Birds species code and name

ROSPA0009 ROSPA0019 ROSPA0031 ROSPA0032 ROSPA0040 ROSPA0052 ROSPA0060 ROSPA0073 ROSPA0076 ROSPA0091 ROSPA0100 ROSPA0121

32 A089 – Aquila pomarina x x x x x x x x

33 A090 – Aquila clanga x x x x x

34 A091 – Aquila chrysaetos x

35 A092 – Hieraaetus pennatus x x x x x x x x

36 A094 – Pandion haliaetus x x x x x

37 A095 – Falco naumanni x

38 A097 – Falco vespertinus x x x x x x x x x x x

39 A098 – Falco columbarius x x x

40 A103 – Falco peregrinus x x x x x x x

41 A119 – Porzana porzana x

42 A120 – Porzana parva x x

43 A121 – Porzana pusilla x

44 A122 – Crex crex x

45 A127 – Grus grus x x x

A131 – Himantopus 46 x x x x himantopus 47 A132 – Recurvirostra avosetta x x x x

48 A133 – Burhinus oedicnemus x x x x x x x x

49 A135 – Glareola pratincola x x x

50 A138 – Charadrius alexandrinus x x x x

51 A139 – Charadrius morinellus x

52 A140 – Pluvialis apricaria x

53 A151 – Philomachus pugnax x x x

54 A154 – Gallinago media x

55 A157 – Limosa lapponica x

56 A159 – Numenius tenuirostris x

57 A166 – Tringa glareola x x x

58 A167 – Xenus cinereus x

59 A170 – Phalaropus lobatus x x x

60 A176 – Larus melanocephalus x x x x

61 A177 – Larus minutus x x x x

62 A180 – Larus genei x x

63 A189 – Gelochelidon nilotica x x x

64 A190 – Sterna caspia x x x

65 A191 – Sterna sandvicensis x x x

66 A193 – Sterna hirundo x x x x x

67 A195 – Sterna albifrons x x x x x

68 A196 – Chlidonias hybridus x x x x x x x

69 A197 – Chlidonias niger x x x x x

70 A215 – Bubo bubo x x x x x

71 A222 – Asio flammeus x

No Birds species code and name

ROSPA0009 ROSPA0019 ROSPA0031 ROSPA0032 ROSPA0040 ROSPA0052 ROSPA0060 ROSPA0073 ROSPA0076 ROSPA0091 ROSPA0100 ROSPA0121

72 A224 – Caprimulgus europaeus x x x x x x

73 A229 – Alcedo atthis x x x x

74 A231 – Coracias garrulus x x x x x x x x

75 A234 – Picus canus x x x x x

76 A236 – Dryocopus martius x x x x x

77 A238 – Dendrocopos medius x x x x

78 A239 – Dendrocopos leucotos x

A242 – Melanocorypha 79 x x x x x x x x calandra A243 – Calandrella 80 x x x x x x x brachydactyla 81 A246 – Lullula arborea x x x x x x

82 A255 – Anthus campestris x x x x x x x x x

83 A272 – Luscinia svecica x

A293 – 84 x x x Acrocephalus melanopogon 85 A307 – Sylvia nisoria x x x x x

86 A320 – Ficedula parva x x x x x

87 A321 – Ficedula albicollis x x x x x

88 A338 – Lanius collurio x x x x x x x x x

89 A339 – Lanius minor x x x x x x x x x

90 A379 – Emberiza hortulana x x x x x x

91 A393 – Phalacrocorax pygmeus x x x x x

92 A396 – Branta ruficollis x x x x x x x x

93 A397 – Tadorna ferruginea x x

94 A402 – Accipiter brevipes x x x x x x x x

95 A403 – Buteo rufinus x x x x x x x x

96 A404 – Aquila heliaca x x x x x x x

97 A429 – Dendrocopos syriacus x x x x x x

98 A464 – Puffinus yelkouan x x

99 A511 – Falco cherrug x x x x x x x x

10 A533 – Oenanthe pleschanka x x x x x x x x 0 x – species mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms

Figure no. 3-22 Numerical distribution of community interest bird species in the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal)

3.3 DESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS OF THE AFFECTED SPECIES AND HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST (AREA, LOCATION, CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES) AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH ADJACENT NATURA 2000 SITES AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION On the surface of the study area, Danube Delta Region, four landforms can be found: delta, plateaus, hills and mountains, and in much smaller proportions also floodplains and marine areas. In terms of the major relief units, Natura 2000 sites are encountered (partially and entirely) in Danube Delta, Dobrudja Plateau, Black Sea (territorial waters) and the Romanian plain (only two of the sites, less than 5 % of their surface). Danube Delta is characterized mainly by reophile and lentic aquatic ecosystems. The reophile ecosystems are represented by: Danube and its branches, channels. The lentic ecosystems are the result of the atrophiation of reofile conditions and the accentuation of the lentic conditions, and are represented by lakes and ponds formed by the closure of the active arms of the Danube or the channels. Along with the freshwater ecosystems, salty and low salinity habitats, lagoons, semi-enclosed bays, coastal marine waters, mixed oak forests, thickets, meadows, dunes, as well as anthropogenic ecosystems, contribute to Delta's heterogeneity. The Northern Dobrudja Plateau is one of the largest Natura 2000 site localized entirely in Dobrudja Plateau, consisting over 95 % of community interest habitats: steppe habitats, Balkan and Submediterranean forests and scrubland habitats. A significant number of the vegetal associations within the 10 community interest habitats (of which 3 are prioritary) have an endemic feature for Dobrudja, the biggest part of their distribution area at national and global level being encountered within this area. Also, Agighiolului and Deniz Tepe Hills are other 2 Natura 2000 sites localized entirely (100 %) within the Dobrudja Plateau, and in the same time within the territory of the study area, being characterized by rocky habitats, meadows steppe, silvosteppe and forest habitats, respectively Ponto- Sarmatic steppes and thickets. Măcinului Mountains are the oldest mountains in Romania, characterized by typical Ponto-Balkan steppe ecosystems, sub-Mediterranean and Balkan forests, and a rich diversity of flora and fauna. The Natura 2000 species and habitats potentially affected, located in the study area, belong to the entire taxonomical spectrum that is subject to protection in Natura 2000 sites. The potentially affected species belong at the same time to the majority of the functional spectrum: primary producers, herbivores, insectivores, carnivores or parasitoids organisms, being represented both of terrestrial species and aquatic species. The species and habitats of community interest are key components for the Natura 2000 sites both in what concern the functional role and of the representativeness or uniqueness. As a result of the current level of detail of the DDISDS projects/ types of interventions, as well as of the large number of species and habitats of community interest that could be affected, a detailed description of the ecological functions of all species and habitats of community interest, for each of potentially affected Natura 2000 sites, it is difficult to achieve at this strategic planning level. Each of the habitats and species of community interest potentially affected have an important role in maintaining the structural and functional integrity of the Natura 2000 sites from which belong, and this analysis will be performed within the environmental proceedings (EA and EIA) at a project/ type of intervention level, depending on the characteristics of each of them. The invertebrates play a crucial role in the functioning of the ecosystems due to their food regime (covering all levels of consumers - primary and secondary), on the one hand, and of their ecological plurivalence, on the other hand: pollinators (e.g.: species of Lepidoptera), phytophagous, primary phytophagous or secondary detritophagous. As prey, the invertebrates are a trophic source both for

other invertebrates and for the amphibians, birds and insectivore mammals (e.g.: bats). Most species of invertebrates shows a high degree of stenoecie (preferences more or less strict regarding the habitat, food, local conditions etc.), making them vulnerable to the disturbances of their living conditions and to habitat degradation. Thus, the presence of certain species of invertebrates constitutes an indicator of the habitat health degree populated by them. The fish are an important feature for the majority of the aquatic ecosystems in terms of their ecological role, including the direct impact on prey populations and the indirect impact on other biotic and abiotic components of the ecosystem, as well as the in terms of their socio-economical value. Fish can be omnivores, herbivores, insectivores, planktivorous, piscivorous and, at the same time, represent the main source of food for many organisms, both terrestrial and aquatic. They control other populations by eating the microorganisms and plankton. There is an interdependence between plants, that release oxygen into the water, necessary for fish breathing, and fish that removes various substances out of their system (during defecation), which fertilizes the plants, and when they die their body nutrients help the plants in the development process. Also, fish are an important food source for many bird species. Some fish have an important role as biomarkers for the waters in which they live, constituting good indicators of the long-term effects of the anthropogenic pressures. The migratory fish species shall travel along the rivers courses to spawn, the flow regime and water temperature being important factors in the early stages of larvae development. The amphibians and reptiles play a major role in the trophic networks, such as predators and as prey. The species potentially affected are mostly represented by consumers of insects or small mammals. When amphibian populations are abundant, they can consume significant amounts of prey organisms, serving to limit the population explosions. The larvae of some species of newts and frogs are important predators in ponds and other water bodies and affect the abundance and diversity of aquatic invertebrate communities and of other amphibians. As prey, herpetofauna is an important trophic resource for small and medium mammals, birds or other species of amphibians and reptiles. The species of amphibians and reptiles are mainly sensitive to habitat disturbances. As a result of reliance on habitat variables, amphibians are considered good indicators of the environmental health. The skin of amphibians has a high permeability coefficient, absorbing toxic substances from water, air and soil. The complex life cycle of amphibians require favorable habitats for oviposition and for the development of larvae and adults. For most of the amphibians and reptiles the movement between the habitats is a must. Both groups performs migrations - in the case of amphibians have been identified two periods of migration: spring migration, to breeding habitats and autumn migration, to hibernating habitats, while in the case of reptiles there are often two movement stages, one in summer, when the males disperse into habitat, and on in autumn, when both sexes crowded near the hibernacula. This means that both for the amphibians and for the reptiles, quality habitats are necessary (both the transitional and the residence ones). In addition, almost all species of herpetofauna have a low capacity of dispersion and often cannot move to alternative habitat when the present one is degraded. Small mammals play an important role in ecosystems, both by contributing to the diversity of life and as predators, consuming especially invertebrates, plant material, other mammals, as well as the as prey for medium and large mammals, birds (especially birds of prey) and snakes. Through this interaction with other groups of animals, small mammals are influencing the trophic networks and are controlling the population levels of predators, insects and of host species.

Medium sized carnivores (mezocarnivores) facilitates the flow of nutrients by connecting the adjacent ecosystems and occupies a unique place in the trophic networks that cannot be occupied by other animals, such as direct dispersion of seeds or animal consumption that disperse seeds. Also, as other species of predators, medium size mammals are controlling the population levels of prey species - small mammals, reptiles, amphibians and birds. Large carnivores represent the peak of the trophic pyramid, being considered key species in ecosystem functioning and implicitly in maintaining the balance of the ecological communities. These species play an important role in the ecosystem through the "top-down" type of control that they have on prey populations over wide territories. Thus the presence of these species indicates natural habitats with a high ecological value and functional ecosystems. Large Carnivores provides a series of benefits, and their disappearance could lead to a triggering chain reaction, for example, due to a decline in populations of wolf / lynx can be seen a dramatic increase of herbivores, which can cause further disturbance of vegetation, populations of birds and small mammals. The birds occupy different levels in the food chain and, like other living organisms, birds contribute to maintaining sustainable levels of prey populations and of predatory species and, after death, provide food for scavengers and decomposers. Many birds are important in plants reproduction through their services as pollinators and seed dispersers, as well as for their contribution to controlling rodent populations. The birds also provide critical resources to many parasites that are host-specific. Some bird species are considered key species because their presence (or disappearance of) in an ecosystem indirectly affects other species. According to Sekercioglu, 2006, the main ecological functions provided by birds are represented by:

 Adjusting services: dispersal of seeds (frugivorous species), pollination (nectarivorous species), pest control (birds which feed on vertebrate and invertebrate species), corpses removal (scavenger species);

 Support services: nutrients deposit (aquatic species), "modeling" ecosystem services (species that digs cavities). 3.4 CONSERVATION STATUS OF SPECIES AND HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST The conservation status of species and habitats of community interest within the Natura 2000 sites from Danube Delta Region is presented in Table no. 3-11, Table no. 3-12 and Table no. 3-13.

Table no. 3-11 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta Region No. Natura 2000 Habitats GEO 57/ Habitat name crt. code Directive 2007 Appendix 1 1110 Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time Appendix I 2 2 1130 Estuaries Appendix I Appendix 3 1140 Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide Appendix I 2 Appendix 4 1150* Coastal lagoons Appendix I 2 Appendix 5 1160 Large shallow inlets and bays Appendix I 2 6 1180 Submarine structures made by leaking gases Appendix I Appendix 7 1210 Annual vegetation of drift lines Appendix I 2 Appendix 8 1310 Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand Appendix I 2 9 1410 Mediterranean salt meadows (Juncetalia maritimi) Appendix I Appendix 10 1530* Pannonic salt steppes and salt marshes Appendix I 2 Appendix 11 2110 Embryonic shifting dunes Appendix I 2 Appendix 12 2130* Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (“grey dunes’) Appendix I 2 Appendix 13 2160 Dunes with Hippophaë rhamnoides Appendix I 2 Appendix 14 2190 Humid dune slacks Appendix I 2 Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto- Appendix 15 3130 Appendix I Nanojuncetea 2 Appendix 16 3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp. Appendix I 2

No. Natura 2000 Habitats GEO 57/ Habitat name crt. code Directive 2007 Appendix 17 3150 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition — type vegetation Appendix I 2 Appendix 18 3160 Natural dystrophic lakes and ponds Appendix I 2 Appendix 19 3260 Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation Appendix I 2 Appendix 20 3270 Rivers with muddy banks with Chenopodion rubri p.p. and Bidention p.p. vegetation Appendix I 2 Appendix 21 40C0* Ponto-Sarmatic deciduous thickets Appendix I 2 Appendix 22 6120* Xeric sand calcareous grasslands Appendix I 2 Appendix 23 62C0* Ponto-Sarmatic steppes Appendix I 2 Appendix 24 6410 Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae) Appendix I 2 Appendix 25 6420 Mediterranean tall humid grasslands of the Molinio-Holoschoenion Appendix I 2 Appendix 26 6430 Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels Appendix I 2 Appendix 27 6440 Alluvial meadows of river valleys of the Cnidion dubii Appendix I 2 Appendix 28 6510 Lowland hay meadows (Alopecurus pratensis, Sanguisorba officinalis) Appendix I 2 Appendix 29 7210* Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae Appendix I 2 Appendix 30 8230 Siliceous rock with pioneer vegetation of the Sedo-Scleranthion or of the Sedo albi-Veronicion dillenii Appendix I 2 Appendix 31 8310 Caves not open to the public Appendix I 2 Appendix 32 91AA* Eastern white oak woods Appendix I 2

No. Natura 2000 Habitats GEO 57/ Habitat name crt. code Directive 2007 Riparian mixed forests of Quercus robur, Ulmus laevis and Ulmus minor, Fraxinus excelsior or Fraxinus Appendix 33 91F0 Appendix I angustifolia, along the great rivers (Ulmenion minoris) 2 Appendix 34 91I0* Euro-Siberian steppic woods with Quercus spp. Appendix I 2 Appendix 35 91M0 Pannonian-Balkanic turkey oak –sessile oak forests Appendix I 2 Appendix 36 91X0* Dobrogean beech forests Appendix I 2 Appendix 37 91Y0 Dacian oak & hornbeam forests Appendix I 2 Appendix 38 92A0 Salix alba and Populus alba galleries Appendix I 2 39 92D0 Southern riparian galleries and thickets (Nerio-Tamaricetea and Securinegion tinctoriae) Appendix I Habitats Directive – Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora: Appendix I - Natural habitat types of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation; GEO 57/ 2007 – Government Emergency Ordinance on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural habitats, of the wild flora and fauna, approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011: Appendix 2 - Natural habitat types whose conservation requires the declaration of Special Areas of Conservation.

Table no. 3-12 Conservation status of the species of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta Region No. IUC Habitats Bern GEO 57/ Red Book of vertebrates in Category Species (Latin) Species (en) Crt. N Directive Convention 2007 Romania 1 Plant Agrimonia pilosa Hairy agrimony LC Appendix II - Appendix 3 - 2 Plant Aldrovanda vesiculosa Waterwheel EN Appendix II Appendix I Appendix 3 - 3 Plant Campanula romanica - DD Appendix II - Appendix 3 - 4 Plant Centaurea jankae - VU Appendix II - Appendix 3 - 5 Plant Centaurea pontica - DD Appendix II - Appendix 3 - 6 Plant Echium russicum LC Appendix II - Appendix 3 -

Himantoglossum 7 Plant - DD Appendix II - - - caprinum Iris aphylla ssp. 8 Plant - DD Appendix II - Appendix 3 - hungarica 9 Plant Marsilea quadrifolia Water Shamrock LC Appendix II Appendix I Appendix 3 - 10 Plant Moehringia jankae - DD Appendix II - Appendix 3 - 11 Plant Potentilla emilii-popii - DD Appendix II - Appendix 3 - Invertebra Appendix 3, 12 Anisus vorticulus Lesser Ramshorn Snail DD - - - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 13 Arytrura musculus - LC - - - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 14 Bolbelasmus unicornis - DD - - - tes 4A Invertebra Callimorpha 15 - DD Appendix II - Appendix 3 - tes quadripunctaria Invertebra Appendix 3, 16 Catopta thrips - DD - - - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 17 Cerambyx cerdo Cerambyx Longicorn VU Appendix IV Appendix II - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 18 Coenagrion ornatum Ornate Bluet LC - - - tes 4A 19 Invertebra Colias myrmidone - EN - - Appendix 3, -

No. IUC Habitats Bern GEO 57/ Red Book of vertebrates in Category Species (Latin) Species (en) Crt. N Directive Convention 2007 Romania tes 4A Invertebra 20 Euphydryas maturna Scarce Fritillary DD Appendix II - Appendix 3 - tes Invertebra Appendix 3, 21 Graphoderus bilineatus - VU - Appendix II - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 22 Leptidea morsei Fenton's Wood White NT - - - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 23 Lucanus cervus Stag beetle NT - Appendix III - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 24 Lycaena dispar Large Copper NT Appendix II Appendix II - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 25 Morimus funereus - VU - - - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 26 Ophiogomphus cecilia Green Gomphid LC - Appendix II - tes 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 27 Osmoderma eremita Hermit Beetle NT Appendix II Appendix II - tes 4A Invertebra Paracaloptenus Appendix 3, 28 - DD - - - tes caloptenoides 4A Invertebra Pholidoptera Appendix 3, 29 - DD - - - tes transsylvanica 4A Invertebra Appendix 3, 30 Theodoxus transversalis Striped Nerite EN - - - tes 4A Appendix 31 Fish Alosa immaculata Pontic shad VU Appendix II, IV - - 5A Appendix 32 Fish Alosa tanaica Azov Shad LC Appendix II, IV - - 5A 33 Fish Aspius aspius Asp LC Appendix II, IV Appendix III Appendix 3 - 34 Fish Cobitis taenia Spined loach LC - Appendix III Appendix 3 - Romanogobio 35 Fish White-finned gudgeon LC Appendix II Appendix III Appendix 3 - albipinatus

No. IUC Habitats Bern GEO 57/ Red Book of vertebrates in Category Species (Latin) Species (en) Crt. N Directive Convention 2007 Romania 36 Fish Gobio kessleri Kessler's gudgeon LC Appendix II Appendix III Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix 3, 37 Fish Gymnocephalus baloni Balon's Ruffe LC Appendix II, IV Appendix III - 4A Gymnocephalus 38 Fish Striped Ruffe LC Appendix II, IV Appendix III Appendix 3 - schraetzer 39 Fish Misgurnus fossilis Weatherfish LC Appendix II Appendix III Appendix 3 - 40 Fish Pelecus cultratus Ziege LC Appendix II, IV Appendix III Appendix 3 - Rhodeus sericeus 41 Fish European bitterling LC Appendix II Appendix III Appendix 3 - amarus 42 Fish Sabanejewia aurata Golden Spined loach LC Appendix II Appendix III Appendix 3 - 43 Fish Umbra krameri European Mudminnow VU Appendix II Appendix II Appendix 3 - 44 Fish Zingel streber Streber LC Appendix II Appendix III Appendix 3 - Appendix 3, 45 Fish Zingel zingel Zingel LC Appendix IV Appendix III - 4A Amphibian Appendix 3, 46 Bombina bombina Fire-bellied Toad LC Appendix II, IV Appendix II Near Threatened species s 4A Amphibian 47 Triturus dobrogicus Danube Crested Newt NT Appendix II Appendix II Appendix 3 Endangered species s Appendix 3, 48 Reptiles Elaphe quatuorlineata Four-lined Snake NT Appendix II, IV - Critically Endangered species 4A Appendix 3, 49 Reptiles Emys orbicularis European Pond Turtle NT Appendix II, IV - Vulnerable species 4A Appendix 3, 50 Reptiles Testudo graeca Greek tortoise VU Appendix II, IV - Endangered species 4A Appendix 3, 51 Reptiles Vipera ursinii Meadow Viper VU Appendix II, IV - Critically Endangered species 4A Mammmal Appendix 3, 52 Lutra lutra Eurasian Otter NT Appendix II, IV Appendix II Vulnerable species s 4A Mammmal Appendix 3, 53 Mesocricetus newtoni Romanian Hamster NT Appendix II, IV - Vulnerable species s 4A 54 Mammmal Mustela eversmannii Steppe Polecat LC Appendix II, IV - Appendix 3 Vulnerable species

No. IUC Habitats Bern GEO 57/ Red Book of vertebrates in Category Species (Latin) Species (en) Crt. N Directive Convention 2007 Romania s Mammmal Appendix 3, 55 Mustela lutreola European Mink CR Appendix II, IV Appendix II Endangered species s 4A Mammmal 56 Phocoena phocoena Harbour Porpoise LC Appendix II Appendix II Appendix 3 Endangered species s Mammmal Rhinolophus 57 Greater Horseshoe Bat LC Appendix II - Appendix 3 Vulnerable species s ferrumequinum Mammmal Appendix 3, 58 Sicista subtilis Southern birch mouse LC Appendix II, IV Appendix II Critically Endangered species s 4A Mammmal European ground Appendix 3, 59 Spermophilus citellus VU Appendix II, IV Appendix II Vulnerable species s squirrel 4A Mammmal Common Bottlenose 60 Tursiops truncatus LC Appendix II Appendix II Appendix 3 Endangered species s Dolphin Mammmal European Marbled Appendix 3, 61 Vormela peregusna VU Appendix II, IV Appendix III Endangered species s Polecat 4A IUCN (The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) Red list of Threatened Species: DD - Data deficient, LC – Least concern, VU – Vulnerable, NT – Near Threatened, EN – Endangered, CR – Critically Endangered; Habitats Directive – Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora: Appendix II - Animal and plant species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation, Appendix IV - Animal and plant species of community interest in need of strict protection; Bern Convention- Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats - 19.IX.1979: Appendix I – Strictly protected flora species; Appendix II – Strictly protected fauna species; Appendix III – Protected fauna species; GEO 57/ 2007 – Government Emergency Ordinance on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural habitats, of the wild flora and fauna, approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011: Appendix 3 - Animal and plant species whose conservation requires the designation of Special Areas of Conservation and Special Bird Protection Areas; Appendix 4A - Species of community interest. Animal and plant species that require strict protection; Appendix 5A - Species of community interest. Animal and plant species of community interest, except bird species, whose removal from nature and exploitation are subject to management measures. Red Book of vertebrates in Romania, Romanian Academy, „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, 2005 – the criteria for the classification of species and the degrees of endangerment are the same as in the IUCN Red List of threatened species.

Table no. 3-13 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from Danube Delta Region Birds Red Book of Bern No. Phen IU Species (Latin) Species (en) Directiv GEO 57/ 2007 vertebrates in Conventi Bonn Convention crt ology CN e Romania on Levant Appendi Appendix 1 Accipiter brevipes OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II Sparrowhawk x I II Acrocephalus Moustached Appendi Appendix 2 OV LC Appendix 3 - melanopogon Warbler x I III Common Appendi Appendix 3 Alcedo atthis MP, S LC Appendix 3 - Kingfisher x I II Lesser White- Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 4 Anser erythropus Ac VU Appendix 3 Appendix II fronted Goose x I species III Appendi Appendix 5 Anthus campestris Tawny Pipit OV LC Appendix 3 - x I II Appendi Appendix 6 Aquila chrysaetos Golden Eagle S LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II x I II Greater Spotted Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 7 Aquila clanga P VU - Appendix II Eagle x I species II Eastern Imperial Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 8 Aquila heliaca MP VU Appendix 3 Appendix II Eagle x I species II Lesser Spotted Appendi Appendix 9 Aquila pomarina OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II Eagle x I II Appendix II (reproducing Appendi Appendix 10 Ardea purpurea Purpule Heron OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species populations in the Western x I II Palearctic) Appendi Appendix 11 Ardeola ralloides Squacco Heron OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species - x I II Appendi Appendix 12 Asio flammeus Short-eared Owl OI LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species - x I II Ferruginous Appendi Appendix 13 Aythya nyroca OV,RI NT Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix I Duck x I III 14 Botaurus stellaris Bittern OV,RI LC Appendi Appendix 3 Appendix Appendix II (Western

Birds Red Book of Bern No. Phen IU Species (Latin) Species (en) Directiv GEO 57/ 2007 vertebrates in Conventi Bonn Convention crt ology CN e Romania on x I II Palearctic populations)

Red Brested Appendi Appendix 15 Branta ruficollis OI EN Appendix 3 Endangered species - Goose x I III Eurasian Eagle Appendi Appendix 16 Bubo bubo S LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species - Owl x I II Eurasian Thick- Appendi Appendix 17 Burhinus oedicnemus OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II knee x I II Long legged Appendi Appendix 18 Buteo rufinus P, OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species - Buzzard x I III Greater Short- Appendi Appendix 19 Calandrella brachydactyla OV LC Appendix 3 - toed Lark x I II Eurasian Appendi Appendix 20 Caprimulgus europaeus OV LC Appendix 3 - Nightjar x I II Appendi Appendix 21 Charadrius alexandrinus Kentish Plover OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I II Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 22 Charadrius morinellus Dotterel OV LC - Appendix II x I species III Chlidonias hybridus Appendi Appendix 23 Whiskered Tern OV LC Appendix 3 - (Chlidonias hybrida) x I II Appendi Appendix 24 Chlidonias niger Black Tern OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II x I II Appendi Appendix 25 Ciconia ciconia White Stork OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I II Appendi Appendix 26 Ciconia nigra Black Stork OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I II Short-toed Appendi Appendix 27 Circaetus gallicus OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II Snake-eagle x I II Western Marsh- Appendi Appendix 28 Circus aeruginosus OV, S LC Appendix 3 Appendix II harrier x I II 29 Circus cyaneus Northern OI LC Appendi Appendix 3 Appendix Appendix II

Birds Red Book of Bern No. Phen IU Species (Latin) Species (en) Directiv GEO 57/ 2007 vertebrates in Conventi Bonn Convention crt ology CN e Romania on Harrier x I II Appendi Appendix 30 Circus macrourus Pallid Harrier P, OI NT Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II x I II Montagu's Appendi Appendix 31 Circus pygargus OV, P LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II Harrier x I II Appendi Appendix 32 Coracias garrulus European Roller OV NT Appendix 3 Appendix II x I II Appendi Appendix 33 Crex crex Corncrake OV LC - Vulnerable species - x I II Appendi Appendix 34 Cygnus columbianus Tundra Swan OI LC - - x I II Appendi Appendix 35 Cygnus cygnus Whooper Swan OI LC - - x I II White-backed Appendi Appendix 36 Dendrocopos leucotos S LC Appendix 3 - - Woodpecker x I II Middle Spotted Appendi Appendix 37 Dendrocopos medius S LC Appendix 3 - Woodpecker x I II Syrian Appendi Appendix 38 Dendrocopos syriacus S LC Appendix 3 - Woodpecker x I II Black Appendi Appendix 39 Dryocopus martius S LC Appendix 3 - woodpecker x I II Casmerodius albus Appendi Appendix Appendix II (Western 40 Great Egret OV, RI LC Appendix 3 Endangered species (Egretta alba) x I II Palearctic populations) Appendi Appendix 41 Egretta garzetta Little Egret OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species - x I II Appendi Appendix 42 Emberiza hortulana Ortolan Bunting OV LC Appendix 3 - x I III Critically Endangered Appendix 43 Falco cherrug Saker Falcon MP EN Appendix 3 Appendix II species II Appendi Appendix 44 Falco columbarius Merlin OI LC - Appendix II x I II

Birds Red Book of Bern No. Phen IU Species (Latin) Species (en) Directiv GEO 57/ 2007 vertebrates in Conventi Bonn Convention crt ology CN e Romania on Appendi Appendix 45 Falco naumanni Lesser Kestrel OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I II Appendi Appendix 46 Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon S, OI LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II x I II Red-footed Appendi Appendix 47 Falco vespertinus OV NT Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II Falcon x I II Collared Appendi Appendix 48 Ficedula albicollis OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II Flycatcher x I II Red-breasted Appendi Appendix 49 Ficedula parva OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II Flycatcher x I II Appendi Appendix 50 Gallinago media Great Snipe P NT - - x I II Black-throated Appendi Appendix 51 Gavia arctica OI LC Appendix 3 Appendix II Loon x I II Red-throated Appendi Appendix Appendix II (Western 52 Gavia stellata OI LC Appendix 3 Loon x I II Palearctic populations) Sterna nilotica Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix Appendix II (Western Eurasia 53 Gull-billed Tern OV LC Appendix 3 (Gelochelidon nilotica) x I species II and Africa populations) Common Appendi Appendix 54 Glareola pratincola OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II Pratincole x I II Appendi Appendix 55 Grus grus Common Crane P LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I II Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 56 Gyps fulvus Griffon Vulture Ac LC Appendix 3 Appendix II x I species II White-tailed MP, Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 57 Haliaeetus albicilla LC Appendix 3 Appendix I, Appendix II Eagle OI x I species II Hieraaetus pennatus Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 58 Booted Eagle OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II (Aquila pennata) x I species II Black-winged Appendi Appendix 59 Himantopus himantopus OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species - Stilt x I III

Birds Red Book of Bern No. Phen IU Species (Latin) Species (en) Directiv GEO 57/ 2007 vertebrates in Conventi Bonn Convention crt ology CN e Romania on Appendi Appendix Appendix II (Western 60 Ixobrychus minutus Little Bittern OV LC Appendix 3 x I II Palearctic populations) Red-backed Appendi Appendix 61 Lanius collurio OV LC Appendix 3 - Shrike x I II Lesser Grey Appendi Appendix 62 Lanius minor OV LC Appendix 3 - Shrike x I II Slender-billed Ac, Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 63 Larus genei LC Appendix 3 Appendix II Gull OV x I species II Mediterranean Appendi Appendix 64 Larus melanocephalus OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II Gull x I II Appendix 65 Larus minutus Little Gull P, OV LC Appendix 3 - II Bar-tailed Appendi Appendix 66 Limosa lapponica Ac LC - - Godwit x I III Appendi Appendix 67 Lullula arborea Wood Lark OV LC Appendix 3 - x I III Luscinia svecica Appendi Appendix 68 Bluethroat P, OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II (Cyanosylvia svecica) x I II Appendi Appendix 69 Melanocorypha calandra Calandra Lark MP, S LC Appendix 3 - x I II Mergus albellus Appendi Appendix 70 Smew OI LC - Vulnerable species - (Mergellus albellus) x I II Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 71 Milvus migrans Black Kite OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II x I species II Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 72 Neophron percnopterus Egyptian vulture OV EN Appendix 3 - x I species III Slender-billed Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 73 Numenius tenuirostris Ac CR Appendix 3 Appendix I Curlew x I species II Appendi Appendix 74 Nycticorax nycticorax Night Heron OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species - x I II 75 Oenanthe pleschanka Pied Wheatear OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix -

Birds Red Book of Bern No. Phen IU Species (Latin) Species (en) Directiv GEO 57/ 2007 vertebrates in Conventi Bonn Convention crt ology CN e Romania on II White-headed Appendi Appendix 76 Oxyura leucocephala OI EN Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix I Duck x I II Appendi Appendix 77 Pandion haliaetus Osprey P LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I II Dalmatian Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 78 Pelecanus crispus OV VU Appendix 3 Appendix I, Appendix II Pelican x I species II Great White Appendi Appendix 79 Pelecanus onocrotalus OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix I, Appendix II Pelican x I II European Appendi Appendix 80 Pernis apivorus OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II Honey-buzzard x I II Pygmy OV, Appendi Appendix 81 Phalacrocorax pygmeus LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II Cormorant RI, S x I II Red-necked Appendi Appendix 82 Phalaropus lobatus P LC Appendix 3 Appendix II Phalarope x I II Appendi Appendix 83 Philomachus pugnax Ruff P LC - Appendix II x I III Grey-faced Appendi Appendix 84 Picus canus S LC Appendix 3 - Woodpecker x I II Appendi Appendix 85 Platalea leucorodia Spoonbill OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II x I III Appendi Appendix 86 Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I III Eurasian Golden Appendi Appendix 3, Appendix 87 Pluvialis apricaria P, RI LC Appendix II Plover x I Appendix 5E III Appendi Appendix 88 Porzana parva Little Crake OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II x I II Appendi Appendix Appendix II (Western 89 Porzana porzana Spotted Crake OV LC Appendix 3 x I II Palearctic populations) Appendi Appendix 90 Porzana pusilla Baillon's Crake OV, P LC Appendix 3 Appendix II x I II

Birds Red Book of Bern No. Phen IU Species (Latin) Species (en) Directiv GEO 57/ 2007 vertebrates in Conventi Bonn Convention crt ology CN e Romania on Yelkouan Appendi Appendix 91 Puffinus yelkouan Ac VU - - Shearwater x I III Appendi Appendix 92 Recurvirostra avosetta Pied Avocet OV LC Appendix 3 Vulnerable species Appendix II x I II Sterna albifrons (Sternula Appendi Appendix 93 Little Tern OV LC Appendix 3 Endangered species Appendix II albifrons) x I II Sterna caspia Appendi Appendix Appendix II (Western Eurasia 94 Caspian Tern P LC Appendix 3 (Hydroprogne caspia) x I II and Africa populations) Appendi Appendix Appendix II (Western 95 Sterna hirundo Common Tern OV LC Appendix 3 x I II Palearctic populations) Sterna sandvicensis Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 96 Sandwich Tern OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II (Thalasseus sandvicensis) x I species II Appendi Appendix 97 Sylvia nisoria Barred Warbler OV LC Appendix 3 - x I II Appendi Critically Endangered Appendix 98 Tadorna ferruginea Ruddy Shelduck OV LC Appendix 3 Appendix II x I species II Appendi Appendix 99 Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper P LC Appendix 3 Appendix II x I II Appendi Appendix 100 Xenus cinereus Terek Sandpiper Ac LC - - x I III Phenology - Ac – accidentally species; MP – partially migratory; OV – summer guest; OI – winter guest; P – passage species; RI – rare in winter; S – sedentary bird; IUCN (The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) Red list of Threatened Species: LC – Least concern, VU – Vulnerable, NT – Near Threatened, EN – Endangered, CR – Critically Endangered; Birds Directive – Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (codified version of Directive 79/409/EEC as amended): Appendix I – Bird species subject of special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their survival and reproduction in their area of distribution; GEO 57/ 2007 – Government Emergency Ordinance on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural habitats, of the wild flora and fauna, approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011: Appendix 3 - Animal and plant species whose conservation requires the designation of Special Areas of Conservation and Special Bird Protection Areas; Appendix 5E: Species of community interest whose trade is allowed under special circumstances;

Red Book of vertebrates in Romania, Romanian Academy, „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, 2005 – the criteria for the classification of species and the degrees of endangerment are the same as in the IUCN Red List of threatened species; Bern Convention- Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats - 19.IX.1979: Appendix II – Strictly protected fauna species; Appendix III – Protected fauna species; Bonn Convention – The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals: Appendix I – Threatened Migratory Species; Appendix II - Migratory Species requiring international cooperation.

3.5 DATA REGARDING THE STRUCTURE AND DYNAMICS OF THE AFFECTED SPECIES POPULATIONS (NUMERICAL EVOLUTION OF POPULATION WITHIN THE NATURA 2000 SITES, ESTIMATIVE PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION OF THE SPECIES AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS, HABITAT SURFACE IS LARGE ENOUGH TO ENSURE THE SPECIES MAINTENANCE ON LONG-TERM) Currently, there are no updated information regarding the structure and dynamics of species populations of the 20 Natura 2000 sites from Danube Delta Region. The only information available are those concerning the population size of the species of community interest, presented in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms, but they do not present age and sex structure or populations dynamics, and also gives no information about the location of populations within the site, in this respect being difficult to determine if the population is affected by the implementation of DDISDS, given that some sites intersects the implementation area only on small surfaces. Along with the completion of the studies regarding the inventory, mapping and assessment of the conservation status of wild fauna and flora of community interest, for which were declared the Natura 2000 sites, may be obtained updated information concerning the size, structure and population dynamics of species of community interest (if the project involved that kind of activities). We appreciate that, currently, there are no sufficient information to present data on the structure and dynamics of populations of the species of community interest affected by the implementation of DDISDS. This information will be analyzed separately for each project/ type of intervention likely to have a significant impact on Natura 2000 sites, within the appropriate assessment studies. The boundaries of any Natura 2000 site are conventional boundaries that do not involve the existence of some geographical or anthropogenic barriers in the field that could hinder the species movements. This means that the land areas outside the protected natural areas can be just as valuable as those inside them, in terms of maintaining the conservation status of species, especially when precisely on this phenomenon (species displacement) depends the ensuring of population connectivity or providing food resources (e.g. for species with high mobility, such as mammals and birds, they may use different habitats existing both inside the Natura 2000 site and outside the site, and can often be present even in strongly anthropogenic habitats). 3.6 STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS THAT CREATE AND MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST The Danube Delta is a complex of aquatic ecosystems, alongside with whom are encountered also forest, coastal, anthropogenic ecosystems etc. In Danube Delta, the most important role plays the water brought by the Danube. The conditions for the development of the aquatic and terrestrial vegetation are favored through the silt brought and deposited, due to the decreased flow rate. This complex of habitats, created with the direct or indirect contribution of Danube River, represents favorable habitats for carrying out various activities (breeding, feeding or resting) for the invertebrate species, fish, amphibians and reptiles, mammals, bats or birds. The inner area of the Danube Delta Region is characterized by steppe meadows, isolated forest bodies and agricultural crops. For the Natura 2000 sites: ROSPA0009 Beştepe-Mahmudia, ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei, ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe, ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel and ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea, localized in the continental zone, the main component that provides structural and functional integrity is the grassland. Grassland habitats are used by small species of birds as feeding and nesting habitats (on land or isolated trees, in underground galleries or anthropogenic structures). The birds of prey use the grassland mainly for hunting or recreation, but for some species, the inaccessible grasslands (due to

topography) can be used also as nesting habitats. Most birds of prey prefer the forests and human structures, located in the vicinity of open habitats, used for feeding, as a nesting habitat. In this area, along with the SPAs, are localized also a series of SCIs: ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului, ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului, ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean, some of them being overlapped with the SPAs. The habitats present within the SCIs, through the floristic species diversity, provide a constant supply of food (and also breeding and resting habitats) for some species of small mammals (Sicista subtilis, Spermophilus citellus, Mesocricetus newtoni), bats (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum), as well as for the mammalian predators of small or medium size (Vormela peregusna, Lutra lutra, Mustela eversmannii, Mustela lutreola). Dobrudja's herpetofauna is characterized by the presence of reptile species that were able to adapt to dry conditions (Testudo graeca, Vipera ursinii, Elaphe quatuorlineata). The small mammals represents a source of food for some species of reptiles (Vipera ursinii, Elaphe quatuorlineata), and in a similar manner these are hunted by small or medium carnivores. For those sites for which the main component that provides structural and functional integrity is the water (lakes, canals, flood plains, etc.) the species diversity is often higher than in other sites, due to the presence of fish, amphibians, reptiles, and bird species in greater numbers. These sites (ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim-Sinoe, ROSPA0040 Dunărea Veche-Braţul Măcin, ROSPA0052 Lacul Beibugeac, ROSPA0060 Lacurile Taşaul-Corbu and ROSPA0121 Lacul Brateş) are especially important for the birds that nest in the reeds, on the lakes surface, in floodplains or in the trees adjacent to the aquatic habitats. At the same time, due to the high diversity of species, these habitats represents nesting habitats for ichthyophagous, insectivorous, omnivorous or omnivore birds, while due to reduced accessibility offer vast territories for resting. The relatively high diversity of aquatic habitats allowed also a strong growth of the fauna, with numerous species of invertebrates, fish, amphibians and reptiles, mammals and birds. The aquatic habitats of the Danube Delta are among the richest, at national level, in terms of number of species, while between these species a number of relationships (predator-prey, symbiosis, parasitism etc.) have developed relationships that helps maintain the numerical balance between species, populations and groups of fauna. 3.7 THE CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES, WHERE WERE ESTABLISHED THROUGH MANAGEMENT PLANS For most of the Natura 2000 sites potentially affected by the projects/ types of interventions proposed in the DDISDS, the elaboration of the Management Plans is not yet complete. The studies regarding the inventorying, mapping and assessment of the conservation status of wild fauna and flora of community interest, based on which the Management Plans will be achieved, have been completed or are ongoing, following that at the end of 2015, all the Natura 2000 sites for which the studies were funded through the Environmental Sectoral Operational Programme to have Management Plans, finalized and approved by the central authority for environmental protection. The only Management Plan approved is „Planul de management integrat al Parcului Naţional Munţii Măcinului, ariei de protecţie specială avifaunistică ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel şi sitului de importanţă comunitară ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului”27. According to this integrated Management Plan for Măcin Mountains National Park (MMNP), ROSPA0073 and ROSCI0123, seven management objectives were established:

27 http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/management/432

conservation and protection of biodiversity and of landscape elements; promotion of tourism and recreation in line with the objectives of preserving the natural heritage; prohibition of human activities impacting the environment, that are not in the interests of human communities within the protected area and its proximity and that are not using traditional techniques or new technologies with reduced environmental impact; supporting the scientific research activities and environmental monitoring, which do not harm the protected elements; promoting and encouraging the educational activities for the local population, tourists and general public; promoting the ecological restoration activities in areas where the ecological balance has been affected; informing the public and local communities about the economic, cultural and spiritual aspects of the conservation activities from MMNP, ROSCI0123 and ROSPA0073. These 7 management objectives will be operationalized through specific actions in the Action Plan proposed to be realized in the next 5 years. It may be considered that, in accordance with the main objective of Natura 2000 european network „to maintain and, where necessary, to restore the favorable conservation status of the species and habitats of community interest, for which have been designated the Natura 2000 sites”, as well as with the requirements of national legislation in force, in all the potentially affected sites, the conservation objectives will be formulated in order to ensure a favorable conservation status for the maintenance of the habitats and species subject to the protection for each site and to ensure the integrity of the site (by maintaining coherence of its ecological structure and functions). 3.8 DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES, INCLUDING EVOLUTIONS/ CHANGES THAT MAY OCCUR IN THE FUTURE Description of the current state of conservation of the protected natural areas of community interest was achieved by describing the conservation status of species of flora and fauna of community interest, as well as of the habitats of community interest, present in the Natura 2000 sites from Danube Delta Region, according to the information contained in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms28. Due to the large number of species of flora and fauna and habitats present in the 8 SCIs and 12 SPAa, we have chosen to present the conservation status graphically for each category, and structured on Natura 2000 sites. The conservation status of the habitats of community interest was analyzed according to the parameters described in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms for the 8 SCIs and in the Order 207/ 2006 regarding the approval of the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form and its completion manual: representativity, relative surface, conservation status and overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the concerned natural habitat type. A brief overview of the conservation status in each Natura 2000 site is shown in Figure no. 3-23.

28 http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/natura-2000/435

Of the 8 sites of community importance which overlaps with the study area it is noted ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, which records the highest values for all 4 parameters. Thus, in what concern the degree of representativity of the habitat type within the site, out of the 29 habitats listed in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form of ROSCI0065, 15 have an excellent representativity, 12 have a good representativity and only 2 have a significant representativity. None of the habitats of community interest within this site have an insignificant representativity. In what concern the relative surface (the report between the surface covered by a particular habitat at national level and that covered by the same habitat at the site level), for ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, 17 habitats have a share between 15 and 100%, 4 habitats between 2 and 15% and only 8 have a share of less than 2%. Through this analysis we can assume that the habitats within this site are unique or almost unique in the country, their largest surface being found within this site. The importance of the Natura 2000 habitats from ROSCI0065 Delta is strengthened also by the fact that the degree of conservation of the structures and functions of the natural habitat types and the possibilities of recovery / reconstruction are classified as excellent for 13 of the habitats of community importance and good for 16 of them. The overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the natural habitats, reveals that 13 of the total of 29 habitats, representing 44%, have an excellent value, 14 (representing 48%) have a good value and only 2 have a considerable value (representing 6.8%).

16 Representativity 18 Relative surface

s 14 s 16 12 14 10 12

habitat habitat

8 8 of

6 of 6

. . . o

4 o 4 n 2 n 2 0 0

Excelentă Bună Semnificativă Nesemnificativă 100 >/= p > 15% 15 >/= p > 2% 2 >/= p > 0%

18 Conservation status 16 Overall assessment

16 14

s s 14 12 12 10

10 8

habitat

8 6

of of 6 .

. . 4

o o

4 n 2 n 2 0 0

Valoare excelentă Valoare bună Valoare considerabilă Excelentă Bună Medie sar redusă

Figure no. 3-23 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest within the 8 SCIs

The conservation status of species of flora and fauna of community interest was analyzed according to the parameters described in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms for the 8 SCIs and in the Order 207/ 2006 regarding the approval of the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form and its completion manual: population, conservation, isolation and overall assessment. Within the 8 SCIs are listed 61 species of flora and fauna of community interest: 11 species of plants, 19 species of invertebrates, 15 species of fish, 6 species of amphibians and reptiles and 10 species of mammals (including one bat species). Figure no. 3-24 gives a concise overview of the conservation status of species of flora and fauna of community interest within the 8 SCIs.

It is noted also a Natura 2000 site, through the presence of large populations of the species compared with their nationwide populations. Thus, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării hosts populations greater than 15% of the national total, for 23 species, more than double than ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean, which hosts populations greater than 15% of the national total, for only 10 species. Also, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării stands out also through the conservation status of the habitats important for the species of community interest, habitats that are in an excellent conservation status for 8 species and good for 30 of them. As regards the degree of isolation of the populations of species of community interest towards the normal range spreading of the species, it is noted that 5 of the sites have such (almost) isolated populations of some species of community interest. Among the species whose populations were assessed as (almost) isolated in at least 2 of the Natura 2000 sites, we mention: Sicista subtilis, Mesocricetus newtoni, Elaphe quatuorlineata, Moehringia jankae and Campanula romanica. The overall assessment of the site value for the conservation of the species of community interest, reveals that for the most of the sites predominate a good value, considerable value being found only for 2 species from 2 distinct Natura 2000 sites (Campanula romanica - ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului and Rhinolophus ferrumequinum - ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului). The excellent value of the overall assessment was found in 5 of the Natura 2000 sites, from which ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului and ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Doborgean, provides excellent features of the site for about 25% of species (considered relevant for them).

25 Population 35 Conservation

20 30

25 15 20

10 15 ofspecies

5 10 5 0 no.

0 no. ofspecies no.

100 >/= p > 15% 15 >/= p > 2% 2 >/= p > 0% Nesemnificativă Excelentă Bună Medie sar redusă

30 Isolation 30 Overall assessment

25 25 20 20 15 15

no. ofspeies no. 10

5 ofspecies no. 10 0 5 0

Populaţie (aproape) izolată Populaţie neizolată, dar la limita ariei de distribuţie Excellent value Good value Considerable value Populaţie neizolată, cu o arie de răspândire extinsă Figure no. 3-24 Conservation status of flora and fauna species of community interest within the 8 SCIs

The conservation status of the bird species of community interest from the 12 SPAs is presented in Figure no. 3-25. The conservation status of the bird species of community interest is presented separately for each of the 4 parameters used within the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms and detailed in the Order 207/ 2006 regarding the approval of the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form content and its completion manual: population, conservation, isolation and overall assessment of the site value for the conservation of the concerned species. In ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim-Sinoie are found the most species of birds whose population represents more than 15% of the national population, respectively 43 species. In other words, for 43 species of birds, this site is one of the few places in the country where they nesting, feeding or transiting during the passage. Other 2 sites that are showing this feature are ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră (for 10 species) and ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag (for 2 species). Also, ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razin-Sinoie stands out also through the conservation status of the habitats important for the bird species of community interest, habitats that are in an excellent conservation status for 4 species and good for 71 of them. Other sites presenting an excellent conservation status for some of the bird species are: ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia, ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei and ROSPA0040 Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin (for over 25% of the bird species of community interest in each site) and ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe (for over 50% of the bird species of community interest in each site). As regards the degree of isolation of the populations of bird species of community interest towards the normal range spreading of the species, it is noted that 3 of the sites have such (almost) isolated populations of some bird species of community interest: ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoie, ROSPA0073 Măcin – Niculiţel and ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră. The species whose populations were assessed as (almost) isolated in the Natura 2000 sites, are: Aquila clanga, Falco naumanni, Pelecanus onocrotalus, Falco cherrug and Puffinus yelkouan. In terms of the overall assessment of the site, out of the 12 SPAs, stands out ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razin-Sinoie, who has an excellent conservation value for 21 bird species and a good value for 31 species out of the 89 bird species of community interest present within the site.

50 Population

30 100 >/= p > 15% 20 10 15 >/= p > 2% 0 2 >/= p > 0%

of bird species bird of Insignificant

. .

o n

80 70 Conservation 60 50 40 Excellent 30

20 Good o. of bird species bird of o. n 10 0 Medium or reduced

es 80 70 Isolation (almost) isolated population 60 speci 50 40

30 unisolated population, but at of bird bird of

. . 20 the limits of the distribution o

n 10 range 0 unisolated population with an extensive distribution range

ies 40 Overall assessment

spec 30 20 Excellent value

of bird bird of

. 0 Good value o n Considerable value

Figure no. 3-25 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest within the 12 SPAs

In Table no. 3-14, Table no. 3-15 and Table no. 3-16 are summarized all Natura 2000 habitat types (unique mentions), Natura 2000 species of flora and fauna (unique mentions), respectively Natura 2000 bird species (unique mentions), present in the Natura 2000 sites from Danube Delta Region, according to the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, being easily to observe the number of sites that hosts a particular type of habitat, respectively a certain species, with a certain value of the mentioned parameters.

Table no. 3-14 Number of SCIs that hosts the habitats of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms Representativity Relative surface Conservation status Overall assessment Habitat code A B C A B C A B C A B C 1110 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 2 - - 2 - 1130 - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 1140 - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 1160 - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 1210 1 - - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 1310 - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 1410 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 2110 - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 2160 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 2190 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 3130 1 2 - 1 - 2 1 2 - 1 2 - 3140 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 2 - - 2 - 3150 1 1 - - 2 - 1 1 - 1 1 - 3160 - 1 1 - 2 - - 1 1 - 1 1 3260 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 3270 1 2 - 1 1 1 1 2 - 1 2 - 6410 - 1 - - - 1 - 1 - - 1 - 6420 1 - - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 6430 1 2 - 1 - 2 1 2 - 1 2 - 6440 - 2 - - - 2 - 2 - - 2 - 6510 - 3 - - 1 2 - 3 - - 3 - 8230 - 2 - 2 - - - 2 - - 2 - 8310 - - 2 - - 2 - 2 - - - 2 1150* - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 1530* - 2 - - - 2 - 2 - - 2 -

Representativity Relative surface Conservation status Overall assessment Habitat code A B C A B C A B C A B C 2130* 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 40C0* 1 1 3 2 - 3 - 5 - - 2 3 6120* 1 - - - - 1 1 - - 1 - - 62C0* 5 1 - 1 1 4 1 5 - 2 4 - 7210* - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 91AA 3 - 1 1 2 1 1 3 - 2 1 1 91F0 2 - - - 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 - 91I0* 1 1 - - 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 - 91M0 2 - - - 1 1 - 2 - 1 1 - 91X0 - 2 - 2 - - - 2 - - 2 - 91Y0 2 - - - 2 - 1 1 - 2 - - 92A0 3 - 1 1 2 1 1 3 - 2 1 1 92D0 - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - Total 31 35 8 29 16 29 16 57 1 21 45 8 Representativity (measure how "typical" is a certain habitat): A – excellent representativity, B – good representativity, C – significant representativity; Relative surface (the site surface covered by the natural habitat reported at the surface covered by the same habitat at national level): A: p>15 %; B: p>2 %; C: p>0 %; Conservation status (the degree of conservation of the structures and functions of the natural habitat type, as well as the possibilities for restoration / reconstruction): A – excellent conservation, B – good conservation, C – medium or reduced conservation; Overall assessment (the overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the concerned natural habitat type): A – excellent value; B – good value, C – considerable value.

Table no. 3-15 Number of SCIs that hosts flora and fauna species of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms Population Conservation Isolation Overall assessment Species name A B C D A B C A B C A B C Agrimonia pilosa 1 1 1 1

Aldrovanda vesiculosa 1 1 1 1

Alosa immaculata 2 2 2 2

Alosa tanaica 2 1 3 1 2 3

Anisus vorticulus 1 1 1 1

Arytrura musculus 1 1 1 1

Aspius aspius 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1

Bolbelasmus unicornis 1 1 1 1

Bombina bombina 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2

Callimorpha quadripunctaria 1 1 2 2 2

Campanula romanica 2 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 1

Catopta thrips 1 1 1 1

Centaurea jankae 1 1 1 1

Centaurea pontica 1 1 1 1

Cerambyx cerdo 1 1 2 2 2

Cobitis taenia 1 1 1 3 3 3

Coenagrion ornatum

Colias myrmidone 1 1 1 1

Echium russicum 3 1 2 3 1 2

Elaphe quatuorlineata 1 2 3 3 1 2

Emys orbicularis 1 1 1 3 3 1 2

Euphydryas maturna 1 1 1 1

Gobio albipinnatus 1 1 1 1

Gobio kessleri 2 1 2 2 2

Graphoderus bilineatus 1 1 1 1

Population Conservation Isolation Overall assessment Species name A B C D A B C A B C A B C Gymnocephalus baloni 1 1 1 1

Gymnocephalus schraetzer 1 2 2 1 1 2 2

Himantoglossum caprinum 1 1 2 2 2

Iris aphylla ssp. hungarica 1 1 1 1

Leptidea morsei 1 1 1 1

Lucanus cervus 1 1 1 1

Lutra lutra 1 1 2 2 2

Lycaena dispar 2 1 3 3 3

Marsilea quadrifolia 1 1 2 2 2

Mesocricetus newtoni 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2

Misgurnus fossilis 1 2 2 1 3 2 1

Moehringia jankae 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Morimus funereus 1 1 1 2 2 2

Mustela eversmannii 1 1 1 3 3 3

Mustela lutreola 1 1 1 1

Ophiogomphus cecilia 1 1 1 1

Osmoderma eremita 1 1 1 1

Paracaloptenus caloptenoides 1 1 1 1

Pelecus cultratus 1 2 3 3 3

Phocoena phocoena 1 1 1 1

Pholidoptera transsylvanica 1 1 1 1

Potentilla emilii-popii

Rhinolophus ferrumequinum 2 1 1 2 1 1

Rhodeus sericeus amarus 2 1 2 1 3 2 1

Sabanejewia aurata 1 1 2 2 2

Sicista subtilis 2 2 2 2

Spermophilus citellus 1 1 4 1 5 6 1 5

Population Conservation Isolation Overall assessment Species name A B C D A B C A B C A B C Testudo graeca 2 3 1 4 4 1 2 3

Theodoxus transversalis 1 1 1 1

Triturus dobrogicus 1 1 1 3 3 1 2

Tursiops truncatus 1 1 1 1

Umbra krameri 1 1 1 1

Vipera ursinii 1 1 1 1

Vormela peregusna 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2

Zingel streber 1 2 3 1 2 3

Zingel zingel 1 2 3 1 2 3

Total 41 39 39 4 18 98 3 16 23 80 22 94 2 Population (size and density of the specie's population from the site in relation to the populations present within the national territory): A - 100>p>15 %; B - 15>p>2 %; C - 2>p>0 %; D – insignificant population; Conservation (the degree of conservation of the habitat's features that are important for the species concerned and the possibilities for restoration): A – excellent conservation, B – good conservation, C – medium or reduced conservation; Isolation (the degree of isolation of the population present on the site towards the normal range of specie's distribution): A – almost isolated population, B - unisolated population, but at the limits of the distribution range, C - unisolated population with an extensive distribution range; Overall assessment (the overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the concerned species): A – excellent value; B – good value, C – considerable value.

Table no. 3-16 Number of SPAs that hosts bird species of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms Population Conservation Isolation Overall assessment Species name A B C D A B C A B C A B C Accipiter brevipes 1 3 4 7 1 1 7 3 5

Acrocephalus melanopogon 1 2 1 1 1

Alcedo atthis 1 1 2 1 1 2 2

Anser erythropus 1 1 1 1 1

Anthus campestris 8 1 5 3 8 7 1

Aquila chrysaetos 1

Aquila clanga 1 3 1 2 3 1 4 4 1

Aquila heliaca 7 2 5 2 5 1 4 2

Aquila pomarina 8 7 1 8 6 2

Ardea purpurea 1 1 2 2 2 1 1

Ardeola ralloides 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Asio flammeus 1 1 1 1

Aythya nyroca 1 2 1 3 3 1 2

Botaurus stellaris 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Branta ruficollis 1 2 5 8 1 7 2 5 1

Bubo bubo 5 3 2 5 1 4

Burhinus oedicnemus 8 8 8 1 6 1

Buteo rufinus 5 3 3 5 1 7 6 2

Calandrella brachydactyla 4 3 5 2 7 6 1

Caprimulgus europaeus 6 1 2 3 6 1 2 3

Charadrius alexandrinus 1 1 2 4 4 4

Charadrius morinellus 1 1 1 1

Chlidonias hybridus 1 4 2 5 5 5

Chlidonias niger 2 2 1 4 4 1 3

Ciconia ciconia 5 3 2 8 8 6 2

Ciconia nigra 2 5 7 7 7

Population Conservation Isolation Overall assessment Species name A B C D A B C A B C A B C Circaetus gallicus 3 4 2 4 3 4 3 4 2 1

Circus aeruginosus 1 7 1 8 8 4 4

Circus cyaneus 2 7 9 9 6 3

Circus macrourus 7 1 8 8 1 6 1

Circus pygargus 2 6 4 4 8 2 4 2

Coracias garrulus 4 4 5 3 8 8

Crex crex 1

Cygnus columbianus bewickii 1 1 1 1

Cygnus cygnus 3 1 3 1 4 1 3

Dendrocopos leucotos 1 1 1 1

Dendrocopos medius 2 1 1 3 3 2 1

Dendrocopos syriacus 2 4 1 1 2 1 1

Dryocopus martius 2 3 2 2 2

Egretta alba 1 3 3 1 4 1 2 1

Egretta garzetta 1 1 2 2 2 1 1

Emberiza hortulana 4 2 2 2 4 1 3

Falco cherrug 1 5 2 2 6 1 2 5 1 7

Falco columbarius 2 1 3 3 2 1

Falco naumanni 1 1 1 1

Falco peregrinus 1 2 4 3 3 1 2

Falco vespertinus 1 10 1 10 11 2 7 2

Ficedula albicollis 5

Ficedula parva 5

Gallinago media 1 1 1 1

Gavia arctica 2 1 2 2 2

Gavia stellata 2 2 2 2

Gelochelidon nilotica 2 1 1 2 3 2 1

Glareola pratincola 1 1 1 2 2 2

Population Conservation Isolation Overall assessment Species name A B C D A B C A B C A B C Grus grus 1 2 1 1 1

Gyps fulvus 1

Haliaeetus albicilla 1 1 5 2 4 1 3 4 1 3 3

Hieraaetus pennatus 1 1 5 1 7 1 6 3 4

Himantopus himantopus 1 2 1 1 2 1 4 3 1

Ixobrychus minutus 1 2 3 3 1 1 1

Lanius collurio 1 8 1 1 1

Lanius minor 5 4 4 1 1 4 2 3

Larus genei 1 1 2 2 2

Larus melanocephalus 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1

Larus minutus 2 2 3 1 4 4

Limosa lapponica 1

Lullula arborea 5 2 1 4 5 2 3

Luscinia svecica 1 1 1 1

Melanocorypha calandra 7 1 5 2 7 7

Mergus albellus 2 2 2 2

Milvus migrans 1 4 1 2 3 2 3 2 3

Neophron percnopterus 2 2 2 2

Numenius tenuirostris 1 1 1 1

Nycticorax nycticorax 1 1 3 2 2 1 1

Oenanthe pleschanka 1 4 2 1 5 2 6 1 1 5 1

Oxyura leucocephala 2 2 1 1 1 1

Pandion haliaetus 4 1 3 1 4 2 2

Pelecanus crispus 1 1 3 5 1 4 1 2 2

Pelecanus onocrotalus 1 7 1 6 1 1 7 1 6 1

Pernis apivorus 4 2 4 4 1 3

Phalacrocorax pygmeus 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1

Phalaropus lobatus 3 2 1 1 2 2 1

Population Conservation Isolation Overall assessment Species name A B C D A B C A B C A B C Philomachus pugnax 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Picus canus 2 3 2 2 2

Platalea leucorodia 1 3 1 4 4 1 3

Plegadis falcinellus 1 1 1 2 2 1 1

Pluvialis apricaria 1 1 1 1

Porzana parva 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Porzana porzana 1 1 1 1

Porzana pusilla 1 1 1 1

Puffinus yelkouan 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Recurvirostra avosetta 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 3 1

Sterna albifrons 1 2 1 1 4 4 4

Sterna caspia 2 1 2 2 2

Sterna hirundo 2 2 1 4 4 4

Sterna sandvicensis 2 1 2 2 2

Sylvia nisoria 2 3 1 1 2 1 1

Tadorna ferruginea 1 1 2 2 1 1

Tringa glareola 2 1 1 1 2 1 1

Xenus cinereus 1 1 1 1

Total 56 100 206 93 70 274 18 5 39 318 50 231 81 Population (size and density of the specie's population from the site in relation to the populations present within the national territory): A - 100>p>15 %; B - 15>p>2 %; C - 2>p>0 %; D – insignificant population; Conservation (the degree of conservation of the habitat's features that are important for the species concerned and the possibilities for restoration): A – excellent conservation, B – good conservation, C – medium or reduced conservation; Isolation (the degree of isolation of the population present on the site towards the normal range of specie's distribution): A – almost isolated population, B - unisolated population, but at the limits of the distribution range, C - unisolated population with an extensive distribution range; Overall assessment (the overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the concerned species): A – excellent value; B – good value, C – considerable value.

4 IDENTIFICATION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT 4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF CURRENT THREATS, PRESSURES AND ACTIVITIES WITH IMPACT ON NATURA 2000 SITES IN THE DANUBE DELTA REGION 4.1.1 Informations extracted from Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms In order to identify current threats, pressures and activities exerted on Natura 2000 sites that are present in the study area, we consulted the database available on the website of the European Environment Agency (EEA - http://www.eea.europa.eu/data- and-maps / data / nature-5) on protected natural areas that are included in the Natura 2000 ecological network (SCI and SPA), designated at national level, including the protected components within them. Where the information regarding the forms of actual impact on Natura 2000 sites that are present in the Danube Delta region were missing, they were completed with the ones under section 4.3 of the Natura 2000 factsheets, updated in accordance with Decision 2011/484/EU concerning a site information format for Natura 2000 sites and published on the MEWF website on 17 February 2015. In the case of ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, no information was found on major threats, pressures and activities with impact in the site, nor in the EEA database or in the Natura 2000 factsheets, and in the case of ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia, the EEA database lists a series of activities, but without a clear indication of their occurrence or intensity, and in the site factsheet these information are missing. Figure no. 4-1 illustrates the main threats, pressures and activities with impact inside SCIs from the Danube Delta region and their share based on the intensity of their impact. The site with the most numerous types of threats, pressures or activities is ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean, most of them manifested with a low intensity. The sites where threats, pressures and activities with a high intensity are present (excluding ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării where data is not present) are: ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină and ROSCI0105 Lunca Joasă a Prutului, due mainly to grazing, eutrophication, polder creation and silting. Figure no. 4-2 presents the main threats, pressures and activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs from the Danube Delta region, and their share based on the intensity of their impact. Threats, pressures and activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs occur only in the case of 4 sites: ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină, ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe şi ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului. None of these threats, pressures or activities occur with a high impact. The main threats that manifest with medium impact are: hunting, eutrophication and pollution of surface waters (first in ROSCI0060, and the next two in ROSCI0066). Figure no. 4-3 illustrates the main threats, pressures and activities with impact within SPAs in the Danube Delta region, and their share based on the intensity of their impact. The only site (except ROSPA0009 for which no data is available) without manifested threats, pressures and activities with impact is ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe. Threats, pressures and activities with high intensity are present in six SPAs: ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei, ROSPA0031 Delta Dunarii si Complexul Razim – Sinoie, ROSPA0060 Lacul Taşăul - Corbu, ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră, ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag, ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea, due to the presence of roads and highways; grazing; outdoor sports and recreation; hunting; littering; capturing, poisoning, poaching; sand and gravel pits; discharges; urban areas, human presence; transport corridors; collection and removal of terrestrial animals; port areas; use of hormones and chemicals in agriculture. Figure no. 4-4 presents the main threats, pressures and activities with impact in the vicinity of SPAs in the Danube Delta region, and their share based on the intensity of their impact. In the case of ROSPA0073 Măcin – Niculiţel and ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag (except ROSPA0009 for which no data is

available) no threats, pressures and activities with impact sites are present in the vicinity. Threats, pressures and activities with high impact occur in the vicinity of 7 SPAs, except ROSPA0052 Lacul Beibugeac, in whose neighborhood low impact activities are manifested (fertilization and littering) and ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea, in whose neighborhood activities impact (urbanized areas and human presence) are manifested. Threats, pressures or high impact activities that manifest in the vicinity of 7 SPAs are generated due to the presence of: sand and gravel pits; grazing; other industrial / commercial areas; exploration or extraction of oil and gas; changes in cultivation practices; passive professional fishing; outdoor sports and recreation; use of hormones and chemicals in agriculture; industrial / commercial areas; fire and fire suppression; cultivation; soil pollution and solid waste (excluding discharges); livestock; overhead lines for electricity and telephone; erosion; military maneuvers; sport and recreation structures; urban areas, human presence. The site where the most numerous types of threats, pressures or activities are present is ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim - Sinoie, most of these manifesting with a high intensity.

Figure no. 4-1 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SCIs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts

Figure no. 4-2 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts

Figure no. 4-3 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SPAs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts

Figure no. 4-4 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SPAs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts

4.1.2 Additional considerations Transport of sediments loaded with pollutants from upstream Danube to downstream in Delta A delicate subject for the Danube Delta has always been the impact of the activities from the upstream Danube, through the sediments loaded with pollutants that arrive within the Delta region as well as in the Black Sea. Along the time, several studies have investigated the impacts of this phenomenon on the Black Sea. A relevant study in this regard is represented by “Mările sud-europene: evaluarea şi modelarea schimbărilor ecosistemice (Southern European Seas: Assessing and Modelling Ecosystem changes - SESAME)”, conducted over a period of 48 months (2006-2010), one of the aspects addressed between 2006 – 2007 being also the impact of liquid, solid and associated with pollutants (with accent on nutrients) flow rates of the Danube on the north western side of the Black Sea. Were tracked also the effects of pollutants on the characteristic ecosystems. In what concern the solid flow rate introduced by Danube into the Black Sea, according to the measurements performed by INCD GEOECOMAR and compared with the results obtained along the time by other research institutes (example INMH), is about 25,088,292 tons/ year, the share on the arms being as follows: Chilia – 67.7 %, Sulina – 17.2 % and Sf. Gheorghe – 15.1 %. According to the same study, this intake of alluviums has decreased gradually, from 58,413,118 tons/ year (average for the period 1858-1900) up to 25,088,292 tons/ year (average for. the period 1981-1989). From the quantities of the alluviums carried by the Danube to the Black Sea, 8.7 % represents the flow dragged (sands with a diameter> 0.1 mm) which, under the wind action, penetrate the marine circuit, taking part to the morphological processes. The calculation of the amounts of nutrients discharged annualy by the Danube 6 river into the Black Sea was of 1.76 x 10 t (93.6% NO3, 2.7% NO2 and 2.4% P-PO4), which represents 99.525% of the total contribution of nutrients from the entire coastal areas into the sea. The following amounts (kilotonnes/ year) were calculated based on the average values of some characteristic parameters and of the multiannual liquid flow of the Danube (6050 m3.s-1): phytoplankton – 286,189, zooplankton – 6,212, suspended solids – 3,221.673, NO3 – 1,062.334, P04 – 23,057, Cu - 1,355, Ni – 0,359, Fe - 117,624, Mn – 8,443, I – 2,601, detergents – 3,116. According to INCD GEOECOMAR, romanian partner within the project, among the main effects of the anthropogenic impact on the north western side of the Black Sea basin, are: the significantly reduction of water retention and flood mitigation capacity; reduction of the solid flow rate carried by Danube and the increase of the coastal erosion rate; 30 % reduction of the wetland surfaces actively involved within the retention and release of the nutrients and a very significant discharged of nutrients into the north west of the Black Sea. A well developed study regarding the effects of the toxic pollutants (heavy metals) on the Lower Danube system is “Ecotoxicology of the heavy metals in Danube floodplain”, elaborated by Virgil Iordache, 2009. The study area is represented more precisely by the Small Island of Brăila, which is a group of islands under the natural flood regime (of which the most important are Ostrovul Popa and Ostrovul Fundu Mare), which is part, in its turn, from the Lower Danube system, a regional complex of ecosystems (Cristofor, 1992, Vădineanu , Cristofor şi Iordache, 2001). Among the main conclusions of this research report, conducted over a period of 7 years, in collaboration with several specialized institutions from Romaniain, is mentioned that Small Island of Brăila plays a significant role in the biogeochemical circuits of the heavy metals in the Lower Danube system, mainly due to the intervention of flooding water filtration. Small Island of Brăila represents an “access gate” of Danube Delta, a real filter for the

pesticides and alluviums carried by the river from the entire European basin, which still benefits of natural self-regulating mechanisms. „Water quality of the Danube River and his impact on the Danube Delta and the Black Sea” is another study that analyzes the water quality at the entire Danube River, along the time, the specific problems facing the downstream sector of the Danube River, as well as the main problems facing the Danube Delta and the Black Sea. Among the main specific problems facing the downstream sector of the Danube River, are mentioned: Nutrient pollution. Romania is among the countries located downstream to Danube, alongside Bulgaria, Moldavia and Ukraine, countries that are confronted with the nutrient pollution, exported from the upstream Danube countries: in the case of nitrogen, the mean contribution of the downstream countries is about 23.4%, compared with the upstream countries, which is about 76.6 %, while for phosphorous the mean contribution of the downstream countries is about 28.5 %, compared with the “import” of pollution from the upstream countries which is about 71.5 %. The nutrient concentration/ load entering in the Danube Delta and the Black Sea decreased in the year 1994 in comparison with the year 1988, with the following values: regarding the concentrations, 27 % for nitrogen and 65 % for phosphorous, and regarding loads, 39 % for nitrogen and 66 % for phosphorous. This decreases mentioned above doesn’t reflect only the water quality protection measures, taken in the last period of time, but also show the declining of the industrial activities and of the quantities of fertilisers applied in agriculture in the transition countries from the Eastern Europe; Pollution with non-biodegradable organic substances. These organic non-biodegradable substances can’t be “”filtered”” by the Danube Delta and it represent an import from the upstream countries. The general time trend of the concentration of the organic substance, evaluated firstly as COD-Cr, is the diminishing, both in the upstream countries and in Romania. Within the study was confirmed the hypothesis that the Danube transports towards the downstream sector a load of heavy degradable chemical substances, “imported” from the upstream sector to the Danube Delta and to the Black Sea, without representative local contributions; Pollution with heavy metals. Excepting the control sections S5 and S6 (Mohacs-Bezdan and Banatska-Palanka-Bazias), which presents a significant “export” of Cd, Pb, Hg and Cr towards the downstream countries, it occurred relatively reduced concentrations of heavy metals transported from the upstream countries; Associated sediment pollution. The sediments from the Iron Gate reservoir present an important pollution due to the upstream industrial discharges with heavy metals and other chemical substances. The heavy metals (Hg, Cu, Pb, Zn and Cr) constitutes the most representative accumulation of pollutants in sediments at concentrations of 1.76 (Pb) till 3.05 (Hg) times greater than the concentrations recorded in the Rhine Delta. In what concerns the main problems facing the Danube Delta and the Black Sea, the eutrophication is the most delicate of all, as a result of the use of fertilisers in the Danube basin. Thus, according to the same study, the Danube River transported 49.300 tonnes of phosphorus and 500.000 tonnes of nitrogen in the year 1989, quantity which is ten times greater in comparison with the year 1960 in the case of nitrogen and 3.5 times greater in the case of phosphorus. Despite the fact that in the year 2003 this impact declined to 392.000 tonnes of nitrogen/ year and about 19.000 tonnes of

phosphorus/ year, the “pressure” of the Danube on the downstream sector still remains at high level. The eutrophication, as a result of the high loads of nutrients, contributed to drastic changes and to global perturbations of the natural balances of the ecosystems. Thus, the first algal blooming occurred in the year 1975. After this date, as a direct consequence of the accentuation of the human activity, this process repeated with a different amplitude and frequency, so, that until the year 1992, it has been founded an increase of phytoplankton concentration, while after 1992, this process diminished, as a result of declining of nutrients load transported by the Danube. Also in the case of Black Sea, as a result of the increase of the nutrients load discharged, in parallel occurred an induced development of other species. The evolution of the water quality of the Danube River shows a slight improvement in the last decades, mainly because of to the declining of the industrial activities (decrease of the application of mineral fertilizers, closure of large animal farms etc.) in the former communist countries from the Eastern Europe, situated in the middle and lower sector of Danube. The improvement is caused by reduced nutrient inputs by Danube River. The transported phosphorus loads were reduced to about 50 % as compared to the situation around 1990. Danube wetlands play a crucial role in sustaining biodiversity in the Danube basin, acting as natural filters for nutrients and toxic substances, providing sediment and erosion control, flood protection, maintaining surface and groundwater resources. They also contribute to the climate stability, their diverse habitats offering support to a wide variety of species. In order to restore these wetlands along the Lower Danube, in June 2000, the Environment Ministers of Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine and Moldova signed a declaration to establish the Lower Danube Green Corridor (LDGC), committing themselves to create a corridor of protected, restored and sustainable-managed wetlands along the Lower Danube. The important function of the wetlands within the retention of nutrients and toxic substances process is also highlighted in two other articles: „The Danube river in the lower sector in two hidrologycal hypostases – high and low waters”, by Petre Gâştescu and Elena Ţuchiu, mentioned that the biochemical (ecotonal) function of Danube floodplain results from hydrological function through maintaining the balance in the carbon-nitrogen-phosphorus cycle, nutrients recycling, retention of toxic substances (pesticides, heavy metals due to the biofilter role of alluvium), and transformation of organic pollutants in inorganic compounds. The decreasing of ecotonal space along the Danube River is leading to pollutants concentration increasing in the Danube Delta and in the coastal and marine waters, having as main consequences, in terms of ecological aspects, the modification of habitats, biodiversity and genetic assets, while in terms of topoclimatic and socioeconomic aspects, the reduction the fish reproductive potential, hunting animals and obvious of renewable resources valorisation; „The Function of Wetlands” presents the “natural biofilter”quality of the Danube Delta. Thus, one of the most important functions of the delta for the Black Sea is its ability to absorb significant quantities of pollutants. The main ways in which this is achieved are:  absorption of pollutants on particles of organic substances - this process is carried out on particles of silt or detritus. In this area each kilogram of dry weight of the bottom sediments contains on average two grammes of oil;

 the destruction of pollutants as a result of the functional activity of hydrobionts. The microorganisms are the most active in this process (68%). The annual volume of organic matter destroyed by hydrobionts makes up about 1.5 millions tons;  absorption of pollutants by higher water plants. About 93-99% of the total absorbed pollutants from the Danube accumulate in reedbeds. Within the second article, the delta functions are compared with those of the kidneys, respectively the filtering capacity in the body. The clearance rate for the main nutrients causing eutrophication in the Danube Delta is 39.7 kg per minute for nitrates and 49.6 kg per minute for phosphates. The functional productivity of the delta higher plants can be estimated over an annual period as: nitrates - 59,100 tons, phosphates - 20,500 tons, heavy metals - 23,300 tons and about 100 kg pesticides. The intensity of absorption of pollution in the Danube Delta is 13 times higher than in the Dniester and 16 times higher than in the Dnieper. Besides Delta faces the problem of intake of pollutants as a result of the activities carried out upstream of the Danube, the changes that have occurred over time in the Danube Delta have led to its diminishing capacity of self-purification. According to the study „Delta Dunării - Una dintre “perlele naturii” din Europa”, performed by WWF, a real threatened for the Danube Delta is represented by the modifications occurred both upstream (nutrients retention, increased pollution) and downstream of the delta, among the most important, and their effects, being as follow: expanding the network of artificial canals inside the delta (from 1910 to 1990, its length doubled, today being of approx.. 3,400 km). The new channels created for transport, as Crişan- Caraorman and Mila 35 channel, changed the ecological balance of the delta ecosystems, altering the natural water circulation and dramatically influencing erosion and sedimentation processes; the wetlands have been converted into farmland and fishponds, which caused a significant decline in the delta fisheries, the rich nutrient silt being directly routed to the Black Sea, through the newly created artificial channels, thereby contributing to the eutrophication process; in 1990s, one quarter of the Danube Delta (974 km2) was dammed, including 400 km2 for agricultural purposes; Tulcea-Sulina arm (81 km) was regularized on its entire length, the former meanders and side arms being disconnected from the natural system. The length of the arm was reduced from 85 to 62 km, and the wide navigable channel of 80 meters must be constantly dredged to ensure the depth of 7.3 m; in the 1960s they were cut also the meanders of the southern arm of St. George (109 km), which is not navigable, thus losing about 50 km of its length; in the coastline Razim-Sinoe 23,500 hectares were dammed, the separation of the main course from the floodplain having as main effect the loss of some valuable habitats, which affected both flora and fauna from the area. An earlier study, „Environmental problems of the Danube Delta”, 1993, presents the roots of the decline of the complex and varied ecosystems of the Danube Delta, from the past few decades, represented by the four primary causes: high nutrient loads in the Danube River as it enters the delta; hydrologic changes in the Danube River – primarily the elimination of the river’s floodplain; hydrologic changes within the delta resulting from engineering works such as drainage programs, dikes, impoundments and

channel dredging; and nutrient and pesticide loading from agricultural activities inside the delta. Along with the increasing process of contamination of the Danube, the hydrological modifications along the river’s course have compromised its capacity for self-purification. Within the Romanian part of the river, embankments built between 1963 and 1967 reduced floodplain by 290.000 hectares, which corresponds to a loss of 4,3 cubic kilometres of water-retention capacity. As a result, the Danube has lost a portion of its capacity to retain nutrients and heavy metals locally, thus being carried in the river to the delta. The importance of wetlands restoration is highlighted also within this article. The researches realized along time have shown that drained wetlands in the delta are probably the major cause of both its inability to handle nutrient loads and its declining fisheries. During the last period of time, a series of projects aimed to restoring natural habitats have been and are still implemented in the Danube Delta region (including wetlands, former abandoned polders, reforestation along the channels etc.), projects that are sustained also through the types on interventions/ projects proposed within the different sectors of the DDISDS (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development etc.). Climate change This subject was treated as a distinct section in the Environmental Report (section 7.2.5), respectively the impact of climate change on various sectors of activity (agriculture, fisheries, forestry etc.), the way how this is understood by the people from the Danube Delta region and from the institutional actors, as well as the types of interventions/ projects proposed within the DDISDS addressing the needs of mitigation and adaptation to climate change on the one hand, and those that have the potential to help the increase/ decrease of CO2 emissions, on the other hand. In the following lines we tried to highlight the main effects that climate change currently have on the biodiversity in the Danube Delta, as well as future trends. WWF elaborated within the synthesis report „Vulnerability of the Danube Delta region to climate change”, 2012, aiming Romania, Ukraine and Moldova, scenarious concerning the impact of climate change on various environmental and socio-economic factors. In what regards the potential changes as results of climate change, in the Danube Delta and the coastal area of the Black Sea, are mentioned the following prognosis: Coastal erosion: the climate change predicted, especially the rise of the sea levels will increase the coastal erosion. The salt sea water will intrude further upstream into the Danube river and wetlands suppressing freshwater fauna and flora; Eutrophication: the frequency of algal blooming will increase because of hypoxia, low water table and high temperature; Physical damage to habitats: the risk of larger scale damage to biotopes will increase due to more intense flash floods, wildfires, storms etc; Loss of biodiversity and mosaic wetlands: changes in the vegetation structure and distribution will continue to persist (example: forest species started to dry (Alnus glutinosa), while in aquatic vegetation certain species, more adapted to the new conditions, and dominate the lake). If no hydro land reclaiming works are started, this process will intensify even more. Degradation of phyto- and biodiversity which commenced in the 80’s will be ongoing; Disappearing rare species on floodplains: for example, badgers and European mink are very rare in this area. The red list of DDBR contains a number of 382 species, of which more than 40% are

critically endangered species. Changing in the condition of the wetland will lead to species disappearing; Declining ground water and plant diversity at sand dunes and ridges: in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve were identified 128 alien plant species (Doroftei & Covaliov, 2009). Most affected are natural floodplain forest, meadows and beach sand dunes. In the same study, are presented the current situations and the forecasts in the context of climate change for the following key issues and topics:  Reeds: change in dominant communities; increase in fire frequencies; longer growing season and salt water intrusion;  Fauna species: phenology and lifecycle; invasive species. For Romania, Ukraine and Moldova, it was elaborated a „Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan for Danube Delta region”. Within the Action Plan for adaptation to climate change, in the case of natural systems, respectively ecosystems, are proposed the following measures:  Preparatory measures:

 Scientific research on the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystems;  Preventive measures:  Include climate refugia and biodiversity migration corridors in the protected areas;

 Modify the management plans and monitoring programmes for the transboundary biosphere reserve according to new climate pattern.  Reactive measures:

 Restore degraded lands (including floodplains);  Manage invasive species. As well, the main conclusions of the study „Danube Delta habitats versus climate change”, elaborated by Doroftei and Mierlă, 2012, states that climate changes lead to modifications in the composition, intensity and frequency of particular environmental elements, which determines increasing hazard towards extremely rare or even inexistent phenomena for a specific area, fact that determines an increasing risk (by increasing hazard on one hand and by increasing vulnerability of one or more elements). Thus, in this way may be explained the high vulnerability of habitats to invasive plant species. The main pressures on habitats within strictly protected areas for Danube Delta have been identified, directly related to climate change, these pressures influencing directly approximately 60% of habitats. The effects of climate change are mostly intensified by the anthropogenic factor, which plays the role of amplification factor for processes and phenomena. A map of vulnerability towards flooding of the habitats within DDBR was realized and the analysis of the reversed map revealed that most of habitats are vulnerable towards drought, this being characteristic to aquatic and wet lands which represent an overwhelming proportion within the entire territory of DDBR. The presence of even less than 30% of DDBR surface of unprotected habitats (habitats which are not classified according to Habitat Directive such as agricultural arrangements, fishing arrangements, plantations etc.) induces the presence of a potential disturbance factor within the reserve regarding the natural balance between various elements (biotic and abiotic) of each habitat. This fact is also reinforced by the „propriety” of the human factor to intensify the effects of climate changes.

The types of interventions/ projects proposed by DDISDS, within the several sectors (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management, Agriculture and Rural Development, Fisheries and Aquaculture etc.), addressed some of the measures proposed in the Action Plan for climate change adaptation for the Danube Delta region, mentioned above, and are among the actions that are necessary to prevent the achievement of the forecasts made about the potential changes that will occur in the Danube Delta as a result of climate change (eg. the achieving of the hydro works for floodplain recovery). 4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL FORMS OF IMPACTS OF DDISDS In order to quantify the potential forms of impacts of the types of interventions of DDISDS on Natura 2000 components, the first step was to identify the types of interventions which are likely to generate pressures, the biodiversity components which can be affected during the phases of the projects implementation and the types of impact generated. The potential forms of impacts identified are: Habitat loss – irreversible loss of the habitats of community interest / surfaces of habitats used for needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of community interest (by constructions or similar activities); Habitat alteration - reversible loss of the habitats of community interest / surfaces of habitats used for needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of community interest (pollution, changes in water regime etc.); Habitat fragmentation - fragmentation of the habitats of community interest / surfaces of habitats used for needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of community interest (limiting dispersion/ mobility/ barrier effect); Disturbance – disturbance of the activities of the species of community interest (induced by human presence, noise etc.); Mortality – road victims or injuries as a result of species of community interest collisions with road vehicles or other structures (e.g. aerial electrical lines); Habitat enhancement (including the enhancement of the management of the species and habitats conservation measures) – improvement of structure and functioning of the habitats of community interest / surfaces of habitats used for needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of community interest as a result of the types of interventions implemented (we considered here also the interventions that aim to improve the managerial performance and decisions related to species and habitats conservation management).

Number of potential impacts

Birds

Amphibians & reptiles

Invertebrates

Mammals

Natura 2000 habitats

Fish

Plants

-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 Habitat loss Habitat alteration Habitat fragmentation Disturbance Mortality Habitat enhancement

Figure no. 4-5 and Figure no. 4-6 show the number and the share of potential impacts (habitat loss, habitat alteration, habitat fragmentation, disturbance, mortality, habitat enhancement) for each Natura 2000 species group and habitats. The largest share belongs to habitat enhancement (35%), followed by habitat alteration (24%), habitat loss (14%), disturbance (14%), mortality (9%) and habitat fragementation (4%). The shares of potential negative impacts sum up to 65%, compared to only 35% of the potential positive impacts.

Number of potential impacts

Birds

Amphibians & reptiles

Invertebrates

Mammals

Natura 2000 habitats

Fish

Plants

-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 Habitat loss Habitat alteration Habitat fragmentation Disturbance Mortality Habitat enhancement

Figure no. 4-5 Number of potential impacts (negative values indicates potential negative impacts)

Habitat loss 14%

Habitat enhancement 35%

Habitat alteration 24%

Mortality Habitat 9% Disturbance fragmentation 14% 4% Figure no. 4-6 Percentage of each type of impact

In Table no. 4-1 are presented all the identified potential forms of impact of the types on interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region.

Table no. 4-1 Preliminary analysis of the potential forms of impact of the types of interventions / projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Development and implementation of I.1 measures to x x x x x x x reduce solid waste in natural areas. Border demarcation and signage of strictly protected areas and buffer areas, sport fishing areas, touristic routes, camping, parking areas, etc. and I.2 x x x x x x x development and implementation of a monitoring and information system, incl. technology such as motion-activated cameras, watchtowers, etc. Improve evidence- based management by developing and implementing a modern/efficient I.3 x x x x x x x monitoring system and predictive model for sedimentation dynamics in the Danube Delta An in-depth institutional I.4 x x x x x x x analysis (functional review)

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE of DDBRA and the associated administrative reforms with the aim of improving its managerial performances, and the legislative framework governing the management of DDBR area to allow local residents to become active participants in guarding and managing the natural resource. Capacity building measures for the communities and DDBRA. Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to I.5 x x x x x x x restore natural water circulation and key habitat areas.

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development I.6 x x x x x x x of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross- border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation. Studies and TA for biodiversity conservation and restoration of ecosystems and I.7 x x x x x x x natural habitats within “Natura 2000” network affected by anthropic impacts. Identify additional poldered areas eligible for ecological I.8 x x x x x x x restoration. This will include feasibility studies and technical

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE projects for the restoration of natural habitats affected by non- ecological activities in agricultural, fishery and forestry polders - integral or partial ecological restoration works Natural capital accounting studies to determine the highest value uses I.9 x x x x x x x of land and natural resources for optimal management. Reforestation of areas where the natural forest I.10 x x x x x x x vegetation has disappeared or been degraded. Investments to support local action to reduce nitrate pollution of I.11 x x x x x x x the waterways from agricultural and livestock rearing activities. Development of an International Center of I.12 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea

Integrated pest management – develop and implement an I.13 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x integrated pest management strategy for mosquitoes. Integrated reed I.14 management x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x strategy. Promoting the use of renewable energy sources. Investments in pilot projects promoting the use of renewable energy sources (wind, solar energy, heat I.15 pumps, biomass, x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x micro-hydro etc.) and non-pollutant technologies, including the development and introduction of environmentally friendly propulsion systems in the Delta. Improving the energy efficiency I.16 of public buildings (schools, hospitals,

Extending and improving the I.17 x x x energy efficiency of public lighting Support for improving energy I.18 efficiency of households Create a CC partnership platform, including a community- driven climate adaptation fund targeted at low income families; a I.19 micro grant or loan mechanism to support SMEs; and a partnership facility to promote private - public collaboration for innovative climate actions. Designate a unit with a clear mandate to address climate change issues, I.20 with a small number of dedicated and knowledgeable staff, and capable of working cross-

Develop clear and easy to use local guidelines for I.21 climate change and energy efficiency programs. Provision of special machinery and equipment for I.22 interventions by IES and SMURD in disaster situations Works for protection against I.23 floods in fourteen x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x (14) towns/communes. Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency I.24 Situations (IES) infrastructure facilities in TULCEA + Macin + Crişan + Babadag + Topolog Create and maintain an inter- I.25 institutional risk factor database

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Complete coherent and comprehensive pollution emergency response and I.26 x x x x x x x prevention plans, covering both water and land, and both mobile and fixed sources of pollution Create an inter- institutional I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.27 Pollution 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Emergency Response Team Purchase of equipment to enable the first response team to I.28 x x x x x x x quickly access pollution incident sites in the Core Delta Create and maintain an inter- institutional environmental I.29 liability data-base for data sharing and better coordination across agencies Development and Installation of I.30 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Visitor Infrastructure

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Institutionalization of a Danube Delta Destination I.31 Management Organization (DMO) Design and implementation of a destination-wide I.32 program for product and attraction development Support mechanism for innovative and sustainable nature-based I.33 x x x x x x x x x x x x tourism MSMEs & social tourism enterprises for green local economy A region-wide program for I.34 beautification of settlements Program for improved quality I.35 of accommodation facilities and services Cultural heritage interventions I.36 x x x x x x (rehabilitation, preservation, etc.) Development of a destination I.37 interpretation (learning)

Develop and roll out program for emergency and I.38 first aid for tourism workers, service providers Develop a specialized I.39 tourism research observatory Reduce sedimentation in I.40 major lakes with x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x the installation of stop locks Dredge major I.41 lakes to restore x x x x x x x water depth Support transition from artisanal capture to recreational fishing (Improve ecotourism venues to accommodate the needs of I.42 recreational x x x x fishers; Promote and provide training in sustainable recreational fishing (catch-and- release fishing etc.)

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Support artificial reproduction of valuable species like pike and I.43 zander and x x construct simple landing facilities in places of fisher concentrations Improve fish I.44 x x x habitat Regulate or eliminate I.45 x x uncontrolled fish camping Consider some tax incentives, like the I.46 x x elimination of the water tax Improve fisheries I.47 data collection and analysis Replace or modify I.48 cherhana based system Strengthen I.49 analytical capacity at DDNRI Improve fisheries research and development activities in I.50 research institutes, public institutions and fishermen associations. Improve I.51 x x x x x x x x x x x x Aquaculture

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Support small scale fish processing. Diversify home and village level fish processing by introducing small scale canning units (for Gibel carp and I.52 other low value fish like roach and bream) and improve smoking systems (smoking bags or small electric smokers); mainly to produce delicacies to visiting tourists. Modernization of facilities for collection / I.53 processing / marketing of agricultural produce Modernization of rural infrastructure I.54 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc)

I.55 Jobs creation

Protection and improvement of I.56 x x x x x x x natural resources (soil, water)

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Completion of land restitution and land book I.57 registration for land/farms consolidation Support for environment- friendly I.58 x x x x x x x agricultural activities within Natura 2000 sites Enlarge the access to vocational I.59 education for agriculture Modernization of quality control I.60 systems for agricultural products Improved information on local and I.61 European financing, including projects preparation Improvement of Advisory/consultin g and training I.62 activity for farmers / rural labor Fostering organic I.63 x x x x x x x farming activities Take-up of farming I.64 activities by young generations

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Modernization/ rehabilitation of I.65 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x irrigation infrastructure Consolidation and I.66 modernization of small farms Creation of small I.67 businesses outside agriculture Modernization of technical I.68 x x x x endowment of farms Bottom-up I.69 initiatives for local development Afforestation of agricultural and I.70 non-agricultural x x x x x x x land in the Danube Delta region Conservation of local patrimony I.71 and traditions (including handicrafts) Release of land through I.72 concessions by Tulcea County Council Exit of old farmers I.73 and transfer of ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? assets Foster establishment of I.74 producer groups/organizatio ns

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Stimulate creation of short supply I.75 chains for the benefit of tourism activities Support branding/certificat ion of agricultural I.76 products and their marketing on international markets Provide incentives to maintain I.77 agricultural x x x x x x x x x x x x x activities in core Delta Support rehabilitation of I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.2 I.78 flood protection 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 infrastructure Enable participation of I.79 farmers and processors to risk management tools Educational infrastructure upgrade I.80 (especially for primary and secondary education) Modernization of national road DN I.81 22 Constanța - x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Tulcea - Macin – Braila

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Modernization of County Road I.82 DJ229E, Section I x x x x x x x x x x x x x x and II, NICULITEL – ZEBIL – SARICHIOI Modernization of County Road I.83 DJ222N, Tulcea – x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Pardina - Chilia Veche Modernization of County Road DJ226:Tronson I.84 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x DN22B-Corbu- Săcele-Istria- MihaiViteazu Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, I.85 Macin, Isaccea, x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

Mahmudia and Chilia ports Development and modernization of I.86 x x x airport infrastructure

Modernization of county roads (regional transport infrastructure): DJ222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus; DJ222 Visina- I.87 Ceamurlia de Sus; x x x x x x x x x x x x x x DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724- 38+798; route Cetatea Histria - DN22/ Tariverde.

Rehabilitation and I.88 modernization of x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x the Sulina Channel Internet / ultra- I.89 fast internet for green tourism Improvement of e- government I.90 services and local public monitoring systems Support of ICT for businesses I.91 through e-portal and grant facility Formulating and I.92 implementing open data policies Increasing vertical integration of ICT I.93 innovation solutions in the

Increasing private investments in RDI I.94 and encouraging the demand for RDI. Increasing knowledge, technology and staff transfer with I.95 RDI skills by means of partnerships between private and research environment. Increasing the excellence of scientific basis as I.96 engine for innovation, by developing RD infrastructure. Increasing the involvement in EU level research by unlocking the excellence potential in RDI, such as within the I.97 framework program Horizon 2020 and by attracting talents and advanced skills to the RDI national system.

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Developing ITC infrastructure and systems and digital skills to I.98 support education, health, online culture and digital inclusion Water and sanitation - Projects in areas I.99 x x x x x x x with > 2000 Population equivalent Water and sanitation - I.10 Projects in areas x x x x x x x 0 with < 2000 Population equivalent Collection of I.10 Floating Waste in x x x x x x x 1 River Channels Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste I.10 (waste separation x x x x x x x 2 at source, collection, sorting and transportation facilities). Public education I.10 and awareness x x x x x x x 3 program on waste management Composting bins I.10 for rural x x x x x x x 4 households to process organic

Investments in treatment and I.10 disposal facilities x x x x x x x 5 for construction and demolition waste Recovering waste I.10 collected from x x x x x x x 6 households and economic agents Consolidate the response capacity of Public Health Directorate (PHD) I.10 by designing and 7 implementing an environmental health surveillance system Rehabilitation/ I.10 modernization of

8 facilities, and IT equipment Modernization and equipment, and organize a functional building block at Tulcea I.10 Emergency 9 Hospital (including for integrated ambulatory department), and for Macin Hospital

0 Hospital to a social accommodation center (residential care shelter) Create public ambulatory centers by I.11 rehabilitating

1 closed hospital buildings in Babadag and Sulina Ensure interoperability of medical I.11 information

2 systems at health care level (telemedicine and e-health) Reforms to increase cost- effectiveness of sector governance/ management I.11 (hospital payment 3 mechanism to incentivize public ambulatory, family doctor, and telemedicine systems)

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Information, education and communication I.11 campaigns on 4 healthy and hygienic environment Ambulances for I.11 emergency care

5 and rehabilitation civil works Provide area I.11 specific training

6 for medical professionals Increase the prevalence of I.11 health programs

7 focused on prevention and screening Provision of relevant, accessible and incentivized LLL programmes in sustainable I.11 tourism, x x x x x x x 8 agriculture and fishery in Community Centers for Permanent Learning

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Creating an Education & Training Network for students living in remote areas or I.11 with less than

9 2000 population to provide access to primary and lower secondary quality education for all Provide support for creating VET schools that are relevant, attractive and inclusive, and which produce a workforce with I.12 knowledge & skills x x x x 0 of international standard and relevance to the global demands of the nature-based tourism and recreational fishing market Enhance kindergartens and nursery services through development, I.12 support, 1 rehabilitation and provision of equipment to increase access to early childhood

Bring Early school leavers back to I.12 school through

2 school after school and second chance programs Create partnerships between employers, E&T providers and I.12 research bodies to 3 ensure better performance of education system in addressing labor market needs Develop early childhood (0-6 years) institutional I.12 infrastructure in 4 communities with high share of Roma Scaling up school mediators in I.12 schools with high 5 percentage of Roma Implementing I.12 community grants

6 for educational intervention

Taxonomic group Types of Cod Habitats/ interventions/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians and reptiles Mammals (including bats) Birds e vegetations projects HL HA HF HE HL HA HF HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE HL HA HF D M HE Facilitate I.12 regularization of 7 property rights Other social I.12 protection ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 8 interventions SME subsidies for I.12 job placement for

9 NEETs in relevant fields Improve digital I.13 literacy among the

0 Roma and vulnerable groups Increase the access to as well I.13 as the efficiency of 1 social service provision Strengthening local administrative capacity for strategic planning I.13 and budgeting, 2 decision making, human resource management and monitoring and evaluation Identification, development and implementation of measures to I.13 increase

3 transparency, inclusiveness, ethics and integrity, and reduce corruption

Technical I.13 Assistance (TA) for

4 ITI program management Revise regulations to improve the design of household subsidies to I.13 improve

5 affordability of services, and a more efficient targeting and use of financial and natural resources Improving access and quality of I.13 services provided 6 by the judicial system Actions intended to ensure the coordination between the public institutions I.13 dealing with the 7 conservation of biodiversity and the ecological reconstruction of the Danube Delta

8 implementation of online services I.13 Urban Renewal x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 9 Interventions HL Habitat loss HA Habitat alteration HF Habitat fragmentation D Disturbance M Mortality HE* Habitat enhancement (including management of conservation enhancement)

4.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 4.3.1 Impact significance assessment methodology The proposed assessment methodology is consistent with legislative requirements, methodological guidelines and best practice recommendations. The principle of the method is to consider the size of the potential effects as being caused by two main parameters: 1. The magnitude of changes proposed by the projects / types of interventions. 2. Sensitivity of the potentially affected areas.

Table no. 4-2 Matrix used to assess the significance of the potential effects of the DDISDS implementation Magnitude High Moderate Low Low Moderate High No negative negative negative positive positive positive changes Sensitivity magnitude magnitude magnitude magnitude magnitude magnitude Very high -3 -3 -2 0 +2 +3 +3 High -3 -3 -2 0 +2 +3 +3 Moderate -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 Low -2 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +2 Without -1 -1 -1 0 +1 +1 +1 sensitivity Where, Color code Impact significance Necessary measures Significant negative impact Requires alternative solutions or compensation measures Moderate negative impact Requires important avoiding and mitigation measures Low negative impact Requires punctual avoiding and mitigation measures No effect can be identified (! It doesn’t necessarily mean - that they don’t exist) Low positive impact Any measure that may lead to the extension/multiplication Moderate positive impact of the effects Significant positive impact

Using a matrix (Table. No 4-2) to evaluate the effects of the implementation of plan/ programme/ strategy has 3 major advantages:  Represents a guarantee of using a uniform measure for assessing the effects for any of the projects / types of interventions of the strategy and any analyzed biodiversity component;  It is an effective tool for communicating the results of the assessment with both specialists and the general public;  It can easily use the results of spatial analyzes on the location and size of impacts. Of course that the proposed matrix presents a number of limitations, the most important of which are the following:

 The magnitude of a project / type of intervention cannot always be assessed so exactly to be classified in one of the classes of magnitude. To avoid this difficulty a precautionary approach is used: classifying in a higher class;  Scoring (assigning a value of -3 to +3) is made for each proposed project / type of intervention from the strategy, even if some of these types of interventions may include several projects themselves. In this case, the given score matches either the potential cumulative impact (if any) or corresponds to the project that is likely to produce the highest negative effects. The magnitude is a three-dimensional parameter that takes into account: Quantitative and qualitative appreciation on the proposed changes (e.g. improving / worsening quality of resources, changing the structural or functional parameters of an environmental component, etc.); Spatial extent (e.g. local, across multiple ATU, on the whole territory of DDISDS); Temporal extent (e.g. during construction, during the programming period, > programming period). An important step in determining the potential impacts that may occur as a result of implementing the types of interventions / projects of DDISDS is to identify their location. This is very important for a subsequent determination of the spatial extent of the effects (e.g. local, across multiple ATU, on the whole territory of DDISDS) and their temporal extensions (e.g. during construction, during the programming period, > programming period), two essential components in determining the magnitude of the impact, one of the main parameters for assessing impact significance. According to the identification scheme based on the types of interventions / projects classified by their location and the possibility of spatial delimitation for the related impact area, shown in Figure no. 4-7, DDISDS contains the following types of interventions / projects: Type A: projects for which the location is not relevant for analysis (generally those that do not involve construction works and by their very nature do not have the potential to generate negative effects on the sites of community importance, e.g.: “Technical assistance for an in- depth institutional analysis (functional review) of DDBRA with the aim of improving its managerial performances, and the legislative framework governing the management of DDBR area, including to better guarantee direct access of the local population to natural resources and services.”); Type B: projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but no information is known about their location; Type C: projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location: “approximate” in the case of WSS and IWM projects for which the limit of the land into the build-up area was considered in the analysis, namely “incomplete” for projects like “Improving fish habitat” from the “Fisheries and Aquaculture” sector, where only 2 lakes are included in the first phase, after which a series of interventions on other lakes will be identified, which locations are not mentioned in this phase). The spatial location of these projects was performed through digitization using Google Earth Pro satellite images, according to the information available in the project title and description; Type D: projects with a specific location (vector data in SHP format was provided by the beneficiary or other stakeholders), but the area of impact cannot be clearly defined (e.g. “I.88. Rehabilitation and modernization of Sulina Channel”;

Type E: projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined. The number and the percentage of types of interventions / projects according to their location and the possibility of defining their areas of impact are shown in Figure no. 4-8.

Figure no. 4-7 Identification scheme for the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS based on their location and the possibility to define their area of impact

6; 4% 4; 3%

A 15; 11% B C 24; 17% D 90; 65% E

Figure no. 4-8 Number and percentage of types of interventions / projects of DDISDS based on their location and the possibility to define their area of impact

5 classes of sensitivity were proposed: very high, high, moderate, low, without sensitivity (see Figure no. 4-9): Very high sensitivity: natural and scientific reserves, strictly protected areas and integral protection areas; High sensitivity: all natural areas within SCI/SPAs, except for areas with very high sensitivity; Moderate sensitivity: all semi natural areas (e.g.: arable, meadows) within SCI/SPAs and natural areas located outside of SCI/SPA limits, except for areas with high and very high sensitivity; Low sensitivity: anthropic areas within SCI/SPAs and all semi natural areas located outside of SCI/SPAs, except for the ones mentioned above; Without sensitivity: all anthropic areas located outside of SCI/SPA limits. Sensitive areas from Măcin Mountains National Park, classified according to “Măcin Mountains National Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcin and ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel Integrated Management Plan” 29, approved by GD no. 1074/11.12.2013, were included within this classification in order to differentiate sensitive areas based on its zoning, available in vector format:  Very high sensitivity: strictly protected areas, integral protection areas;  High sensitivity: sustainable conservation areas;  Low sensitivity: sustainable development areas.

29 http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/management/432

Figure no. 4-9 Sensitivity classes in the DDISDS implementation area

4.3.2 Location of the projects / types of interventions of DDISDS in relation to the sensitivity classes of the study area The following figures show the types of interventions / projects of SDDIDD which have a specific location (with or without a clear delineation of the impact area) and an approximate / incomplete location, namely types C, D or E, in relation to the sensitivity classes of the study area (according to the classification presented in the previous section).

Figure no. 4-10 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-11 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-12 Location of the project/type of intervention “Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-13 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the DRM sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region. A – project detail “Works for protection against floods”, B – project detail “Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of IES infrastructure”

Figure no. 4-14 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “A region-wide program for beautification of settlements” (Tourism sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-15 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-16 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-17 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Transport sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-18 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/type of interventions from the Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM) sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-19 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the SWM sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

Figure no. 4-20 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Health sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region

4.3.3 Estimation of the surfaces from Natura 2000 sites potentially affected by the implementation of the projects proposed by DDISDS 4.3.3.1 Methodology Location of projects was accomplished, as mentioned in the previous sections, using vector data received from the beneficiary, and for those projects for which this information could not be provided by the beneficiary, spatial location was performed through digitization based on Google Earth Pro satellite images, according to the information available in names or in the justifications of the projects (for example, for projects such as "Reforestation of areas where the natural vegetation has disappeared or been degraded", "Development and modernization of Tulcea airport infrastructure", "Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation" etc.). In the case of the project for rehabilitating and strengthening the Sulina canal banks, vector data have been supplied by the River Administration of the Lower Danube Galaţi. In order to assess the land surface affected by the implementation of the projects/types of interventions proposed by DDISDS, polygons were created for the projects that involve new constructions, as well as modernization/rehabilitation/extension works (roads, ports, airport, waste transfer/sorting/composting/MBT stations, wastewater treatment plants, drinking water treatment plants etc.) using the “Buffer” function in ArcGIS 10. The distances used were different depending on the type of work involved (express road, county road, waterways, buildings, etc.) and anticipated impacts (habitat loss, alteration, and disturbance). The created polygons were overlapped with the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta region, joint surfaces being then calculated and disaggregated by the degrees of sensitivity, sector, and type of work. Distances used for the disturbance impact type were established according to the information available in the literature (ex.: Forman et al. 2002). Regarding the intersection of the projects with the types of land use (according to Corine Land Cover 2006), we mention that in the case of permanently occupied land, we considered the buffer for the projects involving new constructions or extensions (i.e. where there will be habitat loss), and for temporarily occupied land, the buffer for projects involving the modernization or rehabilitation of some existing constructions was considered (i.e. where there will be a habitat alteration). Buffers used for each type of intervention and forms of impact are shown in the following table: Table no. 4-3 Buffers used to create the polygons that were subsequently used to calculate the affected areas Buffer for Temporary Buffer for permanent works Disturbanc Habitat existing constructions (habitat e (indirect improvemen construction (direct effects) alteration) effects) (m) t (m) s (m) (m) (m) Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management International New Center of - Digitized polygon - - - constructions Advanced Studies Stipoc sand Digitized Reforestation - - - - bank polygon Habitat Digitized Lakes - - - - rehabilitation polygon

Buffer for Temporary Buffer for permanent works Disturbanc Habitat existing constructions (habitat e (indirect improvemen construction (direct effects) alteration) effects) (m) t (m) s (m) (m) (m) Disaster Risk Management (DRM) New Hydrotechnic Digitized - - - - constructions al works polygons IES Rehabilitation/ Digitized infrastructur - - - - Modernization polygons e Tourism Land within the built-up Beautificatio Rehabilitation/ area of the n of - - - - Modernization mentioned settlements settlement s Fisheries and Aquaculture Dredge major Uzlina Lake Digitized - - - - lakes Fortuna Lake polygons Transport ROAD SECTOR New roads Express road - 25 15 675 - Rehabilitations County road 5 - 5 495 - NAVAL SECTOR Digitized Ports - - - - polygons Polygons received from the Modernization Sulina River

channel Administrat ion Of The Lower Danube AVIATION SECTOR Modernization Airport - - - 200 - Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM) Land within New the built-up DWTP/WWT constructions/ - - - - area of the P Extensions mentioned settlements Rehabilitation/ STAP/SEAU - - - - Land within

Buffer for Temporary Buffer for permanent works Disturbanc Habitat existing constructions (habitat e (indirect improvemen construction (direct effects) alteration) effects) (m) t (m) s (m) (m) (m) Modernization the built-up 30 area of the mentioned settlements Solid Waste Management (SWM) Transfer New Digitized stations, - - - - constructions polygons sorting, MBT Healthcare Medical Rehabilitation/ Digitized infrastructur - - - - Modernization polygons e Education Educational Rehabilitation/ Digitized infrastructur - - - - Modernization polygons e

4.3.3.2 Type E projects / types of interventions - projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined This category includes the following 6 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS:  Transport (6 types of interventions / projects): I.81. Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanța - Tulcea - Macin – Braila; I.82. Modernization of County Road DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL – ZEBIL – SARICHIOI; I.83. Modernization of County Road DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia Veche; I.84. Modernization of County Road DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-Săcele-Istria-Mihai Viteazu ; I.86. Development and modernization of airport infrastructure; I.87. Modernization of county roads (regional transport infrastructure): o DJ 222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus; o DJ 222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus; o DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798; o route Cetatea Histria – DN22/ Tariverde.

30 It is assumed that all the rehabilitation/ modernization works will be carried out on the existing sites of the DWTP/WWTP

For these projects, habitat areas that might be actually lost are equivalent to 0.01% of the intersected SCI sites area. Lost areas in zones with very high and high sensitivity will be equivalent to <0.01% of the intersected SCI sites area. The habitat areas potentially altered by the implementation of these projects represent 0.02% of the intersected SCI sites area. Potentially altered areas with very high and high sensitivity are equivalent to 0.01% of the intersected SCI sites area. Areas where species activity disturbance may appear are estimated to cover 1.54% of the total intersected SCI sites area. Areas where species activity disturbance may appear, located in zones with very high and high sensitivity, are equivalent to 0.74% of the intersected SCI sites area. The projects could affect a total area equivalent to 1.56% of the total intersected SCI sites area. In areas with very high sensitivity, surfaces representing 0.76% of the intersected SCI sites could be affected. In the case of the Special Protection Areas (SPA) network, habitat areas potentially lost through the implementation of the projects are equivalent to 0.02% of the total intersected SPA sites area. In areas with very high and high sensitivity, the areas that might be lost are equivalent to <0.01% of the intersected SPA sites area. The habitat areas potentially altered by the implementation of these projects represent 0.03% of the intersected SPA sites area. Potentially altered areas with very high and high sensitivity are equivalent to 0.01% of the intersected SPA sites area. Areas where species activity disturbance may appear are estimated to cover 1.97% of the total intersected SPA sites area. Areas where species activity disturbance may appear, located in zones with very high and high sensitivity, are equivalent to 0.61% of the intersected SPA sites area. The projects could affect a total area equivalent to 2.01% of the total intersected SPA sites area. In areas with very high sensitivity, surfaces representing 0.62% of the intersected SPA sites could be affected.

98,44% 98,44%

0,09% 0,09% 1,56% 0,72% 0,67% Very high High Moderate Low Unaffected Total affected in SCI Unaffected

Figure no. 4-21 Share of the total areas within the Sites of Community Importance (SCI) intersected by projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E)

97,99% 97,99%

0,08% 0,07% 2,01% 1,31% 0,55% Very high High Moderate Low Unaffected Total affected in SPA Unaffected

Figure no. 4-22 Share of the total areas within the Special Protection Areas (SPA) intersected by projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E)

Table no. 4-4 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Sites of Community Importance (SCI) Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SCIs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 15,08 29,72 1,42 2,49 Total/location 48,69

Table no. 4-5 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Special Protection Areas (SPA) Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SPAs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 15,12 27,12 109,82 4,91 Total/location 156,96

Table no. 4-6 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within Sites of Community Importance (SCI) Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SCIs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 8,99 62,63 18,19 27,33 Total/location 117,14

Table no. 4-7 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within Special Protection Areas (SPA) Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SPAs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 9,01 64,48 103,79 39,41 Total/location 216,69

Table no. 4-8 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by disturbance within Sites of Community Importance (SCI) Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SCIs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 601,03 4539,74 4994,34 578,79 Total/location 10713,90

Table no. 4-9 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by disturbance within Special Protection Areas (SPA) Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SPAs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 606,98 4680,81 11008,49 665,89 Total/location 16922,16

Table no. 4-10 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected within Sites of Community Importance (SCI)

Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SCIs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 625,09 4632,09 5013,95 608,61 Total/location 10879,74

Table no. 4-11 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected within Special Protection Areas (SPA) Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SPAs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Type E 631,10 4732,40 11222,10 710,20 Total/location 17295,81

The lists of habitats and species of community interest on taxonomic groups (habitats, plants, invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds) in the study area, according to Romania’s reports to the European Union under Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive and Art. 12 of the Birds Directive, which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects is presented in Annex no. III. The number of habitats and species of community interest on taxonomic groups (habitats, plants, invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds) which may be affected by the implementation of these projects is presented in Table no. 4-12. Table no. 4-12 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects Number of habitats/ species of community interest

possibly affected

Project

Project name

code

Fish

Birds

Plants

Reptiles

Habitats

Mammals

Invertebrat Amphibians Modernization of national road DN I.81. 22 Constanța - Tulcea - Macin – 12 4 12 19 12 9 22 40 Braila Modernization of County Road I.82. DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL – 7 4 5 18 12 9 17 38 ZEBIL – SARICHIOI Modernization of County Road I.83. DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia 3 2 5 19 10 7 11 32 Veche Modernization of County Road I.84. DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-Săcele- 4 3 2 6 11 8 21 30 Istria-Mihai Viteazu Development and modernization of I.86. 4 1 2 18 11 9 16 27 airport infrastructure Modernizarea drumurilor judeţene (infrastructura de transport regional): o DJ 222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus; I.87. o DJ 222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus; 7 3 5 5 12 9 21 38 o DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798; o traseul Cetatea Histria – DN22/ Tariverde.

The number of unique habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects, is presented in Table no. 4-13. Among these, 3 species of fish (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii, Acipenser stellatus and Huso huso) are listed as CR (Critically Endangered) and 1 species of birds (Falco cherrug) is listed as EN (Endangered) on the IUCN Red List.

Table no. 4-13 Number of unique habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects Number of unique habitats/ species of community interest possibly affected Project type Habitats Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians Reptiles Mammals Birds Type E projects 24 5 14 19 12 9 25 47

4.3.3.3 Type D projects / types of interventions - projects with a specific location, but the area of impact cannot be clearly defined This category includes the following 4 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS:  Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (1 type of intervention / project): I.12. Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation;  Disaster Risk Management – DRM (1 type of intervention / project): I.24. Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency Situations (IES) infrastructure facilities in TULCEA + Macin + Crişan + Babadag + Topolog;  Transport (1 type of intervention / project ): I.88. Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel;  Solid Waste Management (1 type of intervention / project): I.102. Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at source, collection, sorting and transportation facilities). The project for rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel contains several types of interventions consisting of: technical works to achieve bed stabilization, fairway restoration, protection of Sulina Canal banks, and to reduce water flow and the amount of alluvia entering the canal at the junction with the St. George channel, optimization of dredging works to ensure minimum navigation depths at the mouth of the sea, arrangements for retaining alluvia upstream of Sulina bar and sending currents into the sea. An estimation of the land surfaces that might be affected by the technical works to achieve fairway restoration and protection of the banks is shown in Table no. 4-14 and Table no. 4-15.

Table no. 4-14 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel – Land surfaces (ha) within Sites of Community Interest (SCI) which might be affected by the implementation of the project Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SCIs Project Very high High Moderate Low Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina 0 179.31 7.67 5.39 Channel Total/location 192.37

Table no. 4-15 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel – Land surfaces (ha) within Special Protection Areas (SPA) which might be affected by the implementation of the project Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SPAs Project Very high High Moderate Low

Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina 0 179.31 7.67 5.39 Channel Total/location 192.37

Table no. 4-16 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be affected by the implementation of Type D projects Number of habitats/ species of community

interest possibly affected

Project

Project name

code

Fish

Birds

Plants

Reptiles

Habitats

Mammals

Amphibians Invertebrates Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube I.12. 2 0 2 0 10 3 11 28 Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for I.24. Emergency Situations (IES) infrastructure 12 4 13 19 12 9 17 37 facilities in TULCEA + Macin + Crişan + Babadag + Topolog Rehabilitation and modernization of the I.88. 23 3 3 20 8 3 8 29 Sulina Channel Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste I.102. 26 4 3 20 11 10 20 39 separation at source, collection, sorting and transportation facilities)

4.3.3.4 Type C projects / types of interventions – projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) This category includes the following 15 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS:  Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (3 types of interventions / projects): I.5. Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water circulation and key habitat areas. I.6. Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation. I.10. Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded;  Energy efficiency (1 type of intervention / project): I.17. Extending and improving the energy efficiency of public lighting;  Disaster Risk Management (DRM) (1 type of intervention / project): I.23. Works for protection against floods in fourteen (14) towns/communes;  Tourism (2 types of interventions / projects): I.34. A region-wide program for beautification of settlements; I.36. Cultural heritage interventions (rehabilitation, preservation, etc.);  Fisheries and Aquaculture (3 types of interventions / projects): I.40. Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks; I.41. Dredge major lakes to restore water depth; I.44. Improve fish habitat;  Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD) (2 types of interventions / projects): I.54. Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc); I.80. Educational infrastructure upgrade (especially for primary and secondary education);  Transport (1 type of intervention / project): I.85. Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Măcin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports;  Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM) (2 types of interventions / projects): I.99. Projects in areas with > 2000 Population equivalent; I.100. Projects in areas with < 2000 Population equivalent. In terms of impact on biodiversity, it should be mentioned that the projects belonging to “Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM)” sector, as well as the projects I.6. “Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering

the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation”, I.10. “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded”, I.41. “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” and I.44. “Improve fish habitat” will generate long term positive effects on a large surface within the study area. The tables below present the land areas, expressed in hectares, on which long-term positive effects may appear, both within sites of Community Importance (SCI) and Special Protection Areas (SPA). Table no. 4-17 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha) within Sites of Community Interest (SCI) on which positive effects may appear Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SCIs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated 19.39 9387.20 0.00 0.00 monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross- border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation “Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water 0.00 56.32 85.55 890.46 management (IWM)” (2 projects) Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation 0.00 2382.92 486.82 18.44 has disappeared or been degraded Improve fish habitat; Dredge major lakes to restore 0.00 1401.94 0.00 0.00 water depth Total/location 14729.06

Table no. 4-18 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha) within Special Protection Areas (SPA) on which positive effects may appear Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SPAs Projects Very high High Moderate Low Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat 19.39 9387.20 0.00 0.00 within the “Natura 2000” network for species of

European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross- border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation “Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water 1.23 85.11 160.14 1753.28 management (IWM)” (2 projects) Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation 0.00 2382.92 486.82 18.44 has disappeared or been degraded Improve fish habitat; Dredge major lakes to restore 0.00 1401.94 0.00 0.00 water depth Total/location 15696.50

4.3.3.5 Type B projects / types of interventions – projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but no information is known about their location This category includes the following 24 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS that belong to the following sectors:  Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (4 types of interventions / projects);  Energy Efficiency (2 types of interventions / projects);  Disaster Risk Management - DRM (1 type of intervention / project);  Pollution Emergency (1 type of intervention / project );  Tourism (1 type of intervention / project);  Fisheries and Aquaculture (5 types of interventions / projects);  Agriculture and Rural Development - ARD (5 types of interventions / projects);  Solid Waste Management (4 types of interventions / projects);  Others (1 type of intervention / project).

4.3.3.6 Type A projects / types of interventions – projects for which the location is not relevant for analysis This category includes the following 90 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS that belong to the following sectors:

 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (6 types of interventions / projects);  Energy Efficiency (1 type of intervention / project);  Climate change (3 types of interventions / projects);  Disaster Risk Management (1 type of intervention / project);  Pollution emergency (3 types of interventions / projects);  Tourism (7 types of interventions / projects);  Fisheries and Aquaculture (5 types of interventions / projects);  Agriculture and Rural Development - ARD (21 types of interventions / projects);  Information and Communication Technology - ICT (10 types of interventions / projects);  Solid Waste Management (1 type of intervention / project);  Healthcare (11 types of interventions / projects);  Education (6 types of interventions / projects);  Social Inclusion and Protection (8 types of interventions / projects);  Administrative Capacity and Program Management (7 types of interventions / projects).

4.3.4 Assessment results According to the matrix presented in the previous section, we assessed the significance of the potential effects of the DDISDS implementation on the community interest components from the Danube Delta Region (Table no. 4-19). The score is given for the impact of an intervention (project) on a taxonomic group (mammals, birds, etc) and includes a subjective approximation of: all identified types of impacts (habitat loss, habitat alteration etc); the estimated magnitude (when information is insufficient, magnitude is overestimated for negative impacts and underestimated for positive ones); sensitivity of the impact area (usually, the highest sensitivity class is considered). In Figure no. 4-23 is presented the share of the assessment notes granted for each taxonomic group. The significant negative effects are registred for the taxonomical groups: habitats/ vegetation, fish and birds. Habitats/ vegetation is the group that is registering the most significant negative effects, as a result of the interventions from the Transport sector (I.81 Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin – Brăila and I.88 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel). In what concern the positive effects, fish is the taxonomic group that accumulate the most positive effects (approx. 23.7 % of the total assessment notes), given especially the interventions from the Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management and Fisheries and Aquaculture sectors (eg. I.5 Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water circulation and key habitat areas, respectively I.44 Improve fish habitat), which influences directly the aquatic ecosystems. The high share of “no effect can be identified (! It doesn’t necessarily mean that they don’t exist)” is given by the multitude of the interventions from Health, Education, Social Inclusion and Protection, Administrative Capacity and Program Management sectors, which have no influence on the Natura 2000 components.

100%

90%

80%

70%

60% -3 -2 50% -1 40% 0 30% 1 2 20% 3 10%

0% Habitats/ Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians Mammals Birds vegetation and reptiles (including bats)

Figure no. 4-23 The share of the assessment notes granted for each taxonomic group

Figure no. 4-24 shows only the positive and negative effects of the types on interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components.

Birds

Mammals (including bats)

Amphibians and reptiles

-3 -2 Fish -1 1 2 3 Invertebrates

Plants

Habitats/ vegetation

-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Figure no. 4-24 The positive and negative effects associated to each taxonomic group

The share of the total positive and negative effects generated by the implementation of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components is presented in Figure no. 4-25. The total of the positive effects generated by the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS is of 57 %, while the total of the negative effects is of 43 %. The positive effects are associated with the interventions from Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management, Pollution Emergency, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM), Solid Waste Management and Education sectors, while the negative effects are associated with the interventions from Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (I.12 – I.14), Energy Efficiency (I.15 and I.17), Disaster Risk Management (DRM), Tourism, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Transport and other (I.139 Urban Renewal Interventions) sectors.

The projects that have the potential to generate significate positive or negative effects on the Natura 2000 components are listed bellow: Significant positive effects:  I.5 Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water circulation and key habitat areas;  I.6 Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation. Significant negative effects:  I.81 Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanţa – Tulcea – Măcin – Brăila;  I.88 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel.

1% 2%

14% 20% Signifficant positive effects Moderate positive effects Reduced positive effects

28% Reduced negative effects Moderate negative effects 35% Signifficant negative effects

Figure no. 4-25 The share of the total positive and negative effects generated by the implementation of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components

It is important to mention that there are a series of type of interventions for which: the potential effects were already assessed within other interventions: the case of I.27 Create an inter-institutional Pollution Emergency Response Team, I.54 Modernization of rural infrastructure (partially, only some components – see I.80, I.99, I.100) and I.78 Support rehabilitation of flood protection infrastructure; the potential effects on the Natura 2000 components could not be assessed, as a result of insufficient information for assessing correctly the interventions: I.41 Dredge major lakes to restore water depth (for Habitats component), I.73 Exit of old farmers and transfer of assets and I.128 Other social protection interventions.

Table no. 4-19 The analysis of the impact significance of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles Positively affects all species, particularly the natural I.1 Development and implementation of measures to reduce solid waste in natural areas. 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 vegetation in areas with uncontrolled disposal of waste. Border demarcation and signage of strictly protected areas and buffer areas, sport fishing Will reduce the anthropic pressure of tourism activities with areas, touristic routes, camping, parking areas, etc. and development and implementation I.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 benefits for all species and habitats. Area of implementation of a monitoring and information system, incl. technology such as motion-activated is restricted to DDBR. cameras, watchtowers, etc. Improve evidence-based management by developing and implementing a modern/efficient A crucial measure for achieving a scientifically guided I.3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 monitoring system and predictive model for sedimentation dynamics in the Danube Delta. management of wetlands. An in-depth institutional analysis (functional review) of DDBRA and the associated administrative reforms with the aim of improving its managerial performances, and the It is estimated that such measure will generate indirect I.4 legislative framework governing the management of DDBR area to allow local residents to 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 benefits for all species and habitats. Area of implementation become active participants in guarding and managing the natural resource. Capacity is restricted to DDBR. building measures for the communities and DDBRA. If the measure is based on evidence-based management, all Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water I.5 2 1 1 3 2 1 2 species and habitats should benefit, particularly endangered circulation and key habitat areas. water dependent species. Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network Restoration of natural habitats is the most needed for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated I.6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 intervention aiming directly the improvement of monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting conservation status for all Natura 2000 species and habitats. evidence-based decision making and community participation. Project is necessary for the substantiation of physical Studies and TA for biodiversity conservation and restoration of ecosystems and natural interventions. The project involves also species inventories I.7 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 habitats within “Natura 2000” network affected by anthropic impacts. and habitats mapping and therefore it should be considered as the highest priority for implementation. Identify additional poldered areas eligible for ecological restoration. This will include The project will have a positive benefit limited by the feasibility studies and technical projects for the restoration of natural habitats affected by I.8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 unknown spatial extent and the uncertainty of the non-ecological activities in agricultural, fishery and forestry polders - integral or partial implementation. ecological restoration works. The intervention is crucial for a scientific guided Natural capital accounting studies to determine the highest value uses of land and natural management, with indirect positive effects for all habitats I.9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 resources for optimal management. and species. It is conditioned by the existence of a unitary habitats and species mapping. Although the measure doesn’t have a large area of implementation, it is beneficial for a large number of habitats and species, particularly several species of birds and Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been mammals. It is expected that reforestation will be performed I.10 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 degraded. with native species (such as Populus nigra, Populus alba, Salix alba, Salix fragilis, Fraxinus angustifolia, Ulmus minor etc.). Reforestation is also beneficial for the quality of aquatic ecosystems and should be considered, where applicable, in

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles the restoration projects.

As nitrate pollution is among the important pressures on water dependent ecosystems, any measure aiming to reduce Investments to support local action to reduce nitrate pollution of the waterways from I.11 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 pollution is beneficial for Danube Delta’s species and agricultural and livestock rearing activities. habitats. The measure should be considered for the entire study area. The centre location should be reconsidered in accordance with the updated limits of ROSCI0065 Danube Delta, in order Development of an International Centre of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – to avoid any potential impact associated with this I.12 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 Black Sea for biodiversity preservation. development. The proposal of such facility is however very important to consolidate the efforts to achieve a solid scientific foundation for DDBR management. Such measure is important for controlling risks associated with spread of diseases. However there are insufficient information provided at this moment to assure that such Integrated pest management – develop and implement an integrated pest management I.13 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 intervention will not have negative impacts on protected strategy for mosquitoes. flora and fauna. From the biodiversity point of view this intervention should be considered of low priority and should benefit of consistent supporting research. Reed represents the habitat of many species in DDBR and therefore its exploitation cannot be performed without a I.14 Integrated reed management strategy. -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 certain level of negative impact. The elaboration of such strategy must be preceded by studies aiming to identify the carrying capacity and the acceptable limits for exploitation. Renewable energy might be beneficial for wildlife IF it is not implemented in sensitive areas, by large scale projects and if it replaces classical energy sources. In the absence of a clear Promoting the use of renewable energy sources. Investments in pilot projects promoting indication on the size and area of implementation of such the use of renewable energy sources (wind, solar energy, heat pumps, biomass, micro- facilities, it is precautionary to estimate a potential negative I.15 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 hydro etc.) and non-pollutant technologies, including the development and introduction of impact on all species and habitats of conservative interest. environmentally friendly propulsion systems in the Delta. Another project that was analysed here was the proposal to build a cogeneration plant in Tulcea Municipality, which could generate a reduction of atmospheric emissions, and its construction will not be performed in a high sensitivity area. Improving the energy efficiency of public buildings (schools, hospitals, administrative I.16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. buildings, etc.). This intervention might have minor negative effects on habitats and plant species due to the system extension. I.17 Extending and improving the energy efficiency of public lighting. -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 Currently, the interventions for the public lighting system are excpected to take place within towns, but their list is not

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles complete (other eligible ATU’s might appear), and may include natural areas located near settlements. Areas of implementation are unknown but might include natural areas in close vicinity of localities. Also public lighting might induce changes in the activity of nocturnal species. I.18 Support for improving energy efficiency of households. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Create a CC partnership platform, including a community-driven climate adaptation fund I.19 targeted at low income families; a micro grant or loan mechanism to support SMEs; and a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. partnership facility to promote private - public collaboration for innovative climate actions. Designate a unit with a clear mandate to address climate change issues, with a small I.20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. number of dedicated and knowledgeable staff, and capable of working cross-sector. Develop clear and easy to use local guidelines for climate change and energy efficiency I.21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. programs. Provision of special machinery and equipment for interventions by IES and SMURD in I.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. disaster situations Construction works for flood protection extending outside localities limits will generate negative impacts on water dependent species and habitats. As the existing flood I.23 Works for protection against floods in fourteen (14) towns/communes. -2 -1 -2 -2 -2 -1 -2 management plans are not focused on non-structural measures, it is advisable to review these plans in accordance with the knowledge database that will be generated by the DDISDS interventions under the Biodiversity domain. Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency Situations I.24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. (IES) infrastructure facilities in TULCEA + Macin + Crişan + Babadag + Topolog I.25 Create and maintain an inter-institutional risk factor database 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Complete coherent and comprehensive pollution emergency response and prevention The intervention will have an indirect positive impact on all I.26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 plans, covering both water and land, and both mobile and fixed sources of pollution species and habitats. I.27 Create an inter-institutional Pollution Emergency Response Team Potential effects already considered under I.26 - The project is critical for rapid interventions in case of Purchase of equipment to enable the first response team to quickly access pollution accidental pollutions and should be considered with high I.28 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 incident sites in the Core Delta priority. The intervention is directly beneficial for aquatic organisms. Create and maintain an inter-institutional environmental liability data-base for data I.29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. sharing and better coordination across agencies The intervention might be beneficial for sustainable tourism, though the explanatory text in the Strategy offers no certainties for reaching such goal. From the biodiversity point I.30 Development and Installation of Visitor Infrastructure -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 of view this intervention should not be of high priority and should be based on the new knowledge base that will be generated by the DDISDS interventions under the

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles Biodiversity domain.

I.31 Institutionalization of a Danube Delta Destination Management Organization (DMO) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Design and implementation of a destination-wide program for product and attraction I.32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. development Support mechanism for innovative and sustainable nature-based tourism MSMEs & social The intervention will generate additional reduced negative I.33 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 tourism enterprises for green local economy impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.34 A region-wide program for beautification of settlements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.35 Program for improved quality of accommodation facilities and services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Cultural heritage interventions may have minor negative effects on habitats and species of community interest, I.36 Cultural heritage interventions (rehabilitation, preservation, etc.) -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 whereas some of the heritage objects concerned are found within Natura 2000 sites. The full list of objectives is not known at the moment. I.37 Development of a destination interpretation (learning) program. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Develop and roll out program for emergency and first aid for tourism workers, service I.38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. providers I.39 Develop a specialized tourism research observatory 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. This intervention supports the introduction of artificial structures in natural systems, with the potential to limit the spatial movement of many aquatic species and potential I.40 Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks -2 -1 -2 -2 -2 -1 -2 other effects which are not identifiable at this moment. This intervention should not be of high priority and should be based on the new knowledge base that will be generated by the DDISDS interventions under the Biodiversity domain. The intervention might have positive effects on long term for the conservation status of most species, especially on native fishes, amphibians and birds. Particular attention should be paid to impacts on species with reduced mobility and timing I.41 Dredge major lakes to restore water depth ? 1 1 2 2 1 2 of physical interventions by conducting appropriate studies before such interventions, as well as to the management of the dredged material (in order not to affect the natural habitats). Support transition from artisanal capture to recreational fishing (Improve ecotourism This intervention should reduce the existing pressure on fish I.42 venues to accommodate the needs of recreational fishers; Promote and provide training in 1 0 0 2 0 1 1 communities. sustainable recreational fishing (catch-and-release fishing etc.). This intervention should balance the impact generated by Support artificial reproduction of valuable species like pike and zander and construct selective fishing on two raptor species. The intervention I.43 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 simple landing facilities in places of fisher concentrations. requires an adequate scientific base to avoid potential negative impact on fish communities.

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles The intervention is beneficial for fish communities, by the potential to increase the conservation status of Natura 2000 I.44 Improve fish habitat 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 species. Other species, particularly amphibians, reptiles and birds, may also benefit of this intervention. The measure should be beneficial for habitats and fish I.45 Regulate or eliminate uncontrolled fish camping 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 species. The intervention should be correlated with I.30. There are insufficient elements to assess this intervention. It is also strongly recommended to correlate the justification of I.46 Consider some tax incentives, like the elimination of the water tax 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 this intervention with the vision expressed by the interventions of DDISDS Biodiversity domain. I.47 Improve fisheries data collection and analysis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.48 Replace or modify cherhana based system 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.49 Strengthen analytical capacity at DDNRI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Improve fisheries research and development activities in research institutes, public I.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. institutions and fishermen associations. From the biodiversity perspective there are two important considerations: i) restoration is a better perspective I.51 Improve Aquaculture -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 -1 -2 compared to aquaculture, ii) re-establishing of aquaculture on former abandoned fisheries might have impacts on Natura 2000 species that colonised these surfaces. Support small scale fish processing. Diversify home and village level fish processing by introducing small scale canning units (for Gibel carp and other low value fish like roach and I.52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. bream) and improve smoking systems (smoking bags or small electric smokers); mainly to produce delicacies to visiting tourists. I.53 Modernization of facilities for collection / processing / marketing of agricultural produce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Some of the components of this type of intervention were already assessed within other interventions (see I.80, I.99, I.100). In order to assess impact significance, we mainly considered the project regarding the rehabilitation of DC2, DC3 and DC4, which intersects areas with high sensitivity. In I.54 Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc) -2 -2 -2 0 -2 -2 -2 the case of DC3, according to information provided by ADI ITI Delta Dunării, after consulting DDBRA representatives, the road will not pass through the natural protected area Pădurea Letea and its rehabilitation will be made using ecologic solutions and will respect DDBRA rules. I.55 Jobs creation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Providing incentives for using environmentally friendly farming practices, technologies with minimal impact on the I.56 Protection and improvement of natural resources (soil, water) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ground, the existence of adequate facilities for storing manure can have a positive impact on all taxonomical

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles groups.

I.57 Completion of land restitution and land book registration for land/farms consolidation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. The organic farming to the detriment of the one based on I.58 Support for environment-friendly agricultural activities within Natura 2000 sites 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 the use of chemical substances it is beneficial for all Natura 2000 habitats and species, especially fish and birds. I.59 Enlarge the access to vocational education for agriculture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats.

I.60 Modernization of quality control systems for agricultural products 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats.

I.61 Improved information on local and European financing, including projects preparation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats.

I.62 Improvement of Advisory/consulting and training activity for farmers / rural labor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Any initiative aiming at reducing the use of chemicals in I.63 Fostering organic farming activities 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 Danube Delta area is beneficial for Natura 2000 species and habitats, particularly for fishes and birds. I.64 Take-up of farming activities by young generations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. The spatial extend of this intervention is not specified. It is expected to involve construction works and use of important I.65 Modernization/rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 -1 -1 quantities of water, which may affect all water dependent species and habitats. I.66 Consolidation and modernization of small farms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.67 Creation of small businesses outside agriculture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. It is expected that the intervention might increase the I.68 Modernization of technical endowment of farms -1 -1 0 0 0 0 -1 intensity of farming, with negative impacts on vegetation and birds. I.69 Bottom-up initiatives for local development 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. The spatial extend of this measure is not known. It is expected that this intervention will bring benefit to many species and habitats, with the following conditions: I.70 Afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural land in the Danube Delta region 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 afforestation is performed with native species, similar to the surrounding habitat types, and the non-agricultural land does not identify with any existing natural use of land. I.71 Conservation of local patrimony and traditions (including handicrafts) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.72 Release of land through concessions by Tulcea County Council 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. There is insufficient information for assessing this I.73 Exit of old farmers and transfer of assets ? ? ? ? ? ? ? intervention. I.74 Foster establishment of producer groups/organizations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.75 Stimulate creation of short supply chains for the benefit of tourism activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats.

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles Support branding/certification of agricultural products and their marketing on I.76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. international markets This intervention might be incompatible with the vision supporting the ecological restoration and ecotourism in core Delta. It is precautionary to consider a potential negative I.77 Provide incentives to maintain agricultural activities in core Delta -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 impact of this intervention on numerous species and habitats, though the impact depends of the type and extent of the agricultural activities, which are not mentioned in the DDISDS. I.78 Support rehabilitation of flood protection infrastructure Already assessed within I.23 - I.79 Enable participation of farmers and processors to risk management tools 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.80 Educational infrastructure upgrade (especially for primary and secondary education) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. According to the national plans, this route should be upgraded to an express road, involving its enlargement and bypassing localities. The provided route intersects existing sensitive areas (where priority species and habitats are I.81 Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanța - Tulcea - Macin – Braila -3 -2 -2 -1 -2 -2 -2 present (e.g. 1530*, 62C0*, 91I0*, Osmoderma eremita*, Anisus vorticulus*) and a national reserve) and therefore was considered to have a potential significant negative impact. Significant impact might be avoided by adequate re-routing. The intervention involves the modernisation of the road on I.82 Modernization of County Road DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL – ZEBIL – SARICHIOI -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 its actual route, without extension. Impacts are reduced and include potential alterations and disturbance. The intervention involves the modernisation of the road on its actual route, without extension. Impacts during I.83 Modernization of County Road DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia Veche -2 -2 -2 0 -2 -2 -2 construction are reduced, but it is expected that the intervention will increase the traffic on a route close to some high sensitive areas. The intervention involves the modernisation of the road on its actual route, without extension. Impacts during I.84 Modernization of County Road DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-Săcele-Istria-MihaiViteazu -2 -2 -2 0 -2 -2 -2 construction are reduced, but it is expected that the intervention will increase the traffic on a route close to a very high sensitive area. This intervention includes several projects, of which some of them may have negative impacts on habitats and species, as I.85 Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Macin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports -2 -1 -2 -2 -2 -1 -2 well as on hydro-morphology, which are not identifiable at this moment. Though the airport is located in a low sensitivity area, this I.86 Development and modernization of airport infrastructure 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 intervention will lead to traffic increase, with negative impact on bird species.

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles

 Modernization of county roads (regional transport infrastructure): DJ222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus; The intervention involves the modernisation of several roads I.87  DJ222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus; -2 -2 -2 0 -2 -2 -2 segments on their actual routes, without extensions. Some of  DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798; the segments are located close to sensitive areas.  route Cetatea Histria - DN22/ Tariverde.

The intervention has numerous components, all of them represented by physical interventions either on the water flow or on the channel banks. The intervention might involve direct and indirect impacts, as well as long-term and long- I.88 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel -3 -2 -2 -3 -2 -1 -3 distance effects. Some of the impacts might be avoided or reduced by proper substantiation and therefore the project should be implemented after the evidence-based management in the project area is in place. I.89 Internet / ultra-fast internet for green tourism 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.90 Improvement of e-government services and local public monitoring systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.91 Support of ICT for businesses through e-portal and grant facility 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.92 Formulating and implementing open data policies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.93 Increasing vertical integration of ICT innovation solutions in the local economy. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.94 Increasing private investments in RDI and encouraging the demand for RDI. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Increasing knowledge, technology and staff transfer with RDI skills by means of I.95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. partnerships between private and research environment. Increasing the excellence of scientific basis as engine for innovation, by developing RD I.96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. infrastructure. Increasing the involvement in EU level research by unlocking the excellence potential in I.97 RDI, such as within the framework program Horizon 2020 and by attracting talents and 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. advanced skills to the RDI national system. Developing ITC infrastructure and systems and digital skills to support education, health, I.98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. online culture and digital inclusion This intervention will contribute to the reduction of surface I.99 Water and sanitation services - Projects in areas with > 2000 Population equivalent 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 and underground water contamination, with beneficial effect for all species and habitats. This intervention will contribute also to the reduction of surface and underground water contamination, with I.100 Water and sanitation services - Projects in areas with < 2000 Population equivalent 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 beneficial effect for all species and habitats. The extent of future implementation will not cover all localities with < 2000 Population equivalent. Though this is not a long term solution, the intervention I.101 Collection of Floating Waste in River Channels 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 should be of high priority giving the status of waste

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles management in the study area and upstream. Floating waste, particularly plastic, represent a threat to all water dependent species and their habitats. This is one of the important interventions aiming at reducing Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at source, I.102 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 both the floating waste and the existing diffuse waste-related collection, sorting and transportation facilities). pollution, with positive impact for all species and habitats. The intervention has an indirect positive impact and is I.103 Public education and awareness program on waste management 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 essential for the success of the above intervention (I.94). This intervention should be part of I.94. Spatial extent and I.104 Composting bins for rural households to process organic waste 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 intensity of this intervention is unknown. This intervention should be part of I.94. Spatial extent and I.105 Investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition waste 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 intensity of this intervention is unknown. The intervention has a positive impact, indirectly stimulating I.106 Recovering waste collected from households and economic agents 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 the minimization of waste that are to be stored. Consolidate the response capacity of Public Health Directorate (PHD) by designing and I.107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. implementing an environmental health surveillance system I.108 Rehabilitation/modernization of facilities, and IT equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Modernization and equipment, and organize a functional building block at Tulcea I.109 Emergency Hospital (including for integrated ambulatory department), and for Macin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Hospital Rehabilitation /transformation of TB pavilion at Tulcea Emergency Hospital to a social I.110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. accommodation center (residential care shelter) Create public ambulatory centers by rehabilitating closed hospital buildings in Babadag and I.111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Sulina Ensure interoperability of medical information systems at health care level (telemedicine I.112 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. and e-health) Reforms to increase cost-effectiveness of sector governance/management (hospital I.113 payment mechanism to incentivize public ambulatory, family doctor, and telemedicine 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. systems) Information, education and communication campaigns on healthy and hygienic I.114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. environment I.115 Ambulances for emergency care and rehabilitation civil works 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.116 Provide area specific training for medical professionals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.117 Increase the prevalence of health programs focused on prevention and screening 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Unfortunately rural communities still represent an important pressure on wildlife populations. It is expected that such Provision of relevant, accessible and incentivized LLL programmes in sustainable tourism, I.118 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 training programmes to contribute to a reduction of this agriculture and fishery in Community Centres for Permanent Learning pressure mainly by an increasing preoccupation for preserving natural habitats and reducing wildlife mortality.

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles Creating an Education & Training Network for students living in remote areas or with less I.119 than 2000 population to provide access to primary and lower secondary quality education 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. for all Provide support for creating VET schools that are relevant, attractive and inclusive, and It is expected that such intervention may produce a long which produce a workforce with knowledge & skills of international standard and term shift in the way the tourism is conducted in the study I.120 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 relevance to the global demands of the nature-based tourism and recreational fishing area, with benefits for fish and birds communities, as well as market for natural vegetation. Enhance kindergartens and nursery services through development, support, rehabilitation I.121 and provision of equipment to increase access to early childhood education and care 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. (ECEC) Bring Early school leavers back to school through school after school and second chance I.122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. programs Create partnerships between employers, E&T providers and research bodies to ensure I.123 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. better performance of education system in addressing labor market needs Develop early childhood (0-6 years) institutional infrastructure in communities with high I.124 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. share of Roma I.125 Scaling up school mediators in schools with high percentage of Roma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.126 Implementing community grants for educational intervention 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.127 Facilitate regularization of property rights 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. There is insufficient information for assessing this I.128 Other social protection interventions ? ? ? ? ? ? ? intervention. I.129 SME subsidies for job placement for NEETs in relevant fields 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.130 Improve digital literacy among the Roma and vulnerable groups 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. I.131 Increase the access to as well as the efficiency of social service provision 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Strengthening local administrative capacity for strategic planning and budgeting, decision I.132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. making, human resource management and monitoring and evaluation Identification, development and implementation of measures to increase transparency, I.133 inclusiveness, ethics and integrity, and reduce corruption in public authorities and 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. institutions I.134 Technical Assistance (TA) for ITI program management 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Revise regulations to improve the design of household subsidies to improve affordability of I.135 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. services, and a more efficient targeting and use of financial and natural resources I.136 Improving access and quality of services provided by the judicial system 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. Actions intended to ensure the coordination between the public institutions dealing with I.137 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. the conservation of biodiversity and the ecological reconstruction of the Danube Delta I.138 The development and implementation of online services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats. This intervention is not sufficiently detailed in the DDISDS I.139 Urban Renewal Interventions -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 and might overlap with other interventions. As a precaution, potential negative impact was considered under the

Taxonomic group Types of interventions/ projects Inverte- Amphibians Justification Habitats Plants Fish Mammals Birds brates and reptiles susceptibility that future developments outside the existing localities limits will be supported.

4.3.5 Residual impact Residual impact represents the consequences most probably to remain after the implementation of avoidance and mitigation measures (A&M). At this moment the residual impact can only be broadly estimated and to do so we considered a 100% efficiency of implementation for A&M measures. There are two main stages to consider in order to achieve the lowest level of residual negative impacts:

 Consider the avoidance measures (re-routing or relocation to avoid high sensitive areas and / or resizing) in order to reduce the project magnitude and / or to avoid high sensitive areas. Avoidance measures were proposed for all interventions susceptible to generate significant or moderate negative impact;  Consider the available mitigation measures which might eliminate the impact or reduce it to an acceptable level. By applying the above considerations to the assessment results (see section 4.3.4 in this report) we altered the scores considering that the proposed measures are fully integrated within the interventions / projects. The results indicates that the proposed measures have the capacity to wave all potential negative significant impacts, to reduce considerably the rest of negative impacts and to increase the positive effects. Here, as well, we considered mainly the long term effects of each intervention.

30 25

15 10 5 0 -1 -2 -3 -5

Summ of Summ scores individual +3 +2 +1 -10 -15 -20 Estimated impact Residual impact

Figure no. 4-26 The estimated impact and the residual impact, after the implementation of the A&M measures Main focus during the implementation of DDISDS’s projects should be on the proper adaptation of avoidance and mitigation measures. This implies, depending on the details of each project, the identification of supplementary measures to address potentially new identified negative impacts.

The projects for which the evaluation scores were reconsidered by including the A&M measures are presented in the following table.

Table no. 4-20 Reconsidered scores for the assessment of residual impact Natura 2000 components Codes of interventions/ Amphibians Habitats Plants Invertebrates Fishes Mammals Birds projects and reptiles

I.12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.30 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 I.40 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 I.54 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 I.81 -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 I.82 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.83 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.84 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.85 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 I.87 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.88 -2 -1 -2 -2 -1 -1 -2 I.139 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

5 MEASURES TO REDUCE IMPACT ON SPECIES AND HABITATS FROM PROTECTED NATURAL AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST 5.1 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES The types of interventions/projects proposed by DDISDS will follow, in the coming years, a series of successive steps of planning and implementation. In order to avoid and reduce the expected impacts on the Natura 2000 species and habitats, it is necessary to consider the application of a set of avoidance and mitigation measures. The proposed measures (Table no. 5-1) are formulated, in many cases, in a general manner, to cover the whole variety of types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS. For some of the types of interventions/ projects specific measures were also proposed. These measures should be incorporated and detailed under each project susceptible to generate impact on Natura 2000 components. It should be emphasised that several interventions (e.g. water supply and sewage, waste management facilities) that where consider having a positive impact on long term may generate minor negative impacts during construction and operation due to improper location. For all these projects, independent of the positive assessment, avoidance and mitigation measures should apply. As the Vision and strategic objectives of the Strategy are targeting the sustainable development of the Study Area through scientifically-guided environmental management, the prioritisation of the proposed interventions plays an important role (see measures M1 and M2). The prioritisation should ensure that the scientifically base is sufficiently consolidated at the moment when the proposed physical interventions will be implemented. A framework for prioritisation in accordance with Strategy’s vision and objectives is presented in Figure no. 5-1, the blue circles indicating the main criteria for a prioritisation based on scientifically-guided environmental management. Despite the fact that the Danube Delta is the most important protected area and the largest Natura 2000 site in Romania it still lacks a complete inventory and mapping of its protected species and habitats. As a consequence, management decisions are still based on project to project approach with significant difficulty to assess the cumulative impacts and the effects on each species’ conservation status.

Capacity for Habitat mapping intervention on Pollution control and species risk management & Social aspects inventory (I.22, I.28)

Monitoring & predictive models (I.2, I.3)

Studies & Technical Management Assistance decisions (I.7, I.8)

Ecosystem Physical Transport restoration interventions (I.86, I.88) (I5, I6, I10)

Disaster risk Fisheries and management aquaculture (I.23) (I.40, I.41) Tourism (I.30)

Figure no. 5-1 Proposed hierarchy for prioritisation of DDISDS interventions/projects

Table no. 5-1 Avoidance and mitigation measures proposed for DDISDS interventions/ projects related to Natura 2000 habitats and species Component/ Type of intervention/ projects to Measure impact type be applied In order to be in line with the vision and strategic objectives of the DDISDS, prioritisation of interventions should follow the next steps: 1) finalisation of habitat mapping and species inventories All interventions, except: M1 within Natura 2000 sites; 2) implementation of the monitoring system and of the predictive models; 3) emergency situations, pollution Prioritisation implementation of technical assistance and the preparation of studies to support the scientific-based control and social interventions decisions; 4) implementation of physical interventions. Interventions aiming directly the pollution control (e.g. nitrates reduction in water, floating waste, M2 I.11, I.26-I.29, I.99, I.100, I.101 implementation of water supply and sewage systems) should be treated with high priority. Any intervention directly connected with or necessary to the management of the Natura 2000 sites M3 should be preceded by thorough scientific studies and the solutions to be implemented will be chosen I.1 – I.14, I.40, I.41, I.43, I.44, I.70 after analysing several alternatives. Technical Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the Natura 2000 I.15, I.17, I.23, I.30, I.51, I.54, I.65, studies and sites but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other I.81 – I.88, I.139 + other appropriate M4 plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the sites in view of interventions based on the assessment the sites’ conservation objectives. Appropriate assessment process should be initiated at the earliest established locations and stages of design. authorities decisions All interventions, particularly those addressed to biodiversity management and those containing M5 All types of interventions/ projects construction works, should include actions to address climate change adaptation. The projects locations have to take in consideration the updated limits of the Natura 2000 sites, M6 according the last revisions, and the results of the Natura 2000 habitats and species mapping and All types of interventions/ projects inventory, in order to avoid their destruction/alteration. Reconsideration of projects/projects components locations in order to avoid location inside Natura Avoidance 2000 sites, where possible, or inside areas with very high and high sensitivity. Projects for which there I.12, I.17, I.23, I.54, I.81, I.88 M7 are no acceptable alternatives to assure the avoidance of impacts should be subject of compensatory I.99, I.100, I.102, I.105 measures, which should be effective before the implementation of the projects. Types of interventions / projects for flood protection works involving structural measures (e.g. dykes, M8 I.23, I.78 embankments) should be strictly limited to the protection of inhabited areas (localities).

Component/ Type of intervention/ projects to Measure impact type be applied In order to avoid negative impacts associated to structural measures for flood protection, it is necessary to take in consideration the implementation of non-structural measures (green M9 I.23, I.78 infrastructure) based on the knowledge database that will be generated by the DDISDS interventions under the Biodiversity domain and on the existing data on flooding limits. The interventions for afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural land in the Danube Delta region has to be done only after the identification and assessment of existing species and habitats in order M10 I.70 not to affect features of conservative interest. Only native species, specific to the area, has to be considered for planting. Considering the sensitivity of the study area (biosphere reserve, Natura 2000 sites, scientific reserves, M11 migration route etc.), the use of renewable energy sources should be restricted to small-scale projects I.15 (mainly households, public institutions). All interventions involving buildings rehabilitation should implement first an inspection on existing Interventions involving buildings M12 birds’ nests and bats roosts and propose adequate measures to avoid disturbance, damage or killing. rehabilitation The exploitation of any natural resources should be performed within the limit of their carrying M13 capacity and in this respect the identification of acceptable limits for exploitation should represent a I.14, I.15, I.52 study priority. For all types of interventions/ projects that have the potential to limit the species transit or migration (e.g. transport infrastructure, flood protection works), including rehabilitation of existing I.15, I.23, I.40, I.54, I.81-I.84, I.85, M14 infrastructure, there has to be identified and implemented feasible technical solutions, based on I.87 studies and adequate field investigations, which to ensure the highest degree of permeability and Mitigation avoidance of connectivity interruption between the habitats of the conservative interest species. All projects intersecting or located in the vicinity of reproduction habitats for birds and mammals of M15 conservation interest will implement measures to reduce noise and vibrations to levels which assures Transport projects disturbance avoidance. All interventions on banks of water bodies will be carried out so as to preserve or recreate spawning M16 I.23, I.78, I.85, I.88 grounds for fish and amphibians. M17 In the case of the interventions for irrigations and flood protection, it is preferable to rehabilitate I.23, I.65

Component/ Type of intervention/ projects to Measure impact type be applied existing infrastructure, construction of new ones being the last option. Development and modernization of airport infrastructure has to be performed based on thorough M18 assessment of birds’ activity, taking in consideration a much larger area than the project location due I.86 to the large distance on which disturbance of birds activity may appear. It is recommended to implement a work schedule which aims to plan the execution time of the works, for all types of interventions / projects involving constructions within or in the immediate vicinity of Natura 2000 habitats and Natura 2000 species habitats, so they would not affect critical areas31 for All types of interventions/ projects M19 species of community interest (e.g. to avoid working in the breeding / nesting months of bird species, that involve construction works the hibernation / reproduction months of some small mammals, during the months when amphibians lay eggs, during fish spawning period etc.). The interventions in agriculture should be conditioned by the implementation of a minimum set of M20 ecological agricultural principles (e.g. use of natural fertilizers, non-use of genetically modified Agriculture interventions organisms, non-use of antibiotic in livestock, etc.). All proposed projects/types of intervention has to include measures for avoiding installation of All types of interventions/ projects M21 invasive species, as well as their monitoring and control during the project lifetime. that involve construction works For all projects/types of interventions that propose construction works (except of the ecological All types of interventions/ projects M22 reconstruction works), it is recommended (where possible) to avoid the use of natural resources from that involve construction works inside natural protected areas. For all projects with potential negative impacts on Natura 2000 habitats and species it is necessary to All types of interventions/ projects Monitoring M23 implement multiannual monitoring programmes in order to assess residual impact, as well as the that involve physical interventions success of the implemented avoidance/mitigation/compensatory measures. with potential negative impacts

31 The critical areas for species of community interest mean: areas of shelter, hibernation, reproduction, feeding, nesting, which are found within habitats with high favorability for species under conservation in the Natura 2000 site.

5.2 MONITORING At the project phase, monitoring should focus both on impacts and on the efficiency of avoidance and mitigation measures. However, on the scale of the Study area, considering potential cumulative impacts with other activities the focus should be on impacts (positive and negative changes for each habitat and species of community interest). The monitoring system should be:

 Efficient (few and relevant indicators);  Well correlated with existing monitoring programs for related plans and programs, the most important in this case being the monitoring set for Large Infrastructure Operational Programme;  Well correlated with the management plans for Natura 2000 sites in the study area. The most relevant parameters for assessing the conservation status of Natura 2000 habitats and species are related to the habitat quality and coverage and populations size. One of the most difficult task in assessing the conservation status is the quantification of impacts on habitats and populations of the existing pressures and potential threats. Considering all the above, it is advisable that the monitoring program will be oriented towards providing quantitative information on changes in habitats quality and populations size. The proposed indicators are presented in Table no. 5-2.

Table no. 5-2 Monitoring indicators proposed for DDISDS No. Indicator Target Habitat loss. Surfaces of Natura 2000 habitats/ These surfaces should be insignificant at habitats of species of community interest inside the level of each Natura 2000 habitat/ 1. Natura 2000 sites irreversibly affected as a result of habitat of species of community interest the DDISDS interventions/ projects implementation which are subject of conservation in each * potentially affected Natura 2000 site Habitat alteration. Surfaces of Natura 2000 habitats/ habitats of species of community interest inside 2. Natura 2000 sites reversibly affected as a result of the DDISDS interventions/ projects construction * Disturbance. Surfaces of habitats of species of community interest inside Natura 2000 sites affected 3. by one or more disturbing factors (e.g. human presence, noise) as a result of the DDISDS interventions/ projects implementation * Mortality. Mortality of community interest fauna “0” mortality 4. species as a result of the DDISDS types of interventions/ projects construction and operation. Connectivity. Assessment of the success of measures As close to the situation established in for avoidance of ecological connectivity interruption the analysis regarding the baseline 5. (structures for permeability, lateral connectivity and conditions at the project phase longitudinal connectivity assurance). Habitat enhancement. Increased habitats surfaces In an ideal situation, it is expected that: 6. for species of community interest as a result of Habitat enhancement (ha) + interventions aimed at reducing the anthropic Compensatory measures (if any) (ha) >

No. Indicator Target pressures and ecological restoration. To be based on Habitat loss (ha) + Habitat alteration (ha) the confirmation of species presence and activity + Disturbance (ha). outside existing habitats. * It will be performed based on data collected for each species and each habitat type potentially affected, for all projects with potential negative impact on Natura 2000 species and habitats.

Remote sensing techniques (with various satellite platforms) and the use of GIS techniques are two important tools that can be applied successfully for monitoring the indicators mentioned above, respectively for providing quantitative information on changes in habitats quality and populations size, during DDISDS implementation. Remote sensing techniques allows for an impressive suite of wildlife ecology and habitat attributes to be modeled, predicted, and monitored through time, including land cover physiognomy, vegetation structure and condition, specific nutrient concentrations, overall productivity, and biomass etc. Based on these attributes, information on the distribution of shelter, shade, and nesting resources for wildlife, as well as potential to meet their metabolic needs, can be assessed32. Remote sensing is still relatively new, as a data source and analysis tool, and its data are often not well known and improperly handled. However, in the few decades that the data have been available, solid synthesis applications have emerged. For example, land-cover and change-detection analyses are two instances of remote sensing products that have become widely accepted in the various user communities. Thus, is expected that the linkages between ecologists and remote sensing scientists will be improved by addressing gaps in understanding through the establishment of widely accepted standards. There are several articles, along the time, that confirm the usefulness of remote sensing techniques and GIS tool in ecosystem management. A relevant study in Danube Delta, which reveals the importance of using satellite information in the knowledge of those elements and processes of geographic reality is “Utilizarea informaţiei satelitare în studiile de fundamentare a proiectelor de cooperare transfrontalieră în bazinul inferior al Dunării”, 2003, and is presenting several sectors where the use of satellite images and maps can be successfully achieved to address existing and future problems: Space surveillance supply (of rain and snow), of drainage system and particularly of the flash floods and floods; Lakes surveillance; River pollution sightings, meaning detection and prosecution of pollutant substances; Tracking transboundary air pollution; Morphohydrographic mapping mutations related to the evolution of meanders and islands, of the lakes, ponds and brooks evolution from the floodplain and delta, of deltaic shoreline evolution, can be based on records from space; Monitoring of the existing protected areas;

32 Critical Remote Sensing Contributions to Spatial Wildlife Ecological Knowledge and Management, 2009, Gregory J. McDermid , Nicholas C. Coops , Michael A. Wulder , Steven E. Franklin , and Nicole E. Seitz

Observation and mapping of crops, grassland, reeds and forests; Monitoring traffic on the Danube or Sulina Channel. Moreover, in the Needs Assessment Report, elaborated by the World Bank for shaping DDISDS, the use of the satellite images is also mentioned in the analysis of urban heat islands from the study area. They were determined based on satellite images provided by the USGS, processed and mapped using GIS techniques. Thus, we can conclude that the remote sensing, as well as GIS techniques, should be used in many of the interventions proposed within the DDISDS (sectors as Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Transport etc.), but especially in the case of those susceptible to generate loss or alterations of the Natura 2000 habitats/ habitats of species of community interest inside Natura 2000, as well as in the case of the interventions which will lead to the enhancement/ restoration of the habitats of species of conservation interest.

6 METHODS USED TO COLLECT INFORMATION ON POTENTIALLY AFFECTED SPECIES OF COMMUNITY INTEREST 6.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Due to the territorial extension of the analyzed DDISDS (Danube Delta Region: DDBR and its surrounding areas), the strategic level of the assessment approach, as well as the fact that most types of interventions/ projects are in an incipient stage of development (indicative routes/ locations), we mention the following critical issues that were taken into account in this study: This study did not involve field activities in order to gather information on potentially affected habitats and species of community interest. Information and relevant data were based on public information known until this moment (listed in Chapter 1 - General information), meetings organized both with the elaborators of the DDISDS (World Bank Group) and with key stakeholders from the DDISDS implementation area (primarily institutions such as the Tulcea County Council, Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Authority (DDBRA), Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development (DDNIRD), Environmental Protection Agencies, Department of Public Health, Department of Statistics, etc.); The analysis included only those geospatial resources that cover uniform and fully the study area (e.g. boundaries of protected natural areas of community interest, land use - CLC etc.); The analysis took into consideration the information contained in the management plans approved so far, namely “Măcin Mountains National Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcin and ROSPA0073 Măcin- Niculiţel Integrated Management Plan” aimed at only 2 of the 20 Natura 2000 sites present in the study area. For the most part of the Natura 2000 sites in the study area (18 of 20 Natura 2000 sites), Management Plans are not available at this time of the assessment; All information regarding the presence, population, pressures identified in the Natura 2000 sites in the study area, were extracted exclusively from the Natura 2000 sites factsheets, based on the assumption that the data contained within them (updated in accordance with Decision 2011/484/EU concerning a site information format for Natura 2000 sites and published on the MEWF website on February 17, 201533) are complete, actual and sufficient to conduct the evaluation; The impact assessment was performed for those types of interventions/projects with a specific location, based on GIS analysis, quantifying the areas of Natura 2000 sites in the study area that could be affected by the proposed types of interventions / projects (distances and impact surfaces were calculated based on Euclidean distance, without taking into account the digital terrain model). For other types of projects, those with approximate/ incomplete location and those for which no information is known about their location, impact assessment was based on the scoring system described in Section 4.3.1 (Table no. 4-19), the estimation of the magnitude of impact and the sensitivity of the area being based mainly on data and information from the literature, as well as on expert opinion; Information regarding the lists of potentially affected species and habitat due to the implementation of the DDISDS types of interventions / projects, relied solely on Romania’s reporting to the European Union under Article 12 of the Birds Directive and Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, which aim

33 http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/natura-2000/435

habitat mapping and species inventory from the Natura 2000 sites, available in SHP format34, based on the assumption that the data contained in them are complete, actual and sufficient to conduct the assessment.

6.2 LIMITATIONS This Appropriate Assessment study was developed in accordance to the best practices that can be applied at this strategic level, our desire being to achieve a more precise estimation of the main potential forms of impacts on the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region. Considering the multitude of assumptions and uncertainties and taking into account the available resources and information, the target that we set it may be considered too pretentious. Given these issues, we consider it necessary to mention that the results of this study should be interpreted with caution, representing only “a first overview” of the potential impact generated by the types of interventions/projects proposed under DDISDS on the network Natura 2000 sites and not a thorough evaluation of each type of habitat and each species of community interest in the study area. We believe that this analysis will be performed at the level of individual studies developed for each type of intervention/project, our study serving to indicate the necessity to conduct subsequent appropriate assessment studies at the individual project level, namely to guide future assessments, for those projects/types of interventions that are likely to have a potentially negative impact on Natura 2000 sites, and not to provide details on the specific impact of each type of intervention/project. The main limitations of this study relate primarily to the GIS analysis, but not only, consisting of:  The activities concerning the inventory, mapping and assessment of the conservation status of habitats and species of community interest is still ongoing. For example, according to “Măcin Mountains National Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcin and ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel Integrated Management Plan” these inventory, mapping and evaluation activities have been completed, but those of the “Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve management plan” are still ongoing;  The only geospatial datasets on the range and distribution of habitats and species of community interest are Romania’s reports to the European Union under Article 12 of the Birds Directive and Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, which cover the entire study area, being available only in 10 x 10 km grids;  Not all of the proposed interventions/projects have been spatially located as a result of the unavailability of their locations at the time of the assessment. For some of them, for that indicative locations/routes were not provided, spatial location was performed through digitization using Google Earth Pro satellite images, according to the information available in the project title (approximate/incomplete location: “approximate” in the case of WSS and IWM projects for which the limit of the land into the build-up area was considered in the analysis, namely “incomplete” for projects like “Improving fish habitat” from the “Fisheries and Aquaculture” sector, where only 2 lakes are included in the first phase, after which a series of interventions on other lakes will be identified, which locations are not mentioned in this phase). Thus, most of the sites/routes are likely to suffer significant changes in the future. On the other hand, we note that there is another category of projects for which localization was not possible

34http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal, http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal

using satellite images (no information about their location) that were not included in the analysis and their inclusion could lead to a different result of DDISDS impact on the national network of Natura 2000 sites;  The assessment of the sensitivity of the areas within Danube Delta Region was achieved through considering five sensitivity classes common to all taxonomic groups (listed in Section 4.2). The chosen method, represents the best approach (in the absence of Natura 2000 species inventory and habitat mapping) used to provide a wider picture about the impacts of the implementation of the types of interventions/projects proposed under DDISDS on the national network of Natura 2000 sites, but it cannot capture the importance of the sites territories for each type of habitat and each species of community interest. Such an analysis can be achieved only at the level of a site or a project;  GIS analysis was based on using standard dimensions of the projects (e.g. all county roads were considered to have the same width) and of the impact distances (e.g. for all road projects were considered that noise affects an area of 700 m calculated from the center of the road). It is obvious that such an approach can cause overestimation in some cases and underestimation in other cases of the generated impact.

7 CONCLUSIONS DDISDS is a long-awaited strategy having the capacity to assure that the development of Danube Delta area will be built on solid foundation, by conserving the natural capital. DDISDS has several ambitious interventions aiming to restore the natural processes on several transformed areas, to reduce pollution and to identify and reduce other existing pressures on wildlife. However, the Strategy contains also a set of interventions susceptible to generate significant negative effects on Natura 2000 components. This report propose a simple methodology for identification and assessment of impacts in accordance with the Strategy level of details and the available information on the presence and conservation status of Natura 2000 habitats and species. Though GIS was used as a supporting tool for the assessment, the early stages of development for most of the Strategy projects do not allow proper quantification of impacts. For conducting the assessment, the types of interventions/ projects were classified by their location and the possibility of spatial delimitation for the related impact areas in 5 categories: Type A (90 types of intervetions / projects) - projects for which the location is not relevant for analysis, Type B (24 types of intervetions / projects) - projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but no information is yet available on their location, Type C (15 types of intervetions / projects) - projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/ incomplete location), Type D (4 types of intervetions / projects) - projects with a specific location but the area of impact cannot be clearly defined, Type E (6 types of intervetions / projects) - projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined. Most of the projects are intersecting or placed inside existing Natura 2000 sites. At least for the E type project it was estimated that a number of 15 types of habitats, 6 species of plants, 13 of invertebrates, 19 of fish, 12 of amphibians, 9 of reptiles, 25 of mammals and 45 of birds of community interest, may be affected by the implementation of the proposed projects. Among these, 3 species of fish (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii, Acipenser stellatus and Huso huso) are listed as CR (Critically Endangered) and 1 species of birds (Falco cherrug) is listed as EN (Endangered) on the IUCN Red List. Interventions which are most likely to generate negative effects are represented by projects proposing construction works (transportation, flood risk management, channels rehabilitation, ports rehabilitation or rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure). The significant negative effects are registred for the taxonomical groups: habitats/ vegetation, fish and birds. Habitats are likely to be the most affected Natura 2000 component considering the transportation projects, the rehabilitation of ports and the rehabilitation of Sulina Channel. Fishes are the taxonomic group that accumulate the most positive effects (approx. 23.7 % of the total assessment scores), given especially the interventions from the Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management and Fisheries and Aquaculture sectors (eg. I.5 Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water circulation and key habitat areas, respectively I.44 Improve fish habitat), which influences directly the aquatic ecosystems. All interventions aiming to restore water circulation, natural ecosystems and habitats are of great importance for the study area and are most likely to generate significant benefits for most of the Natura 2000 components. However, it should be emphasise that even these interventions can generate impact on protected aquatic species (particularly species with low mobility) which should be addressed by proper avoidance and mitigation measures and that the success of these projects should preferably not be based on constructive solutions requiring continuous human intervention (e.g. installation of stop locks for sedimentation reduction).

The overall results of the assessment indicates that the positive effects generated by the proposed interventions/ projects of DDISDS is of 57 %, while the total of negative effects is of 43 %. The positive effects are mostly associated with the interventions from Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management, Pollution Emergency, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM), Solid Waste Management and Education sectors, while the negative effects are associated with the interventions from Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (I.12 – I.14), Energy Efficiency (I.15 and I.17), Disaster Risk Management (DRM), Tourism, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Transport and other (I.139 Urban Renewal Interventions) sectors. Types of intervetions / projects susceptible to generate significant negative effects are:  I.81 Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanţa – Tulcea – Măcin – Brăila;

 I.88 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel. Of the above mentioned types of intervetions / projects only the modernisation of Sulina Channel it may be able to generate long distance effects which cannot be correctly estimated at this time due to the lack of projects’ details (a new feasibility study will be elaborated). Also, for the implementation of the project for Sulina Channel rehabilitations was suggested, along several proposed measures, to include solutions to avoid long term and long distance effects, to avoid habitat loss and to reduce to minimum extent the alteration of fish habitats. In order to avoid and reduce the expected impacts on the Natura 2000 species and habitats, a set of 23 avoidance and mitigation measures were proposed. Their aim is to eliminate the significant negative impacts, as well as to reduce other negative impacts. Probably the most import measure, to assure the vision of DDISDS is applied, is the prioritisation of interventions. No physical intervention should be started in the absence of sufficient knowledge on Natura 2000 components distribution and assessment of conservation status, in the absence of a predictive model for water and sediment flow or without knowing the carrying capacity of ecosystems and their main resources (fish, reed, water availability). Any significant impact has the potential to affect the conservation status of Natura 2000 habitats and species. In order to assure that all impacts are adequate avoided and mitigates, a monitoring program based on 6 indicators, which should be well correlated with the management plans for Natura 2000 sites in the study area and well correlated with existing monitoring programs for related plans and programs, was proposed for the DDISDS.

8 REFERENCES 1. A. Constantinescu, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Hymenoptera (Apoidea - Fam. Colletidae), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 2. A. D. Sandor, I. Moldovan, S. Bugariu, First breeding record of the Citrine Wagtail (Motacilla citreola) in Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2007; 3. A. D. Sandor, S. Bugariu, Food habits of the Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) in Cheile Dobrogei Gorge, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2008; 4. A. Dorosencu, V. Pocora, C. Ion, Considerations about the observations and the performed ring putting on birds in Furtuna, Maliuc and Vadu (the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve), Analele Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii „Al.I.Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom L, 2004; 5. A. Murgoci, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Trichoptera, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 6. A. Papadopol, Considerations on the dynamics of some birds in connection with the Danube and Black Sea shore in Romania, Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa”, 1968; 7. A. Popescu-Gorj, Données nouvelles pour la connaissance de la faune de Lépidoptères du Delta du Danube (Île de Letea) - Roumanie, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. VII, 1967; 8. A. Popescu-Gorj, I. Drăghia, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Lepidoptera, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 9. A. Popescu-Gorj, Nouvelles données pour la connaissance des lépidopteres de Sulina et du "Grind" Caraorman (Delta du Danube), Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. X, 1970; 10. A. Popescu-Gorj, Pourquoi il faut pro-ger toute la Foret Letea (Delta du Danube) oasis faunistique unique dans le paysage d'europe, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol XXXII, p 185-192, 1992; 11. A. Popescu-Gorj, X. Scolobiola-Palade, L'entomofaune de l'île de Letea (Delta du Danube). Introduction, généralités, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 12. A.D. Sandor , J. B. Kiss, C. Domşa, The importance of Northern Dobrogea in the miogration of the Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), cientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2009; 13. A.D. Sandor, The diet of wintering Barn Owls (Tyto alba) in the region of Histria, the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2008; 14. Alexe, V., Kiss, J. B., Marinov, E. M., 2011, “Preliminary data concerning ornithofauna of the Babadag lake area”, Tulcea, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Vol. 17, 2011; 15. Almăşan H., 1985, Consideraţii privind valorificarea resurselor cinegetice ale Deltei Dunării în condiţiile menţinerii echilibrului ecologic. In: Delta Dunării, Studii şi comunicări ecologice, vol. 1, 71- 76; 16. Almăşan H., 1993, Consideraţii privind valorificarea resurselor cinegetice ale Deltei Dunării în condiţiile menţinerii echilibrului ecologic, Studii şi comunicări de ecologie, Muzeul Delta Dunării; 17. Andrei M., 1963a, Aspecte din vegetaţia Dealului Denis Tepe (Dobrogea), An. Univ. Bucureşti, Ser. Şt. Nat.-Biol., 38: 37-47;

18. Andrei M., 1963b, Plante noi şi rare pentru flora regiunilor Dobrogea şi Galaţi, An. Univ. Bucureşti, Ser. Şt. Nat.-Biol., 38: 49-54; 19. Andrei M., colab., 1967b, Aspecte din vegetaţia Culmii Pricopan şi împrejurimi, St. cerc. Biol., Ser. Bot., 19(3): 247-263; 20. Andrei M., Popescu A., 1967a, Caracterizarea floristică a Culmii Pricopan şi împrejurimi, Stud. Cercet. Biol., Ser. Bot., 19(1): 33-40; 21. Antipa Gr., 1910, Regiunea inundabilă a Dunării. Starea ei actuală şi mijloace de a o pune în valoare, Editura Institutului de Arte Geografice ”C. Gogl.”, Bucureşti; 22. Antipa Gr., 1914, Câteva probleme ştiinţifice şi economice privitoare la Delta Dunării, Analele Academiei Române, Secţ. Ştiinţ., Seria II, 36; 23. Antipa Gr., 1942, Valorificarea stufăriilor Deltei Dunării, Analele Academiei Române, XVIII 24. Asociaţia Grupului Milvus, 2007, “Studiul migraţiei păsărilor răpitoare diurne din Munţii Măcinului 2002 – 2007”, http://milvus.ro/twined-group; 25. Asociaţia Grupului Milvus, 2011, “Studiul migraţiei de toamnă a păsărilor răpitoare din Dobrogea – 2010, 2011”, http://milvus.ro/twined-group; 26. B. Kalocsa, A.E.Tamas, Preliminary results of the bird ringing during autumn migration at the Grinul Lupilor Ornithological Monitoring Centre, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2006; 27. B. Kalocsa, E. A. Tamás, M. Reed, M. Marinov, Evaluation of bird ringing data at the Grindul Lupilor Ornithological Monitoring Centre from 2004 to 2009, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2010; 28. Bacalbaşa-Dobrovici, N., 1994, Evoluţia elementelor critice pentru menţinerea sturionilor în Dunărea inferioară, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 191 – 194; 29. Barber, J. R., Crooks, K. R. and Fristrup, K. M. (2010). The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 180-189; 30. Barbu P., 1969, Sur la systématique et la distribution des petits mammifères du Delta du Danube, Anal. Univ. Bucureşti, Biol. Anim., 18:89-99; 31. Bălăşescu A., 2000, Aşezarea neolitică de la Isaccea, puctul Suhat, jud. Tulcea, Studiul preliminar asupra faunei descoperite la Isaccea-Suhat (cultura Boian-Giuleşti). In: Istro-Pontica, Muzeul tulcean la a 50-a aniversare, 10-12; 32. Beldie Al., 1977-1979, Flora României, Determinator ilustrat al plantelor vasculare, I-II, Bucureşti: Edit. Acad. Române; 33. Beldie Al., Ionescu A., 1959, Un nou arbore în flora R.P.R., Comunic. Academiei Române 9(3): 249- 252; 34. Borza Al., 1931, Die Excursionsrute durch die Dobrogea und das Donau Delta. Guide de la Sixiéme Exc. Phyt. Intern. Roumanie, Cluj, 130-143; 35. Borza Al., 1963a, Fitocenoze specifice pentru ţara noastră. I., Acta Bot. Horti Bucurest., f. II: 779-784; 36. Borza Al., 1963b, Importanţa stabilirii elementelor floristice în studiul geobotanic al vegetaţiei de la Babadag, Com. Acad. R.P.R., XIII, 5: 421-425; 37. Boşcaiu N., colab., 1989, Evaluarea stadiului actual al protecţiei florei României, Ocr. nat. med. înconj., 33(1): 49-52;

38. Buică, G., 2011, Preliminary data on carapace health of Testudo graeca from cetatea Histria, Dobrudja county, Ovidius University Annals of Natural Sciences, Biology – Ecology Series, Volume 15, p. 37 – 39; 39. Bunesco A., 1959, Contribution à l'étude de la répartition géographique de quelques mammiféres méditerranéens en Roumanie, Säugetierkunde Mitteilungen, 7(1): 1-4; 40. Burduja C., 1954, Note floristice relative la Moldova şi Dobrogea (cu unele observaţiuni asupra vegetaţiei de dune), St. cerc. şt., Acad. R.P.R., Fil. Iaşi, 1-2: 337-361; 41. Burduja C., colab., 1971, Contribution a l’etude de la végétation antropophile de la Moldova et Dobrogea (Roumanie), An. Şt. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, XVII, s. II, a. Biol., f. 2: 405-411; 42. C. Fântână, J. Szabo, A. Bertalan, Tricky Wheatear (Oenanthe sp.) in Dobrogea, Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development , Tulcea – Romania, 2005; 43. C. Ion, V. Pocora, The composition of the avifauna on the Lupilor ground in the migratory period, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii “Al.I. Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom LI, 2005; 44. C. Pârvu, Hilara deltaica n. sp. from the Danube Delta and other data on some Hilara species (Diptera Empididae) of Romania, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXXIV, 1994; 45. Călinescu R., 1931, Mamiferele României. II. Ordinul Chiropterelor, Buletinul Ministerului Agriculturii şi Domenii, ser. III., anul 2, vol. I., nr. 1-2, Imprimeria naţională, Bucureşti, 25-30; 46. Călinescu R., 1931, Mamiferele României. Repartiţia şi problemele lor biogeografice-economice, Buletinul Ministerului Agriculturii şi Domeniilor, 66-68; 47. Călinescu R., 1934, Les mammiféres de la Dobroudja et surtout ceux du littoral de la Mer Noire, Ann. Scient. Univ. Jassy, 19: 373-374; 48. Cernişescu, I., Staraş, M., Năvodaru, I., 1994, Studiu comparativ privind exploatarea populaţiilor de caras (Carassius auratus gibelio) din lacurile Razim şi Puiu – Roşu, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 233 – 240; 49. Cerveny, J., 1982, Notes on the Bat Fauna (Chiroptera) of Romanian Dobrogea, Nyctalus 1 (4/5): 349-357; 50. Chihaia P., 1979, Pădurile Dobrogei, Rev. Ştiinţifică, 10: 184-198; 51. Chiriţă C.D., 1977, Staţiuni forestiere, Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti; 52. CIOCÂRLAN V. 1994. Flora Deltei Dunării. Cormophyta. Bucureşti: Editura Ceres; 53. CIOCÂRLAN V. 2009. Flora ilustrată a României. Pteridophyta et Spermatophyta. Bucureşti: Editura Ceres; 54. Ciocârlan V., 1988-1990, Flora ilustrată a României. Determinarea şi descrierea speciilor spontane şi cultivate. I-II, ed. a 1a, Edit. Ceres; 55. Ciocârlan V., colab., 1998, Flora Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării, Addenda et corrigenda, Bul. Grăd. Bot. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, 7: 97-100; 56. Clonaru A., 1967, Cultura plopului şi salciei în Lunca Dunării, Editura Agro-Silvica, Bucureşti; 57. Coldea G., Sanda V., Popescu A., Ştefan N., 1997, Les associations végétales de Roumanie. Tome 1. Les associations herbacées naturelles, Presses Universitaires de Cluj, pg. 261; 58. Constantin, Gh., Năvodaru, I., Cernişescu, I., 1993, Cercetări privind prolificitatea unor specii de peşti de interes economic din Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 239 – 243;

59. Constantin, Gh., Năvodaru, I., Cernişescu, I., 1995, Cercetări privind parazitofauna unor specii de peşti exploataţi comercial din complexul de lacuri Roşu – Puiu, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 83 – 86; 60. Cotta V., Andone Gh., 1969, Fauna cinegetică. Aspecte actule. ”Cercetări forestiere şi cinegetice în Delta Dunării”, Editura Agrosilvică Bucureşti, 99-107; 61. Cristurean I., Ionescu-Ţeculescu V., 1970, Asociaţii vegetale din Rezervaţia naturală „Pădurea Hagieni”, Acta Bot. Horti Bucurest., Bucureşti, 245-279; 62. Cuzic M., Marinov M., Cuzic V., 2002, American mink (Mustela vison) – A new mammal species of the DDBR territory, Scientific annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Research and Development, Tulcea; 63. Cuzic M., Murariu D., 2008, Ghidul ilustrat al mamiferelor sălbatice din România, Editura Dobrogea, Constanţa; 64. Cuzic, V., Petrescu, M., “Studiul avifaunei şi habitatelor din Podişul Dobrogean în scopul dezvoltării reţelei de arii protejate”, Delta Dunării III, Tulcea, p. 153 – 164, 2006; 65. D. Bota, V. Oţel, R. Suciu, J. B. Kiss, L.M. Rasmussen, Un sistem îmbunătăţit de monitorizare a păsărilor din Delta Dunării, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1993; 66. Dămăceanu, C., Leandru, V., Ceuca, G., 1964, Cercetări privind ameliorarea pădurilor degradate din nordul Dobrogei, Editura Agro-Silvică, Bucureşti; 67. Diakov O., Zakorchevnaya N., Nesterenko M., Kovbasko O., Zhmud M., Plotnitskiy L., 2012, Vulnerability of the Danube Delta region to climate change, Synthesis report, Moldova, Romania, Ukraine; 68. DIHORU G., NEGREAN G. 2009. Cartea roşie a plantelor vasculare din România. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei Române; 69. Dihoru Gh., 1962, Insula de fagi din Dobrogea, Natura, Ser. Biol., 14(3): 49-52; 70. Dihoru Gh., Negrean G., 1976, Flora of the Danube Delta, Peuce V., Muzeul Delta dunării, Tulcea; 71. Dinu C., 1987, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea resurselor vegetale din zona Cheia - Munţii Măcinului, Cul. St. Art. Biol., Grăd. Bot. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, 3: 244-246; 72. Done A., 2007, Contribuţii la monitorizarea liliecilor în adăposturile subterane din nord-estul României, Miscelanea Chiropterologica, Suceava, 2: 39-44; 73. Doniţă N., 1966, Câteva probleme ale studiului vegetaţiei forestiere din Dobrogea de Nord, Referate şi Comunic. Şti., prezentate la Ses. Şti. În probleme de Silvicultură, 23-24 V; 74. Doniţă N., Ivan D., 1992, Vegetaţia Dobrogei, Deltei Dunării şi complexului lagunar Razelm, In Doniţă N. et al. (eds.), Vegetaţia României. Edit. Tehn. Agric., Bucureşti, pag.: 82-100; 75. Doroftei, M., Contribution of: Marian Mierlă, Silviu Covaliov, Cristina Nanu, Gabriel Lupu (DDNI) 23.1.2013, Habit-Change. Climate change adapted management plan for Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, project implemented through the CENTRAL EUROPE Programme co-financed by the ERDF; 76. Doroftei, M., Mierlă, M.,. Lupu, G., martie 2011, Approaches to habitat disturbances in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Studii şi Cercetări, Biologie, 20/ 1, p. 46 – 56, Universitatea”Vasile Alecsandri” din Bacău; 77. Doroftei M., Mierlă M., Danube Delta habitats versus climate change, Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, no. 165 Babadag street, 820112-Tulcea, Romania, BALWOIS 2012 - Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia - 28 May, 2 June 2012;

78. Dragomir N.I., Kiss, J.B., 1972, Probleme ale cercetării cinegetice în Delta Dunării. In: Simpozionul ”Noi orientări în cercetarea cinegetică”, Academia R.S.R., Academia de Ştiinţe Agricole şi Silvice, Bucureşti, 58-73; 79. Dumitrescu M., 1969, Importanţa ştiinţifică a Peşterii Liliecilor de la Gura Dobrogii şi a Peşterii ”La Adam”, Ocrotirea naturii, Bucureşti, 13(2): 139-148; 80. Dumitrescu M., Orghidan T., Tanasachi J., 1958, Peştera de la Gura Dobrogei, Anuarul Comitetului Geologic, 31: 462-484; 81. Dumitrescu M., Tanasachi J., Orghidan T., 1962-1963, Răspândirea chiropterelor în R.P. Română, Lucr. Inst. Speol. ”Emil Racoviţă”, 1-2: 509-576; 82. E. Bulankova, P. Beracko, T. Derka, Occurrence of protected species (Gomphus flavipes, Odonata and Palingenia longicauda, Ephemeroptera) in the Danube River and its deltas (Romania, Slovakia), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea, 2013; 83. Ene, C., Suciu, R., Ene, F., Dumitrache, C., 1995, Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în Dunăre (I) Date recente privind hrana sturionilor în zona Gurilor Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 91 – 94; 84. Ene, F., Ene, C., Suciu, R., 1995 ,Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în Dunăre (II) Malformaţii ale înotătoarelor la exemplarele cantonate în faţa Gurilor Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 95 – 100; 85. Făgăraş M., colab., 2001, The ecological and floristical characterization of Salicornietum europeae Wendelbg. 1953 association on Saele (Istria) sand bank, Acta Horti Bot. Bucurest., 29: 199-207; 86. Filat M., Benea V.I., Nicolae C.C.R., Daia M.L., Neţoiu C., 2009, Cultura plopilor, a sălciilor şi a altor specii forestiere în zona inundabilă a Dunării, Editura Silvică, Bucureşti; 87. Filat M., Condac M., Greavu M., 1995, Consideraţii privind starea şi evaluarea unor specii sedentare de vânat din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, Tulcea, 259-264; 88. Foreman Richard T.T., Alexander L.E., 1998, Roads and their major ecological effects, Annual Review of Ecological Systems 29:207-231; 89. G. Chişamera, V. Pocora, M. Gogu - Bogdan, Costicã Adam, Phenology and biometrics of Moustached Warbler Acrocephalus melanopogon (Passeriformes: Sylviidae) in Romania, Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa”, 2010; 90. G. Lupu, Ortopterele din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Deltaica nr. 2, Tulcea, 2013; 91. G. Lupu, Zoogeographic distribution and habitat preferences of Orthoptera species (Insecta) from Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea, 2013; 92. GÂŞTESCU P., ROMULUS Ş., 2008, Delta Dunării – Rezervaţie a Biosferei. Ed.: CD PRESS, Bucureşti; 93. Gâştescu P., Ştiucă R.., 2008, Delta Dunării – rezervaţie a biosferei, Editura CD PRESS, Bucureşti; 94. Gâştescu, P., Ştiucă, R., 2008, Delta Dunării Rezervaţie a Biosferei, Editura CD Press; 95. Georgescu C.C., 1928, Contribuţiuni la studiul pădurilor din Dobrogea de Nord, In Borza A. , Pop E. (eds.), Întâiul Congres Naţional al naturaliştilor din Românie, ţinut la Cluj de la 18 până la 21 aprilie 1928, Cluj., 162-170; 96. Gherghel, I., Iftime, A., 2009, On a record of largest specimen of Triturus dobrogicus (Kiritzescu 1903) from the Danube Delta, Romania, Biharean Biologist, Vol. 3, No.1, Pp.: 83-85, Article No.: 031201;

97. Gomoiu, M. - T., 1996, Facts and remarks on the Danube Delta, Geo-Eco-Marina, Romanian Centre of Marine Geology and Geoecology, Danube Delta – Black Sea System under Global Changes Impact, p. 70 – 82; 98. Gotea V., Kranz A., 2000, The European mink (Mustela lutreola) in the Danube Delta. In: Small Carnivore Conservation, vol. 21, 23-25; 99. Greavu M., 2006, Studiu privind stabilirea tehnologiilor de reconstrucţie ecologică a pădurilor în declin din incintele din Delta Dunării care urmează a fi regenerate în sezonul următor, Referat ştiinţific parţial, Tulcea; 100. Grecescu D., 1898, Conspectul Florei României. Plantele vasculare indigene şi cele naturalizate ce se găsesc pe teritoriul României, considerate subt punctul de vedere sistematic şi geografic, Tipografiea Dreptatea, Bucureşti: 1-836; 101. Grinţescu, G., 1927, Crearea legală a primei rezervaţiuni a naturei, Institutul de Arte Grafice Eminescu, Bucureşti; 102. Halpern, B., Major, A., Pechy, T., Marinov, M., Kiss, B., 2006, Vipera ursinii moldavica populations of the Romanian Danube-Delta, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 12, no. 7, p. 33 – 38; 103. Hamar M., 1960, Cercetări asupra repartiţiei geografice a speciilor de rozătoare din P.P.R., Natura, 1: 75-83; 104. Hanganu J., Dubyna D., Zhmud E., Grigoraş I., Menke U., Drost H., Ştefan N., Sârbu I., 2002, Vegetation of the Biosphere Reserve ”Danube Delta” with Transbaundary Vegetation Map, sc. 1:161.000, Danube Delta National Institute Romania, Institute Botany and Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Ukraine and RIZA The Netherlands; 105. Hanganu J., Teodor C., Ştefan N., 1992, Caracteristicile biometrice ale stufului în primul an de la incendierea sau recoltare pe solurile organice sulfatice natante din Delta Dunării, Analele Şt. Inst. Delta Dunării, Tulcea; 106. Holostenco, D., Onără, D. F., Suciu, R., Honţ, Ş., Paraschiv, M.,2013, Distribution and genetic diversity of sturgeons feeding in the marine area of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 4, p. 25 – 34, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.04; 107. Horeanu Cl., 1970, Contribuţii la flora Dobrogei, Lucr. Şt., Inst. Ped., Galaţi, IV: 181-186; 108. Horeanu Cl., 1976a, Propuneri pentru înfinţarea unor noi rezervaţii în Podişul Casimcea, Ocrotirea naturii dobrogene, Cluj Napoca, 158-165; 109. Horeanu Cl., 1976b, Vegetaţia pajiştilor xerofile din Podişul Casimcea (Dobrogea), Peuce. Muz. Deltei Dunării, Tulcea, 5: 335-346; 110. Horeanu Cl., 1976c, Vegetaţia lemnoasă din Podişul Casimcea, Peuce V, Tulcea, 347-355; 111. I. Drăghia, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Insectes mineurs, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 112. I. Socegolev, M. Marinov, Speciile de Passeriformedin zonele umede de pe litoralul vestic al Mării Negre, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1997 113. Ifrim I., Pocora V., 2007, Preliminary aspects about the specific composition of the bats fauna from three caves of Dobrogea, Anal. Ştiin. Univ. ”Al. I. Cuza” din Iaşi, Sect. Biol. Animală, 53:239-244; 114. Iliescu, M., 1993, Ihtiofauna lagunei Sinoie, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 93 – 97;

115. Inaşcu M., 1971, Cercetări în vederea îmbogăţirii faunei Deltei cu noi specii de vânat (fazan, căprior, cerb lopătar, nutrie) pe grindurile Letea, Caraorman şi zonele limitrofe, Manuscris la Institutul de Cercetări şi Proiectări pentru Delta Dunării; 116. Ionescu G., 2010, Castor fiber – specie reintrodusă. In: Managementul şi monitoringul Speciilor de Animale Natura 2000 din România, Ghid metodologic, Bucureşti, 75-81; 117. Ionescu G., Ionescu O., Paşca Cl., Sîrbu G., Jurj R., Popa M., Vişan M., Popescu I., 2010, Castorul în România. Monografie 158 p., Editura Silvică, Bucureşti; 118. Ionescu G., Troidl C., 1997, Beaver project România. A reintroduction with special focus on antropic factors, European Beaver Symposium Bratislava, Slovakia, p. 29; 119. Iordache, V., 2009, Ecotoxicologia metalelor grele în lunca Dunării, Editura Ars Docendi, Universitatea din Bucureşti; 120. Ivan D., 1979, Fitocenologie şi vegetaţia R.S.R., Ed. Didactică şi Pedagogică, Bucureşti; 121. J. B. Kiss, A.D. Sandor, The diet of wintering Long-eared Owls in Tulcea, Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development , Tulcea – Romania, 2003-2004; 122. J. B. Kiss, D. Hulea, E. Petrescu, E. Ballon, M. Marinov, Dobrogea-România, the main wintering area for Branta ruficollis (Red-breasted Goose), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1997; 123. J. B. Kiss, Data Regarding Antagonistic Relationships of the Common Tern (Sterna hirundo L.) at the Mouths of the Danube, Revista Delta Dunării III , Tulcea, 2006; 124. J. B. Kiss, Gasca de Nil – Atopochen aegyptacus – în apropierea Tulcei, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1994; 125. J. B. Kiss, J. Rekasi, Date privind hrana în Delta Dunării a unor specii de păsări granivore şi insectivore strict protejate, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1995; 126. J. B. Kiss, J. Rékási, I. Sterbetz, Z. Török, Insects as Food of Corvidae from the Northern Dobrudja, Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004; 127. J. B. Kiss, M. Condac, Inelări la pelicani şi evaluarea sincronă a ornitofaunei acvatice pe teritoriul RBDD executate de catre Corpul de Pază şi Intervenţie Tulcea, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1992; 128. J. B. Kiss, M. Marinov, V. Alexe, Preliminary data on the ornithological fauna of the islet forming in the south part of Musura Gulf, between Stambulul Vechi (Ukraine) and Sulina (Romania) branches of the Danube, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2008; 129. J. B. Kiss, Sándor D. Attila, M. Marinov, O. OVERDIJK, New data regarding the migration of spoonbills (Platalea leucorodia) breeding in the Danube Delta, based on color ring resightings, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2007; 130. J. B. Kiss, V. Alexe, A. Doroşencu, M. Marinov, Sándor D. Attila, Situaţia actuală şi preferinţele faţă de locurile de cuibărit ale codalbului (Haliaeetus albicilla) în Delta Dunării (România), Revista de silvicultură şi cinegetică, Nr. 32 , 2013; 131. J. B. Kiss, V. Alexe, M. Marinov, Sándor D. Attila, Data on the distribution of the Greater Black- headed Gull (Larus ichthyaetus Pall. 1773) and its breeding in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2010; 132. J. Rekasi, J. B. Kiss, Date privind Malofagele (Mallophaga) păsărilor din Delta Dunării, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1994;

133. J. Rekasi, J. B. Kiss, New data on birdlices (Mallophala) of rare birds from northern Dobrogea (Romania), Sesiunea Ştiinţifică a ICPDD - Tulcea, 12-14 mai 1998; 134. J. Rekasi, J. B. Kiss, Zs. Torok, Date asupra Malofagelor (Mallophaga) parazite ale speciilor de păsări din Delta Dunării, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996; 135. J.B. Kiss, M. Zenatello, L. Szabo, M. Marinov, Data on the breeding ecology of the Rose-coloured Starling - Sturnus roseus (L.) in Dobrudja, Romania in 2002-2003, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2003-2004; 136. J.B.Kiss, Dermapterele din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiilţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, 1994; 137. Jakucs P., Fekete G., Gergely J., 1959, Angaben zur Vegetation von der Moldau und Dobrudscha, Ann. Hist.-Nat., Mus. Nat. Hung., 51: 211-225; 138. Kiss J. B., Marinov M., Alexe V., 2011, Négylábú jövevények a Duna-deltában. IN: Erdélyi Nimród, Október; 139. Kiss J.B., Doroşencu Al., Marinov M., Alexe V., Bozagievici R., 2012, Considerations regarding the occurrence of the Eurasian Beaver (Castor fiber Linnaeus 1758) in the Danube Delta (Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea, 49-56; 140. Kranz A., Polednik L., Gotea V., 2001, Conservation of the European Mink (Mustela lutreola), in the Danube Delta backgroind information and project plan, Analele Ştiinţifice ale I.N.C.D.D.D., Tulcea, 124-129; 141. Kranz A., Toman A., Kiss J.B., 2003, The European mink in the Danube Delta – Distribution – Habitats – Threats. In: International Conference on the Conservation of the European mink, 5-8 November 2003, Logrono-Spania, 24-25; 142. Kranz A., Toman A., Polednikova K., Polednik L., Kiss J.B., 2004, Distribution, status and conservation of the European mink (Mustela lutreola) in the Danube Delta. In: Analele Ştiinţifice INCDDD, vol. 10, 38-44; 143. L. Petrencu, C. Ion and E. Baltag, The distribution of wader birds in Eastern Romania, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom LVII, 2011; 144. Lode T., Cormier J.P., Jacques D., 2001, Decline in endangered species as an indication of anthropic pressures: the case of European Mink Mustela lutreola western population. In: Environmental Management, vol. 28.4, 727-735; 145. Lupe I. Z., 1954, Cercetări privind cultura speciilor de Quercus de diferite provenienţe în stepa centrală a Dobrogei, Bul. Şt., Acad. R.P.R., Secţ. Şt. Biol., Agron., Geol., Geogr., VI, 3: 803-836; 146. M. GAUTHIER-CLERC, Y. KAYSER, J. B. Kiss, Diet and clutch size of Squacco Heron (Ardeola ralloides) in the Danube Delta (Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2004; 147. M. KOLESNYKOVA, S. UTEVSKY, New Ukrainian records of Branchiobdella parasita (Annelida: Clitellata: Branchiobdellida) from the Danube basin, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea, 2013; 148. M. Marinov, D. Hulea, Dinamica coloniilor mixte de cormorani şi stârci din Delta Dunării, în perioada 1959-1995, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996; 149. M. Marinov, D. Hulea, M. Condac, Dinamica avifaunei din RBDD în corelaţie cu principalii factori de mediu, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996; 150. M. Marinov, D. Hulea, Stârcul de cireadă (Bulbucus ibis) – o nouă specie cuibăritoare în Delta Dunării, Sesiunea Ştiinţifică a ICPDD, 1998;

151. M. Marinov, Tendinţe actuale ale evoluţiei avifaunei în RBDD, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1995; 152. M. Paspaleva, J. B. Kiss, M. Talpeanu, Les oiseaux coloniaux dans le Delta du Danube, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol XXVII, p 289-304, 1985; 153. M. Paspaleva, J. B. Kiss, M. Tălpeanu, Sur la dynamique de quelques especies d’oiseaux dominants dans le Delta du Danube, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXV, p. 313 – 329, 1984; 154. M. Platteeuw, J. B. Kiss, M. Y. Zhmund, N. Sadoul, Large colonial waterbirds in the Romanian and Ukrainian Danube Delta: a complete survey in 2001/2002, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2006; 155. M. Platteeuw, J. B. Kiss, M. Ye. Zhmud, N. Sadoul, Colonial waterbirds and their habitat use in the Danube Delta as an example of a large-scale natural wetland, Institute for Inland Water Management and Waste Water Treatment RIZA, 2004; 156. M. Platteeuw, J. B. Kiss, N. Sadoul, Survey of colonial breeding birds in romanian Danube Delta, May-June 2001, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development , Tulcea – Romania, 2000-2001; 157. M. Schmitz, C. Sudfeldt, H. Legge, K. Mantel, P. Weber & M. Marinov, Spring migration of waders in the Razim-Sinoie lagoon system south of the Danube Delta, Romania, Wader Study Group Bull. 90:59 – 64, 1999; 158. M. Weinberg, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Diptera (Stratiomyidae, Tabanidae, Asilidae, Thereviidae et Sciomyzidae), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 159. M. Zenatello, M. Marinov, J.B. Kiss, Breeding Marsh Terns (Chlidonias sp.) in the Danube Delta in 2003, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2005; 160. Marches G., 1970, Date privind răspândirea şi importanţa ştiinţifică şi practică a unor mamifere din Dobrogea, Ocrotirea Naturii, 14(2): 165-180; 161. Marinov M.E., Kiss J.B., Toman A., Polednik L., Alexe V., Doroftei M., Doroşencu A., Kranz A., 2012, Monitoring of European Mink (Mustela lutreola) in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve – Romania, 2003-2011. Current status and setting of goals for the European Mink conservation, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, vol. 18, Tulcea, 69-74; 162. McDermid G. J., C. Coops N., Wulder M. A., Franklin S. E., Seitz N. E., Critical Remote Sensing Contributions to Spatial Wildlife Ecological Knowledge and Management, 2009, Springer, p. 193 – 222; 163. Michaux J.R., Hardy O.J., Justy F., Fournier P., Kranz A., Cabia M., 2005, Conservation genetics and population history of an threatened European mink Mustela lutreola, with an emphasis on the west European population. In: Molecular Ecology; 164. Mihai Gh., colab., 1964, Contribuţii la studiul florei Dobrogii, St. cerc. Biol., Ser. Bot., 16(6): 471-476; 165. Mitchell-Jones T., Bihari Z., Rodrigues L., Masing M., 2000, Guidelines for the implementation of Resolution No. 4 adopted by the 2nd Session of the Meeting of Parties Transboundary programme – habitats: data compilation; 166. Mohan, Gh., Ardelean, A., Georgescu, M., 1993, Rezervaţii şi monumente ale naturii din România, Casa de Editură şi Comerţ ”Scaiul”, Bucureşti; 167. Morariu I., 1957, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea vegetaţiei litoralului Mării Negre, Bul. Şt., Secţ. Biol.-Şt. Agr. (Ser. Bot.), Acad. R.P.R., IX, 4: 361-382;

168. Morariu I., 1970, Un aspect de vegetaţie naturală din Dobrogea, Acta Bot. Horti Bucurest., /1968/: 193-199; 169. Munteanu D., 1977, Rolul vegetaţiei în viaţa şi repartiţia păsărilor din Delta Dunării, Peuce, vol. V, Dobrogea; 170. Murariu D., 1981, Contribution a la connaissance de la distribution et de l’ecologie des Mammiferes de la zone du Delta du Danube et du lac Razelm (Roumanie), Trav. du Mus. d’Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, vol. XXIII, Bucureşti, 283-296; 171. Murariu D., 1996, Mammals of the Danube Delta (Romania), Trav. Mus, Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, vol. XXXVI, Bucureşti, 361-37; 172. Murariu D., Atanasova I., Raykov I., Chişamera G., 2009, Results on mammals (Mammalia) survey from Bulgarian and Romanian Dobrogea, Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, Bucureşti, 52: 371-386; 173. N. Bacalbaşa-Dobrovici, Problema proliferării cormoranilor în Bazinul Dunării, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1997; 174. Nagy Z.L., Postawa T., 2010, Seasonal and geographical distribution of cave-dwelling bats in Romania: implications for conservation, Animal Conservation, 1-13; 175. Năstase, A., 2012, New data concerning fish fauna from lakes of the fluvial Danube Delta (Gorgova- Uzlina and Sontea-Furtuna lakecomplexes, Romania) in 2010, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 18, no. 8, p. 75 – 88; 176. Năstase, A., Năvodaru, I., 2006, Study of ichthyodiversity from Gorgova – Uzlina lake-complex, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 12, no. 15, p. 91 – 96; 177. Năstase, A., Năvodaru, I., 2008, Ichthyofauna of Danube delta lakes, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 14, no. 6, p. 37 - 46; 178. Năstase, A., Năvodaru, I., Cernişescu, I., 2009, Fish community studies from riverine Danube Delta (Romania) area in 2007: Sontea-Furtuna and Gorgova-Uzlina lake-complexes, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 15, no. 15, p. 115 – 124; 179. Năvodaru, I., Constantin, Gh., 1995, Comportamentul migraţiei scrumbiei de Dunăre (Alosa pontica pontica Eichwald), pe sectorul de Dunăre Mm 52 – Mm 50, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 249 – 253; 180. Năvodaru, I., Maximov, V., 2014, The spatial and temporal distribution of the shads in Black Sea - marine zone of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 20, no. 15, Section III. Natural resources, socio-economic aspects, p. 95 – 100; 181. Năvodaru, I., Năstase A., 2008, Fish fauna from Gârla Pasărea, a heavy modified former floodplain watercourse, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 14, no. 7, p. 47 – 56; 182. Năvodaru, I., Năstase, A., 2011, What fish and how many there are in Danube Delta?, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 17, no. 6, p. 71 – 82; 183. Năvodaru, I., Staraş, M., 1995, Evoluţia, cercetarea şi administrarea pescăriilor din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 241 – 248; 184. Năvodaru, I., Staraş, M., 1998, Conservation of fish stocks in the Danube Delta, Romania: Present status, constraints, and recommendation, Italian Journal of Zoology, 65:S1, 369-371, DOI: 10.1080/11250009809386848;

185. Necrasov O., Stirbu M., 1975, Asupra prezenţei brebului (Castor fiber L.) în faunele vechi din România. In: Ocrotirea naturii şi mediului în conjurător, vol. 19, nr. 1, 29-34 186. Negrean G., 1980, Specii dobrogene noi pentru flora României, St. Cerc., Pontus Euxinus, Compl. Muz. Şt. Nat. Constanţa, 1: 247-250; 187. Negrean G., colab., 1976, Analiza critică a unor taxoni din Delta Dunării, Peuce, Muz. Deltei Dunării, Tulcea, V: 119-124; 188. Nyárády A., 1967, Contribuţii la flora României. III, Notulae Bot. Horti Agro-Bot. Clujensis: 55-57; 189. Oltean M., Negrean G., Popescu A., Roman N., Dihoru Gh., Sanda V., Mihăilescu, S., 1994, Lista roşie a plantelor superioare din România, St., Sint., Doc. Ecol., Acad. Română - Inst. de Biologie, Bucureşti, I: 1-52; 190. Onără, D. F., Holostenco, D., Suciu, R., Tudor 2013, Management applications of genetic structure of anadromous sturgeon populations in the Lower Danube River (LDR), Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 17, p. 129 – 138, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.17; 191. Onără, D. F., Suciu, R., Holostenco, D., Tudor, D., 2013, Heavy metal bio-accumulation in tissues of sturgeon species of the Lower Danube River, Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 12, p. 87 – 94, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.12; 192. Oosterberg, W., et al., 2000, Ecological gradients in the Danube Delta lakes: present state and man- induced changes, Institute for Inland Water Management and Waste Water Treatment RIZA, http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:26576; 193. Oprea A., colab., 1998, The influence of reforestation on remaking the biodiversity in the arid regions of northwestern Dobrudja-Romania (II), St. Cerc. Biol., Univ. Bacău, 3: 5-12; 194. Oţel, V., 12 – 14 mai 1998, Prezenţa speciei Gymnocephalus baloni Holcik et Hensel 1974 (Pisces: Percidae) în Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Sesiunea Ştiinţifică a ICPDD – Tulcea, p. 40 – 43; 195. Oţel, V., Bărărescu, P., Nalbant, T., Baboianu, C., 1993, Rezultatele investigaţiilor ihtiopatologice din teritoriul Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării în anul 1992, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 145 – 162; 196. Palazon S., Ruiz-Olmo J., 1998, A preliminary study of the behaviour of the European mink Mustela lutreola in Spain, by means of radio-tracking. In: Symp. Zool. Soc. London, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71, 93-105; 197. Panţu Z., 1902, Plante vasculare din Dobrogea, Publ. Soc. Nat. din România, 3: 34-47; 198. Panţu Z., colab., 1935, Contribuţiuni la Flora Deltei Dunării, Mem. Secţ. Şt., Acad. Română, Ser. III, XI, Mem. 2: 1-57; 199. Papadopol, A., 1981, „Considerations sur l'ecologie des oiseaux du secteur Murighiol-Tulcea- Babadag-Lunca (Jurilovca) dans le contexte de la dynamique de l'avifaune du complexe lagunaire de Razelm-Sinoe (Dobrogea, Roumanie)”, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXIII, p. 259 – 282; 200. Paşcovschi S., Leandru V., 1962, Tipurile de păduri din Delta Dunării, Revista Hidrobiologia, vol. IV; 201. Paşcovschi, S., 1967, Succesiunea speciilor forestiere, Ed. Agro-Silvică, Bucureşti; 202. Patriche, N., Talpeş, M., Dan, M., 1993, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, agent patogen la Acipenser stellatus, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 165 – 166; 203. Petcu C., 2011, Pădurile din Lunca şi Delta Dunării – trecut, prezent şi viitor, Dunărea – trecut, prezent şi viitor, Academia Oamenilor de Ştiinţă din România, Bucureşti;

204. Petrescu C., 1916, Plantes nouvelles pour la flore de Dobrogea (Troisième Note), Bul. de la Sect. Sci., Acad. Roumaine, IV-ème année, 7: 287-297; 205. Petrescu M., 1994, Necesitatea protejării Munţilor Măcin ca zonă complementară Deltei Dunării în conservarea patrimoniului natural din nordul Dobrogei, Analele Şti., Inst. Delta Dunării, III, Tulcea, 121-128; 206. Petrescu M., 2007, Dobrogea şi Delta Dunării – conservarea florei şi habitatelor, Institutul de Cercetări Eco-Muzeale Tulcea, Tipografia Marinex Print S.R.L., Baia Mare; 207. Pocora I. , Pocora V., 2011, Seasonal distribution of cave-dwelling bats and conservation status of underground habitats in Moldova and Dobrogea (Romania), Studii şi Cercetări, Seria Biologie, 72- 83, Universitatea ”Vasile Alecsandri” din Bacău, Bacău; 208. Pop Em., 1929, Bibliografia botanică a Dobrogei (1878-1928), Bul. Grăd. Bot. Muz. Bot, Univ. Cluj, IX: 210-220; 209. Popescu A., Murariu D., 2001, Mammalia, Rodentia. In: Fauna României, vol. 16, Nr. 2, Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti, p. 32; 210. Popescu A., Sanda V., 1976, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea vegetaţiei psamofile din Delta Dunării, Peuce V, Muz. Deltei Dunării, Tulcea, 193-216; 211. Popescu A., Sanda V., 2003, Considerations about the thermophyl beech forest in Romania, Proceedings of the Institute of Biology, 5: 185-193, Bucureşti; 212. Popescu A., Sanda V., Oroian S., Chifu T., Ştefan N., Sârbu I., 1997, Vegetaţia Deltei Dunării, In: Marisia XXV, Studii şi materiale, Târgu Mureş; 213. Popescu A., Suciu M., Chiriac E., 1974, Quelques considérations écologiques concernant les populations des Rongeurs de Dobroudja, Stud. Comun. Muz. Şt. Nat Bacău, 119-128; 214. Popovici Al., 1913, Contributions à la flore de la Dobroudja (Roumanie), Ann. Sci. de l’Univ. de Jassy, VII, 4-eme fasc.: 291-296; 215. Pringle C., Vellidis G., Heliotis F., Bandacu D., Cristofor S., 1993, Environmental problems of the Danube Delta, American Scientist, Volume 81, p. 350 – 361; 216. Prodan I., 1914, Contribuţiune la Flora României, An. Acad. Române, Ser. II, XXXVI, Mem. Secţ. Şt., 10: 1-56; 217. Prodan I., 1939, Conspectul florei Dobrogei: p. a III-a, Bul. Fac. Agron., Cluj, VII, /1938/: 1-96; 218. Puşcariu V., 1958, Despre înfiinţarea unor rezervaţii naturale în Delta Dunării şi măsurile de ocrotire necesare, Hidrobiologia I, Edit. Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti; 219. Puşcariu V., 1958, Despre înfiinţarea unor rezervaţii naturale în Delta Dunării şi măsurile de ocrotire necesare, Hidrobiologia I, Edit. Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti; 220. Puşcariu V., Boşcaiu N., Täuber F., 1978, Aspecte de vegetaţie de pe Insula Popina din Lacul Razelm (jud. Tulcea), Ocrot. Nat. Med. Înconj., 22(2): 107-112; 221. Puşcaru-Soroceanu Ev., 1963, (ed.), Păşunile şi fâneţele din România. Studiul geobotanic şi agroproductiv, Edit. Acad. R.P. Române. Bucureşti; 222. R. Serafim, Contribution à la conaissance des Coléopterès Cèrambycidés (Coleoptera, Cermbycidae) du Delta du Danube et du Complex lagunaire Razelm (Roumanie), Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXXIII, 1993; 223. Rákosy L., Wieser C. (eds.), 2000, Das Macin Gebirge (Rumänien, NordDobrudscha), Carinthia II, anno 190.-110.: 7-116;

224. Randik A., Sebela M., Zima J., 1980, Contribution to the knowledge of small mammals (Insectivora, Rodentia) of the Danube Delta, Acta Mus. Moraviae, Sc. Nat., 65: 191-198; 225. Răduleţ N., 1994, Contributions to the knowledge of the distribution and the biology of Myotis capaccinii (Bonaparte, 1837) (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) in Romania, Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, 34: 401-409; 226. Răduleţ N., 2005, Contributions to the knowledge of the mammal fauna from Dobrogea (Romania), Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, Bucureşti, 48: 417-425; 227. Răduleţ N., Stănescu M., 1966, Contributions à la connaissance des mammifères du sud de la Dobrogea (Roumanie), Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, Bucureşti, 36: 373-384; 228. Roman N., 1992, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea florei Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării, analele Şt. Inst. Delta Dunării, Tulcea; 229. Rudescu L., Godeanu M., 1980, Fauna ornitologică şi mamalogică a Deltei Dunării. In: Ecosistemele din România, Bucureşti, 239-240; 230. Rudescu L., Niculescu C., Chivu P., 1965, Monografia stufului din Delta Dunării, Edit. Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti; 231. S. Levente, Lepidopterele din Delta Dunării, Braşov, 2006; 232. S. Levente, The Macrolepidoptera (Insecta) of central Dobrogea (Romania), Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. LV, 2012; 233. S. Maican, R. Serafim, Overview on the Chrysomeloidea superfamily (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae, Orsodacnidae, Chrysomelidae) in Dobrogea (Romania), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. LV, 2012; 234. S. Vrabie, Un caz de dracunculoză la egreta mică (Egretta garzetta L.), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996; 235. Sabodash, V. M., Smirnov, A. I., 1994, The changes in the character of reproduction of the Danube hering (Alosa pontica pontica Eichwald) as a result of anthropogen deformation of its ecology, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 145 – 148; 236. Sanda V., colab., 1964, Cercetări floristice asupra dealului Istriţa, St. cerc. Biol., Ser. Bot., 16, 6: 477- 495; 237. Sanda V., colab., 2003, Atlas Florae Romaniae, Edit. Vergiliu, Bucureşti: 1-115; 238. Sándor D. Attila, J. B. Kiss, C. Domşa, The importance of Northern Dobrogea in the migration of Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2009; 239. Săvulescu Tr. (coord. pp.), 1952-1976, Flora R.P.R. – R.S.R., I-XIII, Edit. Acad. R.S.R., Bucureşti; 240. Sârbu A. (coord.), 2003, Ghid pentru identificarea importantelor arii de protecţie şi conservare a plantelor din România, Edit. Alo, Bucureşti: 1-113; 241. SÂRBU A. (coord.). 2007. Arii speciale pentru protecţia şi conservarea plantelor în România. Bucureşti: Editura Victor B Victor; 242. Sârbu I., colab., 1997, Contribution a l'etude de la végétation de l'île de Popina (lac Razim), Dép. de Tulcea, Bul. Grăd. Bot. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, 6, f. 1: 217-234; 243. Simionescu V., Neacşu Gh., 1977, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea faunei de mamifere mici din Delta Dunării, Peuce V, Zoologie, Muz. Del. Dunării, Tulcea, 529-548; 244. Stanc S.M., 2009, Arheozoologia primului mileniu d. Hr. pentru teritoriul cuprins între Dunăre şi Marea Neagră, Editura Universităţii ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Iaşi, p. 305;

245. Staraş, M., Năvodaru, Cernişescu, I., 1994, Aprecieri privind starea şi exploatarea unor stocuri de peşte din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 227 – 232; 246. Staraş, M., Năvodaru, I., 1995, Schimbări în structura ihtiofaunei ca efect al modificării caracteristicilor biotopului, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 233 – 239; 247. Şerbănescu Gh., 1962, Note floristice din Dobrogea, An. Univ. Bucureşti, Ser. Şt. Nat.-Biol., 33: 53- 55; 248. Ştefan N., Sârbu I., Chifu T., Hanganu J., 1995, Contribuţii la fitocenologia stuforesurselor din Delta Dunării, Analele Şt. Inst. Delta Dunării, vol. IV/1; 249. Ştefureac Tr., 1970, Consideraţii fitogeografice şi florogenetice asupra Dobrogei, Com. de Bot., SSB: 51-80; 250. Ştefureac Tr., 1979-1980, Din flora Dobrogei (I), St. Com. Muz. Şt. Nat. Bacău, 13: 87-97; 251. Török, L., Teodorof, L., 2013, Data on abiotic (nutrients) and biotic (phytoplankton) quality elements in Fortuna ecologically reconstructed area (Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve - Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 16, p. 117 – 126, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.16; 252. Torok, Z. C., 2006, GIS technique used for managing data on potential Natura 2000 sites. Case study: areas inhabited by Elaphe quatorlineata, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 12, no. 33, p. 201 – 210; 253. Torok, Z. C., 2012, Doubtful records of reptile species in some areas of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 18, no. 13, p. 223 – 232, doi: 10.7427/DDI.18.13; 254. Torok, Z. C., 2013, Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve. Part I. Amphibians, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 9, p. 63 – 68, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.09; 255. Torok, Z. C., 2013, Information technology used in preparing the national reports on Species of Community Interest. Study case: Vipera ursinii in Pontic bioregion, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 19, p. 147 – 152, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.19; 256. Torok, Z. C., 2014, Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve. Part II. Reptiles, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 17 – 34, doi: 10.7427/DDI.20.03; 257. Torok, Z. C., 2014, Setting-up a medium term plan for risk-assessment in aquatic and semiaquatic reptiles from the site “ROSCI0065” (Danube Delta) – Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 20, no. 19, p. 139 – 144, doi: 10.7427/DDI.20.19; 258. Ţopa Em., 1976, Noi contribuţii la cunoaşterea florei Dobrogei, Peuce, Muz. Deltei Dunării, Tulcea, V: 315-320; 259. Ţucra I., 1960, Plante noi şi rare pentru flora Dobrogei, Com. de Bot., SSNG, /1957-1959/: 333-335; 260. V. Cuzic, Catalogul colecţiei ştiinţifice de păsări naturalizate a Muzeului de Ştiinţele Naturii „Delta Dunării” (I.C.E.M. Tulcea), Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004; 261. V. Cuzic, Contribution to the study of the avifauna of Traian Lake, Tulcea County, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2002; 262. V. Cuzic, Contribuţii la studiul trofobiologiei cormoranului mare (Phalacrocorax carbo) din partea fluvială a Deltei Dunării, Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004;

263. V. Cuzic, Date privind coloniile mixte de păsări Purcelu, Nebunu şi Crasnicol din Delta Dunării, Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004; 264. V. Cuzic, M. Petrescu, Studiul avifaunei şi habitatelor din Podişul Dobrogean în scopul dezvoltării reţelei de arii protejate, Revista Delta Dunării III , Tulcea, 2006; 265. V. Oţel, J. B. Kiss, M. Marinov, Trophical spectrum of the Great Cormorant chicks in the colony Martinca – Danube Delta, after three years of researches: 2001-2003, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development , Tulcea – Romania, 2005; 266. V. Oţel, J.B. Kiss, Data concerning the food components of the Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) in the Danube Delta, Colony Matrinca, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2000-2001; 267. V. Pocora, C. Ion, Preliminary data concerning ornitophauna of the protected area Letea Forest, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2005; 268. V. Pocora, Data on the ornithofauna of Lacul Sărat – Grindul Letea (Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2007; 269. V. Pocora, Diurnal birds of prey (Aves) from Letea forest (the Danube Delta Biosphere Reservation, Romania), Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa”, 2010; 270. V. Pocora, e. I. Pocora, Nesting bird species in Letea forest (the Biosphere Reservation of Danube Delta), Analele Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom Liv, 2008; 271. Valenciuc N., Ion I., 1971, Quelques aspects de l’activite nocturne de chauves-souris de la Grotte de Gura Dobrogei (Distr. De Constanţa), St. Şi Com. Muz. St. Nat., Bacău, 337-341; 272. Vasiuliu G.D., Şova C., 1968, Fauna Vertrebratica Romaniae (Index), Stud. şi Comun. Muz. Şi Nat., Bacău, 221-241; 273. Viţalariu Gh., colab., 1977, Contribuţii fitocorologice din Moldova şi Dobrogea, An. Şt. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, Ser. nouă, XXII, s. II, a. Biol.: 25-27; 274. Vl. Brădescu, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Diptera - Fam. Syrphidae, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 275. X. Scobiola-Palade, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Hymenoptera (subord. Symphyta, Superfam. Vespoidea, Pompiloidea, Sphecoidea), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968; 276. X. Scobiola-Palade, Nouvelles données concernant les espèces de Vespoidea, Pompiloidea et Sphecoidea (Hymenoptera) du grind de Caraorman, Delta du Danube, Roumanie (II), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXXI, 1991; 277. Youngman P.M., 1982, Distribution and systematics of the European mink Mustela lutreola. In: Acta Zoologica Fennica, vol. 166, 1-48; 278. Z. Baczo, S. Kovacs, A. Szabo, Important ornithological observations in Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2009; 279. Zahariadi C., 1940, Plantes nouvelles ou rares pour la flore de Bessarabie et de la Dobrogea, Bul. de la Sect. Sci., Acad. Roumaine, XXIII-ème: 1-10 + o foto; 280. Zahariadi C., colab., 1963, Contribuţii la flora şi vegetaţia Dobrogei, Com. Acad. R.P.R., XIII, 4: 391- 395; 281. Zanoschi V., colab., 1966, Contribuţii la flora Dobrogii, St. cerc. Biol., Ser. Bot., 18, 1: 55-57; 282. *** 2002. Vegetation of the Biosphere Reserve „Danube Delta” with Transboundary Vegetation Map;

283. ***Boris Alexandrov, The Function of Wetlands, Theme 2 – Living Resources, P. 1 – 3; 284. ***Canadian Wildlife Service, 2009, Petroleum Industry Activity Guidelines for Wildlife Species at Risk in the Prairie and Northern Region, Edmonton, Alberta, Environment Canada, Prairie and Northern Region, 64 p; 285. ***Constantinescu, T.L., “Water quality of the Danube river and his impact on the Danube Delta and the Black Sea”, National Administration “Romanian Waters, Bucharest, Romania; 286. ***Draft River Basin Management Plans Adapting the Plans to Climate Change, december 2008, Water Framework Directive, ESB International; 287. ***European Commission, Fish/ 2006/ 09, Assessment of the status, development and diversification of fisheries-dependent communities, Danube Delta Case Study Report, Romania; 288. ***Gâştescu, P., Ţuchiu, E., „The Danube river in the lower sector in two hidrologycal hypostases – high and low waters”; 289. ***Institutul Naţional de Cercetare – Dezvoltare pentru Geologie si Geoecologie Marină – GEOECOMAR, Raport final, „Mãrile sud-europene: evaluarea şi modelarea schimbărilor ecosistemice (Southern European Seas: Assessing and Modelling Ecosystem changes - SESAME)”, Bucureşti, 2009; 290. ***Ivan, O., Cultural change in a fishing village in the Danube Delta: the consequences of environmental protecion and tourism”, PhD thesis - Summary, School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, U.K. Department of Sociology and Social Work, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca, RO; 291. *** Loghin V., Utilizarea informaţiei satelitare în studiile de fundamentare a proiectelor de cooperare transfrontalieră în bazinul inferior al Dunării, p. 296 – 302, publicat în: Forum Geografic – Studii şi cercetări de geografie şi protecţia mediului Anul 2, Nr. 2, Anul 2003; 292. ***National Institute for Research and Development Danube Delta, National Institute for Research and Developmennt for Environmental Protection, The Ministry of Environment and Forests, november 2010, Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Contract of services no. 2489 of 05.02.2010 (I.N.C.D.D.D. no. 413 / 2010), phase I: Evaluation of the current ecological status of the wild species and natural habitats of conservative interest from DDBR and the analysis of trends for 1990 - 2008, Danube Parks, South East Europe, Programme co-funded by the European Union; 293. ***National Institute for Research and Development Danube Delta, National Institute for Research and Developmennt for Environmental Protection, The Ministry of Environment and Forests, november 2010, Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Contract of services no. 2489 of 05.02.2010 (I.N.C.D.D.D. no. 413 / 2010), phase I: Evaluation of the current ecological status of the wild species and natural habitats of conservative interest from DDBR and the analysis of trends for 1990 - 2008, Danube Parks, South East Europe, Programme co-funded by the European Union; 294. ***Nesterenko, M., Dyakov, O., Drumea, D., Doroftei, M., Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan for Danube Delta Region – Romania – Ukraine – Moldova. Adapting to change, WWF Danube Carpathian Programme - Ukraine, Center for Regional Studies - Ukraine, Ecospectr NGO - Moldova, (Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, Romania; 295. ***Propuneri de exploatare a resurselor pescăreşti din RBDD în anul 2010, ARBDD;

296. ***WWF, Delta Dunării - Una dintre „perlele naturii“ din Europa, Studiu de caz.