DOCSLIB.ORG

PP 7 in Bulgaria YORDANOVA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PP 7 in Bulgaria YORDANOVA Priority Axis № 7 in Bulgaria Ministry of Transport - Bulgaria Nelly Yordanova Director Coordination of Programmes and Projects Directorate Ministry of Transport - Bulgaria Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Contents (Information provided by National Road Infrastructure Agency) Introduction Past developments Present activities Future plans Protection of the environment Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Introduction The priority axis - recognized to be of significant importance for the country It crosses the territory of Bulgaria in north-south direction – Vidin-Sofia-Kulata About 450 km of 1st class roads Two sections of about 60 km are motorways Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Introduction Map Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Past developments (1/2) Many projects along the route of the axis have been implemented: ▪ Phare CBC Bulgaria/Greece Programme ▪ EIB funding More than half of the route - rehabilitated during the recent years 20 km - upgraded to a motorway Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Past developments (2/2) Road From To Length Name Funding Year Comment А-2 5.200 14.000 8.800 Transit Roads 2/1, Lot 2 EIB 1999 Hemus Motorway А-2 14.000 22.000 8.000 Transit Roads 1/1, Lot 1 EIB 1997 Hemus Motorway А-2 31.300 34.000 2.700 Transit Roads 2/1, Lot 2 EIB 1999 Hemus Motorway I-1 3.450 21.147 17.697 Transit Roads 3, Lot 9 ISPA 2006 I-1 25.597 39.480 13.883 Transit Roads 3, Lot 9 ISPA 2006 I-1 49.600 65.970 16.370 Transit Roads 2/2, Lot 1 EIB 2001 I-1 61.384 103.090 41.706 Transit Roads 3, Lot 9 ISPA 2006 I-1 110.230 125.670 15.440 Transit Roads 3, Lot 1 EIB 2003 I-1 287.450 306.100 18.650 Phare CBC Lot 1 Phare 2007 Upgrading to motorway I-1 306.100 326.559 20.459 Phare CBC Lot 1 Phare 2007 I-1 322.600 328.600 6.000 Transit Roads 1/1, Lot 6 EIB 1997 I-1 328.100 328.300 0.200 Dupnitsa Tunnel Phare 2008 I-1 333.168 429.268 96.100 Phare CBC Lot 3 Phare 2007 I-1 333.820 350.130 16.310 Transit Roads 1/1, Lot 6 EIB 1997 I-1 425.700 439.070 13.370 Transit Roads 1/1, Lot 6 EIB 1997 295.685 Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Present activities (1/4) Struma Motorway - OP “TRANSPORT” ▪ Construction of 127 km of new motorway ▪ Estimated cost of 600 MEUR ▪ The cost is likely to increase significantly due to introduction of lengthy tunnels for environmental reasons Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 OP “Transport” Projects ¾ Map Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Present activities (2/4) Separated into 4 sections: ▪ Section 1 - Dolna Dikania - Dupnitsa; km 305+800 - 322+000 – 17 km ▪ Section 2 - Dupnitsa - Blagoevgrad; km 322+000 - 356+000 – 34 km ▪ Section 3 - Blagoevgrad - Kresna; km 356+000 - 423+500 – 61 km ▪ Section 4 - Kresna - Kulata; km 423+500 - 438+500 – 15 km Sections 1 and 4 - expected to be tendered by the end of 2009 Section 2 – by the mid 2010 Section 3 – along with tunnels - envisaged for the next programming period – 2014-2020 Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Present activities (3/4) Liulin Motorway - ISPA co-financed ▪ Construction of 19 km of a new motorway near the capital Sofia ▪ Budget - 148 MEUR ▪ Expected to be completed by end of 2010 Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Liulin Motorway (1/2) Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Liulin Motorway (2/2) Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Present activities (4/4) Other projects along the axis: ▪ Widening of a 32 km section between Vratza and Botevgrad - OP Transport ▪ Section Vidin – Montana - OP Transport ▪ Bypasses of Vratza and Montana - preparation under ISPA; construction under OP Transport Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Protection of the environment The protection of the environment is in the focus of attention The design of the Struma Motorway was completely changed in order to mitigate the adverse impact on the environment Through Kresna Gorge (Section 3) the project of Struma Motorway was changed including tunnels with a total length of more than 15 km Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Kresna Gorge (1/2) Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Kresna Gorge (2/2) Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009 Priority Axis No 7 in Bulgaria Ministry of Transport Nelly Yordanova Director Coordination of Programmes and Projects Directorate Ministry of Transport - Bulgaria Joint Conference for Priority Axis 7 and Common Axes 21 and 22 - 26 June 2009.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sapareva Banya / Panichishte
    Bulgaria, Sofia 5B, Triaditza Str Tel.: +359 2 980 10 68; 986 79 03, Mobile: + 359 889 137 478 Fax: +359 2 980 53 94 [email protected] www.planettours.bg www.sporttoursbulgaria.com License N ° 05565, IATA Member Sapareva Banya / Panichishte COORDINATES: Latitude in decimal degrees: +42.17 Longitude in decimal degrees: +23.16 Elevation in meters: 983 m. asl Sapareva Banya is a town in southwestern Bulgaria, part of Kyustendil Province. It is located at the north foot of the Rila mountain 15 km east of Dupnitsa. The town is known for its hot mineral (103 °C (217 °F)) and clear mountain water, as well as the geyser in the town centre that sprang forth in 1957. Panichishte is a village in south Bulgaria. It is located in Sapareva Banya municipality, Kyustendil Province. Panichishte is a starting point for pedestrian route to “Pionerska”, “Lovna”, “Skakavica”, “Vada”, “Rilski ezera”, “Sedemte ezera” rest houses and etc. From “Pionerska” rest house in Panichishte to “Rilski ezera” rest house since 2009 there is a chairlift for about 16 minutes. Bulgaria, Sofia 5B, Triaditza Str Tel.: +359 2 980 10 68; 986 79 03, Mobile: + 359 889 137 478 Fax: +359 2 980 53 94 [email protected] www.planettours.bg www.sporttoursbulgaria.com License N ° 05565, IATA Member Geography: Sapareva Banya is situated in west Bulgaria. The geographic location of the region is favourable for the development of tourism. The district centre Sapareva Banya is located 70 km away from the capital of Bulgaria, Sofia, and 30 km away from the winter resort Borovets.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Public Fund Windfalls Increase Corruption? Evidence from a Natural Disaster Elena Nikolovaa Nikolay Marinovb 68131 Mannheim A5-6, Germany October 5, 2016
    Do Public Fund Windfalls Increase Corruption? Evidence from a Natural Disaster Elena Nikolovaa Nikolay Marinovb 68131 Mannheim A5-6, Germany October 5, 2016 Abstract We show that unexpected financial windfalls increase corruption in local govern- ment. Our analysis uses a new data set on flood-related transfers, and the associated spending infringements, which the Bulgarian central government distributed to mu- nicipalities following torrential rains in 2004 and 2005. Using information from the publicly available audit reports we are able to build a unique objective index of cor- ruption. We exploit the quasi-random nature of the rainfall shock (conditional on controls for ground flood risk) to isolate exogenous variation in the amount of funds received by each municipality. Our results imply that a 10 % increase in the per capita amount of disbursed funds leads to a 9.8% increase in corruption. We also present suggestive evidence that more corrupt mayors anticipated punishment by voters and dropped out of the next election race. Our results highlight the governance pitfalls of non-tax transfers, such as disaster relief or assistance from international organizations, even in moderately strong democracies. Keywords: corruption, natural disasters, governance JEL codes: D73, H71, P26 aResearch Fellow, Central European Labour Studies Institute, Slovakia and associated researcher, IOS Regensburg, Germany. Email: [email protected]. We would like to thank Erik Bergl¨of,Rikhil Bhav- nani, Simeon Djankov, Sergei Guriev, Stephan Litschig, Ivan Penkov, Grigore Pop-Eleches, Sandra Sequeira and conference participants at the 2015 Annual Meeting of the European Public Choice Society, Groningen, the 2015 American Political Science Association, San Francisco and seminar participants at Brunel, King's College workshop on corruption, and LSE for useful comments, and Erik Bergl¨ofand Stefka Slavova for help with obtaining Bulgarian rainfall data.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Light of the Above, the Commission Does Not Conclude That
    14.11.2002 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 277 E/183 In the light of the above, the Commission does not conclude that Directive 97/11/EC has not been properly transposed into Spanish law as regards giving the public concerned an opportunity to take part in the procedure. (1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997. (3) Case C-342/00. (2002/C 277 E/205) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1299/02 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission (7 May 2002) Subject: French farm fraud Further to Commissioner Fischler’s response to written question P-0440/02 (1) by Neil Parish, will the Commission please confirm that it will inform the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control as soon as the Commission has read and examined the report in detail? Will the Commission forward its opinion as soon as possible? How does the Commission plan on recovering the missing funds? (1) OJ C 229 E, 26.9.2002. Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (10 June 2002) The Commission is in the process of examining the report of the French Court of Auditors in detail. It will inform the Parliament’s Committee, on Budgetary Control (Cocobu) about its opinion on the report if invited to do so by the Committee. The results of the examination will be in principle available before the summer break. If there is any evidence of administrative weaknesses leading to a risk to the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) then this will be dealt with by proposing financial corrections through the clearance of accounts process.
    [Show full text]
  • A Change in a Child Is a Change for Bulgaria Annual Report 2015
    A CHANGE IN A CHILD IS A CHANGE FOR BULGARIA ANNUAL REPORT 2015 ABOUT NNC The National Network for Children (NNC) is an alliance of 131 civil society organisations and supporters, working with and for children and families across the whole country. Promotion, protection and observing the rights of the child are part of the key principles that unite us. We do believe that all policies and practices, that affect directly or indirectly children should be based first and foremost on the best interests of the child. Furthermore they should be planned, implemented and monitored with a clear assessment of the impact on children and young people, and with their active participation. OUR VISION The National Network for Children works towards a society where every child has their own family and enjoys the best opportunities for life and development. There is a harmony between the sectoral policies for the child and the family, and the child rights and welfare are guaranteed. OUR MISSION The National Network for Children advocates for the rights and welfare of children by bringing together and developing a wide, socially significant network of organisations and supporters. OUR GOALS • Influence for better policies for children and families; • Changing public attitudes to the rights of the child; • Development of a model for child participation; • Development of the National Network for Children; • Improving the capacity of the Network and its member organisations; • Promotion of the public image of the National Network for Children. II | Annual Report 2015 | www.nmd.bg Dear friends, In 2015 the National Network for Children made a big step forward and reached its 10th anniversary which we are celebrating today.
    [Show full text]
  • Kresna Gorge and Struma Motorway Lot 3.2 (Bulgaria)
    Kresna Gorge and Struma Motorway Lot 3.2 (Bulgaria) Malina Kroumova Representative of the Bulgarian Government 38th Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention November 2018 Struma Motorway . The busiest international road going through Bulgaria in the North-South direction . Part of the core TEN-T network, Orient-East/Med corridor . Located in Southwestern Bulgaria (150 km long) . Top priority infrastructure project for the EU . Site of national importance 2 Kresna Gorge - Issues . Serious and frequent accidents along the existing road . Mortality of wild animals on the road, fragmentation of habitats . Travel time, comfort and reliability of road users . Safety of the population and environmental issues in Kresna Town 3 EIA/AA Decision . Five alternatives were equally and thoroughly assessed . Only Long Tunnel Alternative and Eastern Alternative G10.50 were found to be compatible with the conservation objectives of both protected areas . Eastern Alternative G10.50 has clear advantage over 8 environmental components and factors of human health . The Minister of Environment and Water issued EIA Decision No 3-3/2017 approving Eastern Alternative G10.50 . Mandatory conditions and measures for implementation at all stages of the realization of G10.50 4 EIA/AA Decision - Mitigation Measures . Assessed in the EIA/AA . Fencing and passage facilities – technically feasible . Elimination of the risk of mortality and reduction of the barrier effect . Monitoring of the population (4 of the potentially most affected species) 5 Alternatives addressed in the NGOs’ report . Eastern Alternative G20 . Full Tunnel Alternative . Eastern Bypass (the so called “Votan Project”) . Eastern Tunnel Alternative (combination of Lot 3.2 with the existing railway line) 6 Eastern Alternative G20 .
    [Show full text]
  • The Largest 50 Beneficiaries in Each EU Member State of CAP and Cohesion Funds” Prepared at the Request of the CONT Committee
    STUDY Requested by CONT Committee The Largest 50 Beneficiaries in each EU Member State of CAP and Cohesion Funds PRE-RELEASE Policy Department for Budgetary Affairs Authors: Willem Pieter DE GROEN, Jorge NUNEZ, Daina BELICKA, Roberto EN MUSMECI, Damir GOJSIC and Silvia TADI Directorate-General for Internal Policies PE 679.107– January 2021 The Largest 50 Beneficiaries in each EU Member State of CAP and Cohesion Funds PRE-RELEASE Abstract This report provides the preliminary findings of the study on “The Largest 50 beneficiaries in each EU Member State of CAP and Cohesion Funds” prepared at the request of the CONT committee. It provides the results of an assessment of almost 300 systems for the public disclosure of the beneficiaries of the common agricultural policy (CAP) and cohesion policy. Moreover, it provides the preliminary results for the analysis of about 10 million beneficiaries of the CAP in 2018 and 2019 and more than 500 000 projects receiving cohesion funds between 2014 and 2020. Finally, it assesses the barriers to more data transparency and the possibilities to enhance the transparency. NOTE: This is a pre-release version of the study. Changes may occur based on the final results of the research. For internal use only. This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Budgetary Control. It designated Ms Monika Hohlmeier to follow the study. AUTHORS Willem Pieter DE GROEN, CEPS Jorge NUNEZ, CEPS Daina BELICKA, CSE COE Roberto MUSMECI, CEPS Damir GOJSIC, CEPS Silvia TADI, CEPS The authors would like to thank Daniele Genta, Babak Hakimi and Xinyi Li for their valuable contributions to this report.
    [Show full text]
  • 9.2 Housing Market
    Public Disclosure Authorized BULGARIA Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Housing Sector Assessment F i n a l R e p o r t Prepared for Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works Public Disclosure Authorized By The World Bank June2017 HOUSING IN BULGARIA Organization of the Document To facilitate ease of reading – given the length and complexity of the full report – this document includes the following: - A 5-page Executive Summary, which highlights the key messages; - A 20-page Short Report, which presents in some level of detail the analysis, together with the main conclusions and recommendations; - A 150-page Main Report, which includes the full Situation Analysis, followed by Findings and Recommendations in detail. i HOUSING IN BULGARIA Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations IV Currency Equivalents VI Acknowledgements VII Executive Summary 1 Short Report 6 Main Report 27 SITUATION ANALYSIS 29 INTRODUCTION 31 1.1 Context 31 1.2 Relevance to the CPF and other World Bank projects 33 HOUSING AND URBANIZATION 35 2.1 Population Trends 35 2.2 Emigration 35 2.3 City typologies and trends 38 HOUSING STOCK AND QUALITY 41 3.1 Housing Stock 41 3.2 Ownership and Tenure 46 3.3 Housing Quality 50 PROGRAMS, INSTITUTIONS, LAWS, AND PROCEDURES 56 4.1 Current Approach to Housing 56 4.2 EU- and State-Funded Programs in the Housing Sector 56 4.3 Other State support for housing 61 4.4 Public Sector Stakeholders 69 4.5 Legal Framework 71 i HOUSING IN BULGARIA 4.6 Relevant Legislation and Processes for Housing 80 LOWER INCOME AND
    [Show full text]
  • Committee on Regional Development the Secretariat
    COMMITTEE ON REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT THE SECRETARIAT October 2008 REPORT of the Committee on Regional Development's Delegation to Bulgaria from 30 September to 2 October 2008 European Parliament - Committee on Regional Development - The Secretariat SUMMARY Visit to Bulgaria to meet with Government Ministers and officials as well as the leaders of local administrations responsible for regional Subject development projects. Under the 2006 regulations the whole of Bulgaria qualifies for assistance under the Convergence objective. The field missions had the following main objectives: - To discuss with Ministers, relevant officials and local authorities the future implementation of the Regional development Operational Programme and sectoral programmes as well as to discuss with them any problems they may have. Main objectives - To acquaint members of the delegation with the specific problems of Bulgaria and see in situ some successful projects executed with pre-accession funds and discuss the implementation of operational programmes which are just starting up. Date 30 September to 02 October 2008 Sofia, Gorna Orjahovica, Arbanasi, Balchik, Varna Places Chairman Gerardo Galleote, Chair of the Regional Development Committee. The list of participants is attached in the annex. 2 of 11 European Parliament - Committee on Regional Development - The Secretariat BACKGROUND On the initiative of the Bulgarian Vice President of the Committee on Regional Development Mr Evgeni KIRILOV (PSE), the committee decided to send a delegation to Bulgaria. It was the last out of three delegation trips of the REGI Committee scheduled for 2008. Bulgaria is of particular interest to the Members of the Regional Development Committee for a number of reasons: Together with Romania, Bulgaria is the first Balkan country to join the European Union in the latest phase of the ongoing enlargement process.
    [Show full text]
  • Horizontal Issues and Legislative Procedures on 3Rd August, a Meeting of the Development Council Was Carried Out
    Implementation of the Structural funds in Bulgaria Monthly brief, August-September 2011 Horizontal issues and legislative procedures On 3rd August, a meeting of the Development Council was carried out. There was a discussion on the priorities of the National Development Programme: Bulgaria 2020 (NDP), which were finally approved. On 20th September a meeting-discussion of the Inter-institutional Working group for the elaboration of the National Development Programme: Bulgaria 2020 was hold. The meeting included a presentation by an expert from the OECD, Mr. Jose Enrique Garcilazo, who presented some analytical findings of the publication Regional Outlook 2011, which provided important information that would be helpful in the process of preparation of the National Development Programme: Bulgaria 2020. On 27th September, a Round Table „From National Goals and Priorities of the National Development Programme: Bulgaria 2020 to Partnership Contract for Development and Investments 2014-2020” was hold in Sofia. A public discussion concerning the elaboration of the National Development Programme: Bulgaria 2020, its strategic goals and priorities, and the main areas of interventions, where the policy’ effects will be most important for the development of the country took place. The main participants of the academic society of the country were invited in the event and expressed their opinion on the process of preparation of the document. Regarding the financial corrections mechanism, a permanent interministerial work group for supporting the managing authorities will be established. The main tasks of the work group will be to discuss different cases where financial corrections will be imposed and to support methodologically the Managing Authorities regarding the process of imposing financial corrections under the OPs.
    [Show full text]
  • Investment in Bulgaria 2018 | 121
    Investment in Bulgaria 2018 | 121 Investment in Bulgaria 2018 KPMG in Bulgaria kpmg.com/bg © 2018 KPMG Bulgaria EOOD, a Bulgarian limited liability company and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. Investment in Bulgaria Edition 2018 Investment in Bulgaria 2018 | 3 Preface Investment in Bulgaria is one of a series of booklets published by firms within the KPMG network to provide information to those considering investing or doing business internationally. Every care has been taken to ensure that the information presented in this publication is correct and reflects the situation as of April 2018 unless otherwise stated. Its purpose is to provide general guidelines on investment and business in Bulgaria. As the economic situation is undergoing rapid change, further advice should be sought before making any specific decisions. For further information on matters discussed in this publication, please contact Gergana Mantarkova, Managing Partner. KPMG in Bulgaria Sofia Varna 45/A Bulgaria Boulevard 3 Sofia Street, floor 2 1404 Sofia 9000 Varna Bulgaria Bulgaria Tel: +359 2 96 97 300 Tel: +359 52 699 650 Fax: +359 2 96 97 878 Fax: +359 52 611 502 [email protected] kpmg.com/bg © 2018 KPMG Bulgaria EOOD, a Bulgarian limited liability company and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Priority Public Investments for Wastewater Treatment and Landfill of Waste
    Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Develonment Europe and Central Asia Region 32051 BULGARIA Public Disclosure Authorized ENVIRONMENTAL SEQUENCING STRATEGIES FOR EU ACCESSION PriorityPublic Investments for Wastewater Treatment and Landfill of Waste *t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Public Disclosure Authorized IC- - ; s - o Fk - L - -. Public Disclosure Authorized The World Bank Public Disclosure Authorized May 2004 - "Wo BULGARIA ENVIRONMENTAL SEQUENCING STRATEGIES FOR EU ACCESSION Priority Public Investments for Wastewater Treatment and Landfill of Waste May 2004 Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Europe and Central Asia Region Report No. 27770 - BUL Thefindings, interpretationsand conclusions expressed here are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. Coverphoto is kindly provided by the external communication office of the World Bank County Office in Bulgaria. The report is printed on 30% post consumer recycledpaper. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ..................................................................... i Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................... ii Summary ..................................................................... iiM Introduction.iii Wastewater.iv InstitutionalIssues .xvi Recommendations........... xvii Introduction ...................................................................... 1 Part I: The Strategic Settings for
    [Show full text]
  • BULGARIAN ACADEMY of SCIENCES NATIONAL MUSEUM of NATURAL HISTORY Tzar Osvoboditel Blvd
    BULGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY Tzar Osvoboditel blvd. 1, Sofia 1000, Bulgaria tel. 987 41 95, tel./fax 988 28 94 http://nmnhs.com/ SCIENTISTS’ STATEMENT ON WILDLIFE MONITORING IN KRESNA GORGE, BULGARIA 1 August 2019 RE: Follow-up legal complaint on the Struma motorway project in Kresna Gorge [CHAP(2017)02186 – BULGARIA] - update to the complaint Document1 prepared on a voluntary basis by: Associate Prof. Dr Stoyan Beshkov Head of the Invertebrates Department Chairman of the Scientific Council National Museum of Natural History Tzar Osvoboditel Blvd. 1, 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria GSM +359 896869601 http://nmnhs.com/beshkov-stoyan-en.html https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stoyan_Beshkov Emilia Vacheva PhD student an the National Museum of Natural History (2016-until now) Master of Zoology of vertebrate animals, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski Angel Dyugmedzhiev Assistant at the Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. 1 With translations by CEE Bankwatch Network and Za Zemiata/Friends of the Earth Bulgaria. 1 Dear Sir/Madam, Below, we provide a summary scientific analysis of the methodology, results and conclusions of the monitoring of animals killed by traffic on the existing E-79 international road in Kresna Gorge. We would like to stress that a detailed comparative report prepared by us will be sent to the Commission in September 2019. This document gives a brief comparative description of the monitoring methodology (Section 1), a comparative table for all vertebrate animals found during the monitoring (Section 2) and conclusions (Section 3). The methodology of the two monitoring periods (2003-2004 versus 2013-2014) is found to be similar and the scientific data collected in each year are comparable.
    [Show full text]