Arpa RR Report

Towards River Restoration in Armenia Expert Mission to the Arpa River Basin B. Fokkens, M. Janes, H. Leummens (Ed.), I. Rodriguez & B. Terrier September 2013 Reducing Transboundary Degradation in the Kura Ara(k) river basin TABLE OF CONTENTS MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 3 I INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 5 II OBSERVATIONS ON THE ARPA RIVER BASIN ......................................................................... 7 II.1 Ecological state .................................................................................................................................. 7 II.2 Hydrologic flow .................................................................................................................................. 7 II.3 River morphology .............................................................................................................................. 9 II.4 Hydropower ..................................................................................................................................... 10 II.5 Flooding ........................................................................................................................................... 12 II.6 Irrigated agriculture ......................................................................................................................... 13 II.7 Municipal water ............................................................................................................................... 13 II.8 Other issues ..................................................................................................................................... 14 II.9 Integrated water resources management ...................................................................................... 15 III TOOLS & APPROACHES IN SUPPORT OF IMPROVED RIVER ECOLOGICAL STATE .................. 16 III.1 Information - Ecology, water quality, water quantity, water use ................................................... 16 III.2 Better hydrologic analytical tools & rules on environmental flows ................................................ 16 III.3 More ecologically friendly HPP ........................................................................................................ 17 III.4 Improved water use efficiency in irrigation .................................................................................... 18 III.5 Reduced pollution (urban) ............................................................................................................... 19 III.6 River Basin Management planning .................................................................................................. 19 CITED LITERATURE .................................................................................................................... 23 DISCLAIMER The views presented in this document do not necessarily coincide with or represent the views of the United Nations (UN), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS), the GloBal Environment Facility (GEF), the GEF IW:LEARN International Waters Learning Exchange and Resource Network project, the UNDP-GEF “Reducing transboundary degradation in the Kura Ara(k)s river basin” project or the Government of Armenia and any of its suBsidiary institutions, But reflect exclusively the authors’ opinion. 2 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY The Armenian Ministry of Nature Protection has expressed its willingness to designate the Arpa river basin as a pilot basin in the twinning initiative “Community of Practice for Green Infrastructure Solutions to European River Basin Management”, coordinated by the European Centre for River Restoration, as launched at the 5th European River Restoration Conference (Vienna, September 2013). The initiative aims at strengthening the introduction of river restoration principles in River Basin Management (RBM) plans, for decision makers and planners to become better informed on experiences and best practices in river restoration and management in Europe. To assist the Government of Armenia, the UNDP-GEF Kura Ara(k)s project organized a European Expert Mission1 to Armenia, to provide support in assessing the needs & options for river restoration based on suitable approaches and practical experiences from Europe. Following a 4-day mission to the Arpa river basin in Armenia in June 2013, the participating International Experts share the opinion that actions on river basin management need to emphasize conserving and maintaining existing good natural ecological functions and status, by reducing existing pressures on river ecosystems prior to significant damage being done, and river restoration becoming a necessity. The key message is that today the natural functions of the Arpa river and its tributaries in general appear to be rather good, but not in all cases, as will be further discussed below. The still rather good features provide for a very different starting point than that of “river restoration” in an EU context whereby rivers or parts thereof often are already heavily impacted and changed. In many respects the Arpa system therefore precedes this more onerous undertaking of restoration, instead only asking to conserve the near-natural state (a solution that one would like to see in Europe more often). Far more costly and complex restoration is currently mostly confined to more manageable mitigation and alteration of structural pressures (dams, HPPs, irrigation and bank engineering). For many ‘significant’ pressures in the Arpa basin, the authors do not suggest to remove these where they are still operational – because agricultural land use, the use of natural resources and energy production are economically and socially necessary. The International Expert Team recognizes the need for socio-economic development, specifically in the energy sector, and also in providing livelihoods to the rural communities. The requirement is to strive to maintain the natural functioning of the river system, to allow humans and ecosystems to exist with minimum detriment to each, and maximum benefit for both, avoiding the scenario of destruction and restoration. This suggests an ‘act now’ approach, drawn from Europe’s experience that river restoration requires long-time input and is significantly more costly than initial conservation and good management. Restoration of the Skjern river in Denmark costs € 30 mln, the equivalent sum of the costs to drain the wetlands and straighten the river 50 years earlier (http://www.globalrestorationnetwork.org/database/case-study/?id=115). In Scotland, high energy rivers similar to the Arpa initially showed no detrimental impact from small scale engineering and hydropower, as the supply of bed material and flow was plentiful. But as engineering works became larger, the legacy became erosion, instability and impact on important structures (see e.g. Scottish Government, 2012). In the Netherlands Flood Management Program, about € 500 mln is used for the restoration of natural river hydromorphology and related habitats (Program Directorate “Room for the River”). Meanwhile, even costly restoration does not always lead to the full return of natural ecosystems, as some thresholds may be reached that cannot be reversed. Accordingly the focus in Armenia should be on preventive measures, although also compensation and mitigation is needed and wanted. Part of the solution to strengthen prevention is considering whether within the network of formally Protected Areas the establishing of River Reserves should be considered - to strategically protect natural landscapes and habitats and the processes they depend upon: hydrological, morphological and ecological regimes. While rivers depend on the 3-dimensional river basin to provide 1 The mission was organized with the financial support of the GEF International Waters – Learning Exchange & Resources Network (IW:LEARN), and the UNDP-GEF project “Reducing transboundary degradation in the Kura Ara(k)s river basin”, while all international and national experts generously participated free of charge. 3 water inflow, the river network itself is an inter-connected longitudinal structure. Riverine ecosystems and the services they provide depend on upstream to downstream and lateral linkages, supporting specific environmental relationships and processes. Maintaining longitudinal connectivity in rivers is therefore a critical requirement for the successful conservation of river ecosystems, their processes and flora and fauna, all of which provide products and services to humans (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). The approach of River Reserves links to the European Union’s conservation initiative of Natura 2000. Natura 2000 is the centerpiece of the EU nature & biodiversity policy. It consists of an EU-wide network of nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive (EC, 2007), to assure the long-term survival of Europe's most valuable and threatened species and habitats. It is comprised of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated by Member States under the Habitats Directive, and also incorporates Special Protection Areas (SPAs) which they designate under the Birds Directive (EC, 2009). Natura 2000 is not a system of strict nature reserves where all human activities are excluded. Whereas the network will certainly

Load more