DOCSLIB.ORG

Joint Operational Programme

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Joint Operational Programme South-East Finland – Russia CBC 2014-2020 Joint Operational Programme The Programme is co-financed by the EU, the Russian Federation and Finland Endorsed by the European Commission on 18 December 2015 C(2015) 9184 TABLE OF CONTENT 1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................4 2. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE PROGRAMME AREA ........................................................................7 2.1. Programme regions ............................................................................................................................7 2.1.1. Core regions ................................................................................................................................8 2.1.2. Adjoining regions ........................................................................................................................8 2.1.3. Major social, economic or cultural centres ................................................................................9 2.1.4. Regions outside the programme area ......................................................................................10 2.1.5. A map of the programme area .................................................................................................11 2.2. Socioeconomic situation ...................................................................................................................11 2.3. Population and population density ..................................................................................................14 2.4. Economic structure ...........................................................................................................................14 2.4.1. Main industrial sectors .............................................................................................................14 2.4.2. Labour market and income.......................................................................................................15 2.4.3. SMEs and entrepreneurship .....................................................................................................16 2.4.4. Tourism and Culture .................................................................................................................18 2.5. Education and research ....................................................................................................................19 2.6. The environment and nature............................................................................................................21 2.7. Environmental sustainability ............................................................................................................24 2.8. Infrastructure ....................................................................................................................................25 2.8.1. Telecommunications and broad band ......................................................................................25 2.8.2. Energy .......................................................................................................................................26 2.8.3. Border crossing infrastructure and transport networks...........................................................26 2.9. Area profiles .....................................................................................................................................31 3. PROGRAMME STRATEGY ..........................................................................................................................33 3.1. Description of the four priorities (and measures) chosen in line with the ......................................35 3.2. Justification for the choice of priorities and measures ....................................................................35 3.3. Objectively verifiable indicators, related target values and expected results .................................44 3.4. Risk analysis ......................................................................................................................................46 3.5. Cross-cutting and horizontal issues ..................................................................................................49 3.5.1. People-to-people ......................................................................................................................49 3.6. Coherence with other national and regional strategies and with other programmes financed by the EU, the Russian Federation or Finland ...................................................................................50 3.7. Lessons learned from the previous Programmes .............................................................................57 3.8. Information about the consultations and actions taken to involve the participating countries and regions to the preparation .........................................................................................................59 4. STRUCTURES AND APPOINTMENT OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES AND MANAGEMENT BODIES... 61 2 4.1. Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC) ..................................................................................................61 4.2. Joint Selection Committee (JSC) .......................................................................................................62 4.3. Managing Authority (MA) .................................................................................................................63 4.4. National Authorities in participating countries (NA) ........................................................................66 4.5. Branch Office (BO) ............................................................................................................................68 4.6. Audit Authority (AA) and the members of the Group of Auditors ...................................................69 4.7. Control Contact Points (CCPs) in participating countries .................................................................70 5. PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................70 5.1. Summary description of management and control systems ............................................................70 5.2. Timeframe of the Programme implementation ...............................................................................77 5.3. Description of project selections procedures ...................................................................................78 5.4. Description of types of support ........................................................................................................80 5.5. Description of planned use of TA .....................................................................................................88 5.6. Description of the monitoring and evaluation systems ...................................................................89 5.7. The communication strategy ............................................................................................................94 5.8. Information on fulfilment of regulatory requirements laid down in Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ...............................................................................97 5.9. Indicative financial plan ....................................................................................................................99 5.10. Use of the euro .......................................................................................................................... 102 5.11. Rules on eligibility of expenditure ............................................................................................. 102 5.12. The apportionment of liabilities among the participating countries ........................................ 105 5.13. Rules of transfer, use and monitoring of co-financing .............................................................. 106 5.14. Description of IT systems for the reporting and exchange of computerised data between the MA, the Commission, Finland and the Russian Federation ................................................ 107 5.15. Languages .................................................................................................................................. 108 6. ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 109 ANNEX 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 111 3 1. INTRODUCTION The South-East Finland – Russia Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) Programme 2014–2020 has been drafted jointly by the Finnish and Russian cooperation parties. The preparatory process for the programme was commenced in the summer 2013 with the establishment of the Joint Programming Committee (JPC) composed of an equal number of central government and regional level representatives of both participating countries. The JPC had the overall responsibility for the preparation of the programme. The preparatory work was assisted by a joint regional task force specifically appointed for this purpose. The Joint Regional Task Force (RTF) has been dealing with the objectives and the content of the programme, and it represented the regional level from both countries. A representative of the Commission has participated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Experimental Study of Municipal Solid Waste (Msw) Landfills and Non- Authorized Waste Damps Impact on the Environment
    Linnaeus ECO-TECH ´10 Kalmar, Sweden, November 22-24, 2010 EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE (MSW) LANDFILLS AND NON- AUTHORIZED WASTE DAMPS IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT Veronica Tarbaeva Dmitry Delarov Committee on Natural Resources of Leningrad region, Russia ABSTRACT A purpose was an analysis of waste disposal sites existing in the Leningrad region and a choice of facilities potentially suitable for the removal and utilization of greenhouse- and other gases. In order to achieve the purpose in view, data were collected on the arrangement of non-authorized landfills and waste dumps within the Leningrad region. The preliminary visual evaluation and instrumental monitoring were carried out for 10 facilities. The evaluation of greenhouse- and other gas emissions into the atmosphere as well as of ground water pollution near places of waste disposal was performed. A databank was created for waste disposal sites where it could be possible to organize the work on removing and utilizing of greenhouse gas. The conducted examination stated that landfills exert negative influence on the environment in the form of emissions into the atmosphere and impurities penetrating underground and surface water. A volume of greenhouse gas emissions calculated in units of СО2 – equivalent from different projects fluctuates from 63.8 to 8091.4 t in units of СО2 – equivalent. Maximum summarized emissions of greenhouse gases in units of СО2 – equivalent were stated for MSW landfills of the towns of Kirishi, Novaya Ladoga and Slantsy, as well as for MSW landfills near Lepsari residential settlement and the town of Vyborg. KEYWORDS Non-authorized waste dumps, MSW landfills, greenhouse gases, atmospheric air pollution, instrumental monitoring.
    [Show full text]
  • Savonlinna ENG.Pdf
    Savonlinna is located on the FACTS: Eastern part of Finland. It is Population: 33 272 located on the route of Saimaa Founded: 1639 deep-water channel, which is a Surface area: 3 597,70 km2 straight waterway to European of which ground area: 2 238.09 m2 ports. COORDINATES: 61°52’00”N, 028°53’11”E There are also excellent connections to South Finland and to Russia. DISTANCES: Helsinki 330 km, St. Petersburg 320 km Train NORTHERN TRAIN CONNECTIONS Truck Vaasa Kuopio Ship Joensuu Niirala Pieksämäki Varkaus Savonlinna Mikkeli Tampere Parikkala Pori Imatra Lappeenranta Lahti TRAIN CONNECTIONS Kouvola TO RUSSIA & ASIA Kotka Tur ku Porvoo Helsinki EUROPEAN PORTS St. Petersburg 12/2020 PORT OF VUOHISAARI Number of Berths: PORT SERVICES: 1, lenght of berth 100 m Savonlinnan kaupunki Maximum size of vessels: Port Manager Jyrki Haajanen • Lenght: 82,5 m +358 (0) 44 417 4622 • Width: 12,6 m [email protected] • Draft: 4,35 m Vuohisaarenkatu 5 Services: 57230 SAVONLINNA • Electricity • Water STEVEDORING & FORWARDING: • Bilge • Septic tank station Oy Saimaa Terminals Ab Yhteydet: Hannu Kaipainen • Good access by rail and road +358 (0) 50 327 0341 (Main road 14) [email protected] www.sterm.fi GUEST MARINAS PASSENGER PORT There are 3 guest marinas in the city The Passenger Port of Savonlinna is one center of Savonlinna and 1 in Savonranta. of the vivacious passenger ports of Lake All guest marinas have shower, toilet and Saimaa area. It is located in the city center restaurant services. and is surrounded by excellent Hotel and Restaurant services. The local market Guest marina of Spahotel Casino square is located next to the port.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dispersal and Acclimatization of the Muskrat, Ondatra Zibethicus (L.), in Finland
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center Other Publications in Wildlife Management for 1960 The dispersal and acclimatization of the muskrat, Ondatra zibethicus (L.), in Finland Atso Artimo Suomen Riistanhoito-Saatio (Finnish Game Foundation) Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmother Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Artimo, Atso, "The dispersal and acclimatization of the muskrat, Ondatra zibethicus (L.), in Finland" (1960). Other Publications in Wildlife Management. 65. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmother/65 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Other Publications in Wildlife Management by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. R I 1ST A TIE T L .~1 U ( K A I S U J A ,>""'liSt I " e'e 'I >~ ~··21' \. • ; I .. '. .' . .,~., . <)/ ." , ., Thedi$perscdQnd.a~C:li"'dti~otlin. of ,the , , :n~skret, Ond~trq ~ib.t~i~',{(.h in. Firtland , 8y: ATSO ARTIMO . RllSTATIETEELLISljX JULKAISUJA PAPERS ON GAME RESEARCH 21 The dispersal and acclimatization of the muskrat, Ondatra zibethicus (l.), in Finland By ATSO ARTIMO Helsinki 1960 SUOMEN FIN LANDS R I 1ST A N HOI T O-S A A T I b ] AK TV ARDSSTI FTELSE Riistantutkimuslaitos Viltforskningsinstitutet Helsinki, Unionink. 45 B Helsingfors, Unionsg. 45 B FINNISH GAME FOUNDATION Game Research Institute Helsinki, Unionink. 45 B Helsinki 1960 . K. F. Puromichen Kirjapaino O.-Y. The dispersal and acclimatization of the muskrat, Ondatra zibethicus (L.), in Finland By Atso Artimo CONTENTS I.
    [Show full text]
  • FSC National Risk Assessment
    FSC National Risk Assessment for the Russian Federation DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO PROCEDURE FSC-PRO-60-002 V3-0 Version V1-0 Code FSC-NRA-RU National approval National decision body: Coordination Council, Association NRG Date: 04 June 2018 International approval FSC International Center, Performance and Standards Unit Date: 11 December 2018 International contact Name: Tatiana Diukova E-mail address: [email protected] Period of validity Date of approval: 11 December 2018 Valid until: (date of approval + 5 years) Body responsible for NRA FSC Russia, [email protected], [email protected] maintenance FSC-NRA-RU V1-0 NATIONAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 2018 – 1 of 78 – Contents Risk designations in finalized risk assessments for the Russian Federation ................................................. 3 1 Background information ........................................................................................................... 4 2 List of experts involved in risk assessment and their contact details ........................................ 6 3 National risk assessment maintenance .................................................................................... 7 4 Complaints and disputes regarding the approved National Risk Assessment ........................... 7 5 List of key stakeholders for consultation ................................................................................... 8 6 List of abbreviations and Russian transliterated terms* used ................................................... 8 7 Risk assessments
    [Show full text]
  • This Is the Published Version of a Chapter
    http://www.diva-portal.org This is the published version of a chapter published in Conflict and Cooperation in Divided Towns and Cities. Citation for the original published chapter: Lundén, T. (2009) Valga-Valka, Narva – Ivangorod Estonia’s divided border cities – cooperation and conflict within and beyond the EU. In: Jaroslaw Jańczak (ed.), Conflict and Cooperation in Divided Towns and Cities (pp. 133-149). Berlin: Logos Thematicon N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published chapter. Permanent link to this version: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-21061 133 Valga-Valka, Narva-Ivangorod. Estonia’s Divided Border Cities – Co-operation and Conflict Within and beyond the EU Thomas Lundén Boundary Theory Aboundary is a line, usually in space, at which a certain state of affairs is terminated and replaced by another state of affairs. In nature, boundaries mark the separation of different physical states (molecular configurations), e.g. the boundary between water and air at the surface of the sea, between wood and bark in a tree stem, or bark and air in a forest. The boundaries within an organized society are of a different character. Organization means structuration and direction, i.e. individuals and power resources are directed towards a specific, defined goal. This, in turn, requires delimitations of tasks to be done, as well as of the area in which action is to take place. The organization is defined in a competition for hegemony and markets, and with the aid of technology. But this game of definition and authority is, within the limitations prescribed by nature, governed by human beings.
    [Show full text]
  • Regions of Eastern Finland (Summary)
    Summary of views on the 2nd Cohesion Report Regions of Eastern Finland, 27.8.2001 Regions of South Karelia, South Savo, Kainuu, North Karelia and North Savo Starting point: - The EU regional policy is important for the development of Eastern Finland regions. - During the period 1995-1999 Eastern Finland was covered by the Obj 6, 5b and Interreg II A programmes. Of these the Obj 6 programme area was defined in the Accession Treaty of Finland and Sweden on account of specific circumstances of sparse population. - In the present period until 2006 the South Savo, North Karelia, North Savo and Kainuu regions form an Obj 1 programme area. At the same time East Finland has an A support status according to Article 87.3 of the Treaty, allowing allocation of higher state aid. The region of South Karelia is covered by the Obj 2 programme. In addition there are two Interreg III A programmes implemented in the area. - The Eastern Finland regions consider that the additionality principle has not been followed in the implementation of the regional development programmes. - The Eastern Finland (NUTS II area) GDP has lowered by 2.3 % between 1995-1999 in comparison to the EU average, and by over 5 % in comparison to the national average. It is very likely that the GDP/capita of Eastern Finland will not exceed 75 % of EU15 average without (national) specific measures. Views on the future Cohesion Policy: - The enlargement and increase of territorial inequality means that sufficient structural policy resources are required to guarantee a stable regional development. It seems that the proposed 0.45 % of the GDP will not be enough in the enlarged Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Midge Telmatogeton Japonicus Tokunaga (Diptera: Chironomidae) Exploiting Brackish Water in Finland
    Aquatic Invasions (2009) Volume 4, Issue 2: 405-408 DOI 10.3391/ai.2009.4.2.20 © 2009 The Author(s) Journal compilation © 2009 REABIC (http://www.reabic.net) This is an Open Access article Short communication Marine midge Telmatogeton japonicus Tokunaga (Diptera: Chironomidae) exploiting brackish water in Finland Janne Raunio1*, Lauri Paasivirta2 and Yngve Brodin3 1Janne Raunio, Water and Environment Association for the River Kymi, Tapiontie 2 C, FIN-45160 Kouvola, Finland E-mail: [email protected] 2Lauri Paasivirta, Ruuhikoskenkatu 17 B 5, FIN-24240 Salo, Finland E-mail: [email protected] 3Yngve Brodin, Swedish Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 50007, SE-10405 Stockholm, Sweden E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author Received 20 March 2009; accepted in revised form 26 May 2009; published online 3 June 2009 Abstract Pupal exuviae of marine intertidal midge Telmatogeton japonicus Tokunaga (Diptera: Chironomidae) were found in September 2008 from the Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea. Previous records of the species in the Baltic Sea were from Sweden, Denmark, Germany and Poland. Telmatogeton japonicus is an alien species introduced to Europe from the Pacific Ocean. It probably uses shipping as the vector, since in north-western Europe it has first been detected near large seaports. This was also the case in the Gulf of Finland. Our findings suggests that the species’ distribution extends further northeast in the Baltic Sea than understood before, and that the species is able to establish viable populations into fresh-brackish (salinity < 4 ‰) coastal habitats. Key words: Telmatogeton japonicus, Chironomidae, pupal exuviae, Gulf of Finland Benthic macroinvertabrate communities in the 2005; Raunio 2008) to assess chironomid littoral and sub-littoral zones in the Gulf of community composition in three areas in the Finland (Baltic Sea) are rather poorly known, as Gulf of Finland (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Rail Connecɵon from Kouvola to Kotka/ Hamina Ports, Works For
    Rail connecƟ on from Kouvola to Kotka/ Hamina ports, works for improving and construcƟ on of a new railway yard 2007-FI-12010-P • Part of Priority Project 12 Commission Decision: C(2008)7887 Member States involved: Finland ImplementaƟ on schedule: Start date: January 2008 End date: December 2013 Es mated end year: 2013 Budget: Total project cost: €66,000,000 EU contribu on: €6,600,000 Na onal budget: €59,400,000 Percentage of EU support: Works: 10% his project forms part of the Nordic Triangle railway/road axis (Priority Project 12), which links the capitals of Finland, TSweden, Norway and Denmark to each other and further to central Europe and Russia. The project supports the upgrade of approximately 60 km of railway line on the Kouvola-Kotka/Hamina sec ons and the construc on of a new railway yard at Kotolah . The improvements to the hinterland connec on are essen al to allow for a more effi cient use of freight traffi c on railways, for intermodal transport opera ons using the Motorways of the Sea ports of Kotka and Hamina. The planning and implementa on of the project also takes into due account reliability, func onality, traffi c safety and environmental considera ons. MAP Review The MidMid-Term Term evalua on concluded that the project proje can be completed by the end of 2013, provided any fi nancial uncertainty is eff ec vely removed. Moreover, administra ve procedures for diff erent works on the sec on Kouvola-Kotka/Hamina need to be approved before the end of 2010 and 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Facts About Southeast Finland Frontier Guard
    THE SOUTHEAST FINLAND BORDER GUARD DISTRICT THETHE SOUTHEA SOUTHEASTST FINLAND FINLAND BORDER BORDER GUA GUARDRD DISTRICT DISTRICT Border guard stations 10 Border check station 1 II/123 Border crossing points 8 Uukuniemi International Pitkäpohja Kolmikanta Restricted Imatra BGA (Parikkala) Kangaskoski Immola Personnel 1.1.2006: • headquarters Lake Ladoga • logistics base Niskapietilä Officers 95 Lappeenranta BGA Pelkola Border guards 570 (Imatra) Others 87 Lappeenranta airport Total 752 Nuijamaa Common border with Vehicles: Vainikkala Russia 227 km Virolahti Cars 65 BGA Leino Motorbikes 15 Vyborg Snowmobiles 59 Patrol boats 11 Vaalimaa Vaalimaa Hurppu Dogs 95 (Santio) VI/11 Gulf of Finland BORDERBORDER SECURITYSECURITY SYSTEMSYSTEM ININ SOUTHEASOUTHEASTST FINLAFINLANDND (figures/2005) BORDERBORDER CO-OPERATION WITH SURVEILLASURVEILLANCENCE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES • exposed illegal border crossings 16 • accomplished refused entries 635 • executive assistances 23 • assistances, searches 25 4 3 2 1 CO-OPERATION OVER THE BORDER RUSSIAN BORDER GUARD SERVICE • apprehended ~80 • meetings: • border delegates/deputies 22 • assistants of the border delegates 70 BORDERBORDER CHECKSCHECKS CONSULATES • refusals of entry 707 • ST. PETERSBURG • discovered fraudulent documents 128 • MOSCOW • discovered stolen vehicles 13 • PETROZAVODSK • discovered fraudulent documents 88 BORDERBORDER CHECKSCHECKS Investment: v. 2004 392 man-years; 19,0 mill. € v. 2005 409 man-years; 19,5 mill. € PASSENGERPASSENGER TRAFFIC TRAFFIC 1996 1996 - -20052005 4 764 495 4 694 657
    [Show full text]
  • Country Review Finland
    Universiteit Maastricht Monitoring and analysis of policies and public financing instruments conducive to higher levels of R&D investments The “POLICY MIX” Project Country Review Finland Submitted by: Marcel de Heide Technopolis March 2007 Introduction and Policy mix concept Introduction and Policy mix concept The policy mix project This report is one of the 31 country reviews produced as internal working papers for the research project “Monitoring and analysis of policies and public financing instruments conducive to higher levels of R&D investments” (Contract DG-RTD- 2005-M-01-02, signed on 23 December 2005). This project is a research project conducted for DG Research, to serve as support for policy developments in Europe, notably in the framework of CREST activities. It does not form part of the ERAWATCH project, but the working documents are made available on ERAWATCH webpages for the purpose of steering a debate on the policy mix concept. The “Policy Mix” project is run by a consortium of 7 partners: · UNU-MERIT (The Netherlands), consortium leader · Technopolis (The Netherlands) · PREST – University of Manchester (United Kingdom) · ZEW (Germany) · Joanneum Research (Austria) · Wiseguys Ltd. (United Kingdom) · INTRASOFT International (Luxembourg). Each country review is produced by an individual author, and provides expert’s view on the policy mix in the country. This report is not approved by the Commission or national authorities, and is produced under the responsibility of its author. The role of country reviews is to provide an exploratory analysis of the current policy mixes in place in all countries and detect the most important areas of interactions between instruments as well as new modes of policy governance that are particularly adapted (or detrimental) for the building of policy mixes.
    [Show full text]
  • Airborne and Deposited Radioactivity in Finland in 1987
    ^fi QcnmiH Siv* STUK-A75 April 1990 AIRBORNE AND DEPOSITED RADIOACTIVITY IN FINLAND IN 1987 Supplement 1 to Annual Report STUK-A74 Hannele Aaltonen, Ritva Saxen and Tarja K. Ikäheimonen STvK- h-- >C STUK-A75 April 1990 AIRBORNE AND DEPOSITED RADIOACTIVITY IN FINLAND IN 1987 Supplement 1 to Annual Report STUK-A74 Hannele Aaltonen, Ritva Sax6n and Tarja K. Ikäheimonen Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety P.O.Box 268, SF-00101 HELSINKI FINLAND fS3N951-47-146e-0 ISSN 0781-1705 Helsinki 1990 The Finnish Government Printing Centre 3Ai ABSTRACT The Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety has con­ tinued its nationwide monitoring of airborne and deposited radioactive substances ir, Finland. In the air surveillance programme concentrations of artificial radionuclides are monitored in the air close to the ground. In 1987, air dust samples were collected in Nurmijärvi, 40 km north of Helsinki and in Rovaniemi. When necessary, sampling was also launched in Helsinki. Several radionuclides originating from the accident in Chernobyl in 1987 could still be detected in air dust samples. The con­ centrations of the prevailing nuclides 134Cs and 137Cs were stable and there was no significant difference between winter and summer. Fresh fission nuclides were detected in March and August. A sharp decrease in the amounts of radioactive substances de­ posited was noted at all the 18 sampling stations as against 1986. The total annual amounts of deposited 137Cs varied at different stations in 1987 from 7.7 Bq/m2 (Rovaniemi) to 1500 Bq/m2 (Kauhava) and those of »° Sr in 1986 from 4.7 Eq/m2 (Tai­ valkoski) to 590 Bq/m2 (Kuhmo) and in 1987 from 1.4 Bq/m2 (Iva­ lo) to 38 Bq/m2 (Kuhmo).
    [Show full text]
  • Technical-Economic Substantiation of The
    PROJECT PART-FINANCED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION Technical-economic substantiation of the development of tourist route(-s) in the section: Ivangorod (The Narova River) – The Rosson River (Children sanitary centre) – Silent Lake Saint-Petersburg January 2008 The Leningrad regional state institution «Information – Tourist Center» - 1 - PROJECT PART-FINANCED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION Plan 1. Studying the present situation 1.1. Development of water tourism in Leningrad region 1.1.1. General situation 1.1.2. Present infrastructure 1.1.3. Existent routes 1.1.3.1. Camp routes 1.1.3.2. Cruise lines 1.1.3.3. Regular communication 1.1.4. Sail-motor tourism development 1.1.5. Sports fishing in the region 1.1.6. Perspectives for the development of water tourism in Leningrad region 1.2. Investigation of potentially suitable places for water tourism along the route 1.2.1. Description of the rivers 1.2.2. Present recreation areas and parking places on the banks of the Narova River, Rosson River and lake Silent (Vaikne) 1.2.3. Historical places upon the Narova and the Rosson rivers. 1.2.4. History of navigation along the Narova and Rosson Rivers, Silent lake. 1.2.5. Existent mooring constructions along the route 1.2.6. Existent ships on the rivers that. 1.2.7. Approaches to Parking places 1.2.8. Resume concerning apt places for water tourism 1.3. Legal regulations of the development of the route(-s) along the rivers Narova, Rosson and lake Silent 1.3.1. Boundary regime rules. 1.3.2. Rules of the use of ships of small size and constructions for their berthing 1.3.3.
    [Show full text]