SEE RIVER TOOLKIT

FOR FACILITATING CROSS-SECTORAL MANAGEMENT OF RIVER CORRIDORS

BOOKLET #3

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS ON THE BODROG, , PRUT, SOČA, VJOSA AND RIVERS CONTENTS Hand in Hand in Hand RIVERSFOR of Table

01 PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS oN SEE PILOT RIVERS BODROG, NERETVA, PRUT, SOčA, 6.2 Overview ...... 44 VJOSA AND KOLUBARA ...... 3 6.3 State of play ...... 46 6.4 Process overview ...... 46 02 CASE STUDIES OF SOUTH EAST EUROPE RIVERS ...... 4 Soča Vision ...... 51 2.1 SEE pilot rivers characteristics and comparison ...... 4 6.5 Lessons learned ...... 53 2.2 Drava River Vision Declaration as a common model for other SEE rivers ...... 7 6.6 Conclusions ...... 53 6.7 More Information ...... 53 03 BODROG RIVER CASE STUDY ...... 8 3.1 About the pilot river corridor ...... 8 07 VJOSA RIVER CASE STUDY ...... 54 3.2 Overview ...... 10 7.1 About the pilot river corridor ...... 54 3.3 State of play ...... 12 7.2 Overview ...... 56 3.4 Process overview ...... 12 Vjosa Vision ...... 59 Bodrog Vision ...... 18 7.3 State of play ...... 59 3.5 Lessons learned ...... 19 7.4 Process overview ...... 59 3.6 Conclusions ...... 19 7.5 Lessons learned ...... 60 3.7 More Information ...... 19 7.6 Conclusions ...... 61 7.7 More Information ...... 61 04 NERETVA RIVER CASE STUDY ...... 20 4.1 About the pilot river corridor ...... 2o 08 KOLUBARA RIVER CASE STUDY ...... 62 4.2 Overview ...... 22 8.1 About the pilot river corridor ...... 62 4.3 State of play ...... 25 8.2 Overview ...... 64 4.4 Process overview ...... 27 8.3 State of play ...... 66 Neretva Vision ...... 31 8.4 Process overview ...... 66 4.5 Lessons learned ...... 31 Kolubara Vision ...... 69 4.6 Conclusions ...... 31 8.5 Lessons learned ...... 69 4.7 More Information ...... 31 8.6 Conclusions ...... 69 8.7 More Information ...... 69 05 PRUT RIVER CASE STUDY ...... 32 5.1 About the pilot river corridor ...... 32 09 CONCLUSIONS ON APPLICATIONS ALONG SEE PILOT RIVERS BODROG, NERETVA, 5.2 Overview ...... 34 PRUT, SOČA, VJOSA AND KOLUBARA ...... 70 5.3 State of play ...... 36 5.4 Process overview ...... 37 10 REFERENCES ...... 72 Prut Vision ...... 41 5.5 Lessons learned ...... 41 11 SEE RIVER PROJECT PARTNERS ...... 74 5.6 Conclusions ...... 41 5.7 More Information ...... 41

06 SOČA RIVER CASE STUDY ...... 32 6.1 About the pilot river corridor ...... 42 B3 01

Practical Applications on SEE Pilot Rivers: NERETVA, BODROG, PRUT, SOČA, VJOSA KOLUBARA AND

In addition to the Drava River, five provided for a platform of experiences, the Kolubara River corridor, one of the other international river corridors were lessons learned, approaches tested, most affected areas in the floods. In selected in the SEE River Project to methods that worked and had good ef- the last few months of the project, a address the challenges of transboundary fects in one country but went unnoticed stakeholder engagement process was cross-sectoral river corridor management. in another one. In some cases, the pro- launched in on the Kolubara River, Equipped with experiences of achieving cess was initiated on a local scale and leading to a draft river declaration and a common international vision for the was later transferred across the border, achieved commitment of stakeholders Drava River (Drava River Declaration while again in another, there was a clear to work together for better, integrated (2008), we wanted to initiate cross- top-down approach. management practices in the future. sectoral and transboundary cooperation also in other countries and river corridors A general outline of the process was Based on experiences gained on all in the South East Europe region. This made; however, at the start we did seven SEE River project rivers, we put was done with the aim to help assist not have a general roadmap such as together our knowledge and ideas to the river users and managers to make a the one presented in Booklet 1 of this draw an ideal roadmap towards cross- step forward toward contemporary river Toolkit. Each pilot area adapted the steps, sectoral river corridor management, management both on a local and trans- methods and techniques, recommended which is presented in Booklet 1. However, boundary scale, building a cross-border in the early Project phase by the Project as our seven South East European rivers stakeholder network in all riparian coun- leading team, to their own river corridor show, working under very different con- tries to facilitate common approaches to reality. The work on individual pilot ditions requires adapting the approaches a shared river. sites was mutually communicated and to the present realities. monitored by partners, each milestone As with the pilot cases on the Drava River, and ongoing evaluation was recorded We hope that the roadmap in Booklet 1 we did not sketch out a clear roadmap by each pilot area coordination team in will help guide you through your process of steps and approaches. Our project order to capture the specifics of the ap- of cross-sectoral river corridor manage- concept was to test the partly advanced proaches, and experiences were shared ment. However, the SEE River Project’s Drava River experience (see Booklet 2) in and discussed among Partners at regular main lesson is to be creative in each river different SEE environments and see how intervals during the Project to assist each region and adapt the process where nec- the variety of national conditions and other in their specific process challenges. essary. Hopefully, the six cases presented transboundary relations affect the cross- in Booklet 3 will give you some further sectoral cooperation processes. The sharing of experiences of partners ideas on how to approach specific situa- on the transnational level led to an ad- tions and overcome obstacles on the way, Five very different rivers were selected ditional remarkable project achievement. and at the same time also inspire you for this reason. They run through The approaches, activities and results towards new innovations. countries with sometimes similar or, in from the five SEE river pilot areas were other cases, very different political and observed and monitored by associated economic situations, through countries partners from Serbia, the Jaroslav Cerni where cross-sectoral dialogue is a com- Institute. After the devastating May mon practice as well as across countries 2014 floods in the , affecting where very little is done in the way of Croatia, and and contemporary river corridor manage- Serbia, the initiative was launched to ment. The richness of the backgrounds transfer the SEE River approach also to

4 6

B3 Trebišnjica River, also by . Some 10,100 km 10,100 Some Montenegro. by also River, Trebišnjica The area along the Bodrog River is facing intensive agricultural agricultural intensive facing is River Bodrog the along area The It Slovakia. in Eastern waterway only the is River Bodrog The m co is the largest river in the eastern part of of part eastern in the river largest the is River Bodrog The is 220 km long and its basin is shared by by shared is basin its and long km 220 is River Neretva The Slovakia and created by the confluence of the Ondava and and Ondava the of confluence the by created and Slovakia social conditions. Subsidies to farmers lack sustainability. lack farmers to Subsidies conditions. social and 280 km 280 and cruise ships - cargo transport is marginal). The river is popular popular is river The marginal). is transport -cargo ships cruise Bodrog the of parts Significant km². 11,552 covers catchment primary public concern because of the limited economic and and economic limited the of because concern public primary is It floods. to vulnerability and erosion triggering production, due to property right changes. Environmental issues are no no are issues Environmental changes. right property to due measures non-structural and structural implement to difficult and Croatia, and hydraulically, via the the via hydraulically, and Croatia, and Herzegovina and Bosnia shores overgrown mostly with river lowland atypical is River Bodrog The River. the into flows itself which River, Ukraine with shared is catchment upper The rivers. Latorica River corridor are protected as Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites. Ramsar and 2000 Natura as protected are corridor River its side arms are also a favourite ground for sport fishermen. fishermen. sport for ground afavourite also are arms side its small of (sailing ships larger for border the across navigable is basin and the Neretva source are in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Herzegovina, and in Bosnia are source Neretva the and basin have their sources in Ukraine, while the Bodrog River itself is is itself River Bodrog the while in Ukraine, sources their have transboundary to Hungary and the right tributary of the Tisza Tisza the of tributary right the and Hungary to transboundary which Uh, and -Latorica Bodrog of tributaries the through with slow drainage and without hindrance barriers. The total total The barriers. hindrance without and drainage slow with for canoeing downstream to Tokaji in Hungary. The river and and river The Tokaji to in Hungary. downstream canoeing for length is 67 km, 15 km in Slovakia and 52 km in Hungary. The The in Hungary. km 52 and 67 is 15 km, in Slovakia km length 2.1 2.1 rivers pilot SEE

2 02 and the lower 20 km reach up to its outflow outflow its up to reach km 20 lower the and parison and ’ characteristics

2 Case Studies of of the the of SOUTH EAST The Neretva River is used for quite a number of economic economic of anumber quite for used is River Neretva The The Lower Neretva valley contains the largest and the most most the and largest the contains valley Neretva Lower The EUROPE RIVERS is the second longest tributary of the Danube Danube the of tributary longest second the is River Prut The Adriatic coast and is one of the few areas of this kind remaining remaining kind this of areas few the of one is and coast Adriatic able land and diverse wetlands. Its alluvial delta of 20,000 ha ha 20,000 of delta alluvial Its wetlands. diverse and land able aluminium production, untreated municipal wastewaters and and wastewaters municipal untreated aluminium production, irrigation, and water drinking for extraction as such activities, mountainous character in its upper part and a lowland character alowland and part upper in its character mountainous ecological services they provide, as well as for their support to to support their for as well as provide, they services ecological networks of ponds and natural channels shaped by the river on on river the by shaped channels natural and ponds of networks fisheries and fishing. Pressures on water resources result from from result resources water on Pressures fishing. and fisheries (12,000 ha). The delta is a Natura 2000 site in Croatia and a a and in Croatia site 2000 aNatura is delta The ha). (12,000 uncontrolled dumpsites, both for municipal and industrial industrial and municipal for both dumpsites, uncontrolled valuable remnants of Mediterranean wetlands on the eastern eastern the on wetlands Mediterranean of remnants valuable into the in Croatia. The basin a pronounced a pronounced has basin The in Croatia. Sea Adriatic the into includes important Dinaric karst water ecosystems. ecosystems. water karst Dinaric important includes countries. in both site Ramsar ible and areas protected proposed and present in the interests Croatia and ha) (8,000 Herzegovina and Bosnia by shared is in Europe. The area is a significant resting and wintering place place wintering and resting asignificant is area The in Europe. its mouth into the Danube. Moreover, with its lakes, meanders, meanders, lakes, its with Moreover, Danube. the into mouth its hydropower, gravel and sand extraction, transport, recreation, recreation, transport, extraction, sand and gravel hydropower, the natural assets along the Neretva River are the most vis most the are River Neretva the along assets natural the wastes. Confronting nature conservation and development and development conservation nature Confronting wastes. with a total length of 953 km. Having its spring in Ukraine, it it in Ukraine, spring its Having 953 km. of length atotal with integration. appropriate without ar and fertile valleys, in karst rich is It downstream. further for migratory birds. The wetlands are also valuable for the the for valuable also are wetlands The birds. migratory for forms the border between Romania, Ukraine and Moldova up to up to Moldova and Ukraine Romania, between border the forms local economic activities. Besides the wetlands, the basin also also basin the wetlands, the Besides activities. economic local problems and still handled only under sectoral interests interests sectoral under only handled still and problems - -

7 7 7 is a transboundary river shared between between shared river atransboundary is River Soča The Slovenia and Italy. It emerges onto the surface as an impres an as surface the onto emerges It Italy. and Slovenia southwards over a total length of 137 km, of which 95 km flow flow 95 km 137 which of of km, length atotal over southwards National Triglav the inside valley Trenta in the spring karst sive sectoral plans and procedures. The key management issues for for issues management key The procedures. and plans sectoral a typical Alpine torrential river with large variations of water water of variations large with river torrential Alpine a typical is River Soča The biodiversity. high of region a picturesque are Ramsar site candidates. The Lower Prut is included in the in the included is Prut Lower The candidates. site Ramsar are floodplain Prut the of parts Furthermore, reserves. nature and parks natural as importance), community of -sites SCI and corridor due to hydropower and flood management schemes. schemes. management flood and hydropower to due corridor part with peaks in late spring and autumn. autumn. and spring in late peaks with part lower its in regime afluvioglacial and part upper in the regime river river the designate to led status conservation their and preserved well- still are species and habitats natural the dikes, protection main problems is the lack of integration between different different between integration of lack the is problems main flows. The ratio between the average yearly flow and the the and flow yearly average the between ratio The flows. Many opposing interests meet in the pilot area. One of the the of One area. pilot in the meet interests opposing Many Park in north-western Slovenia’s Julian Alps. The river flows flows river The Alps. Julian Slovenia’s in north-western Park Lower Prut Biosphere Reserve that is planned between Romania, Romania, between planned is that Reserve Biosphere Prut Lower integrated and Programme Corridor Green Danube Lower areas protection -special (SPA site 2000 aNatura as River Prut flood by reduced was floodplain its that fact the Despite Reserve. Biosphere Delta Danube the to agate is River Prut into the Adriatic Sea. Climatic conditions change along the the along change conditions Climatic Sea. Adriatic the into outflows it where in Italy, km 42 remaining the and in Slovenia its lower part and as the last main tributary of the Danube, the the Danube, the of tributary main last the as and part lower its historical maximum flow is about 1:23. It has a glaciofluvial glaciofluvial a has It 1:23. about is flow maximum historical tion and hydromorphological alterations along the Prut River River Prut the along alterations hydromorphological and tion - pollu water are basin in the people local of livelihood the wetland management will be expanded in the future trilateral trilateral future in the expanded be will management wetland Ukraine and Moldova. and Ukraine course from harsh Alpine to sub-Mediterranean, creating creating sub-Mediterranean, to Alpine harsh from course

- The entire watershed is characterised by a diverse landscape, landscape, adiverse by characterised is watershed entire The The river bed is characterised by a high diversity of its hydro its of diversity ahigh by characterised is bed river The is the second longest river in with a a with in Albania river longest second the is River Vjosa The Soča River attracts many domestic and foreign tourists, provid tourists, foreign and domestic many attracts River Soča sides. The Fir of Hotova National Park in Albania is dominated dominated is in Albania Park National Hotova of Fir The sides. aquaculture). river its along areas inhabited as well as sites archaeological anthropogenic pressures and good very water quality. Today, of one is River Soča the River, Neretva the Like plains. gravel al ends at the Adriatic Sea. Adriatic the at ends of the Vikos-Aoos National Park, a NATURA 2000 site; its main main its site; 2000 aNATURA Park, National Vikos-Aoos the of pressures result from agricultural activities (stockbreeding and part is River Aoos the , In land. agricultural and pastured morphological forms, e.g. deep narrow gorges and wide alluvi wide and gorges narrow deep e.g. forms, morphological one pump-storage plant and many small hydropower plants. hydropower small many and plant pump-storage one of about 885 m above sea level. The total size of the basin is is basin the of size total The level. sea mabove 885 about of 6,710 km 6,710 elevation average an with character mountainous pronounced very rich in natural resources such as , natural habitats habitats natural forestry, as such resources in natural rich very volume of the Vjosa River is about 5,550 million m million 5,550 about is River Vjosa the of volume River has its source in the Northern Pindos Mountains and and Mountains Pindos Northern in the source its has River River basin, there are three large hydropower on the river, river, the on dams hydropower large three are there basin, River ing important economic benefits to local residents. In the Soča Soča the In residents. local to benefits economic important ing by Macedonian fir, silver fir (Abies alba), oak forest shrubs, shrubs, forest oak alba), (Abies fir fir,silver Macedonian by km in Greece (named the Aoos River there). The basin has a a has basin The there). River Aoos the (named in Greece km the upper rest is situated in Greece. The annual discharge discharge annual The in Greece. situated is rest upper the the Slovenian Soča River valley is synonymous with outdoor outdoor with synonymous is valley River Soča Slovenian the low with territory awell-preserved through run tributaries its and river The found. are marmoratus) trutta (Salmo trout marble pure genetically where in Europe locations few very the total length of 272 km, of which 192 km are in Albania and 80 80 and in 192 Albania are which km of km, 272 of length total for important flora and fauna species, historical, religious and and religious historical, species, fauna and flora important for leisure activities. Enabled by the preserved river system, the the system, river preserved the by Enabled activities. leisure 2 : 4,365 km : 4,365 2 or about two thirds are in Albania, while while in Albania, are thirds two about or 3 . The Vjosa Vjosa . The - - - B3

In Albania, the Vjosa catchment is still impressively intact and apply and integrate the various EU directives and their objec- considered the last wild river in Europe. There are generally no tives regulating the management of protected and natural 02 dams, sediment barriers, fixed banks, flood dikes or bed regula- areas along these rivers and within the river basins. The main tions but the Vjosa River is a long chain of big canyons with for- objective of the SEE River Project was to strengthen multi- ested mountain slopes of up to 2000 m altitude, rocky gorges, sectoral stakeholders in sharing the territory of international huge braided gravel areas and meandering sections near the river corridors with the aim of reaching consensus on integra- delta. Still, the Vjosa River corridor is shared by different users tive management, taking into account both the development and sectors, notably agriculture, drinking water supply, energy interests and the conservation requirements. supply, wastewater discharge, small industries (sediment extraction, manufacturing, bottling plant), urban development, Among the main pressures, pollution caused by multiple transport, tourism, etc. The main pressures on the Vjosa River wastewater discharges from municipalities and industry ranks are derived from urban, agricultural and industrial activities. on the first place, followed by diffuse pollution from agriculture. Existing dams and are altering the hydromor- Despite the Vjosa River’s very good preservation status, an phological structures and dynamics, but on the other hand integrated approach of all environmental, social, economic and serve multi-purpose functions, providing energy production, technical aspects of water resources management is needed irrigation, industrial and drinking water supplies. As experi- in order to ensure sustainable development, notably water enced notably in May 2014 with the large disasters in Bosnia preservation and environmental integrity in the region. and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia, floods may cause severe local and transboundary damages. In some parts of the river The Kolubara River is a special case among the SEE River cases corridors, uncontrolled solid waste disposal causes water presented in this Booklet. Beside the fact that activities were pollution and environmental problems, especially during peri- only launched in the last few project months, the Kolubara ods of heavy precipitation. On the other hand, intact river areas River is not a transboundary river, but flows only in Serbia. sustain local economies in the form of tourism, recreation and Geographically speaking, the territory of the Kolubara River nature food production. basin (3,640 km2) is located between 19o 31’ and 20o 30’ east geographic longitude and 44o 05’ and 44o 40’ north geographic In addition to the existing bilateral administrative frameworks, latitude. The Kolubara basin belongs to the River basin the SEE River Project succeeded in establishing new coopera- and the Danube River basin. tion mechanisms in the pilot river basins, which involve all riparian countries. The river is formed by merging of the Obnica River and the River upstream of the city and empties 2.2 Drava River Vision Declaration into the Sava River near . At Valjevo, the Kolubara AS a common model for other SEE rivers River receives the River from the right and forms the Valjevo valley between the surrounding mountains, in which The Drava River Vision Declaration was signed on 24 Septem- it spills in several parallel flows. After Valjevo, there are no ber 2008 in Maribor by the 4 riparian states´ Heads of Delega- major settlements along the river, except several villages. The tions (Austria, Slovenia, Hungary and Croatia) to the ICPDR and Kolubara River turns north and continues to flow in several a high Italian representative. The Declaration set 10 long-term parallel flows, receiving its major tributaries in this section: goals that reflect the priorities of contemporary Drava River , Turija, Lukavica and Peštan from the right; Kladnica and management, though it does not cover all management issues from the left. Due to the floods, even though its (such as sediments). valley is densely populated, there are no settlements along the river itself, until it reaches Obrenovac. However, many large The SEE River Project was intended to substantially contribute to villages and towns are located in the vicinity of the Kolubara achieving this Drava vision, for example through the preparation River: , , Šopić, Vreoci, Veliki Crljeni, Draževac, of the Joint Drava River Corridor Action Plan, the Local Pilot Area Mislođin and Barič, where it flows into the Sava River. Action Plans and related Stakeholder Agreements, which took into account the ten objectives agreed in 2008 (see Booklet 2). COMPARISON OF THE STATUS OF THE SIX RIVERS By communicating the progress and achievements along the River corridors in the SEE region are threatened by unsustain- Drava River into the other five SEE river regions, the SEE River able use, increasing human pressures, and problems of in- Project endeavoured to promote similar governmental and creased floods and droughts driven by climate change. On the stakeholder declarations, joint actions plans and cross-border other hand, in most of them there is no clear understanding or cooperation - all aiming at developing more contemporary river consensus, especially within the different sectors, on how to corridors in South East Europe and elsewhere. 8 9 10

B3 The pilot area in Slovakia encompasses encompasses in Slovakia area pilot The Tisza River, which itself flows into the the into flows itself which River, Tisza The Bodrog River is the only waterway waterway only the is River Bodrog The 52 km in Hungary. The catchment cov catchment The in Hungary. km 52 corridor is the largest river in in river largest the is River Bodrog The - tribu the through Ukraine with shared ships, according to the water level with with level water the to according ships, small cruise ships sail from Slovakia to to Slovakia from sail ships cruise small and Hungary. and a regularly frequented tourist area with with area tourist frequented a regularly is It cm. 230 up to of a minimum depth as Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites. Ramsar and 2000 Natura as Even Even Tokaj to in Hungary. down drive ally ers 11,552 km². Significant parts of the the of parts Significant km². 11,552 ers over 50 km across the border for larger larger for border the across km 50 over Slovakia Ukraine, are countries riparian grown shores with slow drainage and and drainage slow with shores grown river is popular for canoeists, who usu who canoeists, for popular is river The area. awine-growing to near runs it because also but coves, picturesque (9 km) in Eastern Slovakia. It is navigable navigable is It Slovakia. in Eastern km) (9 Latorica rivers. The upper catchment is is catchment upper The rivers. Latorica Danube River. The Bodrog River is a is River Bodrog The River. Danube the of tributary right the and Hungary to transboundary is itself River Bodrog Bodrog River corridor are protected areas areas protected are corridor River Bodrog by the confluenceof the Ondava and have their sources in Ukraine, while the the while in Ukraine, sources their have the eastern part of Slovakia and created created and Slovakia of part eastern the typical lowland river with mostly over mostly with river lowland typical taries of Bodrog - Latorica and Uh, which which Uh, and -Latorica Bodrog of taries taries taries the without hindrance barriers. The total total The barriers. hindrance without length is 67 km, 15 km in Slovakia and and 67 is 15 km, in Slovakia km length 3.1 3.1 Bodrog River Uh A and Latorica and

river pilot the bout 03 - tribu its with corridor from Ukraine; its its Ukraine; from - -

- Case Study BODROG RIVER 34.5 km in Slovakia. The catchment catchment The in Slovakia. km 34.5 is created by combining by is created River Uh The source is within within is source River Latorica The several tributaries in the massif ridge at at ridge massif in the tributaries several arms and islands. On the Slovakian Slovakian the On islands. and arms an part of Ukraine. Several important important Several Ukraine. of part an Transcarpathi in the mostly located also drainage land and arms dead and active area is 3,099.62 km 3,099.62 is area sport for ground afavourite also are 850 m above sea level. The catchment is is catchment The level. sea mabove 850 natural gas mining. mining. gas natural various are There arms. blind numerous rare aquatic and wetland communities communities wetland and aquatic rare of part This in Slovakia. located is 6% cities are situated along its course, nota course, its along situated are cities of regulation the after incurred channels of network interlaced an is area entire of 2,640.6 km 2,640.6 of of Ukraine and flows over a length of of length a over flows and Ukraine of flows and drainage works in 1953-1965.works drainage and flows fishermen. unprecedented in Slovakia. This typical typical This in Slovakia. unprecedented Ramsar list of wetlands of international international of wetlands of list Ramsar industries around the Uh River, such as as such River, Uh the around industries importance. Its assets are extremely extremely are assets Its importance. Laborec River, it has a catchment area area acatchment has it River, Laborec Hungary. The river and its side arms arms side its and river The Hungary. bly Uzhorod. At the confluence with the the with confluence the At Uzhorod. bly the Latorica River basin is a protected aprotected is basin River Latorica the territory, it flows through floodplain floodplain through flows it territory, the territory of the Zakarpatska oblast oblast Zakarpatska the of territory the forming a complex system, which is is which system, acomplex forming forests and old meanders. Almost the the Almost meanders. old and forests lands. It creates mighty meanders and and meanders mighty creates It lands. Low Slovak Eastern the of river lowland landscape and was added in 1993 the added to was and landscape lowland river has many meanders, blind blind meanders, many has river lowland 2 . The Uh River is a typical atypical is River Uh . The 2 , of which only only which , of - - -

0 KM 50 km 100 km MAP 1: BODROG PILOT RIVER CORRIDOR B3 03

3.2 Overview

Key facts about the pilot area Key facts about the SEE River process in the pilot area

Pilot Bodrog: Pilot river length: 67 km; Pilot river basin size: 13,579 km² Main goals -- Negotiate about land use area Latorica: Pilot river length: 188 km; Pilot river basin size: 7,622 km² of the SEE River -- Ensure proper using of EU funds for agriculture (use of funds in practice is not good) size Uh: Pilot river length: 133 km; Pilot river basin size: 2,640 km² process -- Find ways how to store water and how to provide flood protection -- Make an attempt to motivate farmers to make changes - farmers and landowners are key stakeholders in the pilot area

Special -- Agricultural land Common International Vision for the Bodrog River was articulated during the characteristics -- Upper basin heavily drained for flood protection river vision SEE River Project as a basis for international action plan of the pilot area -- Complex water management and flood control started already in 1958 articulated -- Poor condition of irrigation and drainage

Protected Areas -- Natura 2000 Within -- Ramsar sites Studies done Study for the project proposal: Solutions for integrated Bodrog River management The Pilot Area during oriented for water storing in the land with a potential of flood protection the project and prevention (April 2014).

Countries Ukraine, Slovakia, Hungary involved Participation -- National workshops in Slovakia, Hungary and Ukraine methods -- International workshop and tools

Bilateral -- Tisza Memorandum of Understanding And Multilateral -- Border Commissions Slovakia-Hungary, Slovakia-Ukraine, Hungary-Ukraine Communication, -- Introductory brochure for the Bodrog River Mechanisms information, -- Contributions to the SEE River Project newsletter dissemination -- Information for the media, articles, media appearances

Connection To Previous projects: Other Projects -- Project for providing water to the Ramsar site and also to fishery companies Or Processes -- UNDP/GEF Project Integration of Ecosystem Management Principles and Practices into Land Capacity -- Capacity building seminar in Bratislava, October 2014 and Water Management of Laborec-Uh region 2007-2012 building -- Capacity building seminar in Budapest, October 2014

Ongoing projects and processes: -- GEF Small Grants Programme - Eastern Slovakia (6 projects) 2013-2014 -- Initiative COMDEKS -- Community Development and Knowledge Management for the Satoyama Initiative

Evaluation -- Peer review technique Pre-Studies ICPDR/UNDP/GEF Project: Making Space for Water in the Bodrog River Basin 2010-2011 of the -- Project Steering Committee evaluation Done process -- Slovakian project team evaluation

Anticipated EU-funded programmes: Pre-Existing Advisory Group of the Autonomous Region of Kosice for Regional Development post-project -- Topic: Demonstration/pilot activities in the framework of drinking water supply Stakeholders activities according to EU requirements, floodplain management, communal waste Platforms/Groups management, etc.: WATER-1b-2015 -- Topic: Integrated approaches to food security, low-carbon energy, sustainable water management and climate change mitigation: WATER-2b-2015

12 13 B3 On the Hungarian part of the river: −− Water regime altered by the Tiszalök and by upstream reservoirs. −− Sedimentation due to the Tiszalök dam. 03 −− River regulation structures along 12 km. −− Side-arms separated from the river by levees. −− Untreated sewage entering the river from smaller munici- palities. −− The river is considered as heavily modified in the River Basin Management Plan. 3.3 State of play −− 12 municipalities exposed to high or medium flood hazards. 3.4.2 Specific objectives

The area along the Bodrog River is subject to intensive On the Ukrainian side of the Latorica and Uh rivers: Contemporary circumstances demand integrative and strategic agriculture, triggering erosion and vulnerability to floods. It is −− Improper communal waste management leads to the pollu- river management, based on a combination of local, regional, difficult to implement structural and non-structural measures tion of floodplains and water courses (mainly plastic bottles), national and transboundary approaches, as well as on knowl- due to property right changes. Environmental issues are not which are transported also to Slovakia and Hungary. edge and experiences in cross-sectoral arbitration/integration. the primary concern because of hard economic and social −− Unregulated forest cuttings in the upper part of the basin, For this purpose, the SEE River activities on the Bodrog River conditions. Subsidies to farmers lack sustainability. which leads to a reduced rainfall interception capacity in the aimed: area and therefore an increase in floods. The main challenge for the Bodrog River area is to achieve co- −− Plans to build small hydropower plants in the upper part of −− To agree on changed land use by thorough negotiations. operation between water managers, nature protection guards the basin. −− To ensure proper use of EU funds for transboundary environ- and farmers to manage land use and water in an integrated −− High concentrations of priority pollutants such as chrome, mental actions. way and to change agricultural practices to achieve resilience mercury and cadmium. −− To find ways to retain water and provide flood protection. against flood disasters. −− Compensation (environmentally friendly) measures do not −− To make an attempt to motivate farmers to make changes. work properly. Farmers and landowners are key stakeholders in the pilot Main characteristics of the Bodrog River: −− Economic and social conditions in the region are not favour- area. −− Agricultural land (including the Tokaj-Hegyalja wine region), able to “environmental concerns”. −− There was a complementary project for providing water many small settlements. to the Ramsar site and also to fishery companies, being −− Upper basin is heavily drained for flood protection and 3.4 Process overview implemented at the same time as the SEE River Project. The agricultural production. SEE River Project is an opportunity to replicate this project −− First water management/flood control associations date 3.4.1 main goals of the process and plan projects which would provide water also to other back as far as 1880. retention sites. −− Complex water management measures started in 1958, The main goals of the Bodrog River pilot action were: −− To show stakeholders that it is possible to do projects which comprising 4 retention reservoirs, 453 km of dikes, 28 pump- −− To establish an innovative stakeholder partnership in the improve current conditions. ing stations and 522 km of drainage canals. project area that can continue to implement a self-sustaining −− To show best practice cases to local stakeholders from the −− The irrigation and drainage infrastructure is actually in poor water and land management programme resulting in Bodrog region. There are also other best practice cases in condition. environmentally sound agricultural practices, alternative Hungary and Ukraine. −− The lower (Hungarian) part of the river corridor is 51 km long, non-farm livelihoods, and further expanding the extent of −− To introduce a new approach to river and land use planning with 50,000 inhabitants in 17 riparian municipalities. (semi-)natural floodplain habitats that provide water quality management by focusing on the river corridor as the core improvements and support a representative range of species. part of the catchment area where most pressures occur. PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES IN THE BODROG RIVER BASIN: −− To reach a stakeholder agreement on concrete actions at −− To ask relevant stakeholders to comment and adjust project the Bodrog River corridor in the form of an action plan as a proposals and to add additional measures for improving the On the Slovakian part of the river: basis for future implementation and funding during the EU management of the Bodrog transnational river corridors. −− Intensive agricultural production in the past impacted the financing period 2014-2020. environmental quality. −− Agricultural practices contribute to erosion and increased vulnerability of the area to floods. −− Property rights changes (expropriation and restitution) make it difficult to implement structural and non-structural measures. −− Subsidies to farmers lack sustainability. −− Compensation (environmentally friendly) measures do not work properly. −− Economic and social conditions in this region are not favour- able to “environmental concerns”. 14 B3 3.4.3 Challenges and obstacles September 2013, the “Advisory Group of the Autonomous could have been based. For this reason, in the first phase, an Region of Kosice for Regional Development” meeting took assessment of the river basin problems and interests had to be In addition to the challenges already identified at the project place in Kosice, Slovakia. This group was created during previ- performed, as follows. beginning by the SEE River project team, further challenges ous work and represents the main target partners in the region. 03 were identified by workshop participants from Slovakia, The status of trans-border cooperation, trans-border commis- Prior to the national workshop, consultations with key Hungary and Ukraine during the national and international sions and national-regional governance was also evaluated. stakeholder representatives were initiated, including the workshops. These are: The following findings were specified: North-Hungarian Water Directorate, the Aggtelek National Park Directorate and the Regional Development Unit of the Borsod- −− Maintenance and development of flood safety along the The national level is very strong; commissions are very formal. Abaúj-Zemplén County Council. During these preliminary con- Bodrog River and its tributaries with an emphasis on non- The situation is quite specific. The Bodrog River is a lowland sultations, the SEE River project approach had to be repeatedly structural flood protection - improvement of the forecasting river with intensive drainage systems. The main problem in the explained; since stakeholders were accustomed to projects that system, water retention, etc. pilot area is how to reuse the land. The socialistic system had directly include local construction works (e.g. reconstruction of −− Environmental awareness raising and environmental educa- a great impact on land use (heavy soils, low outputs). On the a sluice gate, rehabilitation of a protected site) as the result. tion should be promoted in order to ensure proper waste other hand, a part of the Bodrog River is a Ramsar site. management and improve the recognition of value and Together with the invitation to the national workshop, a importance of natural river environment. The Slovakian national workshop, which was attended by 46 questionnaire was sent out to stakeholders to find out their −− Rehabilitation of the natural river ecosystem. participants, was held on 5 March 2014 in Mala Trna. The views on issues and expectations regarding the Bodrog River. −− The Bodrog River should becomes a symbol and a precedent representation was very good and at a proper level. The discus- The number of returned questionnaires was low. of cooperation among countries and nations that meet along sion about proposals of the project team for selected measures its course. was very constructive. Several additional proposals were col- Based on these preliminary stakeholder consultations and the −− Ensuring good water quality for the human population and lected from 4 working groups. questionnaire responses, a short summary was compiled on natural ecosystem. the perceived status of the Bodrog River and this was sent out −− Enforcement of transboundary and nature friendly tourism. UKRAINE to the invited participants of the national workshop. −− The balance between socio-economic activities and the maintenance and protection of natural resources and their In Ukraine, several technical assistance projects were imple- A consultation took place with the Slovakian transbound- sustainable use should be pursued for the benefit of the mented in the territory of the Latorica and Uh basins, devoted ary Bodrog partner (also in its capacity of the Bodrog River communities living in the region. to the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive coordinator) on 14 February 2014 to coordinate the goals of the −− Improvement of navigation and movement along and across and the improvement of flood management. However, there national workshops, in order to develop results that enable a the river should be within the carrying capacity and resil- is a lack of data (monitoring, mapping) and methodological common Bodrog River Vision and an Action Plan. ience of the environment. approaches for proper involvement of Ukrainian partners in the river basin and flood management, following the requirements The national workshop in Hungary was held on 3 April 2014 in 3.4.4 Activities and approach of relevant directives. Tokaj, within the Bodrog River corridor. The aim of the work- shop was to arrive to an agreed upon list of During the first period of the project, the objective was to There are international cooperation mechanisms in place set identify the main characteristics regarding spatial planning by bilateral agreements between Ukraine and Slovakia and −− problems (nature conservation, regional development, and land use management. An inventory of relevant national Ukraine and Hungary on cooperation on transboundary waters. environmental, water management, tourism, etc.) legislation and EU directives and a specific assessment of their However, this cooperation includes only water managers. −− development potentials and impact were done. In collaboration with our national partners, International cooperation involving land owners, foresters, −− medium- to long-term development goals and actions of the stakeholder list was established in Slovakia, Hungary and meteorologists, etc., should be reinforced. the Bodrog River and its river corridor. Ukraine, grouped according to specific interests as follows: In spite of political difficulties, a national workshop was held During the workshop, considerable time was devoted to −− All riparian country ministries responsible for water and on 6 May 2014 in the Baranintsi village near Uzhgorod and discussing and generally understanding the social, economic nature protection management. was attended by 26 participants. The participants discussed and conservation constraints of potential development goals. −− Regional nature protection and water management agencies, a number of water-related problems in the basin, including The workshop resulted in 12 development goals/actions. directorates, inspectorates. wastewater treatment improvement, invasive plant species −− Water management and nature protection associations. cow parsnip Heracléum sosnówskyi, which covers the river Moreover, the establishment of a Bodrog Stakeholder Core −− Land use and agriculture agencies. banks more and more often and has caused problems for hu- Group was proposed. The core group should include regional −− Major industry, transportation and agriculture stakeholders. man skin, local flooding due to unclean melioration channels, and local stakeholders and representatives of the NeKI Branch −− Scientific and other professional organisations, civic and etc. Special attention will be paid to communal waste manage- Office in order to provide continuity beyond the SEE River environmental NGOs, the general public. ment and its transfer along transboundary water courses. Project. Responsibilities for organising this group were vested with the Miskolc Branch Office of NeKI. SLOVAKIA HUNGARY A further aim was to relate priorities to the development goals. Several consultations with main partners were carried out In the Hungarian Bodrog River basin, there was no antecedent Since this aim could not have been fulfilled within the work- during the first period of the project. On 30 April 2013 and 15 project on which a thorough overview of relevant problems shop, a questionnaire was sent out to participants, where 16 17 the 12 development goals were ranked During the workshop and a series of B3 according to four levels of priorities. interactive sessions, the goals of the three Based on responses, the final priority list Bodrog countries were merged, reformu- for the Hungarian Bodrog River corridor lated and prioritised to meet the common is as follows: goals and priorities of the stakeholders 03 of the three countries. A Transnational −− Maintenance of the present level of Bodrog Action Plan was formulated with flood protection. a view on potential transnational projects. −− Elimination of the transboundary influx of floating litter. 3.4.5 Outputs and results Activities Stakeholder involvement Communication −− Protection of existing nature conserva- tion values (including the Ramsar areas −− Agreement on an international vision Identification of the main CREATION OF THE MAIN and Nature 2000 sites). for the Bodrog River was reached. characteristics regarding NATIONAL WORKSHOP - SLOVAKIA GROUP OF PARTNERS IN THE spatial planning and land REGION - THE ADVISORY GROUP −− −− Improvement of cooperation among A transnational action plan was pre- use management. OF THE AUTONOMOUS REGION the Bodrog River basin countries (SK, pared, outlining the actions needed OF KOSICE FOR REGIONAL At the meeting, we discussed new possibilities in the next EU programming period DEVELOPMENT. UA, HU). to reach the common manage- Inventory of relevant 2015-2020 for support of regional development with a focus on water (agriculture, national legislation and EU municipalities, water management, tourism, etc.). The aim of the workshop was to ask −− Ecosystem rehabilitation. ment objectives in all three riparian Directives and a specific the relevant stakeholders for their comments, needs and ideas for improvement of the In Ukraine, contact was −− Development of the tourism infra- countries. assessment of their impact. management of transnational river corridors, thus contributing to an action plan for established with Blue recovery of the Bodrog River corridor. Rivers, the main partner. structure (biking paths, camp sites −− Concrete project proposals were In collaboration with and harbours for nature friendly water identified as a basis for the future our national partners the A consultation took tourism). implementation of agreed measures. stakeholder network was place with the Slovakian established in Slovakia, transboundary Bodrog −− Improvement of environmental Hungary and Ukraine NATIONAL WORKSHOP - HUNGARY partner. education and awareness raising in the In the framework of the Bodrog pilot

Bodrog region. case activities, outputs from the project The aim of the workshop was to arrive to an agreed upon list of problems (nature −− Development of the transportation have created conditions for better conservation, regional development, environmental, water management, tourism, etc.), development potentials, and medium- to long-term development goals and actions on infrastructure. solutions of the specific problems in the the Bodrog River and in its corridor. −− Complex regional development of Bodrog countries. Both top-down and tourism. bottom-up approaches proved to have −− Supporting the near-natural agricul- a synergetic effect on the project out- tural practices on the flood plain. puts. Additionally, after the identifica- NATIONAL WORKSHOP - UKRAINE −− Improvement of cargo shipping on the tion of unsustainable communal waste Bodrog River and towards the Tisza management system leading to the

River. waterways pollution as one of the key One of the main goals of the workshop was to discuss the priority water management and environmental problems in the transboundary Ukraine-Slovakia river basins. −− Improvement of the water quality in transboundary problems in the basin the Bodrog River to make it suitable for at the national workshop in Ukraine, bathing. a meeting with Coca-Cola Beverages Ukraine was held as a follow-up activ- Using these priorities, an Action Plan ity. The situation with the transporta- for stakeholders could be proposed, tion of communal waste along rivers INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP - SLOVAKIA including actions and potential projects and the transboundary importance for the development of the Bodrog of the solution of this problem were River corridor. discussed. After this, Coca-Cola Bever- THE FOLLOWING TOPICS WERE DISCUSSED: - Main problems and development goals in the Bodrog River corridor – synthesized results ages Ukraine provided 1100 l containers of the stakeholder workshops (the report of the project team concerning the problems in the Bodrog pilot case) ALL BODROG PARTNERS for separate recyclables collection free - Proposed items for the Bodrog River Vision and the action plan for the river corridor. of charge for the Baranintsi community - Facilitated discussion on the river corridor vision and action plan. Following the national workshops and (uniting 4 villages), which was already based on their results, a consultation was ready to sort the waste and which is in held with the Slovakian project partner to close proximity to the UA-SK border, so agree upon the main points of a prelimi- the results of proper waste manage- nary Bodrog River Vision. ment would be more visible at the transboundary level. Ukrainian and The International Bodrog Workshop was Slovakian experts oversaw this process held in Kosice with the participation of and provided useful advice regarding stakeholders from Slovakia and Hungary the arrangement of the separate waste FIGURE 1: and a representative of Ukraine. collection at the local level. SEE RIVER PROCESS ON THE BODROG RIVER 18 International Vision for the −− Development of cooperation among T - Tourism 3.6 Conclusions Bodrog River and agreed future the Bodrog countries (SK, UA, HU) FP - Flood Protect and Prevention TR - Transport actions, based on the interna- in the fields of river management, WQ - wATER Quality All Bodrog River corridor countries (Slovakia, Hungary and NC - Nature Protection and Conservation tional workshop on Bodrog River nature conservation, tourism and E - Environment Protection Ukraine) have a similar heritage in water, land and nature in Košice, Slovakia, May 2014. cultural exchange. GE - Green Economy management in typical lowland conditions. During prepara- −− Ensuring good water quality for the tory work, an inventory of problems and possible solutions −− Maintenance and development human population and the natural were discussed at the national levels. Lists of these issues were

BODROG VISION BODROG of flood safety along the Bodrog ecosystem. exchanged among partners. After coordination meetings (in River and its tributaries with an −− Improvement of drinking water Bratislava, Estergom, Budapest and at SEE River Project Project emphasis on non-structural flood quality (WQ). meetings), a common opinion on the main problems and solu- protection - improvement of the −− Sanitation of small municipalities tions was prepared. During the main event - the international forecasting system and water (WQ). workshop in Košice on 21-22 May 2014 - results from national retention. −− Improvement of the water quality workshops were presented. Participants discussed the priori- −− Maintenance and upgrading of the to transform the Bodrog River into ties and possible solutions in detail and a common proposal on existing flood defence system, in- a bathing water (WQ). future cooperation was created. cluding local flood-warning systems (FP). Enforcement of transboundary Project partners work on a Bodrog action plan with follow-up −− Making space for water (FP). and nature friendly tourism. activities in the form of the project document proposals for the −− Drainage systems, flood protection 3.5 Lessons learned EU planning period 2014-2020. and wetland restoration (FP). −− Improvement of nature friendly tourism infrastructure (bicycle Experiences from pilot actions: For further cooperation, it is necessary to strengthen: Environmental awareness raising path along the river, harbours and −− The relevant stakeholders became interested in solving −− The involvement of stakeholders in national and cross- and environmental education camp sites for boaters) (T). cross-sectoral problems, national and local approaches border cooperation. should be promoted in order TO −− Complex development programme (including bottom-up). −− Cross-sectoral cooperation. ensure proper waste management for tourism along the Bodrog River −− Individual interests and responsibilities of key stakeholders −− Cooperation with Ukraine (which should be strengthened and improve the recognition of (T). should be consulted in order to establish a final list of stake- according to the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement signed value and importance of the natu- holders, both for the national and trans-border levels. in 2014. ral river environment. The balance between socio-eco- −− EU, national and other financial support schemes are very −− Project partners have to find a way to achieve sustainability nomic activities and the mainte- complex; their consultation is necessary. The project pro- of the SEE River Project results and transfer the joint vision −− Elimination of the transboundary nance and protection of natural vided input to facilitate these consultations. with goals into project proposals and concrete action. influx of floating litter (E). resources and their sustainable −− Participants at the national workshops were very active. It −− Strengthening of the environmental use should be pursued for the ben- seems that the project became interesting for them because education, environmental aware- efit of the communities living in of its cross-sectoral approach and appropriate timing (at the ness raising in connection with the the region. ending of the current EU financial period and before starting Bodrog River (E). the new 2014-2020 period). −− Promoting nature friendly agri- −− The project contributed to solving gaps between different Rehabilitation of the natural cultural activities on the floodplain sectoral policies. river ecosystem. (grazing, bio products, etc.) instead −− Significant efforts were needed to motivate stakeholders to of intensive production (GE). participate at the meetings and to later become involved in −− Precedence of nature conservation practical/concrete actions. regulations over economic develop- Improvement of navigation and −− Drawing attention to the problem is half of its solution, as ment projects (NC). movement along and across the shown in the case of cooperation with Coca-Cola in Ukraine −− Rehabilitation of ecosystems in river should be within the carry- with regard to waste treatment. the river and the river corridor (incl. ing capacity and resilience of the −− Media acceptance was needed to publish best practices in revitalisation of oxbows) (NC). environment. the region. −− Reduction of impact of invasive −− Possible further activities: species (NC). −− Improving conditions for cargo −− The development of the joint project proposals for the shipping on the Bodrog River and to next EU financial period 2014-2020, based on the priorities The Bodrog River should become the Tisa River (TR). identified in the Bodrog River Vision document and involv- the symbol and a precedent of −− Improving communication between ing intersectoral stakeholders identified within the project cooperation among countries the two riverbanks (by bridge or consultations. 3.7 More information and nations that meet along its ferry) (TR). −− levels corresponding to the quantified target levels and The results of the pilot activities on the Bodrog River are available course. reviewing the whole process by evaluating intangible assets. on the SEE River web page: www.see-river.net/bodrog-toolkit 20 21 22

B3 200 km 200 The Lower Neretva valley contains the the contains valley Neretva Lower The The Neretva River basin is shared by by shared is basin River Neretva The The 240 km long Neretva River has its its has River Neretva long km 240 The corridor Adriatic coast and is one of the few areas areas few the of one is and coast Adriatic Adriatic Sea. The River River Neretva Upper The Sea. Adriatic support of local economic activities. The The activities. economic local of support their for as well as provide, they services pro in role electricity socio-economic acrucial plays and biodiversity standing spreads into an alluvial delta covering covering delta alluvial an into spreads in Bosnia Mountain Jabuka in the source are also valuable for the ecological ecological the for valuable also are wintering and resting asignificant is area and Herzegovina) to its mouth, the river river the mouth, its to Herzegovina) and andandthrough flows Herzegovina, of this kind remaining in Europe. The The in Europe. remaining kind this of part of the delta area extending into into extending area delta the of part wetlands The birds. migratory for place duction, drinking water and agriculture. and water drinking duction, Mediterranean wetlands on the eastern eastern the on wetlands Mediterranean flows through a mountainous landscape; landscape; mountainous a through flows Croatia for 20 km before reaching the the reaching before km 20 for Croatia River, also by Montenegro. Some 10,100 10,100 Some Montenegro. by also River, Bosnia and and and Herzegovina Croatia, Herzegovina, and 280Herzegovina, km km Neretva the with connected hydraulically through the Trebišnjica the River, through for the last 30 km, from (Bosnia (Bosnia Mostar from km, 30 last the for largest and most valuable remnants of of remnants valuable most and largest 4.1

2 of the basin area is in Bosnia and and in Bosnia is area basin the of 2

. The river is a showcase for out for ashowcase is river . The

A 04 river pilot the bout

2 in Croatia. is is which

- Case Study -

NERETVA RIVER 1993). Five protected areas exist in the in the exist areas protected 1993). Five The major transboundary tributaries of of tributaries transboundary major The The Nature Park (74.11 (74.11 Park Nature Blato Hutovo The Šanica, Bijela, , , (left (left Krupa Bregava, Buna, Bijela, Šanica, sensitive areas needs to be improved at at improved be to needs areas sensitive site (2001) and so has been the delta delta the been has so and (2001) site and Park) Nature Blato (Hutovo status area extending in Croatia (designated in in (designated in Croatia extending area of 7.77of km ecosystems. cally altered by land reclamation projects projects reclamation land by altered cally rivers have been channelled and drained drained and channelled been have rivers requirements and measuresprotection delta the since Moreover, level. national Croatian part of the delta, covering ato covering delta, the of part Croatian However, the Neretva and Trebišnjica Trebišnjica and Neretva the However, Bosnia and Herzegovina has protection Bosnia and has protection Herzegovina , , Trebižat (right Neretvica, , , Drežanka, Kraljušnica, Trešanica, Bijela, , entity, ecological and ageographical is in the 1960s. in the is also a Ramsar site in both countries. countries. in both site aRamsar also is basin also includes Dinaric karst water water karst Dinaric includes also basin km2) has been designated as a Ramsar aRamsar as designated been has km2) to manage it. Besides the wetlands, the the wetlands, the Besides it. manage to similar use should countries two the tion along their course and were drasti were and course their along tion tal area of 16.2 km 16.2 of area tal tributaries). Prenjska, Baščica, Šištica, and tributaries) , rivers the include River Neretva the for agriculture and hydropower produc hydropower and agriculture for the of protection The designation. for 2 ) have also been proposed proposed been also ) have 2 ; two other sites (total (total sites other ; two - - -

0 KM 25 km 50 km MAP 2: NERETVA PILOT RIVER CORRIDOR B3 04

4.2 Overview

Key facts about the pilot area Key facts about the SEE River process in the pilot area

Pilot -- Pilot river length: 240 km Main goals To upgrade cross-border cooperation to better manage the Neretva River. For this area -- Pilot river basin size: 10,380 km² of the SEE River purpose, the SEE River Project intended to reach a common agreement on river corridor size process management for harmonising both development and conservation interests along the Neretva River with agreement on common vision and action plan for the Neretva River.

Special -- Dinaric karst water ecosystems Common A River Vision - Future River Framework - was articulated during the SEE River Project characteristics -- Upper part naturally preserved river vision of the pilot area -- Middle part utilised by hydropower articulated -- Lower part mostly used by agriculture -- Water scarcity and droughts (CRO) -- Two administrative units within BiH (FB&H and RS)

Protected Areas -- Hutovo Blato Nature Park (BiH) Studies done -- Analysis of relevant B&H legislation Within -- Ornithological reserves: Prud, Orepak, Podgredom (CRO) during -- Analysis of key national strategic documents The Pilot Area -- Ornithological and ichthyological reserve at the river mouth (CRO) the project -- Analysis of relevant projects for cross-border river management -- Protected landscape: Modro oko Lake (CRO) -- Natura 2000 (CRO) -- Ramsar (CRO, BiH)

Countries Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia involved Participation -- National workshops in B&H and Croatia methods -- International workshop held in B&H and tools -- National capacity building seminars held in B&H and Croatia

Bilateral -- Agreement between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia on Water Management Relations (1996) − And Multilateral joint commission Communication, -- Introductory brochure in local languages Mechanisms -- Memorandum on Cooperation on the Neretva River between Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, information, -- Press releases sent to the media the Principality of Monaco and the Coordination Unit of the Mediterranean Initiative of dissemination -- Many different media appearances; media interest significantly increased during the partner the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (MedWet) (2003) meeting held in B&H -- The Project was presented at the International Water Day event as well as at other events throughout B&H -- Project promotion materials were distributed mainly among addressed stakeholders Connection To Previous projects: -- The Project’s final publication was printed in local languages Other Projects -- Transboundary Management Plan for the Lower Neretva Valley (Ramsar Small Grants Or Processes Fund project, 2000) -- Hydroecological research of sinking karst rivers systems and karst springs aquifers. Capacity -- National capacity building seminar in B&H Croatian-Slovenian project, 2004 building -- National capacity building seminar in Croatia -- WWF Living Neretva (2007-2011) -- WWF Europe’s Living Heart (2008-2011)

Ongoing project: -- GEF Neretva - Trebišnjica

Evaluation Peer review technique Pre-Studies Study of the vulnerability of the area prepared for the Spatial Plan of the Done of the Federation of B&H process

Pre-existing / Anticipated Informing the Bilateral Commission on the results of the SEE River stakeholders post-project Project and joint Vision for the Neretva River. platforms/groups activities

24 25 B3 Another characteristic of the Neretva River basin is that the river is used for quite a number of economic activities, such as extraction for drinking water and irrigation, hydropower, gravel and sand extraction, transport, recreation, fisheries and fishing. 04

One of the unique river basin administrative characteristics is that within B&H the Neretva River basin is shared by two The hydrological characteristics of the waters in the Lower separate administrative units, i.e. two entities: the Federation through coordinated and integrated transboundary manage- Neretva River are very complex due to the karst characteristics of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FB&H) and the Republic of Srpska ment can these challenges be met and protection and sustain- of the geology of this region. The Neretva River catchment (RS). able development of the Neretva area ensured. stretches over a significant area and has all specificities of the hydrological characteristics of the karst. Large irregularity of 4.3 State of play Both the Neretva and Trebišnjica rivers are particularly impor- the discharge is present in the Neretva River during the year: tant in terms of energy production. There are 13 reservoirs in summer discharges are low, while during winter they are very While in the Lower Neretva the challenges of conflicting the Bosnia and Herzegovina part of the Neretva and Trebišnjica high. The maxima usually appear in December and spring, and interests of water and land users are most prevalent (because basins. Large dams with accompanying big reservoirs on the are characteristic in that that they appear suddenly. The most this is where agricultural and other economic activities are Neretva River include those of Jablanica, Grabovica, Salakovac abundant periods of water quantity are December and April, prominent - the upper and part of the middle courses of the and Mostar. A special hydropower production system has been and the poorest are August and September, followed by July. river are in relatively unpopulated, mountainous areas), the constructed on the Trebišnjica River; this includes two dams The water regime of the Neretva River is irregular, especially in use and management of the upper basin water resources have on the river ( I or Grančarevo and Trebinje II in Bosnia its upper stream. a very significant impact on downstream ecosystems, such as and Herzegovina) and two channels: a channel through Popovo the operation of the five hydropower plants in the upper and polje (Popovo field) towards the Čapljina plant (Bosnia and Croatia reports that water scarcity and droughts are observed middle part of the Neretva River. Herzegovina) and a second one across the border towards the during summer. The karst geology of the area results in high power plant (Croatia). Additional infrastructure is interaction between surface waters and groundwater. The The progradation of the saline wedge in the planned for construction through the “Upper Horizons” project, specific complex problem is an encroaching saline water wedge and other problems related to water scarcity and floods are which involves regulating the Gatačko, Nevesinjsko, Dabarsko in the Neretva delta. Human interventions have reduced the complex phenomena generated primarily through 150 years of and Fatničko fields. There is another hydropower plant on the flood periods in the hinterland karst fields and altered the human intervention in the Lower Neretva and inappropriate Rama River. hydrogeologic regime, presenting a direct threat to agriculture management of its watershed. In the 19th century, the Neretva and the natural values in the delta. River was deepened and regulated for the development of the The usage of water for hydropower purposes has caused Metković port. In the middle and later half of the 20th century, dramatic changes due to the diversion of water from the Human interventions have changed the present delta since the flood and water regime of the karst fields in the hinterland watershed in the Lower Neretva section. Already in the first historical times. Works in the 19th century regulated and deep- that supply water to the Lower Neretva through a complex phase of the Neretva-Trebišnjica hydropower system, at the ened the river up to the Metković port and in the second half system of karst pathways, sinkholes and springs was disrupted so-called “Lower Horizons” where the river bed of Trebišnjica of the 20th century hydromelioration works in the delta were primarily on the south-eastern side of the watershed through in the Popovo field was sealed and sinkholes closed, diverted performed. The transfer of water from the Neretva watershed the development of a hydropower system of the Trebišnjica approximately 4 billion cubic meters of water away from the related to the Neretva-Trebišnjica hydropower system had a River, which drastically altered the supply of water compared watershed of the Lower Neretva. Additional 2 billion cubic major impact with significant adverse consequences in the to the natural state. On the southern side, the construction of meters of water will be diverted with completing the “Upper Lower Neretva River. tunnels for withdrawing water from karst areas for agricultural Horizons” hydropower system with yet unforeseen harmful purposes also diverted significant amounts of water. Further- effects on agriculture and nature in the Neretva delta. The Trebišnjica and Trebižat rivers are characteristic examples. more, extensive melioration activities in the Neretva delta in The Trebišnjica River emerges near the town of Bileća (Bosnia the middle of the past century greatly changed the natural dis- The operation of the different existing infrastructures should and Herzegovina). It is a characteristic example of a “sinking tribution system of water and sediments at the mouth of the be coordinated, taking into account upstream/downstream river” that drains into the underground and reappears; its total Neretva River. In spite of all these changes, the area remains an uses and needs as well as evolving climatic conditions, so length is 187 km above and under the ground. A part of the extremely productive agricultural and important natural area as to prevent potential negative impacts on ecosystems and river water drains directly across the borders with Croatia to but it is highly vulnerable and threatened by any new human economic activities. Plans for future hydropower development the Adriatic Sea. The Trebišnjica River is hydraulically partially interventions as well as by climate change. The inadequate in both countries should also take these factors into account. linked to the Neretva River, being part of the same karstic management of the upstream hydropower system presents a Alteration of the hydrological regime as a consequence of hydrogeological basin. The Trebišnjica sub-basin is shared major threat to downstream human lives and property. Only water use for agricultural, municipal, industrial and hydro- between Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the major part of the power generation purposes is a pressure factor. There are sub-basin extends, Croatia and Montenegro; almost the entire water losses due to degraded water supply and distribution western bank of the Bileća belongs to Montenegro. systems, and the efficiency of agricultural water use is limited. The 51 km long Trebižat River is also a “sinking river”; the Other problems include reclamation of wetlands, uncontrolled River (Croatia) drains into the underground and re-emerges at urbanisation and excessive illegal hunting and fishing in the the Tihaljina spring (Bosnia and Herzegovina), then flows as wetlands. The erosion of riverbeds and land as well as the the Tihaljina-Mlade-Trebižat River. decline of groundwater levels in the Trebišnjica/Neretva left 26 27 B3 coastal aquifer have been observed in quality is monitored in the Bilećko Lake constitutional character of two entities: Bosnia and Herzegovina, together with a aquifer; improvements are, however, the Federation of B&H and the Republic reduced spring flow both in the Neretva necessary in both cases. Data on the of Srpska, as well as the District of Brčko. right coast and Trebišnjica/Neretva left Trebišnjica/Neretva left coast aquifer According to the Constitution of B&H, 04 coast aquifers. have been exchanged between the two the constitutions of the entities and the countries but improvement is needed arbitrage decision for Brčko District, the Point-source pollution (from untreated in this regard; enhanced monitoring is competencies for water management municipal and industrial wastewaters needed in both countries. (i.e. for development, water protection, and uncontrolled dumpsites of both water use, flood protection) are with municipal and industrial wastes) and Monitoring of water flow and quality is the entities and Brčko District. The B&H diffuse pollution (due to unsustainable improving; more efforts are needed in state level authorities do not have the agricultural practices) exert pressure biological monitoring. This will allow the competences for arranging the inter- both on surface waters and aquifers. status assessment with regard to water entity relations. Additionally, there is no supply, demand and quality in a basin reliable institutional and process system The cumulative impacts of these with a rather complex hydrogeology, within which possible misunderstand- pressures have led to quality and providing the basis for adequate plan- ings could be solved and conflicts in the quantity degradation of surface waters ning and regulation on the river basin management of water resources could and groundwater, and subsequently of level. The essential balancing of compet- be resolved. associated ecosystems. ing water demands, taking into account social, economic and environmental con- With regard to the competent institu- In many cases, pressures and impacts siderations, through a comprehensive tions in charge of water resources, the have an upstream-downstream character; and coordinated strategy agreed by the territorial basis for water management for instance, the regulation of the river two countries, may follow. Enhancement in line with the entity laws is defined flow has led to salt water intrusion in the of the national institutional capacities to within two river basin districts. The Neretva delta and a reduced sediment plan, implement and enforce manage- Sava River Basin District is part of the deposition in the alluvium affecting ment measures on water demand and international Danube River Basin District the natural system, its functions and water use is indispensable. on the territory of B&H (Federation of services, as well as the economic activi- B&H and Republic of Srpska, as well as ties downstream. This is not applicable Croatia also reports that investments on Brčko District). everywhere throughout the area, since flood protection and hydro-amelioration the existence of karstic geological are necessary. The Adriatic Sea River Basin District formations may, for example, cause includes parts of the international river point pollution impacts, which occur via An Agreement between Bosnia and basin districts of the Neretva River with groundwater transport downstream in Herzegovina and Croatia on Water Trebišnjica, Cetina and rivers in other parts of the basin. Management Relations was signed in the territory of B&H, i.e. territories of 1996 and is being implemented through the Federation of B&H and Republic of A number of water resource manage- a joint commission, which is also the key Srpska. With regard to the Federation ment plans and measures are imple- bilateral mechanism for transbound- of B&H, two agencies in charge of water mented in Croatia, reflecting the changes ary cooperation in the Neretva and management were established by law in water management legislation made Trebišnjica basins. with the head offices in Sarajevo and to harmonise it with EU standards and Mostar, which are, in their legal nature, the requirements of the WFD. The Moreover, a Memorandum on Coopera- public institutions and functions in preparation of a River Basin Manage- tion on the Neretva River was signed accordance with the regulations which ment Plan in accordance with the WFD between Bosnia and Herzegovina, define the work of public institutions. by Croatian Waters, in cooperation with Croatia, the Principality of Monaco and In the Republic of Srpska, there were the Ministry of Regional Development, the Coordination Unit of the Mediterra- some changes in established agencies Forestry and Water Management, is nean Initiative of the Ramsar Convention in charge of water management and underway. on Wetlands (MedWet) in 2003. Pol- in January 2013, the Public Institution lution in the delta of the Neretva River, “VODE SRPSKE” was established as the Bosnia and Herzegovina has established hydropower utilisation and water supply umbrella institution in charge of water protection zones for drinking water supply were among the priority themes. management in this entity. Agencies for the Neretva right coast aquifer. The have their branch offices and their tasks groundwater quantity is monitored in In Bosnia and Herzegovina, there is a are defined in detail by law, while in the the Neretva right coast aquifer in Bosnia complex situation in water management Republic of Srpska, the Public Institu- and Herzegovina, while the groundwater and other sectors, deriving from the tion “Vode Srpske” covers the sector for 28 B3 water management of the Sava River of international and bilateral cooperation the project team analysed the relevant tourism sector ministry representatives and Business LiNK Mostar. The project to present the SEE River Project to the basin district and the sector for water a challenge. This results in considerable B&H legislation, key national strategic were invited but did not attend. The name was Popowo (People Organize stakeholders in Croatia and involved management of the Trebišnjica River delays in coordination and difficulties in documents and EU directives, as well as agricultural ministry was not present but Prevention of Water Overflow) and its relevant stakeholders from the whole basin district. reaching international agreements and relevant projects for cross-border river several representatives from the Faculty main objective was strengthening the country in order to collect their opinions. 04 implementing cross-border actions. basin management. In the process of of Agriculture, University of Mostar, were civil society role in a dialogue initiated The starting point for this workshop’s 4.4 Process overview preparing objectives, 10 goals of the Ner- present. The conclusion of all sector at the Popovo field area in order to inte- participant list was the list used in the With regard to the stakeholder net- etva River Vision were initially drafted. representatives was that the implemen- grate the authorities with the advocacy GEF Neretva-Trebišnjica project. The 4.4.1 main goals of the process work: Local communication techniques tation of the existing legislation should of farmers and local citizens. Its aim was last event that HEIS organised was the on how to integrate cross-sectoral issues Ministries in charge of water manage- be improved. to integrate objectives of the energy and International (bilateral) workshop in The main goal was to upgrade cross- in spatial planning documents and ment and water agencies in both entities agriculture sectors. B&H, held in September 2014. border cooperation to better manage activities are a challenge. are the key stakeholders, so the Bosnian After the workshop, the questionnaires the Neretva River. For this purpose, the SEE River project team presented/ for Toolkit preparation, i.e. preparation A World Bank-financed GEF project, aim- In order to prepare and organise the SEE River Project intended to reach a With regard to the Bilateral Commis- explained the purpose of the project, of a general guideline for achieving ing to prepare a joint Neretva-Trebišnjica international workshop, the project common agreement on river corridor sion: The work procedures and compe- the process and the draft vision with its consensus in cross-sectoral and trans- water management plan for the Republic partners agreed to update the draft joint management for harmonising both tences of the Bilateral Commission, such goals and encouraged stakeholders to national integral water management of of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, vision and its objectives on the basis of development and conservation interests as financing mechanisms for effective give their comments. river corridors, were distributed to the started in 2010 and will finish in 2014. the comments and proposals from all along the Neretva River. operations, are not fully clear and are relevant ministries and water agencies/ A process of involving stakeholders has stakeholders received at the SEE River not accompanied with a defined budget Various corrections were made in certain public institutions for water manage- been launched within that project from workshops or afterwards at individual 4.4.2 Specific objectives for its work. The work procedures and parts of the goals for the joint vision ment in both entities as well as to B&H both countries, Republic of Croatia and meetings with key stakeholders which financing mechanisms of the Bilateral with the support of the participants members of the bilateral commission. Bosnia and Herzegovina, i.e. B&H enti- could not attend the workshops. HEIS Specific objectives of the pilot river Commission can definitely be improved. present at the workshop, resulting in a ties. A programme of measures will be also asked a network of active NGOs, corridor activities were: new draft of the vision. This harmonised A new circle of individual meetings with prepared within this water management which were partners of HEIS in the past −− To compile a list of problems from 4.4.4 Activities and approach and revised version was presented and the competent water management insti- plan and will present a set of activities projects on pollution prevention and stakeholders from different sectors discussed further with the competent tutions in both entities was performed to be carried out in a period of 6 years in nature protection, to help prepare the along the river corridor. With the aim to discuss and prepare a ministries and institutions in charge in order to present the prepared Peer order to ensure a good status of water international workshop. The international −− To prepare a draft joint vision text draft text of common objectives, the of water management, as well as with Review Report of the Neretva River, bodies or prevent their degradation. workshop on Neretva River was held with the objective to achieve integra- HEIS project team set up pre-consultative other sectors, such as spatial planning, which is part of the Project Diary and Therefore, it is necessary to mention the on 17 September 2014 in Neum, B&H, tive cross-sectoral transboundary river meetings with the most relevant au- agriculture, forestry, energy, etc. thus of the Toolkit; meetings were held GEF project within the SEE River Project where the joint vision was adopted by corridor management. thorities in both B&H entities (ministries in Banja Luka on 27 December 2013 activities. different stakeholders for Bosnia and −− To establish a cross-sectoral stake- and public agencies institutions for The first national workshop in Bosnia at the Ministry of Water Management, Herzegovina and Republic of Croatia. holder network on national (B&H and water management) in order to assess and Herzegovina, during which the SEE Forestry and Agriculture (Republic of On the other hand, the stakeholder Croatia) and transboundary levels. the focus of their plans and objectives. River Project was introduced to all stake- Srpska), as well as in Mostar on 9 Janu- process in the GEF Neretva-Trebišnjica 4.4.5 Outputs and results −− To discuss the draft joint vision Also, the list of stakeholders for the holders along the Neretva River corridor, ary 2014 at the Agency for Watershed of project had some difficulties and there (future River Framework) and achieve Neretva River has been jointly prepared was held in June 2013. The main Adriatic Sea (Federation of B&H). is a need to be patient and show some With the SEE River process on the a common agreement with all as follows: workshop objective was to establish a understanding about the work with the Neretva River we have achieved the stakeholders along the Neretva River cross-sectoral network of stakeholders, In relation to answers to the question- stakeholders in this area. The stake- following: corridor. −− all municipalities located along to discuss the draft goals of the joint naires, one suggestion made by the holder participation process presents a −− A cross-sectoral, cross-border −− To compile a list of proposed activities the Neretva River (mayors, head of vision for the Neretva River corridor in FB&H physical planning ministry was to considerable challenge. stakeholder network was established, in form of an action plan for the solu- departments for water management, line with sustainable water manage- take one part of the Neretva River as the which improved the cooperation for tion of identified problems. spatial planning); ment and to present the example of a pilot area (e.g. where river bed erosion The GEF/World Bank project has been the management of the Neretva River. −− To prepare proposals for concrete −− water utility companies; sustainable water management concept is present) to see if the Neretva River initiated with the objective to support −− The agreed joint vision for future projects that will aim at carrying out −− NGOs (active along the Neretva River); of the Drava River. is deeply endangered in that part or to Integrated Water Resources Manage- sustainable development of the pilot the solutions, with the objective of −− ministries on local/county level and make a revision of environmental stud- ment (IWRM) in the basin by harmonis- area agreed during the national stake- supporting the long-term sustainable state level (forestry, water manage- The workshop was attended by 30 rep- ies, look at all pressures of the Neretva ing management approaches and legal holder workshops in B&H and Croatia, development of the area. ment, tourism, environment protec- resentatives from different institutions, River on that part and see how erosion is frameworks across the two countries as well as at the International Neretva tion, etc.); starting from entity-level authorities to connected to other issues. and ensuring improved stakeholder River Stakeholder Workshop. 4.4.3 Challenges and obstacles −− universities,; local-level institutions and NGOs. The participation at all levels. The WFD −− Action plan for realising the goals of −− energy sector companies and other ministry in charge of the spatial plan- Another example to test suggested by principles and guidelines are used for the joint vision for the Neretva River With regard to improving cross-sectoral water-related subjects along the ning sector in the Federation of B&H (as the Agency for Watershed of Adriatic preparing the river basin management corridor and creating conditions for cooperation in B&H: Neretva River. authority) and the competent ministry Sea Mostar was the Popovo field, where plan. The Bilateral Commission has been resolving specific problems in the The data exchange between the sectors in charge of water management in FB&H underground water protection and agri- involved in the project preparation and Neretva River corridor. and between the B&H entity institutions The project team prepared the draft text (as authority) attended, as well as the cultural needs are in conflict with hydro- will oversee its implementation. −− Project proposals drafted together should be improved. In Bosnia and Her- with the objective to achieve, discuss and Agency for Watershed of Adriatic Sea power production objectives. In this area, with the stakeholders in line with zegovina, the multiple levels of involved agree it with all stakeholders along the Mostar and an environment protection an EU project was implemented in 2012 In February 2014, Hrvatske vode the agreed joint vision (Draft River administrations make the coordination Neretva River corridor. For this purpose, sector representative from FB&H. The by the Association for Entrepreneurship organised a national workshop in Croatia Framework). 30 31 B3 The Joint International Vision 4.5 Lessons learned for the Neretva River consists of the following goals: Experiences from pilot actions: −− Workshops (both in B&H and Croatia) enabled the project 04 1. Promoting the integrated imple- team to involve the most relevant key stakeholders in water mentation of EU directives related to management, physical planning and environment protection. water management, flood protec- −− Multi-sectoral stakeholder network should be strengthened tion, renewable energy, sustainable in the future in each of the countries within the river corridor. NERETVA VISION NERETVA water use, environmental protection, −− It was recognised that more local stakeholders from both biodiversity conservation and climate countries should be involved in the international workshop change in the transboundary Neretva and the plan was to draft a list of recognised existing prob- River corridor. lems and possible solutions in the future action plan. 2. Ensuring a high level of flood −− There were already suggestions from the questionnaires that protection by developing operational could be put into the project proposals in the two testing areas. Activities Stakeholder involvement Communication plans for flood control and flood risk −− One of the problems already recognised is that construction management, as well as establishing licensing procedures need improvement since implementa- Analyses of relevant Pre-consultative meetings an efficient system of monitoring and tion (or lack of appropriate implementation) often leads to B&H legislation and NATIONAL WORKSHOP - B&H with the most relevant key national strategic authorities in both B&H alerting, and of data exchange in real uncontrolled construction in water-sensitive zones or, for documents and EU entities (ministries directives, as well as and public agencies, time. example, in bathing zones along certain points of the river relevant projects for The main objective of the workshop was to establish a cross-sectoral network of institutions for water 3. Improving the protection of corridor, and the problem is a lack of an official decision with cross-border river basin stakeholders and to discuss the draft objectives for the creation of a joint vision for management), in order to management. the Neretva River corridor in line with sustainable water management and to present assess what is in focus of ecosystems, all natural resources and regard to proclaiming a bathing zone in that area. the experience of the sustainable water management concept for the Drava River as their plans and objectives. −− an example. improving cross-border protection It was recognised that both project partners, Croatian state- 10 objectives of the Neretva measures for sustainable develop- level water authority (Hrvatske vode) and the private expert River Vision were initially The purpose of the project drafted. and the process as well as ment. institution (HEIS in B&H) have the same attitude toward the draft of the vision with objectives were presented 4. Improving conditions for fish stakeholders and positive joint action within the project in The draft of the B&H vision to ministries in charge migration in the Neretva River and its relation to their scope of work. was improved with the NATIONAL WORKSHOP - CROATIA of water management and objectives for the Croatian water agencies in both tributaries, as well as protection of part of the Neretva River entities. corridor in relation the Neretva delta area as an Interna- Possible further activities: The workshop aimed at presenting the draft Neretva River Vision that was prepared to the sustainable use tional Important Bird Area. −− Further cooperation of the stakeholder network in develop- of irrigation for the at and after the B&H workshop. It also aimed at promoting and strengthening the Individual meetings with agricultural production cooperation between Croatia and B&H for the joint management of the Neretva River the competent water 5. Promoting the area of the ing and implementing concrete project proposals in the needs in the Neretva delta Corridor. Comments to the draft Neretva River Vision were collected and later used to management institutions area, considering the update the text of the vision. in both entities. Neretva River as a Mediterranean 2014-2020 financial period. problem of water salinity cross-border sustainable tourism and −− Informing the Bilateral Commission on the results of the SEE in that part and the impact of the sea water. recreation area. River Project and joint Vision for the Neretva River in order 6. Promoting cross-sectoral to gain further support for the agreed actions. INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP - B&H cooperation with the aim of social and economic sustainable development of 4.6 Conclusions the area. The final project workshop for the Neretva River brought together stakeholders from both riparian countries. The international workshop aimed at harmonising the final 7. Improvement of effective and −− Stakeholders have to be motivated further to take an active objectives of the Neretva River Vision to achieve the common International Neretva River Vision. Additionally, possible future actions were discussed and several concrete transparent principles of integrated part in different international workshops and action groups; ideas for follow-up activities were identified. water management through cross- there is a continuous need for more individual consultative border cooperation. meetings in the future period. 8. Taking necessary measures to −− Stakeholders have to be stimulated in a way that encourages achieve and maintain a good status inter-sectoral cooperation. of surface water, groundwater and −− Stakeholders have to be stimulated to take responsibilities coastal sea waters to protect aquatic to define the problems and suggest actions to solve the and water-dependent ecosystems as problems in the future in the action plan. well as the needs of water users. −− Project partners have to find a way to achieve sustainability 9. Raising awareness of the popula- of the SEE River Project in the Neretva River corridor and tion on the importance of water, as transfer the joint vision with goals into project proposals. well as of forests and forest land in flood protection. 10. Promoting sustainable water use in all sectors as well as ensur- 4.7 More information ing financial sustainability in water The results of the pilot activities on the PRUT River are available FIGURE 2: SEE RIVER PROCESS ON THE NERETVA RIVER NERETVA THE ON PROCESS RIVER SEE management. on the SEE River web page: www.see-river.net/NERETVA-toolkit 33 34

B3 4.6% of the country). The average average The country). the of 4.6% - tribu longest second the River, Prut The 953 km, springs in Ukraine, constitutes constitutes in Ukraine, springs 953 km, corridor system is formed by non-permanent non-permanent by formed is system shaped by the river in its lower section. section. lower in its river the by shaped meanders, lakes, its with Reserve, sphere age slope of the basin is 0.2 ‰. A feature Afeature ‰. 0.2 is basin the of slope age aver The confluence. the 2mat to area 130 central min the from ranges altitude and Republic of Moldova and flows into into flows and Moldova of Republic and occupy especially the areas with a high a high with areas the especially occupy relatively uniform development. development. uniform relatively a have crops Perennial plateau. relief prevalent is land Arable factors. genic anthropo and conditions geographical shape elongated the is basin river the of catchment area of 10,967 of km area catchment networks of ponds and natural channels channels natural and ponds of networks Carpathian Mountains. 80% of the river river the of 80% Mountains. Carpathian Land use is influenced by physical and and physical by influenced is use Land in the Prut River corridor, while forests forests while corridor, River Prut in the In Romania, the Prut River basin has a a has basin River Prut the Romania, In km and an orientation parallel to the the to parallel orientation an and km being a “gate” to the Danube Delta Bio Delta Danube the to a“gate” being the last main tributary of the Danube, Danube, the of tributary main last the is River Prut the Moreover, Danube. the Ukraine Romania, between border the of length atotal with Danube the of tary watercourses. 30 about of width average an with 5.1

A

river pilot the bout 05 2 (about (about - - - Case Study PRUT RIVER 460.4 million m³ (14.58 m³/s), of which which m³/s), of (14.58 m³ million 460.4 214.6 million m³ (6.8 m³/s) from phreatic phreatic m³/s) from (6.8 m³ million 214.6 The multi-annual average flows of the the of flows average multi-annual The sources and 246.1 million m³ (7.8 m³/s) m³ million 246.1 and sources Jijia, Moşna, Elan, Oancea, Brăneşti Brăneşti Oancea, Elan, Moşna, Jijia, area. As regards their surface, only Lake Lake only surface, their regards As area. it side, Moldavian the On Chineja. and - contribu The Danube. the with ence of the source depth. depth. source the of enaia, Vilia, Lopatnic, Racovet, Ciugurul, Ciugurul, Racovet, Lopatnic, Vilia, enaia, Glade, including: tributaries 27 receives section Radauti in the m³/year) million ral lakes are located in the lower Prut Prut lower in the located are lakes ral Tel including: tributaries 32 receives disappeared or have been converted into into converted been have or disappeared fishponds. - conflu the at m³/year) million (3314 Groundwater resources are estimated at Corneşti, Isnovat, Rada, Volovat, Başeu, Başeu, Volovat, Rada, Isnovat, Corneşti, River Prut the side, Romanian the On In the old Prut floodplain, the natural natural the floodplain, Prut old the In m³/year). million m³/s 10 (316 is River, Pochina exceeds 50 ha. 50 exceeds Pochina m³/s (2462 78.1 from increase River Prut - natu Six Mirnov. Mare, Gârla Kamenka, tion of the principal tributary, the Jijia Jijia the tributary, principal the of tion the Ungheni section, reaching 105 m³/s 105 reaching section, Ungheni the in m³/year) million 86.7 m³/sto (2736 to anthropogenic changes they have have they changes anthropogenic to lakes were in large numbers, but due due but numbers, in large were lakes -

0 KM 125 km 250 km MAP 3: PRUT PILOT RIVER CORRIDOR B3 05

5.2 Overview

Key facts about the pilot area Key facts about the SEE River process in the pilot area

Pilot Pilot river length: 953 km Main goals -- Develop an integrated management of the Prut River corridor on the basis of area Pilot river basin size: 27,820 km² of the SEE River transboundary cooperation size process -- Improve the aquatic ecosystem in all its aspects

Special -- Gate to the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Common A common vision for the Prut River was articulated during the SEE River Project characteristics -- Flood risk/flood protection issues river vision of the pilot area -- Agricultural issues articulated

Protected Areas -- Natura 2000 sites (SPA and SPI) Studies done -- GIS analyses Within -- Natural parks and reserves, namely: during -- Analysis of overlapping land use layers The Pilot Area 1) Natural Park “Lakes of the Lower Prut” the project -- Pressures related to the Prut River corridor 2) Scientific Reserve “Lower Prut” -- Extension of Prut River mapping -- Ramsar sites: Beleau and Manta lakes -- Inventory of relevant national legislation and EU directives -- Floodplains are Ramsar candidates -- Specific assessment of legislation and directives -- Lower Prut - part of the Lower Danube Green Corridor -- Stakeholders and target groups identification and grouping in thematic areas -- Lower Prut also proposed as a trilateral Biosphere Reserve -- Communication and stakeholder involvement strategy adapted on the Prut River -- Ongoing synthesis report about results of joint meetings between RO, MD and UA Countries Romania, Ukraine, Moldova involved Participation -- National workshops methods -- International workshop and tools

Bilateral -- Bilateral Commissions: And Multilateral 1) Romania and Moldova Mechanisms 2) Romania and Ukraine Communication, -- Introductory brochure for the Prut River -- Prut-Barlad River Basin Administration Information, -- Contributions to the SEE River Project newsletter -- Agreements, memorandums, conventions, protocols and regulations between dissemination -- Contribution to the completion of specific questionnaires by RO all 3 riparian countries. representative stakeholders

Connection To Previous projects: Other Projects -- Programme DANUBE DIALOGUE: “Transboundary approaches for water and biodiversity Or Processes management issues in Lower Prut” Capacity -- National capacity building seminar in Romania --“ Resources pilot centre for cross-border preservation of the aquatic biodiversity of Prut River building MIS ETC 1150” between Iasi University and the Ecological Centre Moldova

Ongoing project: -- EAST AVERT: “Prevention and flood protection in Siret and Prut river basins - modern monitoring system with automatic stations”

Evaluation -- Peer review technique Pre-Studies N/A of the -- By stakeholders based on detailed questionnaires Done process

Pre-existing In the framework of the DANUBE DIALOGUE Programme: the main aim of the Danube Anticipated -- biodiversity legislation, gravel extraction stakeholders Dialogue Programme was to support cross-border collaboration in the Danube region and post-project -- Report regarding the activity, conclusions and common agreements of the SEE River Project presented platforms/groups to find sustainable solutions for people and nature through the implementation activities to bilateral commissions of transboundary projects. -- Experience exchange, establishing common working groups on different thematic areas (water quality assessment, water and biodiversity legislation, gravel extraction)

36 37 B3 The fish ponds are present in large 35 km upstream from the confluence destructive effects of water, reconstruct 5.4 Process overview River corridor. Based on the stakeholder The meeting was attended by repre- numbers (262) in the Prut River area, with the Danube River at the border water courses, provide hydrological and meetings held in the framework of the sentatives of the following sectors: many of them being set up at the time with Romania. The Beleu Lake is the hydrogeological monitoring, for the 5.4.1 main goals of the process SEE River Project and on the provisions water management, hydropower, of Stephen the Great (14th century). main part of the reserve, covering an implementation of legislation harmo- of the technical bilateral agreements, environment protection, forestry, local 05 Most ponds have a fishery function area of 620 ha (the surface corresponding nised with EU directives in the field The main goal was to establish a we consider the following as the main authorities, NGOs, universities, muse- and a few other functions (irrigation, to the multi-annual mean of its water- of sustainable management and the transboundary stakeholder network challenges for the Prut pilot area: ums and the media. abstraction for drinking water, etc.). In table height). This lake is connected conservation of water resources (usually and agree on a common vision and 2014, there are 26 reservoirs in the Prut with the Prut River by the Manolescu aquatic ecosystems and wetlands). The approach towards integrated manage- −− Lack of joint management strategies - The main conclusions were: basin, of which the most important is the channel (3.9 km long, 38 m wide and up administrator of water resources in the ment of the Prut River corridor to ensure planning for achieving environmental −− There is no strong commitment or Stanca-Costeşti (on the Prut River) with a to 4.5 m deep). Prut River area is the Prut-Barlad Water good water status and flood protec- and flood protection objectives while interest to “change things”. total volume VT = 1,400 million m³. Basin Administration, based in the city tion, preserve nature, biodiversity and taking a cross-sectoral approach into −− Stakeholders expressed their interest 5.3 State of play of Iasi. ecosystems, and to enable development consideration. in doing “something concrete”. Main categories of diffuse pollution at the same time. −− Legislation harmonisation between −− Weak awareness about river corridor sources are agglomerations/towns Many opposing interests meet in the Cooperation with the Republic of RO, UA and MO in the framework of management needs at local level. that do not have wastewater collection pilot area. One of the main problems Moldova and Ukraine is realised on the 5.4.2 Specific objectives bilateral agreements and ICPDR/other −− A need of significant efforts to mobi- systems, agriculture - agrozootechnical is the lack of integration between basis of agreements, memorandums, international conventions and provi- lise stakeholders. farms without proper storage/use of different sectoral plans and procedures. conventions, protocols and regulations The joint effort of water users, main sions/requirements on issues related manure, and industry. The key management issues for the in regional and international frame- stakeholders and the general public, as to water management. Moreover, two important issues were livelihood of local people in the basin works. The main framework of coopera- well as of the authorities involved in −− Effective stakeholder involvement identified during the meeting, namely Despite the fact that the floodplain was are its pollution and the changes of the tion is the Agreement on Cooperation the Prut River management represents - the weak inter-sectoral issues ap- flood protection and agriculture. reduced by flood protection dikes, the natural shape of the Prut area due to for the Protection and Sustainable Use an opportunity for this generation, proach to key issues. natural habitats and species are still hydropower and flood management of Prut and Danube, approved by a for people and organisations, to work The second national stakeholder work- well-preserved and their conservation structures. governmental decision in 2010. together for improving the aquatic 5.4.4 Activities and approach shop of the project took place on 12 status led to designating the Prut River ecosystem in all its aspects. December 2013 in Chisinau, Republic of as a Natura 2000 site (SPA - special During the last 50 years, human The most significant agreements are: In the early stage of the project, both Moldova. This workshop was organised protection areas and SCI - sites of activities have contributed to increased −− Agreement between the Romanian Specific objectives of the pilot river GIS analyses and land use layer overlap- by the National Administration Roma- community importance), as natural pollution and changes of Prut’s natural and Moldavian governments on the corridor activities were: ping were performed in order to identify nian Waters, as a partner of the SEE parks and nature reserves. Further- course. This refers to waste water cooperation for the protection and −− To establish a RO, MD and UA cross- the main characteristics regarding spa- River Project, with the support of the more, parts of the Prut floodplain are a discharges from urban agglomerations, sustainable use of Prut and Danube sectoral stakeholder network involved tial planning and land use management. Moldavian Ministry of Environment. Ramsar site (in Moldova), a natural park industry and farms, changes in land use, waters. in the Prut River corridor manage- At the same time, the extent of the Prut and reserves; other parts are Ramsar inadequate agricultural practices and −− Agreement between the Romanian ment activities, River corridor was mapped. An inven- The main purpose of the workshop was candidates. The Lower Prut belongs to spatial planning, which have all deterio- and Moldavian governments on the −− To establish the main problems and tory of relevant national legislation and to involve the identified network of the Lower Danube Green Corridor. Inte- rated the Prut River corridor. cooperation in the framework of gaps, and develop dialogue and trust. EU directives and a specific assessment institutional, administrative, operational grated management of wetlands will be protecting the fishery resources and −− To identify common actions that of their impact were also done. In and local stakeholders engaged in the expanded in the Lower Prut area as part Other relevant aspects in the Prut River fishery regulations on the Prut River. have to represent solutions to the collaboration with the Prut-Barlad River management and activities related to of the proposed trilateral Biosphere Re- corridor are the people’s social status −− Memorandum of Understanding problems identified. Basin Administration, the stakeholder the Prut River, in particular regarding serve between the Republic of Moldova, (especially poverty), which creates a lack between the Ministry of Environment −− To discuss the joint vision and achieve list was established and grouped ac- the sustainable and integrated manage- Romania and Ukraine. of interest in environmental issues, the and Climate Change from Romania a joint agreement on the proposed cording to specific interests (agriculture, ment of the Prut River corridor on the lack of local funds creating difficulties in and the Ministry of Environment action plan. energy, biodiversity). Moldavian territory and the identifi- The left bank of the Prut River was accessing international funds and diver- from Moldova on the collaboration in cation of key issues, problems, gaps, designated as Natural Park “Lakes of the gent interests between the agriculture environmental protection. 5.4.3 Challenges and obstacles On 26 September 2013, the first obstacles and the appropriate solutions. Lower Prut” (19,152 ha). The lower Prut and flood protection interest groups. −− Agreement between the Ministry national workshop of the project Moldavian stakeholders attended the floodplain lakes Beleu and Manta are of Environment of Moldova and the The Prut River, as the borderline took place in Iasi, Romania, at the meeting in significant numbers, coming the largest natural lakes in Moldova and From an administrative point of view, Ministry of Environment and Climate between Romania, the Republic of Prut-Barlad River Basin Administration. from the fields of water management, have been designated as a Ramsar site the only administrator and manager of Change from Romania. Moldova and Ukraine, involves issues at This meeting aimed to motivate the energy production, local administration, since 2000. the water resources in Romania is the −− Agreement between the Romanian a technical level that are analysed in the network of institutional, administrative, agriculture, government. Moreover, the National Administration “Romanian and Ukrainian governments regarding framework of commissions established operational and local factors involved in Moldavian Vice Minister of Environment The Scientific Reserve “Lower Prut” Waters” and its river basin branches. the cooperation in water manage- by bilateral agreements. The agree- the management and activities related attended the meeting. The main area of is one of the last remaining natural The NARW applies the strategy and na- ment. ments are at intergovernmental and to the Prut River, in order to jointly interest and discussion was related to floodplains in Moldova’s Lower Danube tional policy of quantitative and qualita- inter-ministerial level in the areas of discuss needs for more sustainable and flood protection and agriculture. Posi- region. About two thirds of the total tive management of water resources, environmental protection and water integrated management of the Prut tive and problematic aspects were pre- surface is covered by the lake and one acting for the conservation, rational use management. At the same time, the River corridor on the Romanian territory sented and discussed and the concept third by alluvial forests (mainly willows). and protection of the water resources stakeholder meetings in Romania and and to identify key issues and possibly of river corridor and actions in relation The reserve is located in the south- from depletion and degradation, to en- the Republic of Moldova identified solutions in this regard. to it were of a real interest to Moldavian western part of the Republic of Moldova, sure sustainable development, prevent the main areas of interest for the Prut representatives. 38 39 The SEE River Project was received from −− the feedback of the Ukraine meeting B3 the Moldavian side with a real interest, (problems, obstacles in the Prut River so that proposals for future continuation management prtocess); of the project were also discussed in the −− synthesis of sectoral and cross-sec- framework of the meeting. toral issues for the Prut River corridor 05 management in order to establish a The third national stakeholder work- common vision in line with the final shop of the project took place on 28-29 project and the identification of com- April 2014 in Cernăuţi, Ukraine. mon objectives in the river corridor; −− presentation of European pro- Activities Stakeholder involvement Communication This meeting was organised by the grammes and sources of funding National Administration Romanian in order to be able to continue the Initial analyses were made: Project promotional Waters, as a partner of the SEE River project between the three riparian GIS analyses, analyses NATIONAL WORKSHOP - ROMANIA available to stakeholders of overlapping land use in Romanian and English, Project, with the support of the Ukrain- countries as full partners. layers, pressures related key information also ian Ministry of Environment and Water to the Prut River corridor, available in national extension of Prut River The meeting aimed to motivate the network of institutional, administrative, operational languages to stakeholders Department from Cernăuţi (Ukraine). 5.4.5 Outputs and results mapping, legislative local factors involved in the management and activities related to the Prut River, in in Ukraine and Moldova. framework, etc. order to jointly discuss needs for more sustainable and integrated management of the Prut River corridor on the Romanian territory and to identify key issues and possibly The main purpose of the meeting was The SEE River process on the Prut River solutions in this regard. Local and regional media Stakeholders and target were addressed. to involve the identified network of has led to the following achievements: groups were identified The draft Prut River Vision was discussed and the future actions in the Prut River and grouped according corridor were discussed. −− institutional, administrative, operational Established stakeholder network to thematic areas, a A special questionnaire and local stakeholders in a sustainable and key stakeholders involved in the communication strategy was prepared for Romanian was prepared. representatives. and integrated management and activi- Prut River management in Romania, NATIONAL WORKSHOP - MOLDOVA

ties related to the Prut River corridor. Moldova and Ukraine. Planning of meetings with Key stakeholder The identification of key issues, prob- −− Common agreements on gaps and Romanian, Moldavian and representatives, including Ukrainian stakeholders The main area of interest and discussion was in relation with flood protection and bilateral commissions, lems, gaps, obstacles and the appropri- challenges related to an integrated was done, inputs were agriculture. Positive and problematic aspects were presented and discussed and the were involved and informed concept of river corridor and actions in relation to it were of a real interest to Moldavian incorporated into the also through individual representatives. ate solutions related to the common management of the Prut River. development of the Prut meetings and consultations. River Vision and Action part of the Prut River were also subjects −− Common agreement on the necessity The draft Prut River Vision was discussed and the future actions in the Prut River Plan. of discussion. Ukrainian stakehold- of establishing different thematic corridor were discussed.

ers from the water management field, working groups under the umbrella Results of the national ecology and biodiversity, local councils of bilateral commissions. workshops were gathered and used to prepare the NATIONAL WORKSHOP - UKRAINE and ministry attended the meeting. −− Joint vision and action plan for the final Prut River Vision and the Action Plan that The main area of interest and discus- Prut River, agreed among stakeholders was presented at the sion was related to river bank erosion, from all three riparian countries. international workshop. The main area of interest and discussion was related to river bank erosion, flood protection, biodiversity and water pollution from diffuse sources. flood protection, biodiversity and water −− Synthesis report on the results of The draft Prut River Vision was discussed and the future actions in the Prut River pollution from diffuse sources. In the the SEE River Project presented to corridor were discussed. framework of the current political Bilateral Commissions. situation, the effort of participation of −− Increase in the capacities, awareness Ukrainian stakeholders at this meet- and communication of stakeholders ing proves once more a true interest related to the integrated manage- INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP - MOLDOVA regarding the project and identification ment of water resources. of potential solutions to solve the gaps related to the Prut River management. The main area of discussion was to review the main problems and obstacles in relation with the Prut River corridor management. The draft Prut River Vision was revised and The idea and concept of the Toolkit was updated, the objectives and the joint Action Plan were discussed and agreed upon. very well received and Ukrainian stake- holders were also genuinely interested in the practical continuity of the SEE River Project.

The international workshop took place in the Republic of Moldova (9-10 July). The main objectives of the workshop were related to: −− presentation of the SEE River Project progress; FIGURE 3: −− presentation of the Toolkit; SEE RIVER PROCESS ON THE PRUT RIVER 40 B3 5.5 Lessons learned

Experiences from pilot actions: −− The stakeholder meeting participants were interested in 05 the information presented and actively participated in the discussions, gave proposals to broaden the discussion and PRUT VISION PRUT contributed to the list of stakeholders (e.g. border police). −− Some key stakeholders should be consulted in order to improve the list of stakeholders. −− The specificity of the Prut River (EU-border river) has gener- ated a number of issues, the resolution of which is currently in the political arena. Therefore, a top-down approach for this purpose will also be necessary.

Possible further actions: −− As the basis for continuation of the cooperation started with the SEE River Project, the following steps are crucial: −− A report regarding the activity, conclusions and common agreements of the SEE River Project will be presented to bilateral commissions. −− Common working groups on different thematic areas shall be established (water quality assessment, water and biodiversity legislation, gravel extraction) to exchange experiences and jointly implement the prepared vision and action plan.

5.6 Conclusions

−− The Bilateral Commissions are clearly the key factor in pro- moting and acting in relation to the Prut River corridor vision. −− There is a need for further and stronger discussions on local level in relation to all problems, gaps and possibilities concerning integrated and sustainable management of the Prut River corridor. −− Motivation of stakeholders is also an essential aspect in THE Common vision for the Prut achieving good and practical results. River consists of the following −− There is a stringent need to identify financial needs and main goals: opportunities in relation to the actions on the Prut River corridor. −− Reaching good water quality for the Prut River. −− Ensuring water supply for all water users from both sides, including the ecological flow downstream from the Stanca Costesti River dam. −− Ensuring, maintaining and extend- ing an integrated management of wetlands of the Lower Prut. −− Ensuring integrated river basin management by taking into account all economic and social activities. −− Cooperation on flood risk manage- ment in a suitable way, ensuring 5.7 More information that no unilateral flood protection The results of the pilot activities on the PRUT River are available works which can produce damages on the SEE River web page: www.see-river.net/prut-toolkit 42 43 on the other side will be executed. 44

B3 The Soča River corridor is atransboundary is corridor River Soča The The main economic activities related to to related activities economic main The The course of the Soča River can be be can River Soča the of course The corridor Alps in north-western Slovenia, at the the at Slovenia, in north-western Alps and Vipava in Slovenia, and Torre in Italy. in Italy. Torre and in Slovenia, Vipava and divided into 3parts: into divided corridor shared between Slovenia and and Slovenia between shared corridor entering the Adriatic Sea close to the the to close Sea Adriatic the entering past runs river The 876 m. of elevation extraction. Italy. The whole length of the river is 137 is river the of length whole The Italy. Italian town of Monfalcone. Its main main Its Monfalcone. of town Italian source Its river. Alpine atypical is River Kanal ob Soči, Nova Gorica and Gorizia, Gorizia, and Gorica Nova Soči, ob Kanal ing, hydropower production and gravel gravel and production hydropower ing, km, of which 95 km flow in Slovenia and and Slovenia in flow 95 km which of km, the remaining 42 km in Italy. The Soča Soča The in Italy. km 42 remaining the tributaries are Koritnica, Tolminka, Idrijca Tolminka, Idrijca Koritnica, are tributaries Tolmin, Kobarid, Bovec, of towns the the river are water sport tourism, fish tourism, sport water are river the lies in the Trenta valley in the Julian Julian in the valley Trenta in the lies − − − 6.1 − − − The Lower Soča: from the border to its its to border the from Soča: Lower The Soči to SLO-ITA border, where 3 major 3major where border, SLO-ITA to Soči mouth, where the river is freely flow freely is river the where mouth, river flows in its natural course. natural its in flows river dams and accumulating lakes regulate regulate lakes accumulating and dams Middle Soča Valley: from Most na na Most from Valley: Soča Middle ing across the North Italian lowlands. Italian North the across ing the village of Most na Soči, where the the where Soči, na Most of village the the river. the Upper Soča Valley: from its source to to source its from Valley: Soča Upper

A 06 river pilot the bout

- Case Study - SOČA RIVER Nature conservation: Hydrological characteristics: − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − 11.4 m³/s. 11.4 The Soča River is a typical torrential torrential atypical is River Soča The source the -from Park National Triglav Average yearly flow in the Lower Soča: Soča: Lower the in flow yearly Average Soča: Upper the in flow yearly Average at Tolmin. at 89.8 m³/s. 89.8 peaks in late spring and autumn: and spring in late peaks the with flow lower in the regime water the of variations big with river flow. It has a glaciofluvial regime in regime glaciofluvial a has It flow. first hydropower accumulation lake lake accumulation hydropower first Isola della Cona - river mouth in Italy. mouth -river Cona della Isola Natural monument - from the source source the -from monument Natural areas (EPO). important Ecologically the to source the -from 2000 Natura Historical max: 2066 m³/s. 2066 max: Historical 256 m³/s. max: Historical River. the upper flow and a fluvioglacial fluvioglacial a and flow upper the to the first hydropower accumulation accumulation hydropower first the to to the confluence with the Koritnica Koritnica the with confluence the to lake at Tolmin. at lake

0 KM 25 km 50 km MAP 4: SOČA PILOT RIVER CORRIDOR B3 06

6.2 Overview

Key facts about the pilot area Key facts about the SEE River process in the pilot area

Pilot Pilot river length: 137 km Main goals To upgrade stakeholder cooperation for better management of the Soča River and to area Pilot river basin size: 3,400 km² of the SEE River IMPROVE cross-border cooperation for better management of the Soča River size process catchment and to establish an organised, formal stakeholder group

Special -- Natural course in the Upper Soča Common The vision was articulated as part of the establishment of the Soča River Foundation characteristics -- Hydropower utilisation river vision of the pilot area -- Tourism and recreation articulated -- Area of protected nature

Protected Areas -- Triglav National Park - from the source to the confluence with the Koritnica River Studies done Survey/questionnaires of stakeholders Within -- EPO - Ecologically Important Areas during The Pilot Area -- Natura 2000 site - from the source to the first hydropower accumulation lake at Tolmin the project -- Natural monument - from the source to the first hydropower accumulation lake at Tolmin -- Isola della Cona - river mouth in Italy

Countries Slovenia, Italy Participation -- Interviews with stakeholders involved methods -- Thematic days for stakeholders (Soča River Celebration Day) and tools -- Soča River Foundation platform

Bilateral Slovenian-Italian Commission for Water Management And Multilateral Communication, -- Introductory brochure for the Soča River Mechanisms information, -- Promotional material dissemination -- Articles in local and regional media -- Soča River Day celebration as a platform to disseminate ideas

Connection To Preceding process: Other Projects -- Establishment of legal regulation for the use of the river for water sports Capacity Through the process of establishing the Soča River Foundation Or Processes (first river in Slovenia) building

Ongoing projects: -- TRAP - Territories of Rivers Action Plans (Interreg IVC) -- CAMIS - COORDINATED ACTIVITIES FOR MANAGEMENT OF ISONZO-SOČA (Cross-Border Cooperation Programme Slovenia-Italy)

Evaluation -- Peer review technique within SEE River Pre-Studies -- Ecosystem services on Soča (WWF) of the -- Stakeholder interviews Done -- Assessment of the importance of the fly-fishing in the Upper Soča Valley process -- Through the working group for the Soča River (Angling Club Tolmin)

Pre-existing Ad-hoc initiatives Anticipated -- Continuation of the process on the Soča River Foundation stakeholders post-project -- Regional development programme 2014-2020 platforms/groups activities -- Cross-border (Slo-Ita) programme 2014-2020

46 47 6.3 State of play 6.4 Process overview B3

The Soča River is an Alpine pearl and an important natural 6.4.1 main goals of the process heritage area in Slovenia. It is world-famous for its recreational potential, such as water sports and fly fishing. Its relatively Establishment of an organised and formal stakeholder coop- 06 short flow connects different natural elements, cultures and eration platform for better management of the Soča River. nations. In addition to its two neighbouring countries Slovenia FORMAL POWER and Italy, two European macro regions - Alpine and Adriatic- 6.4.2 Specific objectives ECOLOGICAL PRESSURE Ionian - also meet in the Soča River. ECONOMIC VALUE The Soča Valley Development Centre is involved in two other The Soča River is a protected river in most of its upper flow projects related to river management on the Soča River. Each - especially from the source to Most na Soči. Different designa- of the three projects had a specific role and objective in the tions of nature protection hold large importance for managing process. The aim of the Camis Project was to transfer of the the catchment. National Park, Natura 2000, Ecologically Impor- idea to the Italian side, the Trap Project was responsible for the tant Area, natural monuments and other conservation elements institutionalisation and formalisation of stakeholder engage- can bring an added value to the management perspective. The ment and the SEE River Project tested the idea among the Soča River is also home of the endemic marble trout and many stakeholders in the river corridor. other fish species. The repopulation of marble trout shows that 5,0 conservation and development can go hand in hand. 6.4.3 Challenges and obstacles

The Soča River is attractive for different types of use. Fishing, −− Cooperation on the cross-border level between Slovenia and water sports, gravel extraction, hydropower, irrigation, etc., can Italy. A representative from the basin should be included in 4,0 overlap at the same place and time. Therefore, cooperation is the existing diplomatic bilateral commission. necessary and one of the good examples is the Ordinance on −− Identification and motivation of key stakeholder groups that the determination of the navigation regime on the Soča River, act as opinion makers and as drivers of the changes. 3,0 which was prepared in cooperation with stakeholders and sets −− Transition of the model from ad hoc to systematic work on rules for its upper valley. addressing interdisciplinary challenges. −− Understanding of water management as a cross-sectoral The Soča River has a big hydropower potential, which is development issue and not only as a technical process. 2,0 currently being exploited to quite a high degree. The need for green and renewable energy in Europe is becoming an excuse 6.4.4 Activities and approach for new investments. The Soča River with its tributaries is on 1,0 the list of investors; however, there is a need for better balance DEFINING THE STATE OF PLAY OF STAKEHOLDER ENGAGE- with nature conservation to maintain the landscape and its MENT ON THE SOČA RIVER: uniqueness.

The main focus of activities on the Soča River was stakeholder 0,0 The Soča River is an international river. The existing cross- engagement. A list of potential stakeholders was made, includ- s M

border bilateral commission operates mainly on national levels. ing individuals from private and public sectors, representatives M E- S ATER LAND NERS NGO ydro nergy W H W GRAVEL LOCALS E NATURE SPORTS O There is a need for better cross-border cooperation on the local with different interests, from local, regional and national levels, FISHERY TOURIS VISITORS NATIONAL FORESTRY

and regional levels, which can be achieved through the Soča all with the aim to get the broadest perspective possible about EXTRACTION INSTITUTIONS CONSERVATION

River Foundation. potential problems/conflicts/wishes/ideas and to examine “the M UNICIPALITIES state of mind“ of the existing and possible stakeholder engage- The current manager of the Soča River is the Slovenian Envi- ment in the Soča River corridor. ronment Agency (ARSO), a national body under the Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning. Most stakeholders are aware of the problems, can recognise possible conflicts on the Soča River and are in favour of the The Soča River is more than just a river. Its natural, economic, idea for better cooperation. The biggest doubts that were men-

historical, cultural and other elements have merged into tioned were: how to carry out this cooperation and, especially, s a backbone of cross-border importance. The need for har- how to finance it. Another conclusion was very important for hold er monisation has grown into a process of better stakeholder our next steps. We asked each group how they see each other e stak cooperation. Coming from the bottom and meeting the top is a and about the importance they have. The results (shown in the f

model satisfying the needs of everyone involved. A formalised, figure on the right) were very heterogeneous, but they pointed o i on pt e c

systematic and organised structure is a key element for making out some of the most important stakeholder groups (fishing, er al p al

the idea come true: the new Soča River Foundation may be the water sports, hydropower, local institutions and a national gov- u t FIGURE 4: right answer for this. ernmental body), on which we focused in our next steps. M u 48 B3 FORMALISATION OF STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT:

The main goal was to establish a unique structure in the Slovenian territory, a river trust, an approach that was intro- 06 duced in England and is currently already well-established. This permanent structure combines all interested stakehold- ers - from the local farmer and small navigation company to representatives of national administrations and institutions. It is a bottom-up, multi-sectoral approach involving people ad personam by using their knowledge, ideas and capacities to testing the idea: discuss present issues and it also solves potential disagree- ments. It includes national institutions as equal partners in the In addition to general involvement, we tested the idea of dialogue. The equality of all interested parties (bottom-up cooperation of different stakeholders with different needs meets top-down approach) is a very important factor. The by solving a specific conflict on the Upper Soča between local structure can propose new projects to support sustainable and national administrative units, sport water tourism development in the river catchment. (rafting, kayaking) and fishing. In the framework of the SEE River Project, we prepared materials, analysed the conflict The most adequate official structure in Slovenia to fulfil the and presented ideas for solutions to all sides. above-mentioned characteristics is a foundation.

The Soča River was the first river in Slovenia that established BUREAUCRACY LEVEL: regulations on the use of the river for water sports by using a legal framework. This solved major problems between fishing The legal and organisational aspects of the foundation were In the second step, we concentrated on the future functioning and water sport tourism. It also declared the authority, obliga- prepared. In the first step, we focused on bureaucracy and of the organisation. We established a working model of the tions and shared responsibility for use of the river. The water financial issues: What do we need? How to do it? How much organisation and defined various roles: management board, sport sector has developed quickly recently and has become does it “cost”? communication, stakeholder work and action groups. considerably more important. Because of that there was a need to update existing regulations. The following key issues were defined: The basic idea of the organisational structure is illustrated in −− The Foundation is a formal body - a form of cooperation and the figure on the next page. The bottom-up approach is the methodology that we are participation of different stakeholders, who share the same trying to introduce in all river management issues on the Soča goal and vision. The members of the management board were chosen accord- River. The new regulations on the use of the river for water −− The Foundation is a non-profit and independent organisa- ing to the importance of different stakeholder groups and to sports were no exception. In the summer of 2013, we con- tion. It does not depend on public funds and can apply for/ ensure the heterogeneous structure that would cover all major ducted a series of interviews with the representatives of water become involved in EU or other projects as well as receive aspects of river management on the Soča River catchment. sports enterprises. These were the bases for the legal input financing from donations. Another aspect was finding motivated individuals. that was prepared, agreed among local and national adminis- −− Anybody who shows an interest in or wishes to support the tration, water sports enterprises and the fishing society. activities can participate in the foundation. According to previous analyses and individual meetings, we −− It launches, enters and promotes dialogue with national chose representatives of: The regulations have now been formally and legally prepared authorities. and the content agreed among included stakeholders. It was −− It is a body that also addresses cross-border issues and −− the energy/private sector → Soča Hydropower Plants; approved by the city councils of the three municipalities: Bovec, cooperation with the Italian neighbours. −− fishery/NGO → Angling Club Tolmin; Kobarid and Tolmin. The new Ordinance on determination of −− a tourism organisation/regional → LTO Sotočje; the use of the Soča and Koritnica rivers for water sports was −− a water management body/national → Institute for Water announced in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia of the Republic of Slovenia; in November 2014 and will be put into practice in the tourism −− a development agency/local → Soča Valley Development season of 2015. Centre.

Apart from the ordinance, the process itself is also an impor- All representatives of the above-mentioned bodies signed the tant output. It is a good example of cooperation between constituent act. This was sent to the Ministry of the Environ- different stakeholders and a win-win situation for everyone; in ment and Spatial Planning for their approval. The Soča River this case not only for fishing and water sports sectors, which Foundation was approved by the ministry on 20 October 2014 agreed on the basic rules with regard to sharing the river in a and its registration was officially announced in the Official cooperative and sustainable way, but also for other stakeholders, Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia on 14 November 2014. showing them that cooperation is an urgent and (only?) way of On this date, the Soča River Foundation formally started its acting while dealing with the river. activities. 50 FIGURE 5: ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE FOUNDATION 06 B3 TASK OR AREA ACT GROUP R SPEC FOR WORK I BAS VER I PRESIDENT GROUP ON I 1 NG I F I I N OR C (managing, communication, control) communication, (managing, PRESIDENT TASK OR AREA ACT GROUP R SPEC FOR WORK VICE SOČA FOUNDATION RIVER BOARD OF MANAGEMENT I BAS VER I GROUP ON I 2 NG I F I I N OR C MEMBER 1 TASK OR AREA ACT GROUP R SPEC FOR WORK I BAS VER I GROUP ON I X NG MEMBER I F I I N OR C 2 TASK OR AREA ACT GROUP R SPEC FOR WORK MEMBER I BAS VER I GROUP ON 3 I Y NG I F I I N OR C

OPERATIVE TASKS PRC (external manager) 53

SOČA VISION The Soča River Vision was prepared prepared was Vision River Soča The an Alpine pearl with great importance importance great with pearl Alpine an appropriately. can sectors all which statements stakeholders as a basis overcom stakeholders for all for point starting acommon as VALUE: The Soča River is a value that that avalue is River Soča The VALUE: development of river space for the the for space river of development cultures, nations. countries, stakeholders, connects onRiver. the Soča cooperation example of coordinated sustainable sustainable coordinated of example and residents many for income of eration ineration planning spatial and use. companies. SY SPACE: The Soča River is the space of of space the is River Soča The SPACE: asource is River Soča The SOURCE: must be taken care of and managed managed and of care taken be must potential. CONNECTIVE ROLE: The Soča River River Soča The ROLE: CONNECTIVE the river corridor taken into consid takeninto corridor the river in the past, present and future, both both future, and present past, the in well-being of everyone. of well-being identify with and serves as a basis for for abasis as serves and with identify presents It differences. sectoral ing BRAND: The Soča River is a recognised arecognised is River Soča The BRAND: RIVER: The Soča River is ariver... is River Soča The RIVER: people the is River Soča The PEOPLE: EXA brand and added value with great great with value added and brand locally and in a wider context. awider in and locally living with it. with living M M BOL: The Soča River is a symbol, asymbol, is River Soča The BOL: PLE: The Soča River serves as an an as serves River Soča The PLE: - - - Contratti di Fiume - which could be suitable for cooperation. for suitable be could -which di Fiume - Contratti The next step was to present the idea to the public. public. the to idea the present to was step next The The SEE River Project and the idea of a River Trust was dis was Trust aRiver of idea the and Project River SEE The The following has been achieved through the stakeholder An international workshop for the fishing sector was also also was sector fishing the for workshop international An stage - both from the national level and from local stakeholders. stakeholders. local from and level national the from -both stage seminated and presented to Italian partners at a meeting of the the of ameeting at partners Italian to presented and seminated all agreed on and supported the idea of the foundation the of idea the supported and on all agreed a member of the commission on the Slovenian side, so they they so side, Slovenian the on commission the of a member approval of the process was checked and confirmed at an early early an at confirmed and checked was process the of approval engagement process on the Soča River: round table where the main topic was discussed - the Soča Soča -the discussed was topic main the where table round organised in September 2014 in Tolmin. Participants from Slo from in Tolmin. Participants 2014 in September organised process. working and idea our to regard with expressed to presented was idea basic The established. was commission next EU financial perspective. They recognised the Soča River River Soča the recognised They perspective. financial EU next difficulties or challenges were presented byrepresentatives of - institu protection nature and ministry tourism, sport fishery, venia and Italy agreed to cooperate on concrete projects in the in the projects concrete on cooperate to agreed Italy and venia On 14 October 2013, a local stakeholder meeting was organ was meeting stakeholder 2013, alocal October 14 On Camis Project in Gorizia (Italy) on 17 April 2013. 17 struc on Asimilar April (Italy) in Gorizia Project Camis River Foundation. Different aspects of problematic issues, issues, problematic of aspects Different Foundation. River a of preparation the for responsible was Centre Development In addition, communication activities were also carried out. The The out. carried also were activities communication addition, In Furthermore, contact with the Slovenian-Italian bilateral bilateral Slovenian-Italian the with contact Furthermore, Foundation as a body that could be involved in these activities. in these involved be could that abody as Foundation ised in Solkan as part of the Soča River Day Celebration, which which Celebration, Day River Soča the of part as in Solkan ised tions. Despite being from totally different interest groups, they they groups, interest different totally from being Despite tions. was hosted by the Municipality of Nova Gorica. The Soča Valley Valley Soča The Gorica. Nova of Municipality the by hosted was were familiar with it from the early stage. Strong support was was support Strong stage. early the from it with familiar were side Italian the on recognised also was afoundation) (to ture INTERNATIONAL APPROACH: − − − − − 6.4.5 PUBLIC APPROVAL AND PRESENTATION OF THE IDEA: THE OF PRESENTATION AND APPROVAL PUBLIC − − − − − September 2014). September A formal stakeholder body established: the Soča River River Soča the established: body stakeholder A formal set-up basis for formal cooperation with the Italian side (in (in side Italian the with cooperation formal for basis set-up solved: legal basis for a new navigation regime on the Soča Soča the on regime navigation anew for basis legal solved: and workshops with local stakeholders. local with workshops and aims in river management. in river aims Cooperation of stakeholders on concrete examples - conflict -conflict examples concrete on stakeholders of Cooperation Improved transboundary river management: contact with with contact management: river transboundary Improved common with projects of cluster approach: Interdisciplinary Foundation. River. the Italian side established; international workshop and a a and workshop international established; side Italian the Use of the bottom-up approach: questionnaires, meetings meetings questionnaires, approach: bottom-up the of Use

Outputs and results - - - - B3 6.6 Conclusions

The Soča River and its corridor are very important for many different types of stakeholders. Tourism, hydropower, gravel 06 extraction and nature conservation are just some basic types of uses. Due to this diversity of interests, some conflicts are occurring and will continue to occur.

The main question of river management of the Soča River was: is it possible to establish cooperation and achieve a win-win situation for different stakeholder groups on the one hand and sustainable development for the river on the other?

Activities Stakeholder involvement Communication We did not only want to establish cooperation among stake- holders - we wanted to promote synergy among stakeholders and the river. From the beginning of the process, we believed A CROSS-SECTORAL, A LIST OF POTENTIAL INTERDISCIPLINARY AND LOCAL WORKSHOP - SLOVENIA STAKEHOLDERS WAS MADE, 6.5 Lessons learned that this could be achieved - however, only with appropriate TRANSBOUNDARY APPROACH WHICH INCLUDES INDIVIDUALS, WAS ESTABLISHED, COMBINING ENTERPRISES AND INSTITUTIONS river management and an appropriate level of cooperation. DIFFERENT PROJECTS, NEEDS, FROM DIFFERENT SECTORS AND Experiences from pilot actions: Good examples from other rivers (River Trusts in UK) prove that INTERESTS AND GEOGRAPHICAL A questionnaire was prepared and interviews conducted among stakeholders. The AREAS. THE AIM WAS TO GET THE SCOPES INTO A COMMON GOAL – purpose of this individual methodology was to obtain independent opinions on WIDEST POSSIBLE PERSPECTIVE −− It is possible (even recommended) to create a synergy this is possible, while existing good practices on the Soča River SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF problematic issues and gain an understanding of the stakeholders’ perception (“the AND BACKUP ABOUT POTENTIAL THE SOČA RIVER. state of mind”) of the Soča River. We also asked about the importance of different PROBLEMS, CONFLICTS, WISHES among similar projects, even when they are financed from (new decree on the navigation regime) allow us to believe that stakeholder groups, the urgency for cooperation and, if required, what kind of AND IDEAS IN THE RIVER different funds. Even more, a different perspective on the this is also achievable on the Soča River. cooperation this should be. Stakeholders identified different problems and confirmed CATCHMENT. INVOLVEMENT OF LOCAL that there should be a formal cooperation for the soča river management. same matter (in this case river management) can facilitate STAKEHOLDERS IN THE PROCESS AND PARALLEL DIALOGUE WITH THE PROCESS AND THE IDEA OF the work, as it makes it possible to approach the problem This example defined methodology - a bottom-up combined NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS – THE FOUNDATION AND ITS AIMS from different aspects. with a top-down approach, strong engagement of stakeholders ACTING SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH WERE PRESENTED AT VARIOUS BOTTOM-UP AND TOP-DOWN NATIONAL WORKSHOP - SLOVENIA MEETINGS, WORKSHOPS −− We gained knowledge on the importance of stakeholder from the beginning and cooperation between different sides. APPROACHES. ROUNDTABLES, CONSULTATIONS - ON LOCAL, REGIONAL, NATIONAL engagement on all levels (local, regional, national, trans- In order to establish a formal body, we used the idea from AND INTERNATIONAL LEVELS. boundary). other countries and the bottom-up approach from existing ex- FORMALLY AND LEGALLY It was organised as part of the 2013 Soča River Day celebration. The main part was the COORDINATED WORK OF THREE PREPARED NEW REGULATIONS roundtable, which was attended by stakeholders from different areas: fishery, water DIFFERENT PROJECTS FACILITATED −− It is important to combine work on the local level with that amples. After obtaining the general stakeholder approval of our FOR USE OF THE RIVER FOR sports, tourism, nature conservation institutions and the environmental ministry. It COMMUNICATION AND MADE WATER SPORTS – AGREED was followed by an open discussion. Although coming from totally different interest DISSEMINATION MORE EFFECTIVE. on national or even transnational levels. In this way, it is idea and support of responsible institutions, the only task was AMONG INCLUDED groups and areas, all participants generally agreed on and supported the idea of the foundation. With this public approval, the base for a formal stakeholder body was possible to get input, confirmation or refusal from any or to define the most adequate formal structure: the foundation. STAKEHOLDERS AND APPROVED established. BY THE LOCAL AND NATIONAL CONTACT WITH THE SLO-ITA both sides, and to modify the work in the early stage if ADMINISTRATION. BILATERAL COMMISSION WAS ALSO ESTABLISHED AND STRONG SUPPORT necessary. In our case, top-down and bottom-up approaches The Soča River Foundation is an effective tool and player EXPRESSED BY ITS MEMBERS. were synchronised and met the expectations. that improves local water management and cross-border TRANSFER OF EXISTING GOOD INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP - SLOVENIA PRACTICES IN STAKEHOLDER −− Nevertheless, we learned that more work should be done cooperation as well as a body which effectively communicates ENGAGEMENT, ITS ADAPTATION THE PLATFORM OF THE SOČA RIVER FOR LOCAL NEEDS AND DAY CELEBRATION WAS USED TO and a major focus should be placed on the local level. Still, local and regional needs on river management to national ESTABLISHMENT OF A FORMAL PRESENT AND DISCUSS THE IDEA The 2014 Soča River Day celebration was used to transfer general ideas of cross-border this is the example of the Soča River - things can be differ- organisations. The Foundation also follows many EU objectives STAKEHOLDER BODY – SOČA OF THE FOUNDATION PUBLICLY cooperation to stakeholders from both sides of the border. Almost 80 individuals RIVER FOUNDATION. and members of different institutions were present at the meeting. Additionally, a AND TO PROMOTE IT IN THE LOCAL ent elsewhere. and represents an opportunity for the next financial period MEDIA. A SPECIAL PROMOTIONAL workshop with stakeholders from the fishery sector was organised, resulting in the 2014-2020. agreement on further cooperation and proposals for common projects. The role of the BROCHURE WAS ALSO MADE FOR Soča River Foundation was recognised as very positive among both sides. The Soča THIS PURPOSE, PRESENTING THE Useful tips: Valley Development Centre also attended consultations about the Soča River, organised IDEA TO THE PUBLIC IN A SIMPLE by the Italian side. At the event, the idea and concept of the Soča River Foundation was AND ATTRACTIVE WAY. −− Our prediction that individual work is sometimes more presented to the members of the Italian local government along the Soča River in Italy. effective than classical workshops was correct. We achieved much better inputs with interviews because people were not influenced or distracted. We would like to stress that this was true for our example, where the aim of questionnaires was to learn about “the state of mind” and not to concretise and solve specific problems. It might be completely different in other corridors or with other aims.

Possible further activities: −− The next steps are to improve cross-border cooperation. Since the model was successfully translated from the United Kingdom to Slovenia and from the local to regional level, we 6.7 More information also believe that it can be transferred from the regional to The results of the pilot activities on the SOČA River are available FIGURE 6: SEE RIVER PROCESS ON THE SOČA RIVER transnational level. on the SEE River web page: www.see-river.net/soca-toolkit 55 56

B3 The entire watershed is characterised characterised is watershed entire The and Selenice Tepelene, Memaliaj, near Albania enters River Vjosa The The Vjosa River is the second longest longest second the is River Vjosa The The Albanian catchment of the Vjosa Vjosa the of catchment Albanian The 6,710 is km². basin the of area total The corridor sea level and continues northwest along along northwest continues and level sea areas along the river sides. One of the the of One sides. river the along areas inhabited as well as sites archaeological about 5,550 million m³ and the specific specific the and m³ million 5,550 about are in the Mountains in Greece. in Greece. Mountains Pindus in the are construction works at two sites, there there sites, two at works construction pared to other rivers in Europe is the fact fact the is in Europe rivers other to pared com values natural important most and flora important for habitats nature forestry, as such resources natural Vlorë. of city the of northwest river in Albania with a total length of 272 272 of length atotal with in Albania river discharge is about 26 litres/second/km². litres/second/km². 26 about is discharge is River Vjosa the of volume discharge (named the Aoos River there). Its sources sources Its there). River Aoos the (named Çarshovë at an altitude of 350 m above 350 mabove of altitude an at Çarshovë Novosele. It flows into the Adriatic Sea, Sea, Adriatic the into flows It Novosele. River and the Shushica River. The annual annual The River. Shushica the and River two about or km² 4,365 covers River is no hydropower plant in the Albanian Albanian in the plant hydropower no is initial of in spite and 2014 of As intact. - tribu largest The in Greece. situated is in Greece kilometres 80 and in Albania by a diverse landscape, very rich in in rich very landscape, adiverse by kilometres, of which 192 kilometres are are 192 which kilometres of kilometres, that the Vjosa hydromorphology is still still is hydromorphology Vjosa the that 7.1 taries of the Vjosa River are the Drino the are River Vjosa the of taries rest The catchment. entire the of thirds the the fauna species, historical, religious and and religious historical, species, fauna

Albanian cities of Permet, Kelcyre, Kelcyre, Permet, of cities Albanian

A 07 river pilot the bout

- Case Study VJOSA RIVER 31 plant species which are classified as as classified are which species plant 31 2000 site. The main pressures result result pressures main The site. 2000 This river has good water quality ad quality water good has river This The local community is based on on based is community local The Agriculture and livestock raising are the the are raising livestock and Agriculture Albania, the Fir of Hotova National Park species mainly in the shrubland and for and shrubland in the mainly species around as well as species, sub-endemic and aquaculture. and throughoutactivities the year. and cultural natural, of presence the and and agriculture land. land. agriculture and plant medicinal and aromatic 200 around Vikos-Aoos National Park, a NATURA aNATURA Park, National Vikos-Aoos cities. The diverse nature, the landscape, landscape, the nature, diverse The cities. catchment, thus the Vjosa River is still still is River Vjosa the thus catchment, main activity in the area. The socio-eco The area. in the activity main rich very is basin River Vjosa The capacity. insuf is sewage local all uses: for equate nomic conditions of the local communi local the of conditions nomic In basin. River Vjosa the within area est and endemic 11 around are There cies. people to migrate from the upper part to to part upper the from migrate to people passable for fish and other organisms organisms other and fish for passable part with diverse flora and fauna habitats, habitats, fauna and flora diverse with part self-purification ahigh has biology river rare and endangered. There are also also are There endangered. and rare ficiently treated but the still very intact intact very still the but treated ficiently (Abies alba), oak forest shrubs, pasture pasture shrubs, forest oak alba), (Abies In Greece, the Aoos River is part of the the of part is River Aoos the Greece, In is dominated by Macedonian fir, silver fir fir fir,silver Macedonian by dominated is in biodiversity, especially in the upper upper in the especially in biodiversity, historical monuments create conditions conditions create monuments historical the lower part of the river and to coastal coastal to and river the of part lower the local forces which limited, very are ties traditional uses of natural resources. resources. natural of uses traditional from agricultural activities, stockbreeding activities, agricultural from recreation and development tourism for from the sea to the mountains (279 rkm). rkm). (279 mountains the to sea the from forestry, rare and endangered plant spe plant endangered and rare forestry, ------

0 KM 50 km 100 km MAP 5: VJOSA PILOT RIVER CORRIDOR B3 07

7.2 Overview

Key facts about the pilot area Key facts about the SEE River process in the pilot area

Pilot Pilot river length: 272 km Main goals Establishment of a common platform for joint integrated management of the area Pilot river basin size: 6,710 km² of the SEE River Vjosa River through a joint vision and management objectives. size process

Special -- Naturally preserved river, flowing naturally without any dams built so far Common A common river vision was articulated in the SEE River Project characteristics -- Very rich in biodiversity and with few negative impacts on its watershed river vision of the pilot area -- The Vjosa River remains in good ecological conditions articulated

Protected Areas -- Fir of Hotova National Park and several nature monuments in Albania Studies done -- Nature protected areas along the Vjosa River Within -- Vikos-Aoos National Park in Greece during -- Mapping of industrial activities on the Vjosa River The Pilot Area the project -- Mapping of the flood situation at the Lower Vjosa River

Countries Albania, Greece Participation -- Involvement of local and national stakeholders, meetings and consultations involved methods -- National workshops and tools -- Meetings with Greek stakeholders

Bilateral Greek-Albanian Bilateral Commission on Water Management Communication, -- Introductory brochure for the Vjosa River And Multilateral information, -- Promotional material Mechanisms dissemination -- Presentations at external conferences -- Communication with NGOs active in the field of environment protection -- Articles in the media -- TV communications

Connection To -- The project “Vjosa/Aoos river eco-museum; promotion and protection of the natural and Capacity Capacity building seminar in , Albania Other Projects cultural heritage of the Vjosa/Aoos river basin (VAEcoM)” was co-funded by the EU building Or Processes and national funds from Albania and Greece under the IPA Cross Border Programme “Greece - Albania 2007-2013”. -- Balkan Rivers - The Blue Heart of Europe

Pre-Studies Biological Monitoring of the Vjosa valley, Ministry of the Environment of Albania Evaluation Peer review technique Done of the process

Pre-existing Vjosa River Basin Council Anticipated -- Preparation of the Vjosa River Management Plan stakeholders post-project -- The plan for the new HPP on the cascade of the Vjosa River should be reconsidered platforms/groups activities

58 59 7.3 State of play B3 The Vjosa catchment in Albania is still impressively intact and the river is considered to be the last wild river in Europe. There are no dams, sediment barriers, fixed banks, flood dikes or bed 07 regulations. The Vjosa River is a long chain of large canyons with forested mountain slopes of up to 2000 m altitude, rocky VJOSA VISION VJOSA gorges, huge braided areas and meandering sections near the delta. Still, the Vjosa River corridor is shared among different users and sectors, notably agriculture, drinking water supply, energy supply, wastewater discharge, small industries (sediment extraction, manufacturing, bottling), urban develop- ment, transport, tourism, etc. The main pressures on the Vjosa River are derived from urban, industrial and agricultural activi- ties. As a result, the Vjosa water use management is shared Activities Stakeholder involvement Communication among these different users and sectors. There is a River Basin Council and a River Basin Agency, but they are very weak in An assessment of the Vjosa Several meetings were terms of decision making and also in policy implementation. River was carried out, 1. NATIONAL WORKSHOP - ALBANIA organised at individual including all relevant and group scales. Office The Declaration for the Their representatives and staff changed very often and were development goals. visits and other occasional activities were used to Integrated Management of replaced mainly for political reasons. Regarding transboundary The aim of the workshop was to discuss the SEE River Project implementation in Albania, meet stakeholders and the Vjosa Transboundary cooperation with the Greek partners and institutions, there is a Water resources policy environmental state and socio-economic conditions of the Vjosa River, and the draft discuss the Vjosa River and and transboundary water vision and objectives for the integrated management of the Vjosa River corridor, as the the project with them. River, prepared in October 2014, bilateral commission but its operations remain very weak. policy were reviewed. SEE River Project’s pilot river corridor. includes the following key mes- Establishment of the sage for the future manage- 7.4 Process overview Identification of the stakeholder network on the relevant institutions and Greek side. ment of the Vjosa River: stakeholders relevant to the Vjosa River. 7.4.1 main goals of the process Preparation of media We appeal to the respective 2. NATIONAL WORKSHOP - ALBANIA information in order to Progress on the raise public awareness on institutions of Albania and The main aim was the achievement of a common platform for activation of the bilateral the Vjosa River. commission. Greece to undertake the joint, integrated management of the Vjosa River, through a The workshop focused on the important role of institutions, central and local following necessary common authorities, NGOs, donors, etc. in the management of theVjosa River. Transboundary Communication with common vision and defined objectives. management issues with Greece were also an important item of the agenda. NGOs active in the field of actions for preservation, res- environmental protection. toration and sustainable use 7.4.2 Specific objectives of water and natural resourc- es of the entire Vjosa Trans- −− Application of the SEE River Toolkit as a model for the Vjosa boundary River, as follows: River and other rivers in Albania and as an instrument to Transboundary cooperation with Greece reach harmonisation between development and conserva- −− To set up the legal instrument tion of the watershed/river corridor. for joint management based on −− Strengthening the official bilateral body on the Vjosa River. Individual meetings with key government representatives in Albania, responsible for cooperation with the Greece counterparts, and with selected stakeholders from Greece. common and long-term vision and Establishment of the stakeholder network on the Greek side. As a result, there has been some progress in the work of the bilateral commission. objectives. 7.4.3 Challenges and obstacles The Albanian government has updated the Albanian-Greek Commission for Transboundary Waters and will soon organise a meeting with the Greek counterpart, −− To establish an adequate bilateral where the project staff will be introduced and issues of the SEE River Project will be commission with a clear agenda −− Keeping the network functional: in Albania, it is evident, part of the agenda. and means of cooperation. especially after governmental changes following general −− To suspend and revise all unilateral elections, that there is a need to update the network. energetic developments, planned or Contacting the structures and new representatives is ongoing, which create impacts on continuously required. the natural and biodiversity condi- −− Involving Greek stakeholders: Greek stakeholders as potential, tions in the Vjosa River corridor. suitable partners should be approached and involved −− To take the necessary measures for continuously. The official bilateral commission should be restoration of ecosystems and to more active in order to respond in real time to all issues that promote sustainable development are present on the Vjosa River. across the watershed. −− Lack of funds is a big challenge in the Vjosa River manage- −− To promote the public participation ment. Mechanism for resource mobilisation should be set up. and stakeholder engagement in the −− Strategic documents for river basin management should be planning, monitoring and decision- elaborated with the participation of local governments and FIGURE 7: SEE RIVER PROCESS ON THE VJOSA RIVER making process. stakeholders. 61 B3 7.4.4 Activities and approach 7.4.5 Outputs and results −− Regarding data collection on the Vjosa River, it was difficult ered as a routine and bureaucratic step but as a crucial point to obtain it easily from institutions. However, the problem that will ease the long-term management of river corridors. The activities on the Vjosa River focused on establishing and The activities of the Vjosa River process have led to the follow- was solved by using informal relations. engaging the stakeholder network for joint management of ing achievements: −− We tried to involve Greek partners; still, it was difficult to More reactions from the community and civil society through 07 the Vjosa River, both on the national and on the transboundary −− Assured information and knowledge transfer on the Vjosa get significant contributions from them during project im- various NGOs have influenced the relevant institutions to levels. River including all relevant sectors such as nature, bio- plementation. Only a few of them replied on this matter. review their decisions on the Vjosa River. diversity, industry, agriculture, energy, tourism, demography, The activities started with individual meetings and consul- historical and cultural aspects. Other useful tips: The Government is setting up a new policy on river basin tations with key institutions and stakeholders of the Vjosa −− Establishment of stakeholder networks on both sides of the −− Workshops were very important in establishing a strong management by enacting new legislation in line with the one River. On the basis of that, the Vjosa River stakeholders were river in Albania and Greece. network and especially in discussing weaknesses/pressures/ in European countries. Strengthening the institutions and grouped on three levels: −− Identification and establishment of stakeholders (national, responses on the Vjosa River. The participants were very allocating more financial resources were other positive steps regional and local) as well as NGOs and scientific stake- active in discussions. undertaken in this period of the SEE River implementation −− National level: central ministries and agencies on holders. −− Most participants think that the government should pay in Albania. The Bilateral Commission with Greece has been environment, economy (energy, mining), land use planning, −− Preparation of a map consisting of information on the more attention to natural resources not only with regard to re-activated and enlarged with more members, including agriculture. environmental state and activities of on-going and future the Vjosa River but in the whole territory of Albania, since representatives from the science sector. The Vjosa River is −− Regional and local level: river basin agency, regional projects. the government provides the policies and controls and now a priority for the Government with regard to elaborating drainage board, nature protection and forestry, regional −− Preparation of national reports on the Vjosa River. monitors their implementations. a management plan. The stakeholder network, communica- environmental agencies, local communities, regional −− Consultations with relevant stakeholders. −− The representatives from the private sector are more tions and the workshops should be continued in the future as a councils, communes/municipalities, etc. −− Preparation of a draft common vision and objectives and courageous in expressing their ideas to the government powerful approach for continuing the joint work for sustain- −− University, private sector and NGO levels. the Declaration for the Integrated Management of the Vjosa representatives compared to those from the public sector. able management of the Vjosa River. −− This list of stakeholders was discussed with the representa- Transboundary River, which will be presented to the relevant They insist that the government has to review the energy tives of the Ministry of Environment, the Directorate of ministries in Albania and Greece as a basis for future coop- strategy, especially for projects along the Vjosa River. The Vjosa River management has now become an important Water Resources Policies and the Vjosa River Agency, who eration on the Vjosa River. −− It was evident that more meetings and workshops should priority in Albania. Preservation of its natural values and confirmed the list. −− Preparation of media information in order to raise public be organised about the Vjosa River in the future. Every sustainable use in cooperation with Greece, based on a com- awareness on the Vjosa River. problem should be discussed with all relevant stakeholders mon and integrated platform, remain a top priority. In order to get the stakeholders involved in project but no institutions should be allowed to take inappropriate implementation, several meetings were organised at individual 7.5 Lessons learned decisions which can affect the river corridor. and group scales. Office visits and other occasional activities were used to meet and discuss the Vjosa River and the Pro- Experiences from pilot actions: Possible further activities: ject with stakeholders. Workshops were organised and −− The Albanian Geological Survey and the SEE River Project −− Cooperation with Greek institutions remains a priority; the stakeholders invited. After the workshops e-mails were shared team found it very interesting to deal with so many issues government is planning to strengthen it and make it more on the conclusions. on the Vjosa River. We collected, assessed and conducted efficient based on the platform created in the framework of a supplementary study on the Vjosa River to complete the the SEE River Project. The list of stakeholders was updated, taking into consideration entire picture needed for setting up a management system −− The network of stakeholders that cooperate in or whose the political changes in June 2013. In this regard, several indi- for a transboundary river. Desk studies, field visits, meetings, activity is related to the Vjosa River corridor should become vidual meetings and consultations were held in order to keep consultations and workshops were the methodology of the legalised in the form of a foundation or association, or serve stakeholders involved in project implementation. At the same project implementation in Albania. as a technical body to the River Basin Council or Bilateral- time, members of the Bilateral Commission were approached in −− While creating the list of stakeholders, it was recognised Commission. order to inform them about the discussions going on. Some of that state authorities, ministries and agencies are more the members participated in the workshops organised. powerful than regional and local authorities in terms of the 7.6 Conclusions Vjosa River management. This means that the decentrali- Moreover, efforts were made to establish a stakeholder sation of competences on water resources and river basin The Vjosa River remains one of the few rivers in natural condi- network in Greece. E-mails were delivered to several Greek management is still not completed in Albania. tions in Albania and in Europe. Its preservation and protection partners using a similar stakeholder network created by a −− The role of universities and NGOs is very significant in the should be a priority not only for the relevant public institutions project on the Vjosa River. management, as they are considered as independent in but also a responsibility of all stakeholders with interests in the their positions. corridor. As a result, there has been some progress on the activation −− It seems that political efforts in communications with Greek of the Bilateral Commission. The Albanian Government has partners are more productive than technical efforts. In the framework of cooperation established with all relevant updated the Commission for Transboundary Waters and plans −− A common vision and objectives on the Vjosa River were public institutions, a package of data was collected and are in place to organise a meeting with its Greek counterpart, discussed at the workshops and the participants indicated assessed for all natural and human activities, and maps with where the local SEE River Project staff will be present and is- that in order to realise such objectives the government problematic and hotspot areas were sent to the relevant sues of the SEE River Project will be part of the agenda. should establish a strong administration for the Vjosa River ministries. and also mobilise funds. 7.7 More information −− A detailed management plan should be elaborated and The main public institutions became more aware of the impor- The results of the pilot activities on the VJOSA River are available approved for a period of at least 10 years. tance of stakeholder participation, which should not be consid- on the SEE River web page: www.see-river.net/vjosa-toolkit 62 63 64 64

B3 44 Turija, Lukavica and Peštan from the the from Peštan and Turija, Lukavica the of merging by formed is river The corridor several parallel flows. After Valjevo, there there Valjevo, After flows. parallel several until until itself, river the along settlements the river, river, the along settlements major no are Valjevo, the Kolubara River receives the the receives River Kolubara the Valjevo, The Kolubara Kolubara The villages. several except geographic longitude and 44 longitude geographic right; Kladnica and Tamnava from the the Tamnava from and Kladnica right; Ljig, section: in this tributaries major rounding mountains, in which it spills in in spills it which in mountains, rounding upstream of the Valjevo city and empties empties and city Valjevo the of upstream Geographically speaking, the territory of of territory the speaking, Geographically no no are there populated, densely is valley River Jablanica the and River Obnica Gradac River from the right and forms forms and right the from River Gradac Crljeni, Draževac, Mislođin and Barič, Barič, and Mislođin Draževac, Crljeni, Kolubara basin belongs to the Sava River River Sava the to belongs basin Kolubara River turns north and continues to flow flow to continues and north turns River Lajkovac, Lazarevac, Šopić, Vreoci, Veliki Veliki Vreoci, Šopić, Lazarevac, Lajkovac, its receiving flows, parallel in several At Obrenovac. near River Sava the into in the vicinity of the Kolubara River: River: Kolubara the of vicinity in the many However, Obrenovac. reaches it basin (part of the Danube River basin). basin). River Danube the of (part basin the Kolubara River basin (3,640 km (3,640 basin River Kolubara the the Valjevo valley between the sur the between valley Valjevo the where it flows into the Sava River. Sava the into flows it where located between 19 between located left. Due to the floods, even though its its though even floods, the to Due left. large villages and towns are located located are towns and villages large 8.1 o 40’ north geographic latitude. The The latitude. geographic north 40’

A

river pilot the bout 08 o 31’ 20 and o 05’ and and 05’ o 30’ east east 30’ - 2 ) is ) is Case Study KOLUBARA RIVER The larger part of the basin is densely densely is basin the of part larger The is River Kolubara the of basin The The Kolubara River basin area includes includes area basin River Kolubara The section of the Kolubara River and its its and River Kolubara the of section average altitude of the Kolubara River River Kolubara the of altitude average est settlements in the basin are Valjevo, Valjevo, are basin in the settlements est per km per populated. Theaverage population parts or total territory of 6 administrative 6administrative of territory total or parts that revealing level, sea above metres diverse. and morphologically geologically part of the basin is open towards the the towards open is basin the of part density is approximately 92 inhabitants inhabitants 92 approximately is density districts and 16 municipalities. and districts Lazarevac, Lajkovac, Ljig, and other. and Ub Ljig, Lajkovac, Lazarevac, larg The 335,000. about is basin in the It lies between slopes of the Vlašić and and Vlašić the of slopes between lies It Pannonian plain. The central part of of part central The plain. Pannonian and west, the on mountains basin is rather small, approximately 206 206 approximately small, rather is basin the Kolubara River basin is mainly flat, flat, mainly is basin River Kolubara the northern The east. the on Šumadija the of mountains massive and south the on plateaus Kačerska and Maljen the with surrounding slightly hilly area. The The area. hilly slightly surrounding with -shaped and covers an area which is is which area an covers and fan-shaped largest tributary Ljig. tributary largest upstream most in the only located are mountains high medium and lower hills, the while dominant are lowlands 2 . The total number of inhabitants inhabitants of number total . The -

0 KM 25 km 50 km MAP 6: KOLUBARA PILOT RIVER CORRIDOR B3 08

8.2 Overview

Key facts about the pilot area Key facts about the SEE River process in the pilot area

Pilot Pilot river length: 90 km Main goals To initiate the Kolubara River Declaration and achievement of area Pilot river basin size: 3,640 km² of the SEE River a common platform for future harmonised management of the Kolubara size process River through a joint vision and management objectives.

Special -- The most downstream tributary of the Sava River (27 km upstream of the capital city − ) characteristics -- Fan-shaped catchment with a very dense hydrographic network of the pilot area -- The most flood affected basin in Serbia in May 2014 Common The draft of the Kolubara River Declaration was articulated in the SEE River Project -- Several districts and more than ten municipalities (some are within the Belgrade city area) river vision -- Kolubara mining basin (a part of Electric Power Industry of Serbia) articulated -- Two Public Water Management Companies (PWMC) “Srbijavode“ and “Beogradvode“ -- The diversity of hydromorphological characteristics: - Upstream part (trained rivers section in Valjevo) - Natural river section between Valjevo and Slovac - Middle part − open-pit coal mines (realigned river section due to the coal mine expansion) - Natural river section downstream of coal mines Studies done -- New stakeholders list (for the national capacity building seminar and - drained river section with levees near Obrenovac during for the Kolubara River Declaration) identified, as well as channels -- Several dams on tributaries The project for Project and Declaration dissemination

Protected AreaS Landscapes of exceptional features: “Gradac River gorge” Within (Gradac River is a tributary of the Kolubara River) The Pilot Area

Participation -- Involvement of national and local stakeholders, meetings and consultations methods -- National capacity building seminar Countries Serbia and tools -- Meetings with national and Kolubara River corridor stakeholders involved

Bilateral Not relevant Communication, -- SEE River promotional material And Multilateral information, -- Presentations at external conferences (Expert Meeting “Flood in Serbia in May 2014”, Mechanisms dissemination June 10, 2014 in the Sava Congress Centre, Belgrade, Serbia) -- Articles in the media -- TV communications -- Published article about the SEE River Project in the Journal of the Association of Administrative -- River basin: 6 Administrative Districts; 16 Municipalities. Water Technology and Sanitary Engineering, Belgrade (in English and Serbian) and water management -- River corridor: 2 Administrative Districts (Kolubarski, City of Belgrade); 5 Municipalities competences (City of Valjevo, Lajkovac, , Lazarevac and Obrenovac) Capacity National capacity building seminar in Belgrade, Serbia -- Two PWMCs: “Srbijavode“ and “Beogradvode“ building

Connection to Previous projects: other projects -- EC CARDS Regional Programme 2003 “Pilot River Basin Plan for Sava River” or processes -- Twinning Project − SR 2005/IB/EN/01, Capacity Building of the Directorate for Water, between the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management from Serbia and the German Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety Evaluation Peer review technique -- Pilot River Basin Management Plan for Kolubara River Basin, Swedish Environmental of the Protection Agency (Swedish EPA) process

Pre-studies / done

Anticipated Kolubara River Declaration Conference, planned for December 2014 post-project Pre-existing Stakeholders involved in related activities in the frame of the project “Pilot activities stakeholders River Basin Management Plan for Kolubara River Basin”, Swedish EPA. platforms/groups

66 67 B3 8.3 State of play 8.4 Process overview

Important industrial, mining and energy-production facilities 8.4.1 main goals of the process to invite, how to mediate different stakeholders at an event, and transportation infrastructure are located in the area. The how to involve the media that can help in organisation, etc.), 08 soils in the basin are of good quality and are mainly used for The main goal was to develop the Kolubara River Declara- the IJC team was able to make an appropriate selection of key crop production. The area is characterized by intensive economic tion and achieve a common platform for future harmonised stakeholders to be involved in the national capacity building development. The most developed industries are: coal mining, management of the Kolubara River through a joint vision and seminar and later in the process of initiation of the Kolubara thermal power plants and fly ash depots, separation and coal management objectives. River Declaration. One of the main conclusions of the visits processing, food processing industry, metal industry, chemical and of the experiences on the Kolubara River was that local industry, leather tanning industry and other. 8.4.2 Specific objectives institutions should be motivated to take over further activities and lead the process of stakeholder involvement. The Kolubara River basin was the area most affected by the −− Application of the SEE River Toolkit as a model for the floods in Serbia in May 2014. Days of extensive rainfall on Kolubara River and as an instrument to reach stakeholder A draft Kolubara River Declaration was prepared and pre-saturated soil caused devastating floods in the Western agreement and harmonisation between development and presented at the national capacity building seminar by the Balkans. Several regions in the central part of Serbia and along conservation of the watershed/river corridor. IJC team. As an outcome of the seminar, a final draft of the the Sava River were heavily impacted but the most affected −− Strengthening the multi-sectoral dialogue. Declaration is in place based on suggestions and improve- one was the basin of the Kolubara River. ments gathered from several seminar participants. Based 8.4.3 Challenges and obstacles particularly on the Slovenian study visit experience, two local The Kolubara River reaches the Sava River near Obrenovac, institutions expressed interest to take over further activities: one of Belgrade’s outer municipalities. The catchment is fan- −− After the catastrophic floods, people needed concrete help Kolubara Administrative District (KAD) and Regional Chamber shaped with diverse geological and morphological character- and have little understanding for long-term activities with of Commerce Valjevo (RCCV). istics and a very dense hydrographic network. It is surrounded long-term improvements. by mountains on the west and south while the northern part −− In these circumstances, the national capacity building A consultative meeting with KAD and RCCV heads was is open towards the Pannonian plain. It covers territories of seminar of the SEE River Project was the one and only organised in order to prepare a roadmap for further activi- several counties and more than ten municipalities. chance to initiate such cooperation and to draft the Kolubara ties. Several steps were agreed: preparation of a Declaration River Declaration. conference, drafting of a motivation letter for attracting key The area is unique due to the variety of activities and respec- −− The main challenge in the future is to keep the network stakeholders, updating stakeholders list, tentative date of the tive interests, from large cities to smallest rural settlements, functional and up-to-date, despite external factors (e.g. conference, etc. from coal mining and waste disposal to environmental after each election, either national or local). Contacting the protection issues. Electrical power production facilities of administrative structures and attracting new representatives As a follow up of the seminar and of the draft Declaration, national importance, drinking and industrial water supply, is needed continuously. some individuals and institutions representatives from the nature protection and conservation, agriculture and tourism Obrenovac Municipality contacted the IJC team, expressing are present in different parts of the basin. Generations have 8.4.4 Activities and approach: interest to actively contribute to the Declaration enactment faced such antagonistic sectoral objectives for decades, aiming process. to build and keep their homes and properties in this attractive The experience gained during the SEE River Project by the region. Moreover, flood management is not presently based on Jaroslav Cerni Institute (IJC) led to the idea to initiate similar A positive atmosphere and great interest in becoming actively the catchment but on the administrative units, which makes action in Serbia. Although the Kolubara River is not an inter- involved, especially after the catastrophic floods in May 2014, flood protection even more complex. national one, it abounds with natural and sectoral diversities which severely hit particularly the Kolubara River area, are a and needs an integral approach for river corridor management. good sign that the good will to manage the river in a manner of Not the first but certainly the worst floods in May 2014 hit this Unlike other SEE River Project partners, who have had 2 years sustainable development exists. Currently, there are activi- area and damages are of catastrophic scale. Entire settlements and several workshops at different levels, the IJC took the only ties in two most significant administrative areas (Valjevo and were literally submerged, resulting in human losses, thousands chance to gather national, regional and local stakeholders from Obrenovac) towards achieving support from the decision mak- of people in collective shelters, destroyed houses and land different sectors. ers before the Declaration conference. properties. Landslides were triggered and caused breakdown of roads and bridges. The country’s main electrical power Prior to the national capacity building seminar, the IJC team, 8.4.5 Outputs and results production facilities were endangered, while the overriding supported by the Slovenian Lead Partner Institute for Water of open pit coal mine was transformed into a lake with millions of the Republic of Slovenia and by the Iskriva Institute, organised The activities of the Kolubara River process have led to the cubic meters of water. Crops and animal farms were completely a study visit to Slovenian partners in the SEE River Project in following achievements: destroyed. Flood protection structures were seriously damaged order to gather experience from respective stakeholder work- −− Identification and establishment of stakeholder networks of and need urgent reconstruction. shops. Experiences from the Drava and Soča pilot areas, which the Kolubara River (national, regional and local levels). were presented by the Maribor office of the Institute of the −− Consultations with key stakeholders. Republic of Slovenia for Nature Conservation and the Soča Val- −− Preparation of a Draft of the Kolubara River Declaration and ley Development Centre respectively, were very useful. Based dissemination to national and Kolubara stakeholders. on the new knowledge on stakeholder involvement (e.g. what −− Preparation of media information in order to raise public kind of approach to use, which and how many stakeholders awareness. 68 69 B3 8.5 Lessons learned

Experiences from pilot actions: −− Different approaches are needed for different stakeholders. 08 −− Find at least one local institution with good reputation to lead the process. −− Mediate stakeholders with and through the local institution. −− Provide key stakeholders with support and information

KOLUBARA VISION KOLUBARA before the Declaration conference. −− Other useful tips: −− The established SEE River expert network can be very useful in future for the IJC and other partners’ activities. −− Possible further activities: −− The Kolubara River is proposed to be the pilot river corridor in Serbia in the follow-up project (SEE River Project 2.0).

8.6 Conclusions

−− The special role of the IJC in the project (non-EU associ- ated strategic partner with limited financial resources) was a challenge for the whole team in terms of experience DRAFT PROPOSAL OF THE KOLUBARA exchange and brainstorming for solutions. RIVER CORRIDOR DECLARATION −− The SEE River Project and the Kolubara River Declaration proposal were presented to national, regional and local In order to achieve the vision stakeholders at the national capacity building seminar, held “Kolubara River - pure and natural, in Belgrade. safe and sufficient for all”, −− Acknowledging the importance of this kind of a document, it is necessary to: the heads of the and Regional Chamber of Commerce Valjevo accepted to follow up this initiative and 1. Integratively implement EU direc- organise a conference aimed at presenting the draft Declara- tives related to water management tion to the general public with strong support of the IJC team. and environmental protection in the −− Even after the SEE River Project end, the activities towards Kolubara river basin. Kolubara River Declaration adoption will continue. Two 2. Reduce the risk of flooding in the meetings have already been organised, aiming to set up Kolubara River basin. a strategy and a roadmap for the provision of necessary 3. Take necessary measures to support by key stakeholders. achieve and maintain a good status −− The Kolubara River is proposed to be a SEE River follow-up of surface water and groundwater, in project pilot corridor in Serbia. order to protect aquatic and water- dependent ecosystems and satisfy needs of all water users. 4. Adapt the Kolubara River Manage- ment to the development needs. 5. Restore the natural values of the Kolubara River. 6. Promote the tourism and recrea- tional potential of the Kolubara River. 7. Improve inter-sectoral coopera- tion for sustainable development. 8. Raise awareness of the general population. 9. Raise awareness and capacities of national and local government and 8.7 More information spatial planners. The results of the pilot activities on the KOLUBARA River are available 10. Promote sustainable water use. on the SEE River web page: www.see-river.net/KOLUBARA-toolkit 71 B3 09

Conclusions on on Conclusions Applications along SEE Pilot Rivers: NERETVA, BODROG, PRUT, SOČA, VJOSA KOLUBARA AND

The SEE River Project activities along but it should be acknowledged that a challenge, therefore good modera- the Bodrog, Neretva, Prut, Soča, Vjosa this can open new development tion is the key of success. and Kolubara rivers with their different perspectives. −− Expectations about measurable starting points and local circumstances −− Each river area and each country has improvement should not be too high have shown a lot of progress and individual situations that have to - success is never guaranteed or sus- various concrete results to be proud of. be respected in the course of a local tained without iterative efforts after The combination of national analyses stakeholder process - any general some action: monitoring is the key of and international workshops among guidance has to be applied with sustainable success and should trigger the SEE River Partners has resulted not flexibility, both in terms of the river a regular review and evaluation, both only in new appraisals of these river development options and the stake- in terms of stakeholder cooperation, regions but also in new stakeholder holder roles and actions. river governance and local field work. networks and a list of follow-up activi- −− Experience in countries with many −− Results that are achieved at the end of ties. New experiences have been gained years of stakeholder involvement an executed process should therefore and many lessons learned. On a more has shown that regular communica- rather be seen as a milestone of a general level, our conclusions include tion and cooperation leads to joint longer process of the river region but the following points: successes and mutual trust. This also not as a reason to fall back into the reduces the risk of misunderstand- earlier (lower) standards of com- −− The local issues very often relate to ings, misuse or even conflicts close to munication, cooperation and active the key management issues that zero. Thus, integrated and cross- involvement. were identified as actually affecting border river corridor management can or even dominating the quality of contribute to good resolutions and the entire/international river courses. reconciliation. There is growing awareness among −− In countries and regions going many stakeholders about the strong through “innovative management”, connection between downstream it is important that the local process and upstream parties, and the need drivers are early and well-prepared for coordinated management across (possibly supported/guided) about the several sectors and political borders. dimension (e.g. needed input and −− It is important to make local stake- capacities), scope (diversity of topics holders aware of the wider implica- and opinions) and risks of an inte- tions of individual river management: grated stakeholder process: finding a sharing the river corridor requires balance between guiding a target-ori- more communication and cooperation, ented process and allowing an open which should not be seen as a burden, reflection of possible developments is 72 B3 10

REFERENCES

−− AKL & IzVRS (2008). Is the Drava River Basin manage- −− Moisiu, L., Hoxha, S. (2013). Common Platform for −− SEE River (2014l). SEE River Toolkit for Facilitat- ment sustainable and well on the way? International Integrated Management of International Vjosa River ing Cross-Sectoral Management of River Corridors, Symposium ‘Drava River Vision’, 23-25 September Corridor. International Conference of Ecosystems (ICE). Booklet #2: Practical Applications in SEE pilot Rivers 2008, Maribor. Final Report. Government of Carinthia, Tirana, Albania. - Drava River. SEE River project, Sustainable integrated Department of Water Management, Klagenfurt, Insti- management of international river corridors in SEE tute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana. −− Polpovici, M. (2014). Report on final communication countries. strategy and synthesis of relevant results of the work- −− BLFUW, AKL (2009). Gewässerentwicklungskonzept shops held in Romania, Moldova and Ukraine. PhD eng. −− STMUG (2006). River Basin Agenda for Alpine Space: Gurk. Austrian Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Mihaela Polpovici with contribution of SEE River Team. Model and examples for sustainable development of Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Bucharest, Romania. the Alpine river basins. Bavarian State Ministry for the Vienna, Government of Carinthia, Department of Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection, Water Management, Klagenfurt. −− PRC (2013). Z roko v roki za Sočo - Hand in Hand for Munich. Soča. Publication published by Soča Valley Develop- −− CSEEP (2014). Report on identification and stakeholder’s ment Centre for Soča River Day Celebration 2013. SEE communication strategy. Center for Sustainable Envi- River Project. Kobarid, Slovenia. ronmental Economic Policies with contribution of SEE River Team. Oana Islam, Bucharest, Romania. −− SEE River (2014f). Pilot river corridor diary for record- ing and monitoring of experiences from pilot areas in −− GWP, INBO (2009). A Handbook for Integrated Water the SEE River Project - Bodrog River. SEE River project, Resources Management in Basin. Global Water Part- Sustainable integrated management of international nership, International Network of Basin Organisations. river corridors in SEE countries.

−− ICPDR (2010). Platina. Manual on Good Practices in −− SEE River (2014g). Pilot river corridor diary for record- Sustainable Waterway Planning. 7th Framework Pro- ing and monitoring of experiences from pilot areas in gramme for Research and Technological Development, the SEE River Project - Prut River. SEE River project, EC DG Mobility and Transport, International Commis- Sustainable integrated management of international sion for the Protection of the Danube River. river corridors in SEE countries.

−− INBO, GWP, UNECE, UNESCO, GEF and AFD (2012). −− SEE River (2014h). Pilot river corridor diary for record- The Handbook for integrated water resources manage- ing and monitoring of experiences from pilot areas in ment in transboundary basins of rivers, lakes and the SEE River Project - Neretva River. SEE River project, aquifers. International Network of Basin Organisations, Sustainable integrated management of international Global Water Partnership, United Nations Economic river corridors in SEE countries. Commission for Europe, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, Global Environ- −− SEE River (2014i). Pilot river corridor diary for record- mental Fund, Agence Francaise de Development. ing and monitoring of experiences from pilot areas in the SEE River Project - Soča River. SEE River project, −− IRKA (2005). Entwicklungskonzept Alpenrhein, Eine Sustainable integrated management of international Initiative der Internationalen Regierungskommission river corridors in SEE countries. Alpenrhein. Kurzbericht. Lichtenstein, Voralrlberg, Graubünden, St. Gallen, Internationale Rhein- −− SEE River (2014j). Pilot river corridor diary for record- regulierung. ing and monitoring of experiences from pilot areas in the SEE River Project - Vjosa River. SEE River project, −− Lešková, D., Simonová, D., Sokolová, L., Holubecká, Sustainable integrated management of international M., Spišiaková, K., Psotová, M. (2013). Manažment river corridors in SEE countries. povodí a povodňových rizík 2013 (River basin and flood risk). SEE River Project, Bratislava. −− SEE River (2014k). SEE River Toolkit for Facilitat- ing Cross-Sectoral Management of River Corridors, −− Lešková, D., Minárik, B., Sokolová, L., Holubecká, M., Booklet #1: Roadmap to Cross-Sectoral Management Mrázová, L. (2013). Konferencia „12. Zdravotno-tech- of River Corridors. SEE River project, Sustainable inte- nické stavby - Malé vodné diela - Krajina a voda“. SEE grated management of international river corridors in River Project, Vysoké Tatry, Tatranská Lomnica. SEE countries.

74 B3 11

Project PartnersProject RIVER SEE

LEAD PARTNER

76 SEE RIVER GENERAL INFO: Project name: Sustainable Integrated Management of International River Corridors in SEE Countries Duration of the project: October 2012 to November 2014 Value: 2,107,354.30 EUR Funding: South East Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme Website: www.see-river.net Join: www.facebook.com/Hand.in.Hand.for.Rivers

SEE RIVER CONTACT: Aleš Bizjak, Project Manager, [email protected] Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia Hajdrihova 28c, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

DISCLAIMER: This publication reflects only the views of the authors and the Managing Authority of the South East Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme cannot be held responsible for its contents or any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

EDITORS: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: ISBN: Aleš Bizjak, Institute for Water of the Republic of This publication has been prepared by the SEE River CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Slovenia, Slovenia experts taking part in the pilot activities on the Bodrog, Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana Matej Cunder, Institute for Water of the Republic of Neretva, Prut, Soča, Vjosa and Kolubara rivers. The Slovenia, Slovenia following partner organisations and external experts 502.131.1:556.53(4-12)(082) Semra Fejzibegović, Hzydro Engineering Institute Sara- contributed to this Booklet: 556.18(4-12)(082) jevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina Lucija Marovt, Communications Management, Slovenia Bodrog River: SEE River Toolkit for facilitating cross-sectoral manage- Primož Skrt, Soča Valley Development Centre, Slovenia Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute, Slovakia ment of river corridors / [editors Aleš Bizjak ... [et al.] Mateja Softić, Iskriva, Institute for Development of Local National Institute for Environment, Hungary ; illustration Vladan Srdić ; photos See River Project, Potentials, Slovenia Blue Rivers, Ukraine 2012-2014]. - 1st ed. - Ljubljana : Institute for Water of the Alexander Zinke, Zinke Environment Consulting for CEE Republic of Slovenia, 2014 on behalf of the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Neretva River: Austria Hydro Engineering Institute Sarajevo, Bosnia and Vsebina: Herzegovina Booklet 3: Practical applications on the Bodrog, Neretva, CONTRIBUTIONS: Hrvatske vode, Legal Entity for Water Management, Prut, Soča, Vjosa and Kolubara rivers / [cartography Matej Boris Minarik, Martina Holubecká, Slovak Hydrometeoro- Croatia Cunder, Miklós Szalay] logical Institute, Slovakia State Institute for Nature Protection, Croatia András Almássy, Miklós Szalay, National Institute for ISBN 978-961-90074-6-4 (zv. 3) Environment, Hungary Prut River: 1. Bizjak, Aleš, 1968- Olena Marushevska, Blue Rivers, Ukraine National Administration Romanian Waters, Romania 278212352 Semra Fejzibegović, Hydro Engineering Institute Sara- Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Romania jevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina Department for Waters, Forests and Fishery, Romania LINKS: Alan Cibilić, Hrvatske vode, Legal Entity for Water All referenced SEE River products are available on the Management, Croatia Soča River: Project web page www.see-river.net. Neven Trenc, State Institute for Nature Protection, Soča Valley Development Centre, Slovenia Croatia Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia, Slovenia Cristian Rusu, Ioana Nedelea, Ramona Curelea, Elena Institute of the Republic of Slovenia for Nature Conserva- Tuchiu, National Administration Romanian Waters, tion, Slovenia Romania Lucija Marovt Communications Management, Slovenia Miro Kristan, Primož Skrt, Soča Valley Development Centre, Slovenia Vjosa River: Aleš Bizjak, Institute for Water of the Republic of Albanian Geological Survey, Albania Slovenia, Slovenia Sajmir Hoxha, Environmental Consultant, Albania Andrej Grmovšek, Daniel Rojšek, Institute of the Republic of Slovenia for Nature Conservation, Slovenia Kolubara River: Mateja Softić, Iskriva, Institute for Development of Local Jaroslav Černi Institute for the Development of Water Potentials, Slovenia Resources, Serbia Lucija Marovt, Communications Management, Slovenia Lavdie Moisiu, Albanian Geological Survey, Albania PROOFREADING: Marina Babić-Mladenović, Dragana Ninković, Ljiljana Mojca Trampuš Marjanović, Vesna Tripković, Jaroslav Černi Institute for the Development of Water Resources, Serbia GRAPHIC DESIGN, ILLUSTRATION: Alexander Zinke, Zinke Environment Consulting for CEE Vladan Srdić, Studio 360, www.studio360.si on behalf of the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Austria PHOTOS: SEE River Project, 2012-2014 INTERNAL REVIEW: Tanja Nikowitz, WWF Austria, Austria PRINT: Neven Trenc, State Institute for Nature Protection, Croatia Tiskarna Littera picta d.o.o. Branko Vučijak, Hydro Engineering Institute Sarajevo, Circulation: 800, printed on Cyclus Offset 140 g Bosnia and Herzegovina PUBLISHED BY: EXTERNAL REVIEW: Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Kathryn Hardcastle, dialogue matters ltd, United Kingdom Slovenia, November 2014

CARTOGRAPHY: CITATION: Matej Cunder, Institute for Water of the Republic of Bizjak, A. et.al. (2014). The SEE River Toolkit for Slovenia, Slovenia Facilitating Cross-Sectoral Management of River Corridors: Miklós Szalay, National Institute for Environment, Booklet 3. 1st edition. Ljubljana: Institute for Water of the Hungary Republic of Slovenia Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia Hajdrihova 28c, SI-1000 Ljubljana www.izvrs.si, [email protected], www.see-river.net