Integrating the Water Framework Directive and the Nature

Directives: implementation in Central and Eastern Europe

©Zvonimir Tanocki 2013

Water Framework Directive Implementation in Central

and Eastern Europe

CEEweb for Biodiversity is an international network of NGOs in Central and Eastern Europe. The mission of CEEweb is the conservation of biodiversity through the promotion of sustainable development. Published with the financial support of the European Commission, although its content does not necessarily reflect the donor position or views. The sole responsibility lies with the authors and the donors are not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. Please feel free to distribute the information contained in the publication acknowledging the source, and we encourage you to let us know about it. Please cite as: “CEEweb for Biodivesity. 2013. Integrating Water Framework Directive and Nature Directives: Implementation in Central and Eastern Europe”. Editors responsible: Agnes Zolyomi CEEweb for Biodiversity Text: Sarolta Tripolszky, CEEweb for Biodiversity Editing: Eduard Nedelciu, CEEweb for Biodiversity

We are grateful for the valuable contributions to the writing of this report to:

Pawel Pawlaczyk, Naturalist Club (Poland)

Ivanyi Anna, Nimfea Environment and Nature Conservation Association and

Rideg Dora (Hungary)

The study was generously funded by the European Commission, but does not

necessarily reflect its views or opinions.

Executive Summary

Most of European water bodies are polluted, overexploited or at risk and in the context of further development, climate change, a business-as-usual scenario would mean that the situation will deteriorate. Through the Water Framework Community Directive, Member States committed themselves to bring water bodies throughout Europe in good ecological status and safeguarding and quality of water resources for present and future generations. However, there is growing recognition that achieving such ambitious goals is not possible without an integrated, cross-sectoral approach and a first step is to provide for synergies between the WFD and Nature Directives (Birds and Habitats Directives), which aim for achieving favourable conservation status for habitats and species of European importance. In Central and Eastern Europe there are already examples of projects implemented with such approach. Case studies from Poland, Hungary and Romania revealed a number of key success factors among which availability of restoration funds through various EU financing lines, partnership between research and fieldwork-oriented institutes/organisations, use of environmental legislation to preserve the ecological status, establishment of monitoring systems and implementation of integrated management plans are the most important. Undoubtedly, more synergies with other sectors such as agriculture and cohesion would provide for a significant progress in achieving the Community’s goals for water quality and biodiversity conservation.

Context

Water resources in Europe are under increased pressure. According to the European Commission, 20% of surface water is at serious risk from pollution; 60% of European cities over-exploit their groundwater resources; 50% of wetlands are endangered. At the same time, demand for water is on a continuously rising trend. Three-quarters of Europeans get their supply from groundwater, locked in the Earth. Nearly half the EU population lives in ‘water-stressed’ countries, where the abstraction of water from freshwater sources is too high1. The ‘Birds’ and the ‘Habitats’ Directives (BHD) together form the backbone of the EU’s biodiversity policy as they protect Europe’s most valuable species and habitats. The protected areas designated under these directives form the Natura 2000 network. Natura 2000 is the centrepiece of EU nature & biodiversity policy. It is an EU wide network of nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive. The aim of the network is to assure the long-term survival of Europe's most valuable and threatened species and habitats. It is comprised of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated by Member States under the Habitats Directive, and also incorporates Special Protection Areas (SPAs) which they designate under the 1979 Birds Directive. Natura 2000 is not a system of strict nature reserves where all human activities are excluded. Whereas the network will certainly include nature reserves most of the land is likely to continue to be privately owned and the emphasis will be on ensuring that future management is sustainable, both ecologically and economically. The establishment of this network of protected areas also fulfils a Community obligation under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. Together with the Directives’ species protection requirements they are the central tool for bringing protected species and habitats into a favourable conservation status besides other existing tools2. On a related topic, the aim of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is to establish a framework for the protection of all surface waters and groundwater with the aim to reach good status in all waters as a rule by 2015. All EU Member States apart from islands like Cyprus and Malta share waters with neighbouring countries. A river basin or a catchment covers the entire river system, from the sources of small tributaries to the estuary, including its groundwater. The EU and the Member States have divided the river basins and associated coastal areas into 110 river basin districts, 40 of which are international and cross borders, covering about 60% of EU territory3. When tackling issues related to water quality, processes taking place upstream and downstream are significant factors and these should be considered when implementing a remediation/restoration plan. An integrated river basin management adopts a holistic approach to protecting the whole body of water, its source, tributaries, delta and river mouth, through a coordinated

1 EU Commission 2010: Water is for life: How the Water Framework Directive helps safeguard Europe’s

resources 2 EU Commission 2013: Natura 2000 network

3 EU Commission 2010: Water is for life: How the Water Framework Directive helps safeguard Europe’s

resources.

strategy involving all the interested parties in decision-making4. In Europe, the river basin approach is seen as the best way to manage water and it is this thinking that lies behind the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Therefore, Member States have had to draw up river basin management plans (RBMPs) to safeguard each one of the 110 EU river basin districts. According to the EU Commission, the planning and implementation stages of RBMPs are fundamentally related to public participation.

The definition of ecological status (see Fig.1) looks at the abundance of aquatic flora and fish fauna, the availability of nutrients, and aspects like salinity, temperature and pollution by chemical pollutants5. The EU now has more than 100 000 surface water bodies: 80% of them rivers, 15% lakes and 5% coastal and transitional waters6. The same river can contain different water bodies, since the status of the water may change. The diagram below applies to a river with high-quality water at its source, which gradually becomes more polluted downstream.

Fig.1) Decrease in the ecological status for river7

The WFD is backed up by other EU legislation such as the REACH regulation on chemicals and the Directive for Integrated Pollution8. At the EU level, current discourse in terms of water management is connected to climatic changes, which are expected to bring:

• Lower rainfall and higher summer temperatures in the south, putting stress on scarce water resources. The Commission’s 2007 Communication on “Addressing the challenge of water scarcity and droughts” found that implementing the WFD will be crucial; • More rain and a higher flood risk in the north. Floods are already becoming increasingly frequent: since 1990, 259 major river floods have been reported, 165 of them since 2000. The 2007 Floods Directive adopted a new, proactive approach, requiring Member States to prepare preliminary flood risk assessments for all river basin districts by 2011, followed up in 2013 by flood

4 Ibid.

5 EU Commission 2000: Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a

framework for Community action in the field of water policy 6 EU Commission 2010: Water is for life: How the Water Framework Directive helps safeguard Europe’s

resources 7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.

hazard maps. By 2015, Member States should have flood risk management plans, ready to link into the next cycle of RBMPs for 2016-20219 (see Fig.2).

Both the nature directives and the WFD aim at ensuring healthy aquatic ecosystems while at the same time ensuring a balance between water/nature protection and the sustainable use of nature's natural resources. Indeed there are many synergies as the implementation of measures under the WFD will generally benefit the objectives of the nature directives10. In the view of this, public involvement will be crucial to meet the goals of the Nature Directives and WFD. Yet large numbers of Europeans are still unaware of their right to have a say on the future of water. As biodiversity, resource and water problems affect whole Europe, policies are already in place to address these issues at various levels. However, in order to apply these policy tools more effectively, it would be inevitable for all stakeholders group to understand the elements of these policies and the potential overlapping issues.

Fig.2) Expected effects of climatic changes in Europe11

Poland

Odra river, Domaszkow-Tarchalice project Odra is the second highest river in Poland. In the middle river course, one of the biggest complexes of alluvial oak-elm-ash forests (91F0) habitat was preserved. The alluvial forests in Odra valley are also important for birds, with one of the biggest

9 EU Commission 2010: Water is for life: How the Water Framework Directive helps safeguard Europe’s

resources 10

EU Commission 2011: Links between Water Framework Directive and Nature Directives 11

EU Commission 2013: Agriculture and Climate Change

European population of Middle Spotted Woodpecker (Dendrocopos medius). The complex of alluvial forests and river ox-bow lakes was designated as Natura 2000 sites: SPA Łęgi Odrzańskie PLB010008 and SCI Łęgi Odrzańskie PLH020018. Nevertheless, the forests are originally dependent on the occasional floods. After building, in the beginning of XX century, flood embankments along the river banks in most of the forests, the flooding was excluded and ecological succession towards less valuable mixed deciduous hornbeam forests (9170 habitat) was started. Nevertheless, flood control by building the embankments close to the river was also not entirely successful. High water was concentrated in a narrow corridor and consequently some big floods, with the biggest one in 1997, overflooded and broke the embarkments, destroying roads, houses and fields. After several similar episodes, a project to improve both flooding control and the conservation status of the forests was designated. Between Domaszkow and Tarchalice villages, the present embarkment will be partially destroyed (four “flooding windows” totaling 136 km in length), and a new embarkment will be built (6,39 km length) outside the forest (see Fig.3).

Fig.3) Floof control project for Odra River

As a result, 600 ha of the alluvial forests and ox-bow lakes can be, at least once for some years, flooded again. And, the flooding water will be “stored” in such natural polder, as a result the flood risk for the ca 1500 ha or urbanized and agricultural areas will be significantly reduced. Costs of this project is estimated as 10 millions Eur, in 85% funded by EU. The project is planned to be finally implemented in October 2015.

Biała Tarnowska River – restoring ecological continuity Biala Tarnowska is a middle size submontane river in Carpathians foothills, representing the so called ‘gravel rivers’ (i.e. submontane rivers with gravel sediments). For conservation of Natura 2000 fish species (Barbus peloponessius, Cottus gobio) and gravel sediments habitats 3220, 3230, 3240, the river was designated as a Natura 2000 site SCI Biala Tarnowska PLH120090. In the past, the river was strongly transformed by building barriers and dams, fragmenting its continuity and the fish population. After several flooding episodes, local stakeholder grew disappointed with the river eroding their fields. This led to a strong pressure to build stone embankment, which narrowed the river bed. In 2011, a restoration project started as a joint venture of Regional Authority for Water Management (official water authority and official manager of the river), the Institute of Nature Conservation (scientific instituye) and WWF Poland (NGO). The project assumes:

Along at least 15 km of the river course, the ‘river free migration corridor’ will be designated as the belt of terrain in which the processes of banks erosion will be fully tolerated and so will the processes of gravel accumulation in the river. Relevant private owned lands, which will be exposed to erosion or flooding in this belt, will be purchased;

16 barriers will be removed or rebuild, allowing for restoration of fish migration. As a result, 58km part of the river in the lower river course, and 10 km in the upper course, will be restored as continuous river sections without barriers;

Thick shelled river mussel (Unio crassus, Habitat directive annex II species) will be reintroduced to the river section where they have disappeared;

20 ha of new alluvial forests will be planted;

Invasive alien plant species (IAS) will be removed from the alluvial forests.

The project is directed both towards restoring the good ecological status of the river (WFD target) and to restoring the Favourable Conservation Status (FCS) of natural habitats and Annex II species in Natura 2000 site – thus achieving the Natura 2000 site conservation objectives. The project cost is cca. 4,5 million EUR and 85% of this amount is funded through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The project is expected to be finalized in 2014. Drawa – lowland reference river The Drawa river, a middle size river in north-western Poland, and its main tributary Płociczna, is one of the few lowland rivers that still exhibits many natural features along major portions of the river. With some small exceptions, such as the Kamienna hydropower plant, which transforms cca. 10-km of the river course, features include fluvial dynamics of the river, conectivity to many natural lakes, extensive surrounding forests and unmanaged riverbanks. With the exception of a few kilometers in the upper course, Plociczna is also almost entirely natural.

The middle and low course of Plociczna and the middle course of Drawa were designated as Drawa National Park (Drawieński Park Narodowy) in 1990, together with the surrounding forest complex. After Poland’s accession to the EU, the Park was also designated as Natura 2000 site: SPA Lasy Puszczy Nad Drawą PLB320016 and SCI Uroczyska Puszczy Drawskiej PLH320046, with the 3260 (floating vegetation of Ranunculus of plain, submountainous rivers), 91E0 (alluvial forests) habitats, salmon (Samlo salar), Euroepan bullhead (Cottus gobio), Thick shelled river mussel (Unio crassus), Green snaketail dragonfly (Ophiogomphus celilia) among the conservation targets. Also, the population of Goldeneye (Bucephalla clangula) reproduces in the beech forests on the slopes of the river valley and uses river water table in the phase of duckling development. The ecological status of the rivers is assessed as high – moreover, the river is a reference base for establishing the conditions of relevant ecological types of rivers in Poland. Conservation Status of the Natura 2000 conservation target is also assessed as favourable. This is simply the result of natural river conditions by conserving natural hydromorphology without any intervention. Drawa and Plociczna in the Drawa National Park are the exceptional examples of rivers with little or no maintenance works. Among others, the coarse woody debris is not removed from the rivers, therefore creating a unique opportunity for recording their ecological function and role. Typically for natural rivers in forest landscape, debris is numerous and sometimes its number exceeds 100 per km. Nevertheless, after cca. 30 years of such policy, the number of coarse woody debris in rivers seems to be stable. (i.e. there is equilibrium between decomposition and providing new debris input by natural processes such as erosion). Coarse woody debris in river currently modifies the river bed morphology, providing microhabitats that support biodiversity. Opposing widespread myths, even the coarse woody debris jams do not influence water level importantly, and do not cause significant flooding outside embankments and alluvial forests. The argument that debris is source of flooding risk in other lowland rivers is probably overestimated. Both for preserving to good ecological status or the FCS of Natura 2000 habitats, the most appropriate is the no-intervention methodology (i.e. allow natural processes to shape the morphology and hydrology of the river). Recent years have witnessed some pressure from the increased canoe tourism on Drawa: tourist operators pledged for removing part of the coarse woody debris from the river to make the canoeing easier. However, this particularity should be preserved as it is, as it provides the unique possibility of recording fully natural dynamics of debris and rivers.

Fig.4) Drawa River. Photo by Pawel Pawlaczyk

Bialka river – solving conflict Bialka river is an example of well preserved gravel mountaneous river, comprising a complex of Natura 2000 gravel sediments habitats: 3220, 3230 and 3240. A small fragment of the river is a nature reserve, while the entire river was designated as Natura 2000 site SCI Dolina Bialki PLH120024 after Poland’s accession of Poland to the EU. At the moment, river management is a source of conflict. The local community asks for ‘much better flood control’, mainly by deepeneing the river channel and stabilizing the main current among gravel sediments. From the point of view of Natura 2000 site conservation this is not realistic, because it would significantly contribute to the destruction of the natural dynamics of relevant natural habitats. For its unique landscape, Bialka River is also famous among the general public in Poland and in 2013 it was the scene of pro-conservation manifestations. A compromise solution was proposed by river official managers – Regional Authority for Water Management. An environmental impact report for different alternatives of managing the flood risk was carried out and flooding embankments are to be built outside the Natura 2000 site and outside the belts of river-dependent habitats: gravel river bed and alluvial shrubs and forests. Inside embankments, the river would be kept in its natural condition for as much as possible, with intervention (moving gravel only, without building concrete or stony constructions) in a short, few hundred meters sections adjacent to the bridges threatened by potential floods. In this way, the flooding safety for people can be achieved and natural values of the rivers can be

maintained. Nevertheless, the final decision is not taken yet and this compromise is currently under criticism from local communities.

Fig.5) Bialka River. Photo by Pawel Pawlaczyk

Hungary - Mura river case study

In Hungary, a site area was selected in 2010 for a project aimed at exploiting gravel reefs of the Mura River. In the same year, the site received national protection under the name of Mura river Landscape Protection Area, part of the Natura 2000 network (see Fig.3). According to the research work carried out by Nimfea Association, a environmental NGO, a number of nationally protected and of Community importance fish species are present in the river: Danubian gudgeon (Gobio uranoscopus), Kessler’s gudgeon (Gobio kessleri), Streber (Zingel streber), Golden spined loach (Sabanejewia aurata), Zingel (Zingel zingel). The reef is also a habitat for the Little Ringed Plover (Charadrius dubius). Gravel reefs are important breeding areas for fishes, and as such they play an essential role in the life-cycle of Natura 2000 fish species. Based on the above scientific facts, the Association submitted a legally grounded request not to issue the permission for exploitation. Another NGO, Dráva Alliance reached the same conclusion. Both organizations made use of their legal standing in the case.

Fig. 3) Mura river Landscape Protection Area (Natura 2000 site HUBF20043) in

blue (source: EEA, 2013) Despite expert opinions and statements, the authorities gave the permission for gravel exploitation. Both NGOs made an appeal to change this decision, arguing that the reefs would partly or entirely disappear, regardless of the fact that the planned exploitation would be authorized out of the breeding season of the fish. The surveys conducted by the Association in 2007 confirmed that the gravel reefs are living, resting and breeding areas for the above listed fish species under national and EU-level protection. The surveys found that out of the 14 species occurring during breeding season, 8 species (57%) are under protection on national or Community level. All of the listed protected species were represented by young specimens, evidencing that the site is also a breeding area. Out of 149, 130 of the caught fish (87%) belonged to species under national or EU-level protection. These facts highlighted that the gravel reef is a habitat for a high number of protected species. Exploiting and destroying the reef would, without any doubt, have made irreversible damage in the valuable fish fauna of the river. As opposed to the findings of the Association, the authority referred to a preliminary impact assessment, in which a researcher of a renamed university had not found any fish at all on the reef. In the second instance procedure, the authority found the concerns of the two NGOs substantiated, so obliged the first instance to carry out the permission procedure again. In the repeated procedure, the authority examined the impacts of gravel exploitation again, and concluded that such activities do not endanger natural values. Both NGOs made an appeal again, then the second instance – after “thorough reconsideration” – obliged again the first instance to start a new procedure. The arguments of the first instance authority presented in the permission decision were apparently lacking solid evidence, that the NGOs requested the state secretary for nature conservation to revise the objectivity of the authority’s procedure.

Romania - Restoration of Bobina-Cernovca in the Danube Delta

For the past decades, the Danube Delta has suffered from human interventions that led to dramatic changes in some areas. These included dyking of large areas for the purpose of agricultural use, intensive farming and forestry, leading to alterations or disturbances of the water balance. In turn, this had effects on the alteration of natural processes, the ecological balance as well as the characteristic functions of wetlands and a deterioration, or sometimes even loss of area-specific habitats. When the transformation measures were stopped in early 1990, the dyked area already covered 97.408 ha (22 %) of the total 482.592 ha12. The Danube Delta Biosphere National Institute for Research and Development in co-operation with the Institute for Floodplain Ecology of WWF Germany designed a management plan aimed at the restoration of the affected areas in the delta. This included pilot restoration project the agricultural polders of Babina (2100ha) and Cernovca (1560ha), which were carried out.

By 1994, Babina polder was reconnected to the flood regime of the Danube and two years later the same process was applied to the Cernovca polder. In addition, dams were opened in specific hydraulically and ecologically effective spots. Upon completion of the restoration project, a monitoring system and a management plan were put in place, yielding positive results. Some of the Natura 2000 habitats that can be found here are 3150 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magno-potamion or Hydrocharition-type vegetation, 3270 Rivers with muddy banks with Chenopodion rubri p.p. and Bidention p.p. vegetation, 92A0 Salix alba and populous alba galleries, 92D0 Southern riparian galleries and tickets (Nerio-Tamaricetea). Some of the Natura 2000 species resettled in the area include the greater bladderwort (Aldrovanda vesiculosa), the European pond turtle, otter and mink, the fire-bellied

12

WWF and Danube Delta National Institute for Development and Research 2008: Ecological restoration in the

Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve

Fig. 4) Map of Babina and

Cernovca ponds

toad, the large copper (Lycaena dispar) and a large number of birds. Another positive outcome of the project was the reconnection of Babina island to the dynamics of the river, which resulted in nutrient retention, thus reducing eutrophication in the area13.

13

Ibid.

Further reading

EU Commission 2010: The Water Framework Directive. Available here>>

EU Commission 2010: Water is for life: How the Water Framework Directive helps

safeguard Europe’s resources. Available here>>

EU Commission 2011: Links between the Water Framework Directive and Nature

Directives. Available here>>

EU Commission 2013: Natura 2000 network. Available here>>

EU Commission 2013: Agriculture and climate change. Available here>>

EURlex 2000: Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.

Available here>>

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and Danube Delta National Institute for Development

and Research 2008. Ecological restoration in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve.

Available here>>

The study was generously funded by the European Commission, but does not

necessarily reflect its views or opinions.