REPORT 2.6 Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

Transcription

Project co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through Operational Program for
Technical Assistance 2007-2013
REPORT 2.6
Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA)
c
October 2015
This report relates to the deliverable “Output 2.6 – Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA)” under the Agreement for Technical Assistance with regard to the Danube Delta Integrated
Sustainable Development Strategy between the Ministry of Regional Development and Public
Administration of Romania (MRDPA) and the World Bank for Reconstruction and Development,
concluded on 4 September 2013.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
GENERAL INFORMATION ................................................................................................................... 14
2
INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS SUBJECT OF APPROVAL .................................................... 16
2.1 GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS ................................................................................... 16
2.2 GEOGRAPHIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE LOCATION ........................................................................................ 21
2.3 PHYSICAL MODIFICATIONS RESULTED FROM THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION................................................. 26
2.4 NATURAL RESOURCES NECESSARY FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................ 27
2.5 NATURAL RESOURCES WHICH WILL BE EXPLOITED FROM THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY
IMPORTANCE IN ORDER TO BE USED FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................. 27
2.6 EMISSIONS AND WASTE GENERATED BY THE DDISDS AND THE METHODS FOR THEIR ELIMINATION ................... 27
2.7 REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO LAND USE, NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DDISDS ..................... 40
2.8 SUPPLEMENTARY SERVICES REQUIRED BY THE DDISDS IMPLMENTATION ...................................................... 43
2.9 DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION, FUNCTIONING, DISMANTLING AND THE SCHEDULING OF THE DDISDS
IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD ............................................................................................................................. 43
2.10 ACTIVITIES THAT WILL BE GENERATED AS RESULT OF THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION...................................... 44
2.11 CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTENT, PROPOSED OR APPROVED PP, WHICH MAY GENERATE CUMULATIVE IMPACT WITH
DDISDS AND WHICH MAY AFFECT THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY IMPORTANCE ........................... 55
3
INFORMATION ABOUT THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST AFFECTED BY
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS ............................................................................................................ 55
3.1 DATA CONCERNING THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS ......................................................................................................................... 55
3.2 DATA ABOUT THE PRESENCE, LOCATION, POPULATION AND ECOLOGY OF SPECIES AND/ OR HABITATS OF
COMMUNITY INTEREST PRESENT ON THE SURFACE AND IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DDISDS, MENTIONED IN THE
STANDARD DATA FORMS OF THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST.......................................... 83
3.3 DESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS OF THE AFFECTED SPECIES AND HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST
(AREA, LOCATION, CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES) AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH ADJACENT NATURA 2000 SITES AND THEIR
DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................................................... 119
3.4 CONSERVATION STATUS OF SPECIES AND HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST ............................................. 121
3.5 DATA REGARDING THE STRUCTURE AND DYNAMICS OF THE AFFECTED SPECIES POPULATIONS (NUMERICAL
EVOLUTION OF POPULATION WITHIN THE NATURA 2000 SITES, ESTIMATIVE PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION OF THE SPECIES
AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS, HABITAT SURFACE IS LARGE ENOUGH TO ENSURE THE SPECIES
MAINTENANCE ON LONG-TERM) ................................................................................................................... 137
3.6 STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS THAT CREATE AND MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE NATURAL
PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST ................................................................................................. 137
3.7 THE CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES, WHERE WERE ESTABLISHED THROUGH
MANAGEMENT PLANS ................................................................................................................................. 138
3.8 DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES, INCLUDING EVOLUTIONS/
CHANGES THAT MAY OCCUR IN THE FUTURE.................................................................................................... 139
4
IDENTIFICATION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT .................................................................................. 156
4.1 IDENTIFICATION OF CURRENT THREATS, PRESSURES AND ACTIVITIES WITH IMPACT ON NATURA 2000 SITES IN THE
DANUBE DELTA REGION ............................................................................................................................. 156
4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL FORMS OF IMPACTS OF DDISDS ............................................................... 168
4.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................................... 198
5
MEASURES TO REDUCE IMPACT ON SPECIES AND HABITATS FROM PROTECTED NATURAL AREAS OF
COMMUNITY INTEREST ............................................................................................................................ 247
5.1 AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................................. 247
5.2 MONITORING ................................................................................................................................... 252
6
METHODS USED TO COLLECT INFORMATION ON POTENTIALLY AFFECTED SPECIES OF COMMUNITY
INTEREST .................................................................................................................................................. 255
6.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................................ 255
6.2 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 256
7
CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................................. 258
8
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................... 260
INDEX OF TABLES
Table no. 2-1 List of administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable
Development Strategy................................................................................................................................ 21
Table no. 2-2 Land occupied, permanently or temporarily, depending on the code and land use category
.................................................................................................................................................................... 42
Table no. 2-3 Types of possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of the
types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS (2030) .................................................................. 45
Table no. 3-1 List of Natura 2000 sites in the study area ........................................................................... 58
Table no. 3-2 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SCIs for each sector ................ 71
Table no. 3-3 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SPAs for each sector ............... 71
Table no. 3-4 The community interest habitats included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the
SCIs from the study area ............................................................................................................................ 84
Table no. 3-5 The community interest plant species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of
the SCIs from the study area ...................................................................................................................... 91
Table no. 3-6 The community interest invertebrate species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data
Forms of the SCIs from the study area ....................................................................................................... 94
Table no. 3-7 Fish species of community interest included in the Natura 2000 factsheets of the SCIs
located in the study area .......................................................................................................................... 103
Table no. 3-8 The community interest amphibian and reptile species included in the Natura 2000
Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area ............................................................................. 108
Table no. 3-9 The community interest mammal species (including bat species) included in the Natura
2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area .................................................................... 111
Table no. 3-10 The community interest bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive 2009/147/
EC, included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from the study area ....................... 115
Table no. 3-11 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000
Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta Region .................................................................. 122
Table no. 3-12 Conservation status of the species of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000
Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta Region .................................................................. 125
Table no. 3-13 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest, mentioned in the Natura
2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from Danube Delta Region ........................................................ 129
Table no. 3-14 Number of SCIs that hosts the habitats of community interest from the study area and
the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000
Standard Data Forms ................................................................................................................................ 147
Table no. 3-15 Number of SCIs that hosts flora and fauna species of community interest from the study
area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the
Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms........................................................................................................... 149
Table no. 3-16 Number of SPAs that hosts bird species of community interest from the study area and
the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000
Standard Data Forms ................................................................................................................................ 152
Table no. 4-1 Preliminary analysis of the potential forms of impact of the types of interventions /
projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region ..................... 171
Table no. 4-2 Matrix used to assess the significance of the potential effects of the DDISDS
implementation ........................................................................................................................................ 198
Table no. 4-3 Buffers used to create the polygons that were subsequently used to calculate the affected
areas ......................................................................................................................................................... 216
Table no. 4-4 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be
defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Sites of Community Importance (SCI)............................. 221
defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Special Protection Areas (SPA) ....................................... 221
defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within Sites of Community Importance (SCI) ....................... 221
defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within Special Protection Areas (SPA).................................. 221
defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by disturbance within Sites of Community Importance (SCI)
.................................................................................................................................................................. 222
defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by disturbance within Special Protection Areas (SPA) ....... 222
Table no. 4-10 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can
be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected within Sites of Community Importance (SCI).... 222
Table no. 4-11 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can
be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected within Special Protection Areas (SPA) .............. 222
Table no. 4-12 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may
be affected by the implementation of Type E projects............................................................................ 223
Table no. 4-13 Number of unique habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups,
which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects ......................................................... 224
Table no. 4-14 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel – Land surfaces (ha) within Sites
of Community Interest (SCI) which might be affected by the implementation of the project ................ 224
Table no. 4-15 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel – Land surfaces (ha) within
Special Protection Areas (SPA) which might be affected by the implementation of the project ............ 224
Table no. 4-16 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may
be affected by the implementation of Type D projects ........................................................................... 225
Table no. 4-17 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is
available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha) within
Sites of Community Interest (SCI) on which positive effects may appear ............................................... 227
Table no. 4-18 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is
available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha) within
Special Protection Areas (SPA) on which positive effects may appear .................................................... 227
Table no. 4-19 The analysis of the impact significance of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS
on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region .................................................... 234
Table no. 4-20 Reconsidered scores for the assessment of residual impact ........................................... 246
Table no. 5-1 Avoidance and mitigation measures proposed for DDISDS interventions/ projects related
to Natura 2000 habitats and species........................................................................................................ 249
Table no. 5-2 Monitoring indicators proposed for DDISDS ...................................................................... 252
INDEX OF FIGURES
Figure no. 2-1 DDISDS structure (2030) ..................................................................................................... 20
Figure no. 2-2 Location of the study area – Danube Delta region – within the national territory ............ 24
Figure no. 2-3 Administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable
Development Strategy................................................................................................................................ 25
Figure no. 2-4 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the major geographical units ............. 25
Figure no. 2-5 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the development regions................... 26
Figure no. 2-6 Contribution of acidifying pollutants in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual Report on
the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013) ............................................................................... 30
Figure no. 2-7 Share of SO2 emissions by sector ........................................................................................ 30
Figure no. 2-8 Evolution of SO2 emissions in Tulcea County ...................................................................... 31
Figure no. 2-9 Share of NH3 emissions by sector ....................................................................................... 31
Figure no. 2-10 Evolution of NH3 emissions in Tulcea County ................................................................... 32
Figure no. 2-11 Share of NOx emissions by sector ..................................................................................... 32
Figure no. 2-12 Evolution of NOx emissions in Tulcea County ................................................................... 33
Figure no. 2-13 Contribution of GHG in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual report on the state of the
environment in Tulcea County, 2013) ........................................................................................................ 33
Figure no. 2-14 Total annual emissions of GHG in Tulcea County (expressed in thousands of tonnes CO2
equivalent) ................................................................................................................................................. 34
Figure no. 2-15 Total emissions of GHG per capita in Tulcea County (expressed in tonnes CO2 Eq per
capita) ......................................................................................................................................................... 34
Figure no. 2-16 Land use in the study area according to Corine Land Cover 2006 .................................... 41
Figure no. 3-1 Location of the natural protected areas of national interest in relation with the study area
.................................................................................................................................................................... 60
Figure no. 3-2 Location of the Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) in relation with the study area..... 61
Figure no. 3-3 Location of the Special Protection Areas (SPAs) in relation with the study area ............... 62
Figure no. 3-4 Location of the study area in relation with the biogeographical regions ........................... 63
Figure no. 3-5 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Restoration of
ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European
conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the
whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and
community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura
2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ........................................................................................... 72
Figure no. 3-5 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Reforestation of
areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta
Region ......................................................................................................................................................... 73
Figure no. 3-6 Location of the project/ type of intervention “Development of an International Center of
Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta
Region ......................................................................................................................................................... 74
Figure no. 3-7 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from DRM sector in relation with the
Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region. A- project detail “Works for protection against
floods”, B - project detail “Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency
Situations (IES)” .......................................................................................................................................... 75
Figure no. 3-8 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Implementation
of a region-wide program for beautification of settlements” (Tourism sector) in relation with the Natura
2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ........................................................................................... 76
Figure no. 3-9 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions “Improve fish
habitat. Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks. Dredge major lakes to
restore water depth.” (Fisheries and aquaculture sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from
the Danube Delta Region ........................................................................................................................... 77
Figure no. 3-9 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions
“Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc)” (ARD sector) in relation
with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region................................................................. 78
Figure no. 3-10 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from Transport sector in relation with
the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ......................................................................... 79
Figure no. 3-11 The location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions from WSS
and IWM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region .................... 80
Figure no. 3-12 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from SWM sector in relation with the
Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ............................................................................... 81
Figure no. 3-13 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from Health sector in relation with the
Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region ............................................................................... 82
Figure no. 3-14 Numerical distribution of habitats of community interest in the Danube Delta Region
(http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ..................................... 87
Figure no. 3-15 Numerical distribution of community interest plant species in the Danube Delta Region
(http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ..................................... 93
Figure no. 3-16 Numerical distribution of community interest invertebrate species in the Danube Delta
Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ......................... 96
Figure no. 3-17 Numerical distribution of fish species of community interest in the Danube Delta Region
(http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) ................................... 104
Figure no. 3-18 Numerical distribution of community interest amphibian and reptile species in the
Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal) 109
Figure no. 3-19 Numerical distribution of community interest mammal species (including bat species) in
the Danube Delta Region (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)
.................................................................................................................................................................. 112
Figure no. 3-20 Numerical distribution of community interest bird species in the Danube Delta Region
(http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal) ................................... 118
Figure no. 3-21 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest within the 8 SCIs ............... 141
Figure no. 3-22 Conservation status of flora and fauna species of community interest within the 8 SCIs
.................................................................................................................................................................. 143
Figure no. 3-23 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest within the 12 SPAs ...... 145
Figure no. 4-1 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SCIs from the Danube Delta
Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts .............................................................. 158
Figure no. 4-2 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs from the Danube
Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts .................................................... 159
Figure no. 4-3 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SPAs from the Danube Delta
Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts .............................................................. 160
Figure no. 4-4 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SPAs from the Danube
Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their impacts .................................................... 161
Figure no. 4-5 Number of potential impacts (negative values indicates potential negative impacts) .... 170
Figure no. 4-6 Percentage of each type of impact ................................................................................... 170
Figure no. 4-7 Identification scheme for the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS based on their
location and the possibility to define their area of impact ...................................................................... 201
Figure no. 4-8 Number and percentage of types of interventions / projects of DDISDS based on their
location and the possibility to define their area of impact ...................................................................... 202
Figure no. 4-9 Sensitivity classes in the DDISDS implementation area .................................................... 203
Figure no. 4-10 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Restoration of
ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of European
conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the
whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and
community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity
areas from the Danube Delta Region ....................................................................................................... 205
Figure no. 4-10 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Reforestation of
areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ..... 206
Figure no. 4-11 Location of the project/type of intervention “Development of an International Center of
Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ..... 207
Figure no. 4-12 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the DRM sector in relation to the
sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region. ..................................................................................... 208
Figure no. 4-13 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “A region-wide
program for beautification of settlements” (Tourism sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the
Danube Delta Region ................................................................................................................................ 209
Figure no. 4-14 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major
lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from
the Danube Delta Region ......................................................................................................................... 210
Figure no. 4-14 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major
lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from
the Danube Delta Region ......................................................................................................................... 211
Figure no. 4-15 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Transport sector in relation to
the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ............................................................................... 212
Figure no. 4-16 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/type of interventions from the
Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM) sector in relation to the
sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region ...................................................................................... 213
Figure no. 4-17 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the SWM sector in relation to the
Figure no. 4-18 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Health sector in relation to the
Figure no. 4-19 Share of the total areas within the Sites of Community Importance (SCI) intersected by
projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined
(Type E) ..................................................................................................................................................... 220
Figure no. 4-20 Share of the total areas within the Special Protection Areas (SPA) intersected by projects
with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) .. 220
Figure no. 4-21 The share of the assessment notes granted for each taxonomic group ........................ 231
Figure no. 4-22 The positive and negative effects associated to each taxonomic group ........................ 232
Figure no. 4-23 The share of the total positive and negative effects generated by the implementation of
the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components .................................. 233
Figure no. 4-24 The estimated impact and the residual impact, after the implementation of the A&M
measures .................................................................................................................................................. 245
Figure no. 5-1 Proposed hierarchy for prioritisation of DDISDS interventions/projects ......................... 248
ANNEXES
Annex no. I List of types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within the Danube
Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030)
Annex no. II Correlation of ITI projects fiches (structured according to the Operational Programmes that
will finance them) in relation to the types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within
Danube Delta Integrated Sustainanble Development Strategy (2030)
Annex no. III Lists of habitats and species of community interest potentially affected by the
implementation of the types of interventions/ projects proposed within DDISDS
Annex no. IV List of types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation within DDISDS and the
intersected Natura 2000 sites
Annex no. V The lists of Natura 2000 sites crossed by the types of interventions/ projects proposed for
implementation within DDISDS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AA
Appropriate Assessment
A&M
Avoidance and mitigation
ARD
Agriculture and Rural Development
ATU
Administrative territorial unit
Buffer
Used exclusively with the meaning of the ArcGIS tool; no implications in
terms of protected natural areas management
CC
Climate change
CLC
Corine Land Cover
DD
Danube Delta
DDBRA
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Administration
DDISDS
Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy
DDNIRD
Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development
DRM
Disaster Risk Management
DWTP
Drinking Water Treatment Plant
EC
European Commission
EEA
European Environment Agency
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
EU
European Union
FF
Fishing facility
GD no. 1076/ 2004
Government Decision no. 1076/ 2004, for setting up the environmental
assessment procedure of certain plans and programmes
GEO no. 57/ 2007
Government Emergency Ordinance no. 57/2007 on the regime of the
protected natural areas, the preservation of natural habitats, of the wild
flora and fauna, approved with modifications and completions by Law no.
49/2011, with subsequent modifications and completions
GHG
Greenhouse gases
GTMP
Romania's General Transport Master Plan
HWB
Hot water boiler
IBA
Important Bird Areas
ICT
Information and Communication Technology
IES
Inspectorate for Emergency Situations
ITI
Integrated Territorial Investments
IUCN
International Union for Conservation of Nature
IWM
Integrated Water Management
LIOP
Large Infrastructure Operational Programme
MEWF
Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests
MMNP
Măcin Mountains National Park
MRDPA
Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration
Ord. no. 19/ 2010
Order no. 19/2010 regarding the appropriate assessment of the potential
effects of plans or projects on protected natural areas of community
interest
PP
Plans or projects
ROP
Regional Operational Programme
SCI
Site of Community Importance (part of the Natura 2000 network)
SEA
Strategic Environmental Assessment
SOR
Romanian Ornithological Society
SPA
Special Protection Area (part of the Natura 2000 network)
SWM
Solid Waste Management
VET
Vocational education and training
USGS
United States Geological Survey
WSS
Water Supply and Sanitation
WWTP
Waste Water Treatment Plant
1
GENERAL INFORMATION
This report represents the Appropriate Assessment Study on the potential effects of the
implementation of the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (DDISDS, 2030) that
may be generated on natural protected areas of community interest in the Danube Delta region.
According to Decision no. 349/19.01.2015 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests
(MEWF), the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030) shall follow the
environmental assessment procedure, according to the provisions of GD 1076/2004 for setting up the
environmental assessment procedure of certain plans and programmes, including the appropriate
assessment procedure, according to the provisions of GEO no. 57/2007 on the regime of the protected
natural areas, the preservation of natural habitats, of the wild flora and fauna, approved with
modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011, with subsequent modifications and completions
(Government Ordinance no. 20/2014, Law no. 73/ 2015).
The Appropriate Assessment Study is developed within the Strategic Environmental Assessment
procedure (SEA), which was started in February 2015, the conclusions of the appropriate assessment
study to be undertaken in the Environmental Report
The Appropriate Assessment Study is prepared according to the requirements of the Methodological
guidelines regarding the appropriate assessment of plans and projects potential effects on natural
protected areas of community interest (Order no. 19/ 2010).
The elaboration of the Appropriate Assessment Study was based on public information that were
available at the moment, as following:
Strategic documents made available by the beneficiary: Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable
Development Strategy (2030), report 2.2, June 2015, Formulation of ITI proposal for the Danube
Delta (for the 2014-2020 programming period), report 2.5, May 2015, Project fiches that are
proposed for ITI funding, October 2015 (their correlation with the types of interventions is shown in
Annex no. II of the present study), as well as the Action Plan including priority projects to implement
the Strategy (http://www.mdrap.ro/dezvoltare-teritoriala/-9749/-3558);
Information and data collected and published by World Bank Group, involved in the elaboration of
the DDISDS, which contains 3 reports that are published on the beneficiary website: Diagnostic
Report,
Danube
Delta
Visioning
Report
and
Needs
Assessment
Report
(http://www.mdrap.ro/dezvoltare-teritoriala/-9749/-3558);
Relevant information and data collected about the implementation area of the DDISDS from the
main stakeholders (mainly institutions like: Tulcea County Council, Constanţa County Council,
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Administration (DDBRA), Danube Delta National Institute for
Research and Development (DDNIRD), Environment Protection Agencies, Public Health District
Authority, Directorate of Statistics etc.);
Geospatial coordinates of the types of interventions/ projects proposed to be implemented in
DDISDS, known during the elaboration of the DDISDS and the Appropriate Assessment Study;
Database
available on
the
European Environment
Agency website
(EEA
http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/natura-5) regarding the natural protected areas
that are included in the Natura 2000 ecological network (SCI and SPA) nationally designated,
including protected components within them;
Natura 2000 factsheets (updated according to Decision 2011/484/EU concerning a site information
format for Natura 2000 sites and published on the Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests
website on 17 February 2015), http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/natura-2000/435;
Limits of the Sites of Community Importance and Special Protection Areas, în Stereo 70 projection
(updated in 2012), available on the website of the Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests on
17 February 2015 (http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/date-gis/434);
Romania’s reporting to the European Union under Article 12 of the Birds Directive and Article 17 of
the Habitats Directive, that aim to produce inventories and maps for habitats and species from
Natura
2000
sites,
available
in
SHP
format
(http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal,
http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal);
Geospatial data regarding the types of land use at a national level, according to Corine Land Cover
2006, available on European Environment Agency website (http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-andmaps/data/corine-land-cover-2006-raster-3);
Specialized literature.
2
INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS SUBJECT OF APPROVAL
2.1
GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE DDISDS
2.1.1 Name, description and objectives of the DDISDS
The Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030) which is subject of the
assessment and approval is promoted by the Ministry of Regional Development and Public
Administration (MRDPA), as the holder of the strategy.
DDISDS was developed based on a systematic technical analysis and a participatory process by the
World Bank Group, who was appointed in 2013 by the Romanian Government, through MRDPA for
providing consultancy services in order to develop a strategy for the Danube Delta and its surrounding
areas (Danube Delta Region)1, with 2030 timeframe, and to identify action plans to implement such a
strategy.
DDISDS represents an important step in the process of planning interventions that will take place in the
Danube Delta, presenting themes and future development directions.
The elaboration of the Strategy for the study area (Danube Delta Region) started with creating a
Diagnostic Report, which analyzed the situation, including the current opportunities and constraints.
The report revealed the dual challenge of protecting both livelihood and the environment in the Danube
Delta, and included the results of the initial public consultations, which took place between September
and December 2013, regarding the problems and concerns of local communities. The evaluation was
completed by the findings of participatory consultations with local residents and stakeholders, on their
“preferences” about how the future would look like in the Danube Delta.
Subsequently, following extensive consultations and a diagnostic process, resulted the Danube Delta
Visioning Report.
All these have provided the motivation to identify physical investment needs, political and legislative
reforms, technical assistance and institutional development needs, materialized in a Needs Assessment
Report. The report identifies measures and interventions for achieving the objectives of the Strategy.
The strategy identifies key projects in each sector based on criteria related to the expected impact on
fulfilling strategic objectives, level of training, and financial and administrative viability, connecting most
of them with the financial resources allocated through 2014-2020 EU funds - ITI tool (Integrated
Territorial Investments).
After the consultations with all stakeholders, the Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030) has been
defined, which was derived from the visions defined for the two sub-areas of the region (biosphere
reserve and its surrounding areas) due to their different characteristics:
Vision for the Danube Delta (the Biosphere Reserve area): a „living Delta” (an area where
people live and work) with balanced support for the environment and the community; a
1
Danube Delta (DD) is the area referred to as the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR). This covers: (i) the Core
Delta (the area between the Sf. Gheorghe and the Chilia branches of the Danube River); (ii) the Razim-SinoeBabadag lake system and adjacent land areas; and (iii) the area along the Danube River west of Tulcea City towards
Galaţi. The Study Area – also called the Danube Delta Region - covers DDBR and its Neighboring Area. The Study
Area consists of Tulcea City, four towns (Babadag, Isaccea, Măcin, and Sulina), and thirty three communes (the
total number of communes in Tulcea county is 46). Four communes (Corbu, Istria, Mihai Viteazu, and Săcele) are in
Constanţa County, all four bordering the bay area of the Razim-Sinoe lake system.
healthy, sustainable local economy - mainly based on nature and culture tourism; and with an
inclusive planning process (residents, governments, businesses);
Vision for the Neighboring Area: a vibrant agricultural and business area, with a network of
urban service centers and a tourism sector that is integrated with the attractions of the area and
the Delta;
as following: „An attractive area – with precious biodiversity and vibrant business environment, with
small/medium scale economic activities both in traditional and modern fields - where people live in
harmony with nature; integrating economies of tourism, farming and fishery; and supported by urban
service centers”.
DDISDS has two strategic objectives derived from the Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030):
Conserve the unique environmental assets through scientifically-guided environmental
management, and through empowering local communities to be proactive guardians of this
unique global heritage;
Develop a green and inclusive local economy, based on sustainable consumption and protection,
resource efficient, capitalizing on the area’s comparative advantages, supported by improved
public services.
These two strategic objectives alongside with the Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030) were the
basis for the preparation of the Strategy Report, being based on the holistic approach of the needs
assessment on each sector that defined the needs of physical investments, policy and legislative
reforms, institutional development and technical assistance.
The strategy is structured around five pillars that reinforce each other and are closely interlinked, and
derives from the two aforementioned objectives (environmental protection and economic
development). Sectorial analyzes results from previous needs assessments were grouped as the five
pillars2 (Figure no. 2-1):
Pillar I: Protecting the environmental and natural resource assets;
Pillar II: Improving the economy;
Pillar III: Improving connectivity;
Pillar IV: Providing public services;
Pillar V: Promoting Efficiency, Affordability and Sustainability.
Pillar I: Protecting the environmental and natural resource assets
This pillar refers to the sustainability of natural resources and environmental protection in the long term
that will depend on how the locals will play an active role of protectors and administrators of cultural
and environmental assets in the Delta, in partnership with DDBRA. Among the main types of
interventions are: hydrological modeling; desilting; ecological restoration; dredging; flood protection;
signs; energy-efficiency initiatives; monitoring systems; and institutional strengthening etc.
Pillar II: Improving the economy
2
A fifth pillar "Ensuring Efficiency, Affordability and Financial and Administrative Sustainability" is transversal, and
was adopted as one of the guiding principles for the development of the strategy.
Pillar II refers to the generation of economic opportunities and jobs, with support ranging from skills
development and workplace training, to small grants schemes for micro businesses, including small
agricultural and fish processing units that will support tourism, in order to address accessibility
constraints. It is intended a conservation of movable and immovable cultural heritage of the region
(traditions, art, local cuisine, cultural sites and events) that can bring added value to the distinct
positioning of the area. Examples of interventions: infrastructure for visitors; beautification efforts;
small grants; touristic training; destination management; rural infrastructure; supporting the
modernization of infrastructure in agriculture; support aquaculture, sport fishing, and small-scale fish
processing (preservation, smoking), etc.
Pillar III: Improving connectivity
Ensuring connectivity is needed to narrow the gap between cities and remote locations, between the
developed and undeveloped regions (e.g. Constanţa, one of the growth poles of the country) and in the
region (e.g. between the Core Danube Delta and surrounding areas), with the aim of increasing the
circulation of people, goods and information. Health and education sectors are also targeted, by
creating opportunities for offering innovative services, as well as the tourism sector, by improving
business opportunities by connecting sellers with markets and information and communication
technology infrastructure (ICT) and movement. Examples of interventions: upgrading roads (linking
Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin – Brăila; and various county roads); Tulcea port and airport modernization;
improvement of inland waterway transport; increasing access to broadband internet etc.
Pillar IV: Providing public servicesPillar IV aims to reduce the gap between underdeveloped and
developed regions in terms of access and quality of basic urban services (water, sewage, waste
disposal), to health clinics and education in the region. Improving these services and resolving the gaps
between them, will implicitly lead to the development of tourism and their partially improvement by
using ICT, will result in the improving of health and social mobility. Examples of action: rehabilitation of
water supply systems; wastewater collection and treatment at low costs; improving waste management,
with the support of separation/sorting of waste; improving access and response capacity in the health
sector; telemedicine; support lifelong learning, creating links between vocational schools and labor
markets and preschool education and care; distance learning etc.
Pillar V: Promoting Efficiency, Affordability and Sustainability.
Pillar V refers to empowering local authorities to develop and oversee the provision of public services,
being a key factor that would help the development the study area. Local capacity is not the only one
that needs to be strengthened, but also the capacity of all institutions to manage the type and level of
planned projects. Examples of interventions: technical assistance to improve the administrative
capacity, technical assistance for program management, creation of subsidies on households, etc.
Among the most frequent words in the documents drafts available on the MRDPA website
(http://www.mdrt.ro/dezvoltare-teritoriala/-9749/-3558) are “precarious”, “low”, “limited”,
“inappropriate”, illustrating, unfortunately, the current challenges faced by local communities (“poor
living conditions”, “poor accessibility and low population density”, “limited access to knowledge,
innovation and research results”, “inadequate condition of rural infrastructure”, etc.). Therefore, it is
important to emphasize that the strategy is looking for a balance between protecting the unique natural
and cultural values of DDBR, meeting the aspirations of the inhabitants of the region to improve living
conditions and to identify better economic opportunities.
DDISDS owns the premises to be a truly sustainable strategy in order to strengthen the foundation for
sustainable communities: “natural capital that provides goods and services for the development of local
communities”.
The strategy defines the type of key interventions/ projects in each sector and how they complement
and add their value to the territorial development. Projects are also related to the financial resources
allocated by government ITI instruments and from other sources of funding.
The focus is on providing directions for an economic development without having a significant negative
impact on the environment, particularly in the Delta (ex. The creation of facilities in tourism, fishing and
shipping through dredging and other works, while protecting biodiversity in wetland; the rehabilitation
of existing roads, not building new ones, to improve access for the population of the Delta; searching
and finding affordable solutions to water and sewage facilities, that local authorities will operate and
maintain, for residents with financial possibilities; limited strategic focus for commercial fishing versus
the transition to a recreational fishing with a higher value; supporting the improvement of current
accommodation structures, not building new ones, as part of the proposal to develop a small-scale
tourism, based on nature and culture, until the demand will guarantee the extension). All areas of the
region will be represented in the organization / management mechanism for ongoing development of
tourism.
However, any development comes with some definite changes of the land and, for this reason, the most
challenging part of a strategic environmental assessment is to identify and propose alternatives with the
lowest impact on natural habitats. Such challenges may arise for the transport, fishing, agriculture and
even tourism projects.
Diagnostic Report
Vision for the Danube Delta
Region (2030)
Needs Assessment Report
DDISDS (2030)
Strategic objective 1
Pillar I
Sectorial objectives:
Strategic objective 2
Pillar II
Biodiversity and ecosystem management;
Tourism;
Energy efficiency;
Fishery
and
aquaculture;
Climate changes;
Disaster Risk Management;
Pollution emergency.
Pillar III
Sectorial
objectives:
Agriculture and
Rural
Development.
Pillar IV
WSS and IWM;
Transport;
SWM;
ICT.
Healthcare;
Types of interventions / projects
Figure no. 2-1 DDISDS structure (2030)
Education;
Social
Inclusion and
Protection.
Pillar V
Sectorial
objectives:
Administrative
Capacity and
Program
Management.
2.1.2
Information regarding the raw materials and the chemical substances or compounds
Estimated quantities of raw materials, substances or chemicals to be used to implement all types of
interventions/ projects proposed by DDISDS (2030) is not possible at this stage of the analysis, given the
level of detail of the strategy and that it covers a wide range of investments in various sectors
(biodiversity and ecosystem management; energy efficiency; climate change; disaster risk management;
emergencies associated to risk of pollution; agriculture and rural development; tourism; fishing and
aquaculture; transport; information and communications technology; water supply and sanitation (WSS)
and integrated water management (IWM); solid waste management; health; education; social inclusion
and protection; administrative and program management). This information will be detailed at a later
stage, for each type of intervention / project, during the environmental proceedings (EIA and AA).
It can be mentioned that for the types of interventions/ projects involving construction works,
significant quantities of earth, sand, crushed stone, ballast, mineral aggregates, concrete, asphalt
mixture, paints, wood, fuels, fuels etc., will be used, according to their specificities.
Depending on the development pillar, the types of interventions/ projects proposed for implementation
within DDISDS involving construction works belong mainly to the following sectors:
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management;
Disaster Risk Management;
Tourism;
Fishery and aquaculture;
Agriculture and Rural Development;
Transport;
Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM);
Solid Waste Management.
2.2
GEOGRAPHIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE LOCATION
DDISDS (2030) ensures the development framework for a number of types of interventions/ projects in
the study area, the Danube Delta Region, which occupies an area of approximately 730,461.50 hectares
and includes the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR) and its neighboring areas.
Danube Delta (DD) is the area referred to as the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR). This covers: (i)
the Core Delta (the area between the Sf. Gheorghe and the Chilia branches of the Danube River); (ii) the
Razim-Sinoe-Babadag lake system and adjacent land areas; and (iii) the area along the Danube River
west of Tulcea City towards Galaţi. It is the only delta of a river that is contained entirely within a
Biosphere Reserve.
The Study Area – also called the Danube Delta Region - covers DDBR and its Neighboring Area. The Study
Area consists of Tulcea City, four towns (Babadag, Isaccea, Măcin, and Sulina), and thirty three
communes. Four communes (Corbu, Istria, Mihai Viteazu, and Săcele) are located in Constanţa County,
all four bordering the bay area of the Razim-Sinoe lake system.
Table no. 2-1 List of administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated
Sustainable Development Strategy
No. crt.
Locality
Type
County
No. crt.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Locality
Babadag
Baia
Beştepe
C.A. Rosetti
Ceamurlia De Jos
Ceatalchioi
Chilia Veche
Corbu
Crişan
Frecăţei
Greci
Grindu
I.C.Brătianu
Isaccea
Istria
Jijila
Jurilovca
Luncaviţa
Măcin
Mahmudia
Maliuc
Mihai Bravu
Mihai Viteazu
Mihail Kogălniceanu
Murighiol
Niculiţel
Nufăru
Pardina
Săcele
Sarichioi
Sfântu Gheorghe
Slava Cercheză
Smârdan
Somova
Sulina
Tulcea
Văcăreni
Valea Nucarilor
Type
Town
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Town
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Town
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Commune
Town
County Capital City
Commune
Commune
The geographical position of the DDBR is bounded by the following coordinates3:
3
http://www.ddbra.ro/rezervatia/delta-dunarii/localizare
County
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Constanţa
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Constanţa
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Constanţa
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Constanţa
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
Tulcea
28º 10’ 50’’ eastern longitude (Cotul Pisicii);
29º 42’ 45’’ eastern longitude (Sulina);
45º 27’ northern latitude (Chilia arm, km 43);
44º 20’ 40’’ northern latitude (Cape Midia).
The reservation is crossed by the 45º parallel, which marks the halfway between the Equator and the
North Pole.
In terms of component physical-geographical units, in accordance with Law no. 82/1993, with
subsequent completions ans modifications, the DDBR, an area of national and international ecological
importance, contains the following:
Danube Delta;
Maritime Danube until Cotul Pisicii;
Isaccea – Tulcea sector with its floodplain;
Murighiol – Plopu saltings;
Razim-Sinoe lake system;
Black Sea coast from the Chilia arm to Cape Midia;
Internal maritime waters and territorial sea up to the 20 m isobath.
The climate of the Danube Delta corresponds to a temperate continental climate with sea influences. Air
temperature shows moderate values with a slight increase from west to east, and the large amount of
heat is given by the average annual duration of sunshine, which is approx. 2.300 – 2.500 hours, annual
global solar radiation summing to 125-135 kcal/ cm2, being among the highest in the country4.
The Danube is the longest river that crosses the EU and the second largest river in Europe after the
Volga, with a length of 2.8405 kilometers, of which 2.415 km are navigable, providing a link between
Central Europe and the Black Sea and, thereby, to the Transcaucasian area and Central Asia6.
The Danube Region's economic growth potential is still insufficiently unexploited. Danube was declared
part of the EU Pan-European Transport corridor VII, representing an important waterway, which
connects through the Rhine - Main - Danube the Constanţa port, the industrial centers of Western
Europe and the port of Rotterdam.
In Romania, the Danube has a length of 1075 km and includes four distinct sectors, with the following
characteristics7:
Baziaş – Porţile de Fier II sector: 212 km length;
Porţile de Fier II – Călăraşi sector: 488 km length;
Călăraşi – Brăila sector: 200 km length;
4
http://www.ddbra.ro/rezervatia/delta-dunarii/prezentare-generala/clima-a18
5
http://www.ddbra.ro/dunarea.php
6
First national contribution to the elaboration of the European Union Strategy for the Danube region.
7
First national contribution to the elaboration of the European Union Strategy for the Danube region
Brăila – Black Sea sector, on the Sulina channel: 175 km length.
The link between the Danube River and the Black Sea is made through two navigable channels:
 Danube – Black Sea channel – located between Constanţa-South Harbor – Agigea, and the 293
km of the Danube;
 Poarta Albă – Midia – Năvodari Channel – has a length of 27.5 km, being located between Midia
harbor, the 0 km of the channel, and the confluence with the Danube – Black Sea channel, at the
km 29 + 41 of the last one, including the 5.5 km length junction, part of the Poarta Albă – Midia
– Năvodari channel, which links Luminiţa harbor from its 3 km.
The study area, Danube Delta region, is located in the south-eastern part of the country, consisting of
the DDBR and its surrounding areas (Figure no. 2-2).
In terms of location in relation to major geographical units, the study area is located in the north-east
Dobrogea Plateau and all over the Danube Delta (Figure no. 2-4), and in relation to developing regions,
the study area is located in the south-east (Figure no. 2-5).
Figure no. 2-2 Location of the study area – Danube Delta region – within the national territory
Figure no. 2-3 Administrative territorial units targeted by the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable
Development Strategy
Figure no. 2-4 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the major geographical units
Figure no. 2-5 Location of the Danube Delta region in relation to the development regions
2.3
PHYSICAL MODIFICATIONS RESULTED FROM THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION
Physical changes that could result from implementing the DDISDS are related to the implementation of
the types of interventions/ projects provided for each development sector addressed by the strategy.
The nature of the DDISDS types of interventions/ projects is very diverse, belonging to different sectors
depending on the pillar of development (see Section 2.1.1).
Projects that could lead to physical changes are, generally, those which involve construction works.
More detailed information about the types of work performed can be exemplified for the transport
sector (more precisely the road transport), from development pillar III, namely “Improving connectivity”.
Thus, for the construction of a km of express road (2x2 lanes, plain topography) and for the
rehabilitation of a km of national road, the usual necessary main categories of works that can create
physical changes are: embankments; scraping, digging, filling; road superstructure; water drainage;
works for traffic safety; consolidation works; hydraulic works; environmental protection works etc.
Given the diversity of the types of interventions / projects listed by the five development pillars of
DDISDS and the current level of detail, at this point of the analysis a detailed description of the physical
changes that will occur as a result of implementation all these types of interventions / projects cannot
be performed. They will be further detailed in the environmental procedures (EIA / AA) for each type of
intervention / project.
The main types of physical changes that can be generated by the types of interventions / projects from
the DDISDS, which include construction works, are both reversible and irreversible changes in the short
or long term, and that can directly or indirectly affect the physical environment
(hydrogeomorphological) as well as the biological one. In this assessment, to be relevant, all physical
changes were grouped based on the main forms of impact analyzed as follows:
Loss of habitat: any activities which may lead to long-term or irreversible changes of Natura
2000 habitats and habitats of species of community interest (mainly occupied with building
surfaces);
Alteration of habitats: all activities that may affect the short or medium term, reversible,
population parameters of a species of community interest or the optimum conditions of their
habitats;
Disturbance of the activity / natural processes - from animal disturbance caused by performed
activities (human presence, noise) or altering natural processes that ensures the integrity of
habitats.
Further details on the physical changes considered in this appropriate assessment study can be found in
Section 4.3.3.
2.4
NATURAL RESOURCES NECESSARY FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION
The implementation of the types of interventions / projects that will be promoted by DDISDS will
require the use of natural resources (water, renewable resources, non-renewable resources, etc.)
depending on the nature of each type of intervention / project. At the time of analysis, the natural
resources needed to implement the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS cannot be
estimated, nor their quantities, but knowing the sectors of development, we can list some of the
resources that might be used for the types of interventions / projects that require construction works:
sand, mineral aggregates, soils, water, crushed stone, wood etc. Detailed information will be provided in
the environmental procedures (EIA and AA) at project level, regarding the type of natural resources to
be used and quantities required, as these can vary significantly from one type of project to another.
It is important to note, however, that there will be types of interventions / projects in the DDISDS aimed
at protecting natural resources, including resources within natural protected areas of community
interest and ecosystem restoration projects that are not located in natural protected areas.
2.5
NATURAL RESOURCES WHICH WILL BE EXPLOITED FROM THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS
OF COMMUNITY IMPORTANCE IN ORDER TO BE USED FOR THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION
As regarding the natural resources that will be used to implement the types of interventions / projects
proposed by SDDIDD, within natural protected areas included in the Natura 2000 ecological network,
the main resource is represented by the soil surfaces, which will be occupied temporarily during the
planning and construction activities (e.g.: land occupied by site organization, warehouses for working
materials and machinery etc.) or permanently due to the construction of new infrastructure elements
(buildings, energy facilities, etc.).
It is recommended that work sites, borrow pits, materials warehouses, etc., to be located outside
Natura 2000 sites to minimize the areas affected during the construction works.
2.6
EMISSIONS AND WASTE GENERATED BY THE DDISDS AND THE METHODS FOR THEIR
ELIMINATION
The DDISDS Vision for the Danube Delta Region (2030) has 2030 as the target year, providing a
framework for the implementation of the ITI proposals and the Action Plan (which will include
interventions that are not eligible for ITI financing), whose effects (depending on the specific of each
type of intervention / project) starting from the operating period, will be reflected on extended periods
of time.
The provided types of interventions / projects aim a broad range of sectors (listed in Section 2.1.2) and
will consist of both investments that involve construction works and that will generate different
emissions and waste in water, air and on ground (e.g. dredging the large lakes to restore water depth,
rehabilitation and modernization of DN 22 Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin - Brăila, including the construction
of a bridge over the Danube at Brăila, modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Măcin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and
Chilia ports, development and modernization of airport infrastructure in Tulcea, Mihail Kogălniceanu
commune, rehabilitation of county roads etc.) and investments with positive effects on the natural
environment, impacting over human health and environmental quality (e.g. reforestation of areas
where the natural vegetation has disappeared or deteriorated; development and implementation of
measures to reduce the discharge of solid waste in natural areas; investments to support local actions to
reduce nitrate pollution of waterways from agriculture or livestock rearing activities; protect and
improve natural resources (soil, water); support for organic farming in Natura 2000 areas; types of
investments / projects related to water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management;
types of investments / projects related to solid waste management etc.).
2.6.1 Emissions
The main types of emissions that might be generated as a result of implementing the types of
interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS are:
Emissions in water bodies;
Atmospheric emissions;
Emissions on the ground.
Emissions in water bodies
The main source of pollution of surface water and groundwater in the Danube Delta region is
represented by untreated or poorly treated wastewater from human agglomerations (city, towns and
villages - most concentrated residential areas), the main deficiencies of the wastewater collection and
treatment system being8:
the existence of a large number of undersized channels with depositions, damage / subsidence
of channel, important infiltrations and exfiltration;
leaky pipes in the branching connections area, which generate leaks of wastewater;
lack of waste water treatment plants for municipal wastewater;
insufficient human and material resources to ensure proper functioning;
problems due to the impossibility of rapid and complete discharge of storm water during floods
caused by heavy rain conditions which exceed the sizing of the network flow, which leads to the
flooding of streets and adjacent spaces, as well as the deteriorated storm water pumping
stations.
According to the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, the largest
impact on surface waters, especially in terms of pollution with organic matter and nutrients (nitrogen
and phosphorus), which usually come from household and agricultural wastewater, is caused by the 4
companies that capture, treat and distribute water in the towns of Isaccea, Măcin, Babadag and Tulcea
8
Annual report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, http://www.anpm.ro/web/apmtulcea/rapoarte-anuale1
City, as well as other three types of economic activities from Tulcea: construction and ship repairs,
aluminum production and pig breeding. Thus, it can be observed that, according to the mentioned
source, the activity which has the largest share in the discharge of poorly treated or untreated
wastewater is represented by the water catchment, treatment and distribution activity.
According to the Needs Assessment Report, the needs of water supply, sewerage and wastewater
treatment of the population in the study area, the Danube Delta region, are numerous and can be
divided into the following domains:
New water treatment stations with transport network and distribution for communities that do
not have potable water;
Improving water supply / equipment used in water treatment plants to improve the quality of
the supplied potable water;
Improving the water distribution network by replacing old pipes in order to reduce leaks and
interruptions in the water supply activity;
The collection and treatment of wastewater for communities larger than 2000 inhabitants;
Local solutions for the collection and treatment of wastewater in smaller communities.
Prioritization of the types of interventions / projects was conducted according to several criteria that
take into account the degree of water supply of communities, the existing state of water treatment
plants, the readiness to launch the investment, as well as the local economy and the touristic potential
of the area. Based on these criteria, a score was calculated, communities being divided hierarchically
into two classes: i) communities with a population greater than 2000 inhabitants (to be financed by
LIOP) and ii) communities with a population lower than 2000 inhabitants (to be financed by OP Rural
Development).
Many other types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS include components for generating
and managing wastewater as well as rainwater collected from the transport infrastructure or rainwater
(leachate) collected in waste management systems; investments to support local actions to reduce
nitrate pollution of waterways in agricultural or livestock rearing activities. Measures for proper
management were provided for all of the previous mentioned types of interventions / projects both in
the DDISDS and the environmental report.
In conclusion, DDISDS presents a significant positive contribution to reducing emissions of pollutants
into water bodies in the Danube Delta region.
Atmospheric emissions
The main sectors proposed for development within the DDISDS that represent the most significant
sources of pollutants in the atmosphere (particulates - PM10 and PM2,5, nitrogen oxides - NOx, sulfur
dioxide - SO2, carbon monoxide – CO, ammonia - NH3, volatile organic compounds - VOC, benzene and
other unburned hydrocarbons) and emissions of greenhouse gases - GHG (carbon dioxide - CO2,
methane - CH4, nitrous oxide - N2O, hydrofluorocarbons - HFCs, perfluorocarbons - PFC, sulfur
hexafluoride - SF6, aerosols, ozone - O3, water vapor etc.) are transport sector, agriculture and rural
development and management of solid waste.
According to the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013 in Tulcea County
in 2013, according to the inventory of emissions, the share of acidifying substances emitted into the
atmosphere is as follows: SO2 - 0.67%, NH3 - 37.96% and NOx - 61.37% (Figure no. 2-6).
0.67%
37.96%
61.37%
NOx
NH3
SO2
Figure no. 2-6 Contribution of acidifying pollutants in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual Report on
the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013)
Sulphur dioxide is a highly toxic gas, which can have direct negative effects on biodiversity, human
health (e.g. can lead to soil acidification, degradation of buildings). In 2013, in Tulcea, the main sectors
contributing to the SO2 emissions in the atmosphere and the share of their contributions are shown in
Figure no. 2-7. It can be observed that the sector that had the highest contribution in terms of SO2
emissions belongs to non-industrial combustion plants.9
4.51%
5.31%
non-industrial combustion
plants
combustions in energy industry
and processing industry
26.73%
combustions in processing
industry
63.45%
production processes
Figure no. 2-7 Share of SO2 emissions by sector
Regarding the evolution of SO2, in Tulcea County, during 2005-2013, there is a clear decrease since 2007,
mainly due to decreasing in the use of natural gas instead of liquid fuels (Figure no. 2-8).
9
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
SO2 (tons)
2010
2011
2012
2013
Figure no. 2-8 Evolution of SO2 emissions in Tulcea County
Ammonia produces negative effects that translate into the acidification and eutrophication of natural
ecosystems. The major contribution in 2013, in Tulcea County, is owned by the livestock rearing
activities sector (especially manure management) representing approx. 68% of total emissions of NH3,
followed by waste treatment and storage activities with a share of 32%10 (Figure no. 2-9).
31.76%
agriculture (zootechnics)
68.24%
waste treatment and disposal
Figure no. 2-9 Share of NH3 emissions by sector
Regarding the evolution of NH3 emissions, in Tulcea County, between 2005 and 2013, it can be noted
that the NH3 emissions fluctuate from year to year, depending on the quantities of manure produced
and the quantities of fertilizers used, meaning that it depends on the development of agricultural sector
(Figure no. 2-10).
10
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2005
2006
2007
2008 2009
NH3 (tons)
2010
2011
2012
2013
Figure no. 2-10 Evolution of NH3 emissions in Tulcea County
Nitrogen oxides are formed due to the use of conventional fuels, the basic substance that contribute to
the generation of fuels being the nitrogen (which is found in the atmosphere in large quantities), the
high temperatures during the combustion stimulating the reaction that forms the oxide, respectively the
nitrogen dioxide. In 2013, in Tulcea, the main sectors that contributed to the emissions of NOx in the
atmosphere and the share of their contributions are shown in Figure no. 2-11. It can be noted that the
sector that had the highest contribution in terms of NOx emissions is the road transport, closely
followed by the non-industrial combustion plants sector11.
6.86%
road transport
14.76%
32.03%
non-industrial combustion
plants
combustions in energy industry
and processing industry
19.17%
other mobile sources and
machineries
27.18%
combustions in processing
industry
Figure no. 2-11 Share of NOx emissions by sector
Regarding the evolution of NOx emissions, in Tulcea County, between 2005 and 2013, there is a clear
drop since 2007, in 2013 the decrease in NOx emissions being by 3.3% below the previous year. One
reason for this decline is the use of low NOx burners in the HWB from SC Energoterm SA Tulcea (Figure
no. 2-12).
11
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2005
2006
2007
2008 2009
NOx (tons)
2010
2011
2012
2013
Figure no. 2-12 Evolution of NOx emissions in Tulcea County
From the data presented above we can deduce that in Tulcea County, among the most common
pollutants emitted into the atmosphere are nitrogen oxides and the main sector contributing to their
emission is the road transport sector. Also, it can be noticed that the quantities of NH3 increased
considerably in the recent years due to the development of the agricultural sector (increasing amounts
of manure produced and increasing quantities of fertilizers used).
In terms of GHG emissions in Tulcea County in 2013, the share of GHG emissions in the atmosphere was
as follows: CO2 – 99.37 %, CH4 – 0.57 % and N2O – 0.06 %12.
0.57%
0.06%
99.37%
CO2
CH4
N2O
Figure no. 2-13 Contribution of GHG in Tulcea County – 2013 (source: Annual report on the state of
the environment in Tulcea County, 2013)
The main sources of GHG in the atmosphere are:
12
Industrial combustion processes;
Production of thermal energy through thermal power stations;
Production of thermal energy in stations for commercial, institutional and residential buildings;
Livestock;
Landfilling.
Figure no. 2-14 presents the evolution of annual GHG emissions expressed in thousands of tonnes CO2
eq., at county level, between 2005 and 2013. Total annual GHG emissions are an indicator of trends in
anthropogenic GHG emissions expressed as CO2 equivalent, transformation achieved based on the
coefficients of global warming.
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
2005
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Total emissions of CO2 Eq (thousand tons)
2012
2013
Figure no. 2-14 Total annual emissions of GHG in Tulcea County (expressed in thousands of tonnes CO2
equivalent)
Regarding the annual GHG emissions (thousands of tonnes CO2 eq.) per capita, i.e. the ratio between
the total annual GHG emissions, expressed as CO2 equivalent, and total population of Tulcea County in
the period 2005-2013, these are presented in Figure no. 2-15.
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2005
2006
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
tonnes CO2 Eq / per inhabitant
2012
2013
Figure no. 2-15 Total emissions of GHG per capita in Tulcea County (expressed in tonnes CO2 Eq per
capita)
From the data presented above on GHG, we find that the greenhouse gas that presents a major
contribution to the greenhouse effect is the CO2. Approximately 75% of anthropogenic emissions of CO2
in the atmosphere over the last 20 years, are caused by burning fossil fuels. The main measures
identified in the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013 to decrease CO2
emissions are:

increasing the efficiency of energy facilities;

developing alternative forms of energy generation;

modernization of thermal points;

modernization and rehabilitation of secondary thermal networks;

modernization and rehabilitation of hot water transport network;

improvement of thermal insulation;

control and measuring of the delivered heat;

structural changes (reduction of the share of energy-intensive consumer industries);

modernization and rehabilitation of existing technologies;

improving energy management;

increasing the efficiency of agricultural machinery;

modernization of livestock farms;

changing the forest policy by preventing deforestation and expansion of green areas;

increasing the performance of road vehicles;

development of urban and interurban public transport;

use of alternative fuels.
Also, the main measures proposed to reduce emissions of N2O are:

extension of woodland areas;

establishment of young forests, with faster growth, which absorb greater amounts of emissions
compared with aging forests;

use of biomass as a renewable energy source.
According to the same report, policies and measures for reducing GHG emissions plotted for Romania
should be implemented also at local level:
Promotion of energy production from renewable sources;
Promoting energy efficiency at the energy end users;
Promoting cogeneration systems and energy efficiency in district heating systems;
Managing emissions of greenhouse gases from transport;
Land use, land use change and forestry.
Among the actions that have the effect of reducing GHG emissions, implemented in Tulcea so far, we
mention13:
 21 wind farms were approved until the end of 2013 for obtaining electricity, using Tulcea
County’s wind as a renewable source, available due to climate conditions;
 carbon-rich fossil fuels (fuel oil, light fuel) were replaced with low-carbon fuel or natural gas
thermal plants belonging to operators in Tulcea: ENERGOTERM SA, ALUM SA and SC DALKIA SA,
and to a significant proportion of households in Tulcea;
 during 2013 afforestation and reforestation were carried out on an area of 231 ha and natural
regeneration on an area of 634 ha;
 modernization of the vehicle fleet owned by TRANSPORT PUBLIC SA by replacing polluting
buses, which led firstly to a reduction of the pollution and a more attractive public transport for
citizens, thus may give up using their personal cars.
Types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS concern a range of actions that directly or
indirectly contribute to reducing emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere, respectively GHG,
mainly those belonging to the following development sectors addressed by DDISDS: biodiversity and
ecosystem management; energy efficiency; climate change; disaster risk management; emergency
situations associated with pollution risk; agriculture and rural development; water supply systems
and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM); solid waste management; health.
Some of these activities belonging to the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS
coincide with measures identified in the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea
County, 2013 on reducing CO2 emissions.
Emissions on the ground
According to the Annual Report on the state of the environment in Tulcea County, 2013, the main
types of pressure on soil quality condition identified in Tulcea County are:
applying fertilizers without taking into account the nature of the soil, weather conditions
and plant needs, which can cause a disruption of the ecological balance (especially through
nitrate accumulation);
application of plant protection products (phytosanitary);
the precarious situation of land / agricultural improvement;
natural processes that determine critical areas of land in terms of soil degradation
(landslides, salinization);
accidental pollutions / major environmental accidents.
Regarding the state of the forests, the main human activities that are harmful to forest habitats at
Tulcea County level are: constructions, illegal logging, disorganized tourism, uncontrolled waste storage
13
and arson. In 2013 an amount of 1323 cubic meters of removed timber was recorded, and 1363 ha of
forest have been affected by drought and floods, the damage couldn’t be estimated14.
Types of interventions / projects proposed by SDDIDD consist of a range of actions that reduce the
impact on the soil, belonging to the following areas of development: biodiversity and ecosystem
management; climate change; disaster risk management; emergency situations associated with
pollution risk; tourism; agriculture and rural development; solid waste management.
Some examples of these types of interventions / projects:
reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been degraded;
development and implementation of measures to reduce solid waste in natural areas;
works for protection against floods in Babadag, Ceatalchioi, Beştepe, Greci, Vulturu, Ilganii de
Jos, Nufăru, Ilganii de Sus, Luncaviţa, Sulina, Sarichioi, Pardina, Săcele, Sf. Gheorghe;
implementation of a mechanism for innovative and sustainable nature-based tourism MSME’s
and social tourism enterprises for a green local economy;
protection and improvement of natural resources (soil, water);
completion of land restitution and land book registration for land/farms consolidation;
support for environment-friendly agricultural activities within Natura 2000 sites;
investments in SWM Systems for handling separated waste (waste separation at source,
collection, sorting and transportation facilities);
composting bins for rural households to process organic waste;
collection of floating waste in river channels;
investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition waste;
public education and awareness program on waste management.
On the other hand, we note that there are other types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS
which, by their nature, can generate emissions on the ground, namely those that require the
construction works, or in the event of accidental pollution. Please note, however, that these can be
avoided by complying with Waste / emissions management plans, respectively Plans for preventing and
control of accidental pollution.
2.6.2 Waste
As a result of the implementation of the DDISDS, waste (in water, in air, on the surface where wastes are
stored) could be generated especially after the implementation of types of interventions / projects
involving construction works (related to the sectors listed in section 2.1.2).
The amounts and types of waste generated as a result of implementing the types of interventions /
projects mentioned in DDISDS cannot be estimated at this time of the evaluation, knowing the current
level of detailing of the DDISDS (2030) and the fact that it covers a wide range of investments in various
sectors (see section 2.1.2). This information will be detailed later for each type of intervention / project
as a part of the environmental proceedings (EIA and AA).
14
It should be mentioned, however, that DDISDS provides a number of types of interventions / projects in
the solid waste management sector that will improve the current waste management situation in the
Danube Delta region as:
Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at source,
collection, sorting and transportation facilities);
Composting bins for rural households to process organic waste;
Collection of Floating Waste in River Channels;
Investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition waste;
Public education and awareness program on waste management.
Sectorial objectives established for this sector are:
 Improving the recycling rate in order to achieve the EU objective of 50%, to which Romania
committed;
 Effective implementation of waste reduction, reuse and recycling of waste in local communities
ensuring an effective and sustainable management, resource conservation, environmental
protection and development of touristic destinations;
 Floating waste management.
By achieving these strategic objectives for the Danube Delta Region, it is expected:

a significantly improvement of the collection rate, especially in rural areas by providing efficient
collection and transportation services in the next budget cycle;

an increase of the separation of waste at source, through public awareness and changes in the
behavior of locals and tourists;

a decrease of the volume of waste disposed in landfills by promoting recycling and through
other methods of treatment.
2.6.3 Noise
Noise is a significant stress factor for the wild species.
By implementing the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS, noise can be generated both
in execution phases and in periods of operation of different types of interventions / projects. Given their
diversity and the actual level of detail of the DDISDS, it should be mentioned that at this time of
evaluation is not possible to estimate noise levels for each type of intervention / project proposed to be
conducted. However, this analysis will be performed in environmental studies (AA and EIA) for each
individual project.
All activities that involve the existence of noise sources located within or in the neighborhood of Natura
2000 sites may generate negative impact on fauna. Types of interventions / projects proposed by
SDISDS that might represent the most significant noise source belong to the transport sector, whose
negative effects can be experienced over distances up to 700 m (e.g. affecting the reproduction and
nesting areas of bird species).
There are quite little information in literature on the effects of noise on species of community interest,
and in general on Natura 2000 sites in Romania, but in recent years useful information appeared on
urban noise monitoring in the main agglomerations and on some sources of noise such as road and rail
sectors. This information was taken and used in this study.
Among the main effects that can occur regarding the fauna as a result of a higher noise level, are
mentioned:
increase of the noise level (as compared to the natural background noise) from 3 up to 10 dB (A)
may cause a decrease in the warning distances of wild animals by 30 up to 90%15;
decline of grassland birds living in meadows occurs at overruns above 48 dB (A) and for forest
species at noise levels over 42 dB (A)16;
behavioral changes when emitting sounds of mating for amphibians and in some cases, a
complete loss of vocalization;
disturbance of the species of reptiles by affecting daily activity patterns and reproduction.
Most of the data underlying the above comes from investigations of the noise generated by roads, the
effects of intermittent noises deployed for short periods of time or generated by actual operation of
energy facilities, stations treatment etc., being lesser known. In general, recommended distances to
avoid such disturbances are 200 meters for environmental impact activities and can reach up to 500 m
for high impact activities17. It is recommended that the same distances to be maintained towards
hibernacula.
Noise sources are often vibration generators. In fact, almost all field activities involving human presence
are generating vibrations, most of which can be felt and animals, depending on the species and the
distance towards the generating source.
At the moment, according to EEA18 (European Environment Agency), at the sites of community interest
in the Danube Delta region, the main existing pressures / threats (inside the sites or in their vicinity) that
generate noise are:
transport corridors: roads, highways;
industrial or commercial zones;
port areas;
urbanized areas, human presence;
other industrial / commercial areas;
campsites and parking areas for campers;
outdoor sports and recreational activities, leisure activities;
structures for sport and recreation.
DDISDS proposes a number of types of interventions / projects in the tourism sector, having as main
goal the development of the Danube Delta Region as an integrated tourism destination with a rich
portfolio of sustainable products and services, based on natural and cultural attractions, along with
relevant marketing activities. It also proposes the institutionalization of a Destination Management
15
The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms, 2010
16
Roads and their major ecological effects, 1998
17
Canadian Wildlife Service, 2009
18
http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/natura-5
Organizations (DMO) in the Danube Delta, whose main role will be to coordinate relations with other
public, private and non-governmental organizations operating in important socio-economic areas.
2.7
REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO LAND USE, NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
DDISDS
DDISDS aims to implement projects / types of interventions proposed to be located in the whole
territory of DDBR and surrounding area, having the role to address, manage and solve the problems
identified in several activity sectors.
Land use in the study area, according to Corine Land Cover 2006, is shown in Figure no. 2-16.
Figure no. 2-16 Land use in the study area according to Corine Land Cover 2006
The following table shows the land areas that will be permanently and temporarily occupied by projects
/ types of interventions proposed for implementation, based on the code and land use category,
according to Corine Land Cover 2006. The methodology based on which they were calculated is
presented in section 4.3.3.1.
Table no. 2-2 Land occupied, permanently or temporarily, depending on the code and land use
category
Land occupied
Land occupied temporarily
Code and land use category
permanently (ha)
(ha)
112 - Discontinuous urban fabric
0.04
1446.86
121 - Industrial or commercial units
3.84
608.50
123 - Port areas
206.15
131 - Mineral extraction sites
0.02
1.56
132 - Dump sites
21.49
133 - Construction sites
141 - Green urban areas
0.38
142 - Sport and leisure facilities
37.16
211 - Non-irrigated arable land
509.43
470.72
221 - Vineyards
18.34
17.38
222 - Fruit trees and berry plantations
16.45
9.87
231 - Pastures
27.47
89.70
242 - Complex cultivation patterns
8.87
38.96
243 - Land principally occupied by
agriculture. with significant areas of natural
15.15
10.32
vegetation
311 - Broad-leaved forest
39.06
96.85
321 - Natural grasslands
30.45
36.49
324 - Transitional woodland-shrub
8.31
10.65
331 – Beaches, dunes, sands
9.64
411 - Inland marshes
9.11
96.21
421 - Salt marshes
1.71
511 - Water courses
184.37
512 - Water bodies
1.67
30.90
523 - Sea and ocean
0.03
Total
688.21
3425.88
2.8
SUPPLEMENTARY SERVICES REQUIRED BY THE DDISDS IMPLMENTATION
The implementation of the types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS may involve the
development of additional services, which requires identifying ways in which accessing these additional
services could affect the integrity of natural protected areas of community interest, in case they overlap
or they are located in their immediate neighborhood.
Potential additional services are those related to: dismantling / relocation of pipelines, objectives,
power lines, construction / development of related facilities, occupying additional land areas larger than
the ones required by the investment, etc., and may occur mainly in those types of interventions /
projects involving construction works (see section 2.1.2).
Given the diversity and the current degree of detail of the types of interventions / projects that are
proposed by DDISDS, the estimation of the additional services required to implement all of these types
of interventions / projects is difficult to perform at this time of evaluation. These additional services
could occur within those types of interventions / projects involving the rehabilitation / expansion of
road infrastructure works, expanding the operating capacity of ports, construction of passenger
terminals in the airports, modernization or construction works on water and sewage networks, where it
may be necessary to decommission existing buildings, to build power lines etc. We believe that this
aspect should be looked at by type of intervention / project on a case by case basis in environmental
procedures (AA or EIA).
Regarding the potential impact on the Natura 2000 network we consider the necessity for any additional
activities deriving from the implementation of the types of interventions / projects proposed, to be
rigorously analyzed their opportunity or their location within the immediate vicinity of protected natural
areas of community interest. It is preferable that all possible additional services necessary for the types
of interventions / projects not to be placed / located inside or in the immediate vicinity of protected
natural areas of community interest.
2.9
DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION, FUNCTIONING, DISMANTLING AND THE SCHEDULING OF
THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD
Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030) is based on five pillars and aims the
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and its surrounding areas (a total of 38 administrative-territorial units).
The Development Vision for the Danube Delta Region and DDISDS, having 2030 as target year, provide a
framework for the ITI proposal and Action Plan until 2020 (possibly by 2022, if the EC will grant a similar
extension to the one granted in the previous programming period)19, but not all the needs identified in
the Needs Assessment Report can be solved by 2020. Thus, while the Development Vision for the Delta
Region and the outlined DDISDS has 2030 as the time horizon, they will be initially used as a result for a
proposed ITI investment program and a wider Action Plan by 2020.
To be harnessed, DDISDS role is to provide implementable solutions to problems and requirements
identified in the Needs Assessment Report. The term of the projects proposed for implementation within
DDISDS is 15 years.
Currently, not all the types of interventions / projects to be implemented by DDISDS (2030) are known
with certainty, nor how they will be implemented, their exact location or their timetable for
implementation. The Action Plan will describe the future prioritized types of interventions / projects and
will help to operationalize their implementation, together with other specifications on their order,
19
Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy (2030), Report 2.2
preparations for implementation and monitoring and evaluation systems. We mention that in the
absence of a detailed timetable for the implementation of all types of interventions / projects proposed
by DDISDS, we could not take into account the temporal dynamics of impacts in this study.
2.10
ACTIVITIES THAT WILL BE GENERATED AS RESULT OF THE DDISDS IMPLEMENTATION
The types of activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of the types of
investments / projects proposed by DDISDS can be very different, depending on the development
sector. Possible types of activities that can be generated as a result of implementing the types of
investment / proposed projects structured by the sector that they address and the development pillar to
which each sector belongs are presented in Table no. 2-3.
Table no. 2-3 Types of possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of the types of interventions / projects proposed by
DDISDS (2030)
Possible activities that will be generated as a result of the implementation of
the proposed interventions / projects
Pillar I - Protecting the environmental and natural resource assets
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management
Development and implementation of measures to reduce solid waste in natural
areas;
 decontamination activities and general ecological recovery of degraded or
Border demarcation and signage of strictly protected areas and their buffer areas,
abandoned land, with emphasis on those areas that are located near
sport fishing areas, touristic routes, camping, parking areas, etc. with development
protected areas;
and implementation of a monitoring and information system, including  establishment of collection centers and infrastructure required for recycling
appropriate technology such as motion-activated cameras, watchtowers, etc.;
solid waste;
Improve evidence-based management by developing and implementing a  signaling activities for strictly protected areas;
modern/efficient monitoring system and predictive model for sedimentation
 access monitoring activities in strictly protected areas as a result of
dynamics in the Danube Delta;
implementing the signaling system;
An in-depth institutional analysis (functional review) of DDBRA and the associated
 monitoring and forecasting activities of the dynamics of the sedimentation
administrative reforms with the aim of improving its managerial performances,
process in the Danube Delta;
and the legislative framework governing the management of DDBR area to allow
 information and promotion activities concerning the importance of
local residents to become active participants in guarding and managing the natural
protecting and management of the natural resources;
resource. Capacity building measures for the communities and DDBRA;
 maintenance work on the channels (dredging / desilting);
Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water
 mapping and inventorying activities of Natura 2000 species and habitats;
circulation and key habitat areas;
 inventorying activities for livestock in the Danube Delta region;
Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000”
 activities of monitoring and evaluation of the conservation status of species
network for species of European conservation concern, together with
and habitats belonging to the Natura 2000 network;
development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD area
(including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and  ecological reconstruction works;
 scientific research and monitoring of the processes related to river-delta sea
community participation.;
systems;
Studies and TA for biodiversity conservation and restoration of ecosystems and
 pest management activities;
natural habitats within “Natura 2000” network affected by anthropic impact;
Identify additional poldered areas eligible for ecological restoration. This will  reed harvest activities.
include feasibility studies and technical projects for the restoration of natural
habitats affected by non-ecological activities in agricultural, fishery and forestry
polders - integral or partial ecological restoration works;
Natural capital accounting studies to determine the highest value uses of land and
natural resources for optimal management;
Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or
been degraded;
Investments to support local action to reduce nitrate pollution of the waterways
from agricultural and livestock rearing activities;
Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube
Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity preservation;
Integrated pest management – develop and implement an integrated pest
management strategy for mosquitoes;
Integrated reed management strategy.
Energy efficiency
Promoting the use of renewable energy sources. Investments in pilot projects
promoting the use of renewable energy sources (wind, solar energy, heat pumps,
biomass, micro-hydro etc.) and non-pollutant technologies, including the  monitoring activities of the projects aiming the use of the renewable sources
of energy;
development and introduction of environmentally friendly propulsion systems in
the Delta;
 maintenance activities of public buildings;
Improving the energy efficiency of public buildings (schools, hospitals,  maintenance activities for some equipment;
administrative buildings, etc.);
 maintenance works for overhead and underground lines.
Extending and improving the energy efficiency of public lighting;
Support for improving energy efficiency of households.
Climate change
Create a CC partnership platform, including a community-driven climate
 monitoring activities of the proper functioning of the CC partnership
adaptation fund targeted at low income families; a micro grant or loan mechanism
platform;
to support SMEs; and a partnership facility to promote private - public
 local governments and private sector staff training activities on the use of the
collaboration for innovative climate actions;
CC partnership platform.
Designate a unit with a clear mandate to address climate change issues, with a
small number of dedicated and knowledgeable staff, and capable of working crosssector;
Develop clear and easy to use local guidelines for climate change and energy
efficiency programs.
Disaster risk management
Provision of special machinery and equipment for interventions by IES and SMURD
 developing a training system of the IES and SMURD staff concerning the
in disaster situations;
proper use of the special machineries and equipments for interventions;
Works for protection against floods in fourteen (14) towns/communes;
 maintenance activities for equipment and for special vehicles that are used;
Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency
 bed regulation, reshaping creek, bank consolidation, wall protection works
Situations (IES) infrastructure facilities in TULCEA + Măcin + Crişan + Babadag +
etc.;
Topolog;
 monitoring activities to ensure the success of the implemented measures.
Create and maintain an inter-institutional risk factor database.
Pollution emergency
Complete coherent and comprehensive pollution emergency response and
prevention plans, covering both water and land, and both mobile and fixed sources
 inter-institutional intervention staff training activities in cases of pollution
of pollution;
incidents;
Create an inter-institutional Pollution Emergency Response Team;
Purchase of equipment to enable the first response team to quickly access  maintenance activities for equipment and for special vehicles that are used;
pollution incident sites in the Core Delta;
 monitoring activities to ensure the success of the implemented measures.
Create and maintain an inter-institutional environmental liability data-base for
data sharing and better coordination across agencies.
Pillar II - Improving the Economy
Tourism
 ecotourism activities;
The establishment and development of tourism infrastructure;
The institutionalization of a Danube Delta Destination Management Organization  intensification of activities such as hiking, cycling, horse riding, water sports
(DMO);
etc.;
Design and implementation of a destination-wide program for product and  signaling activities for important places for tourists;
attraction development;
 developing a local management and yield management in tourism
Support mechanism for innovative and sustainable nature-based tourism MSMEs
development policy;
& social tourism enterprises for green local economy;
 detailed assessment activities for existing locations and tourist attractions
A region-wide program for beautification of settlements;
that can be converted into new travel offers;
Program for improved quality of accommodation facilities and services;
 maintenance activities of public buildings, accommodation facilities, historical
Cultural heritage interventions (rehabilitation, preservation, etc.);
monuments etc.;
Development of a destination interpretation (learning) program;
 creation and growth of micro, small and medium companies that offer
Develop and roll out program for emergency and first aid for tourism workers,
natural touristic services to build a green local economy;
service providers;
 entrepreneurship activities;
 intensification of commercial activities;
Develop a specialized tourism research observatory.
 intensification of related activities.
Fishery and aquaculture
Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks;
Dredge major lakes to restore water depth;
Support transition from artisanal capture to recreational fishing (Improve
ecotourism venues to accommodate the needs of recreational fishers; Promote
and provide training in sustainable recreational fishing (catch-and-release fishing
etc.);
Support artificial reproduction of valuable species like pike and zander and
construct simple landing facilities in places of fisher concentrations;
 intensification of tourism activities;
Improve fish habitat;
Regulate or eliminate uncontrolled fish camping;
 enhancing research and development activities within research institutes,
Consider some tax incentives, like the elimination of the water tax;
public institutions and associations of fishermen.
Improve fisheries data collection and analysis;
Replace or modify cherhana based system;
Strengthen analytical capacity at DDNRI;
Improve fisheries research and development activities in research institutes, public
institutions and fishermen associations;
Improve Aquaculture;
Support small scale fish processing. Diversify home and village level fish processing
by introducing small scale canning units (for Gibel carp and other low value fish
like roach and bream) and improve smoking systems (smoking bags or small
electric smokers); mainly to produce delicacies to visiting tourists.
Agriculture and rural development
Modernization of facilities for collection / processing / marketing of agricultural
produce;
Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools,
dispensaries etc.);
Jobs creation;
Protection and improvement of natural resources (soil, water);
Completion of land restitution and land book registration for land/farms
consolidation;
Support for environment-friendly agricultural activities within Natura 2000 sites;
Enlarge the access to vocational education for agriculture;
 intensification tourism activities;
Modernization of quality control systems for agricultural products;
Improved information on local and European financing, including projects
 creation of new jobs in non-agricultural sectors such as tourism, services,
preparation;
crafts, logistics, etc.;
Improvement of Advisory/consulting and training activity for farmers / rural labor;
 vocational education training activities for agriculture;
Fostering organic farming activities;
 development of tourist centers supplying activities;
Take-up of farming activities by young generations;
 consultancy and training activities for farmers / rural workforce.
Modernization/rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure;
Consolidation and modernization of small farms;
Creation of small businesses outside agriculture;
Modernization of technical endowment of farms;
Bottom-up initiatives for local development;
Afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural land in the Danube Delta region;
Conservation of local patrimony and traditions (including handicrafts);
Release of land through concessions by Tulcea County Council;
Exit of old farmers and transfer of assets;
Foster establishment of producer groups/organizations;
Stimulate creation of short supply chains for the benefit of tourism activities;
Support branding/certification of agricultural products and their marketing on
international markets;
Provide incentives to maintain agricultural activities in core Delta;
Support rehabilitation of flood protection infrastructure;
Enable participation of farmers and processors to risk management tools;
Educational infrastructure upgrade (especially for primary and secondary
education).
Pillar III - Improving connectivity
Transport
Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin – Brăila;
Modernization of County Road DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL – ZEBIL –
SARICHIOI;
 service areas (including gas stations);
Modernization of County Road DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia Veche;
 intensification of road transport of passengers and freight;
Modernization of County Road DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-Săcele-Istria intensification of water transport of passengers and freight;
MihaiViteazu;
 intensification of air transport of passengers and freight;
Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Măcin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports;
Development and modernization of airport infrastructure;
 intensification of related activities;
Modernization of county roads (regional transport infrastructure):
 intensification of ways of transport between several types of transport (road,
• DJ222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus;
rail, air);
• DJ222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus;
 intensification of tourism activities.
• DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798;
• route Cetatea Histria - DN22/ Tariverde.
Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel.
Information and communication technology
Internet / ultra-fast internet for green tourism;
 intensification of tourism activities;
Improvement of e-government services and local public monitoring systems;
Support of ICT for businesses through e-portal and grant facility;
Formulating and implementing open data policies;
Increasing vertical integration of ICT innovation solutions in the local economy;
Increasing private investments in RDI and encouraging the demand for RDI;
Increasing knowledge, technology and staff transfer with RDI skills by means of
partnerships between private and research environment;
Increasing the excellence of scientific basis as engine for innovation, by developing
RD infrastructure;
Increasing the involvement in EU level research by unlocking the excellence
potential in RDI, such as within the framework program Horizon 2020 and by
attracting talents and advanced skills to the RDI national system;
Developing ITC infrastructure and systems and digital skills to support education,
health, online culture and digital inclusion.
Pillar IV - Providing basic services
Water supply and sanitation and integrated water management
 collection, treatment and disposal of wastewater;
Types of interventions / projects that aim water supply and sanitation and
 sludge management in the wastewater treatment process;
integrated water management in areas with an equivalent population greater than
 potable water treatment and monitoring of the substances that are
2000 inhabitants;
discharged into waters;
Types of interventions / projects that aim water supply and sanitation and
 rehabilitation and expansion of transport and distribution systems for potable
integrated water management in areas with an equivalent population greater
water;
lower 2000 inhabitants.
 maintenance and repairs of equipment that is used in the activities.
Solid waste management
Collection of Floating Waste in River Channels;
 floating waste collection activities on river channels;
Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at
 collection and transport activities of waste from the localities located in the
source, collection, sorting and transportation facilities);
DD;
Public education and awareness program on waste management;
 MBT activities for waste;
Composting bins for rural households to process organic waste;
 information and promoting activities, at non-formal or educational level, of a
Investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition
proper management of waste, both to locals and tourists;
waste;
 composting of biodegradable waste activities in rural areas;
Recovering waste collected from households and economic agents.


Healthcare
Consolidate the response capacity of Public Health Directorate (PHD) by designing
and implementing an environmental health surveillance system;
Rehabilitation/modernization of facilities, and IT equipment;
Modernization and equipment, and organize a functional building block at Tulcea
Emergency Hospital (including for integrated ambulatory department), and for

Macin Hospital;
Rehabilitation /transformation of TB pavilion at Tulcea Emergency Hospital to a

social accommodation center (residential care shelter);
Create public ambulatory centers by rehabilitating closed hospital buildings in
Babadag and Sulina;
Ensure interoperability of medical information systems at health care level 
(telemedicine and e-health);

Reforms to increase cost-effectiveness of sector governance/management
(hospital payment mechanism to incentivize public ambulatory, family doctor, and 
telemedicine systems);

Information, education and communication campaigns on healthy and hygienic
environment;
Ambulances for emergency care and rehabilitation civil works;
Provide area specific training for medical professionals;
Increase the prevalence of health programs focused on prevention and screening.
Education
Provision of relevant, accessible and incentivized LLL programmes in sustainable 
tourism, agriculture and fishery in Community Centers for Permanent Learning;
Creating an Education & Training Network for students living in remote areas or
with less than 2000 population to provide access to primary and lower secondary 
treatment and disposal activities of construction and demolition waste, with
focus on recycling and reuse;
waste valorification activities.
appropriate maintenance activities for IT and laboratory equipment, as well
as for auto vehicles;
medical staff training activities in order to strengthen the capacity of public
health surveillance, as well as the capacity of early warning and coordinated
response to public health emergencies, natural and human disasters;
monitoring activities to ensure the success of the implemented measures;
information, education and communication activities on a healthy and
hygienic living environment;
intensification of commercial activities;
intensification of related activities.
activities that will include counseling services, support for partnerships with
companies through internships and apprenticeships, training mechanisms
and incentives, provision of spaces for workshops in VET schools;
quality education for all;
Provide support for creating VET schools that are relevant, attractive and inclusive,
and which produce a workforce with knowledge & skills of international standard
and relevance to the global demands of the nature-based tourism and recreational
fishing market;
Enhance kindergartens and nursery services through development, support,
rehabilitation and provision of equipment to increase access to early childhood
education and care (ECEC);
Bring Early school leavers back to school through school after school and second
chance programs;
Create partnerships between employers, E&T providers and research bodies to
ensure better performance of education system in addressing labor market needs.
Social inclusion and protection
Develop early childhood (0-6 years) institutional infrastructure in communities
with high share of Roma;
Scaling up school mediators in schools with high percentage of Roma;
Implementing community grants for educational intervention;
 creating new jobs for mediators;
Facilitate regularization of property rights;
 counseling activities.
Other social protection interventions;
SME subsidies for job placement for NEETs in relevant fields;
Improve digital literacy among the Roma and vulnerable groups;
Increase the access to as well as the efficiency of social service provision.
Pillar V - Promoting efficiency, affordability and sustainability
Administrative capacity and program management
Strengthening local administrative capacity for strategic planning and budgeting,
decision making, human resource management and monitoring and evaluation;
 capacity and support strengthening activities offered through technical
Identification, development and implementation of measures to increase
assistance for the development of government entities in the DD region;
transparency, inclusiveness, ethics and integrity, and reduce corruption in public  creation of new administrative spaces.
authorities and institutions;
Technical Assistance (TA) for ITI program management;
Revise regulations to improve the design of household subsidies to improve
affordability of services, and a more efficient targeting and use of financial and
natural resources;
Improving access and quality of services provided by the judicial system;
Actions intended to ensure the coordination between the public institutions
dealing with the conservation of biodiversity and the ecological reconstruction of
the Danube Delta;
The development and implementation of online services.
Other categories

Urban Renewal Interventions.





modernization activities of local roads/ streets, community and sports units
and other community facilities;
working to improve public spaces;
rehabilitation measures;
intensification of tourism activities;
intensification of related activities.
2.11
CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTENT, PROPOSED OR APPROVED PP, WHICH MAY GENERATE
CUMULATIVE IMPACT WITH DDISDS AND WHICH MAY AFFECT THE NATURAL PROTECTED
AREAS OF COMMUNITY IMPORTANCE
DDISDS (2030) provides the development framework for a number of types of interventions / projects
planned in the Danube Delta region. The types of interventions / projects cover several activity sectors
(see section 2.1.2), but those that can potentially generate cumulative impact with other existing,
proposed or approved PP, and that may affect natural protected areas of the Danube Delta region are
those that require the construction works.
An analysis in order to quantify the cumulative impact of DDISDS with other proposed / existing or
approved plans or projects, it is impossible to perform at this time due to the current spatial details for
both types of interventions / projects provided for DDISDS as well as the fairly vague spatial information
about the location of other proposed PP in the Danube Delta region.
In the actual form of DDISDS, project which may generate cumulative impacts with existinting activities
or proposed plans and projects are represented by:

All transport interventions;

Interventions for flood risk management;

Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Macin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports;

Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel.
Whitout avoidance and mitigation measures, this projects may generate moderate to significant impacts
in areas where several other pressures are already existing (see section 4.1). The most important
examples are:

Cummulative impacts on fishes, particularly on sturgeon species by the interventions for ports
modernisation and Sulina Chennel rehabilitation. Species like Acipenser gueldenstaedtii, Huso
huso or Acipenser stellatus, which are critically endangered are still facing a decline despite the
prohibition established in 2006, mainly due to the illegal fishing. This species may be
supplementary affected by the above mentioned interventions;

Transportation projects, particularly the extention of national road 22, may add significant
contribution to the impact on steppe habitats and one of the few forests in Dobrogea region:
Babadag forest. Such impact will add to the process of wind parks and quarries (with their
additional infrastructure) expansions of the last decade.
DDISDS projects mentioned above have to implement adequate measures at the project level, based on
appropriate assessments in order to avoid and mitigate potential impacts on Natura 2000 components.
Such measures should avoid potential cumulative impacts generated by the implementation of the
Strategy.
3
INFORMATION ABOUT THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST AFFECTED BY
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS
3.1
DATA CONCERNING THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST THAT MAY
BE AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS
3.1.1 General information regarding Natura 2000 network from Danube Delta Region
General information on Natura 2000 network and its legal framework
The Natura 2000 network was established in 1992 and is the largest ecological network of protected
areas in the world, comprising Sites of Community Importance (SCIs, designated for protection of
habitats and species from Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs,
designated for protection of bird species from Annex I of the Birds Directive). By creating Natura 2000
network a special regime for the protection of the natural habitats and wild species of flora and fauna
was established, as well as for the wild bird species, present on the European Union territory, that are
considered rare, have a restricted range or highly fragmented or are threatened with extinction,
protecting, in the same time, other species and natural habitats that are not found in Annexes I and II of
the Habitats Directive or Annex I of the Birds Directive. The Natura 2000 ecological network was
established not only for the protection of the wild species of flora and fauna and natural habitats, but
also for their conservation, preserving the diversity of natural capital, promoting traditional activities
and long-term sustainable development.
Two European Union directives were the cornerstone of the Natura 2000 network, governing the
selection, designation and protection of habitats, species and sites:
Birds Directive - Council Directive 79/409 EEC on the conservation of wild birds, abrogated and
amended in 30 November 2009 with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council on the conservation of wild birds, comprises 7 Annexes, in Annex I being listed species for
which are required special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their
survival and reproduction in their area of distribution;
Habitats Directive – Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural
habitats and of wild fauna and flora, comprises 6 Annexes, in Annex I being listed the types of
natural habitats of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas
of conservation, while in Annex II are listed animal and plant species of community interest whose
conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation.
The two European Directives were transposed into the Romanian legislation through Government
Emergency Ordinance no. 57/ 2007 on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural
habitats, wild flora and fauna, approved with amendments and supplements by Law no. 49/ 2011, as
amended and supplemented subsequent by Law no. 73/ 2015 approving Government Ordinance no. 20/
2014 for amending GEO no. 57/ 2007 on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural
habitats, wild flora and fauna, which contains in addition to the species listed in Directives, which are
found in our country's territory, those species considered important for Romania, requiring a special
protection regime. Also, GEO no. 57/ 2007 contains an additional annex (Annex 4B) in which are
presented species of national interest requiring strict protection.
Protected natural areas and Natura 2000 network in Danube Delta Region
The study area is represented by DDBR (the area between the Sf. Gheorghe and the Chilia branches of
the Danube River; the Razim-Sinoe-Babadag lake system and adjacent land areas; and the area along the
Danube River west of Tulcea City towards Galati) and its neighboring area, which together form the socalled „Danube Delta Region”.
The Danube Delta Region consists of Tulcea City, four towns (Babadag, Isaccea, Măcin, and Sulina) and
thirty three communes, respectively a total number of 38 territorial administrative units (see section 2.2
- Table no. 2-1).
On the territory of the study area, Danube Delta Region, the following types of natural protected areas
are present, with differentiated regime of protection, conservation and use:
Of international interest: Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, natural heritage site of universal
value (included in List of World Natural and Cultural Heritage), wetland area of international
importance (RAMSAR site);
Of national interest: Danube Delta National Park (according to the IUCN international taxonomy,
category II), Munţii Măcinului National Park and 29 scientific and natural reserves: Arinişul
Erenciuc, Capul Doloşman, Cetatea Histria, Complexul Periteasca-Leahova, Complexul Sacalin
Zătoana , Complexul Vătafu Lungule, Corbu-Nuntaşi-Histria, Dealul Deniz tepe, Dealurile
Beştepe, Grindul Chituc, Grindul Lupilor, Grindul şi Lacul Răducu, Insula Ceaplacea, Insula
Popina, Insula Prundul cu Păsări, Lacul Belciug, Lacul Nebunu, Lacul Potcoava, Lacul Rotundu,
Ostrovul Prut, Pădurea Babadag-Codru, Pădurea Caraorman, Pădurea Letea, Rezervaţia botanică
Korum Tarla, Rezervaţia de liliac Fântâna Mare, Rezervaţia Geologică Agighiol, Roşca Buhaiova,
Sărăturile Murighiol, Valea Fagilor, of which 6 are located outside the DDBR (Dealul Deniz Tepe,
Dealurile Beştepe, Pădurea Babadag-Codru, Rezervaţia botanică Korum Tarla, Rezervaţia
Geologică Agighiol and Valea Fagilor) (Figure no. 3-1);
Of community interest (Natura 2000 sites): on the study area are overlapping, partly or fully, 8
Sites of Community Importance: ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin, ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului,
ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină, ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe,
ROSCI0105 Lunca Joasă a Prutului, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului and ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord
Dobrogean (Figure no. 3-2) and 12 Special Protection Areas: ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia,
ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei, ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoie, ROSPA0032
Deniz Tepe, ROSPA0040 Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin, ROSPA0052 Lacul Beibugeac,
ROSPA0060 Lacul Taşaul – Corbu, ROSPA0073 Măcin – Niculiţel, ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră,
ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag, ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea and ROSPA0121 Lacul Brateş (Figure
no. 3-3).
DDBR is the unique delta in the world which has been declared a biosphere reserve (in September
1990), being one of the largest wetlands (including freshwater marshes, lakes and ponds, streams and
canals) in terms of habitats for waterfowl, having a largest area of reed beds, 30 types of ecosystems,
with a surface area of 580,000 ha, representing approx. 2 % of Romania's territory (22nd place among
the deltas of the world and 3rd in Europe, after the Volga and Kuban)20. Only 9 % of the area is
permanently above water 21.
The universal value of DDBR was recognized by its inclusion in the international network of biosphere
reserves, in 1990, within the programme „Man and biosphere” (MAB) launched by UNESCO.
The natural heritage universal value of DDBR was recognized by its inclusion in List of World Natural
and Cultural Heritage, in December 1990.
DDBR was recognized, in September 1991, as Wetland area of international importance, especially as
Waterfowl Habitat – RAMSAR Convention.
In 1999 RBDD was included together with Danube Biosphere Reserve in Ukraine in the international
network of transboundary biosphere reserves Romania - Ukraine.
20
http://www.ddbra.ro/rezervatia/delta-dunarii/prezentare-generala/valoare-universala-a15
21
Raport de diagnostic - Strategie Integrată de Dezvoltare Durabilă pentru Delta Dunării, 3 Martie 2014
The natural heritage value and the effectiveness of the ecological Management plan, applied on DDBR
territory, were recognized through the granting in 2000 of the European Diploma of Protected Areas,
renewed in 2005 and 2010. The European Diploma of Protected Areas it is granted by the European
Council for those regions which are of particular importance for the conservation of biological diversity,
geological and landscape in Europe.
Also, Danube Delta has a "national park" status in the IUCN international taxonomy, and is overlapping
with Sites of Community Importance (SCIs): ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării and ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării –
zona marină, as well as with Special Protection Areas (SPAs): ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul
Razim – Sinoie. On DDBR territory are, also, present 22 scientific and natural reserves. The protected
natural areas present present throughout the territory of the study area are presented in Section 3.1.1
of the present study.
The Administration of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (ADDBR) was established in 1990 as being
the administrative organization responsible for the conservation and management of biodiversity,
ecosystems and natural resources of the Danube Delta. This role was legalized by the law enacted in
1993 (Law no. 83/1993)22.
The list of Natura 2000 sites which overlap, partly or fully, on the study area, as well as the percentage
from each site located in the Danube Delta Region are shown in Table no. 3-1.
Table no. 3-1 List of Natura 2000 sites in the study area
Site code
Site name
Site surface (ha)
ROSCI0012
ROSCI0060
ROSCI0065
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0105
ROSCI0123
ROSCI0201
ROSPA0009
ROSPA0019
Braţul Măcin
Dealurile Agighiolului
Delta Dunării
Delta Dunării - zona marină
Deniz Tepe
Lunca Joasă a Prutului
Munţii Măcinului
Podişul Nord Dobrogean
Beştepe - Mahmudia
Cheile Dobrogei
Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim
- Sinoie
Deniz Tepe
Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin
Lacul Beibugeac
Lacul Taşaul
Măcin - Niculiţel
Marea Neagră
Pădurea Babadag
10235.433
1433.287
453076.127
123320.544
413.701
5806.456
16893.877
84799.223
3662.603
10932.553
Site surface in
the study area
(ha)
651.557
1433.287
451661.178
2560.772
413.701
283.618
7315.358
31445.429
3662.603
168.883
508688.204
506598.165
99.59
1899.766
18759.248
470.394
2701.108
67361.073
148846.695
58473.223
1899.766
604.434
470.394
524.817
34014.558
2569.417
27225.050
100.00
3.22
100.00
19.43
50.50
1.73
46.56
ROSPA0031
ROSPA0032
ROSPA0040
ROSPA0052
ROSPA0060
ROSPA0073
ROSPA0076
ROSPA0091
22
http://www.ddbra.ro/administratia/despre-noi
% located in
the study
area
6.37
100.00
99.69
2.08
100.00
4.88
43.30
37.08
100.00
1.54
Site code
ROSPA0100
ROSPA0121
Site name
Stepa Casimcea
Lacul Brateş
Site surface (ha)
22202.407
15801.043
Site surface in
the study area
(ha)
175.745
296.365
% located in
the study
area
0.79
1.88
Out of the 8 SCIs present on the Danube Delta Region, 2 are located entirely on the territory of the
study area: ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului and ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe, while ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării
is located in proportion of 99.7 % on the study area’s territory. Out of the 12 SPAs, 3 are located entirely
on the territory of the study area: ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia, ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe and
ROSPA0052 Lacul Beibugeac, while ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoe is situated in
proportion of 99.6 % on the study area’s territory.
Regarding the biogeographical regions, on the Danube Delta Region, are encountered 3 out of 6
biogeographical regions present on the national territory (Figure no. 3-4):
Pontic – lies on the western shores of the Black Sea and the East part of the Danube Delta – 94.5 %
of this biogeographical region is encountered in the study area;
Steppic – comprises the lowland landscape from the south-eastern part and, partial, Danube Delta
and Black Sea – 13.7 % of this biogeographical region is encountered in the study area;
Black Sea - only 0.1 % of the Black Sea surface is included in the study area.
Figure no. 3-1 Location of the natural protected areas of national interest in relation with the study area
Figure no. 3-2 Location of the Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) in relation with the study area
Figure no. 3-3 Location of the Special Protection Areas (SPAs) in relation with the study area
Figure no. 3-4 Location of the study area in relation with the biogeographical regions
3.1.2 Information regarding the natural protected areas of community interest potentially affected
by the implementation of the DDISDS
In this section are briefly presented some relevant information regarding the Natura 2000 sites present
on the study area, the Danube Delta Region, in accordance with the Natura 2000 Standard Forms23.
Sites of Community Importance (SCIs)
1. ROSCI0012 – Braţul Măcin
The site is located within the territories of three counties: Brăila (44 %), Constanţa (14 %) and Tulcea (44
%), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 10,235 hectares,
comprising altitudes between 0 and 94 meters above sea level, with an average of 8 meters.
The site is important in the first place for the habitat conservation: 92A0 Zăvoaie cu Salix alba şi Populus
alba, occupying approximately 19.41 % of site surface, respectively 4 % of the habitat surface at national
level. Also, the site represents the northern part of the migration corridor of the plant species from
Balkan Peninsula to the Northern Dobrogea and Danube Delta. Moreover this represents an important
migration route for bird species (being also proposed as SPA), and for certain species of fish, including
sturgeon.
The site was designated for the protection of 8 habitat types, 1 species of plants, 11 species of fish, 4
species of amphibians and reptiles and 2 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of
the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts 3 other important species of plants.
2. ROSCI0060 - Dealurile Agighiolului
The site is located entirely within the Tulcea County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic
biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 1,433 hectare, comprising altitudes between 32 and
218 meters above sea level, with an average of 124 meters.
The site includes the priority habitat 62C0* Stepe ponto-sarmatice, occupying approximately 61 % of
site surface, respectively 0.9 % of the habitat surface at national level. Within this habitat the
association Agropyro brandzae – Thymetum zygioidi is present, which has a remarkable value, being
endemic for Dobrogea, and occupies large surfaces here, hundreds of hectares. Within the Agropyro
brandzae – Thymetum zygioidi association are found important populations of Euphorbia myrsinites
species, included in the National Red List, very rare in Dobrogea, being the only region in the country
where it is encountered this taxon.
The site was designated for the protection of 3 habitat types, 1 species of plants, 1 species of reptiles
and 2 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC.
Beside this, the site also hosts another one important species of plants.
3. ROSCI0065 - Delta Dunării
The site is located within the territories of two counties: Tulcea (93 %) and Constanţa (7 %), belonging to
the biogeographical regions: steppic (51.98 %) and pontic (48.02 %). The site’s surface is about 453,076
hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 229 meters above sea level, with an average of 1 meter.
This site covers a wide area and comprises a great diversity of aquatic, swamp, land, river, river-marine
and coastal ecosystems, creating the possibility to populate the region with a high diversity of ecotypes
23
http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/natura-2000/435
of the species from the Quaternary post-glacial retreats, mainly the Mediterranean and eastern species.
Among the endemic plants are mentioned Centaurea pontica and Centaurea jankae, the orchids (Orchis
elegans, Platantera bifolia, Anacamptis pyramidalis), the Silk vine (Periploca graeca), the sand bindweed
(Convolvulus persicus), among the insects - the iris butterflies (Apatura metis, Rhiparioides metelkana,
Catocala elocata, Arctia villica, Thersamonia dispar), the beetles - the European rhinoceros beetle
(Oryctes nasicornis), the praying mantis (Empusa fasciata) and the orthoptera (Saga pedo), and among
amphibians - the European tree frog (Hyla arborea) it is very numerous here. Also, the birds are well
represented in this site, some of them being protected (the great white pelican and the Dalmatian
pelican, the mute swan, the great egret and the little egret, the squacco heron, the Eurasian Spoonbill,
the pied avocet, the black-winged stilt, the red-crested Pochard, the red-breasted goose etc.), most of
them nesting in the area.
The site was designated for the protection of 29 habitat types, 5 species of plants, 11 species of
invertebrates, 15 species of fish, 5 species of amphibians and reptiles and 5 species of mammals, listed
in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other
101 important species of flora and fauna, belonging to taxonomic groups: plants, invertebrates,
amphibians, reptiles, fish and mammals.
4. ROSCI0066 – Delta Dunării – zona marină
The site is located in the marine area, belonging entirely to the Black Sea biogeographical region (100
%). The site’s surface is about 123,321 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 14 meters above sea
level, with an average of 0 meter.
The site corresponds with the geographical unit with the same name, component of DDBR (Black Sea
coastal area from the mouth of the Cape Midia to the Chilia branch, with an extent on offshore to water
depths of ~20m), and main classes of habitats being represented by: marine areas and islands, estuaries
and lagoons, sandy beaches, marshes and bogs. The marine area of the Danube Delta has certain
specific features resulting as a major influence of the Danube waters and of the silt deposited by the
waters, being present here unique sedimentary habitats, at the Romanian seaside.
The site was designated for the protection of 4 habitat types, 2 species of fish and 2 species of
mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site
also hosts other 34 important species of flora and fauna (plants, invertebrates, fish and mammals).
5. ROSCI0067 - Deniz Tepe
biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 414 hectare, comprising altitudes between 42 and
258 meters above sea level, with an average of 118 meter.
The site is constituted 99 % of grasslands and 1 % of thickets, the main classes of habitats are
represented by: natural grasslands, steppes and crops (arable land).
The site was designated for the protection of 2 habitat types, 1 species of plants, 1 species of reptiles
and 1 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC.
Beside this, the site also hosts other 3 important species of plants.
6. ROSCI0105 - Lunca Joasă a Prutului
The site is located entirely within the Galaţi County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic
biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 5,807 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 31
meters above sea level, with an average of 7 meter.
Lunca Prutului Inferior it is characterized by absolute altitudes ranging from 8 m in the northern part and
3-4 m in the southern part, the floodplain topography is, generally, plane, with a continuous gradient
from north to south, and transversal the land is tilted toward the Prut River (east), general appearance
of the floodplain being that of a large depressions. The microrelief is represented by accumulation forms
(grinds) and negative forms (former lakes, ponds, puddles and swamps).
The site was designated for the protection of 8 habitat types, 1 species of invertebrates, 9 species of
fish, 3 species of amphibians and 1 species of mammals, listed in Annex I, respectively Annex II of the
Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 8 important species of flora and fauna.
7. ROSCI0123 - Munţii Măcinului
Măcin Mountains, formed during the hercinic orogenesis (between Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras), are
some of the oldest mountains in Romania, with a surface of 50,000 ha and are localized in the southeastern part of Romania. These mountains presents characteristic ecosystems Ponto-Balkan steppe,
sub-mediterranean and Balkan forests, as well as a great diversity of flora and fauna. The number of
superior plants that are found at this area represents over 19 % of European flora, being comparable
with the rich flora of Crete and Corsica islands. Măcin Mountains and their surroundings are the only
parts of Romania where there are still significant areas of natural vegetation steppe, which is not found
in other parts of Romania or elsewhere in the Balkans.
invertebrates, 3 species of amphibians and reptiles and 5 species of mammals, listed in Annex I,
respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 86
important species of flora and fauna (plants, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles and mammals).
8. ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean
The main classes of habitats of this site are represented by: rivers, lakes, natural meadows, steppes,
crops (arable land), grassland, other arable land, deciduous forests, coniferous forests, vineyards,
orchards and other artificial land and forest habitats (forests in transition). At national level, the site is
one of the largest and most representative for the Steppic biogeographical region, being constituted in
proportion of 95.5 % (85,046 ha) of community interest habitats, of which steppe habitats occupies an
area of approx. 24,807 ha (27.85 %).
invertebrates, 3 species of amphibians and reptiles and 6 species of mammals, listed in Annex I,
respectively Annex II of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC. Beside this, the site also hosts other 52
important species of flora and fauna (plants, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles and mammals).
Special Protection Areas (SPAs)
1. ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia
The site is located in a hilly area, at DDBR boundary, component part of Tulcea Hills geographical unit,
Beştepe Hills being a peisagistic reservation, representative for the steppe and silvosteppe vegetation.
The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting
populations of the following species: Burhinus oedicnemus, Caprimulgus europaeus, Calandrella
brachydactyla and Oenanthe pleschanka. Also, the site is important during the migration period for prey
bird species, and during the winter, in particular, for the following species: Branta ruficollis and Circus
cyaneus.
The site was designated for the protection of 30 bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive
2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 32 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I of
the Council Directive 2009/147/EC.
2. ROSPA0019 - Cheile Dobrogei
The site is located entirely within the Constanţa County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic
The site is important not only from the point of view of the geomorphological, paleontological, botanical
and landscape characteristics, but also through the elements of fauna, reptiles, birds and bat species
being very well represented, within the site perimeter being two caves important in what concern the
speleological and paleontological terms.. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird
species, being important for nesting populations of the following species: Burhinus oedicnemus,
Circaetus gallicus, Circus pygargus, Coracias garullus, Melanocorypha calandra, Calandrella
brachydactyla and Anthus campestris. Also, the site is important during the migration period for prey
bird species, and during the winter, in particular, for Branta ruficollis.
3. ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim – Sinoie
The site is located within the territories of two counties: Tulcea (89 %) and Constanţa (9 %), belonging to
the biogeographical regions: steppic (57.21 %) and pontic (42.79 %). The site’s surface is about 508,688
hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 137 meters above sea level, with an average of 3 meters.
This site is represented by the territory between the first bifurcation of the Danube (Ceatalul Chiliei),
bordered to the east by the Black Sea littoral, Chilia branch at the north and Razim Sinoie Complex at
south. The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being important for nesting
populations of the following species: Pelecanus crispus, Pelecanus onocrotalus, Aythya nyroca, Falco
vespertinus, Phalacrocorax pygmeus, Plegadis falcinellus, Egretta garzetta, Nycticorax nycticorax,
Egretta alba, Recurvirostra avosetta, Ardeola ralloides, Sterna albifrons, Porzana porzana, Haliaeetus
albicilla, Sterna hirundo, Larus melanocephalus, Himantopus himantopus, Glareola pratincola, Platalea
leucorodia, Ixobrychus minutus, Charadrius alexandrinus, Chlidonias hybridus, Circus aeruginosus, Ardea
purpurea, Botaurus stellaris, Coracias garrulus, Alcedo atthis, Gelochelidon nilotica. Also, the site is
important during the migration period for prey bird species.
2009/147/EC. Beside this, the site also houses other 134 regular migrant birds, not specified in Annex I
of the Council Directive 2009/147/EC.
4. ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe
The site is located in the hilly area from the Dobrudjan forest steppe vegetation, being important for
nesting populations of some species characteristic to steppe areas such as: Burhinus oedicnemus,
Calandrella brachydactyla, Melanocorypha calandra, Anthus campestris and Buteo rufinus. Also, the
area is an important feeding area for some of the nesting pairs from the neighboring site ROSPA0091
Pădudea Babadag: Circaetus gallicus and Hieraaetus pennatus.
5. ROSPA0040 - Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin
The site is located within the territories of three counties: Brăila (33 %), Constanţa (22 %) and Tulcea (45
%), belonging to the steppic biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 18,759 hectare,
comprising altitudes between 0 and 198 meters above sea level, with an average of 17 meters.
populations of the following species: Coracias garrulus, Falco vespertinus, Aythya nyroca, Accipiter
brevipes, Anthus campestris, Lanius minor, Lanius collurio and Calandrella brachydactyla. Also, the site is
important during the migration period for prey birds species: Pelecanus crispus, Accipiter brevipes,
Branta ruficollis, Pelecanus onocrotalus şi Phalacrocorax pygmaeus, and during the winter, in particular,
for two species: Phalacrocorax pygmaeus and Anser albifrons.
6. ROSPA52 - Lacul Beicugeac
biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 470 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 24
meters above sea level, with an average of 5 meters.
Beibugeac – Plopu Lake is a wetland area located near the DDBR, with a lake surface that varies from
year to year, depending on the rainfall and temperatures levels that are recorded during the summer.
Over the time, the lake bottom was covered with a fine silt, rich in invertebrate species, which attracts
many wader species, ducks, shelducks and swans.
populations of the following species: Glareola pratincola, Falco vespertinus, Recurvirostra avosetta and
Himantopus himantopus. During migration the site hosts more than 20,000 copies of aquatic birds,
being possible candidate as a Ramsar site, and during the winter, in particular, for the species:
Phalacrocorax pygmaeus, Branta ruficollis, Anser albifrons and Cygnus cygnus. The SPA is also
designated as an IBA, according SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International:
C1, C2, C3, C4.
7. ROSPA0060 - Lacurile Taşăul – Corbu
The site is located entirely within the Constanţa County territory (100 %), belonging to the pontic
biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 2,701 hectare, comprising altitudes between 0 and 16
meters above sea level, with an average of 2 meters.
Taşaul Lake form together with Gargalâc Lake (known as Corbu Lake) a lake complex. Taşaul Lake is a
typical maritime shore, having no direct connection to the Black Sea, its shores having the shape of a sea
wall, the hydrographic basin being formed, mostly, by the Casimcea River. Corbu Lake's shores are
constituted mostly from loess, in the form of a sea wall with small heights.
The site houses important effectives of some protected bird species, being also a possible candidate as a
Ramsar site, and during the winter is important, in particular, for the species: Pelecanus crispus, Aythya
ferina, Fulica atra, Larus ridibundus and Larus cachinnans. The SPA is also designated as an IBA,
according SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2, C4 and C6.
8. ROSPA0073 - Măcin – Niculiţel
populations of the following species: Falco cherrug, Coracias garrulus, Ciconia ciconia, Accipiter brevipes,
Burhinus oedicnemus, Oenanthe pleschanka, Circaetus gallicus, Buteo rufinus, Emberiza hortulana,
Caprimulgus europaeus, Hieraaetus pennatus and Lullula arborea. Also, represents an important area
for the migrating birds, being designated, according SOR, as an IBA based on the following criteria
developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2, C5 and C6.
9. ROSPA0076 - Marea Neagră
The site’s surface is about 148,847 ha, comprising altitudes between 0 and 22 meters above sea level,
belonging to the biogeographical regions: pontic (0.03 %) and Black Sea (99.97 %). The main classes of
habitats being represented by: marine areas and islands, estuaries, lagoons, sandy beaches, marshes,
peatlands and other artificial lands, the physicochemical and biological particularities of the Black Sea,
confering the status of an unique site.
The site is important during the migration and the winter periods for a number of bird species,
protected at national and international level, during migration hosting more than 20,000 copies of
aquatic birds, being possible candidate as RAMSAR site. The SPA is also designated as an IBA, according
SOR, based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2, C3, C4 and C6.
10. ROSPA0091 - Pădurea Babadag
populations of the following species: Falco vespertinus, Falco cherrug, Coracias garrulus, Hieraaetus
pennatus, Accipiter brevipes, Circaetus gallicus, Circus pygargus, Oenanthe pleschanka, Picus canus,
Milvus migrans and Dendrocopos medius. Also, represents an important area for the migrating birds:
Haliaeetus albicilla, Ficedula parva and Ciconia ciconia, and during the winter for the species: Circus
macrourus and Circus cyaneus. The SPA is also designated as an IBA, according SOR, based on the
following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1, C2 and C6.
11. ROSPA0100 - Stepa Casimcea
biogeographical region. The site’s surface is about 22,202 hectares, comprising altitudes between 33
and 333 meters above sea level, with an average of 216 meters.
populations of the following species: Coracias garrulus, Falco cherrug, Falco vespertinus, Aquila heliaca,
Anthus campestris, Accipiter brevipes, Calandrella brachydactyla, Buteo rufinus, Milvus migrans, Pernis
apivorus, Lanius collurio, Lullula arborea, Oenanthe pleschanka, Lanius minor, Melanocorypha calandra,
Burhinus oedicnemus, Circaetus gallicus, Galerida cristata, Aquila pomarina, Dendrocopos syriacus and
Emberiza hortulana. Also, represents an important area for the migrating birds: Falco vespertinus,
Accipiter brevipes, Hieraaetus pennatus, Falco peregrinus, Circus cyaneus, Aquila pomarina, Ficedula
albicollis, Circus macrourus and Circus pygargus. The SPA is also designated as an IBA, according SOR,
based on the following criteria developed by BirdLife International: C1 and C6.
12. ROSPA0121 - Lacul Brateş
The site is located entirely within the Galaţi County territory (100 %), belonging to the steppic
The site comprises agricultural lands, water bodies, swamps and floodplain forests, the current lake
being only a small part of the old Brateş Lake, which was mostly drained. The site qualifies for the IBA
area owed to the species populations: Anser albifrons – C3, Branta ruficollis – C1, Chlidonias hybridus –
C2, C6, Chlidonias niger – C6, Falco vespertinus – C1, C6, Pelecanus onocrotalus – C2, C6. Also, the site
qualifies under C4 criterion for the concentrations of waterfowls during the migration.
In the following figures are presented the locations of the projects/ types of interventions in relation to
Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta region, for some projects/ types of interventions for which
the vector data (SHP format) were made available, received from the beneficiary or from other parties
directly concerned (specific locations), as well as for those projects/ types of interventions for which the
spatial location was performed based on the digitization using satellite images on Google Earth Pro,
according to the information available in the projects titles (incomplete or approximate locations; for
example „approximate” for the projects like WSS and IWM where the buildable settlements limits were
considered referred in projects titles, respectively „incomplete” for the projects like „Improve fish
habitat”, within the sector „Fisheries and aquaculture”, where are mentioned, in a first phase, only 2
lakes, after which shall be identified a series of other interventions on other lakes whose location is not
specified at this stage).
19 types of interventions / projects belonging to 8 sectors intersect sites of community interest, while
20 types of interventions / projects belonging to 8 sectors intersect special protection areas (Table no.
3-2 and Table no. 3-3). A complete list of the types of interventions / projects that intersect Natura 2000
sites can be found in Annex no. IV.
Table no. 3-2 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SCIs for each sector
No. of types of interventions / projects that intersect SCIs
Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Management
3
DRM Tourism
2
1
Fishery and
Aquaculture
3
Transport
6
WSS and
SWM Health
IWM
2
1
1
Table no. 3-3 Number of types of interventions / projects that intersect SPAs for each sector
No. of types of interventions / projects that intersect SPAs
Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Management
3
DRM Tourism
2
1
Fishery and
Aquaculture
3
Transport
7
WSS and
SWM Health
IWM
2
1
1
A number of 2 sites of community interest and 5 special protection areas overlap with components of
the types of interventions/projects of DDISDS. A complete list of the Natura 2000 sites intersected by
types of interventions / projects of DDISDS can be found in Annex no. V.
Figure no. 3-5 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the
“Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD
area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management
sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-6 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has
disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-7 Location of the project/ type of intervention “Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea
for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-8 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from DRM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region. Aproject detail “Works for protection against floods”, B - project detail “Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency Situations
(IES)”
Figure no. 3-9 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the project/ type of intervention “Implementation of a region-wide program for beautification of
settlements” (Tourism sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-10 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions “Improve fish habitat. Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the
installation of stop locks. Dredge major lakes to restore water depth.” (Fisheries and aquaculture sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the
Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-11 Location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions “Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads,
schools, etc)” (ARD sector) in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-12 Locations of the projects/ types of interventions from Transport sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-13 The location (approximate/ incomplete) of the projects/ types of interventions from WSS and IWM sector in relation with the Natura 2000
network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-14 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from SWM sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 3-15 Location of the projects/ types of interventions from Health sector in relation with the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region
3.2
DATA ABOUT THE PRESENCE, LOCATION, POPULATION AND ECOLOGY OF SPECIES AND/ OR
HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST PRESENT ON THE SURFACE AND IN THE IMMEDIATE
VICINITY OF DDISDS, MENTIONED IN THE STANDARD DATA FORMS OF THE NATURAL
PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST
Relevant data regarding the presence, location, population and ecology of the species and/ or habitats
of community interest, were collected from the scientific literature, being carried out researches on the
history of the studies conducted over time for each taxonomic group in part, from the study region. This
information are presented below, in the following sections, for each analyzed taxonomic group being
presented also maps (Figure no. 3-16 - Figure no. 3-22) concerning the numerical distribution of habitats
and species of community interest protected in SCIs/ SPAs from the Danube Delta Region, extracted
according to the reporting of Romania to the European Union, under Article 12 of the Birds Directive
and Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, regarding the habitats mapping and the inventory of the species
of community interest 24.
3.2.1 Habitats and vegetation
The researches regarding the geographical area of the Danube Delta (including the shedding area of the
Danube River to the Black Sea and the associated marine littoral) started since ancient times by
Herodotus, Eratosthenes, Strabon and Ptolemais, who described the mouths of the Danube and the
northwest shore of the Black Sea. There followed a long period, until the second half of the XIXth
century (when it was raised the question to create a waterway on Danube, with extensions from the
Black Sea to the central Europe), when appeared sporadic and less consistent information (Gâştescu and
Ştiucă, 2008).
Dobrudja was always a special attraction for botanists, and later for phytocoenologists, having a rich and
diversified flora, in terms of component geo elements, but also a diversified vegetation of forests,
xerofile meadows, halophilous, psammophile, helofile and aquatic communities.
Although there is a rich literature regarding the flora species and the vegetation types present in the
Danube Delta, some regions of Dobrudja were less investigated, still being gaps concerning their
characteristic vegetation.
The first records of the Danube Delta flora occurred in ”Prodromul florei Române” by Brândză (1883),
which includes many species of vascular plants, as well as in the first published determinator in
Romanian language, ”Flora descriptivă a Dobrogei” (1891) and then in Grecescu’s monograph (1898),
”Conspectul florei României”. Over the course of approximately 50-60 years since these botanical
studies appeared, for this area sporadic data were published, but important in different works:
Grinţescu G. (1927), Georgescu C.C. (1928, 1940), Pop Em., (1878-1928), Panţu Z. (1902-1935), Popovici
I. (1913), Prodan I. (1914-1939), Petrescu C. (1916), Borza Al. (1931-1963) and Zahariadi C. (1940, 1963).
Also, it is stated that in the first half of the XXth century, an important contribution to the knowledge of
the Danube Delta was brought by Antipa Gr. through his works: Regiunea inundabilă a Dunării. Starea ei
actuală şi mijloace de a o pune în valoare (1910), Delta Dunării (1914) and Valorificarea stufăriilor Deltei
Dunării (1942).
24
http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal
After the 50s of the XXth century, when the studies on flora and vegetation were intensified, several
researchers have contributed to complete the inventory of flora and to the vegetation studies in the
Danube Delta. Among these researchers we mentioned:: Săvulescu Tr. (1952-1976), Beldie Al. (19591979), Burduja C. (1954-1971), Puşcariu V. (1958-1978), Dihoru Gh. (1962-1976), Paşcovschi S. (19621967), Andrei M. (1963-1967), Doniţă N. (1966-1992), Horeanu Cl. (1970-1976), Ştefureac Tr. (19701980), Negrean G. (1976-1980), who filled in with new data to the scientific literature, bringing a
significant contribution in the knowledge of flora and vegetation in the Danube Delta.
Considerable contributions to the studies on flora and vegetation from Danube Delta were brought also
by: Sanda V. (1964-2013), Popescu A. (1976-2013), Ciocârlan V. (1988-2009), Hanganu J. (1992-2002)
and Petrescu M. (1994-2007). Please note that the studies conducted by M. Petrescu were performed in
the Dobrudja Plateau, predominantly in Tulcea County and less in Constanta County, in the surrounding
areas of the Danube, being identified 34 natural sites for which were developed projects for designation
as protected areas (researches on flora and vegetation).
Also, important contributions to Danube Delta characterization, regarding the floristic and
phytocenologic terms, was carried out also by: Lupe (1954), Morariu (1957, 1970), Puşcariu et al. (1958,
1978), Puşcaru-Soroceanu (1959, 1963), Jakucs et al. (1959), Ţucra (1960), Şerbănescu (1962, 1967,
1971), Dămăceanu et al. (1964), Mihai et al. (1964), Rudescu (1965), Zanoschi (1966), Clonaru (1967),
Nyárády (1967), Cristurean (1970), Ţopa (1976), Chiriţă (1977), Munteanu (1977), Viţalariu (1977),
Chihaia (1979), Ivan (1979), Dinu (1987, 1990), Boşcaiu (1989), Roman (1992), Mohan et al. (1993),
Oltean et al. (1994, 2002), Ştefan et al. (1995), Coldea et al. (1997), Sârbu I. (1997, 2003), Oprea (1998,
2005), Rákosy et al. (2000), Făgăraş et al. (2001), Sârbu A. (2003, 2006), Greavu (2006 şi 2007), Filat et al.
(2009) and Petcu (2011, 2012).
In addition to the aforementioned authors contributions, several institutions such as the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve Administration in Tulcea, Danube Delta National Institute for Research and
Development in Tulcea, "Gavrilă Simion" Eco-Museum Research Institute - Tulcea, and the Institute of
Biology - Romanian Academy, have initiated various projects over the years having as main business
field to perform fundamental and applicative research in ecology and environmental protection, in order
to develop DDBR'S management for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development.
In Table no. 3-4 are presented the 38 habitats of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs from the
study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).
2
3
4
5
6
x
x
x
x
x
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0123
x
ROSCI0105
x
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0066
1110 – Bancuri de nisip acoperite permanent de un strat mic de apă
de mare
1130 – Estuare
1140 – Nisipuri şi zone mlăştinoase neacoperite de apă de mare la
reflux
1150* – Lagune costiere
1160 – Melele şi golfuri
1210 – Vegetaţie anuală de-a lungul liniei ţărmului
ROSCI0065
1
Habitats code and name
ROSCI0060
N
o
.
ROSCI0012
Table no. 3-4 The community interest habitats included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of
the SCIs from the study area
7
8
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
1310 – Comunităţi cu Salicornia şi alte specii anuale care
colonizează terenurile umede şi nisipoase
1410 – Pajişti sărăturate de tip mediteranean (Juncetalia maritimi)
1530* – Pajişti şi mlaştini sărăturate panonice şi ponto-sarmatice
2130* – Dune fixate cu vegetaţie herbacee peren (dune gri)
x
2160 – Dune cu Hippophae rhamnoides
x
2190 – Depresiuni umede intradunale
x
x
x
x
x
3160 – Lacuri distrofice şi iazuri
x
6440 – Pajişti aluviale din Cnidion dubii
6510 – Pajişti de altitudine joasă (Alopecurus pratensis, Sanguisorba
officinalis)
7210* – Mlaştini calcaroase cu Cladium mariscus
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0123
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
6120* – Pajişti xerice pe substrat calcaros
6410 – Pajişti cu Molinia pe soluri calcaroase, turboase sau
argiloase (Molinion caeruleae)
6420 – Pajişti mediteraneene umede cu ierburi înalte din MolinioHoloschoenion
6430 – Comunităţi de lizieră cu ierburi înalte higrofile de la nivelul
câmpiilor, până la cel montan şi alpin
x
x
40C0* – Tufărişuri de foioase ponto-sarmatice
62C0* – Stepe ponto-sarmatice
ROSCI0105
x
x
x
3260 – Cursuri de apă din zonele de câmpie, până la cele montane,
cu vegetaţie din Ranunculion fluitantis şi Callitricho-Batrachion
3270 – Râuri cu maluri nămoloase cu vegetaţie de Chenopodion
rubri şi Bidention
ROSCI0067
x
2110 – Dune mobile embrionare (în formare)
3130 – Ape stătătoare oligotrofe până la mezotrofe cu vegetaţie
din Littorelletea uniflorae şi/sau Isoëto-Nanojuncetea
3140 – Ape puternic oligo-mezotrofe cu vegetaţie bentonic de
specii de Chara
3150 – Lacuri eutrofe naturale cu vegetaţie tip Magnopotamion sau
Hydrocharition
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0065
ROSCI0060
ROSCI0012
N
o
.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
91M0 – Păduri balcano-panonice de cer şi gorun
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSCI0105
8310 – Peşteri în care accesul publicului este interzis
3
91I0* – Vegetaţie de silvostepă eurosiberiană cu Quercus spp.
4
3
91X0 – Păduri dobrogene de fag
5
3
91Y0 – Păduri dacice de stejar şi carpen
6
3
92A0 – Zăvoaie cu Salix alba şi Populus alba
7
3 92D0 – Galerii ripariene şi tufărişuri (Nerio-Tamaricetea şi
8 Securinegion tinctoriae)
x – habitats mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
ROSCI0067
x
91F0 – Păduri ripariene mixte cu Quercus robur, Ulmus laevis,
Fraxinus excelsior sau Fraxinus angustifolia, din lungul marilor râuri
(Ulmenion minoris)
ROSCI0066
x
x
ROSCI0065
8230 – Comunităţi pioniere din Sedo-Scleranthion sau din Sedo albiVeronicion dilleni pe stâncării silicioase
91AA – Vegetaţie forestieră ponto-sarmatică cu stejar pufos
ROSCI0060
ROSCI0201
3
3
ROSCI0123
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
ROSCI0012
N
o
.
x
x
x
x
x
Figure no. 3-16 Numerical distribution of habitats of community interest in the Danube Delta Region
(http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/reference_portal)
3.2.2 Plants
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve – marine area, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării –
zona marină
The DDBR territory is characterized by a particularly high diversity concerning the geographical
distribution of the plant species areals, which inhabits the region.
In biogeographical terms, the DDBR territory is located in the Palearctic region, the Mediterranean
subregion, the pontic and steppic biogeographical regions. In phytogeographical terms, Danube Delta
falls within the Danubian-Pontic province, Danube Delta district (Ciocârlan 2009).
Prior to the period when human intervention has played a major role in changing the appearance of the
geomorphological and structural characteristics of the deltaic territory, this space included mostly lakes,
ponds, low hollows, reedbeds expanses, willow riverside coppices, along with the marine sandbanks:
Letea, Caraorman, Sărăturile, Câmpia Bugeacului, Chilia and Stipoc, all these landforms ensuring an
aquatic, paludous, land, river, river-marine and coastal ecosystems complex, characterized by a mosaic
of habitats and an impressive number of plant species for such a reduced space (in comparison with the
entire country's surface).
Since the second half of the last century, extensive interventions occurred in Danube Delta, which can
be grouped into several temporary periods, very distinct in terms of the performed works, in which both
arms of the Danube and the terrestrial areas were modified. Vegetation and flora species have thus
been directly affected, in early 1990 was estimated that about 30 % (approx. 1,000 km 2) of the Danube
Delta surface was removed from the natural regime (Gâştescu et Ştiucă 2008).
The changes on habitats, vegetation and flora from the Danube Delta have generated in time negative
effects, which led to the necessity to protect them, before the first half of the last century, within some
reserves with a special status of protection for elements of flora, vegetation and habitats (especially the
forest ones). Thus, many nature reserves have been established (Letea Forest and Roşca-Buhaiova area,
being the firsts), followed in the 1990 with the appointment of the status of Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve (1990) and RAMSAR site (1991), and since 2007 have been designated the natural protected
areas included in the Natura 2000 ecological network.
The cormophitic flora of the Danube Delta has preoccupied many researchers over the time, so that in
his work „Flora Deltei Dunării” (1994) Ciocârlan mention the existence of over 300 papers on different
groups of plants (species of water, marshes, meadows, woody, important for fisheries, sandy etc.).
Although the literature mainly treated vegetation issues, they provided also lists of species, having as
subjects of interest both spontaneous species and those introduced cultures. With the occasion of these
researches were reported also numerous endemic species for the Danubian-Pontic space. Synthesis
floristic works containing also references about the Danube Delta flora were developed already two
centuries now, starting with D. Brândză – Flora Dobrogei 1898, D. Grecescu – Conspectul florei României
1989, Supliment la conspectul florei României 1909, I. Prodan – Conspectul Florei Dobrogei 1935-1939,
Flora pentru determinarea şi descrierea plantelor care cresc în România 1939, Flora României – T.
Săvulescu (edit.) 1952-1976. Other authors that refers in their works at Danube Delta flora are Kanitz A.
(1879-1881), Pallis M. (1916), Panţu Z. et al. (1935), Borza Al. (1947, 1949), Beldie Al. (1977, 1979), Ivan
D. Et Dihoru G. 1991-1992, Sanda et Popescu 1992, Roman N. 1992, Hanganu et al. 1994 (has described
and mapped Danube Delta flora) etc.
A special work belongs to the authors Gh. Dihoru and G. Negrean – Flora of the Danube Delta 1976, in
which it is presented an enumeration of the vascular species, based on the existing literature at that
time (being mentioned 1,100 plant species, both native and cultivated, from Razim-Sinoie Complex,
Babadag Lake, to Grindul Chituc, Tulcea hills and the neighboring localities. In the paper of the authors
Şeliag-Sosonco and Dubîna, regarding the flora and vegetation from the secondary delta of Chilia, are
mentioned 563 species of cormophytae.
In his paper since 1994, Ciocârlan mention 955 species of spontaneous cormophytae, number about
which stated that „may increase through the introducing of other species by man, (...), or may decrease
by profound modifications on biotopes”, what actually happened during the years before or after the
publication of this work. Including in the mentioned paper, at the closure of the manuscript drafting, the
author adds other 8 taxa to the list of the 955. In the paper, 10 new taxa for Romania's flora are located
on the map (inclusive Delta's flora) and 7 new taxa for Delta's flora (many of species being
allochthonous), and for about 150 species taken from ancient literature and not found in the field, argue
their absence due to changes on the habitats, especially in what regards the wet meadows.
Owing to the natural or anthropogenic driven evolutions, the deltaic area is in a constant formation and
modification, while the interest for the Danube Delta flora is continuously growing – studies conducted
in this regard were performed by National Institute for Research and Development in Environmental
Protection and Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, the results being
included in „Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and
management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” 2010-2011 – the study
provides a comprehensive historic regarding the research developed in Danube Delta in the period
1995-2010 (as well as lists concerning species and habitats protected in DDBR area). Along with the
Delta's natural changes, evolves also its flora, in recent years continue the reporting of many new
species, for this space, some of them being even new for the country's flora.
Recent researches on the Romania's flora, extensive papers of synthesis, have conducted also the
authors Ciocârlan V. 2000, 2009 (Flora ilustrată a României), Dihoru et Negrean 2009 (Cartea Roşie a
Plantelor Vasculare din România), Sârbu et al 2013 (Plante vasculare din România), in the second paper
were included the rare plants of the national flora (548 taxa), which include also species from Danube
Delta and the northern area of Dobrudja (respectively 6 of the species mentioned in the Standard Data
Forms of the sites of community interest targeted by DDISDS – Aldrovanda veiculosa, Campanula
romanica, Centaurea jankae, C. pontica, Moehringia jankae, Potentilla emilii-popii), being provided very
important data regarding the distribution of the presented taxa at national level. Studies and surveys
conducted after 2000 (articles and summaries), dedicated to flora (spontaneous, but also allochthonous)
and the vegetation of the Danube Delta, entirely or partially, have published also Sârbu et al. 2001, Strat
2005, 2012, Covaliov et al. 2010, Oprea et al. 2011, Făgăraş 2013, 2014, Voichiţa et al. 2014.
In the study „Ecological gradients in the Danube Delta Lakes: present state and man-induced changes”–
Oosterberg W. et al. 2000, the authors noted that following the records from the Danube Delta, carried
out between 1991-1997, Delta's flora counted 1,615 species, respectively one third of the total number
of species known in Romania at that time.
In 2002, have been published the results of a cross-border collaboration between three parties involved,
respectively Romania, Ukraine and Germany, through which was continued the research on terrestrial
and aquatic ecosystems of the Delta. The researches were conducted on three fronts – the river area,
the marine area and the transition zone between these two, being offered new data regarding the
composition, description and the distribution of the vegetation types from Danube Delta, on the
Romanian and Ukrainian territories. Following the researches and analyzes performed, the authors have
classified and mapped the vegetation types identified (coastal vegetation, halophilous vegetation, sandy
steppe vegetation, river banks vegetation, marshy, paludous and aquatic vegetation, sand dunes
forestry vegetation, forests vegetation and meadow scrublands, psammophilous vegetation (sand
dunes), aquatic, submerged and emerged vegetation). The number of flora species (in this case
representing an aggregate of the data from the Romanian part and the Ukrainian part) is of 1,460 taxa
(vascular plants), the subject of rare plants from the Danube Delta not being treated in particular, but
rather the groups of interest industrial plants (melliferous, alimentary, technical and fodder plant) or
decorative plants (here are mentioned also several species of orchids, species considered rare in
Romania's flora), as well as toxic or phyto alimentary plants. At the end of the paper are presented „Red
List of vascular plants from Danube Delta”, list made based on Ciocârlan's researches (1994, 2000), for
the Romanian area, and Dubyna (1990, 1999) and Mosyakin (1999), for the Ukrainian area, thereby
resulting a total of 518 taxa, representing 35.5% of the total deltaic flora (1,460 species) – only 3 of the
taxa targeted by DDISDS (only the taxa within the limits OF DDBR: Aldrovanda vesiculosa, Centaurea
jankae, Centaurea pontica) are listed and valued in terms of the sozological category. The threat factors
that contributed and still produce effects on the natural areas are underlined (naturale habitats) – the
construction of the upstream dams, the development of the agricultural polders and fishponds,
increasing of the water eutrophication, extension and excavation of the navigation channels, are causes
of decline and extinction of the rare species. Centaurea pontica (taxon specific to psammophile flora,
endemic to the deltaic area) and Aldrovanda vesiculosa (cosmopolitan taxon), are mentioned as rare
and endangered species.
In the paper „Reasesement of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and
management proposal of the core areas in Danube Biosphere Reserve” (2010), the specialists team,
botanists, has conducted researches on the vegetation and fauna of the Danube Delta, thus are listed 7
plant species of conservation interest of which only 4 are concerned by the implementation of DDISDS,
being established an evolutive trend for them, during the 1990-2008 period, respectively Marsilea
quadrifolia was slightly increasing, Echium russicum, Centaurea jankae, C. pontica, Aldrovanda
vesiculosa are shown stable populations. For 2008-2010 period, M. quadrifolia, C. jankae, C. pontica and
Aldrovanda vesiculosa are mentioned as present, while Echium russicum is identified as a rare species.
The floristic inventory of the delta area is in a permanent upgrade through the deployment of the
scientific research developed by the Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, in
collaboration with many researchers in the field of botany. However, we notice the differences between
the reporting of the total number of the Danube Delta species – in 2008 was indicated a number of
1,016 floristic species (Gâştescu et Ştiucă 2008), in 2011 Doroftei et al. mentioned 1,215 taxons (native
and allochthonous), while in the DDBR Management Plan are mentioned 1,466 taxons (native and
allochthonous). Thus, we conclude that the number of flora species in the Danube Delta area grows on
short periods of time, due to rapid and highly diverse dynamic of the ecosystems from Danube Delta, as
well as of the permanent anthropogenic impact.
Măcinului Mountains National Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului, ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin; ROSCI0201
Podişul Nord Dobrogean, ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului, ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe.
The northern Dobrudja Plateau includes predominantly peaks and valleys, differently oriented following
the orogenesis, in Măcinului Mountains and Niculiţel Plateau the directions being NW-SE, while in Tulcei
Hills and Babadag Plateau these being less arranged. From north to south-east (350-400 m in the west)
the altitudes decrease gradually until the southeastern limit (15-20 m towards Razelm Lake). Thus, in
this highly varied space, both morphostructural and climate, can be found peaks and plateaus with an
"alpine" appearance, some of them affected by erosion, alternating with lowland areas, thus providing a
favorable development over time of a very diverse cover vegetation comprising steppe, silvosteppe and
woodland, sometimes with extra-zonal vegetation.
The flora of this geographical area, included entirely within the steppic bioregion, comprises submediterranean, mediterranean-balkans and eastern, tauric-caucasian, european-medium elements
(Popovici et colab. 1984). In the northern area are characteristics: common oak, linden and hornbeam,
that constitute a Balkan-type mesophilic floor (Doniţă 1969), in the central area (Casimcea Plateau)
appear the linden and gray oak alongside with the ash and the hornbeam, forming dense forests
disposed in a second floor of vegetation, xerotem with mediterranean influences. The silvosteppe and
steppe comprising most of the Dobrudja Plateau – the silvosteppe occupies higher ridges and interfluvial
bridges (100 – 150 m) from the northern half of Dobrudja (Babadag Plateau, Tulcei Hills, south of
Niculiţel Plateau and Casimcea Plateau), being formed of downy oak, gray oak and maple Tartarians. The
steppe vegetation is currently arranged on small areas, characterized by vegetal associations with
twitch, stipa, and wormwood.
The Dobrudja vegetation, generally, is very diverse and includes 252 coenotaxons, representing 36.8 %
of the total identified in Romania (Petrescu 2007), many of them being also found in the area of interest
for DDISDS (North and Central Dobrudja). It should be noted also that many of these coenotaxons are
specific (endemic) for Dobrudja.
As Danube Delta, of interest for botanists was also Dobrudja, representing a specific territory in terms of
the mosaic of the habitat types and the flora richness. The researches on Dobrudja largely overlap, as
period of development, with those concerning the deltaic flora. Among the researchers that have paid
attention to this territory, very diverse and rich in botanical species (many of which are endemic or at
the limit of the complex), we mentioned: D. Brândză – Flora Dobrogei 1898, D. Grecescu – Conspectul
florei României 1989, Supliment la conspectul florei României 1909, I. Prodan – Conspectul Florei
Dobrogei 1935-1939, Flora pentru determinarea şi descrierea plantelor care cresc în România 1939, T.
Săvulescu (edit.) 1952-1976 – Flora României, Puşcaru-Soroceanu 1966, Sârbu et al. 2001, Petrescu
2004, 2007, Petrescu et al. 2011, Oprea et al 2011, Negrean 2011 etc.
The latest information on the North Dobrudja area are contained in the Management Plan of Măcinului
Mountains National Park, stating that currently the Măcin Mountains flora comprises over 1,700 plant
species, representing approximately 50 % of Romania's flora, of which 72 are considered rare taxa for
our country's flora, and 27 species are endemic to this region.
In Table no. 3-5 are presented the 11 plant species of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs from
the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1428 – Marsilea quadrifolia
1516 – Aldrovanda vesiculosa
1939 – Agrimonia pilosa
2079 – Moehringia jankae
2125 – Potentilla emilii-popii
2236 – Campanula romanica
2253 – Centaurea jankae
x
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0123
ROSCI0105
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0065
Plant species code and name
ROSCI0060
No.
ROSCI0012
Table no. 3-5 The community interest plant species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
of the SCIs from the study area
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0105
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0065
ROSCI0123
8
2255 – Centaurea pontica
9
2327 – Himantoglossum caprinum
10 4067 – Echium russicum
11 4097 – Iris aphylla ssp. hungarica
x – species mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
ROSCI0060
Plant species code and name
ROSCI0012
No.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Figure no. 3-17 Numerical distribution of community interest plant species in the Danube Delta Region
3.2.3 Invertebrates
The oldest data on Danube Delta's entomofauna refers to several species of butterflies collected by A. L.
Montandon at Sf. Gheorghe, subsequently published by Aristide Caradja in 1902, or to those collected
by Frantz Salay at Sulina and published also by Aristide Caradja in 1905. In the following years (1904 and
1905) Edmund Fleck indicates some coleopterans from Sulina, after which A. L. Montandon published in
1905 six species of Myrmeleonide, and in 1906-1908 also some coleopteran collected at Sulina and
Letea. In 1912, Ion Borcea also publishes some Hymenoptera from the Danube Delta (S. Levente, 2006).
In the following period A. Muller published some data on Hymenoptera and Diptera (1929-1930)
following that only in 1952 (after malaria eradication) to be published new works related to Coleoptera:
S. Panin, M.A. Ieniştea, N. Săvulescu, Odonate: Fr. Por, Himenoptere: V. Iuga, X Scolobia-Palade (S.
Levente, 2006).
A particularly important contribution to the entomofauna study of Danube Delta had the entomology
department's team of the „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, led by A. Popescu-Gorj.
They conducted thorough researches on entomofauna of different river-marine sand banks from
Danube Delta, during the period 1962-1966, focusing attention on a total of 13 orders: Odonata,
Montodea, Orthoptera, Coleoptera, Raphidioptera, Neuroptera, Plannipennia, Heteroptera, Homoptera,
Hymenoptera, Trichoptera, Lepidoptera and Diptera (S. Levente, 2006).
Along with the team of „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, it is noted also Alexandru
Ioan Cuza University of Iasi who undertook studies especially on ichneumonidae fauna (1968-1985).
These studies were carried out by M.I. Constantineanu, R. Constantineanu, D.I. Constantineanu and I.
Andriescu (S. Levente, 2006).
The knowledge of Danube Delta's entomofauna is also possible by the results of the works of C.V.
Mândru, Gh. Mustaţă, I Andriescu, V. Ciochia, C. Pisică, M. Varvara, I. Moglan, K. Fabritius, J. Papp, I.
Weiss, E. Schneider, G. Uhl, O. Klaus (S. Levente, 2006).
After 1991, Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development in Tulcea has been affirmed
by the contributions of N. Vasiliu, M. Huţu, O. Ivan, A. Călugăr and L. Fabian. Thus, over the period 19921995 were published a series of papers regarding the edaphic mites from DDBR area. Through the effort
Danube Delta NIRD have been identified, in 2003, 143 species of edaphic mites including seven species
and a subspecies new to science (S. Levente, 2006).
The study on insects from Danube Delta has continued also in recent years, thus in 2013, Deltaica
periodical No. 2 was intended to the Orthoptera, being presented 79 species (Lupu, 2013). In the same
year, G. Lupu publishes in the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta, a paper that deals with the
distribution and habitat preferences of Orthoptera species from the Danube Delta (Lupu, 2013). Also in
2013, E. Bulankova, P. Beracko and T. Derka have reported the presence of species Gomphus flavipes
and Palingenia longicauda.
In Table no. 3-6 are presented the 19 invertebrate species of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs
from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0123
ROSCI0105
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0065
Invertebrate species code and name
ROSCI0060
No.
ROSCI0012
Table no. 3-6 The community interest invertebrate species included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data
Forms of the SCIs from the study area
ROSCI0123
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0105
1
1037 – Ophiogomphus cecilia
2
1052 – Euphydryas maturna
3
1060 – Lycaena dispar
4
1078 – Callimorpha quadripunctaria
5
1082 – Graphoderus bilineatus
6
1083 – Lucanus cervus
7
1084 – Osmoderma eremita
8
1088 – Cerambyx cerdo
9
1089 – Morimus funereus
10 4011 – Bolbelasmus unicornis
11 4027 – Arytrura musculus
12 4028 – Catopta thrips
13 4030 – Colias myrmidone
14 4036 – Leptidea morsei
15 4045 – Coenagrion ornatum
16 4053 – Paracaloptenus caloptenoides
17 4054 – Pholidoptera transsylvanica
18 4056 – Anisus vorticulus
19 4064 – Theodoxus transversalis
ROSCI0065
ROSCI0060
Invertebrate species code and name
ROSCI0012
No.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Figure no. 3-18 Numerical distribution of community interest invertebrate species in the Danube Delta Region
3.2.4 Fish
Fish is one of the best represented components in terms of fauna in the DDBR territory. Both
cartilaginous-bony fish species, represented by the order Acipenseriformes (sturgeon) and species with
completely ossified skeleton can be encountered here.
About 135 of the 300 fish species in Europe were recorded in DDBR waters, respectively 188 species in
Romania, which basically fall into two categories, in terms of salinity, stenohaline species (that support
limited thresholds of water salinity) and euryhaline species (which support higher variations of water
salinity): 44 exclusively freshwater species, 58 exclusively marine species and 31 euryhaline species,
found both in freshwater and in the brackish waters or even in the Black Sea25.
Ichtyofauna of lake complexes in the Danube Delta was studied over time, being published both articles
aimed at describing the current state of lakes ichtyofauna from the entire Danube Delta and articles
aimed at a single lake complex status. Mainly, the methods used were: electrofishing and gillnet fishing.
The main authors who have studied aspects of fish communities in the Danube Delta lakes were Nastase
Aurel and Năvodaru Ion, for the lake complexes: Somova-Parcheş, Şontea-Furtuna, Gorgova-Uzlina,
Merhei-Matiţa, Roşu-Puiu and Gârla Pasărea.
According to the study „Study of ichthyodiversity from Gorgova – Uzlina lake-complex”, published in
2006, which describes ichtyofauna communities from Gorgova - Uzlina complex in 2004, among the
analyzed fish species 6 species of fish of community importance were identified: Alosa caspia nordmanni
Antipa 1906, Aspius aspius L.1758, Cobitis spp. L.1758, Misgurnus fossilis L.1758, Rhodeus amarus Bloch
1782 and Umbra krameri Walbaum 1792.
Another study, „Fish fauna from Gârla Pasărea, a heavy modified former floodplain watercourse”,
published in 2008, conducted in 2007 in a former floodplain area, Gârla Pasărea, transformed and
dammed to become an agricultural polder (Vedea River being redirected to discharge directly into the
Danube River), being divided into several sections connected by underground tubes, reveals the
existence of the following 2 fish species of community interest: Aspius aspius and Misgurnus fossilis.
According to the article „Ichthyofauna of Danube delta lakes” published in 2008, in the period from 2003
to 2005, using two complementary methods of sampling, namely electric fishing and gillnets fishing sets,
34 distinct fish species were identified in the Danube Delta lakes (of which about half are commercial
species): 20 species in the lake-complex Somova-Parcheş - 2003 (avandelta - flooded area of the delta),
24 species Şontea-Furtuna – 2004, 24 species in Matiţa-Merhei - 2004, 27 species in Gorgova-Uzlina 2005 (all 3 are located at the mouth of the river in the sea) and 29 species in the Roşu-Puiu complex 2005 (marine delta). The situation concerning species from the mentioned lake-complexes was analyzed
based on species richness, relative abundance, relative biomass, ecological indices and biodiversity
index, the main purpose being to compare ichthyofauna of lakes in the context of major human
interventions. The main results on the fish species of community interest that were found in the
mentioned lake complexes are:
Species richness: Misgurnus fossilis species was not encountered in Matiţa-Merhei and RoşuPuiu complexes; Umbra krameri species was not encountered in Somova-Parcheş and MatiţaMerhei complexes; Alosa tanaica species was encountered in all investigated lake complexes,
except for Şontea-Furtuna; and Aspius aspius, Cobitis spp and Rhodeus amarus were
encountered in all 5 lake complexes;
25
Delta Dunării Rezervaţie a Biosferei, 2008, Petre Gâştescu, Romulus Ştiucă, Editura CD Press
Relative biomass (expressed in CPUE - Catch per Unit Effort: g/ h for electrofishing and g/ 100 m
for gillnet fishing): Alosa tanaica: 100 – 1000 g/ 100 m; Aspius aspius: 10 - 100 g/ h, and 100 –
1000 g/ 100 m; Cobitis spp: approx. 10 g/ h and 1 - 10 g/ 100 m; Misgurnus fossilis: 10 - 100 g/ h;
Rhodeus amarus: 10 - 100 g/ h and 10– 100 g/ 100 m; Umbra krameri: approx. 1 g/ h; Umbra
krameri and Cobitis spp species are on the last ranks;
Ecological indices (frequency, abundance and ecological significance):
No.
Species
1
Electric
Gillnets
C class
D class
W class
C class
D class
W class
A. tanaica
-
-
-
C3
D1
W2
2
A. aspius
C1
D1
W1
C3
D1
W2
3
Cobitis spp.
C2
D1
W2
C2
D1
W1
4
M. fossilis
C3
D2
W3
C1
D1
W1
5
R. amarus
C4
D4
W4
C3
D4
W3
6
U. krameri
C2
D1
W1
-
-
-
Where,
C – constance/ frequency (%)
Euconstante: 75,1 – 100 -> C4;
Constancy: 50,1 – 75 -> C3;
Accessory: 25,1 – 50 -> C2;
Accidental: 1 – 25 -> C1.
D – dominance/ abundance (%)
Eudominante: > 10,1 -> D5;
Dominant: 5,1 – 10 -> D4;
Subdominant: 2,5 - 5-> D3;
Recedent: 1,2 – 2 -> D2;
Subrecedent: < 1,1 -> D1.
W - ecological significance (%)
Leading: > 20-> W6;
Characteristic: 10 – 20 -> W5;
Accompanying: 5 – 10 -> W4;
Associated: 1 – 5 -> W3;
Accessory: 0,1 – 1 -> W2;
Accidental: < 0,1-> W1.
Biodiversity index: per total, for the entire Danube Delta region, indicate a stable ecosystem or
a stable environment, due to values that are closer to 1 and more distant to 0.
For all 5 studied lake complexes from the Danube Delta it was observed that the number of fish species
increases from the upstream area of the Danube Delta, the predeltaic area (Somova-Parcheş lake
complex) to the maritime area (Roşu-Puiu lake complex), the area of where the Danube discharges into
the Black Sea.
Another article also aimed at the ichtyofauna situation for the same 5 lake complexes, called „What fish
and how many there are in Danube Delta?”, published in 2011, covering the 2006-2008 period, reveals
in the Danube Delta lakes using the same two methods, 40 fish species, of which 36 species were
captured using the electric fishing method and 31 through gillnets fishing method. The main results on
the fish species of community interest that were found in the mentioned lake complexes, for the 2006 2008 period, are:

Species richness: Species of community interest Alosa tanaica, Aspius aspius, Cobitis taenia
danubialis, Misgurnus fossilis, Rhodeus amarus and Umbra krameri, were encountered through
both sampling methods, lesser through the electrofishing method in the case of Alosa tanaica
species and through gillnets fishing in the case of Umbra krameri species;
Relative biomass (expressed in CPUE - Catch per Unit Effort: individual and/ or biomass per 1
electrofishing hour, and individuals and biomass per 100 m2 net per night for gillnets fishing):
Umbra krameri species is one of the species with a very low biomass;
Ecological indices: the frequency of appearance for the species Alosa tanaica: 19,48 % - rare
species, Aspius asapius: 20,22 % - rare species, Cobitis taenia danubialis: 25,84 % - rare species,
Misgurnus fossilis: 11,61 % - rare species, R. amarus: 66,67 % - frequent species and Umbra
krameri: 0,37 % - very rare species; species abundance: R. amarus is amongst the small and
medium size fish species with a very high abundance (third of the 40 identified species), being
followed by Alosa tanaica (15 out of 40), Cobitis taenia danubialis (16 out of 40), Misgurnus
fossilis (18 out of 40), Aspius asapius (20 din 40) and Umbra krameri (32 out of 40).
Overall, this second study shows the fact that eurytopic and opportunist fish species are dominant in the
Danube Delta lakes, favored by eutrophication.
In this second study, in addition to describing the current state of the ichtyofauna from the lakes in the
entire Danube Delta reflected by the results of the scientific sampling of ichtyofauna, an analysis of the
statistics on catches was also carried out, in order to compare the obtained results. Long data series of
statistics on commercial catches in the Danube Delta reflects two main trends in the evolution of the
stocks of freshwater fish: first, a steady decline in catches and, secondly, changes in the structure of the
fish species, being dominated by Gibel carp exotic species (since 1970). At the same time, in addition to
decline of freshwater species, migratory sturgeon catches in the Danube Delta arms were almost
exhausted, while the shad (Alosa immaculata) catches fell slightly. Commercial fisheries catches show a
completely different picture of the delta ichtyofauna compared to the results of the ichtyofauna
scientific sampling. This totally different structure of the ichtyofauna is caused by fishing targeted on
large species and also due to their high market value, and especially due to failures to report from the
black market. Fisheries statistics on catches from 1920 to 2010 show a continuous downward trend of
ichthyofauna, the composition of ichtyofauna being balanced until 1972, and after 1972 to 2010 it
shows the dominance of the carp, followed by far by the roach category (roach + rudd) and the bream
category (bream + white bream).
Both analyzes, the results from the ichtyofauna scientific sampling - showing the recent status of
ichtyofauna, and the analysis based on catch statistics - showing the evolution of the trend in catch size
and changes in species composition influenced by environmental factors pressures, are valuable tools in
the sustainable management of fish resources and to promote conservation of fish diversity in the
Danube Delta.
Two other articles, „Fish community studies from riverine Danube Delta (Romania) area in 2007: Sontea Furtuna and Gorgova - Uzlina lake-complexes”, published in 2009, and „New data concerning fish fauna
from lakes of the fluvial Danube Delta (Gorgova-Uzlina and Sontea-Furtuna lakecomplexes, Romania) in
2010”, published in 2012, also made by the authors Năvodaru Ion, Nastase Aurel and Irina Cernisencu,
and Nastase Aurel in the case of the second article, study the structure of fish communities in GorgovaUzlina and Şontea-Furtuna lake complexes, that are part of the river delta. The following fish species of
community interest were also encountered in the two aforementioned complex: Alosa tanaica, Aspius
aspius, Cobitis sp (only in 2010), Misgurnus fossilis, Rhodeus amarus and Umbra krameri.
Among other important articles on the ichtyofauna research on lake complexes of the Danube Delta, we
mention: „Ihtiofauna lagunei Sinoie” – 1993, „Studiu comparativ privind exploatarea populaţiilor de
caras (Carassius auratus gibelio) din lacurile Razim şi Puiu – Roşu” - 1994 and „Data on abiotic (nutrients)
and biotic (phytoplankton) quality elements in Fortuna ecologically reconstructed area (Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve - Romania)” – 2013.
A number of other relevant articles on the presence and population trends of fish species of
community interest, in the Danube Delta region, are presented below.
V. Oţel deals in the article „Prezenţa speciei Gymnocephalus baloni Holcik et Hensel 1974 (Pisces:
Percidae) în Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării”, published in 1998, with the presence of species
Gymnocephalus baloni in DDBR balloon between 1991 and 1998. According to the author,
Gymnocephalus baloni species was recorded in most of the cases in the Danube fairway and very rarely
in stagnogley environment (mouth of deep channels – e.g. Tulcea shipyard channel). In this period there
were captured 113 individuals of the Gymnocephalus baloni species. This species is endemic to the
Danube basin, having the smallest area in its genus, being frequent and abundant all along the Danube
in the DDBR territory. Habitat preferences overlap with those of Gymnocephalus schraetser species, to
which is much larger. According to the author, in the period between 1991 and 1998, the species was
not threatened on DDBR territory.
According to „Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and
management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve”, published in November
2010, 17 fish species of conservation interest were recorded in DDBR. The article presents the
population trend in DDBR in the period 1990 – 2008, for the 17 species. Among the species with only
one record or very few records in DDBR during that period, are:
Gobio kessleri kessleri/ antipai – the only record is based on the capturing of an individual on the
Sulina Channel; in the past, antipai subspecies was recorded in all three branches of the
Danube;
Alosa tanaica – in DDBR the species is relatively common in the marine area. In some years,
during migration, species occur in large numbers in the Razim-Sinoe Complex, Danube arms and
several lakes. Considerable population fluctuations are registered during certain years and
seasons. It is a commercial species. Even if several records of the species are present in the area,
there are no real quantitative assessments on the species distribution in DDBR.
For these species, population trend evolution during 1990 - 2008 could not be assessed due to
insufficient data.
For one species, trend during 1990-2008, was evaluated as fluctuating:
Alosa immaculata - in RBDD this species is present in all marine areas, and during the breeding
period adults migrate upstream along the main arms of the Danube and, more rarely, isolated
individuals migrate to Razim-Sinoe Complex. It is an important commercial species. The
population of this species presents great natural fluctuations.
For one species, trend during 1990-2008, was evaluated as decreasing:
Umbra krameri – due to the high occurrence of algal blooming process in the second half of the
'80s, favorable habitats for this species were deteriorated. As a consequence of this
phenomenon, the population of this species of fish has decreased in DDBR. The decline of this
species was also recorded in the 90s.
The population of Plecus cultratus in RBDD registered an increasing trend during 1990-2008.
The trend on the populations of 10 other species of conservation interest in DDBR was assessed as
stable, including species: Aspius aspiu, Gobio albipinnatus, Rhodeus amarus, Cobitis taenia, Sabanejewia
aurata, Misgurnus fossilis, Gymnocephalus baloni, Gymnocephalus schraetzer, Zingel streber and Zingel
zingel.
Also, this article presents a table for the 17 fish species of conservation interest from the DDBR, which
shows the current environmental status of these species in DDBR. It also presents proposals for longterm monitoring protocols for fish species of European conservation interest, whose presence was
reconfirmed since 1990 to present in the DDBR.
„The spatial and temporal distribution of the shads in Black Sea - marine zone of Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve”, published in 2014 by Năvodaru Ion and Maximov Valodea analyzes shad species in the
maritime area of the Danube Delta. The analysis was conducted in 2012 and presents the appearance
and distribution of species of shad in the Black Sea, Natura 2000 site ROSCI0066 Danube Delta – zona
marină (10 sectors were chosen to investigate shad species: Vadu, Chituc, Periboina, Portiţa, Periteasca,
Perişor, Zaton, Sahalin, Sf. Gheorghe and Sulina) using two methods: fixed gill nets during the night and
daytime trawlers. The main results of the study are: only two species of shad were found, namely A.
immaculata and A. tanaica that are present in ROSCI0066 throughout the year; spatial distribution
increases from southwest to northeast and from great depth - 20 m isobath - towards shore, with a
maximum aggregation near the mouth of the Danube River; the presence of shads decreases from
spring to autumn. In the last 50 years, A. maeotica, who lives in the Azov Sea and occasionally reaches
the Romanian coast, was cited as present in the Romanian marine waters. According to the authors,
conservation status of the shads seems appropriate, but under the pressures of fishing, habitat loss and
degradation. Sustainable fishing, monitoring and appropriate research are recommended for the
conservation of shad of the Danube - Black Sea complex.
Among other important items on shad we mention: „The changes in the character of reproduction of the
Danube hering (Alosa pontica pontica Eichwald) as a result of anthropogen deformation of its ecology” –
1994 and „Comportamentul migraţiei scrumbiei de Dunăre (Alosa pontica pontica Eichwald), pe sectorul
de Dunăre Mm 52 – Mm 50” – 1995.
Numerous articles published both in Romanian and in English, study the sturgeon species in the Danube
Delta region:
„Evoluţia elementelor critice pentru menţinerea sturionilor în Dunărea inferioară”, 1994;
„Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în Dunăre (I) Date recente privind hrana sturionilor
în zona Gurilor Dunării”, 1995;
„Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în Dunăre (II) Malformaţii ale înotătoarelor la
exemplarele cantonate în faţa Gurilor Dunării”, 1995;
„Distribution and genetic diversity of sturgeons feeding in the marine area of the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve”, 2013;
„Heavy metal bio-accumulation in tissues of sturgeon species of the Lower Danube River,
Romania”, 2013;
„Management applications of genetic structure of anadromous sturgeon populations in the
Lower Danube River (LDR), Romania”, 2013.
A number of relevant data on dynamics and trend of fish catches in the Danube Delta region, are
presented in the following articles:
„Facts and remarks on the Danube Delta” study, written by Marian-Traian Gomoiu and
published in 1996, provides basic information on the ecological status of the Danube Delta,
review of the general characteristics of this unique biome, changes in the deltaic ecosystem and
their causes, as well as current efforts for a better understanding and management of the DDBR.
According to the author, in terms of biological resources represented by the fish in the Danube
Delta (annual fluctuations and dynamic trends) in the 1960-1990 period, dynamics and trend of
fish catches declined greatly; less valuable species (carp, bream, perch and other species)
increased from 4,000 tonnes in 1960 to 6,000 tons in 1990; sturgeon species have declined from
approx. 250 tonnes in 1960 to 0 in 1990;
Status assessment, development and diversification of fishing-dependent communities in the
Danube Delta were analyzed in a study called „Assessment of the status, development and
diversification of fisheries-dependent communities- Danube Delta case study report, Romania”,
published in 2006. According to the article, Danube Delta fish fauna has about 136 species, most
of them being freshwater and migratory species. The total volume of catches of shad is 4 times
higher than the MSY - "Maximum Sustainable Yield". For species of community interest like
Aspius aspius and Pelecus cultratus, the state of fish stocks is as follows: MSY according to
DDBRA - 4.8 tonnes and 0.4 tonnes; stock condition in relation to MSY - sustainable; the main
management regulations affecting the stock - fishing ban during the April 5-June 3; mesh sizing
restrictions; Natura 2000 protected species;
The article „Conservation of fish stocks in the Danube Delta, Romania: Present status,
constraints, and recommendation”, published in 2009 in the Italian Journal of Zoology by Ion
Năvodaru and Mircea Staraş, analyzes the state of fish stocks, the main constraints and
recommendations on their preservation in the Danube Delta, in the year 1998. The introduction
of "Total allowable Catch" (TAC) was the first adopted strategy for sustainable use of fishery
resources. However, the poor quality of catch data, lack of data on fishing effort and failure in
fulfilling the model assumptions in estimating the "Maximum Sustainable Yield" are the main
constraints to achieve this goal. Limiting fishing to 1,000 individual fishing licenses should be a
practical regulation for the conservation of fish stocks.
Another study dealing with the status of fish stocks in the Danube Delta is Propuneri de
exploatare a resurselor pescăreşti din RBDD în anul 2010” conducted by DDBRA and containing
recommendations on the sustainable exploitation of fish species. This article presents the
dynamics in fish catches (tonnes) in DDBR from 1996 to 2008. In the article there are proposals
on sustainable catches of commercial fisheries resources DDBR, for 2010, among which are
found species of community interest: Pelecus cultratus, Aspius aspius, Alosa tanaica and Alosa
imaculata.
Other important articles on the fish species of economic interest, the condition and exploitation of fish
stocks in DDBR or on fisheries in the area are: „Cercetări privind prolificitatea unor specii de peşti de
interes economic din Delta Dunării” – 1993„ Aprecieri privind starea şi exploatarea unor stocuri de peşte
din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării” – 1994 and „Evoluţia, cercetarea şi administrarea pescăriilor din
Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării” – 1995.
Cultural changes arising from changes in fishing practices as a consequence of environmental
protection and tourism, were studied in a doctoral thesis „Cultural change in a fishing village in the
Danube Delta: the consequences of environmental protection and tourism”, by Oana Ivan. The main
purpose of the study was to analyze and explain local communities’ responses on fishing prohibition and
other environmental restrictions that have been imposed in the last decade, focusing mainly on torusim
development and implied consequences on social and cultural life of Sf. Gheorghe, a fishing village
within DDBR. This study revealed that western institutions and "green" speeches play an extremely
important role in shaping a culture, while addressing critical issues that must be addressed effectively by
DDBRA, in order to prevent future cultural and environmental disruptions.
A series of articles study the effects of climate change on protected habitats, including fish species in
the Danube Delta. Among them we mention: „Schimbări în structura ihtiofaunei ca efect al modificării
caracteristicilor biotopului” - 1995, „Draft River Basin Management Plans - Adapting the Plans to Climate
Change Final Report” – 2008; „Approaches to habitat disturbances in the Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve” – 2011; „Climate change adapted management plan for Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” –
2013 and „Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan for Danube Delta Region – România –
Ukraine – Moldova” – 2014.
There were also carried out a series of studies that analyze issues related to fish species diseases:
„Rezultatele investigaţiilor ihtiopatologice din teritoriul Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării în anul 1992”
– 1993, „Pseudomonas aeruginosa, agent patogen la Acipenser stellatus” – 1993, and „Cercetări privind
parazitofauna unor specii de peşti exploataţi comercial din complexul de lacuri Roşu - Puiu” – 1995.
According to Natura 2000 factsheets (updated on February 17, 2015), in the study area, the Danube
Delta Region (DDBR and surrounding areas), fish species of community interest are found in 4 of the 8
Sites of Community Importance: ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, ROSCI0066 Delta
Dunării – zona marină and in ROSCI0105 Lunca Joasă a Prutului.
Table no. 3-7 presents the 15 fish species of community interest protected in the 8 SCIs in the study
area, according to the Natura 2000 factsheets (updated on February 17, 2015).
1
1124 – Gobio albipinnatus
2
1130 – Aspius aspius
3
1134 – Rhodeus sericeus amarus
4
1145 – Misgurnus fossilis
5
1146 – Sabanejewia aurata
6
1149 – Cobitis taenia
7
1157 – Gymnocephalus schraetzer
8
1159 – Zingel zingel
9
1160 – Zingel streber
10
2011 – Umbra krameri
11
2511 – Gobio kessleri
12
2522 – Pelecus cultratus
13
2555 – Gymnocephalus baloni
14
4125 – Alosa immaculata
15
4127 – Alosa tanaica
x – species mentioned in Natura 2000 factsheets
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0123
ROSCI0105
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0065
Code and fish species name
ROSCI0060
No.
ROSCI0012
Table no. 3-7 Fish species of community interest included in the Natura 2000 factsheets of the SCIs
located in the study area
Figure no. 3-19 Numerical distribution of fish species of community interest in the Danube Delta Region
3.2.5 Amphibians and reptiles
According to Gâştescu and Ştiucă26, on DDBR territory, the amphibian class is represented by a small
number of species belonging to 2 orders: 2 species of newts and 8 species of frogs. Thus, in Danube
Delta are present only 10 amphibian species out of the 17 existing across the country, respectively out
of 45 species existing across Europe. The small number of species is offset by the very high density of 3
aquatic species: Rana ridibunda (marsh frog), Bombina bombina (European fire-bellied toad) and Hyla
arborea (European tree frog). Other 2 frog species are also frequent: Pelobates fuscus (European
spadefoot toad), especially on the fluvial grinds, and Pelobates syriacus balcanicus (eastern spadefoot
toad), in sandy coastal areas. Bufo bufo (common toad) although generally frequent across the country,
on DDBR territory is rare, being reported currently only between the Danube river branches, while Bufo
viridis (European green toad) is frequent in human settlements ecosystems. Regarding the newts,
Triturus dobrogicus and Triturus vulgaris are present in Danube Delta Region, the first being more
widespread than the second.
According to the same authors, the reptile class on DDBR territory is represented by: Testudines order –
turtles, Sauria order - lizards and Serpentes order - snakes. Thus, in Danube Delta are present only 11
reptile species out of the 23 existing across the country, respectively out of 83 species existing across
Europe. All 11 species are protected by Bern Convention, 9 of them being strictly protected. The 11
species encountered on Danube Delta Region are:
2 turtle species:
 Emys orbicularis – European pond turtle – frequent in all the aquatic areas;
 Testudo graeca ibera - spur-thighed tortoise – very rare in some steppe areas (Iancina
and Doloşman), also still quite numerous in Istria fortress area; it was declared a natural
monument species at national level;
4 lizard species:
 Lacerta agilis – sand lizard – in sandy areas, especially in Letea and Caraorman forests,
and the entire coastal area, large populations of Lacerta agilis euxinica;
 Eremias arguta deserti – steppe runner – present in the same habitat type as the sand
lizard, but is much less numerous;
 Lacerta trilineata donrogica – Balkan green lizard – on rocky areas and hills with highest
grasses and bushes in the vicinity of Razim Lake, with relatively numerous populations;
 Podarcis taurica – Balkan wall lizard – on hilly steppe areas, with relatively numerous
populations;
5 snake species:
 Natrix natrix – grass snake – aquatic species, numerous, common in all the aquatic
areas;
 Natrix tesselata – dice snake – prefers rocky shores, being very rare within the delta and
extremely numerous in Razim - Sinoe lagoon complex (Iancina, Doloşman, Popina and
Bisericuţa islands etc.);
 Coluber caspius – caspian whipsnake – is the largest and the most aggressive snake in
Europe (exceeding 2 m long) being relatively frequently encountered in many
extradeltaic steppe areas, but difficult to observe, preferring to stay near the colonies of
the ground squirrels or rich in lizards;
26
Delta Dunării Rezervaţie a Biosferei, 2008, Petre Gâştescu, Romulus Ştiucă, Editura CD Press


Coronella austriaca – smooth snake – it is very rare and is found as isolated specimens
in Letea forest and Chituc grind (sand bank);
Vipera ursinii – meadow viper – it is the only poisonous snake on DDBR territory, nearly
extinct in its European area; in Danube Delta occurs in large populations in the forest
planted near St. Gheorghe town and on Perişor grind (sand bank).
According to „Ecological gradients in the Danube Delta lakes: present state and man-induced changes”
article, published in 2000, by Oosterberg, W. et al., in Danube Delta fauna were observed, during 1991 1997, 3.491 species, of which 9 species of amphibians and 12 species of reptiles.
Another study, published in 2006, by Török, examines the use of GIS technology for data management
of the Natura 2000 sites and the importance of this tool in the selection process of the potential Natura
2000 sites and the establishment of their limits, if the policy makers take into account information
related on the biology, habitat requirements of target species and the results of the field studies from
the target zones. Case study: Elaphe quatorlineata – „GIS technique used for managing data on potential
Natura 2000 sites. Case study: areas inhabited by Elaphe quatorlineata”. This paper presents a history of
Elaphe quatorlineata records (with exact summoning of the works) before 1990 and between 1990 and
2006. According to this article, in the last two centuries, the number of copies of Elaphe quatorlineata
recorded in Romania ranged between 42 and 45 copies (of which approx. 20 copies were registered
before 1990 and 22 specimens between 1990 and 2006, mostly in Dobrudja).
2 important studies on populations of Vipera ursinii in Danube Delta Region are: „Vipera ursinii
moldavica populations of the Romanian Danube-Delta” and „Information technology used in preparing
the national reports on Species of Community Interest. Study case: Vipera ursinii in Pontic bioregion”,
published in 2006, respectively in 2013, in the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Tulcea. The first
analyzes and compares the populations of Vipera ursinii moldavica in 2 locations from Danube Delta:
Periteaşca and Sfântu Gheorghe, while the second study represents a contribution to the preliminary
version of the national report on the status of Vipera ursinii in Pontic biogeographical region.
„On a record of largest specimen of Triturus dobrogicus (Kiritzescu 1903) from the Danube Delta,
Romania”, 2009, brings a new contribution to the knowledge of the morphology and ecology of the
species. According to this article, the presence of large specimens may indicate optimal habitat
conditions, essential for the establishment of a favorable conservation status, and given that the species
has suffered a severe decline, represents a very important contribution in this regard.
„Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and management
proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve”, published in November 2010, indicates
the population trend of the amphibians and reptiles species, in DDBR, during 1990 - 2008. Thus,
according to the study, on DDBR territory were recorded during the period referred, 6 species of reptiles
and amphibians of conservation interest. 5 species out of the 6 mentioned in the study, are found also
in the protected natural areas of community interest that overlap with our study region, namely the
Danube Delta Region (DDBR and the surrounding areas): Bombina bombina, Triturus dobrogicus, Emys
orbicularis, Testudo graeca and Vipera ursinii. During 1990 – 2008, the population trend of the species
mentioned was assessed as stable. Within the same study it is presented also the current environmental
status of these species in DDBR, being assessed as „secure” for Bombina bombina, Triturus dobrogicus,
Emys orbicularis and Testudo graeca, respectively „localized” for Vipera ursinii, due to the fact that the
populations of this species are closely concentrated in only three areas on DDBR territory. The study
also presents proposals regarding the long-term monitoring protocols of the amphibian and reptile
species of European conservation interest, whose presence was reconfirmed in 1990 and till today, on
DDBR territory.
„Preliminary data on carapace health of Testudo graeca from cetatea Histria, Dobrudja county”, 2011,
analyzes the population of Testudo graeca in Histria fortress, based on the health of their shells.
According to this article, Testudo graeca is one of the endangered species from Dobrogea, heavily
threatened by the destruction and fragmentation of the habitats as a result of the human activities. The
area investigated, in the vicinity of Histria fortress, holds a large population of the species, 54 specimens
being investigated in order to assess the general health of the shells and the anthropogenic impact
depending on the erosion zone, injuries and scars caused by humans, genetic malformations. The results
revealed that the population of this species is healthy, rarely impacted by the anthropogenic causes.
„Doubtful records of reptile species in some areas of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (Romania)”,
published in 2012, by Török, provide details of the doubtful records (sources published between 1863
and 2011) of some reptile species reported from different parts of DDBR: Testudo graeca, Elaphe
(quatorlineata) sauromates and Vipera ursinii.
2 studies: Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve. Part I. Amphibians and Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve. Part II. Reptiles, published in 2013, respectively in 2014, in the
Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta, by Török Zsolt Csaba, brings contributions to the Red List of wild
species from the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, for amphibian and reptile species. According to the
first study, targeting the amphibian species on DDBR territory, the first Red List of wild species from
DDBR was developed in 1999 and published in 2000. So far, in DDBR were recorded 11 native species of
amphibians (respectively 10 native species and one hybrid). The paper provides details on proposals to
consider the conservation status assessed for the amphibian species encountered on DDBR territory,
based on the results of investigations carried out since 2000 and taking into account the developments
related to criteria for granting the status of preservation for the wildlife species (worldwide, European,
EU and national level). Thus, for the 2 amphibian species of community interest, referred in the analysis,
arising the following: Triturus dobrogicus (widespread species, but not frequent) – Vulnerable and
Bombina bombina (widespread and frequent species) –Least Concern. Also, within the study are
presented also maps of the areas of records (before 1990, after 1990 and also continuous data) on
DDBR territory and the neighboring regions, for the 2 species mentioned above, overlapped on the grid
of 10 x 10 km UTM. It was noted that for Bombina bombina are present much more records, both on
DDBR territory and in the neighboring regions.
As regards the second study, provides details on proposals to consider the conservation status assessed
for the reptile species encountered on DDBR territory, based on the results of investigations carried out
since 2000 and taking into account the developments related to criteria for granting the status of
preservation for the wildlife species (worldwide, european, EU and national level). So far, in DDBR were
recorded 12 native species of reptile. Thus, for the 3 reptile species of community interest, referred in
the analysis, arising the following: Testudo graeca (rare species in DDBR) – Vulnerable; Emys orbicularis
(relatively common species) - Vulnerable; Vipera ursinii (rare species in DDBR) – Critically endangered
species. Also, within the study are presented also maps regarding the administrative territories where
there are reliable records on natural populations of the species, as well as the main threats considered
in the Danube Delta region on the species of community interest. In what concern the specie Elaphe
(quatuorlineata) sauromates, was not included in the Red List of wild species from the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve, because until the submission of the paper there were no published information
regarding the species presence in DDBR, even if one of the areas targeted by the current national
monitoring project of the species of community interest, where was planned the assessment of Elaphe
(quatuorlineata) sauromates populations, cover a part of DDBR (Histria plot), due to the fact that in the
area, in places close to the Histria, were present recent records of Elaphe (quatuorlineata) sauromates.
The same author, Török Zsolt Csaba, has published in 2014 „Setting-up a medium term plan for riskassessment in aquatic and semiaquatic reptiles from the site “ROSCI0065” (Danube Delta) – Romaniaan,
an article aimed also to the impact of human activities on the populations of 3 species of aquatic and
semi-aquatic reptiles (Emys orbicularis, Natrix natrix and Natrix tessellata), carried out in ROSCI0065
Delta Dunării. The key findings that emerged from the study, conducted between January-August 2013,
are: road accidents, deliberate killing of snake species and trap systems. Based on these preliminary
results, a medium-term plan was planned for the period March-October 2014, weekly, in order to collect
data concerning the impact of human activities on populations of reptiles.
A series of other articles reveals the effects of climate change on the protected habitats, including on
the amphibian and reptile species from the Danube Delta. Among them, we mention: „Schimbări în
structura ihtiofaunei ca efect al modificării caracteristicilor biotopului” – 1995; „Draft River Basin
Management Plans - Adapting the Plans to Climate Change Final Report” – 2008; „Approaches to habitat
disturbances in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” – 2011; „Climate change adapted management
plan for Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve” – 2013 and „Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action
Plan for Danube Delta Region – România – Ukraine – Moldova” – 2014.
According to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015), on the study area,
the Danube Delta Region (DDBR and the surrounding areas), the amphibian and reptile species of
community interest are found in 7 of the 8 sites of community importance, except for ROSCI0066 Delta
Dunării - zona marină. Also, in other 2 sites is encountered only one of the 6 species of community
interest, respectively in ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului may be encountered only Testudo graeca,
while in ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe may be encountered only Elaphe quatuorlineata.
In Table no. 3-8 are presented the 6 amphibian and reptile species of community interest protected in
the 8 SCIs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17,
2015).
ROSCI0105
ROSCI0123
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0065
x
x
x
Amphibian and reptile species code and
name
ROSCI0066
ROSCI0060
1
1188 – Bombina bombina
x
2
1219 – Testudo graeca
x
x
3
1220 – Emys orbicularis
x
4
1279 – Elaphe quatuorlineata
5
1298 – Vipera ursinii
6
1993 – Triturus dobrogicus
x
No.
ROSCI0012
Table no. 3-8 The community interest amphibian and reptile species included in the Natura 2000
Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Figure no. 3-20 Numerical distribution of community interest amphibian and reptile species in the Danube Delta Region
3.2.6 Mammals (including bat species)
Although extremely important both scientifically and economically, the mammals fauna has not been
the subject of scientific studies dedicated to this biotic compartment in the Danube Delta until 1931
when was published the scientific monography ”Mamiferele României. Repartiţia şi problemele lor
biogeografice-economice” by Raul I. Călinescu, standing out however for this deltaic area, a faunistical
and cynegetical bibliography rich in systematic and zoogeographical data on mammals in Romania.
Considerations regarding the valorification of the cynegetic resources of the Danube Delta were brought
by Cotta V. and Andone Gh. (1969), Inaşcu M. (1971), Dragomir N.I. şi Kiss, J.B. (1972), Almăşan H. (1985,
1993), Filat M. Condac M. and Greavu M. (1995).
The most important researches concerning the distribution and the importance of the mammals from
Danube Delta have been achieved by Bunesco A. (1959), Hamar M. (1960), Barbu P. (1969), Marches G.
(1970), Popescu A., Suciu M. şi Chiriac E. (1974), Murariu D. (1981), Murariu D. (1996), Popescu A. and
Murariu D. (2001), Cuzic M. and Murariu D. (2008) and Stanc S.M. (2009).
As regards the knowledge of the beaver from Danube Delta, the researches were focused more in
paleozoology terms, because by the end of the XXth century, Danube Delta territory was considered
inappropriate for beaver’s habitat preferences, due to large fluctuations of the Danube water level (thus
considering that the beaver is not present). Despite this, the paleozoology researches (Bălăşescu, 2000)
confirmed the beaver's presence in the lower area of the Danube up to Isaccea and near the Dobruja
Plateau next to Murighiol (the latest paleozoology evidence on the beaver presence are originating from
the early medieval period).
The most important contributions regarding the presence of the beaver populations from Danube Delta
were brought by Călinescu (1931, 1934), Vasiuliu and Şova (1968), Necrasov O. and Stirbu M. (1975),
Rudescu and Godeanu (1980), Ionescu and colab. (2010),
Although almost disappeared from Romania in the last two centuries, the beaver (Castor fiber) was
reintroduced in some areas of the country in old habitats from which disappeared, in particular due to
the effect of the human pressures (Kiss and colab., 2011, 2012). Since 1998, many projects concerning
the reintegration and monitoring of this specie's populations in Romania have been started (Ionescu and
Troidl, 1997, Ionescu, 2010), especially in some areas of the Danube Delta.
Regarding the knowledge of Mustela lutreola populations from Danube Delta, specie of conservation
interest, significant contributions were brought by Youngman P.M. (1982), Palazon S. and Ruiz-Olmo J.
(1998), Gotea V. and Kranz A. (2000), Kranz A., Polednik L., Gotea V. (2001), Cuzic M., Marinov M. and
Cuzic V. (2002), Kranz A., Toman A. and Kiss J.B. (2003), Kranz A., Toman A., Polednikova K., Polednik L.
and Kiss J.B. (2004), Lode T., Cormier J.P., and Jacques D. (2001), Marinov M.E., Kiss J.B., Toman A.,
Polednik L., Alexe V., Doroftei M., Doroşencu A. and Kranz A. (2012), Michaux J.R., Hardy O.J., Justy F.,
Fournier P., Kranz A. and Cabia M. (2005).
It is important to mention that, in 1993 was reported for the first time the jackal presence (Canis
aureaus L.) in Danube Delta, on Chituc and Sinoe hunting areas, while in 1994 the species was observed
also in Sf. Gheorghe hunting area (Filat and colab., 1995). Since then it was considered that the specie's
area expands to the north and was especially important that the population’s evolution to be
monitored.
The studies regarding the bats fauna from the Danube Delta have started after the middle of the XXth
century, focusing mainly on the researches concerning the underground shelters (Călinescu, 1931,
Cerveny, 1982, Dumitrescu et al., 1962-1963, Dumitrescu et al., 1958, Dumitrescu, 1969, Răduleţ, 1994,
Răduleţ and Stănescu, 1966, Valenciuc and Ion, 1971). Since the XXI century have appeared also
publications that had, besides the researches on favorable habitats of the bat species, important
contributions to the inventorying / monitoring of the bat's populations from the Dobrudjan carstic
environment (Răduleţ, 2005, Done, 2007, Ifrim and Pocora, 2007, Murariu et al., 2009, Nagy and
Postawa, 2010, Pocora and Pocora, 2011). Nagy and Postawa (2010) based on observations from 2003,
have rated the conservation degree of the underground shelters of bats, assigning a conservation value,
on a scale of 1-4, for the caves in Romania (Mitchell-Jones et al., 2000).
Contributions concerning the dynamic and migration of the bat populations from Danube Delta have
been brought also by Măntoiu Dragoş (performs monitoring activities on bat fauna of Dobruja since
2012), the partial results of the monitoring being disseminated within the oral presentations at various
International Scientific Conferences and Symposiums.
In Table no. 3-9 are presented the 10 mammals species (including one bat species) of community
interest protected in the 8 SCIs from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
(updated on February 17, 2015).
x
ROSCI0201
ROSCI0105
ROSCI0067
ROSCI0066
x
ROSCI0123
1
1304 – Rhinolophus ferrumequinum
2
1335 – Spermophilus citellus
x
x
3
1349 – Tursiops truncatus
4
1351 – Phocoena phocoena
5
1355 – Lutra lutra
x
6
1356 – Mustela lutreola
7
2021 – Sicista subtilis
8
2609 – Mesocricetus newtoni
x
9
2633 – Mustela eversmannii
10 2635 – Vormela peregusna
ROSCI0065
Mammal species code and name
ROSCI0060
No.
ROSCI0012
Table no. 3-9 The community interest mammal species (including bat species) included in the Natura
2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from the study area
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Figure no. 3-21 Numerical distribution of community interest mammal species (including bat species) in the Danube Delta Region
3.2.7 Birds
The study on bird species in Danube Delta began relatively late, compared to other country regions (M,
Marinov, 2012). First researches on bird species from Danube Delta dates from the second half of the
XIXth century (O. Finsch, H. W. Simpson, A. Pelzeln). In the following period stood out Dombrowski,
Dionisie Linţia, E. Nadra, C. Rosetti – Bălănescu, S. Pascovschi, I. Cătuneanu, G. D. Vasiliu, L. Rodewald
(Rudescu), M. Băcescu, D. Radu, A. Papadopol, M. Tălpeanu, Maria Paspaleva, Dan Munteanu, G.
Andone, H. Almăsan and others. Subsequently, J. B. Kiss, L. Manolache, M. Măties, D. Stănescu, V.
Ciochia, K. P. Zsivanovits and many others.
Although extremely important for science, the early researches conducted on birds in Danube Delta are
difficult to consult. On the other hand, the changes made in Danube Delta in the last 100 or even 50
years (both natural and anthropogenic) make that those papers not to be entirely updated. Due to the
wide diversity of the bird species in Danube Delta, 1000 works have been published over time. In this
regard, we consider it is necessary to mention that the studies on bird species from Danube Delta and
the surrounding areas do not consist only in the papers presented here.
In the last 50 years, many researchers have focused on the study of bird species from Danube Delta and
the neighboring areas. An important contribution to the study of bird species from Danube Delta was
the establishment of some researches centers, among which we mention: „Danube Delta” Cynegetic
Station (1954), Museum of Natural Sciences – Danube Delta (1964), Danube Delta Research and Design
Institute - Tulcea (1970), Romanian Ornithological Society (1990) and „Grigore Antipa” National Museum
of Natural History, established since 1834.
The study conducted during 1978 - 1979, published in 1981, by Aurel Papadopol – „Considerations sur
l'ecologie des oiseaux du secteur Murighiol-Tulcea-Babadag-Lunca (Jurilovca) dans le contexte de la
dynamique de l'avifaune du complexe lagunaire de Razelm-Sinoe (Dobrogea, Roumanie)”, contains
ecological considerations related to the peripheral sectors of Danube Delta and Razelm-Sinoe lagoon
complex, regarding 137 species of birds. The data presented summarizes the researches made by the
author during 1978 - 1979, and for comparison are presented also historical data, from 1956 - 1973. The
main bird species identified at the time, on the sector located between Babadag lake and Enisala, are:
Fulica atra, Gallinula chloropus, Anas querquedula, Aythya ferina, Anas platyrhynchos, Ardeola ralloides,
Ardea cinerea, Ardea purpurea, Ixobrychus minutus, Egretta garzetta, Cygnus olor, Larus ridibundus,
Sterna hirundo, Chlidonias niger, Chlidonias hybrida, Larus argentatus cachinnans, Larus argentatus,
Merops apiaster, Falco tinnunculus, Passer rnontanus, Corvus monedula, Oenanthe oenanthe.
The papers that have as study object only a small number of bird species from Danube Delta are
numerous, among their authors we mention: Botond J. Kiss, Vasile Alexe, Alexandru Doroşencu, Mihai
Marinov, Attila Sándor, Dan Hulea, Viorel Pocora, Elena Irina Pocora, Kalocsa Béla, Tamás Enikő Anna,
Reed Mike, Alexandru Doroşencu, Constantin Ion, Michael Schmitz, Christoph Sudfeldt, Harald Legge,
Kristian Mantel, Peter Weber, Laurenţiu Petrencu, Emanuel Baltag, Domsa Cristian, Aurel Papadopol,
Gabriel Chişamera, Mircea Gogu-Bogdan, Costică Adam.
Among the interesting discoveries made in the Danube Delta we can cite the Egyptian goose (Alopochen
aegyptiacus) reporting, near Tulcea (J.B. Kiss, 1994). In 1990, at Somova, an unknown hunter shot a
goose that has been naturalized by an amateur, but over time it began to deteriorate. Entering into its
possession, J.B. Kiss recognized the specie and described it as being an adult exemplary of the Egyptian
goose (Alopochen aegyptiacus), brown-red version. In 1998, another unusual occurrence was reported
in Danube Delta by Mihai Marinov and Dan Hulea. They reported the nesting presence of the cattle
egret (Bulbucus ibis). The specie's observations occurred in 1993 (4 reporting of the species, non-
breeding) and 1994 (1 reporting, non-breeding), while in 1996 was identified the first nest of the cattle
egret in the colony of Chiril Lake. Subsequently, in 1997 another two nests were identified in the colony
from the vicinity of Nebunu Lake, while in 1998 were identified another 3 nests. The authors explain the
appearance of the specie in Danube Delta at nesting, as a possible extension of its areal toward north.
The locations of colonial bird species, and not only, have been the subject of several studies concerning
the bird species from Danube Delta. Thus, in 2004 was published a paper having as study topic: 13 birds
species belonging to Pelecaniformes and Ciconiiformes rrders, as well as the habitats preferences
(Platteeuw et all, Colonial waterbirds and their habitat use in the Danube Delta, 2004). This paper
presents the results of a study conducted in 2001-2002 in Danube Delta, both in Romania territory and
Ukraine, where have been identified over 100 colonies, respectively 48,000 nesting pairs.
In 2006, Sandor D. Attila, Moldovan Istvan and Sebastian Bugariu have observed what may represent
the first evidence of nesting for the citrine wagtail (Motacilla citreola), in Romania. The observation took
place during an annular bird campaign in Danube Delta, on Grindul Chituc. In the paper, the authors
point to a possible extension of the species nesting's territory toward south, thus including also
Romania, in a manner similar to Poland or Latvia.
Also in 2006, the authors Cuzic and Petrescu, in „Studiul avifaunei şi habitatelor din Podişul Dobrogean
în scopul dezvoltării reţelei de arii protejate”, have inventoried in Deniz Tepe Hill nature reserve, 11 bird
species of Annex I of the Birds Directive (respectively Annex 3 of GEO 57/ 2007) and 8 species of Annex
4b of GEO 57/ 2007, the main major habitat types identified being represented by meadows, thickets
and also rocky regions.
In 2009, the authors Baczó Zoltán, Kovács Szabolcs, Szabó Attila have conducted a review of the major
ornithological observations made in Romania in 2004, 2006 and 2007. Of the nine species and one
subspecies listed, only three have been seen outside of Dobrogea and Danube Delta territories. Thus,
the authors mentioned the presence of: the lesser kestrel (Falco naumanni) and the bluethroat (Luscinia
svecica magna) in the vicinity of the Tătaru Channel from the Danube Delta, the aquatic warbler
(Acrocephalus paludicola) and the demoiselle crane (Antropoides virgo) in the vicinity of Histria, the
sardinian warbler (Sylvia melanocephala) on Sahalin island, the eastern orphean warbler (Sylvia
crassirostris) near Murighiol and the pallas' leaf warbler (Phylloscopus proregulus) in Chituc area.
Milvus Group Association has identified within the project „Studiul migraţiei de toamnă a păsărilor
răpitoare din Dobrogea – 2010, 2011”, the migration routes of the raptor bird species in Dobrudja, the
main observation points being located in Northern Dobrudja, in 2010. The results revealed that the total
number of migratory bird species observed in Dobrudja, at the observation point located on the Deniz
Tepe hill, was of 313 migratory raptor species and 92 other large size species, such as the white stork
(Ciconia ciconia), the black stork (Ciconia nigra), the great white pelican (Pelecanus onocrotalus), the
Dalmatian pelican (Pelecanus crispus), geese, cormorants, etc.
Another important article can be found in the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta - “Preliminary data
concerning ornithofauna of the Babadag lake area”, Tulcea – Romania, 2011. This article presents
ornithological observations made in Babadag lake area and its surroundings, in 2008 and 2009. The aim
of this study was to update the data concerning the quantitative analyzes of the ornithological fauna
present in Babadag lake area. Overall, 91 species of birds have been identified, of which 80 are nesting
in the area. The identified birds belong to 12 orders, 36 families and 65 genera. Also, one of the largest
colonies of Riparia riparia, from Dobrudja area and also from Romania, was identified, respectively over
2,000 pairs.
The birds are one of the biggest attractions of the Danube Delta and the neighboring areas, drawing
attention both researchers and tourists. In this paper we have presented only a part of the studies
concerning the avifauna from Danube Delta.
In Table no. 3-10 are presented the 100 bird species of community interest protected in the 12 SPAs
from the study area, according to Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms (updated on February 17, 2015).
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0076
ROSPA0073
ROSPA0060
ROSPA0052
ROSPA0040
ROSPA0031
ROSPA0032
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0121
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0100
16
A001 – Gavia stellata
A002 – Gavia arctica
A019 – Pelecanus onocrotalus
A020 – Pelecanus crispus
A021 – Botaurus stellaris
A022 – Ixobrychus minutus
A023 – Nycticorax nycticorax
A024 – Ardeola ralloides
A026 – Egretta garzetta
A027 – Egretta alba
A029 – Ardea purpurea
A030 – Ciconia nigra
A031 – Ciconia ciconia
A032 – Plegadis falcinellus
A034 – Platalea leucorodia
A037 – Cygnus columbianus
bewickii
A038 – Cygnus cygnus
A042 – Anser erythropus
A060 – Aythya nyroca
A068 – Mergus albellus
A071 – Oxyura leucocephala
A072 – Pernis apivorus
A073 – Milvus migrans
A075 – Haliaeetus albicilla
A077 – Neophron percnopterus
A078 – Gyps fulvus
A080 – Circaetus gallicus
A081 – Circus aeruginosus
A082 – Circus cyaneus
A083 – Circus macrourus
A084 – Circus pygargus
ROSPA0091
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Birds species code and name
ROSPA0019
No
.
ROSPA0009
Table no. 3-10 The community interest bird species, listed in Annex I of the Council Directive
2009/147/ EC, included in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from the study area
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0121
x
x
x
ROSPA0100
x
x
ROSPA0091
ROSPA0040
x
x
ROSPA0076
ROSPA0032
x
x
x
ROSPA0052
ROSPA0031
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0073
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
x
x
x
ROSPA0060
46
A089 – Aquila pomarina
A090 – Aquila clanga
A091 – Aquila chrysaetos
A092 – Hieraaetus pennatus
A094 – Pandion haliaetus
A095 – Falco naumanni
A097 – Falco vespertinus
A098 – Falco columbarius
A103 – Falco peregrinus
A119 – Porzana porzana
A120 – Porzana parva
A121 – Porzana pusilla
A122 – Crex crex
A127 – Grus grus
A131
–
Himantopus
himantopus
A132 – Recurvirostra avosetta
A133 – Burhinus oedicnemus
A135 – Glareola pratincola
A138 – Charadrius alexandrinus
A139 – Charadrius morinellus
A140 – Pluvialis apricaria
A151 – Philomachus pugnax
A154 – Gallinago media
A157 – Limosa lapponica
A159 – Numenius tenuirostris
A166 – Tringa glareola
A167 – Xenus cinereus
A170 – Phalaropus lobatus
A176 – Larus melanocephalus
A177 – Larus minutus
A180 – Larus genei
A189 – Gelochelidon nilotica
A190 – Sterna caspia
A191 – Sterna sandvicensis
A193 – Sterna hirundo
A195 – Sterna albifrons
A196 – Chlidonias hybridus
A197 – Chlidonias niger
A215 – Bubo bubo
A222 – Asio flammeus
ROSPA0019
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
ROSPA0009
No
.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
81
82
83
84
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0121
x
x
x
ROSPA0100
x
ROSPA0091
x
ROSPA0076
x
ROSPA0073
x
ROSPA0060
x
ROSPA0052
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0031
x
x
x
x
x
x
ROSPA0040
80
x
ROSPA0032
79
A224 – Caprimulgus europaeus
A229 – Alcedo atthis
A231 – Coracias garrulus
A234 – Picus canus
A236 – Dryocopus martius
A238 – Dendrocopos medius
A239 – Dendrocopos leucotos
A242
–
Melanocorypha
calandra
A243
–
Calandrella
brachydactyla
A246 – Lullula arborea
A255 – Anthus campestris
A272 – Luscinia svecica
A293
–
Acrocephalus melanopogon
A307 – Sylvia nisoria
A320 – Ficedula parva
A321 – Ficedula albicollis
A338 – Lanius collurio
A339 – Lanius minor
A379 – Emberiza hortulana
A393 – Phalacrocorax pygmeus
A396 – Branta ruficollis
A397 – Tadorna ferruginea
A402 – Accipiter brevipes
A403 – Buteo rufinus
A404 – Aquila heliaca
A429 – Dendrocopos syriacus
A464 – Puffinus yelkouan
A511 – Falco cherrug
ROSPA0019
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
ROSPA0009
No
.
x
x
x
x
x
85
x
x
86
x
x
x
87
x
x
x
88
x
x
x
x
x
89
x
x
x
x
x
90
x
x
x
91
x
x
92
x
x
x
x
93
94
x
x
x
x
x
95
x
x
x
x
x
96
x
x
x
x
97
x
x
x
x
98
x
99
x
x
x
x
10
A533 – Oenanthe pleschanka
x
x
x
x
x
0
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Figure no. 3-22 Numerical distribution of community interest bird species in the Danube Delta Region
3.3
DESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS OF THE AFFECTED SPECIES AND HABITATS OF
COMMUNITY INTEREST (AREA, LOCATION, CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES) AND THEIR
RELATIONSHIP WITH ADJACENT NATURA 2000 SITES AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION
On the surface of the study area, Danube Delta Region, four landforms can be found: delta, plateaus,
hills and mountains, and in much smaller proportions also floodplains and marine areas. In terms of the
major relief units, Natura 2000 sites are encountered (partially and entirely) in Danube Delta, Dobrudja
Plateau, Black Sea (territorial waters) and the Romanian plain (only two of the sites, less than 5 % of
their surface).
Danube Delta is characterized mainly by reophile and lentic aquatic ecosystems. The reophile
ecosystems are represented by: Danube and its branches, channels. The lentic ecosystems are the result
of the atrophiation of reofile conditions and the accentuation of the lentic conditions, and are
represented by lakes and ponds formed by the closure of the active arms of the Danube or the channels.
Along with the freshwater ecosystems, salty and low salinity habitats, lagoons, semi-enclosed bays,
coastal marine waters, mixed oak forests, thickets, meadows, dunes, as well as anthropogenic
ecosystems, contribute to Delta's heterogeneity.
The Northern Dobrudja Plateau is one of the largest Natura 2000 site localized entirely in Dobrudja
Plateau, consisting over 95 % of community interest habitats: steppe habitats, Balkan and
Submediterranean forests and scrubland habitats. A significant number of the vegetal associations
within the 10 community interest habitats (of which 3 are prioritary) have an endemic feature for
Dobrudja, the biggest part of their distribution area at national and global level being encountered
within this area. Also, Agighiolului and Deniz Tepe Hills are other 2 Natura 2000 sites localized entirely
(100 %) within the Dobrudja Plateau, and in the same time within the territory of the study area, being
characterized by rocky habitats, meadows steppe, silvosteppe and forest habitats, respectively PontoSarmatic steppes and thickets. Măcinului Mountains are the oldest mountains in Romania, characterized
by typical Ponto-Balkan steppe ecosystems, sub-Mediterranean and Balkan forests, and a rich diversity
of flora and fauna.
The Natura 2000 species and habitats potentially affected, located in the study area, belong to the
entire taxonomical spectrum that is subject to protection in Natura 2000 sites. The potentially affected
species belong at the same time to the majority of the functional spectrum: primary producers,
herbivores, insectivores, carnivores or parasitoids organisms, being represented both of terrestrial
species and aquatic species. The species and habitats of community interest are key components for the
Natura 2000 sites both in what concern the functional role and of the representativeness or uniqueness.
As a result of the current level of detail of the DDISDS projects/ types of interventions, as well as of the
large number of species and habitats of community interest that could be affected, a detailed
description of the ecological functions of all species and habitats of community interest, for each of
potentially affected Natura 2000 sites, it is difficult to achieve at this strategic planning level. Each of the
habitats and species of community interest potentially affected have an important role in maintaining
the structural and functional integrity of the Natura 2000 sites from which belong, and this analysis will
be performed within the environmental proceedings (EA and EIA) at a project/ type of intervention
level, depending on the characteristics of each of them.
The invertebrates play a crucial role in the functioning of the ecosystems due to their food regime
(covering all levels of consumers - primary and secondary), on the one hand, and of their ecological
plurivalence, on the other hand: pollinators (e.g.: species of Lepidoptera), phytophagous, primary
phytophagous or secondary detritophagous. As prey, the invertebrates are a trophic source both for
other invertebrates and for the amphibians, birds and insectivore mammals (e.g.: bats). Most species of
invertebrates shows a high degree of stenoecie (preferences more or less strict regarding the habitat,
food, local conditions etc.), making them vulnerable to the disturbances of their living conditions and to
habitat degradation. Thus, the presence of certain species of invertebrates constitutes an indicator of
the habitat health degree populated by them.
The fish are an important feature for the majority of the aquatic ecosystems in terms of their ecological
role, including the direct impact on prey populations and the indirect impact on other biotic and abiotic
components of the ecosystem, as well as the in terms of their socio-economical value.
Fish can be omnivores, herbivores, insectivores, planktivorous, piscivorous and, at the same time,
represent the main source of food for many organisms, both terrestrial and aquatic. They control other
populations by eating the microorganisms and plankton. There is an interdependence between plants,
that release oxygen into the water, necessary for fish breathing, and fish that removes various
substances out of their system (during defecation), which fertilizes the plants, and when they die their
body nutrients help the plants in the development process. Also, fish are an important food source for
many bird species.
Some fish have an important role as biomarkers for the waters in which they live, constituting good
indicators of the long-term effects of the anthropogenic pressures.
The migratory fish species shall travel along the rivers courses to spawn, the flow regime and water
temperature being important factors in the early stages of larvae development.
The amphibians and reptiles play a major role in the trophic networks, such as predators and as prey.
The species potentially affected are mostly represented by consumers of insects or small mammals.
When amphibian populations are abundant, they can consume significant amounts of prey organisms,
serving to limit the population explosions. The larvae of some species of newts and frogs are important
predators in ponds and other water bodies and affect the abundance and diversity of aquatic
invertebrate communities and of other amphibians. As prey, herpetofauna is an important trophic
resource for small and medium mammals, birds or other species of amphibians and reptiles.
The species of amphibians and reptiles are mainly sensitive to habitat disturbances. As a result of
reliance on habitat variables, amphibians are considered good indicators of the environmental health.
The skin of amphibians has a high permeability coefficient, absorbing toxic substances from water, air
and soil. The complex life cycle of amphibians require favorable habitats for oviposition and for the
development of larvae and adults.
For most of the amphibians and reptiles the movement between the habitats is a must. Both groups
performs migrations - in the case of amphibians have been identified two periods of migration: spring
migration, to breeding habitats and autumn migration, to hibernating habitats, while in the case of
reptiles there are often two movement stages, one in summer, when the males disperse into habitat,
and on in autumn, when both sexes crowded near the hibernacula. This means that both for the
amphibians and for the reptiles, quality habitats are necessary (both the transitional and the residence
ones). In addition, almost all species of herpetofauna have a low capacity of dispersion and often cannot
move to alternative habitat when the present one is degraded.
Small mammals play an important role in ecosystems, both by contributing to the diversity of life and as
predators, consuming especially invertebrates, plant material, other mammals, as well as the as prey for
medium and large mammals, birds (especially birds of prey) and snakes. Through this interaction with
other groups of animals, small mammals are influencing the trophic networks and are controlling the
population levels of predators, insects and of host species.
Medium sized carnivores (mezocarnivores) facilitates the flow of nutrients by connecting the adjacent
ecosystems and occupies a unique place in the trophic networks that cannot be occupied by other
animals, such as direct dispersion of seeds or animal consumption that disperse seeds. Also, as other
species of predators, medium size mammals are controlling the population levels of prey species - small
mammals, reptiles, amphibians and birds.
Large carnivores represent the peak of the trophic pyramid, being considered key species in ecosystem
functioning and implicitly in maintaining the balance of the ecological communities. These species play
an important role in the ecosystem through the "top-down" type of control that they have on prey
populations over wide territories. Thus the presence of these species indicates natural habitats with a
high ecological value and functional ecosystems.
Large Carnivores provides a series of benefits, and their disappearance could lead to a triggering chain
reaction, for example, due to a decline in populations of wolf / lynx can be seen a dramatic increase of
herbivores, which can cause further disturbance of vegetation, populations of birds and small mammals.
The birds occupy different levels in the food chain and, like other living organisms, birds contribute to
maintaining sustainable levels of prey populations and of predatory species and, after death, provide
food for scavengers and decomposers. Many birds are important in plants reproduction through their
services as pollinators and seed dispersers, as well as for their contribution to controlling rodent
populations. The birds also provide critical resources to many parasites that are host-specific. Some bird
species are considered key species because their presence (or disappearance of) in an ecosystem
indirectly affects other species.
According to Sekercioglu, 2006, the main ecological functions provided by birds are represented by:

Adjusting services: dispersal of seeds (frugivorous species), pollination (nectarivorous species), pest
control (birds which feed on vertebrate and invertebrate species), corpses removal (scavenger
species);

Support services: nutrients deposit (aquatic species), "modeling" ecosystem services (species that
digs cavities).
3.4
CONSERVATION STATUS OF SPECIES AND HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST
The conservation status of species and habitats of community interest within the Natura 2000 sites from
Danube Delta Region is presented in Table no. 3-11, Table no. 3-12 and Table no. 3-13.
Table no. 3-11 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta
Region
No. Natura 2000
Habitats
GEO 57/
Habitat name
crt.
code
Directive
2007
Appendix
1
1110
Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time
Appendix I
2
2
1130
Estuaries
Appendix I
Appendix
3
1140
Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide
Appendix I
2
Appendix
4
1150*
Coastal lagoons
Appendix I
2
Appendix
5
1160
Large shallow inlets and bays
Appendix I
2
6
1180
Submarine structures made by leaking gases
Appendix I
Appendix
7
1210
Annual vegetation of drift lines
Appendix I
2
Appendix
8
1310
Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand
Appendix I
2
9
1410
Mediterranean salt meadows (Juncetalia maritimi)
Appendix I
Appendix
10
1530*
Pannonic salt steppes and salt marshes
Appendix I
2
Appendix
11
2110
Embryonic shifting dunes
Appendix I
2
Appendix
12
2130*
Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (“grey dunes’)
Appendix I
2
Appendix
13
2160
Dunes with Hippophaë rhamnoides
Appendix I
2
Appendix
14
2190
Humid dune slacks
Appendix I
2
Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the IsoëtoAppendix
15
3130
Appendix I
Nanojuncetea
2
Appendix
16
3140
Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.
Appendix I
2
No.
crt.
Natura 2000
code
17
3150
Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition — type vegetation
Appendix I
18
3160
Natural dystrophic lakes and ponds
Appendix I
19
3260
Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation
Appendix I
20
3270
Rivers with muddy banks with Chenopodion rubri p.p. and Bidention p.p. vegetation
Appendix I
21
40C0*
Ponto-Sarmatic deciduous thickets
Appendix I
22
6120*
Xeric sand calcareous grasslands
Appendix I
23
62C0*
Ponto-Sarmatic steppes
Appendix I
24
6410
Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)
Appendix I
25
6420
Mediterranean tall humid grasslands of the Molinio-Holoschoenion
Appendix I
26
6430
Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels
Appendix I
27
6440
Alluvial meadows of river valleys of the Cnidion dubii
Appendix I
28
6510
Lowland hay meadows (Alopecurus pratensis, Sanguisorba officinalis)
Appendix I
29
7210*
Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae
Appendix I
30
8230
Siliceous rock with pioneer vegetation of the Sedo-Scleranthion or of the Sedo albi-Veronicion dillenii
Appendix I
31
8310
Caves not open to the public
Appendix I
32
91AA*
Eastern white oak woods
Appendix I
Habitat name
Habitats
Directive
GEO 57/
2007
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
No.
crt.
Natura 2000
code
Habitat name
Habitats
Directive
33
91F0
Riparian mixed forests of Quercus robur, Ulmus laevis and Ulmus minor, Fraxinus excelsior or Fraxinus
angustifolia, along the great rivers (Ulmenion minoris)
Appendix I
34
91I0*
Euro-Siberian steppic woods with Quercus spp.
Appendix I
35
91M0
Pannonian-Balkanic turkey oak –sessile oak forests
Appendix I
36
91X0*
Dobrogean beech forests
Appendix I
37
91Y0
Dacian oak & hornbeam forests
Appendix I
38
92A0
Salix alba and Populus alba galleries
Appendix I
GEO 57/
2007
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
Appendix
2
39
92D0
Southern riparian galleries and thickets (Nerio-Tamaricetea and Securinegion tinctoriae)
Appendix I
Habitats Directive – Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora: Appendix I - Natural habitat
types of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation;
GEO 57/ 2007 – Government Emergency Ordinance on the regime of protected natural areas, conservation of natural habitats, of the wild flora and fauna,
approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011: Appendix 2 - Natural habitat types whose conservation requires the declaration of Special
Areas of Conservation.
Table no. 3-12 Conservation status of the species of community interest, mentioned in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SCIs from Danube Delta
Region
No.
IUC
Habitats
Bern
GEO 57/
Red Book of vertebrates in
Category
Species (Latin)
Species (en)
Crt.
N
Directive
Convention
2007
Romania
1
Plant
Agrimonia pilosa
Hairy agrimony
LC
Appendix II
Appendix 3
2
Plant
Aldrovanda vesiculosa
Waterwheel
EN
Appendix II
Appendix I
Appendix 3
3
Plant
Campanula romanica
DD
Appendix II
Appendix 3
4
Plant
Centaurea jankae
VU
Appendix II
Appendix 3
5
Plant
Centaurea pontica
DD
Appendix II
Appendix 3
6
Plant
Echium russicum
LC
Appendix II
Appendix 3
Himantoglossum
7
Plant
DD
Appendix II
caprinum
Iris aphylla ssp.
8
Plant
DD
Appendix II
Appendix 3
hungarica
9
Plant
Marsilea quadrifolia
Water Shamrock
LC
Appendix II
Appendix I
Appendix 3
10
Plant
Moehringia jankae
DD
Appendix II
Appendix 3
11
Plant
Potentilla emilii-popii
DD
Appendix II
Appendix 3
Invertebra
Appendix 3,
12
Anisus vorticulus
Lesser Ramshorn Snail
DD
tes
4A
Invertebra
Appendix 3,
13
Arytrura musculus
LC
tes
4A
Invertebra
Appendix 3,
14
Bolbelasmus unicornis
DD
tes
4A
Invertebra
Callimorpha
15
DD
Appendix II
Appendix 3
tes
quadripunctaria
Invertebra
Appendix 3,
16
Catopta thrips
DD
tes
4A
Invertebra
Appendix 3,
17
Cerambyx cerdo
Cerambyx Longicorn
VU
Appendix IV
Appendix II
tes
4A
Invertebra
Appendix 3,
18
Coenagrion ornatum
Ornate Bluet
LC
tes
4A
19
Invertebra
Colias myrmidone
EN
Appendix 3,
-
No.
Crt.
20
Category
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Invertebra
tes
Species (Latin)
Species (en)
IUC
N
Habitats
Directive
Bern
Convention
GEO 57/
2007
4A
Romania
Euphydryas maturna
Scarce Fritillary
DD
Appendix II
-
Appendix 3
-
Graphoderus bilineatus
-
VU
-
Appendix II
Leptidea morsei
Fenton's Wood White
NT
-
-
Lucanus cervus
Stag beetle
NT
-
Appendix III
Lycaena dispar
Large Copper
NT
Appendix II
Appendix II
Morimus funereus
-
VU
-
-
Ophiogomphus cecilia
Green Gomphid
LC
-
Appendix II
Osmoderma eremita
Hermit Beetle
NT
Appendix II
Appendix II
-
DD
-
-
-
DD
-
-
Theodoxus transversalis
Striped Nerite
EN
-
-
31
Fish
Alosa immaculata
Pontic shad
VU
Appendix II, IV
-
32
Fish
Alosa tanaica
Azov Shad
LC
Appendix II, IV
-
33
34
Fish
Fish
Asp
Spined loach
LC
LC
Appendix II, IV
-
Appendix III
Appendix III
35
Fish
Aspius aspius
Cobitis taenia
Romanogobio
albipinatus
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix
5A
Appendix
5A
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
White-finned gudgeon
LC
Appendix II
Appendix III
Appendix 3
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Paracaloptenus
caloptenoides
Pholidoptera
transsylvanica
-
No.
Crt.
36
Kessler's gudgeon
IUC
N
LC
Habitats
Directive
Appendix II
Bern
Convention
Appendix III
Balon's Ruffe
LC
Appendix II, IV
Appendix III
Striped Ruffe
LC
Appendix II, IV
Weatherfish
Ziege
LC
LC
Category
Species (Latin)
Species (en)
Fish
Gobio kessleri
37
Fish
Gymnocephalus baloni
38
Fish
39
40
Fish
Fish
41
Fish
42
43
44
45
46
47
GEO 57/
2007
Appendix 3
Appendix 3,
4A
Romania
Vulnerable species
Appendix III
Appendix 3
-
Appendix II
Appendix II, IV
Appendix III
Appendix III
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
-
European bitterling
LC
Appendix II
Appendix III
Appendix 3
-
Fish
Fish
Fish
Gymnocephalus
schraetzer
Misgurnus fossilis
Pelecus cultratus
Rhodeus sericeus
amarus
Sabanejewia aurata
Umbra krameri
Zingel streber
Golden Spined loach
European Mudminnow
Streber
LC
VU
LC
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix III
Appendix II
Appendix III
-
Fish
Zingel zingel
Zingel
LC
Appendix IV
Appendix III
Bombina bombina
Fire-bellied Toad
LC
Appendix II, IV
Appendix II
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Triturus dobrogicus
Danube Crested Newt
NT
Appendix II
Appendix II
Amphibian
s
Amphibian
s
48
Reptiles
Elaphe quatuorlineata
Four-lined Snake
NT
Appendix II, IV
-
49
Reptiles
Emys orbicularis
European Pond Turtle
NT
Appendix II, IV
-
50
Reptiles
Testudo graeca
Greek tortoise
VU
Appendix II, IV
-
51
Reptiles
Vipera ursinii
Meadow Viper
VU
Appendix II, IV
-
Lutra lutra
Eurasian Otter
NT
Appendix II, IV
Appendix II
Mesocricetus newtoni
Romanian Hamster
NT
Appendix II, IV
-
Mustela eversmannii
Steppe Polecat
LC
Appendix II, IV
-
52
53
54
-
Mammmal
s
Mammmal
s
Mammmal
Appendix 3
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3,
4A
Appendix 3
Near Threatened species
Endangered species
Critically Endangered species
Vulnerable species
Endangered species
Vulnerable species
Vulnerable species
Vulnerable species
No.
Crt.
Category
Species (Latin)
Species (en)
IUC
N
Habitats
Directive
Bern
Convention
GEO 57/
2007
Romania
s
Mammmal
Appendix 3,
55
Mustela lutreola
European Mink
CR Appendix II, IV
Appendix II
Endangered species
s
4A
Mammmal
56
Phocoena phocoena
Harbour Porpoise
LC
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix 3
Endangered species
s
Mammmal
Rhinolophus
57
Greater Horseshoe Bat
LC
Appendix II
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
s
ferrumequinum
Mammmal
Appendix 3,
58
Sicista subtilis
Southern birch mouse
LC
Appendix II, IV
Appendix II
s
4A
Mammmal
European ground
Appendix 3,
59
Spermophilus citellus
VU Appendix II, IV
Appendix II
Vulnerable species
s
squirrel
4A
Mammmal
Common Bottlenose
60
Tursiops truncatus
LC
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix 3
Endangered species
s
Dolphin
Mammmal
European Marbled
Appendix 3,
61
Vormela peregusna
VU Appendix II, IV
Appendix III
Endangered species
s
Polecat
4A
IUCN (The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) Red list of Threatened Species: DD - Data deficient, LC – Least concern, VU –
Vulnerable, NT – Near Threatened, EN – Endangered, CR – Critically Endangered;
Habitats Directive – Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora: Appendix II - Animal and
plant species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation, Appendix IV - Animal and plant species of
community interest in need of strict protection;
Bern Convention- Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats - 19.IX.1979: Appendix I – Strictly protected flora species; Appendix II
– Strictly protected fauna species; Appendix III – Protected fauna species;
approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011: Appendix 3 - Animal and plant species whose conservation requires the designation of Special
Areas of Conservation and Special Bird Protection Areas; Appendix 4A - Species of community interest. Animal and plant species that require strict protection;
Appendix 5A - Species of community interest. Animal and plant species of community interest, except bird species, whose removal from nature and exploitation
are subject to management measures.
Red Book of vertebrates in Romania, Romanian Academy, „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, 2005 – the criteria for the classification of species
and the degrees of endangerment are the same as in the IUCN Red List of threatened species.
Table no. 3-13 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest, mentioned in
Delta Region
Birds
No.
Phen IU
Species (Latin)
Species (en)
Directiv GEO 57/ 2007
crt
ology CN
e
Levant
Appendi
1
Accipiter brevipes
OV
LC
Appendix 3
Sparrowhawk
xI
Acrocephalus
Moustached
Appendi
2
OV
LC
Appendix 3
melanopogon
Warbler
xI
Common
Appendi
3
Alcedo atthis
MP, S LC
Appendix 3
Kingfisher
xI
Lesser WhiteAppendi
4
Anser erythropus
Ac
VU
Appendix 3
fronted Goose
xI
Appendi
5
Anthus campestris
Tawny Pipit
OV
LC
Appendix 3
xI
Appendi
6
Aquila chrysaetos
Golden Eagle
S
LC
Appendix 3
xI
Greater Spotted
Appendi
7
Aquila clanga
P
VU
Eagle
xI
Eastern Imperial
Appendi
8
Aquila heliaca
MP
VU
Appendix 3
Eagle
xI
Lesser Spotted
Appendi
9
Aquila pomarina
OV
LC
Appendix 3
Eagle
xI
10
Ardea purpurea
Purpule Heron
OV
LC
11
Ardeola ralloides
Squacco Heron
OV
LC
12
Asio flammeus
Short-eared Owl
OI
LC
13
Aythya nyroca
Ferruginous
Duck
OV,RI
NT
14
Botaurus stellaris
Bittern
OV,RI
LC
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms of the SPAs from Danube
Red Book of
vertebrates in
Romania
Vulnerable species
Critically Endangered
species
Endangered species
species
species
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Bern
Conventi
on
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
Bonn Convention
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II (reproducing
populations in the Western
Palearctic)
Appendix I
Appendix II (Western
No.
crt
Species (Latin)
15
Branta ruficollis
16
Bubo bubo
17
Burhinus oedicnemus
18
Buteo rufinus
19
Calandrella brachydactyla
20
Caprimulgus europaeus
21
Charadrius alexandrinus
22
Species (en)
Red Brested
Goose
Eurasian Eagle
Owl
Eurasian Thickknee
Long legged
Buzzard
Greater Shorttoed Lark
Eurasian
Nightjar
Phen
ology
IU
CN
OI
EN
S
LC
OV
LC
P, OV
LC
OV
LC
OV
LC
Kentish Plover
OV
LC
Charadrius morinellus
Dotterel
OV
LC
23
Chlidonias hybridus
(Chlidonias hybrida)
Whiskered Tern
OV
LC
24
Chlidonias niger
Black Tern
OV
LC
25
Ciconia ciconia
White Stork
OV
LC
26
Ciconia nigra
Black Stork
OV
LC
27
Circaetus gallicus
OV
LC
28
Circus aeruginosus
OV, S
LC
29
Circus cyaneus
OI
LC
Short-toed
Snake-eagle
Western Marshharrier
Northern
Birds
Directiv
e
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
GEO 57/ 2007
Red Book of
vertebrates in
Romania
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
-
species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Bern
Conventi
on
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
Bonn Convention
Palearctic populations)
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
No.
crt
Species (Latin)
Species (en)
Phen
ology
IU
CN
Harrier
30
Circus macrourus
Pallid Harrier
P, OI
NT
31
Circus pygargus
Montagu's
Harrier
OV, P
LC
32
Coracias garrulus
European Roller
OV
NT
33
Crex crex
Corncrake
OV
LC
34
Cygnus columbianus
Tundra Swan
OI
LC
35
Cygnus cygnus
Whooper Swan
OI
LC
36
Dendrocopos leucotos
S
LC
37
Dendrocopos medius
S
LC
38
Dendrocopos syriacus
S
LC
39
Dryocopus martius
S
LC
40
Casmerodius albus
(Egretta alba)
Great Egret
OV, RI
LC
41
Egretta garzetta
Little Egret
OV
LC
42
Emberiza hortulana
Ortolan Bunting
OV
LC
43
Falco cherrug
Saker Falcon
MP
EN
44
Falco columbarius
Merlin
OI
LC
White-backed
Woodpecker
Middle Spotted
Woodpecker
Syrian
Woodpecker
Black
woodpecker
Birds
Directiv
e
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
GEO 57/ 2007
Red Book of
vertebrates in
Romania
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
-
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendi
xI
Vulnerable species
-
species
Bern
Conventi
on
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Bonn Convention
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
No.
crt
Species (en)
Phen
ology
IU
CN
Species (Latin)
45
Falco naumanni
Lesser Kestrel
OV
LC
46
Falco peregrinus
Peregrine Falcon
S, OI
LC
47
Falco vespertinus
OV
NT
48
Ficedula albicollis
OV
LC
49
Ficedula parva
OV
LC
50
Gallinago media
P
NT
51
Gavia arctica
OI
LC
52
Gavia stellata
OI
LC
53
Sterna nilotica
(Gelochelidon nilotica)
Gull-billed Tern
OV
LC
54
Glareola pratincola
Common
Pratincole
OV
LC
55
Grus grus
Common Crane
P
LC
56
Gyps fulvus
Griffon Vulture
Ac
LC
57
Haliaeetus albicilla
White-tailed
Eagle
MP,
OI
LC
58
Hieraaetus pennatus
(Aquila pennata)
Booted Eagle
OV
LC
59
Himantopus himantopus
Black-winged
Stilt
OV
LC
Red-footed
Falcon
Collared
Flycatcher
Red-breasted
Flycatcher
Great Snipe
Black-throated
Loon
Red-throated
Loon
Birds
Directiv
e
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
GEO 57/ 2007
Red Book of
vertebrates in
Romania
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
species
species
species
Endangered species
Bern
Conventi
on
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Bonn Convention
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II (Western Eurasia
and Africa populations)
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix I, Appendix II
Appendix II
-
No.
crt
Species (en)
Phen
ology
IU
CN
Species (Latin)
60
Ixobrychus minutus
Little Bittern
OV
LC
61
Lanius collurio
OV
LC
62
Lanius minor
OV
LC
63
Larus genei
Ac,
OV
LC
64
Larus melanocephalus
OV
LC
65
Larus minutus
Little Gull
P, OV
LC
66
Limosa lapponica
Bar-tailed
Godwit
Ac
LC
67
Lullula arborea
Wood Lark
OV
LC
68
Luscinia svecica
(Cyanosylvia svecica)
Bluethroat
P, OV
LC
69
Melanocorypha calandra
Calandra Lark
MP, S
LC
70
Mergus albellus
(Mergellus albellus)
Smew
OI
LC
71
Milvus migrans
Black Kite
OV
LC
72
Neophron percnopterus
Egyptian vulture
OV
EN
73
Numenius tenuirostris
Slender-billed
Curlew
Ac
CR
74
Nycticorax nycticorax
Night Heron
OV
LC
75
Oenanthe pleschanka
Pied Wheatear
OV
LC
Red-backed
Shrike
Lesser Grey
Shrike
Slender-billed
Gull
Mediterranean
Gull
Birds
Directiv
e
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
GEO 57/ 2007
Red Book of
vertebrates in
Romania
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
species
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
species
species
species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Bern
Conventi
on
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
Bonn Convention
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix I
-
No.
crt
Species (en)
Phen
ology
IU
CN
Species (Latin)
76
Oxyura leucocephala
White-headed
Duck
OI
EN
77
Pandion haliaetus
Osprey
P
LC
78
Pelecanus crispus
OV
VU
79
Pelecanus onocrotalus
OV
LC
80
Pernis apivorus
OV
LC
81
Phalacrocorax pygmeus
OV,
RI, S
LC
82
Phalaropus lobatus
P
LC
83
Philomachus pugnax
Ruff
P
LC
84
Picus canus
Grey-faced
Woodpecker
S
LC
85
Platalea leucorodia
Spoonbill
OV
LC
86
Plegadis falcinellus
Glossy Ibis
OV
LC
87
Pluvialis apricaria
Eurasian Golden
Plover
P, RI
LC
88
Porzana parva
Little Crake
OV
LC
89
Porzana porzana
Spotted Crake
OV
LC
90
Porzana pusilla
Baillon's Crake
OV, P
LC
Dalmatian
Pelican
Great White
Pelican
European
Honey-buzzard
Pygmy
Cormorant
Red-necked
Phalarope
Birds
Directiv
e
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
Appendi
xI
GEO 57/ 2007
Red Book of
vertebrates in
Romania
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix 3,
Appendix 5E
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Appendix 3
Bern
Conventi
on
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
III
Appendix
III
Appendix
III
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Appendix
II
Bonn Convention
Appendix I
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Appendix II
Birds
Red Book of
Bern
Species (Latin)
Species (en)
Directiv GEO 57/ 2007
vertebrates in
Conventi
Bonn Convention
e
Romania
on
Yelkouan
Appendi
Appendix
91
Puffinus yelkouan
Ac
VU
Shearwater
xI
III
Appendi
Appendix
92
Recurvirostra avosetta
Pied Avocet
OV
LC
Appendix 3
Vulnerable species
Appendix II
xI
II
Sterna albifrons (Sternula
Appendi
Appendix
93
Little Tern
OV
LC
Appendix 3
Endangered species
Appendix II
albifrons)
xI
II
Sterna caspia
Appendi
Appendix Appendix II (Western Eurasia
94
Caspian Tern
P
LC
Appendix 3
(Hydroprogne caspia)
xI
II
and Africa populations)
Appendi
Appendix
95
Sterna hirundo
Common Tern
OV
LC
Appendix 3
xI
II
Sterna sandvicensis
Appendi
Critically Endangered Appendix
96
Sandwich Tern
OV
LC
Appendix 3
Appendix II
(Thalasseus sandvicensis)
xI
species
II
Appendi
Appendix
97
Sylvia nisoria
Barred Warbler
OV
LC
Appendix 3
xI
II
Appendi
Critically Endangered Appendix
98
Tadorna ferruginea
Ruddy Shelduck
OV
LC
Appendix 3
Appendix II
xI
species
II
Appendi
Appendix
99
Tringa glareola
Wood Sandpiper
P
LC
Appendix 3
Appendix II
xI
II
Appendi
Appendix
100
Xenus cinereus
Terek Sandpiper
Ac
LC
xI
III
Phenology - Ac – accidentally species; MP – partially migratory; OV – summer guest; OI – winter guest; P – passage species; RI – rare in winter; S – sedentary bird;
IUCN (The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) Red list of Threatened Species: LC – Least concern, VU – Vulnerable, NT –
Near Threatened, EN – Endangered, CR – Critically Endangered;
Birds Directive – Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (codified version of
Directive 79/409/EEC as amended): Appendix I – Bird species subject of special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their survival
and reproduction in their area of distribution;
approved with modifications and completions by Law no. 49/2011: Appendix 3 - Animal and plant species whose conservation requires the designation of Special
Areas of Conservation and Special Bird Protection Areas; Appendix 5E: Species of community interest whose trade is allowed under special circumstances;
No.
crt
Phen
ology
IU
CN
Red Book of vertebrates in Romania, Romanian Academy, „Grigore Antipa” National Museum of Natural History, 2005 – the criteria for the classification of species
and the degrees of endangerment are the same as in the IUCN Red List of threatened species;
Bern Convention- Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats - 19.IX.1979: Appendix II – Strictly protected fauna species; Appendix
III – Protected fauna species;
Bonn Convention – The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals: Appendix I – Threatened Migratory Species; Appendix II - Migratory
Species requiring international cooperation.
3.5
DATA REGARDING THE STRUCTURE AND DYNAMICS OF THE AFFECTED SPECIES
POPULATIONS (NUMERICAL EVOLUTION OF POPULATION WITHIN THE NATURA 2000 SITES,
ESTIMATIVE PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION OF THE SPECIES AFFECTED BY THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF DDISDS, HABITAT SURFACE IS LARGE ENOUGH TO ENSURE THE
SPECIES MAINTENANCE ON LONG-TERM)
Currently, there are no updated information regarding the structure and dynamics of species
populations of the 20 Natura 2000 sites from Danube Delta Region. The only information available are
those concerning the population size of the species of community interest, presented in the Natura
2000 Standard Data Forms, but they do not present age and sex structure or populations dynamics, and
also gives no information about the location of populations within the site, in this respect being difficult
to determine if the population is affected by the implementation of DDISDS, given that some sites
intersects the implementation area only on small surfaces.
Along with the completion of the studies regarding the inventory, mapping and assessment of the
conservation status of wild fauna and flora of community interest, for which were declared the Natura
2000 sites, may be obtained updated information concerning the size, structure and population
dynamics of species of community interest (if the project involved that kind of activities).
We appreciate that, currently, there are no sufficient information to present data on the structure and
dynamics of populations of the species of community interest affected by the implementation of
DDISDS. This information will be analyzed separately for each project/ type of intervention likely to have
a significant impact on Natura 2000 sites, within the appropriate assessment studies.
The boundaries of any Natura 2000 site are conventional boundaries that do not involve the existence of
some geographical or anthropogenic barriers in the field that could hinder the species movements. This
means that the land areas outside the protected natural areas can be just as valuable as those inside
them, in terms of maintaining the conservation status of species, especially when precisely on this
phenomenon (species displacement) depends the ensuring of population connectivity or providing food
resources (e.g. for species with high mobility, such as mammals and birds, they may use different
habitats existing both inside the Natura 2000 site and outside the site, and can often be present even in
strongly anthropogenic habitats).
3.6
STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS THAT CREATE AND MAINTAIN THE
INTEGRITY OF THE NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST
The Danube Delta is a complex of aquatic ecosystems, alongside with whom are encountered also
forest, coastal, anthropogenic ecosystems etc. In Danube Delta, the most important role plays the water
brought by the Danube. The conditions for the development of the aquatic and terrestrial vegetation
are favored through the silt brought and deposited, due to the decreased flow rate. This complex of
habitats, created with the direct or indirect contribution of Danube River, represents favorable habitats
for carrying out various activities (breeding, feeding or resting) for the invertebrate species, fish,
amphibians and reptiles, mammals, bats or birds.
The inner area of the Danube Delta Region is characterized by steppe meadows, isolated forest bodies
and agricultural crops. For the Natura 2000 sites: ROSPA0009 Beştepe-Mahmudia, ROSPA0019 Cheile
Dobrogei, ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe, ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel and ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea,
localized in the continental zone, the main component that provides structural and functional integrity is
the grassland. Grassland habitats are used by small species of birds as feeding and nesting habitats (on
land or isolated trees, in underground galleries or anthropogenic structures). The birds of prey use the
grassland mainly for hunting or recreation, but for some species, the inaccessible grasslands (due to
topography) can be used also as nesting habitats. Most birds of prey prefer the forests and human
structures, located in the vicinity of open habitats, used for feeding, as a nesting habitat. In this area,
along with the SPAs, are localized also a series of SCIs: ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului, ROSCI0067
Deniz Tepe, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului, ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean, some of them being
overlapped with the SPAs. The habitats present within the SCIs, through the floristic species diversity,
provide a constant supply of food (and also breeding and resting habitats) for some species of small
mammals (Sicista subtilis, Spermophilus citellus, Mesocricetus newtoni), bats (Rhinolophus
ferrumequinum), as well as for the mammalian predators of small or medium size (Vormela peregusna,
Lutra lutra, Mustela eversmannii, Mustela lutreola). Dobrudja's herpetofauna is characterized by the
presence of reptile species that were able to adapt to dry conditions (Testudo graeca, Vipera ursinii,
Elaphe quatuorlineata). The small mammals represents a source of food for some species of reptiles
(Vipera ursinii, Elaphe quatuorlineata), and in a similar manner these are hunted by small or medium
carnivores.
For those sites for which the main component that provides structural and functional integrity is the
water (lakes, canals, flood plains, etc.) the species diversity is often higher than in other sites, due to the
presence of fish, amphibians, reptiles, and bird species in greater numbers. These sites (ROSPA0031
Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim-Sinoe, ROSPA0040 Dunărea Veche-Braţul Măcin, ROSPA0052 Lacul
Beibugeac, ROSPA0060 Lacurile Taşaul-Corbu and ROSPA0121 Lacul Brateş) are especially important for
the birds that nest in the reeds, on the lakes surface, in floodplains or in the trees adjacent to the
aquatic habitats. At the same time, due to the high diversity of species, these habitats represents
nesting habitats for ichthyophagous, insectivorous, omnivorous or omnivore birds, while due to reduced
accessibility offer vast territories for resting.
The relatively high diversity of aquatic habitats allowed also a strong growth of the fauna, with
numerous species of invertebrates, fish, amphibians and reptiles, mammals and birds. The aquatic
habitats of the Danube Delta are among the richest, at national level, in terms of number of species,
while between these species a number of relationships (predator-prey, symbiosis, parasitism etc.) have
developed relationships that helps maintain the numerical balance between species, populations and
groups of fauna.
3.7
THE CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES, WHERE WERE ESTABLISHED
THROUGH MANAGEMENT PLANS
For most of the Natura 2000 sites potentially affected by the projects/ types of interventions proposed
in the DDISDS, the elaboration of the Management Plans is not yet complete. The studies regarding the
inventorying, mapping and assessment of the conservation status of wild fauna and flora of community
interest, based on which the Management Plans will be achieved, have been completed or are ongoing,
following that at the end of 2015, all the Natura 2000 sites for which the studies were funded through
the Environmental Sectoral Operational Programme to have Management Plans, finalized and approved
by the central authority for environmental protection.
The only Management Plan approved is „Planul de management integrat al Parcului Naţional Munţii
Măcinului, ariei de protecţie specială avifaunistică ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel şi sitului de importanţă
comunitară ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului”27. According to this integrated Management Plan for Măcin
Mountains National Park (MMNP), ROSPA0073 and ROSCI0123, seven management objectives were
established:
27
http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/management/432
conservation and protection of biodiversity and of landscape elements;
promotion of tourism and recreation in line with the objectives of preserving the natural
heritage;
prohibition of human activities impacting the environment, that are not in the interests of
human communities within the protected area and its proximity and that are not using
traditional techniques or new technologies with reduced environmental impact;
supporting the scientific research activities and environmental monitoring, which do not harm
the protected elements;
promoting and encouraging the educational activities for the local population, tourists and
general public;
promoting the ecological restoration activities in areas where the ecological balance has been
affected;
informing the public and local communities about the economic, cultural and spiritual aspects of
the conservation activities from MMNP, ROSCI0123 and ROSPA0073.
These 7 management objectives will be operationalized through specific actions in the Action Plan
proposed to be realized in the next 5 years.
It may be considered that, in accordance with the main objective of Natura 2000 european network „to
maintain and, where necessary, to restore the favorable conservation status of the species and habitats
of community interest, for which have been designated the Natura 2000 sites”, as well as with the
requirements of national legislation in force, in all the potentially affected sites, the conservation
objectives will be formulated in order to ensure a favorable conservation status for the maintenance of
the habitats and species subject to the protection for each site and to ensure the integrity of the site (by
maintaining coherence of its ecological structure and functions).
3.8
DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE NATURA 2000 SITES,
INCLUDING EVOLUTIONS/ CHANGES THAT MAY OCCUR IN THE FUTURE
Description of the current state of conservation of the protected natural areas of community interest
was achieved by describing the conservation status of species of flora and fauna of community interest,
as well as of the habitats of community interest, present in the Natura 2000 sites from Danube Delta
Region, according to the information contained in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms28.
Due to the large number of species of flora and fauna and habitats present in the 8 SCIs and 12 SPAa, we
have chosen to present the conservation status graphically for each category, and structured on Natura
2000 sites.
The conservation status of the habitats of community interest was analyzed according to the parameters
described in the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms for the 8 SCIs and in the Order 207/ 2006 regarding
the approval of the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form and its completion manual: representativity,
relative surface, conservation status and overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the
concerned natural habitat type. A brief overview of the conservation status in each Natura 2000 site is
shown in Figure no. 3-23.
28
Of the 8 sites of community importance which overlaps with the study area it is noted ROSCI0065 Delta
Dunării, which records the highest values for all 4 parameters. Thus, in what concern the degree of
representativity of the habitat type within the site, out of the 29 habitats listed in the Natura 2000
Standard Data Form of ROSCI0065, 15 have an excellent representativity, 12 have a good
representativity and only 2 have a significant representativity. None of the habitats of community
interest within this site have an insignificant representativity. In what concern the relative surface (the
report between the surface covered by a particular habitat at national level and that covered by the
same habitat at the site level), for ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, 17 habitats have a share between 15 and
100%, 4 habitats between 2 and 15% and only 8 have a share of less than 2%. Through this analysis we
can assume that the habitats within this site are unique or almost unique in the country, their largest
surface being found within this site. The importance of the Natura 2000 habitats from ROSCI0065 Delta
is strengthened also by the fact that the degree of conservation of the structures and functions of the
natural habitat types and the possibilities of recovery / reconstruction are classified as excellent for 13
of the habitats of community importance and good for 16 of them. The overall assessment of the site
value in terms of conserving the natural habitats, reveals that 13 of the total of 29 habitats, representing
44%, have an excellent value, 14 (representing 48%) have a good value and only 2 have a considerable
value (representing 6.8%).
no. of habitats
no. of habitats
Representativity
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Bună
Semnificativă
100 >/= p > 15%
Nesemnificativă
Conservation status
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
no. of habitats
no. of habitats
Excelentă
Excelentă
Bună
Medie sar redusă
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Valoare excelentă
Relative surface
15 >/= p > 2%
2 >/= p > 0%
Overall assessment
Valoare bună
Valoare considerabilă
Figure no. 3-23 Conservation status of the habitats of community interest within the 8 SCIs
The conservation status of species of flora and fauna of community interest was analyzed according to the parameters described in the Natura 2000 Standard Data
Forms for the 8 SCIs and in the Order 207/ 2006 regarding the approval of the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form and its completion manual: population,
conservation, isolation and overall assessment. Within the 8 SCIs are listed 61 species of flora and fauna of community interest: 11 species of plants, 19 species of
invertebrates, 15 species of fish, 6 species of amphibians and reptiles and 10 species of mammals (including one bat species). Figure no. 3-24 gives a concise
overview of the conservation status of species of flora and fauna of community interest within the 8 SCIs.
It is noted also a Natura 2000 site, through the presence of large populations of the species compared with their nationwide populations. Thus, ROSCI0065 Delta
Dunării hosts populations greater than 15% of the national total, for 23 species, more than double than ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean, which hosts
populations greater than 15% of the national total, for only 10 species. Also, ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării stands out also through the conservation status of the
habitats important for the species of community interest, habitats that are in an excellent conservation status for 8 species and good for 30 of them. As regards
the degree of isolation of the populations of species of community interest towards the normal range spreading of the species, it is noted that 5 of the sites have
such (almost) isolated populations of some species of community interest. Among the species whose populations were assessed as (almost) isolated in at least 2 of
the Natura 2000 sites, we mention: Sicista subtilis, Mesocricetus newtoni, Elaphe quatuorlineata, Moehringia jankae and Campanula romanica. The overall
assessment of the site value for the conservation of the species of community interest, reveals that for the most of the sites predominate a good value,
considerable value being found only for 2 species from 2 distinct Natura 2000 sites (Campanula romanica - ROSCI0060 Dealurile Agighiolului and Rhinolophus
ferrumequinum - ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului). The excellent value of the overall assessment was found in 5 of the Natura 2000 sites, from which ROSCI0065
Delta Dunării, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcinului and ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Doborgean, provides excellent features of the site for about 25% of species (considered
relevant for them).
Population
Conservation
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
no. of species
no. of species
25
20
15
10
5
0
100 >/= p > 15%
15 >/= p > 2%
2 >/= p > 0%
Nesemnificativă
Excelentă
Bună
Medie sar redusă
Isolation
no. of speies
30
25
20
15
Overall assessment
30
no. of species
25
20
15
10
5
0
10
5
0
Populaţie (aproape) izolată
Populaţie neizolată, dar la limita ariei de distribuţie
Populaţie neizolată, cu o arie de răspândire extinsă
Excellent value
Good value
Considerable value
Figure no. 3-24 Conservation status of flora and fauna species of community interest within the 8 SCIs
The conservation status of the bird species of community interest from the 12 SPAs is presented in Figure
no. 3-25. The conservation status of the bird species of community interest is presented separately for
each of the 4 parameters used within the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms and detailed in the Order
207/ 2006 regarding the approval of the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form content and its completion
manual: population, conservation, isolation and overall assessment of the site value for the
conservation of the concerned species.
In ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim-Sinoie are found the most species of birds whose
population represents more than 15% of the national population, respectively 43 species. In other
words, for 43 species of birds, this site is one of the few places in the country where they nesting,
feeding or transiting during the passage. Other 2 sites that are showing this feature are ROSPA0076
Marea Neagră (for 10 species) and ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag (for 2 species). Also, ROSPA0031 Delta
Dunării şi Complexul Razin-Sinoie stands out also through the conservation status of the habitats
important for the bird species of community interest, habitats that are in an excellent conservation
status for 4 species and good for 71 of them. Other sites presenting an excellent conservation status for
some of the bird species are: ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia, ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei and
ROSPA0040 Dunărea Veche - Braţul Măcin (for over 25% of the bird species of community interest in
each site) and ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe (for over 50% of the bird species of community interest in each
site). As regards the degree of isolation of the populations of bird species of community interest towards
the normal range spreading of the species, it is noted that 3 of the sites have such (almost) isolated
populations of some bird species of community interest: ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim –
Sinoie, ROSPA0073 Măcin – Niculiţel and ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră. The species whose populations
were assessed as (almost) isolated in the Natura 2000 sites, are: Aquila clanga, Falco naumanni,
Pelecanus onocrotalus, Falco cherrug and Puffinus yelkouan. In terms of the overall assessment of the
site, out of the 12 SPAs, stands out ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razin-Sinoie, who has an
excellent conservation value for 21 bird species and a good value for 31 species out of the 89 bird
species of community interest present within the site.
Population
no. of bird species
100 >/= p > 15%
15 >/= p > 2%
2 >/= p > 0%
Insignificant
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
no. of bird species
no. of bird species
no. of bird species
50
40
30
20
10
0
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
40
30
20
10
0
Conservation
Excellent
Good
Medium or reduced
Isolation
(almost) isolated population
unisolated population, but at
the limits of the distribution
range
unisolated population with an
extensive distribution range
Overall assessment
Excellent value
Good value
Considerable value
Figure no. 3-25 Conservation status of the bird species of community interest within the 12 SPAs
In Table no. 3-14, Table no. 3-15 and Table no. 3-16 are summarized all Natura 2000 habitat types
(unique mentions), Natura 2000 species of flora and fauna (unique mentions), respectively Natura 2000
bird species (unique mentions), present in the Natura 2000 sites from Danube Delta Region, according
to the parameters used to assess their conservation status within the sites, being easily to observe the
number of sites that hosts a particular type of habitat, respectively a certain species, with a certain value
of the mentioned parameters.
Table no. 3-14 Number of SCIs that hosts the habitats of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their conservation status
within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
Representativity
Relative surface
Conservation status
Overall assessment
Habitat code
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
1110
2
1
1
2
2
1130
1
1
1
1
1140
1
1
1
1
1160
1
1
1
1
1210
1
1
1
1
1310
1
1
1
1
1410
1
1
1
1
2110
1
1
1
1
2160
1
1
1
1
2190
1
1
1
1
3130
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
3140
2
1
1
2
2
3150
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
3160
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
3260
1
1
1
1
3270
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
6410
1
1
1
1
6420
1
1
1
1
6430
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
6440
2
2
2
2
6510
3
1
2
3
3
8230
2
2
2
2
8310
2
2
2
2
1150*
1
1
1
1
1530*
2
2
2
2
-
Representativity
Relative surface
Conservation status
Overall assessment
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
2130*
1
1
1
1
40C0*
1
1
3
2
3
5
2
3
6120*
1
1
1
1
62C0*
5
1
1
1
4
1
5
2
4
7210*
1
1
1
1
91AA
3
1
1
2
1
1
3
2
1
1
91F0
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
91I0*
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
91M0
2
1
1
2
1
1
91X0
2
2
2
2
91Y0
2
2
1
1
2
92A0
3
1
1
2
1
1
3
2
1
1
92D0
1
1
1
1
Total
31
35
8
29
16
29
16
57
1
21
45
8
Representativity (measure how "typical" is a certain habitat): A – excellent representativity, B – good representativity, C – significant representativity;
Relative surface (the site surface covered by the natural habitat reported at the surface covered by the same habitat at national level): A: p>15 %; B: p>2
%; C: p>0 %;
Conservation status (the degree of conservation of the structures and functions of the natural habitat type, as well as the possibilities for restoration /
reconstruction): A – excellent conservation, B – good conservation, C – medium or reduced conservation;
Overall assessment (the overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the concerned natural habitat type): A – excellent value; B – good
value, C – considerable value.
Habitat code
Table no. 3-15 Number of SCIs that hosts flora and fauna species of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their
conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
Population
Conservation
Isolation
Overall assessment
Species name
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
Agrimonia pilosa
1
1
1
1
Aldrovanda vesiculosa
1
1
1
1
Alosa immaculata
2
2
2
2
Alosa tanaica
2
1
3
1
2
3
Anisus vorticulus
1
1
1
1
Arytrura musculus
1
1
1
1
Aspius aspius
1
1
1
2
1
3
2
1
Bolbelasmus unicornis
1
1
1
1
Bombina bombina
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
Callimorpha quadripunctaria
1
1
2
2
2
Campanula romanica
2
2
2
1
1
3
1
2
1
1
Catopta thrips
1
1
1
1
Centaurea jankae
1
1
1
1
Centaurea pontica
1
1
1
1
Cerambyx cerdo
1
1
2
2
2
Cobitis taenia
1
1
1
3
3
3
Coenagrion ornatum
Colias myrmidone
1
1
1
1
Echium russicum
3
1
2
3
1
2
Elaphe quatuorlineata
1
2
3
3
1
2
Emys orbicularis
1
1
1
3
3
1
2
Euphydryas maturna
1
1
1
1
Gobio albipinnatus
1
1
1
1
Gobio kessleri
2
1
2
2
2
Graphoderus bilineatus
1
1
1
1
Species name
Gymnocephalus baloni
Gymnocephalus schraetzer
Himantoglossum caprinum
Iris aphylla ssp. hungarica
Leptidea morsei
Lucanus cervus
Lutra lutra
Lycaena dispar
Marsilea quadrifolia
Mesocricetus newtoni
Misgurnus fossilis
Moehringia jankae
Morimus funereus
Mustela eversmannii
Mustela lutreola
Ophiogomphus cecilia
Osmoderma eremita
Paracaloptenus caloptenoides
Pelecus cultratus
Phocoena phocoena
Pholidoptera transsylvanica
Potentilla emilii-popii
Rhinolophus ferrumequinum
Rhodeus sericeus amarus
Sabanejewia aurata
Sicista subtilis
Spermophilus citellus
A
1
1
1
Population
B
C
D
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
4
Conservation
A
B
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
5
C
A
1
Isolation
B
1
1
2
C
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
3
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
Overall assessment
A
B
C
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
3
2
2
6
1
2
1
1
2
2
5
1
Conservation
Isolation
Overall assessment
A
D
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
Testudo graeca
2
1
4
4
1
2
3
Theodoxus transversalis
1
1
1
Triturus dobrogicus
1
3
3
1
2
Tursiops truncatus
1
1
1
1
Umbra krameri
1
1
1
1
Vipera ursinii
1
1
1
1
Vormela peregusna
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
2
Zingel streber
1
2
3
1
2
3
Zingel zingel
1
2
3
1
2
3
Total
41
39
39
4
18
98
3
16
23
80
22
94
2
Population (size and density of the specie's population from the site in relation to the populations present within the national territory): A - 100>p>15 %; B 15>p>2 %; C - 2>p>0 %; D – insignificant population;
Conservation (the degree of conservation of the habitat's features that are important for the species concerned and the possibilities for restoration): A – excellent
conservation, B – good conservation, C – medium or reduced conservation;
Isolation (the degree of isolation of the population present on the site towards the normal range of specie's distribution): A – almost isolated population, B unisolated population, but at the limits of the distribution range, C - unisolated population with an extensive distribution range;
Overall assessment (the overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the concerned species): A – excellent value; B – good value, C – considerable
value.
Species name
Population
B
C
3
1
1
1
Table no. 3-16 Number of SPAs that hosts bird species of community interest from the study area and the parameters used to assess their
conservation status within the sites, according to the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
Species name
Accipiter brevipes
Acrocephalus melanopogon
Alcedo atthis
Anser erythropus
Anthus campestris
Aquila chrysaetos
Aquila clanga
Aquila heliaca
Aquila pomarina
Ardea purpurea
Ardeola ralloides
Asio flammeus
Aythya nyroca
Botaurus stellaris
Branta ruficollis
Bubo bubo
Burhinus oedicnemus
Buteo rufinus
Calandrella brachydactyla
Caprimulgus europaeus
Charadrius alexandrinus
Charadrius morinellus
Chlidonias hybridus
Chlidonias niger
Ciconia ciconia
Ciconia nigra
A
1
1
1
1
Population
B
C
3
4
1
8
1
3
7
D
2
2
1
1
1
1
A
7
1
5
2
2
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
8
5
4
1
1
1
4
2
5
2
2
1
1
1
5
5
3
3
3
6
2
1
2
3
5
3
5
1
2
1
2
Conservation
B
1
1
1
3
3
5
7
2
1
1
3
1
8
2
8
5
2
2
4
1
5
4
8
7
C
A
Isolation
B
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
C
7
1
2
1
8
4
5
8
2
2
1
3
1
7
5
8
7
7
6
4
1
5
4
8
7
Overall assessment
A
B
C
3
5
1
2
1
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
4
4
6
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
5
4
6
6
6
2
4
1
1
2
1
3
1
5
1
6
7
3
2
Species name
Circaetus gallicus
Circus aeruginosus
Circus cyaneus
Circus macrourus
Circus pygargus
Coracias garrulus
Crex crex
Cygnus columbianus bewickii
Cygnus cygnus
Dendrocopos leucotos
Dendrocopos medius
Dendrocopos syriacus
Dryocopus martius
Egretta alba
Egretta garzetta
Emberiza hortulana
Falco cherrug
Falco columbarius
Falco naumanni
Falco peregrinus
Falco vespertinus
Ficedula albicollis
Ficedula parva
Gallinago media
Gavia arctica
Gavia stellata
Gelochelidon nilotica
Glareola pratincola
A
1
Population
B
C
3
4
7
2
7
7
1
2
6
4
4
D
2
1
A
4
4
5
Conservation
B
3
8
9
8
4
3
C
A
Isolation
B
4
C
3
8
9
8
8
8
Overall assessment
A
B
C
4
2
1
4
4
6
3
1
6
1
2
4
2
8
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
1
5
2
4
2
1
1
4
3
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
10
4
1
1
3
1
3
1
2
3
2
2
6
3
1
3
10
1
1
1
2
1
4
1
3
2
2
4
2
4
5
3
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
7
2
1
3
11
2
1
7
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
5
5
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
Species name
Grus grus
Gyps fulvus
Haliaeetus albicilla
Hieraaetus pennatus
Himantopus himantopus
Ixobrychus minutus
Lanius collurio
Lanius minor
Larus genei
Larus melanocephalus
Larus minutus
Limosa lapponica
Lullula arborea
Luscinia svecica
Melanocorypha calandra
Mergus albellus
Milvus migrans
Neophron percnopterus
Numenius tenuirostris
Nycticorax nycticorax
Oenanthe pleschanka
Oxyura leucocephala
Pandion haliaetus
Pelecanus crispus
Pelecanus onocrotalus
Pernis apivorus
Phalacrocorax pygmeus
Phalaropus lobatus
A
1
1
1
1
Population
B
C
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
5
5
1
2
1
5
1
1
2
D
2
1
A
2
1
1
8
4
1
5
1
2
1
7
1
5
4
2
1
2
1
2
2
4
3
7
4
1
3
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
5
1
1
2
3
1
Conservation
B
1
4
7
2
3
1
4
2
2
3
4
1
2
2
3
2
1
2
2
2
3
5
6
4
1
2
C
A
1
Isolation
B
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
C
1
4
6
4
3
1
4
2
2
4
5
1
7
2
3
2
1
2
1
1
4
4
4
2
2
Overall assessment
A
B
C
1
1
3
1
2
2
3
4
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
4
2
1
7
1
1
3
3
3
2
1
1
5
1
2
2
6
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
3
1
Conservation
Isolation
Overall assessment
A
D
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
Philomachus pugnax
1
1
1
2
1
1
Picus canus
3
2
2
2
Platalea leucorodia
1
1
4
4
1
3
Plegadis falcinellus
1
1
2
2
1
1
Pluvialis apricaria
1
1
1
Porzana parva
1
2
1
1
1
1
Porzana porzana
1
1
1
Porzana pusilla
1
1
1
Puffinus yelkouan
1
2
1
1
1
1
Recurvirostra avosetta
1
1
2
1
4
3
1
Sterna albifrons
1
1
4
4
4
Sterna caspia
2
1
2
2
2
Sterna hirundo
2
2
1
4
4
4
Sterna sandvicensis
2
1
2
2
2
Sylvia nisoria
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
Tadorna ferruginea
1
1
2
2
1
1
Tringa glareola
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
Xenus cinereus
1
1
1
1
Total
56
100
206
93
70
274
18
5
39
318
50
231
81
Population (size and density of the specie's population from the site in relation to the populations present within the national territory): A - 100>p>15 %; B 15>p>2 %; C - 2>p>0 %; D – insignificant population;
Conservation (the degree of conservation of the habitat's features that are important for the species concerned and the possibilities for restoration): A – excellent
conservation, B – good conservation, C – medium or reduced conservation;
Isolation (the degree of isolation of the population present on the site towards the normal range of specie's distribution): A – almost isolated population, B unisolated population, but at the limits of the distribution range, C - unisolated population with an extensive distribution range;
Overall assessment (the overall assessment of the site value in terms of conserving the concerned species): A – excellent value; B – good value, C – considerable
value.
Species name
Population
B
C
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
4
4.1
IDENTIFICATION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT
IDENTIFICATION OF CURRENT THREATS, PRESSURES AND ACTIVITIES WITH IMPACT ON
NATURA 2000 SITES IN THE DANUBE DELTA REGION
4.1.1 Informations extracted from Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms
In order to identify current threats, pressures and activities exerted on Natura 2000 sites that are
present in the study area, we consulted the database available on the website of the European
Environment Agency (EEA - http://www.eea.europa.eu/data- and-maps / data / nature-5) on protected
natural areas that are included in the Natura 2000 ecological network (SCI and SPA), designated at
national level, including the protected components within them. Where the information regarding the
forms of actual impact on Natura 2000 sites that are present in the Danube Delta region were missing,
they were completed with the ones under section 4.3 of the Natura 2000 factsheets, updated in
accordance with Decision 2011/484/EU concerning a site information format for Natura 2000 sites and
published on the MEWF website on 17 February 2015. In the case of ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării, no
information was found on major threats, pressures and activities with impact in the site, nor in the EEA
database or in the Natura 2000 factsheets, and in the case of ROSPA0009 Beştepe – Mahmudia, the EEA
database lists a series of activities, but without a clear indication of their occurrence or intensity, and in
the site factsheet these information are missing.
Figure no. 4-1 illustrates the main threats, pressures and activities with impact inside SCIs from the
Danube Delta region and their share based on the intensity of their impact. The site with the most
numerous types of threats, pressures or activities is ROSCI0201 Podişul Nord Dobrogean, most of them
manifested with a low intensity. The sites where threats, pressures and activities with a high intensity
are present (excluding ROSCI0065 Delta Dunării where data is not present) are: ROSCI0012 Braţul Măcin,
ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină and ROSCI0105 Lunca Joasă a Prutului, due mainly to grazing,
eutrophication, polder creation and silting.
Figure no. 4-2 presents the main threats, pressures and activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs from
the Danube Delta region, and their share based on the intensity of their impact. Threats, pressures and
activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs occur only in the case of 4 sites: ROSCI0060 Dealurile
Agighiolului, ROSCI0066 Delta Dunării - zona marină, ROSCI0067 Deniz Tepe şi ROSCI0123 Munţii
Măcinului. None of these threats, pressures or activities occur with a high impact. The main threats that
manifest with medium impact are: hunting, eutrophication and pollution of surface waters (first in
ROSCI0060, and the next two in ROSCI0066).
Figure no. 4-3 illustrates the main threats, pressures and activities with impact within SPAs in the
Danube Delta region, and their share based on the intensity of their impact. The only site (except
ROSPA0009 for which no data is available) without manifested threats, pressures and activities with
impact is ROSPA0032 Deniz Tepe. Threats, pressures and activities with high intensity are present in six
SPAs: ROSPA0019 Cheile Dobrogei, ROSPA0031 Delta Dunarii si Complexul Razim – Sinoie, ROSPA0060
Lacul Taşăul - Corbu, ROSPA0076 Marea Neagră, ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag, ROSPA0100 Stepa
Casimcea, due to the presence of roads and highways; grazing; outdoor sports and recreation; hunting;
littering; capturing, poisoning, poaching; sand and gravel pits; discharges; urban areas, human presence;
transport corridors; collection and removal of terrestrial animals; port areas; use of hormones and
chemicals in agriculture.
Figure no. 4-4 presents the main threats, pressures and activities with impact in the vicinity of SPAs in
the Danube Delta region, and their share based on the intensity of their impact. In the case of
ROSPA0073 Măcin – Niculiţel and ROSPA0091 Pădurea Babadag (except ROSPA0009 for which no data is
available) no threats, pressures and activities with impact sites are present in the vicinity. Threats,
pressures and activities with high impact occur in the vicinity of 7 SPAs, except ROSPA0052 Lacul
Beibugeac, in whose neighborhood low impact activities are manifested (fertilization and littering) and
ROSPA0100 Stepa Casimcea, in whose neighborhood activities impact (urbanized areas and human
presence) are manifested. Threats, pressures or high impact activities that manifest in the vicinity of 7
SPAs are generated due to the presence of: sand and gravel pits; grazing; other industrial / commercial
areas; exploration or extraction of oil and gas; changes in cultivation practices; passive professional
fishing; outdoor sports and recreation; use of hormones and chemicals in agriculture; industrial /
commercial areas; fire and fire suppression; cultivation; soil pollution and solid waste (excluding
discharges); livestock; overhead lines for electricity and telephone; erosion; military maneuvers; sport
and recreation structures; urban areas, human presence. The site where the most numerous types of
threats, pressures or activities are present is ROSPA0031 Delta Dunării şi Complexul Razim - Sinoie, most
of these manifesting with a high intensity.
Figure no. 4-1 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SCIs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their
impacts
Figure no. 4-2 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SCIs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of
their impacts
Figure no. 4-3 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact within SPAs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of their
impacts
Figure no. 4-4 Main threats, pressures or activities with impact in the vicinity of SPAs from the Danube Delta Region and their share based on the intensity of
their impacts
4.1.2 Additional considerations
Transport of sediments loaded with pollutants from upstream Danube to downstream in Delta
A delicate subject for the Danube Delta has always been the impact of the activities from the upstream
Danube, through the sediments loaded with pollutants that arrive within the Delta region as well as in
the Black Sea.
Along the time, several studies have investigated the impacts of this phenomenon on the Black Sea. A
relevant study in this regard is represented by “Mările sud-europene: evaluarea şi modelarea
schimbărilor ecosistemice (Southern European Seas: Assessing and Modelling Ecosystem changes SESAME)”, conducted over a period of 48 months (2006-2010), one of the aspects addressed between
2006 – 2007 being also the impact of liquid, solid and associated with pollutants (with accent on
nutrients) flow rates of the Danube on the north western side of the Black Sea. Were tracked also the
effects of pollutants on the characteristic ecosystems.
In what concern the solid flow rate introduced by Danube into the Black Sea, according to the
measurements performed by INCD GEOECOMAR and compared with the results obtained along the time
by other research institutes (example INMH), is about 25,088,292 tons/ year, the share on the arms
being as follows: Chilia – 67.7 %, Sulina – 17.2 % and Sf. Gheorghe – 15.1 %. According to the same
study, this intake of alluviums has decreased gradually, from 58,413,118 tons/ year (average for the
period 1858-1900) up to 25,088,292 tons/ year (average for. the period 1981-1989). From the quantities
of the alluviums carried by the Danube to the Black Sea, 8.7 % represents the flow dragged (sands with a
diameter> 0.1 mm) which, under the wind action, penetrate the marine circuit, taking part to the
morphological processes. The calculation of the amounts of nutrients discharged annualy by the Danube
river into the Black Sea was of 1.76 x 106 t (93.6% NO3, 2.7% NO2 and 2.4% P-PO4), which represents
99.525% of the total contribution of nutrients from the entire coastal areas into the sea. The following
amounts (kilotonnes/ year) were calculated based on the average values of some characteristic
parameters and of the multiannual liquid flow of the Danube (6050 m3.s-1): phytoplankton – 286,189,
zooplankton – 6,212, suspended solids – 3,221.673, NO3 – 1,062.334, P04 – 23,057, Cu - 1,355, Ni –
0,359, Fe - 117,624, Mn – 8,443, I – 2,601, detergents – 3,116.
According to INCD GEOECOMAR, romanian partner within the project, among the main effects of the
anthropogenic impact on the north western side of the Black Sea basin, are: the significantly reduction
of water retention and flood mitigation capacity; reduction of the solid flow rate carried by Danube and
the increase of the coastal erosion rate; 30 % reduction of the wetland surfaces actively involved within
the retention and release of the nutrients and a very significant discharged of nutrients into the north
west of the Black Sea.
A well developed study regarding the effects of the toxic pollutants (heavy metals) on the Lower Danube
system is “Ecotoxicology of the heavy metals in Danube floodplain”, elaborated by Virgil Iordache, 2009.
The study area is represented more precisely by the Small Island of Brăila, which is a group of islands
under the natural flood regime (of which the most important are Ostrovul Popa and Ostrovul Fundu
Mare), which is part, in its turn, from the Lower Danube system, a regional complex of ecosystems
(Cristofor, 1992, Vădineanu , Cristofor şi Iordache, 2001). Among the main conclusions of this research
report, conducted over a period of 7 years, in collaboration with several specialized institutions from
Romaniain, is mentioned that Small Island of Brăila plays a significant role in the biogeochemical circuits
of the heavy metals in the Lower Danube system, mainly due to the intervention of flooding water
filtration. Small Island of Brăila represents an “access gate” of Danube Delta, a real filter for the
pesticides and alluviums carried by the river from the entire European basin, which still benefits of
natural self-regulating mechanisms.
„Water quality of the Danube River and his impact on the Danube Delta and the Black Sea” is another
study that analyzes the water quality at the entire Danube River, along the time, the specific problems
facing the downstream sector of the Danube River, as well as the main problems facing the Danube
Delta and the Black Sea. Among the main specific problems facing the downstream sector of the Danube
River, are mentioned:
Nutrient pollution. Romania is among the countries located downstream to Danube, alongside
Bulgaria, Moldavia and Ukraine, countries that are confronted with the nutrient pollution,
exported from the upstream Danube countries: in the case of nitrogen, the mean contribution
of the downstream countries is about 23.4%, compared with the upstream countries, which is
about 76.6 %, while for phosphorous the mean contribution of the downstream countries is
about 28.5 %, compared with the “import” of pollution from the upstream countries which is
about 71.5 %. The nutrient concentration/ load entering in the Danube Delta and the Black Sea
decreased in the year 1994 in comparison with the year 1988, with the following values:
regarding the concentrations, 27 % for nitrogen and 65 % for phosphorous, and regarding loads,
39 % for nitrogen and 66 % for phosphorous. This decreases mentioned above doesn’t reflect
only the water quality protection measures, taken in the last period of time, but also show the
declining of the industrial activities and of the quantities of fertilisers applied in agriculture in
the transition countries from the Eastern Europe;
Pollution with non-biodegradable organic substances. These organic non-biodegradable
substances can’t be “”filtered”” by the Danube Delta and it represent an import from the
upstream countries. The general time trend of the concentration of the organic substance,
evaluated firstly as COD-Cr, is the diminishing, both in the upstream countries and in Romania.
Within the study was confirmed the hypothesis that the Danube transports towards the
downstream sector a load of heavy degradable chemical substances, “imported” from the
upstream sector to the Danube Delta and to the Black Sea, without representative local
contributions;
Pollution with heavy metals. Excepting the control sections S5 and S6 (Mohacs-Bezdan and
Banatska-Palanka-Bazias), which presents a significant “export” of Cd, Pb, Hg and Cr towards the
downstream countries, it occurred relatively reduced concentrations of heavy metals
transported from the upstream countries;
Associated sediment pollution. The sediments from the Iron Gate reservoir present an
important pollution due to the upstream industrial discharges with heavy metals and other
chemical substances. The heavy metals (Hg, Cu, Pb, Zn and Cr) constitutes the most
representative accumulation of pollutants in sediments at concentrations of 1.76 (Pb) till 3.05
(Hg) times greater than the concentrations recorded in the Rhine Delta.
In what concerns the main problems facing the Danube Delta and the Black Sea, the eutrophication
is the most delicate of all, as a result of the use of fertilisers in the Danube basin. Thus, according to
the same study, the Danube River transported 49.300 tonnes of phosphorus and 500.000 tonnes of
nitrogen in the year 1989, quantity which is ten times greater in comparison with the year 1960 in
the case of nitrogen and 3.5 times greater in the case of phosphorus. Despite the fact that in the
year 2003 this impact declined to 392.000 tonnes of nitrogen/ year and about 19.000 tonnes of
phosphorus/ year, the “pressure” of the Danube on the downstream sector still remains at high
level.
The eutrophication, as a result of the high loads of nutrients, contributed to drastic changes and to
global perturbations of the natural balances of the ecosystems. Thus, the first algal blooming
occurred in the year 1975. After this date, as a direct consequence of the accentuation of the human
activity, this process repeated with a different amplitude and frequency, so, that until the year 1992,
it has been founded an increase of phytoplankton concentration, while after 1992, this process
diminished, as a result of declining of nutrients load transported by the Danube. Also in the case of
Black Sea, as a result of the increase of the nutrients load discharged, in parallel occurred an
induced development of other species.
The evolution of the water quality of the Danube River shows a slight improvement in the last
decades, mainly because of to the declining of the industrial activities (decrease of the application of
mineral fertilizers, closure of large animal farms etc.) in the former communist countries from the
Eastern Europe, situated in the middle and lower sector of Danube. The improvement is caused by
reduced nutrient inputs by Danube River. The transported phosphorus loads were reduced to about
50 % as compared to the situation around 1990.
Danube wetlands play a crucial role in sustaining biodiversity in the Danube basin, acting as natural
filters for nutrients and toxic substances, providing sediment and erosion control, flood protection,
maintaining surface and groundwater resources. They also contribute to the climate stability, their
diverse habitats offering support to a wide variety of species. In order to restore these wetlands
along the Lower Danube, in June 2000, the Environment Ministers of Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine
and Moldova signed a declaration to establish the Lower Danube Green Corridor (LDGC),
committing themselves to create a corridor of protected, restored and sustainable-managed
wetlands along the Lower Danube.
The important function of the wetlands within the retention of nutrients and toxic substances
process is also highlighted in two other articles:
„The Danube river in the lower sector in two hidrologycal hypostases – high and low
waters”, by Petre Gâştescu and Elena Ţuchiu, mentioned that the biochemical (ecotonal)
function of Danube floodplain results from hydrological function through maintaining the
balance in the carbon-nitrogen-phosphorus cycle, nutrients recycling, retention of toxic
substances (pesticides, heavy metals due to the biofilter role of alluvium), and
transformation of organic pollutants in inorganic compounds. The decreasing of ecotonal
space along the Danube River is leading to pollutants concentration increasing in the
Danube Delta and in the coastal and marine waters, having as main consequences, in terms
of ecological aspects, the modification of habitats, biodiversity and genetic assets, while in
terms of topoclimatic and socioeconomic aspects, the reduction the fish reproductive
potential, hunting animals and obvious of renewable resources valorisation;
„The Function of Wetlands” presents the “natural biofilter”quality of the Danube Delta.
Thus, one of the most important functions of the delta for the Black Sea is its ability to
absorb significant quantities of pollutants. The main ways in which this is achieved are:
 absorption of pollutants on particles of organic substances - this process is carried out
on particles of silt or detritus. In this area each kilogram of dry weight of the bottom
sediments contains on average two grammes of oil;
 the destruction of pollutants as a result of the functional activity of hydrobionts. The
microorganisms are the most active in this process (68%). The annual volume of organic
matter destroyed by hydrobionts makes up about 1.5 millions tons;
 absorption of pollutants by higher water plants. About 93-99% of the total absorbed
pollutants from the Danube accumulate in reedbeds.
Within the second article, the delta functions are compared with those of the kidneys, respectively the
filtering capacity in the body. The clearance rate for the main nutrients causing eutrophication in the
Danube Delta is 39.7 kg per minute for nitrates and 49.6 kg per minute for phosphates. The functional
productivity of the delta higher plants can be estimated over an annual period as: nitrates - 59,100 tons,
phosphates - 20,500 tons, heavy metals - 23,300 tons and about 100 kg pesticides. The intensity of
absorption of pollution in the Danube Delta is 13 times higher than in the Dniester and 16 times higher
than in the Dnieper.
Besides Delta faces the problem of intake of pollutants as a result of the activities carried out upstream
of the Danube, the changes that have occurred over time in the Danube Delta have led to its diminishing
capacity of self-purification.
According to the study „Delta Dunării - Una dintre “perlele naturii” din Europa”, performed by WWF, a
real threatened for the Danube Delta is represented by the modifications occurred both upstream
(nutrients retention, increased pollution) and downstream of the delta, among the most important, and
their effects, being as follow:
expanding the network of artificial canals inside the delta (from 1910 to 1990, its length
doubled, today being of approx.. 3,400 km). The new channels created for transport, as CrişanCaraorman and Mila 35 channel, changed the ecological balance of the delta ecosystems,
altering the natural water circulation and dramatically influencing erosion and sedimentation
processes;
the wetlands have been converted into farmland and fishponds, which caused a significant
decline in the delta fisheries, the rich nutrient silt being directly routed to the Black Sea, through
the newly created artificial channels, thereby contributing to the eutrophication process;
in 1990s, one quarter of the Danube Delta (974 km2) was dammed, including 400 km2 for
agricultural purposes;
Tulcea-Sulina arm (81 km) was regularized on its entire length, the former meanders and side
arms being disconnected from the natural system. The length of the arm was reduced from 85
to 62 km, and the wide navigable channel of 80 meters must be constantly dredged to ensure
the depth of 7.3 m;
in the 1960s they were cut also the meanders of the southern arm of St. George (109 km), which
is not navigable, thus losing about 50 km of its length;
in the coastline Razim-Sinoe 23,500 hectares were dammed, the separation of the main course
from the floodplain having as main effect the loss of some valuable habitats, which affected
both flora and fauna from the area.
An earlier study, „Environmental problems of the Danube Delta”, 1993, presents the roots of the decline
of the complex and varied ecosystems of the Danube Delta, from the past few decades, represented by
the four primary causes: high nutrient loads in the Danube River as it enters the delta; hydrologic
changes in the Danube River – primarily the elimination of the river’s floodplain; hydrologic changes
within the delta resulting from engineering works such as drainage programs, dikes, impoundments and
channel dredging; and nutrient and pesticide loading from agricultural activities inside the delta. Along
with the increasing process of contamination of the Danube, the hydrological modifications along the
river’s course have compromised its capacity for self-purification. Within the Romanian part of the river,
embankments built between 1963 and 1967 reduced floodplain by 290.000 hectares, which corresponds
to a loss of 4,3 cubic kilometres of water-retention capacity. As a result, the Danube has lost a portion of
its capacity to retain nutrients and heavy metals locally, thus being carried in the river to the delta.
The importance of wetlands restoration is highlighted also within this article. The researches realized
along time have shown that drained wetlands in the delta are probably the major cause of both its
inability to handle nutrient loads and its declining fisheries.
During the last period of time, a series of projects aimed to restoring natural habitats have been and are
still implemented in the Danube Delta region (including wetlands, former abandoned polders,
reforestation along the channels etc.), projects that are sustained also through the types on
interventions/ projects proposed within the different sectors of the DDISDS (Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Management, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development etc.).
Climate change
This subject was treated as a distinct section in the Environmental Report (section 7.2.5), respectively
the impact of climate change on various sectors of activity (agriculture, fisheries, forestry etc.), the way
how this is understood by the people from the Danube Delta region and from the institutional actors, as
well as the types of interventions/ projects proposed within the DDISDS addressing the needs of
mitigation and adaptation to climate change on the one hand, and those that have the potential to help
the increase/ decrease of CO2 emissions, on the other hand. In the following lines we tried to highlight
the main effects that climate change currently have on the biodiversity in the Danube Delta, as well as
future trends.
WWF elaborated within the synthesis report „Vulnerability of the Danube Delta region to climate
change”, 2012, aiming Romania, Ukraine and Moldova, scenarious concerning the impact of climate
change on various environmental and socio-economic factors. In what regards the potential changes as
results of climate change, in the Danube Delta and the coastal area of the Black Sea, are mentioned the
following prognosis:
Coastal erosion: the climate change predicted, especially the rise of the sea levels will increase
the coastal erosion. The salt sea water will intrude further upstream into the Danube river and
wetlands suppressing freshwater fauna and flora;
Eutrophication: the frequency of algal blooming will increase because of hypoxia, low water
table and high temperature;
Physical damage to habitats: the risk of larger scale damage to biotopes will increase due to
more intense flash floods, wildfires, storms etc;
Loss of biodiversity and mosaic wetlands: changes in the vegetation structure and distribution
will continue to persist (example: forest species started to dry (Alnus glutinosa), while in aquatic
vegetation certain species, more adapted to the new conditions, and dominate the lake). If no
hydro land reclaiming works are started, this process will intensify even more. Degradation of
phyto- and biodiversity which commenced in the 80’s will be ongoing;
Disappearing rare species on floodplains: for example, badgers and European mink are very rare
in this area. The red list of DDBR contains a number of 382 species, of which more than 40% are
critically endangered species. Changing in the condition of the wetland will lead to species
disappearing;
Declining ground water and plant diversity at sand dunes and ridges: in the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve were identified 128 alien plant species (Doroftei & Covaliov, 2009). Most
affected are natural floodplain forest, meadows and beach sand dunes.
In the same study, are presented the current situations and the forecasts in the context of climate
change for the following key issues and topics:
 Reeds: change in dominant communities; increase in fire frequencies; longer growing season
and salt water intrusion;
 Fauna species: phenology and lifecycle; invasive species.
For Romania, Ukraine and Moldova, it was elaborated a „Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and
Action Plan for Danube Delta region”. Within the Action Plan for adaptation to climate change, in the
case of natural systems, respectively ecosystems, are proposed the following measures:
 Preparatory measures:

Scientific research on the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystems;
 Preventive measures:

Include climate refugia and biodiversity migration corridors in the protected areas;

Modify the management plans and monitoring programmes for the transboundary
biosphere reserve according to new climate pattern.
 Reactive measures:

Restore degraded lands (including floodplains);

Manage invasive species.
As well, the main conclusions of the study „Danube Delta habitats versus climate change”, elaborated by
Doroftei and Mierlă, 2012, states that climate changes lead to modifications in the composition,
intensity and frequency of particular environmental elements, which determines increasing hazard
towards extremely rare or even inexistent phenomena for a specific area, fact that determines an
increasing risk (by increasing hazard on one hand and by increasing vulnerability of one or more
elements). Thus, in this way may be explained the high vulnerability of habitats to invasive plant species.
The main pressures on habitats within strictly protected areas for Danube Delta have been identified,
directly related to climate change, these pressures influencing directly approximately 60% of habitats.
The effects of climate change are mostly intensified by the anthropogenic factor, which plays the role of
amplification factor for processes and phenomena. A map of vulnerability towards flooding of the
habitats within DDBR was realized and the analysis of the reversed map revealed that most of habitats
are vulnerable towards drought, this being characteristic to aquatic and wet lands which represent an
overwhelming proportion within the entire territory of DDBR.
The presence of even less than 30% of DDBR surface of unprotected habitats (habitats which are not
classified according to Habitat Directive such as agricultural arrangements, fishing arrangements,
plantations etc.) induces the presence of a potential disturbance factor within the reserve regarding the
natural balance between various elements (biotic and abiotic) of each habitat. This fact is also reinforced
by the „propriety” of the human factor to intensify the effects of climate changes.
The types of interventions/ projects proposed by DDISDS, within the several sectors (Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Management, Agriculture and Rural Development, Fisheries and Aquaculture etc.),
addressed some of the measures proposed in the Action Plan for climate change adaptation for the
Danube Delta region, mentioned above, and are among the actions that are necessary to prevent the
achievement of the forecasts made about the potential changes that will occur in the Danube Delta as a
result of climate change (eg. the achieving of the hydro works for floodplain recovery).
4.2
IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL FORMS OF IMPACTS OF DDISDS
In order to quantify the potential forms of impacts of the types of interventions of DDISDS on Natura
2000 components, the first step was to identify the types of interventions which are likely to generate
pressures, the biodiversity components which can be affected during the phases of the projects
implementation and the types of impact generated.
The potential forms of impacts identified are:
Habitat loss – irreversible loss of the habitats of community interest / surfaces of habitats used for
needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of community interest (by constructions or
similar activities);
Habitat alteration - reversible loss of the habitats of community interest / surfaces of habitats used
for needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of community interest (pollution, changes in
water regime etc.);
Habitat fragmentation - fragmentation of the habitats of community interest / surfaces of habitats
used for needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of community interest (limiting
dispersion/ mobility/ barrier effect);
Disturbance – disturbance of the activities of the species of community interest (induced by human
presence, noise etc.);
Mortality – road victims or injuries as a result of species of community interest collisions with road
vehicles or other structures (e.g. aerial electrical lines);
Habitat enhancement (including the enhancement of the management of the species and habitats
conservation measures) – improvement of structure and functioning of the habitats of community
interest / surfaces of habitats used for needs of food, rest and reproduction of the species of
community interest as a result of the types of interventions implemented (we considered here also
the interventions that aim to improve the managerial performance and decisions related to species
and habitats conservation management).
Number of potential impacts
Birds
Amphibians & reptiles
Invertebrates
Mammals
Natura 2000 habitats
Fish
Plants
-80
Habitat loss
Disturbance
-60
-40
-20
Habitat alteration
Mortality
0
20
40
Habitat fragmentation
Habitat enhancement
Figure no. 4-5 and Figure no. 4-6 show the number and the share of potential impacts (habitat loss,
habitat alteration, habitat fragmentation, disturbance, mortality, habitat enhancement) for each Natura
2000 species group and habitats.
The largest share belongs to habitat enhancement (35%), followed by habitat alteration (24%), habitat
loss (14%), disturbance (14%), mortality (9%) and habitat fragementation (4%). The shares of potential
negative impacts sum up to 65%, compared to only 35% of the potential positive impacts.
Number of potential impacts
Birds
Amphibians & reptiles
Invertebrates
Mammals
Natura 2000 habitats
Fish
Plants
-80
-60
Habitat loss
Disturbance
-40
-20
0
Habitat alteration
Mortality
20
40
Habitat enhancement
Figure no. 4-5 Number of potential impacts (negative values indicates potential negative impacts)
Habitat loss
14%
Habitat
enhancement
35%
Habitat alteration
24%
Mortality
9%
Disturbance
14%
Habitat
fragmentation
4%
Figure no. 4-6 Percentage of each type of impact
In Table no. 4-1 are presented all the identified potential forms of impact of the types on interventions/
projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region.
Table no. 4-1 Preliminary analysis of the potential forms of impact of the types of interventions / projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.1
I.2
I.3
I.4
Development and
implementation of
measures
to
reduce solid waste
in natural areas.
Border
demarcation and
signage of strictly
protected
areas
and buffer areas,
sport fishing areas,
touristic routes,
camping, parking
areas, etc. and
development and
implementation of
a monitoring and
information
system,
incl.
technology such as
motion-activated
cameras,
watchtowers, etc.
Improve evidencebased
management by
developing
and
implementing
a
modern/efficient
monitoring system
and
predictive
model
for
sedimentation
dynamics in the
Danube Delta
An
in-depth
institutional
analysis
(functional review)
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Amphibians and reptiles
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Mammals (including bats)
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.5
of DDBRA and the
associated
administrative
reforms with the
aim of improving
its
managerial
performances, and
the
legislative
framework
governing
the
management of
DDBR area to
allow
local
residents
to
become
active
participants
in
guarding
and
managing
the
natural resource.
Capacity building
measures for the
communities and
DDBRA.
Equipment
and
operating costs for
physical
interventions to
restore
natural
water circulation
and key habitat
areas.
HA
HF
Plants
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.6
I.7
I.8
Restoration
of
ecological systems
and
natural
habitat within the
“Natura
2000”
network
for
species
of
European
conservation
concern, together
with development
of an integrated
monitoring system
covering
the
whole DD area
(including crossborder
areas),
supporting
evidence-based
decision making
and
community
participation.
Studies and TA for
biodiversity
conservation and
restoration
of
ecosystems and
natural habitats
within
“Natura
2000”
network
affected
by
anthropic impacts.
Identify additional
poldered
areas
eligible
for
ecological
restoration. This
will
include
feasibility studies
and
technical
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.9
I.10
I.11
I.12
projects for the
restoration
of
natural habitats
affected by nonecological
activities
in
agricultural,
fishery
and
forestry polders integral or partial
ecological
restoration works
Natural
capital
accounting studies
to determine the
highest value uses
of land and natural
resources
for
optimal
management.
Reforestation of
areas where the
natural
forest
vegetation
has
disappeared
or
been degraded.
Investments
to
support
local
action to reduce
nitrate pollution of
the
waterways
from agricultural
and
livestock
rearing activities.
Development of
an International
Center
of
Advanced Studies
Danube – Danube
Delta – Black Sea
x
HA
x
HF
x
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
for
biodiversity
preservation
I.13
I.14
I.15
I.16
Integrated
pest
management
–
develop
and
implement
an
integrated
pest
management
strategy
for
mosquitoes.
Integrated
reed
management
strategy.
Promoting the use
of
renewable
energy
sources.
Investments
in
pilot
projects
promoting the use
of
renewable
energy
sources
(wind,
solar
energy,
heat
pumps, biomass,
micro-hydro etc.)
and non-pollutant
technologies,
including
the
development and
introduction
of
environmentally
friendly propulsion
systems in the
Delta.
Improving
the
energy efficiency
of public buildings
(schools, hospitals,
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
x
x
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
administrative
buildings, etc.)
I.17
I.18
I.19
I.20
Extending
and
improving
the
energy efficiency
of public lighting
Support
for
improving energy
efficiency
of
households
Create
a
CC
partnership
platform, including
a
communitydriven
climate
adaptation fund
targeted at low
income families; a
micro grant or
loan mechanism
to support SMEs;
and a partnership
facility to promote
private - public
collaboration for
innovative climate
actions.
Designate a unit
with
a
clear
mandate
to
address
climate
change
issues,
with
a
small
number
of
dedicated
and
knowledgeable
staff, and capable
of working cross-
x
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
x
x
x
x
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
x
x
x
x
M
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
x
x
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
sector.
I.21
I.22
I.23
I.24
I.25
Develop clear and
easy to use local
guidelines
for
climate
change
and
energy
efficiency
programs.
Provision
of
special machinery
and equipment for
interventions by
IES and SMURD in
disaster situations
Works
for
protection against
floods in fourteen
(14)
towns/communes.
Modernization,
rehabilitation and
construction
of
Inspectorate for
Emergency
Situations
(IES)
infrastructure
facilities in TULCEA
+ Macin + Crişan +
Babadag
+
Topolog
Create
and
maintain an interinstitutional risk
factor database
x
x
M
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.26
I.27
I.28
I.29
I.30
Complete
coherent
and
comprehensive
pollution
emergency
response
and
prevention plans,
covering
both
water and land,
and both mobile
and fixed sources
of pollution
Create an interinstitutional
Pollution
Emergency
Response Team
Purchase
of
equipment
to
enable the first
response team to
quickly
access
pollution incident
sites in the Core
Delta
Create
and
maintain an interinstitutional
environmental
liability data-base
for data sharing
and
better
coordination
across agencies
Development and
Installation
of
Visitor
Infrastructure
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
Invertebrates
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
HE
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
HE
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
Birds
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
x
x
HE
I.2
6
I.2
6
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.31
I.32
I.33
I.34
I.35
I.36
I.37
Institutionalization
of a Danube Delta
Destination
Management
Organization
(DMO)
Design
and
implementation of
a destination-wide
program
for
product
and
attraction
development
Support
mechanism
for
innovative
and
sustainable
nature-based
tourism MSMEs &
social
tourism
enterprises
for
green
local
economy
A
region-wide
program
for
beautification of
settlements
Program
for
improved quality
of accommodation
facilities
and
services
Cultural heritage
interventions
(rehabilitation,
preservation, etc.)
Development of a
destination
interpretation
(learning)
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
x
x
x
x
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
x
HF
D
x
x
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
x
HF
D
x
M
HE
HL
HA
x
HF
D
x
x
M
HE
HL
HA
x
HF
D
x
x
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
x
HF
D
x
x
M
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
Plants
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
x
x
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
program.
I.38
I.39
I.40
I.41
I.42
Develop and roll
out program for
emergency
and
first
aid
for
tourism workers,
service providers
Develop
a
specialized
tourism research
observatory
Reduce
sedimentation in
major lakes with
the installation of
stop locks
Dredge
major
lakes to restore
water depth
Support transition
from
artisanal
capture
to
recreational
fishing (Improve
ecotourism venues
to accommodate
the
needs
of
recreational
fishers; Promote
and
provide
training
in
sustainable
recreational
fishing (catch-andrelease
fishing
etc.)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.43
I.44
I.45
I.46
I.47
I.48
I.49
I.50
I.51
Support artificial
reproduction
of
valuable species
like
pike
and
zander
and
construct simple
landing facilities in
places of fisher
concentrations
Improve
fish
habitat
Regulate
or
eliminate
uncontrolled fish
camping
Consider some tax
incentives, like the
elimination of the
water tax
Improve fisheries
data
collection
and analysis
Replace or modify
cherhana based
system
Strengthen
analytical capacity
at DDNRI
Improve fisheries
research
and
development
activities
in
research
institutes, public
institutions
and
fishermen
associations.
Improve
Aquaculture
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
M
HE
x
x
x
D
x
x
x
HF
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.52
I.53
I.54
Support
small
scale
fish
processing.
Diversify
home
and village level
fish processing by
introducing small
scale canning units
(for Gibel carp and
other low value
fish like roach and
bream)
and
improve smoking
systems (smoking
bags or small
electric smokers);
mainly to produce
delicacies
to
visiting tourists.
Modernization of
facilities
for
collection
/
processing
/
marketing
of
agricultural
produce
Modernization of
rural
infrastructure
(water, sanitation,
roads,
schools,
etc)
I.55
Jobs creation
I.56
Protection
and
improvement of
natural resources
(soil, water)
HA
HF
Plants
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
x
x
HL
HA
x
x
HF
Fish
D
M
x
x
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
x
x
x
HF
D
M
x
x
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
x
x
Birds
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
x
x
HE
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.57
I.58
I.59
I.60
I.61
I.62
I.63
I.64
Completion
of
land
restitution
and land book
registration
for
land/farms
consolidation
Support
for
environmentfriendly
agricultural
activities
within
Natura 2000 sites
Enlarge the access
to
vocational
education
for
agriculture
Modernization of
quality
control
systems
for
agricultural
products
Improved
information
on
local
and
European
financing,
including projects
preparation
Improvement of
Advisory/consultin
g and training
activity
for
farmers / rural
labor
Fostering organic
farming activities
Take-up of farming
activities by young
generations
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
I.65
I.66
I.67
I.68
I.69
I.70
I.71
I.72
I.73
I.74
Types of
interventions/
projects
Modernization/
rehabilitation of
irrigation
infrastructure
Consolidation and
modernization of
small farms
Creation of small
businesses outside
agriculture
Modernization of
technical
endowment
of
farms
Bottom-up
initiatives for local
development
Afforestation of
agricultural
and
non-agricultural
land in the Danube
Delta region
Conservation
of
local
patrimony
and
traditions
(including
handicrafts)
Release of land
through
concessions
by
Tulcea
County
Council
Exit of old farmers
and transfer of
assets
Foster
establishment of
producer
groups/organizatio
ns
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
x
?
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
HE
x
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
x
x
x
?
?
x
?
?
HF
x
x
?
Invertebrates
?
?
x
?
?
?
?
?
?
x
?
?
?
?
?
?
x
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
M
x
x
?
?
?
?
?
?
HE
x
?
?
?
?
?
?
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
I.75
I.76
I.77
I.78
I.79
I.80
I.81
Types of
interventions/
projects
Stimulate creation
of short supply
chains for the
benefit of tourism
activities
Support
branding/certificat
ion of agricultural
products and their
marketing
on
international
markets
Provide incentives
to
maintain
agricultural
activities in core
Delta
Support
rehabilitation of
flood protection
infrastructure
Enable
participation
of
farmers
and
processors to risk
management tools
Educational
infrastructure
upgrade
(especially
for
primary
and
secondary
education)
Modernization of
national road DN
22 Constanța Tulcea - Macin –
Braila
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
x
Plants
HE
I.2
3
HL
HA
HF
x
x
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
x
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
HA
HF
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
x
x
x
I.2
3
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
x
HA
HF
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
x
x
x
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
D
M
HE
I.2
3
I.2
3
I.2
3
x
x
x
I.2
3
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.82
I.83
I.84
I.85
I.86
Modernization of
County
Road
DJ229E, Section I
and II, NICULITEL –
ZEBIL – SARICHIOI
Modernization of
County
Road
DJ222N, Tulcea –
Pardina - Chilia
Veche
Modernization of
County
Road
DJ226:Tronson
DN22B-CorbuSăcele-IstriaMihaiViteazu
Modernization of
Tulcea,
Sulina,
Macin,
Isaccea,
Mahmudia
and
Chilia ports
Development and
modernization of
airport
infrastructure
x
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
Fish
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.87
I.88
I.89
I.90
I.91
I.92
I.93
Modernization of
county
roads
(regional transport
infrastructure):
DJ222B
BaiaCeamurlia de Sus;
DJ222
VisinaCeamurlia de Sus;
DJ 223A Enisala –
Babadag – Slava
Rusă, km 54+72438+798;
route
Cetatea
Histria - DN22/
Tariverde.
Rehabilitation and
modernization of
the Sulina Channel
Internet / ultrafast internet for
green tourism
Improvement of egovernment
services and local
public monitoring
systems
Support of ICT for
businesses
through e-portal
and grant facility
Formulating and
implementing
open data policies
Increasing vertical
integration of ICT
innovation
solutions in the
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
x
x
x
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
x
x
x
x
HA
HF
Fish
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
x
HE
HL
x
HA
x
HF
D
x
M
x
HE
HL
x
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
x
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
HE
Birds
HL
x
HA
HF
D
M
x
x
x
x
x
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
local economy.
I.94
I.95
I.96
I.97
Increasing private
investments in RDI
and encouraging
the demand for
RDI.
Increasing
knowledge,
technology
and
staff transfer with
RDI skills by means
of
partnerships
between private
and
research
environment.
Increasing
the
excellence
of
scientific basis as
engine
for
innovation,
by
developing
RD
infrastructure.
Increasing
the
involvement in EU
level research by
unlocking
the
excellence
potential in RDI,
such as within the
framework
program Horizon
2020
and
by
attracting talents
and
advanced
skills to the RDI
national system.
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.98
I.99
I.10
0
I.10
1
I.10
2
I.10
3
I.10
4
Developing
ITC
infrastructure and
systems
and
digital skills to
support education,
health,
online
culture and digital
inclusion
Water
and
sanitation
Projects in areas
with
>
2000
Population
equivalent
Water
and
sanitation
Projects in areas
with
<
2000
Population
equivalent
Collection
of
Floating Waste in
River Channels
Investments
in
SWM Systems for
Handling
Separated Waste
(waste separation
at
source,
collection, sorting
and transportation
facilities).
Public education
and
awareness
program on waste
management
Composting bins
for
rural
households
to
process
organic
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
waste
I.10
5
I.10
6
I.10
7
I.10
8
I.10
9
Investments
in
treatment
and
disposal facilities
for construction
and
demolition
waste
Recovering waste
collected
from
households
and
economic agents
Consolidate
the
response capacity
of Public Health
Directorate (PHD)
by designing and
implementing an
environmental
health surveillance
system
Rehabilitation/
modernization of
facilities, and IT
equipment
Modernization
and equipment,
and organize a
functional building
block at Tulcea
Emergency
Hospital (including
for
integrated
ambulatory
department), and
for Macin Hospital
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.11
0
I.11
1
I.11
2
I.11
3
Rehabilitation
/transformation of
TB pavilion at
Tulcea Emergency
Hospital to a social
accommodation
center (residential
care shelter)
Create
public
ambulatory
centers
by
rehabilitating
closed
hospital
buildings
in
Babadag
and
Sulina
Ensure
interoperability of
medical
information
systems at health
care
level
(telemedicine and
e-health)
Reforms
to
increase
costeffectiveness
of
sector
governance/
management
(hospital payment
mechanism
to
incentivize public
ambulatory, family
doctor,
and
telemedicine
systems)
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.11
4
I.11
5
I.11
6
I.11
7
I.11
8
Information,
education
and
communication
campaigns
on
healthy
and
hygienic
environment
Ambulances
for
emergency care
and rehabilitation
civil works
Provide
area
specific
training
for
medical
professionals
Increase
the
prevalence
of
health programs
focused
on
prevention
and
screening
Provision
of
relevant,
accessible
and
incentivized
LLL
programmes
in
sustainable
tourism,
agriculture
and
fishery
in
Community
Centers
for
Permanent
Learning
HA
HF
Plants
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
Birds
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
I.11
9
I.12
0
I.12
1
Creating
an
Education
&
Training Network
for students living
in remote areas or
with less than
2000 population
to provide access
to primary and
lower secondary
quality education
for all
Provide support
for creating VET
schools that are
relevant,
attractive
and
inclusive,
and
which produce a
workforce
with
knowledge & skills
of
international
standard
and
relevance to the
global demands of
the nature-based
tourism
and
recreational
fishing market
Enhance
kindergartens and
nursery services
through
development,
support,
rehabilitation and
provision
of
equipment
to
increase access to
early
childhood
HA
HF
Plants
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
x
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
education
care (ECEC)
I.12
2
I.12
3
I.12
4
I.12
5
I.12
6
and
Bring Early school
leavers back to
school
through
school after school
and
second
chance programs
Create
partnerships
between
employers,
E&T
providers
and
research bodies to
ensure
better
performance
of
education system
in addressing labor
market needs
Develop
early
childhood
(0-6
years) institutional
infrastructure in
communities with
high share of
Roma
Scaling up school
mediators
in
schools with high
percentage
of
Roma
Implementing
community grants
for
educational
intervention
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
I.12
7
I.12
8
I.12
9
I.13
0
I.13
1
I.13
2
I.13
3
Types of
interventions/
projects
Facilitate
regularization of
property rights
Other
social
protection
interventions
SME subsidies for
job placement for
NEETs in relevant
fields
Improve
digital
literacy among the
Roma
and
vulnerable groups
Increase
the
access to as well
as the efficiency of
social
service
provision
Strengthening
local
administrative
capacity
for
strategic planning
and
budgeting,
decision making,
human resource
management and
monitoring
and
evaluation
Identification,
development and
implementation of
measures
to
increase
transparency,
inclusiveness,
ethics
and
integrity,
and
reduce corruption
Habitats/
vegetations
Plants
Invertebrates
Fish
Birds
HL
HA
HF
HE
HL
HA
HF
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
in
public
authorities
and
institutions
I.13
4
I.13
5
I.13
6
I.13
7
Technical
Assistance (TA) for
ITI
program
management
Revise regulations
to improve the
design
of
household
subsidies
to
improve
affordability
of
services, and a
more
efficient
targeting and use
of financial and
natural resources
Improving access
and quality of
services provided
by the judicial
system
Actions intended
to ensure the
coordination
between
the
public institutions
dealing with the
conservation
of
biodiversity and
the
ecological
reconstruction of
the Danube Delta
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
HF
D
M
HE
Taxonomic group
Cod
e
Types of
interventions/
projects
Habitats/
vegetations
HL
HA
HF
Plants
HE
HL
HA
HF
Invertebrates
HE
HL
HA
The development
and
implementation of
online services
I.13 Urban
Renewal
x
x
x
x
x
x
9
Interventions
HL
Habitat loss
HA
Habitat alteration
HF
D
Disturbance
M
Mortality
HE*Habitat enhancement (including management of conservation enhancement)
HF
D
Fish
M
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
HE
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
M
HE
Birds
HL
HA
x
x
HF
D
I.13
8
x
x
M
HE
4.3
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
4.3.1 Impact significance assessment methodology
The proposed assessment methodology is consistent with legislative requirements, methodological
guidelines and best practice recommendations. The principle of the method is to consider the size of the
potential effects as being caused by two main parameters:
1. The magnitude of changes proposed by the projects / types of interventions.
2. Sensitivity of the potentially affected areas.
Table no. 4-2 Matrix used to assess the significance of the potential effects of the DDISDS
implementation
Magnitude
High
Moderate
Low
Low
Moderate
High
No
negative
negative
negative
positive
positive
positive
changes
Sensitivity
magnitude magnitude magnitude
magnitude magnitude magnitude
Very high
-3
-3
-2
0
+2
+3
+3
High
-3
-3
-2
0
+2
+3
+3
Moderate
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
Low
-2
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+2
Without
-1
-1
-1
0
+1
+1
+1
sensitivity
Where,
Color code
Impact significance
Significant negative impact
Moderate negative impact
Low negative impact
No effect can be identified (!
It doesn’t necessarily mean
that they don’t exist)
Low positive impact
Moderate positive impact
Significant positive impact
Necessary measures
Requires alternative solutions or compensation measures
Requires important avoiding and mitigation measures
Requires punctual avoiding and mitigation measures
-
Any measure that may lead to the extension/multiplication
of the effects
Using a matrix (Table. No 4-2) to evaluate the effects of the implementation of plan/ programme/
strategy has 3 major advantages:
 Represents a guarantee of using a uniform measure for assessing the effects for any of the
projects / types of interventions of the strategy and any analyzed biodiversity component;
 It is an effective tool for communicating the results of the assessment with both specialists and
the general public;
 It can easily use the results of spatial analyzes on the location and size of impacts.
Of course that the proposed matrix presents a number of limitations, the most important of which are
the following:

The magnitude of a project / type of intervention cannot always be assessed so exactly to be
classified in one of the classes of magnitude. To avoid this difficulty a precautionary approach is
used: classifying in a higher class;

Scoring (assigning a value of -3 to +3) is made for each proposed project / type of intervention
from the strategy, even if some of these types of interventions may include several projects
themselves. In this case, the given score matches either the potential cumulative impact (if any)
or corresponds to the project that is likely to produce the highest negative effects.
The magnitude is a three-dimensional parameter that takes into account:
Quantitative and qualitative appreciation on the proposed changes (e.g. improving / worsening
quality of resources, changing the structural or functional parameters of an environmental
component, etc.);
Spatial extent (e.g. local, across multiple ATU, on the whole territory of DDISDS);
Temporal extent (e.g. during construction, during the programming period, > programming period).
An important step in determining the potential impacts that may occur as a result of implementing the
types of interventions / projects of DDISDS is to identify their location. This is very important for a
subsequent determination of the spatial extent of the effects (e.g. local, across multiple ATU, on the
whole territory of DDISDS) and their temporal extensions (e.g. during construction, during the
programming period, > programming period), two essential components in determining the magnitude
of the impact, one of the main parameters for assessing impact significance. According to the
identification scheme based on the types of interventions / projects classified by their location and the
possibility of spatial delimitation for the related impact area, shown in Figure no. 4-7, DDISDS contains
the following types of interventions / projects:
Type A: projects for which the location is not relevant for analysis (generally those that do not
involve construction works and by their very nature do not have the potential to generate
negative effects on the sites of community importance, e.g.: “Technical assistance for an indepth institutional analysis (functional review) of DDBRA with the aim of improving its
managerial performances, and the legislative framework governing the management of DDBR
area, including to better guarantee direct access of the local population to natural resources and
services.”);
Type B: projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but no information is known
about their location;
Type C: projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information is
available about their location (approximate/incomplete location: “approximate” in the case of
WSS and IWM projects for which the limit of the land into the build-up area was considered in
the analysis, namely “incomplete” for projects like “Improving fish habitat” from the “Fisheries
and Aquaculture” sector, where only 2 lakes are included in the first phase, after which a series
of interventions on other lakes will be identified, which locations are not mentioned in this
phase). The spatial location of these projects was performed through digitization using Google
Earth Pro satellite images, according to the information available in the project title and
description;
Type D: projects with a specific location (vector data in SHP format was provided by the
beneficiary or other stakeholders), but the area of impact cannot be clearly defined (e.g. “I.88.
Rehabilitation and modernization of Sulina Channel”;
Type E: projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can
be defined.
The number and the percentage of types of interventions / projects according to their location and
the possibility of defining their areas of impact are shown in Figure no. 4-8.
Figure no. 4-7 Identification scheme for the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS based on their location and the possibility to define their area of impact
4; 3%
6; 4%
15; 11%
24; 17%
90; 65%
A
B
C
D
E
Figure no. 4-8 Number and percentage of types of interventions / projects of DDISDS based on their
location and the possibility to define their area of impact
5 classes of sensitivity were proposed: very high, high, moderate, low, without sensitivity (see Figure no.
4-9):
Very high sensitivity: natural and scientific reserves, strictly protected areas and integral
protection areas;
High sensitivity: all natural areas within SCI/SPAs, except for areas with very high sensitivity;
Moderate sensitivity: all semi natural areas (e.g.: arable, meadows) within SCI/SPAs and natural
areas located outside of SCI/SPA limits, except for areas with high and very high sensitivity;
Low sensitivity: anthropic areas within SCI/SPAs and all semi natural areas located outside of
SCI/SPAs, except for the ones mentioned above;
Without sensitivity: all anthropic areas located outside of SCI/SPA limits.
Sensitive areas from Măcin Mountains National Park, classified according to “Măcin Mountains National
Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcin and ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel Integrated Management Plan” 29,
approved by GD no. 1074/11.12.2013, were included within this classification in order to differentiate
sensitive areas based on its zoning, available in vector format:
 Very high sensitivity: strictly protected areas, integral protection areas;
 High sensitivity: sustainable conservation areas;
 Low sensitivity: sustainable development areas.
29
http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/management/432
Figure no. 4-9 Sensitivity classes in the DDISDS implementation area
4.3.2
Location of the projects / types of interventions of DDISDS in relation to the sensitivity
classes of the study area
The following figures show the types of interventions / projects of SDDIDD which have a specific location
(with or without a clear delineation of the impact area) and an approximate / incomplete location,
namely types C, D or E, in relation to the sensitivity classes of the study area (according to the
classification presented in the previous section).
Figure no. 4-10 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the
“Natura 2000” network for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering the whole DD
area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and community participation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management
sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-11 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has
disappeared or been degraded” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-12 Location of the project/type of intervention “Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea
for biodiversity preservation” (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-13 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the DRM sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region.
A – project detail “Works for protection against floods”, B – project detail “Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of IES infrastructure”
Figure no. 4-14 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the project/type of intervention “A region-wide program for beautification of settlements” (Tourism
sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-15 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and
Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-16 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/types of interventions “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” (Fisheries and
Aquaculture sector) in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-17 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Transport sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-18 Location (approximate/incomplete) of the projects/type of interventions from the Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water
management (IWM) sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-19 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the SWM sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
Figure no. 4-20 Location of the projects/type of interventions from the Health sector in relation to the sensitivity areas from the Danube Delta Region
4.3.3
Estimation of the surfaces from Natura 2000 sites potentially affected by the implementation
of the projects proposed by DDISDS
4.3.3.1
Methodology
Location of projects was accomplished, as mentioned in the previous sections, using vector data
received from the beneficiary, and for those projects for which this information could not be provided
by the beneficiary, spatial location was performed through digitization based on Google Earth Pro
satellite images, according to the information available in names or in the justifications of the projects
(for example, for projects such as "Reforestation of areas where the natural vegetation has disappeared
or been degraded", "Development and modernization of Tulcea airport infrastructure", "Development
of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity
preservation" etc.). In the case of the project for rehabilitating and strengthening the Sulina canal banks,
vector data have been supplied by the River Administration of the Lower Danube Galaţi.
In order to assess the land surface affected by the implementation of the projects/types of interventions
proposed by DDISDS, polygons were created for the projects that involve new constructions, as well as
modernization/rehabilitation/extension
works
(roads,
ports,
airport,
waste
transfer/sorting/composting/MBT stations, wastewater treatment plants, drinking water treatment
plants etc.) using the “Buffer” function in ArcGIS 10. The distances used were different depending on the
type of work involved (express road, county road, waterways, buildings, etc.) and anticipated impacts
(habitat loss, alteration, and disturbance). The created polygons were overlapped with the sensitivity
areas from the Danube Delta region, joint surfaces being then calculated and disaggregated by the
degrees of sensitivity, sector, and type of work. Distances used for the disturbance impact type were
established according to the information available in the literature (ex.: Forman et al. 2002).
Regarding the intersection of the projects with the types of land use (according to Corine Land Cover
2006), we mention that in the case of permanently occupied land, we considered the buffer for the
projects involving new constructions or extensions (i.e. where there will be habitat loss), and for
temporarily occupied land, the buffer for projects involving the modernization or rehabilitation of some
existing constructions was considered (i.e. where there will be a habitat alteration).
Buffers used for each type of intervention and forms of impact are shown in the following table:
Table no. 4-3 Buffers used to create the polygons that were subsequently used to calculate the
affected areas
Buffer for
Temporary
Buffer for
permanent
works
Disturbanc
Habitat
existing
constructions
(habitat
e (indirect improvemen
construction
(direct effects)
alteration) effects) (m)
t (m)
s (m)
(m)
(m)
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management
New
constructions
Reforestation
Habitat
rehabilitation
International
Center of
Advanced
Studies
Stipoc sand
bank
Lakes
-
Digitized polygon
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Digitized
polygon
Digitized
polygon
Buffer for
existing
construction
s (m)
Buffer for
permanent
constructions
(direct effects)
(m)
Temporary
works
(habitat
alteration)
(m)
Disturbanc
e (indirect
effects) (m)
Habitat
improvemen
t (m)
Disaster Risk Management (DRM)
New
constructions
Rehabilitation/
Modernization
Hydrotechnic
al works
IES
infrastructur
e
-
Digitized
polygons
-
-
-
-
-
Digitized
polygons
-
-
Land within
the built-up
area of the
mentioned
settlement
s
-
-
Digitized
polygons
-
-
15
5
675
495
-
-
-
200
-
Tourism
Rehabilitation/
Modernization
Beautificatio
n of
settlements
-
-
Fisheries and Aquaculture
Dredge major
lakes
Uzlina Lake
Fortuna Lake
-
Transport
ROAD SECTOR
New roads
Express road
Rehabilitations County road
NAVAL SECTOR
Ports
Modernization
5
25
-
-
-
-
-
Sulina
channel
AVIATION SECTOR
Modernization Airport
Digitized
polygons
Polygons
received
from the
River
Administrat
ion Of The
Lower
Danube
-
Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM)
New
constructions/
Extensions
DWTP/WWT
P
-
-
-
-
Rehabilitation/
STAP/SEAU
-
-
-
-
Land within
the built-up
area of the
mentioned
settlements
Land within
Buffer for
existing
construction
s (m)
Buffer for
permanent
constructions
(direct effects)
(m)
Temporary
works
(habitat
alteration)
(m)
Disturbanc
e (indirect
effects) (m)
Modernization
Habitat
improvemen
t (m)
the built-up
area of the
mentioned
settlements
30
Solid Waste Management (SWM)
Transfer
stations,
sorting, MBT
New
constructions
Digitized
polygons
-
-
-
-
Digitized
polygons
-
-
Digitized
polygons
-
-
Healthcare
Medical
infrastructur
e
Rehabilitation/
Modernization
-
Education
Educational
infrastructur
e
Rehabilitation/
Modernization
4.3.3.2
-
-
Type E projects / types of interventions - projects with a specific location, for which a clear
delimitation of the area of impact can be defined
This category includes the following 6 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS:
 Transport (6 types of interventions / projects):
I.81. Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanța - Tulcea - Macin – Braila;
I.82. Modernization of County Road DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL – ZEBIL – SARICHIOI;
I.83. Modernization of County Road DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia Veche;
I.84. Modernization of County Road DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-Săcele-Istria-Mihai Viteazu ;
I.86. Development and modernization of airport infrastructure;
I.87. Modernization of county roads (regional transport infrastructure):
30
o
DJ 222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus;
o
DJ 222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus;
o
DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798;
o
route Cetatea Histria – DN22/ Tariverde.
It is assumed that all the rehabilitation/ modernization works will be carried out on the existing sites of the DWTP/WWTP
For these projects, habitat areas that might be actually lost are equivalent to 0.01% of the intersected
SCI sites area. Lost areas in zones with very high and high sensitivity will be equivalent to <0.01% of the
intersected SCI sites area.
The habitat areas potentially altered by the implementation of these projects represent 0.02% of the
intersected SCI sites area. Potentially altered areas with very high and high sensitivity are equivalent to
0.01% of the intersected SCI sites area.
Areas where species activity disturbance may appear are estimated to cover 1.54% of the total
intersected SCI sites area. Areas where species activity disturbance may appear, located in zones with
very high and high sensitivity, are equivalent to 0.74% of the intersected SCI sites area.
The projects could affect a total area equivalent to 1.56% of the total intersected SCI sites area. In areas
with very high sensitivity, surfaces representing 0.76% of the intersected SCI sites could be affected.
In the case of the Special Protection Areas (SPA) network, habitat areas potentially lost through the
implementation of the projects are equivalent to 0.02% of the total intersected SPA sites area. In areas
with very high and high sensitivity, the areas that might be lost are equivalent to <0.01% of the
intersected SPA sites area.
The habitat areas potentially altered by the implementation of these projects represent 0.03% of the
intersected SPA sites area. Potentially altered areas with very high and high sensitivity are equivalent to
0.01% of the intersected SPA sites area.
Areas where species activity disturbance may appear are estimated to cover 1.97% of the total
intersected SPA sites area. Areas where species activity disturbance may appear, located in zones with
very high and high sensitivity, are equivalent to 0.61% of the intersected SPA sites area.
The projects could affect a total area equivalent to 2.01% of the total intersected SPA sites area. In areas
with very high sensitivity, surfaces representing 0.62% of the intersected SPA sites could be affected.
98,44%
0,09%
0,72%
Very high
High
98,44%
0,09%
0,67%
Moderate
1,56%
Low
Unaffected
Total affected in SCI
Unaffected
Figure no. 4-21 Share of the total areas within the Sites of Community Importance (SCI) intersected by projects with a specific location, for which a clear
delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E)
97,99%
0,08%
1,31%
Very high
High
97,99%
2,01%
0,07%
0,55%
Moderate
Low
Unaffected
Total affected in SPA
Unaffected
Figure no. 4-22 Share of the total areas within the Special Protection Areas (SPA) intersected by projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation
of the area of impact can be defined (Type E)
Table no. 4-4 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Sites of
Community Importance (SCI)
Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SCIs
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Type E
15,08
29,72
Total/location
1,42
2,49
48,69
Table no. 4-5 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) lost within Special
Protection Areas (SPA)
Sensitivity classes of areas (ha) within SPAs
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Type E
15,12
27,12
Total/location
109,82
4,91
156,96
Table no. 4-6 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within Sites
of Community Importance (SCI)
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Type E
8,99
62,63
Total/location
18,19
27,33
117,14
Table no. 4-7 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) altered within
Special Protection Areas (SPA)
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Type E
Total/location
9,01
64,48
103,79
216,69
39,41
Table no. 4-8 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by
disturbance within Sites of Community Importance (SCI)
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Type E
601,03
4539,74
Total/location
4994,34
578,79
10713,90
Table no. 4-9 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Land areas (ha) affected by
disturbance within Special Protection Areas (SPA)
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Type E
606,98
4680,81
Total/location
11008,49
665,89
16922,16
Table no. 4-10 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected
within Sites of Community Importance (SCI)
Projects
Type E
Very high
625,09
High
Moderate
4632,09
Total/location
5013,95
Low
608,61
10879,74
Table no. 4-11 Projects with a specific location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined (Type E) – Total of land areas (ha) affected
within Special Protection Areas (SPA)
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Type E
Total/location
631,10
4732,40
11222,10
17295,81
710,20
The lists of habitats and species of community interest on taxonomic groups (habitats, plants,
invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds) in the study area, according to Romania’s
reports to the European Union under Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive and Art. 12 of the Birds Directive,
which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects is presented in Annex no. III.
The number of habitats and species of community interest on taxonomic groups (habitats, plants,
invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds) which may be affected by the implementation
of these projects is presented in Table no. 4-12.
Birds
I.87.
Mammals
I.86.
Reptiles
I.84.
Amphibians
I.83.
Fish
I.82.
Modernization of national road DN
22 Constanța - Tulcea - Macin –
Braila
Modernization of County Road
DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL –
ZEBIL – SARICHIOI
DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia
Veche
DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-SăceleIstria-Mihai Viteazu
Development and modernization of
airport infrastructure
Modernizarea drumurilor judeţene
(infrastructura
de
transport
regional):
o DJ 222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus;
o DJ 222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus;
o DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag –
Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798;
o traseul Cetatea Histria – DN22/
Tariverde.
Invertebrat
es
I.81.
Project name
Plants
Project
code
Habitats
Table no. 4-12 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which
may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects
Number of habitats/ species of community interest
possibly affected
12
4
12
19
12
9
22
40
7
4
5
18
12
9
17
38
3
2
5
19
10
7
11
32
4
3
2
6
11
8
21
30
4
1
2
18
11
9
16
27
7
3
5
5
12
9
21
38
The number of unique habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which may be
affected by the implementation of Type E projects, is presented in Table no. 4-13. Among these, 3
species of fish (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii, Acipenser stellatus and Huso huso) are listed as CR (Critically
Endangered) and 1 species of birds (Falco cherrug) is listed as EN (Endangered) on the IUCN Red List.
Table no. 4-13 Number of unique habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups,
which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects
Number of unique habitats/ species of community interest possibly affected
Project type
Habitats Plants Invertebrates Fish Amphibians Reptiles Mammals Birds
Type E projects
4.3.3.3
24
5
14
19
12
9
25
47
Type D projects / types of interventions - projects with a specific location, but the area of
impact cannot be clearly defined
 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (1 type of intervention / project):
I.12. Development of an International Center of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta –
Black Sea for biodiversity preservation;
 Disaster Risk Management – DRM (1 type of intervention / project):
I.24. Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency Situations
(IES) infrastructure facilities in TULCEA + Macin + Crişan + Babadag + Topolog;
 Transport (1 type of intervention / project ):
I.88. Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel;
 Solid Waste Management (1 type of intervention / project):
I.102. Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at source,
collection, sorting and transportation facilities).
The project for rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel contains several types of
interventions consisting of: technical works to achieve bed stabilization, fairway restoration, protection
of Sulina Canal banks, and to reduce water flow and the amount of alluvia entering the canal at the
junction with the St. George channel, optimization of dredging works to ensure minimum navigation
depths at the mouth of the sea, arrangements for retaining alluvia upstream of Sulina bar and sending
currents into the sea.
An estimation of the land surfaces that might be affected by the technical works to achieve fairway
restoration and protection of the banks is shown in Table no. 4-14 and Table no. 4-15.
Sites of Community Interest (SCI) which might be affected by the implementation of the project
Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SCIs
Project
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Rehabilitation and
modernization of the Sulina
0
179.31
7.67
5.39
Channel
Total/location
192.37
Special Protection Areas (SPA) which might be affected by the implementation of the project
Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SPAs
Project
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Rehabilitation and
modernization of the Sulina
Channel
Total/location
0
179.31
7.67
5.39
192.37
The lists of habitats and species of community interest on taxonomic groups (habitats, plants,
invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds) in the study area, according to Romania’s
reports to the European Union under Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive and Art. 12 of the Birds Directive,
which may be affected by the implementation of Type E projects is presented in Annex no. III.
The number of habitats and species of community interest on taxonomic groups (habitats, plants,
invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds) which may be affected by the implementation
of these projects is presented in Table no. 4-16.
Reptiles
Mammals
Birds
I.102.
Amphibians
I.88.
Fish
I.24.
Development of an International Center
of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube
Delta – Black Sea for biodiversity
preservation
Modernization,
rehabilitation
and
construction of
Inspectorate for
Emergency Situations (IES) infrastructure
facilities in TULCEA + Macin + Crişan +
Babadag + Topolog
Rehabilitation and modernization of the
Sulina Channel
Investments in SWM Systems for
Handling Separated Waste (waste
separation at source, collection, sorting
and transportation facilities)
Invertebrates
I.12.
Project name
Plants
Project
code
Habitats
Table no. 4-16 Number of habitats and species of community interest, on taxonomic groups, which
may be affected by the implementation of Type D projects
Number of habitats/ species of community
interest possibly affected
2
0
2
0
10
3
11
28
12
4
13
19
12
9
17
37
23
3
3
20
8
3
8
29
26
4
3
20
11
10
20
39
4.3.3.4
Type C projects / types of interventions – projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their
nature), but not enough information is available about their location
(approximate/incomplete location)
 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (3 types of interventions / projects):
I.5. Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water
circulation and key habitat areas.
I.6. Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network
for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated
monitoring system covering the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting
evidence-based decision making and community participation.
I.10. Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been
degraded;
 Energy efficiency (1 type of intervention / project):
I.17. Extending and improving the energy efficiency of public lighting;
 Disaster Risk Management (DRM) (1 type of intervention / project):
I.23. Works for protection against floods in fourteen (14) towns/communes;
 Tourism (2 types of interventions / projects):
I.34. A region-wide program for beautification of settlements;
I.36. Cultural heritage interventions (rehabilitation, preservation, etc.);
 Fisheries and Aquaculture (3 types of interventions / projects):
I.40. Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks;
I.41. Dredge major lakes to restore water depth;
I.44. Improve fish habitat;
 Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD) (2 types of interventions / projects):
I.54. Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc);
I.80. Educational infrastructure upgrade (especially for primary and secondary education);
 Transport (1 type of intervention / project):
I.85. Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Măcin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports;
 Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM) (2 types of
interventions / projects):
I.99. Projects in areas with > 2000 Population equivalent;
I.100. Projects in areas with < 2000 Population equivalent.
In terms of impact on biodiversity, it should be mentioned that the projects belonging to “Water supply
and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM)” sector, as well as the projects I.6.
“Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for species of
European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated monitoring system covering
the whole DD area (including cross-border areas), supporting evidence-based decision making and
community participation”, I.10. “Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has
disappeared or been degraded”, I.41. “Dredge major lakes to restore water depth” and I.44. “Improve
fish habitat” will generate long term positive effects on a large surface within the study area.
The tables below present the land areas, expressed in hectares, on which long-term positive effects may
appear, both within sites of Community Importance (SCI) and Special Protection Areas (SPA).
Table no. 4-17 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information
is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha)
within Sites of Community Interest (SCI) on which positive effects may appear
Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SCIs
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Restoration of ecological
systems and natural habitat
within the “Natura 2000”
network for species of
European conservation
concern, together with
development of an integrated
19.39
9387.20
0.00
0.00
monitoring system covering the
whole DD area (including crossborder areas), supporting
evidence-based decision
making and community
participation
“Water supply and sanitation
(WSS) and integrated water
0.00
56.32
85.55
890.46
management (IWM)” (2
projects)
Reforestation of areas where
the natural forest vegetation
0.00
2382.92
486.82
18.44
has disappeared or been
degraded
Dredge major lakes to restore
0.00
1401.94
0.00
0.00
water depth
Total/location
14729.06
Table no. 4-18 Projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but not enough information
is available about their location (approximate/incomplete location) (Type C) – Land surfaces (ha)
within Special Protection Areas (SPA) on which positive effects may appear
Sensitivity classes of surfaces (ha) within SPAs
Projects
Very high
High
Moderate
Low
Restoration of ecological
systems and natural habitat
19.39
9387.20
0.00
0.00
within the “Natura 2000”
network for species of
European conservation
concern, together with
development of an integrated
monitoring system covering the
whole DD area (including crossborder areas), supporting
evidence-based decision
making and community
participation
“Water supply and sanitation
(WSS) and integrated water
management (IWM)” (2
projects)
Reforestation of areas where
the natural forest vegetation
has disappeared or been
degraded
Dredge major lakes to restore
water depth
Total/location
4.3.3.5
1.23
85.11
160.14
1753.28
0.00
2382.92
486.82
18.44
0.00
1401.94
0.00
0.00
15696.50
Type B projects / types of interventions – projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their
nature), but no information is known about their location
This category includes the following 24 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS that
belong to the following sectors:
 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (4 types of interventions / projects);
 Energy Efficiency (2 types of interventions / projects);
 Disaster Risk Management - DRM (1 type of intervention / project);
 Pollution Emergency (1 type of intervention / project );
 Tourism (1 type of intervention / project);
 Fisheries and Aquaculture (5 types of interventions / projects);
 Agriculture and Rural Development - ARD (5 types of interventions / projects);
 Solid Waste Management (4 types of interventions / projects);
 Others (1 type of intervention / project).
4.3.3.6
Type A projects / types of interventions – projects for which the location is not relevant for
analysis
This category includes the following 90 types of interventions/projects proposed within DDISDS that
belong to the following sectors:
 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (6 types of interventions / projects);
 Energy Efficiency (1 type of intervention / project);
 Climate change (3 types of interventions / projects);
 Disaster Risk Management (1 type of intervention / project);
 Pollution emergency (3 types of interventions / projects);
 Tourism (7 types of interventions / projects);
 Fisheries and Aquaculture (5 types of interventions / projects);
 Agriculture and Rural Development - ARD (21 types of interventions / projects);
 Information and Communication Technology - ICT (10 types of interventions / projects);
 Solid Waste Management (1 type of intervention / project);
 Healthcare (11 types of interventions / projects);
 Education (6 types of interventions / projects);
 Social Inclusion and Protection (8 types of interventions / projects);
 Administrative Capacity and Program Management (7 types of interventions / projects).
4.3.4
Assessment results
According to the matrix presented in the previous section, we assessed the significance of the potential
effects of the DDISDS implementation on the community interest components from the Danube Delta
Region (Table no. 4-19).
The score is given for the impact of an intervention (project) on a taxonomic group (mammals, birds,
etc) and includes a subjective approximation of:
all identified types of impacts (habitat loss, habitat alteration etc);
the estimated magnitude (when information is insufficient, magnitude is overestimated for
negative impacts and underestimated for positive ones);
sensitivity of the impact area (usually, the highest sensitivity class is considered).
In Figure no. 4-23 is presented the share of the assessment notes granted for each taxonomic group.
The significant negative effects are registred for the taxonomical groups: habitats/ vegetation, fish and
birds. Habitats/ vegetation is the group that is registering the most significant negative effects, as a
result of the interventions from the Transport sector (I.81 Modernization of national road DN 22
Constanţa - Tulcea - Măcin – Brăila and I.88 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel). In
what concern the positive effects, fish is the taxonomic group that accumulate the most positive effects
(approx. 23.7 % of the total assessment notes), given especially the interventions from the Biodiversity
and Ecosystem Management and Fisheries and Aquaculture sectors (eg. I.5 Equipment and operating
costs for physical interventions to restore natural water circulation and key habitat areas, respectively
I.44 Improve fish habitat), which influences directly the aquatic ecosystems. The high share of “no effect
can be identified (! It doesn’t necessarily mean that they don’t exist)” is given by the multitude of the
interventions from Health, Education, Social Inclusion and Protection, Administrative Capacity and
Program Management sectors, which have no influence on the Natura 2000 components.
100%
90%
80%
70%
-3
60%
-2
50%
-1
40%
0
30%
1
2
20%
3
10%
0%
Habitats/
vegetation
Plants
Invertebrates
Fish
Amphibians
and reptiles
Mammals
(including
bats)
Birds
Figure no. 4-23 The share of the assessment notes granted for each taxonomic group
Figure no. 4-24 shows only the positive and negative effects of the types on interventions/ projects of
DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components.
Birds
-3
-2
-1
Fish
1
2
3
Invertebrates
Plants
Habitats/ vegetation
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Figure no. 4-24 The positive and negative effects associated to each taxonomic group
The share of the total positive and negative effects generated by the implementation of the types of
interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components is presented in Figure no. 4-25. The
total of the positive effects generated by the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS is of 57 %, while
the total of the negative effects is of 43 %. The positive effects are associated with the interventions
from Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management, Pollution Emergency, Fisheries and Aquaculture,
Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Water supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water
management (IWM), Solid Waste Management and Education sectors, while the negative effects are
associated with the interventions from Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management (I.12 – I.14), Energy
Efficiency (I.15 and I.17), Disaster Risk Management (DRM), Tourism, Fisheries and Aquaculture,
Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Transport and other (I.139 Urban Renewal Interventions)
sectors.
The projects that have the potential to generate significate positive or negative effects on the Natura
2000 components are listed bellow:
Significant positive effects:
 I.5 Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water circulation
and key habitat areas;
 I.6 Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network for
species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated
Significant negative effects:
 I.81 Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanţa – Tulcea – Măcin – Brăila;
 I.88 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel.
1% 2%
14%
20%
Signifficant positive effects
Moderate positive effects
Reduced positive effects
Reduced negative effects
28%
Moderate negative effects
35%
Signifficant negative effects
Figure no. 4-25 The share of the total positive and negative effects generated by the implementation
of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the Natura 2000 components
It is important to mention that there are a series of type of interventions for which:
the potential effects were already assessed within other interventions: the case of I.27 Create an
inter-institutional Pollution Emergency Response Team, I.54 Modernization of rural infrastructure
(partially, only some components – see I.80, I.99, I.100) and I.78 Support rehabilitation of flood
protection infrastructure;
the potential effects on the Natura 2000 components could not be assessed, as a result of
insufficient information for assessing correctly the interventions: I.41 Dredge major lakes to restore
water depth (for Habitats component), I.73 Exit of old farmers and transfer of assets and I.128 Other
social protection interventions.
Table no. 4-19 The analysis of the impact significance of the types of interventions/ projects of DDISDS on the community interest components in the Danube Delta Region
Taxonomic group
Types of interventions/ projects
I.1
I.2
I.3
I.4
Development and implementation of measures to reduce solid waste in natural areas.
Border demarcation and signage of strictly protected areas and buffer areas, sport fishing
areas, touristic routes, camping, parking areas, etc. and development and implementation
of a monitoring and information system, incl. technology such as motion-activated
cameras, watchtowers, etc.
Improve evidence-based management by developing and implementing a modern/efficient
monitoring system and predictive model for sedimentation dynamics in the Danube Delta.
An in-depth institutional analysis (functional review) of DDBRA and the associated
administrative reforms with the aim of improving its managerial performances, and the
legislative framework governing the management of DDBR area to allow local residents to
become active participants in guarding and managing the natural resource. Capacity
building measures for the communities and DDBRA.
Habitats Plants
2
2
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
1
1
1
1
Justification
1
Positively affects all species, particularly the natural
vegetation in areas with uncontrolled disposal of waste.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Will reduce the anthropic pressure of tourism activities with
benefits for all species and habitats. Area of implementation
is restricted to DDBR.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
A crucial measure for achieving a scientifically guided
management of wetlands.
1
It is estimated that such measure will generate indirect
benefits for all species and habitats. Area of implementation
is restricted to DDBR.
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.5
Equipment and operating costs for physical interventions to restore natural water
circulation and key habitat areas.
2
1
1
3
2
1
2
If the measure is based on evidence-based management, all
species and habitats should benefit, particularly endangered
water dependent species.
I.6
Restoration of ecological systems and natural habitat within the “Natura 2000” network
for species of European conservation concern, together with development of an integrated
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Restoration of natural habitats is the most needed
intervention aiming directly the improvement of
conservation status for all Natura 2000 species and habitats.
1
Project is necessary for the substantiation of physical
interventions. The project involves also species inventories
and habitats mapping and therefore it should be considered
as the highest priority for implementation.
1
The project will have a positive benefit limited by the
unknown spatial extent and the uncertainty of the
implementation.
I.7
Studies and TA for biodiversity conservation and restoration of ecosystems and natural
habitats within “Natura 2000” network affected by anthropic impacts.
I.8
Identify additional poldered areas eligible for ecological restoration. This will include
feasibility studies and technical projects for the restoration of natural habitats affected by
non-ecological activities in agricultural, fishery and forestry polders - integral or partial
ecological restoration works.
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.9
Natural capital accounting studies to determine the highest value uses of land and natural
resources for optimal management.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.10
Reforestation of areas where the natural forest vegetation has disappeared or been
degraded.
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
The intervention is crucial for a scientific guided
management, with indirect positive effects for all habitats
and species. It is conditioned by the existence of a unitary
habitats and species mapping.
Although the measure doesn’t have a large area of
implementation, it is beneficial for a large number of habitats
and species, particularly several species of birds and
mammals. It is expected that reforestation will be performed
with native species (such as Populus nigra, Populus alba, Salix
alba, Salix fragilis, Fraxinus angustifolia, Ulmus minor etc.).
Reforestation is also beneficial for the quality of aquatic
ecosystems and should be considered, where applicable, in
Taxonomic group
Habitats Plants
Justification
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
the restoration projects.
As nitrate pollution is among the important pressures on
water dependent ecosystems, any measure aiming to reduce
pollution is beneficial for Danube Delta’s species and
habitats. The measure should be considered for the entire
study area.
The centre location should be reconsidered in accordance
with the updated limits of ROSCI0065 Danube Delta, in order
to avoid any potential impact associated with this
development. The proposal of such facility is however very
important to consolidate the efforts to achieve a solid
scientific foundation for DDBR management.
Such measure is important for controlling risks associated
with spread of diseases. However there are insufficient
information provided at this moment to assure that such
intervention will not have negative impacts on protected
flora and fauna. From the biodiversity point of view this
intervention should be considered of low priority and should
benefit of consistent supporting research.
Reed represents the habitat of many species in DDBR and
therefore its exploitation cannot be performed without a
certain level of negative impact. The elaboration of such
strategy must be preceded by studies aiming to identify the
carrying capacity and the acceptable limits for exploitation.
Renewable energy might be beneficial for wildlife IF it is not
implemented in sensitive areas, by large scale projects and if
it replaces classical energy sources. In the absence of a clear
indication on the size and area of implementation of such
facilities, it is precautionary to estimate a potential negative
impact on all species and habitats of conservative interest.
Another project that was analysed here was the proposal to
build a cogeneration plant in Tulcea Municipality, which
could generate a reduction of atmospheric emissions, and its
construction will not be performed in a high sensitivity area.
I.11
Investments to support local action to reduce nitrate pollution of the waterways from
agricultural and livestock rearing activities.
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
I.12
Development of an International Centre of Advanced Studies Danube – Danube Delta –
Black Sea for biodiversity preservation.
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
I.13
Integrated pest management – develop and implement an integrated pest management
strategy for mosquitoes.
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
I.14
Integrated reed management strategy.
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
I.15
Promoting the use of renewable energy sources. Investments in pilot projects promoting
the use of renewable energy sources (wind, solar energy, heat pumps, biomass, microhydro etc.) and non-pollutant technologies, including the development and introduction of
environmentally friendly propulsion systems in the Delta.
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
I.16
Improving the energy efficiency of public buildings (schools, hospitals, administrative
buildings, etc.).
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No detectable impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats.
-1
This intervention might have minor negative effects on
habitats and plant species due to the system extension.
Currently, the interventions for the public lighting system are
excpected to take place within towns, but their list is not
I.17
Extending and improving the energy efficiency of public lighting.
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
Taxonomic group
I.18
I.19
I.20
I.21
I.22
Support for improving energy efficiency of households.
Create a CC partnership platform, including a community-driven climate adaptation fund
targeted at low income families; a micro grant or loan mechanism to support SMEs; and a
partnership facility to promote private - public collaboration for innovative climate actions.
Designate a unit with a clear mandate to address climate change issues, with a small
number of dedicated and knowledgeable staff, and capable of working cross-sector.
Develop clear and easy to use local guidelines for climate change and energy efficiency
programs.
Provision of special machinery and equipment for interventions by IES and SMURD in
disaster situations
Habitats Plants
Justification
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
complete (other eligible ATU’s might appear), and may
include natural areas located near settlements. Areas of
implementation are unknown but might include natural
areas in close vicinity of localities. Also public lighting might
induce changes in the activity of nocturnal species.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.23
Works for protection against floods in fourteen (14) towns/communes.
-2
-1
-2
-2
-2
-1
-2
Construction works for flood protection extending outside
localities limits will generate negative impacts on water
dependent species and habitats. As the existing flood
management plans are not focused on non-structural
measures, it is advisable to review these plans in accordance
with the knowledge database that will be generated by the
DDISDS interventions under the Biodiversity domain.
I.24
Modernization, rehabilitation and construction of Inspectorate for Emergency Situations
(IES) infrastructure facilities in TULCEA + Macin + Crişan + Babadag + Topolog
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.25
Create and maintain an inter-institutional risk factor database
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.26
Complete coherent and comprehensive pollution emergency response and prevention
plans, covering both water and land, and both mobile and fixed sources of pollution
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
The intervention will have an indirect positive impact on all
species and habitats.
I.27
Create an inter-institutional Pollution Emergency Response Team
Potential effects already considered under I.26
-
I.28
Purchase of equipment to enable the first response team to quickly access pollution
incident sites in the Core Delta
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
The project is critical for rapid interventions in case of
accidental pollutions and should be considered with high
priority. The intervention is directly beneficial for aquatic
organisms.
I.29
Create and maintain an inter-institutional environmental liability data-base for data
sharing and better coordination across agencies
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
The intervention might be beneficial for sustainable tourism,
though the explanatory text in the Strategy offers no
certainties for reaching such goal. From the biodiversity point
of view this intervention should not be of high priority and
should be based on the new knowledge base that will be
generated by the DDISDS interventions under the
I.30
Development and Installation of Visitor Infrastructure
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
Taxonomic group
Habitats Plants
Justification
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
Biodiversity domain.
I.31
I.32
I.33
Institutionalization of a Danube Delta Destination Management Organization (DMO)
Design and implementation of a destination-wide program for product and attraction
development
Support mechanism for innovative and sustainable nature-based tourism MSMEs & social
tourism enterprises for green local economy
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
The intervention will generate additional reduced negative
impacts on Natura 2000 species and habitats.
I.34
A region-wide program for beautification of settlements
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.35
Program for improved quality of accommodation facilities and services
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.36
Cultural heritage interventions (rehabilitation, preservation, etc.)
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
Cultural heritage interventions may have minor negative
effects on habitats and species of community interest,
whereas some of the heritage objects concerned are found
within Natura 2000 sites. The full list of objectives is not
known at the moment.
I.37
Development of a destination interpretation (learning) program.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.38
Develop and roll out program for emergency and first aid for tourism workers, service
providers
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.39
Develop a specialized tourism research observatory
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
This intervention supports the introduction of artificial
structures in natural systems, with the potential to limit the
spatial movement of many aquatic species and potential
other effects which are not identifiable at this moment. This
intervention should not be of high priority and should be
based on the new knowledge base that will be generated by
the DDISDS interventions under the Biodiversity domain.
The intervention might have positive effects on long term for
the conservation status of most species, especially on native
fishes, amphibians and birds. Particular attention should be
paid to impacts on species with reduced mobility and timing
of physical interventions by conducting appropriate studies
before such interventions, as well as to the management of
the dredged material (in order not to affect the natural
habitats).
I.40
Reduce sedimentation in major lakes with the installation of stop locks
-2
-1
-2
-2
-2
-1
-2
I.41
Dredge major lakes to restore water depth
?
1
1
2
2
1
2
I.42
Support transition from artisanal capture to recreational fishing (Improve ecotourism
venues to accommodate the needs of recreational fishers; Promote and provide training in
sustainable recreational fishing (catch-and-release fishing etc.).
1
0
0
2
0
1
1
This intervention should reduce the existing pressure on fish
communities.
0
This intervention should balance the impact generated by
selective fishing on two raptor species. The intervention
requires an adequate scientific base to avoid potential
negative impact on fish communities.
I.43
Support artificial reproduction of valuable species like pike and zander and construct
simple landing facilities in places of fisher concentrations.
0
0
0
1
0
0
Taxonomic group
Habitats Plants
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
Justification
I.44
Improve fish habitat
0
0
0
2
2
0
1
I.45
Regulate or eliminate uncontrolled fish camping
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
I.46
Consider some tax incentives, like the elimination of the water tax
0
0
0
-1
0
0
0
I.47
I.48
I.49
Improve fisheries data collection and analysis
Replace or modify cherhana based system
Strengthen analytical capacity at DDNRI
Improve fisheries research and development activities in research institutes, public
institutions and fishermen associations.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The intervention is beneficial for fish communities, by the
potential to increase the conservation status of Natura 2000
species. Other species, particularly amphibians, reptiles and
birds, may also benefit of this intervention.
The measure should be beneficial for habitats and fish
species. The intervention should be correlated with I.30.
There are insufficient elements to assess this intervention. It
is also strongly recommended to correlate the justification of
this intervention with the vision expressed by the
interventions of DDISDS Biodiversity domain.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.50
I.51
Improve Aquaculture
-1
-1
-1
-2
-1
-1
-2
From the biodiversity perspective there are two important
considerations: i) restoration is a better perspective
compared to aquaculture, ii) re-establishing of aquaculture
on former abandoned fisheries might have impacts on
Natura 2000 species that colonised these surfaces.
I.52
Support small scale fish processing. Diversify home and village level fish processing by
introducing small scale canning units (for Gibel carp and other low value fish like roach and
bream) and improve smoking systems (smoking bags or small electric smokers); mainly to
produce delicacies to visiting tourists.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.53
Modernization of facilities for collection / processing / marketing of agricultural produce
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.54
Modernization of rural infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, schools, etc)
-2
-2
-2
0
-2
-2
-2
Some of the components of this type of intervention were
already assessed within other interventions (see I.80, I.99,
I.100). In order to assess impact significance, we mainly
considered the project regarding the rehabilitation of DC2,
DC3 and DC4, which intersects areas with high sensitivity. In
the case of DC3, according to information provided by ADI ITI
Delta Dunării, after consulting DDBRA representatives, the
road will not pass through the natural protected area
Pădurea Letea and its rehabilitation will be made using
ecologic solutions and will respect DDBRA rules.
I.55
Jobs creation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Providing incentives for using environmentally friendly
farming practices, technologies with minimal impact on the
ground, the existence of adequate facilities for storing
manure can have a positive impact on all taxonomical
I.56
Protection and improvement of natural resources (soil, water)
1
1
1
1
1
1
Taxonomic group
Habitats Plants
Justification
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
groups.
I.57
Completion of land restitution and land book registration for land/farms consolidation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.58
Support for environment-friendly agricultural activities within Natura 2000 sites
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
The organic farming to the detriment of the one based on
the use of chemical substances it is beneficial for all Natura
2000 habitats and species, especially fish and birds.
I.59
Enlarge the access to vocational education for agriculture
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.60
Modernization of quality control systems for agricultural products
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.61
Improved information on local and European financing, including projects preparation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.62
Improvement of Advisory/consulting and training activity for farmers / rural labor
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Any initiative aiming at reducing the use of chemicals in
Danube Delta area is beneficial for Natura 2000 species and
habitats, particularly for fishes and birds.
The spatial extend of this intervention is not specified. It is
expected to involve construction works and use of important
quantities of water, which may affect all water dependent
species and habitats.
I.63
Fostering organic farming activities
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
I.64
Take-up of farming activities by young generations
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.65
Modernization/rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure
-1
-1
-1
-2
-1
-1
-1
I.66
Consolidation and modernization of small farms
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.67
Creation of small businesses outside agriculture
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
It is expected that the intervention might increase the
intensity of farming, with negative impacts on vegetation and
birds.
The spatial extend of this measure is not known. It is
expected that this intervention will bring benefit to many
species and habitats, with the following conditions:
afforestation is performed with native species, similar to the
surrounding habitat types, and the non-agricultural land does
not identify with any existing natural use of land.
I.68
Modernization of technical endowment of farms
-1
-1
0
0
0
0
-1
I.69
Bottom-up initiatives for local development
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.70
Afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural land in the Danube Delta region
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
I.71
Conservation of local patrimony and traditions (including handicrafts)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.72
Release of land through concessions by Tulcea County Council
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.73
Exit of old farmers and transfer of assets
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
There is insufficient
intervention.
I.74
Foster establishment of producer groups/organizations
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.75
Stimulate creation of short supply chains for the benefit of tourism activities
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
information
for
assessing
this
Taxonomic group
I.76
Support branding/certification of agricultural products and their marketing on
international markets
Habitats Plants
0
-1
0
-1
Justification
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
0
-1
0
-1
0
-1
0
-1
0
-1
This intervention might be incompatible with the vision
supporting the ecological restoration and ecotourism in core
Delta. It is precautionary to consider a potential negative
impact of this intervention on numerous species and
habitats, though the impact depends of the type and extent
of the agricultural activities, which are not mentioned in the
DDISDS.
I.77
Provide incentives to maintain agricultural activities in core Delta
I.78
Support rehabilitation of flood protection infrastructure
I.79
Enable participation of farmers and processors to risk management tools
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.80
Educational infrastructure upgrade (especially for primary and secondary education)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Already assessed within I.23
-
I.81
Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanța - Tulcea - Macin – Braila
-3
-2
-2
-1
-2
-2
-2
I.82
Modernization of County Road DJ229E, Section I and II, NICULITEL – ZEBIL – SARICHIOI
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
I.83
Modernization of County Road DJ222N, Tulcea – Pardina - Chilia Veche
-2
-2
-2
0
-2
-2
-2
I.84
Modernization of County Road DJ226:Tronson DN22B-Corbu-Săcele-Istria-MihaiViteazu
-2
-2
-2
0
-2
-2
-2
I.85
Modernization of Tulcea, Sulina, Macin, Isaccea, Mahmudia and Chilia ports
-2
-1
-2
-2
-2
-1
-2
I.86
Development and modernization of airport infrastructure
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
According to the national plans, this route should be
upgraded to an express road, involving its enlargement and
bypassing localities. The provided route intersects existing
sensitive areas (where priority species and habitats are
present (e.g. 1530*, 62C0*, 91I0*, Osmoderma eremita*,
Anisus vorticulus*) and a national reserve) and therefore was
considered to have a potential significant negative impact.
Significant impact might be avoided by adequate re-routing.
The intervention involves the modernisation of the road on
its actual route, without extension. Impacts are reduced and
include potential alterations and disturbance.
its actual route, without extension. Impacts during
construction are reduced, but it is expected that the
intervention will increase the traffic on a route close to some
high sensitive areas.
its actual route, without extension. Impacts during
construction are reduced, but it is expected that the
intervention will increase the traffic on a route close to a very
high sensitive area.
This intervention includes several projects, of which some of
them may have negative impacts on habitats and species, as
well as on hydro-morphology, which are not identifiable at
this moment.
Though the airport is located in a low sensitivity area, this
intervention will lead to traffic increase, with negative impact
on bird species.
Taxonomic group

I.87



Modernization of county roads (regional transport
DJ222B Baia- Ceamurlia de Sus;
DJ222 Visina- Ceamurlia de Sus;
DJ 223A Enisala – Babadag – Slava Rusă, km 54+724-38+798;
route Cetatea Histria - DN22/ Tariverde.
Habitats Plants
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
Justification
infrastructure):
-2
-2
-2
0
-2
-2
-2
The intervention involves the modernisation of several roads
segments on their actual routes, without extensions. Some of
the segments are located close to sensitive areas.
I.88
Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel
-3
-2
-2
-3
-2
-1
-3
The intervention has numerous components, all of them
represented by physical interventions either on the water
flow or on the channel banks. The intervention might involve
direct and indirect impacts, as well as long-term and longdistance effects. Some of the impacts might be avoided or
reduced by proper substantiation and therefore the project
should be implemented after the evidence-based
management in the project area is in place.
I.89
Internet / ultra-fast internet for green tourism
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.90
Improvement of e-government services and local public monitoring systems
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.91
Support of ICT for businesses through e-portal and grant facility
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.92
Formulating and implementing open data policies
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.93
Increasing vertical integration of ICT innovation solutions in the local economy.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.94
Increasing private investments in RDI and encouraging the demand for RDI.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.95
I.96
I.97
I.98
I.99
Increasing knowledge, technology and staff transfer with RDI skills by means of
partnerships between private and research environment.
Increasing the excellence of scientific basis as engine for innovation, by developing RD
infrastructure.
Increasing the involvement in EU level research by unlocking the excellence potential in
RDI, such as within the framework program Horizon 2020 and by attracting talents and
advanced skills to the RDI national system.
Developing ITC infrastructure and systems and digital skills to support education, health,
online culture and digital inclusion
Water and sanitation services - Projects in areas with > 2000 Population equivalent
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
I.100 Water and sanitation services - Projects in areas with < 2000 Population equivalent
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
I.101 Collection of Floating Waste in River Channels
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
This intervention will contribute to the reduction of surface
and underground water contamination, with beneficial effect
for all species and habitats.
This intervention will contribute also to the reduction of
surface and underground water contamination, with
beneficial effect for all species and habitats. The extent of
future implementation will not cover all localities with < 2000
Population equivalent.
Though this is not a long term solution, the intervention
should be of high priority giving the status of waste
Taxonomic group
I.102
Investments in SWM Systems for Handling Separated Waste (waste separation at source,
collection, sorting and transportation facilities).
Habitats Plants
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
Justification
management in the study area and upstream. Floating waste,
particularly plastic, represent a threat to all water dependent
species and their habitats.
This is one of the important interventions aiming at reducing
both the floating waste and the existing diffuse waste-related
pollution, with positive impact for all species and habitats.
The intervention has an indirect positive impact and is
essential for the success of the above intervention (I.94).
This intervention should be part of I.94. Spatial extent and
intensity of this intervention is unknown.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
I.103 Public education and awareness program on waste management
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.104 Composting bins for rural households to process organic waste
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.105 Investments in treatment and disposal facilities for construction and demolition waste
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
This intervention should be part of I.94. Spatial extent and
intensity of this intervention is unknown.
I.106 Recovering waste collected from households and economic agents
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
The intervention has a positive impact, indirectly stimulating
the minimization of waste that are to be stored.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.115 Ambulances for emergency care and rehabilitation civil works
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.116 Provide area specific training for medical professionals
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.117 Increase the prevalence of health programs focused on prevention and screening
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Unfortunately rural communities still represent an important
pressure on wildlife populations. It is expected that such
training programmes to contribute to a reduction of this
pressure mainly by an increasing preoccupation for
preserving natural habitats and reducing wildlife mortality.
I.107
Consolidate the response capacity of Public Health Directorate (PHD) by designing and
implementing an environmental health surveillance system
I.108 Rehabilitation/modernization of facilities, and IT equipment
Modernization and equipment, and organize a functional building block at Tulcea
I.109 Emergency Hospital (including for integrated ambulatory department), and for Macin
Hospital
Rehabilitation /transformation of TB pavilion at Tulcea Emergency Hospital to a social
I.110
accommodation center (residential care shelter)
Create public ambulatory centers by rehabilitating closed hospital buildings in Babadag and
I.111
Sulina
Ensure interoperability of medical information systems at health care level (telemedicine
I.112
and e-health)
Reforms to increase cost-effectiveness of sector governance/management (hospital
I.113 payment mechanism to incentivize public ambulatory, family doctor, and telemedicine
systems)
Information, education and communication campaigns on healthy and hygienic
I.114
environment
I.118
Provision of relevant, accessible and incentivized LLL programmes in sustainable tourism,
agriculture and fishery in Community Centres for Permanent Learning
1
1
1
1
1
1
Taxonomic group
I.119
Creating an Education & Training Network for students living in remote areas or with less
than 2000 population to provide access to primary and lower secondary quality education
for all
Provide support for creating VET schools that are relevant, attractive and inclusive, and
which produce a workforce with knowledge & skills of international standard and
relevance to the global demands of the nature-based tourism and recreational fishing
market
Enhance kindergartens and nursery services through development, support, rehabilitation
and provision of equipment to increase access to early childhood education and care
(ECEC)
Bring Early school leavers back to school through school after school and second chance
programs
Create partnerships between employers, E&T providers and research bodies to ensure
better performance of education system in addressing labor market needs
Develop early childhood (0-6 years) institutional infrastructure in communities with high
share of Roma
Habitats Plants
0
0
Justification
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
It is expected that such intervention may produce a long
term shift in the way the tourism is conducted in the study
area, with benefits for fish and birds communities, as well as
for natural vegetation.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.125 Scaling up school mediators in schools with high percentage of Roma
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.126 Implementing community grants for educational intervention
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.127 Facilitate regularization of property rights
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.128 Other social protection interventions
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
There is insufficient
intervention.
I.129 SME subsidies for job placement for NEETs in relevant fields
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.130 Improve digital literacy among the Roma and vulnerable groups
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I.131 Increase the access to as well as the efficiency of social service provision
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
This intervention is not sufficiently detailed in the DDISDS
and might overlap with other interventions. As a precaution,
potential negative impact was considered under the
I.120
I.121
I.122
I.123
I.124
Strengthening local administrative capacity for strategic planning and budgeting, decision
making, human resource management and monitoring and evaluation
Identification, development and implementation of measures to increase transparency,
I.133 inclusiveness, ethics and integrity, and reduce corruption in public authorities and
institutions
I.132
I.134 Technical Assistance (TA) for ITI program management
Revise regulations to improve the design of household subsidies to improve affordability of
services, and a more efficient targeting and use of financial and natural resources
I.136 Improving access and quality of services provided by the judicial system
Actions intended to ensure the coordination between the public institutions dealing with
I.137
the conservation of biodiversity and the ecological reconstruction of the Danube Delta
I.138 The development and implementation of online services
I.135
I.139 Urban Renewal Interventions
information
for
assessing
this
Taxonomic group
Habitats Plants
InverteAmphibians
Fish
Mammals Birds
brates
and reptiles
Justification
susceptibility that future developments outside the existing
localities limits will be supported.
4.3.5
Residual impact
Residual impact represents the consequences most probably to remain after the implementation of
avoidance and mitigation measures (A&M). At this moment the residual impact can only be broadly
estimated and to do so we considered a 100% efficiency of implementation for A&M measures.
There are two main stages to consider in order to achieve the lowest level of residual negative
impacts:


Consider the avoidance measures (re-routing or relocation to avoid high sensitive areas and
/ or resizing) in order to reduce the project magnitude and / or to avoid high sensitive areas.
Avoidance measures were proposed for all interventions susceptible to generate significant
or moderate negative impact;
Consider the available mitigation measures which might eliminate the impact or reduce it to
an acceptable level.
By applying the above considerations to the assessment results (see section 4.3.4 in this report) we
altered the scores considering that the proposed measures are fully integrated within the
interventions / projects.
The results indicates that the proposed measures have the capacity to wave all potential negative
significant impacts, to reduce considerably the rest of negative impacts and to increase the positive
effects. Here, as well, we considered mainly the long term effects of each intervention.
30
25
Summ of individual scores
20
15
10
5
-1
0
-5
-10
+3
+2
-2
-3
+1
-15
-20
Estimated impact
Residual impact
Figure no. 4-26 The estimated impact and the residual impact, after the implementation of the
A&M measures
Main focus during the implementation of DDISDS’s projects should be on the proper adaptation of
avoidance and mitigation measures. This implies, depending on the details of each project, the
identification of supplementary measures to address potentially new identified negative impacts.
The projects for which the evaluation scores were reconsidered by including the A&M measures are
presented in the following table.
Table no. 4-20 Reconsidered scores for the assessment of residual impact
Natura 2000 components
Codes of
interventions/
projects
Habitats Plants Invertebrates Fishes
Amphibians
and reptiles
Mammals Birds
I.12
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.13
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.14
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.15
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.17
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.30
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
I.40
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
I.54
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
I.81
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
I.82
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.83
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.84
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.85
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
I.87
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I.88
-2
-1
-2
-2
-1
-1
-2
I.139
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
MEASURES TO REDUCE IMPACT ON SPECIES AND HABITATS FROM PROTECTED NATURAL
AREAS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST
5.1
AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The types of interventions/projects proposed by DDISDS will follow, in the coming years, a series of
successive steps of planning and implementation. In order to avoid and reduce the expected impacts on
the Natura 2000 species and habitats, it is necessary to consider the application of a set of avoidance
and mitigation measures. The proposed measures (Table no. 5-1) are formulated, in many cases, in a
general manner, to cover the whole variety of types of interventions / projects proposed by DDISDS. For
some of the types of interventions/ projects specific measures were also proposed. These measures
should be incorporated and detailed under each project susceptible to generate impact on Natura 2000
components.
It should be emphasised that several interventions (e.g. water supply and sewage, waste management
facilities) that where consider having a positive impact on long term may generate minor negative
impacts during construction and operation due to improper location. For all these projects, independent
of the positive assessment, avoidance and mitigation measures should apply.
As the Vision and strategic objectives of the Strategy are targeting the sustainable development of the
Study Area through scientifically-guided environmental management, the prioritisation of the proposed
interventions plays an important role (see measures M1 and M2). The prioritisation should ensure that
the scientifically base is sufficiently consolidated at the moment when the proposed physical
interventions will be implemented.
A framework for prioritisation in accordance with Strategy’s vision and objectives is presented in Figure
no. 5-1, the blue circles indicating the main criteria for a prioritisation based on scientifically-guided
environmental management.
Despite the fact that the Danube Delta is the most important protected area and the largest Natura
2000 site in Romania it still lacks a complete inventory and mapping of its protected species and
habitats. As a consequence, management decisions are still based on project to project approach with
significant difficulty to assess the cumulative impacts and the effects on each species’ conservation
status.
Habitat mapping
and species
inventory
Capacity for
intervention on
risk management
Pollution control
& Social aspects
(I.22, I.28)
Monitoring &
predictive
models
(I.2, I.3)
Studies &
Technical
Assistance
Management
decisions
(I.7, I.8)
Ecosystem
restoration
Physical
interventions
Transport
(I.86, I.88)
(I5, I6, I10)
Disaster risk
management
Fisheries and
aquaculture
(I.23)
(I.40, I.41)
Tourism
(I.30)
Figure no. 5-1 Proposed hierarchy for prioritisation of DDISDS interventions/projects
Table no. 5-1 Avoidance and mitigation measures proposed for DDISDS interventions/ projects related to Natura 2000 habitats and species
Component/
Type of intervention/ projects to
Measure
impact type
be applied
In order to be in line with the vision and strategic objectives of the DDISDS, prioritisation of
interventions should follow the next steps: 1) finalisation of habitat mapping and species inventories
All interventions, except:
M1 within Natura 2000 sites; 2) implementation of the monitoring system and of the predictive models; 3)
emergency situations, pollution
implementation of technical assistance and the preparation of studies to support the scientific-based
control and social interventions
Prioritisation
decisions; 4) implementation of physical interventions.
Interventions aiming directly the pollution control (e.g. nitrates reduction in water, floating waste,
M2
I.11, I.26-I.29, I.99, I.100, I.101
implementation of water supply and sewage systems) should be treated with high priority.
Any intervention directly connected with or necessary to the management of the Natura 2000 sites
M3 should be preceded by thorough scientific studies and the solutions to be implemented will be chosen I.1 – I.14, I.40, I.41, I.43, I.44, I.70
after analysing several alternatives.
Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the Natura 2000 I.15, I.17, I.23, I.30, I.51, I.54, I.65,
Technical
sites but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other
I.81 – I.88, I.139 + other
studies and
M4 plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the sites in view of
interventions based on the
appropriate
the sites’ conservation objectives. Appropriate assessment process should be initiated at the earliest
established locations and
assessment
stages of design.
authorities decisions
All interventions, particularly those addressed to biodiversity management and those containing
M5
All types of interventions/ projects
construction works, should include actions to address climate change adaptation.
M6
Avoidance
M7
M8
The projects locations have to take in consideration the updated limits of the Natura 2000 sites,
according the last revisions, and the results of the Natura 2000 habitats and species mapping and
inventory, in order to avoid their destruction/alteration.
Reconsideration of projects/projects components locations in order to avoid location inside Natura
2000 sites, where possible, or inside areas with very high and high sensitivity. Projects for which there
are no acceptable alternatives to assure the avoidance of impacts should be subject of compensatory
measures, which should be effective before the implementation of the projects.
Types of interventions / projects for flood protection works involving structural measures (e.g. dykes,
embankments) should be strictly limited to the protection of inhabited areas (localities).
I.12, I.17, I.23, I.54, I.81, I.88
I.99, I.100, I.102, I.105
I.23, I.78
Component/
impact type
Measure
In order to avoid negative impacts associated to structural measures for flood protection, it is
necessary to take in consideration the implementation of non-structural measures (green
M9
infrastructure) based on the knowledge database that will be generated by the DDISDS interventions
under the Biodiversity domain and on the existing data on flooding limits.
The interventions for afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural land in the Danube Delta region
has to be done only after the identification and assessment of existing species and habitats in order
M10
not to affect features of conservative interest. Only native species, specific to the area, has to be
considered for planting.
Considering the sensitivity of the study area (biosphere reserve, Natura 2000 sites, scientific reserves,
M11 migration route etc.), the use of renewable energy sources should be restricted to small-scale projects
(mainly households, public institutions).
M12
M13
M14
Mitigation
M15
M16
M17
All interventions involving buildings rehabilitation should implement first an inspection on existing
birds’ nests and bats roosts and propose adequate measures to avoid disturbance, damage or killing.
The exploitation of any natural resources should be performed within the limit of their carrying
capacity and in this respect the identification of acceptable limits for exploitation should represent a
study priority.
For all types of interventions/ projects that have the potential to limit the species transit or migration
(e.g. transport infrastructure, flood protection works), including rehabilitation of existing
infrastructure, there has to be identified and implemented feasible technical solutions, based on
studies and adequate field investigations, which to ensure the highest degree of permeability and
avoidance of connectivity interruption between the habitats of the conservative interest species.
All projects intersecting or located in the vicinity of reproduction habitats for birds and mammals of
conservation interest will implement measures to reduce noise and vibrations to levels which assures
disturbance avoidance.
All interventions on banks of water bodies will be carried out so as to preserve or recreate spawning
grounds for fish and amphibians.
In the case of the interventions for irrigations and flood protection, it is preferable to rehabilitate
be applied
I.23, I.78
I.70
I.15
Interventions involving buildings
rehabilitation
I.14, I.15, I.52
I.15, I.23, I.40, I.54, I.81-I.84, I.85,
I.87
Transport projects
I.23, I.78, I.85, I.88
I.23, I.65
Component/
impact type
Measure
M18
M19
M20
M21
M22
Monitoring
31
M23
existing infrastructure, construction of new ones being the last option.
Development and modernization of airport infrastructure has to be performed based on thorough
assessment of birds’ activity, taking in consideration a much larger area than the project location due
to the large distance on which disturbance of birds activity may appear.
It is recommended to implement a work schedule which aims to plan the execution time of the works,
for all types of interventions / projects involving constructions within or in the immediate vicinity of
Natura 2000 habitats and Natura 2000 species habitats, so they would not affect critical areas31 for
species of community interest (e.g. to avoid working in the breeding / nesting months of bird species,
the hibernation / reproduction months of some small mammals, during the months when amphibians
lay eggs, during fish spawning period etc.).
The interventions in agriculture should be conditioned by the implementation of a minimum set of
ecological agricultural principles (e.g. use of natural fertilizers, non-use of genetically modified
organisms, non-use of antibiotic in livestock, etc.).
All proposed projects/types of intervention has to include measures for avoiding installation of
invasive species, as well as their monitoring and control during the project lifetime.
For all projects/types of interventions that propose construction works (except of the ecological
reconstruction works), it is recommended (where possible) to avoid the use of natural resources from
inside natural protected areas.
For all projects with potential negative impacts on Natura 2000 habitats and species it is necessary to
implement multiannual monitoring programmes in order to assess residual impact, as well as the
success of the implemented avoidance/mitigation/compensatory measures.
be applied
I.86
that involve construction works
Agriculture interventions
that involve physical interventions
with potential negative impacts
The critical areas for species of community interest mean: areas of shelter, hibernation, reproduction, feeding, nesting, which are found within habitats with high favorability for
species under conservation in the Natura 2000 site.
5.2
MONITORING
At the project phase, monitoring should focus both on impacts and on the efficiency of avoidance and
mitigation measures. However, on the scale of the Study area, considering potential cumulative impacts
with other activities the focus should be on impacts (positive and negative changes for each habitat and
species of community interest).
The monitoring system should be:

Efficient (few and relevant indicators);

Well correlated with existing monitoring programs for related plans and programs, the most
important in this case being the monitoring set for Large Infrastructure Operational Programme;

Well correlated with the management plans for Natura 2000 sites in the study area. The most
relevant parameters for assessing the conservation status of Natura 2000 habitats and species are
related to the habitat quality and coverage and populations size. One of the most difficult task in
assessing the conservation status is the quantification of impacts on habitats and populations of the
existing pressures and potential threats.
Considering all the above, it is advisable that the monitoring program will be oriented towards providing
quantitative information on changes in habitats quality and populations size. The proposed indicators
are presented in Table no. 5-2.
Table no. 5-2 Monitoring indicators proposed for DDISDS
No.
Indicator
Habitat loss. Surfaces of Natura 2000 habitats/
habitats of species of community interest inside
1.
Natura 2000 sites irreversibly affected as a result of
the DDISDS interventions/ projects implementation
*
Habitat alteration. Surfaces of Natura 2000 habitats/
habitats of species of community interest inside
2.
Natura 2000 sites reversibly affected as a result of
the DDISDS interventions/ projects construction *
Disturbance. Surfaces of habitats of species of
community interest inside Natura 2000 sites affected
3.
by one or more disturbing factors (e.g. human
presence, noise) as a result of the DDISDS
interventions/ projects implementation *
Mortality. Mortality of community interest fauna
4.
species as a result of the DDISDS types of
interventions/ projects construction and operation.
Connectivity. Assessment of the success of measures
for avoidance of ecological connectivity interruption
5.
(structures for permeability, lateral connectivity and
longitudinal connectivity assurance).
Habitat enhancement. Increased habitats surfaces
6.
for species of community interest as a result of
interventions aimed at reducing the anthropic
Target
These surfaces should be insignificant at
the level of each Natura 2000 habitat/
habitat of species of community interest
which are subject of conservation in each
potentially affected Natura 2000 site
“0” mortality
As close to the situation established in
the analysis regarding the baseline
conditions at the project phase
In an ideal situation, it is expected that:
Habitat
enhancement
(ha)
+
Compensatory measures (if any) (ha) >
No.
Indicator
Target
pressures and ecological restoration. To be based on Habitat loss (ha) + Habitat alteration (ha)
the confirmation of species presence and activity + Disturbance (ha).
outside existing habitats.
* It will be performed based on data collected for each species and each habitat type potentially
affected, for all projects with potential negative impact on Natura 2000 species and habitats.
Remote sensing techniques (with various satellite platforms) and the use of GIS techniques are two
important tools that can be applied successfully for monitoring the indicators mentioned above,
respectively for providing quantitative information on changes in habitats quality and populations size,
during DDISDS implementation.
Remote sensing techniques allows for an impressive suite of wildlife ecology and habitat attributes to be
modeled, predicted, and monitored through time, including land cover physiognomy, vegetation
structure and condition, specific nutrient concentrations, overall productivity, and biomass etc. Based
on these attributes, information on the distribution of shelter, shade, and nesting resources for wildlife,
as well as potential to meet their metabolic needs, can be assessed32.
Remote sensing is still relatively new, as a data source and analysis tool, and its data are often not well
known and improperly handled. However, in the few decades that the data have been available, solid
synthesis applications have emerged. For example, land-cover and change-detection analyses are two
instances of remote sensing products that have become widely accepted in the various user
communities. Thus, is expected that the linkages between ecologists and remote sensing scientists will
be improved by addressing gaps in understanding through the establishment of widely accepted
standards.
There are several articles, along the time, that confirm the usefulness of remote sensing techniques and
GIS tool in ecosystem management. A relevant study in Danube Delta, which reveals the importance of
using satellite information in the knowledge of those elements and processes of geographic reality is
“Utilizarea informaţiei satelitare în studiile de fundamentare a proiectelor de cooperare transfrontalieră
în bazinul inferior al Dunării”, 2003, and is presenting several sectors where the use of satellite images
and maps can be successfully achieved to address existing and future problems:
Space surveillance supply (of rain and snow), of drainage system and particularly of the flash
floods and floods;
Lakes surveillance;
River pollution sightings, meaning detection and prosecution of pollutant substances;
Tracking transboundary air pollution;
Morphohydrographic mapping mutations related to the evolution of meanders and islands, of
the lakes, ponds and brooks evolution from the floodplain and delta, of deltaic shoreline
evolution, can be based on records from space;
Monitoring of the existing protected areas;
32
Critical Remote Sensing Contributions to Spatial Wildlife Ecological Knowledge and Management, 2009, Gregory
J. McDermid , Nicholas C. Coops , Michael A. Wulder , Steven E. Franklin , and Nicole E. Seitz
Observation and mapping of crops, grassland, reeds and forests;
Monitoring traffic on the Danube or Sulina Channel.
Moreover, in the Needs Assessment Report, elaborated by the World Bank for shaping DDISDS, the use
of the satellite images is also mentioned in the analysis of urban heat islands from the study area. They
were determined based on satellite images provided by the USGS, processed and mapped using GIS
techniques.
Thus, we can conclude that the remote sensing, as well as GIS techniques, should be used in many of the
interventions proposed within the DDISDS (sectors as Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management,
Fisheries and Aquaculture, Transport etc.), but especially in the case of those susceptible to generate
loss or alterations of the Natura 2000 habitats/ habitats of species of community interest inside Natura
2000, as well as in the case of the interventions which will lead to the enhancement/ restoration of the
habitats of species of conservation interest.
6
METHODS USED TO COLLECT INFORMATION ON POTENTIALLY AFFECTED SPECIES OF
COMMUNITY INTEREST
6.1
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Due to the territorial extension of the analyzed DDISDS (Danube Delta Region: DDBR and its surrounding
areas), the strategic level of the assessment approach, as well as the fact that most types of
interventions/ projects are in an incipient stage of development (indicative routes/ locations), we
mention the following critical issues that were taken into account in this study:
This study did not involve field activities in order to gather information on potentially affected
habitats and species of community interest. Information and relevant data were based on public
information known until this moment (listed in Chapter 1 - General information), meetings
organized both with the elaborators of the DDISDS (World Bank Group) and with key stakeholders
from the DDISDS implementation area (primarily institutions such as the Tulcea County Council,
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Authority (DDBRA), Danube Delta National Institute for Research
and Development (DDNIRD), Environmental Protection Agencies, Department of Public Health,
Department of Statistics, etc.);
The analysis included only those geospatial resources that cover uniform and fully the study area
(e.g. boundaries of protected natural areas of community interest, land use - CLC etc.);
The analysis took into consideration the information contained in the management plans approved
so far, namely “Măcin Mountains National Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcin and ROSPA0073 MăcinNiculiţel Integrated Management Plan” aimed at only 2 of the 20 Natura 2000 sites present in the
study area. For the most part of the Natura 2000 sites in the study area (18 of 20 Natura 2000 sites),
Management Plans are not available at this time of the assessment;
All information regarding the presence, population, pressures identified in the Natura 2000 sites in
the study area, were extracted exclusively from the Natura 2000 sites factsheets, based on the
assumption that the data contained within them (updated in accordance with Decision
2011/484/EU concerning a site information format for Natura 2000 sites and published on the
MEWF website on February 17, 201533) are complete, actual and sufficient to conduct the
evaluation;
The impact assessment was performed for those types of interventions/projects with a specific
location, based on GIS analysis, quantifying the areas of Natura 2000 sites in the study area that
could be affected by the proposed types of interventions / projects (distances and impact surfaces
were calculated based on Euclidean distance, without taking into account the digital terrain model).
For other types of projects, those with approximate/ incomplete location and those for which no
information is known about their location, impact assessment was based on the scoring system
described in Section 4.3.1 (Table no. 4-19), the estimation of the magnitude of impact and the
sensitivity of the area being based mainly on data and information from the literature, as well as on
expert opinion;
Information regarding the lists of potentially affected species and habitat due to the implementation
of the DDISDS types of interventions / projects, relied solely on Romania’s reporting to the European
Union under Article 12 of the Birds Directive and Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, which aim
33
habitat mapping and species inventory from the Natura 2000 sites, available in SHP format34, based
on the assumption that the data contained in them are complete, actual and sufficient to conduct
the assessment.
6.2
LIMITATIONS
This Appropriate Assessment study was developed in accordance to the best practices that can be
applied at this strategic level, our desire being to achieve a more precise estimation of the main
potential forms of impacts on the Natura 2000 network from the Danube Delta Region. Considering the
multitude of assumptions and uncertainties and taking into account the available resources and
information, the target that we set it may be considered too pretentious. Given these issues, we
consider it necessary to mention that the results of this study should be interpreted with caution,
representing only “a first overview” of the potential impact generated by the types of
interventions/projects proposed under DDISDS on the network Natura 2000 sites and not a thorough
evaluation of each type of habitat and each species of community interest in the study area. We believe
that this analysis will be performed at the level of individual studies developed for each type of
intervention/project, our study serving to indicate the necessity to conduct subsequent appropriate
assessment studies at the individual project level, namely to guide future assessments, for those
projects/types of interventions that are likely to have a potentially negative impact on Natura 2000
sites, and not to provide details on the specific impact of each type of intervention/project.
The main limitations of this study relate primarily to the GIS analysis, but not only, consisting of:
 The activities concerning the inventory, mapping and assessment of the conservation status of
habitats and species of community interest is still ongoing. For example, according to “Măcin
Mountains National Park, ROSCI0123 Munţii Măcin and ROSPA0073 Măcin-Niculiţel Integrated
Management Plan” these inventory, mapping and evaluation activities have been completed,
but those of the “Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve management plan” are still ongoing;
 The only geospatial datasets on the range and distribution of habitats and species of community
interest are Romania’s reports to the European Union under Article 12 of the Birds Directive and
Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, which cover the entire study area, being available only in 10
x 10 km grids;
 Not all of the proposed interventions/projects have been spatially located as a result of the
unavailability of their locations at the time of the assessment. For some of them, for that
indicative locations/routes were not provided, spatial location was performed through
digitization using Google Earth Pro satellite images, according to the information available in the
project title (approximate/incomplete location: “approximate” in the case of WSS and IWM
projects for which the limit of the land into the build-up area was considered in the analysis,
namely “incomplete” for projects like “Improving fish habitat” from the “Fisheries and
Aquaculture” sector, where only 2 lakes are included in the first phase, after which a series of
interventions on other lakes will be identified, which locations are not mentioned in this phase).
Thus, most of the sites/routes are likely to suffer significant changes in the future. On the other
hand, we note that there is another category of projects for which localization was not possible
34
http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_12/reference_portal,
using satellite images (no information about their location) that were not included in the
analysis and their inclusion could lead to a different result of DDISDS impact on the national
network of Natura 2000 sites;
 The assessment of the sensitivity of the areas within Danube Delta Region was achieved through
considering five sensitivity classes common to all taxonomic groups (listed in Section 4.2). The
chosen method, represents the best approach (in the absence of Natura 2000 species inventory
and habitat mapping) used to provide a wider picture about the impacts of the implementation
of the types of interventions/projects proposed under DDISDS on the national network of
Natura 2000 sites, but it cannot capture the importance of the sites territories for each type of
habitat and each species of community interest. Such an analysis can be achieved only at the
level of a site or a project;
 GIS analysis was based on using standard dimensions of the projects (e.g. all county roads were
considered to have the same width) and of the impact distances (e.g. for all road projects were
considered that noise affects an area of 700 m calculated from the center of the road). It is
obvious that such an approach can cause overestimation in some cases and underestimation in
other cases of the generated impact.
7
CONCLUSIONS
DDISDS is a long-awaited strategy having the capacity to assure that the development of Danube Delta
area will be built on solid foundation, by conserving the natural capital. DDISDS has several ambitious
interventions aiming to restore the natural processes on several transformed areas, to reduce pollution
and to identify and reduce other existing pressures on wildlife. However, the Strategy contains also a set
of interventions susceptible to generate significant negative effects on Natura 2000 components.
This report propose a simple methodology for identification and assessment of impacts in accordance
with the Strategy level of details and the available information on the presence and conservation status
of Natura 2000 habitats and species.
Though GIS was used as a supporting tool for the assessment, the early stages of development for most
of the Strategy projects do not allow proper quantification of impacts. For conducting the assessment,
the types of interventions/ projects were classified by their location and the possibility of spatial
delimitation for the related impact areas in 5 categories: Type A (90 types of intervetions / projects) projects for which the location is not relevant for analysis, Type B (24 types of intervetions / projects) projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their nature), but no information is yet available on their
location, Type C (15 types of intervetions / projects) - projects that are relevant to the analysis (by their
nature), but not enough information is available about their location (approximate/ incomplete
location), Type D (4 types of intervetions / projects) - projects with a specific location but the area of
impact cannot be clearly defined, Type E (6 types of intervetions / projects) - projects with a specific
location, for which a clear delimitation of the area of impact can be defined.
Most of the projects are intersecting or placed inside existing Natura 2000 sites. At least for the E type
project it was estimated that a number of 15 types of habitats, 6 species of plants, 13 of invertebrates,
19 of fish, 12 of amphibians, 9 of reptiles, 25 of mammals and 45 of birds of community interest, may be
affected by the implementation of the proposed projects. Among these, 3 species of fish (Acipenser
gueldenstaedtii, Acipenser stellatus and Huso huso) are listed as CR (Critically Endangered) and 1 species
of birds (Falco cherrug) is listed as EN (Endangered) on the IUCN Red List.
Interventions which are most likely to generate negative effects are represented by projects proposing
construction works (transportation, flood risk management, channels rehabilitation, ports rehabilitation
or rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure). The significant negative effects are registred for the
taxonomical groups: habitats/ vegetation, fish and birds. Habitats are likely to be the most affected
Natura 2000 component considering the transportation projects, the rehabilitation of ports and the
rehabilitation of Sulina Channel.
Fishes are the taxonomic group that accumulate the most positive effects (approx. 23.7 % of the total
assessment scores), given especially the interventions from the Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Management and Fisheries and Aquaculture sectors (eg. I.5 Equipment and operating costs for physical
interventions to restore natural water circulation and key habitat areas, respectively I.44 Improve fish
habitat), which influences directly the aquatic ecosystems.
All interventions aiming to restore water circulation, natural ecosystems and habitats are of great
importance for the study area and are most likely to generate significant benefits for most of the Natura
2000 components. However, it should be emphasise that even these interventions can generate impact
on protected aquatic species (particularly species with low mobility) which should be addressed by
proper avoidance and mitigation measures and that the success of these projects should preferably not
be based on constructive solutions requiring continuous human intervention (e.g. installation of stop
locks for sedimentation reduction).
The overall results of the assessment indicates that the positive effects generated by the proposed
interventions/ projects of DDISDS is of 57 %, while the total of negative effects is of 43 %. The positive
effects are mostly associated with the interventions from Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management,
Pollution Emergency, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Water
supply and sanitation (WSS) and integrated water management (IWM), Solid Waste Management and
Education sectors, while the negative effects are associated with the interventions from Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Management (I.12 – I.14), Energy Efficiency (I.15 and I.17), Disaster Risk Management (DRM),
Tourism, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD), Transport and other
(I.139 Urban Renewal Interventions) sectors.
Types of intervetions / projects susceptible to generate significant negative effects are:

I.81 Modernization of national road DN 22 Constanţa – Tulcea – Măcin – Brăila;

I.88 Rehabilitation and modernization of the Sulina Channel.
Of the above mentioned types of intervetions / projects only the modernisation of Sulina Channel it may
be able to generate long distance effects which cannot be correctly estimated at this time due to the
lack of projects’ details (a new feasibility study will be elaborated). Also, for the implementation of the
project for Sulina Channel rehabilitations was suggested, along several proposed measures, to include
solutions to avoid long term and long distance effects, to avoid habitat loss and to reduce to minimum
extent the alteration of fish habitats.
In order to avoid and reduce the expected impacts on the Natura 2000 species and habitats, a set of 23
avoidance and mitigation measures were proposed. Their aim is to eliminate the significant negative
impacts, as well as to reduce other negative impacts.
Probably the most import measure, to assure the vision of DDISDS is applied, is the prioritisation of
interventions. No physical intervention should be started in the absence of sufficient knowledge on
Natura 2000 components distribution and assessment of conservation status, in the absence of a
predictive model for water and sediment flow or without knowing the carrying capacity of ecosystems
and their main resources (fish, reed, water availability).
Any significant impact has the potential to affect the conservation status of Natura 2000 habitats and
species. In order to assure that all impacts are adequate avoided and mitigates, a monitoring program
based on 6 indicators, which should be well correlated with the management plans for Natura 2000 sites
in the study area and well correlated with existing monitoring programs for related plans and programs,
was proposed for the DDISDS.
8
REFERENCES
1. A. Constantinescu, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord.
Hymenoptera (Apoidea - Fam. Colletidae), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore
Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968;
2. A. D. Sandor, I. Moldovan, S. Bugariu, First breeding record of the Citrine Wagtail (Motacilla citreola)
in Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2007;
3. A. D. Sandor, S. Bugariu, Food habits of the Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) in Cheile Dobrogei
Gorge, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2008;
4. A. Dorosencu, V. Pocora, C. Ion, Considerations about the observations and the performed ring
putting on birds in Furtuna, Maliuc and Vadu (the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve), Analele
Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii „Al.I.Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom L, 2004;
5. A. Murgoci, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Trichoptera,
Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968;
6. A. Papadopol, Considerations on the dynamics of some birds in connection with the Danube and
Black Sea shore in Romania, Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa”,
1968;
7. A. Popescu-Gorj, Données nouvelles pour la connaissance de la faune de Lépidoptères du Delta du
Danube (Île de Letea) - Roumanie, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore
Antipa”, vol. VII, 1967;
8. A. Popescu-Gorj, I. Drăghia, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube).
Ord. Lepidoptera, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968;
9. A. Popescu-Gorj, Nouvelles données pour la connaissance des lépidopteres de Sulina et du "Grind"
Caraorman (Delta du Danube), Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore
Antipa”, vol. X, 1970;
10. A. Popescu-Gorj, Pourquoi il faut pro-ger toute la Foret Letea (Delta du Danube) oasis faunistique
unique dans le paysage d'europe, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”,
vol XXXII, p 185-192, 1992;
11. A. Popescu-Gorj, X. Scolobiola-Palade, L'entomofaune de l'île de Letea (Delta du Danube).
Introduction, généralités, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”,
vol. IX, 1968;
12. A.D. Sandor , J. B. Kiss, C. Domşa, The importance of Northern Dobrogea in the miogration of the
Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), cientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea –
Romania, 2009;
13. A.D. Sandor, The diet of wintering Barn Owls (Tyto alba) in the region of Histria, the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2008;
14. Alexe, V., Kiss, J. B., Marinov, E. M., 2011, “Preliminary data concerning ornithofauna of the Babadag
lake area”, Tulcea, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Vol. 17, 2011;
15. Almăşan H., 1985, Consideraţii privind valorificarea resurselor cinegetice ale Deltei Dunării în
condiţiile menţinerii echilibrului ecologic. In: Delta Dunării, Studii şi comunicări ecologice, vol. 1, 7176;
16. Almăşan H., 1993, Consideraţii privind valorificarea resurselor cinegetice ale Deltei Dunării în
condiţiile menţinerii echilibrului ecologic, Studii şi comunicări de ecologie, Muzeul Delta Dunării;
17. Andrei M., 1963a, Aspecte din vegetaţia Dealului Denis Tepe (Dobrogea), An. Univ. Bucureşti, Ser. Şt.
Nat.-Biol., 38: 37-47;
18. Andrei M., 1963b, Plante noi şi rare pentru flora regiunilor Dobrogea şi Galaţi, An. Univ. Bucureşti,
Ser. Şt. Nat.-Biol., 38: 49-54;
19. Andrei M., colab., 1967b, Aspecte din vegetaţia Culmii Pricopan şi împrejurimi, St. cerc. Biol., Ser.
Bot., 19(3): 247-263;
20. Andrei M., Popescu A., 1967a, Caracterizarea floristică a Culmii Pricopan şi împrejurimi, Stud.
Cercet. Biol., Ser. Bot., 19(1): 33-40;
21. Antipa Gr., 1910, Regiunea inundabilă a Dunării. Starea ei actuală şi mijloace de a o pune în valoare,
Editura Institutului de Arte Geografice ”C. Gogl.”, Bucureşti;
22. Antipa Gr., 1914, Câteva probleme ştiinţifice şi economice privitoare la Delta Dunării, Analele
Academiei Române, Secţ. Ştiinţ., Seria II, 36;
23. Antipa Gr., 1942, Valorificarea stufăriilor Deltei Dunării, Analele Academiei Române, XVIII
24. Asociaţia Grupului Milvus, 2007, “Studiul migraţiei păsărilor răpitoare diurne din Munţii Măcinului
2002 – 2007”, http://milvus.ro/twined-group;
25. Asociaţia Grupului Milvus, 2011, “Studiul migraţiei de toamnă a păsărilor răpitoare din Dobrogea –
2010, 2011”, http://milvus.ro/twined-group;
26. B. Kalocsa, A.E.Tamas, Preliminary results of the bird ringing during autumn migration at the Grinul
Lupilor Ornithological Monitoring Centre, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea –
Romania, 2006;
27. B. Kalocsa, E. A. Tamás, M. Reed, M. Marinov, Evaluation of bird ringing data at the Grindul Lupilor
Ornithological Monitoring Centre from 2004 to 2009, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute,
Tulcea – Romania, 2010;
28. Bacalbaşa-Dobrovici, N., 1994, Evoluţia elementelor critice pentru menţinerea sturionilor în Dunărea
inferioară, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 191 – 194;
29. Barber, J. R., Crooks, K. R. and Fristrup, K. M. (2010). The costs of chronic noise exposure for
terrestrial organisms. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 180-189;
30. Barbu P., 1969, Sur la systématique et la distribution des petits mammifères du Delta du Danube,
Anal. Univ. Bucureşti, Biol. Anim., 18:89-99;
31. Bălăşescu A., 2000, Aşezarea neolitică de la Isaccea, puctul Suhat, jud. Tulcea, Studiul preliminar
asupra faunei descoperite la Isaccea-Suhat (cultura Boian-Giuleşti). In: Istro-Pontica, Muzeul tulcean
la a 50-a aniversare, 10-12;
32. Beldie Al., 1977-1979, Flora României, Determinator ilustrat al plantelor vasculare, I-II, Bucureşti:
Edit. Acad. Române;
33. Beldie Al., Ionescu A., 1959, Un nou arbore în flora R.P.R., Comunic. Academiei Române 9(3): 249252;
34. Borza Al., 1931, Die Excursionsrute durch die Dobrogea und das Donau Delta. Guide de la Sixiéme
Exc. Phyt. Intern. Roumanie, Cluj, 130-143;
35. Borza Al., 1963a, Fitocenoze specifice pentru ţara noastră. I., Acta Bot. Horti Bucurest., f. II: 779-784;
36. Borza Al., 1963b, Importanţa stabilirii elementelor floristice în studiul geobotanic al vegetaţiei de la
Babadag, Com. Acad. R.P.R., XIII, 5: 421-425;
37. Boşcaiu N., colab., 1989, Evaluarea stadiului actual al protecţiei florei României, Ocr. nat. med.
înconj., 33(1): 49-52;
38. Buică, G., 2011, Preliminary data on carapace health of Testudo graeca from cetatea Histria,
Dobrudja county, Ovidius University Annals of Natural Sciences, Biology – Ecology Series, Volume 15,
p. 37 – 39;
39. Bunesco A., 1959, Contribution à l'étude de la répartition géographique de quelques mammiféres
méditerranéens en Roumanie, Säugetierkunde Mitteilungen, 7(1): 1-4;
40. Burduja C., 1954, Note floristice relative la Moldova şi Dobrogea (cu unele observaţiuni asupra
vegetaţiei de dune), St. cerc. şt., Acad. R.P.R., Fil. Iaşi, 1-2: 337-361;
41. Burduja C., colab., 1971, Contribution a l’etude de la végétation antropophile de la Moldova et
Dobrogea (Roumanie), An. Şt. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, XVII, s. II, a. Biol., f. 2: 405-411;
42. C. Fântână, J. Szabo, A. Bertalan, Tricky Wheatear (Oenanthe sp.) in Dobrogea, Romania, Scientific
Annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development , Tulcea – Romania, 2005;
43. C. Ion, V. Pocora, The composition of the avifauna on the Lupilor ground in the migratory period,
Analele Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii “Al.I. Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom LI, 2005;
44. C. Pârvu, Hilara deltaica n. sp. from the Danube Delta and other data on some Hilara species
(Diptera Empididae) of Romania, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore
Antipa”, vol. XXXIV, 1994;
45. Călinescu R., 1931, Mamiferele României. II. Ordinul Chiropterelor, Buletinul Ministerului Agriculturii
şi Domenii, ser. III., anul 2, vol. I., nr. 1-2, Imprimeria naţională, Bucureşti, 25-30;
46. Călinescu R., 1931, Mamiferele României. Repartiţia şi problemele lor biogeografice-economice,
Buletinul Ministerului Agriculturii şi Domeniilor, 66-68;
47. Călinescu R., 1934, Les mammiféres de la Dobroudja et surtout ceux du littoral de la Mer Noire,
Ann. Scient. Univ. Jassy, 19: 373-374;
48. Cernişescu, I., Staraş, M., Năvodaru, I., 1994, Studiu comparativ privind exploatarea populaţiilor de
caras (Carassius auratus gibelio) din lacurile Razim şi Puiu – Roşu, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului
Delta Dunării, p. 233 – 240;
49. Cerveny, J., 1982, Notes on the Bat Fauna (Chiroptera) of Romanian Dobrogea, Nyctalus 1 (4/5):
349-357;
50. Chihaia P., 1979, Pădurile Dobrogei, Rev. Ştiinţifică, 10: 184-198;
51. Chiriţă C.D., 1977, Staţiuni forestiere, Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti;
52. CIOCÂRLAN V. 1994. Flora Deltei Dunării. Cormophyta. Bucureşti: Editura Ceres;
53. CIOCÂRLAN V. 2009. Flora ilustrată a României. Pteridophyta et Spermatophyta. Bucureşti: Editura
Ceres;
54. Ciocârlan V., 1988-1990, Flora ilustrată a României. Determinarea şi descrierea speciilor spontane şi
cultivate. I-II, ed. a 1a, Edit. Ceres;
55. Ciocârlan V., colab., 1998, Flora Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării, Addenda et corrigenda, Bul.
Grăd. Bot. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, 7: 97-100;
56. Clonaru A., 1967, Cultura plopului şi salciei în Lunca Dunării, Editura Agro-Silvica, Bucureşti;
57. Coldea G., Sanda V., Popescu A., Ştefan N., 1997, Les associations végétales de Roumanie. Tome 1.
Les associations herbacées naturelles, Presses Universitaires de Cluj, pg. 261;
58. Constantin, Gh., Năvodaru, I., Cernişescu, I., 1993, Cercetări privind prolificitatea unor specii de peşti
de interes economic din Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 239 – 243;
59. Constantin, Gh., Năvodaru, I., Cernişescu, I., 1995, Cercetări privind parazitofauna unor specii de
peşti exploataţi comercial din complexul de lacuri Roşu – Puiu, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului
Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 83 – 86;
60. Cotta V., Andone Gh., 1969, Fauna cinegetică. Aspecte actule. ”Cercetări forestiere şi cinegetice în
Delta Dunării”, Editura Agrosilvică Bucureşti, 99-107;
61. Cristurean I., Ionescu-Ţeculescu V., 1970, Asociaţii vegetale din Rezervaţia naturală „Pădurea
Hagieni”, Acta Bot. Horti Bucurest., Bucureşti, 245-279;
62. Cuzic M., Marinov M., Cuzic V., 2002, American mink (Mustela vison) – A new mammal species of
the DDBR territory, Scientific annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Research and Development,
Tulcea;
63. Cuzic M., Murariu D., 2008, Ghidul ilustrat al mamiferelor sălbatice din România, Editura Dobrogea,
Constanţa;
64. Cuzic, V., Petrescu, M., “Studiul avifaunei şi habitatelor din Podişul Dobrogean în scopul dezvoltării
reţelei de arii protejate”, Delta Dunării III, Tulcea, p. 153 – 164, 2006;
65. D. Bota, V. Oţel, R. Suciu, J. B. Kiss, L.M. Rasmussen, Un sistem îmbunătăţit de monitorizare a
păsărilor din Delta Dunării, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1993;
66. Dămăceanu, C., Leandru, V., Ceuca, G., 1964, Cercetări privind ameliorarea pădurilor degradate din
nordul Dobrogei, Editura Agro-Silvică, Bucureşti;
67. Diakov O., Zakorchevnaya N., Nesterenko M., Kovbasko O., Zhmud M., Plotnitskiy L., 2012,
Vulnerability of the Danube Delta region to climate change, Synthesis report, Moldova, Romania,
Ukraine;
68. DIHORU G., NEGREAN G. 2009. Cartea roşie a plantelor vasculare din România. Bucureşti: Editura
Academiei Române;
69. Dihoru Gh., 1962, Insula de fagi din Dobrogea, Natura, Ser. Biol., 14(3): 49-52;
70. Dihoru Gh., Negrean G., 1976, Flora of the Danube Delta, Peuce V., Muzeul Delta dunării, Tulcea;
71. Dinu C., 1987, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea resurselor vegetale din zona Cheia - Munţii Măcinului, Cul.
St. Art. Biol., Grăd. Bot. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, 3: 244-246;
72. Done A., 2007, Contribuţii la monitorizarea liliecilor în adăposturile subterane din nord-estul
României, Miscelanea Chiropterologica, Suceava, 2: 39-44;
73. Doniţă N., 1966, Câteva probleme ale studiului vegetaţiei forestiere din Dobrogea de Nord, Referate
şi Comunic. Şti., prezentate la Ses. Şti. În probleme de Silvicultură, 23-24 V;
74. Doniţă N., Ivan D., 1992, Vegetaţia Dobrogei, Deltei Dunării şi complexului lagunar Razelm, In Doniţă
N. et al. (eds.), Vegetaţia României. Edit. Tehn. Agric., Bucureşti, pag.: 82-100;
75. Doroftei, M., Contribution of: Marian Mierlă, Silviu Covaliov, Cristina Nanu, Gabriel Lupu (DDNI)
23.1.2013, Habit-Change. Climate change adapted management plan for Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve, project implemented through the CENTRAL EUROPE Programme co-financed by the ERDF;
76. Doroftei, M., Mierlă, M.,. Lupu, G., martie 2011, Approaches to habitat disturbances in the Danube
Delta Biosphere Reserve, Studii şi Cercetări, Biologie, 20/ 1, p. 46 – 56, Universitatea”Vasile
Alecsandri” din Bacău;
77. Doroftei M., Mierlă M., Danube Delta habitats versus climate change, Danube Delta National
Institute for Research and Development, no. 165 Babadag street, 820112-Tulcea, Romania,
BALWOIS 2012 - Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia - 28 May, 2 June 2012;
78. Dragomir N.I., Kiss, J.B., 1972, Probleme ale cercetării cinegetice în Delta Dunării. In: Simpozionul
”Noi orientări în cercetarea cinegetică”, Academia R.S.R., Academia de Ştiinţe Agricole şi Silvice,
Bucureşti, 58-73;
79. Dumitrescu M., 1969, Importanţa ştiinţifică a Peşterii Liliecilor de la Gura Dobrogii şi a Peşterii ”La
Adam”, Ocrotirea naturii, Bucureşti, 13(2): 139-148;
80. Dumitrescu M., Orghidan T., Tanasachi J., 1958, Peştera de la Gura Dobrogei, Anuarul Comitetului
Geologic, 31: 462-484;
81. Dumitrescu M., Tanasachi J., Orghidan T., 1962-1963, Răspândirea chiropterelor în R.P. Română,
Lucr. Inst. Speol. ”Emil Racoviţă”, 1-2: 509-576;
82. E. Bulankova, P. Beracko, T. Derka, Occurrence of protected species (Gomphus flavipes, Odonata
and Palingenia longicauda, Ephemeroptera) in the Danube River and its deltas (Romania, Slovakia),
Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea, 2013;
83. Ene, C., Suciu, R., Ene, F., Dumitrache, C., 1995, Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în
Dunăre (I) Date recente privind hrana sturionilor în zona Gurilor Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale
Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 91 – 94;
84. Ene, F., Ene, C., Suciu, R., 1995 ,Cercetări asupra sturionilor marini migratori în Dunăre (II)
Malformaţii ale înotătoarelor la exemplarele cantonate în faţa Gurilor Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale
Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 95 – 100;
85. Făgăraş M., colab., 2001, The ecological and floristical characterization of Salicornietum europeae
Wendelbg. 1953 association on Saele (Istria) sand bank, Acta Horti Bot. Bucurest., 29: 199-207;
86. Filat M., Benea V.I., Nicolae C.C.R., Daia M.L., Neţoiu C., 2009, Cultura plopilor, a sălciilor şi a altor
specii forestiere în zona inundabilă a Dunării, Editura Silvică, Bucureşti;
87. Filat M., Condac M., Greavu M., 1995, Consideraţii privind starea şi evaluarea unor specii sedentare
de vânat din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării,
Tulcea, 259-264;
88. Foreman Richard T.T., Alexander L.E., 1998, Roads and their major ecological effects, Annual Review
of Ecological Systems 29:207-231;
89. G. Chişamera, V. Pocora, M. Gogu - Bogdan, Costicã Adam, Phenology and biometrics of
Moustached Warbler Acrocephalus melanopogon (Passeriformes: Sylviidae) in Romania, Travaux du
Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa”, 2010;
90. G. Lupu, Ortopterele din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Deltaica nr. 2, Tulcea, 2013;
91. G. Lupu, Zoogeographic distribution and habitat preferences of Orthoptera species (Insecta) from
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea,
2013;
92. GÂŞTESCU P., ROMULUS Ş., 2008, Delta Dunării – Rezervaţie a Biosferei. Ed.: CD PRESS, Bucureşti;
93. Gâştescu P., Ştiucă R.., 2008, Delta Dunării – rezervaţie a biosferei, Editura CD PRESS, Bucureşti;
94. Gâştescu, P., Ştiucă, R., 2008, Delta Dunării Rezervaţie a Biosferei, Editura CD Press;
95. Georgescu C.C., 1928, Contribuţiuni la studiul pădurilor din Dobrogea de Nord, In Borza A. , Pop E.
(eds.), Întâiul Congres Naţional al naturaliştilor din Românie, ţinut la Cluj de la 18 până la 21 aprilie
1928, Cluj., 162-170;
96. Gherghel, I., Iftime, A., 2009, On a record of largest specimen of Triturus dobrogicus (Kiritzescu
1903) from the Danube Delta, Romania, Biharean Biologist, Vol. 3, No.1, Pp.: 83-85, Article No.:
031201;
97. Gomoiu, M. - T., 1996, Facts and remarks on the Danube Delta, Geo-Eco-Marina, Romanian Centre
of Marine Geology and Geoecology, Danube Delta – Black Sea System under Global Changes
Impact, p. 70 – 82;
98. Gotea V., Kranz A., 2000, The European mink (Mustela lutreola) in the Danube Delta. In: Small
Carnivore Conservation, vol. 21, 23-25;
99. Greavu M., 2006, Studiu privind stabilirea tehnologiilor de reconstrucţie ecologică a pădurilor în
declin din incintele din Delta Dunării care urmează a fi regenerate în sezonul următor, Referat
ştiinţific parţial, Tulcea;
100. Grecescu D., 1898, Conspectul Florei României. Plantele vasculare indigene şi cele naturalizate ce se
găsesc pe teritoriul României, considerate subt punctul de vedere sistematic şi geografic,
Tipografiea Dreptatea, Bucureşti: 1-836;
101. Grinţescu, G., 1927, Crearea legală a primei rezervaţiuni a naturei, Institutul de Arte Grafice
Eminescu, Bucureşti;
102. Halpern, B., Major, A., Pechy, T., Marinov, M., Kiss, B., 2006, Vipera ursinii moldavica populations
of the Romanian Danube-Delta, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania,
vol. 12, no. 7, p. 33 – 38;
103. Hamar M., 1960, Cercetări asupra repartiţiei geografice a speciilor de rozătoare din P.P.R., Natura,
1: 75-83;
104. Hanganu J., Dubyna D., Zhmud E., Grigoraş I., Menke U., Drost H., Ştefan N., Sârbu I., 2002,
Vegetation of the Biosphere Reserve ”Danube Delta” with Transbaundary Vegetation Map, sc.
1:161.000, Danube Delta National Institute Romania, Institute Botany and Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve Ukraine and RIZA The Netherlands;
105. Hanganu J., Teodor C., Ştefan N., 1992, Caracteristicile biometrice ale stufului în primul an de la
incendierea sau recoltare pe solurile organice sulfatice natante din Delta Dunării, Analele Şt. Inst.
Delta Dunării, Tulcea;
106. Holostenco, D., Onără, D. F., Suciu, R., Honţ, Ş., Paraschiv, M.,2013, Distribution and genetic
diversity of sturgeons feeding in the marine area of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Scientific
Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 4, p. 25 – 34, doi:
10.7427/DDI.19.04;
107. Horeanu Cl., 1970, Contribuţii la flora Dobrogei, Lucr. Şt., Inst. Ped., Galaţi, IV: 181-186;
108. Horeanu Cl., 1976a, Propuneri pentru înfinţarea unor noi rezervaţii în Podişul Casimcea, Ocrotirea
naturii dobrogene, Cluj Napoca, 158-165;
109. Horeanu Cl., 1976b, Vegetaţia pajiştilor xerofile din Podişul Casimcea (Dobrogea), Peuce. Muz.
Deltei Dunării, Tulcea, 5: 335-346;
110. Horeanu Cl., 1976c, Vegetaţia lemnoasă din Podişul Casimcea, Peuce V, Tulcea, 347-355;
111. I. Drăghia, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Insectes mineurs,
Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968;
112. I. Socegolev, M. Marinov, Speciile de Passeriformedin zonele umede de pe litoralul vestic al Mării
Negre, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1997
113. Ifrim I., Pocora V., 2007, Preliminary aspects about the specific composition of the bats fauna from
three caves of Dobrogea, Anal. Ştiin. Univ. ”Al. I. Cuza” din Iaşi, Sect. Biol. Animală, 53:239-244;
114. Iliescu, M., 1993, Ihtiofauna lagunei Sinoie, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 93 –
97;
115. Inaşcu M., 1971, Cercetări în vederea îmbogăţirii faunei Deltei cu noi specii de vânat (fazan,
căprior, cerb lopătar, nutrie) pe grindurile Letea, Caraorman şi zonele limitrofe, Manuscris la
Institutul de Cercetări şi Proiectări pentru Delta Dunării;
116. Ionescu G., 2010, Castor fiber – specie reintrodusă. In: Managementul şi monitoringul Speciilor de
Animale Natura 2000 din România, Ghid metodologic, Bucureşti, 75-81;
117. Ionescu G., Ionescu O., Paşca Cl., Sîrbu G., Jurj R., Popa M., Vişan M., Popescu I., 2010, Castorul în
România. Monografie 158 p., Editura Silvică, Bucureşti;
118. Ionescu G., Troidl C., 1997, Beaver project România. A reintroduction with special focus on
antropic factors, European Beaver Symposium Bratislava, Slovakia, p. 29;
119. Iordache, V., 2009, Ecotoxicologia metalelor grele în lunca Dunării, Editura Ars Docendi,
Universitatea din Bucureşti;
120. Ivan D., 1979, Fitocenologie şi vegetaţia R.S.R., Ed. Didactică şi Pedagogică, Bucureşti;
121. J. B. Kiss, A.D. Sandor, The diet of wintering Long-eared Owls in Tulcea, Romania, Scientific Annals
of the Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development , Tulcea – Romania, 2003-2004;
122. J. B. Kiss, D. Hulea, E. Petrescu, E. Ballon, M. Marinov, Dobrogea-România, the main wintering area
for Branta ruficollis (Red-breasted Goose), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea –
Romania, 1997;
123. J. B. Kiss, Data Regarding Antagonistic Relationships of the Common Tern (Sterna hirundo L.) at the
Mouths of the Danube, Revista Delta Dunării III , Tulcea, 2006;
124. J. B. Kiss, Gasca de Nil – Atopochen aegyptacus – în apropierea Tulcei, Scientific Annals of the
Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1994;
125. J. B. Kiss, J. Rekasi, Date privind hrana în Delta Dunării a unor specii de păsări granivore şi
insectivore strict protejate, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1995;
126. J. B. Kiss, J. Rékási, I. Sterbetz, Z. Török, Insects as Food of Corvidae from the Northern Dobrudja,
Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004;
127. J. B. Kiss, M. Condac, Inelări la pelicani şi evaluarea sincronă a ornitofaunei acvatice pe teritoriul
RBDD executate de catre Corpul de Pază şi Intervenţie Tulcea, Scientific Annals of the Danube
Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1992;
128. J. B. Kiss, M. Marinov, V. Alexe, Preliminary data on the ornithological fauna of the islet forming in
the south part of Musura Gulf, between Stambulul Vechi (Ukraine) and Sulina (Romania) branches
of the Danube, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2008;
129. J. B. Kiss, Sándor D. Attila, M. Marinov, O. OVERDIJK, New data regarding the migration of
spoonbills (Platalea leucorodia) breeding in the Danube Delta, based on color ring resightings,
Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2007;
130. J. B. Kiss, V. Alexe, A. Doroşencu, M. Marinov, Sándor D. Attila, Situaţia actuală şi preferinţele faţă
de locurile de cuibărit ale codalbului (Haliaeetus albicilla) în Delta Dunării (România), Revista de
silvicultură şi cinegetică, Nr. 32 , 2013;
131. J. B. Kiss, V. Alexe, M. Marinov, Sándor D. Attila, Data on the distribution of the Greater Blackheaded Gull (Larus ichthyaetus Pall. 1773) and its breeding in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve,
132. J. Rekasi, J. B. Kiss, Date privind Malofagele (Mallophaga) păsărilor din Delta Dunării, Scientific
Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1994;
133. J. Rekasi, J. B. Kiss, New data on birdlices (Mallophala) of rare birds from northern Dobrogea
(Romania), Sesiunea Ştiinţifică a ICPDD - Tulcea, 12-14 mai 1998;
134. J. Rekasi, J. B. Kiss, Zs. Torok, Date asupra Malofagelor (Mallophaga) parazite ale speciilor de păsări
din Delta Dunării, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996;
135. J.B. Kiss, M. Zenatello, L. Szabo, M. Marinov, Data on the breeding ecology of the Rose-coloured
Starling - Sturnus roseus (L.) in Dobrudja, Romania in 2002-2003, Scientific Annals of the Danube
Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2003-2004;
136. J.B.Kiss, Dermapterele din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiilţifice ale Institutului Delta
Dunării, 1994;
137. Jakucs P., Fekete G., Gergely J., 1959, Angaben zur Vegetation von der Moldau und Dobrudscha,
Ann. Hist.-Nat., Mus. Nat. Hung., 51: 211-225;
138. Kiss J. B., Marinov M., Alexe V., 2011, Négylábú jövevények a Duna-deltában. IN: Erdélyi Nimród,
Október;
139. Kiss J.B., Doroşencu Al., Marinov M., Alexe V., Bozagievici R., 2012, Considerations regarding the
occurrence of the Eurasian Beaver (Castor fiber Linnaeus 1758) in the Danube Delta (Romania),
Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea, 49-56;
140. Kranz A., Polednik L., Gotea V., 2001, Conservation of the European Mink (Mustela lutreola), in the
Danube Delta backgroind information and project plan, Analele Ştiinţifice ale I.N.C.D.D.D., Tulcea,
124-129;
141. Kranz A., Toman A., Kiss J.B., 2003, The European mink in the Danube Delta – Distribution –
Habitats – Threats. In: International Conference on the Conservation of the European mink, 5-8
November 2003, Logrono-Spania, 24-25;
142. Kranz A., Toman A., Polednikova K., Polednik L., Kiss J.B., 2004, Distribution, status and
conservation of the European mink (Mustela lutreola) in the Danube Delta. In: Analele Ştiinţifice
INCDDD, vol. 10, 38-44;
143. L. Petrencu, C. Ion and E. Baltag, The distribution of wader birds in Eastern Romania, Analele
Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom LVII, 2011;
144. Lode T., Cormier J.P., Jacques D., 2001, Decline in endangered species as an indication of anthropic
pressures: the case of European Mink Mustela lutreola western population. In: Environmental
Management, vol. 28.4, 727-735;
145. Lupe I. Z., 1954, Cercetări privind cultura speciilor de Quercus de diferite provenienţe în stepa
centrală a Dobrogei, Bul. Şt., Acad. R.P.R., Secţ. Şt. Biol., Agron., Geol., Geogr., VI, 3: 803-836;
146. M. GAUTHIER-CLERC, Y. KAYSER, J. B. Kiss, Diet and clutch size of Squacco Heron (Ardeola ralloides)
in the Danube Delta (Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania,
2004;
147. M. KOLESNYKOVA, S. UTEVSKY, New Ukrainian records of Branchiobdella parasita (Annelida:
Clitellata: Branchiobdellida) from the Danube basin, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute,
Tulcea, 2013;
148. M. Marinov, D. Hulea, Dinamica coloniilor mixte de cormorani şi stârci din Delta Dunării, în
perioada 1959-1995, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996;
149. M. Marinov, D. Hulea, M. Condac, Dinamica avifaunei din RBDD în corelaţie cu principalii factori de
mediu, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996;
150. M. Marinov, D. Hulea, Stârcul de cireadă (Bulbucus ibis) – o nouă specie cuibăritoare în Delta
Dunării, Sesiunea Ştiinţifică a ICPDD, 1998;
151. M. Marinov, Tendinţe actuale ale evoluţiei avifaunei în RBDD, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta
Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1995;
152. M. Paspaleva, J. B. Kiss, M. Talpeanu, Les oiseaux coloniaux dans le Delta du Danube, Travaux –
Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol XXVII, p 289-304, 1985;
153. M. Paspaleva, J. B. Kiss, M. Tălpeanu, Sur la dynamique de quelques especies d’oiseaux dominants
dans le Delta du Danube, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXV,
p. 313 – 329, 1984;
154. M. Platteeuw, J. B. Kiss, M. Y. Zhmund, N. Sadoul, Large colonial waterbirds in the Romanian and
Ukrainian Danube Delta: a complete survey in 2001/2002, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta
Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2006;
155. M. Platteeuw, J. B. Kiss, M. Ye. Zhmud, N. Sadoul, Colonial waterbirds and their habitat use in the
Danube Delta as an example of a large-scale natural wetland, Institute for Inland Water
Management and Waste Water Treatment RIZA, 2004;
156. M. Platteeuw, J. B. Kiss, N. Sadoul, Survey of colonial breeding birds in romanian Danube Delta,
May-June 2001, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development ,
Tulcea – Romania, 2000-2001;
157. M. Schmitz, C. Sudfeldt, H. Legge, K. Mantel, P. Weber & M. Marinov, Spring migration of waders in
the Razim-Sinoie lagoon system south of the Danube Delta, Romania, Wader Study Group Bull.
90:59 – 64, 1999;
158. M. Weinberg, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Diptera
(Stratiomyidae, Tabanidae, Asilidae, Thereviidae et Sciomyzidae), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de
Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968;
159. M. Zenatello, M. Marinov, J.B. Kiss, Breeding Marsh Terns (Chlidonias sp.) in the Danube Delta in
2003, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2005;
160. Marches G., 1970, Date privind răspândirea şi importanţa ştiinţifică şi practică a unor mamifere din
Dobrogea, Ocrotirea Naturii, 14(2): 165-180;
161. Marinov M.E., Kiss J.B., Toman A., Polednik L., Alexe V., Doroftei M., Doroşencu A., Kranz A., 2012,
Monitoring of European Mink (Mustela lutreola) in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve – Romania,
2003-2011. Current status and setting of goals for the European Mink conservation, Scientific
Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, vol. 18, Tulcea, 69-74;
162. McDermid G. J., C. Coops N., Wulder M. A., Franklin S. E., Seitz N. E., Critical Remote Sensing
Contributions to Spatial Wildlife Ecological Knowledge and Management, 2009, Springer, p. 193 –
222;
163. Michaux J.R., Hardy O.J., Justy F., Fournier P., Kranz A., Cabia M., 2005, Conservation genetics and
population history of an threatened European mink Mustela lutreola, with an emphasis on the west
European population. In: Molecular Ecology;
164. Mihai Gh., colab., 1964, Contribuţii la studiul florei Dobrogii, St. cerc. Biol., Ser. Bot., 16(6): 471-476;
165. Mitchell-Jones T., Bihari Z., Rodrigues L., Masing M., 2000, Guidelines for the implementation of
Resolution No. 4 adopted by the 2nd Session of the Meeting of Parties Transboundary programme
– habitats: data compilation;
166. Mohan, Gh., Ardelean, A., Georgescu, M., 1993, Rezervaţii şi monumente ale naturii din România,
Casa de Editură şi Comerţ ”Scaiul”, Bucureşti;
167. Morariu I., 1957, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea vegetaţiei litoralului Mării Negre, Bul. Şt., Secţ. Biol.-Şt.
Agr. (Ser. Bot.), Acad. R.P.R., IX, 4: 361-382;
168. Morariu I., 1970, Un aspect de vegetaţie naturală din Dobrogea, Acta Bot. Horti Bucurest., /1968/:
193-199;
169. Munteanu D., 1977, Rolul vegetaţiei în viaţa şi repartiţia păsărilor din Delta Dunării, Peuce, vol. V,
Dobrogea;
170. Murariu D., 1981, Contribution a la connaissance de la distribution et de l’ecologie des
Mammiferes de la zone du Delta du Danube et du lac Razelm (Roumanie), Trav. du Mus. d’Hist. Nat.
”Gr. Antipa”, vol. XXIII, Bucureşti, 283-296;
171. Murariu D., 1996, Mammals of the Danube Delta (Romania), Trav. Mus, Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr.
Antipa”, vol. XXXVI, Bucureşti, 361-37;
172. Murariu D., Atanasova I., Raykov I., Chişamera G., 2009, Results on mammals (Mammalia) survey
from Bulgarian and Romanian Dobrogea, Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, Bucureşti, 52:
371-386;
173. N. Bacalbaşa-Dobrovici, Problema proliferării cormoranilor în Bazinul Dunării, Scientific Annals of
the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1997;
174. Nagy Z.L., Postawa T., 2010, Seasonal and geographical distribution of cave-dwelling bats in
Romania: implications for conservation, Animal Conservation, 1-13;
175. Năstase, A., 2012, New data concerning fish fauna from lakes of the fluvial Danube Delta (GorgovaUzlina and Sontea-Furtuna lakecomplexes, Romania) in 2010, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta
Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 18, no. 8, p. 75 – 88;
176. Năstase, A., Năvodaru, I., 2006, Study of ichthyodiversity from Gorgova – Uzlina lake-complex,
Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 12, no. 15, p. 91 – 96;
177. Năstase, A., Năvodaru, I., 2008, Ichthyofauna of Danube delta lakes, Scientific Annals of the Danube
Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 14, no. 6, p. 37 - 46;
178. Năstase, A., Năvodaru, I., Cernişescu, I., 2009, Fish community studies from riverine Danube Delta
(Romania) area in 2007: Sontea-Furtuna and Gorgova-Uzlina lake-complexes, Scientific Annals of
the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 15, no. 15, p. 115 – 124;
179. Năvodaru, I., Constantin, Gh., 1995, Comportamentul migraţiei scrumbiei de Dunăre (Alosa pontica
pontica Eichwald), pe sectorul de Dunăre Mm 52 – Mm 50, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta
Dunării Tulcea, p. 249 – 253;
180. Năvodaru, I., Maximov, V., 2014, The spatial and temporal distribution of the shads in Black Sea marine zone of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute,
Tulcea – Romania, vol. 20, no. 15, Section III. Natural resources, socio-economic aspects, p. 95 –
100;
181. Năvodaru, I., Năstase A., 2008, Fish fauna from Gârla Pasărea, a heavy modified former floodplain
watercourse, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 14, no. 7, p. 47
– 56;
182. Năvodaru, I., Năstase, A., 2011, What fish and how many there are in Danube Delta?, Scientific
Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 17, no. 6, p. 71 – 82;
183. Năvodaru, I., Staraş, M., 1995, Evoluţia, cercetarea şi administrarea pescăriilor din Rezervaţia
Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 241 – 248;
184. Năvodaru, I., Staraş, M., 1998, Conservation of fish stocks in the Danube Delta, Romania: Present
status, constraints, and recommendation, Italian Journal of Zoology, 65:S1, 369-371, DOI:
10.1080/11250009809386848;
185. Necrasov O., Stirbu M., 1975, Asupra prezenţei brebului (Castor fiber L.) în faunele vechi din
România. In: Ocrotirea naturii şi mediului în conjurător, vol. 19, nr. 1, 29-34
186. Negrean G., 1980, Specii dobrogene noi pentru flora României, St. Cerc., Pontus Euxinus, Compl.
Muz. Şt. Nat. Constanţa, 1: 247-250;
187. Negrean G., colab., 1976, Analiza critică a unor taxoni din Delta Dunării, Peuce, Muz. Deltei Dunării,
Tulcea, V: 119-124;
188. Nyárády A., 1967, Contribuţii la flora României. III, Notulae Bot. Horti Agro-Bot. Clujensis: 55-57;
189. Oltean M., Negrean G., Popescu A., Roman N., Dihoru Gh., Sanda V., Mihăilescu, S., 1994, Lista roşie
a plantelor superioare din România, St., Sint., Doc. Ecol., Acad. Română - Inst. de Biologie,
Bucureşti, I: 1-52;
190. Onără, D. F., Holostenco, D., Suciu, R., Tudor 2013, Management applications of genetic structure
of anadromous sturgeon populations in the Lower Danube River (LDR), Romania, Scientific Annals
of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 17, p. 129 – 138, doi:
10.7427/DDI.19.17;
191. Onără, D. F., Suciu, R., Holostenco, D., Tudor, D., 2013, Heavy metal bio-accumulation in tissues of
sturgeon species of the Lower Danube River, Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta
Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 12, p. 87 – 94, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.12;
192. Oosterberg, W., et al., 2000, Ecological gradients in the Danube Delta lakes: present state and maninduced changes, Institute for Inland Water Management and Waste Water Treatment RIZA,
http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:26576;
193. Oprea A., colab., 1998, The influence of reforestation on remaking the biodiversity in the arid
regions of northwestern Dobrudja-Romania (II), St. Cerc. Biol., Univ. Bacău, 3: 5-12;
194. Oţel, V., 12 – 14 mai 1998, Prezenţa speciei Gymnocephalus baloni Holcik et Hensel 1974 (Pisces:
Percidae) în Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Sesiunea Ştiinţifică a ICPDD – Tulcea, p. 40 – 43;
195. Oţel, V., Bărărescu, P., Nalbant, T., Baboianu, C., 1993, Rezultatele investigaţiilor ihtiopatologice din
teritoriul Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării în anul 1992, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta
Dunării, p. 145 – 162;
196. Palazon S., Ruiz-Olmo J., 1998, A preliminary study of the behaviour of the European mink Mustela
lutreola in Spain, by means of radio-tracking. In: Symp. Zool. Soc. London, Cambridge University
Press, vol. 71, 93-105;
197. Panţu Z., 1902, Plante vasculare din Dobrogea, Publ. Soc. Nat. din România, 3: 34-47;
198. Panţu Z., colab., 1935, Contribuţiuni la Flora Deltei Dunării, Mem. Secţ. Şt., Acad. Română, Ser. III,
XI, Mem. 2: 1-57;
199. Papadopol, A., 1981, „Considerations sur l'ecologie des oiseaux du secteur Murighiol-TulceaBabadag-Lunca (Jurilovca) dans le contexte de la dynamique de l'avifaune du complexe lagunaire de
Razelm-Sinoe (Dobrogea, Roumanie)”, Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală
“Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXIII, p. 259 – 282;
200. Paşcovschi S., Leandru V., 1962, Tipurile de păduri din Delta Dunării, Revista Hidrobiologia, vol. IV;
201. Paşcovschi, S., 1967, Succesiunea speciilor forestiere, Ed. Agro-Silvică, Bucureşti;
202. Patriche, N., Talpeş, M., Dan, M., 1993, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, agent patogen la Acipenser
stellatus, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 165 – 166;
203. Petcu C., 2011, Pădurile din Lunca şi Delta Dunării – trecut, prezent şi viitor, Dunărea – trecut,
prezent şi viitor, Academia Oamenilor de Ştiinţă din România, Bucureşti;
204. Petrescu C., 1916, Plantes nouvelles pour la flore de Dobrogea (Troisième Note), Bul. de la Sect.
Sci., Acad. Roumaine, IV-ème année, 7: 287-297;
205. Petrescu M., 1994, Necesitatea protejării Munţilor Măcin ca zonă complementară Deltei Dunării în
conservarea patrimoniului natural din nordul Dobrogei, Analele Şti., Inst. Delta Dunării, III, Tulcea,
121-128;
206. Petrescu M., 2007, Dobrogea şi Delta Dunării – conservarea florei şi habitatelor, Institutul de
Cercetări Eco-Muzeale Tulcea, Tipografia Marinex Print S.R.L., Baia Mare;
207. Pocora I. , Pocora V., 2011, Seasonal distribution of cave-dwelling bats and conservation status of
underground habitats in Moldova and Dobrogea (Romania), Studii şi Cercetări, Seria Biologie, 7283, Universitatea ”Vasile Alecsandri” din Bacău, Bacău;
208. Pop Em., 1929, Bibliografia botanică a Dobrogei (1878-1928), Bul. Grăd. Bot. Muz. Bot, Univ. Cluj,
IX: 210-220;
209. Popescu A., Murariu D., 2001, Mammalia, Rodentia. In: Fauna României, vol. 16, Nr. 2, Editura
Academiei Române, Bucureşti, p. 32;
210. Popescu A., Sanda V., 1976, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea vegetaţiei psamofile din Delta Dunării, Peuce
V, Muz. Deltei Dunării, Tulcea, 193-216;
211. Popescu A., Sanda V., 2003, Considerations about the thermophyl beech forest in Romania,
Proceedings of the Institute of Biology, 5: 185-193, Bucureşti;
212. Popescu A., Sanda V., Oroian S., Chifu T., Ştefan N., Sârbu I., 1997, Vegetaţia Deltei Dunării, In:
Marisia XXV, Studii şi materiale, Târgu Mureş;
213. Popescu A., Suciu M., Chiriac E., 1974, Quelques considérations écologiques concernant les
populations des Rongeurs de Dobroudja, Stud. Comun. Muz. Şt. Nat Bacău, 119-128;
214. Popovici Al., 1913, Contributions à la flore de la Dobroudja (Roumanie), Ann. Sci. de l’Univ. de Jassy,
VII, 4-eme fasc.: 291-296;
215. Pringle C., Vellidis G., Heliotis F., Bandacu D., Cristofor S., 1993, Environmental problems of the
Danube Delta, American Scientist, Volume 81, p. 350 – 361;
216. Prodan I., 1914, Contribuţiune la Flora României, An. Acad. Române, Ser. II, XXXVI, Mem. Secţ. Şt.,
10: 1-56;
217. Prodan I., 1939, Conspectul florei Dobrogei: p. a III-a, Bul. Fac. Agron., Cluj, VII, /1938/: 1-96;
218. Puşcariu V., 1958, Despre înfiinţarea unor rezervaţii naturale în Delta Dunării şi măsurile de ocrotire
necesare, Hidrobiologia I, Edit. Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti;
219. Puşcariu V., 1958, Despre înfiinţarea unor rezervaţii naturale în Delta Dunării şi măsurile de ocrotire
necesare, Hidrobiologia I, Edit. Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti;
220. Puşcariu V., Boşcaiu N., Täuber F., 1978, Aspecte de vegetaţie de pe Insula Popina din Lacul Razelm
(jud. Tulcea), Ocrot. Nat. Med. Înconj., 22(2): 107-112;
221. Puşcaru-Soroceanu Ev., 1963, (ed.), Păşunile şi fâneţele din România. Studiul geobotanic şi
agroproductiv, Edit. Acad. R.P. Române. Bucureşti;
222. R. Serafim, Contribution à la conaissance des Coléopterès Cèrambycidés (Coleoptera, Cermbycidae)
du Delta du Danube et du Complex lagunaire Razelm (Roumanie), Bucureşti, Travaux – Muzeul
Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXXIII, 1993;
223. Rákosy L., Wieser C. (eds.), 2000, Das Macin Gebirge (Rumänien, NordDobrudscha), Carinthia II,
anno 190.-110.: 7-116;
224. Randik A., Sebela M., Zima J., 1980, Contribution to the knowledge of small mammals (Insectivora,
Rodentia) of the Danube Delta, Acta Mus. Moraviae, Sc. Nat., 65: 191-198;
225. Răduleţ N., 1994, Contributions to the knowledge of the distribution and the biology of Myotis
capaccinii (Bonaparte, 1837) (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) in Romania, Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat.
”Gr. Antipa”, 34: 401-409;
226. Răduleţ N., 2005, Contributions to the knowledge of the mammal fauna from Dobrogea (Romania),
Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, Bucureşti, 48: 417-425;
227. Răduleţ N., Stănescu M., 1966, Contributions à la connaissance des mammifères du sud de la
Dobrogea (Roumanie), Trav. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. ”Gr. Antipa”, Bucureşti, 36: 373-384;
228. Roman N., 1992, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea florei Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării, analele Şt.
Inst. Delta Dunării, Tulcea;
229. Rudescu L., Godeanu M., 1980, Fauna ornitologică şi mamalogică a Deltei Dunării. In: Ecosistemele
din România, Bucureşti, 239-240;
230. Rudescu L., Niculescu C., Chivu P., 1965, Monografia stufului din Delta Dunării, Edit. Academiei
R.S.R., Bucureşti;
231. S. Levente, Lepidopterele din Delta Dunării, Braşov, 2006;
232. S. Levente, The Macrolepidoptera (Insecta) of central Dobrogea (Romania), Muzeul Naţional de
Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. LV, 2012;
233. S. Maican, R. Serafim, Overview on the Chrysomeloidea superfamily (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae,
Orsodacnidae, Chrysomelidae) in Dobrogea (Romania), Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie
Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. LV, 2012;
234. S. Vrabie, Un caz de dracunculoză la egreta mică (Egretta garzetta L.), Scientific Annals of the
Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 1996;
235. Sabodash, V. M., Smirnov, A. I., 1994, The changes in the character of reproduction of the Danube
hering (Alosa pontica pontica Eichwald) as a result of anthropogen deformation of its ecology,
Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 145 – 148;
236. Sanda V., colab., 1964, Cercetări floristice asupra dealului Istriţa, St. cerc. Biol., Ser. Bot., 16, 6: 477495;
237. Sanda V., colab., 2003, Atlas Florae Romaniae, Edit. Vergiliu, Bucureşti: 1-115;
238. Sándor D. Attila, J. B. Kiss, C. Domşa, The importance of Northern Dobrogea in the migration of
Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea –
Romania, 2009;
239. Săvulescu Tr. (coord. pp.), 1952-1976, Flora R.P.R. – R.S.R., I-XIII, Edit. Acad. R.S.R., Bucureşti;
240. Sârbu A. (coord.), 2003, Ghid pentru identificarea importantelor arii de protecţie şi conservare a
plantelor din România, Edit. Alo, Bucureşti: 1-113;
241. SÂRBU A. (coord.). 2007. Arii speciale pentru protecţia şi conservarea plantelor în România.
Bucureşti: Editura Victor B Victor;
242. Sârbu I., colab., 1997, Contribution a l'etude de la végétation de l'île de Popina (lac Razim), Dép. de
Tulcea, Bul. Grăd. Bot. Univ. „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, 6, f. 1: 217-234;
243. Simionescu V., Neacşu Gh., 1977, Contribuţii la cunoaşterea faunei de mamifere mici din Delta
Dunării, Peuce V, Zoologie, Muz. Del. Dunării, Tulcea, 529-548;
244. Stanc S.M., 2009, Arheozoologia primului mileniu d. Hr. pentru teritoriul cuprins între Dunăre şi
Marea Neagră, Editura Universităţii ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Iaşi, p. 305;
245. Staraş, M., Năvodaru, Cernişescu, I., 1994, Aprecieri privind starea şi exploatarea unor stocuri de
peşte din Rezervaţia Biosferei Delta Dunării, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării, p. 227 –
232;
246. Staraş, M., Năvodaru, I., 1995, Schimbări în structura ihtiofaunei ca efect al modificării
caracteristicilor biotopului, Analele Ştiinţifice ale Institutului Delta Dunării Tulcea, p. 233 – 239;
247. Şerbănescu Gh., 1962, Note floristice din Dobrogea, An. Univ. Bucureşti, Ser. Şt. Nat.-Biol., 33: 5355;
248. Ştefan N., Sârbu I., Chifu T., Hanganu J., 1995, Contribuţii la fitocenologia stuforesurselor din Delta
Dunării, Analele Şt. Inst. Delta Dunării, vol. IV/1;
249. Ştefureac Tr., 1970, Consideraţii fitogeografice şi florogenetice asupra Dobrogei, Com. de Bot., SSB:
51-80;
250. Ştefureac Tr., 1979-1980, Din flora Dobrogei (I), St. Com. Muz. Şt. Nat. Bacău, 13: 87-97;
251. Török, L., Teodorof, L., 2013, Data on abiotic (nutrients) and biotic (phytoplankton) quality
elements in Fortuna ecologically reconstructed area (Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve - Romania),
Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 16, p. 117 – 126, doi:
10.7427/DDI.19.16;
252. Torok, Z. C., 2006, GIS technique used for managing data on potential Natura 2000 sites. Case
study: areas inhabited by Elaphe quatorlineata, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute,
Tulcea – Romania, vol. 12, no. 33, p. 201 – 210;
253. Torok, Z. C., 2012, Doubtful records of reptile species in some areas of the Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve (Romania), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 18, no.
13, p. 223 – 232, doi: 10.7427/DDI.18.13;
254. Torok, Z. C., 2013, Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the Danube
Delta Biosphere Reserve. Part I. Amphibians, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea
– Romania, vol. 19, no. 9, p. 63 – 68, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.09;
255. Torok, Z. C., 2013, Information technology used in preparing the national reports on Species of
Community Interest. Study case: Vipera ursinii in Pontic bioregion, Scientific Annals of the Danube
Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 19, no. 19, p. 147 – 152, doi: 10.7427/DDI.19.19;
256. Torok, Z. C., 2014, Contributions to an up-date of the Red List of wild species from the Danube
Delta Biosphere Reserve. Part II. Reptiles, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea –
Romania, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 17 – 34, doi: 10.7427/DDI.20.03;
257. Torok, Z. C., 2014, Setting-up a medium term plan for risk-assessment in aquatic and semiaquatic
reptiles from the site “ROSCI0065” (Danube Delta) – Romania, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta
Institute, Tulcea – Romania, vol. 20, no. 19, p. 139 – 144, doi: 10.7427/DDI.20.19;
258. Ţopa Em., 1976, Noi contribuţii la cunoaşterea florei Dobrogei, Peuce, Muz. Deltei Dunării, Tulcea,
V: 315-320;
259. Ţucra I., 1960, Plante noi şi rare pentru flora Dobrogei, Com. de Bot., SSNG, /1957-1959/: 333-335;
260. V. Cuzic, Catalogul colecţiei ştiinţifice de păsări naturalizate a Muzeului de Ştiinţele Naturii „Delta
Dunării” (I.C.E.M. Tulcea), Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004;
261. V. Cuzic, Contribution to the study of the avifauna of Traian Lake, Tulcea County, Scientific Annals
of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2002;
262. V. Cuzic, Contribuţii la studiul trofobiologiei cormoranului mare (Phalacrocorax carbo) din partea
fluvială a Deltei Dunării, Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004;
263. V. Cuzic, Date privind coloniile mixte de păsări Purcelu, Nebunu şi Crasnicol din Delta Dunării,
Revista Delta Dunării II, Tulcea, 2004;
264. V. Cuzic, M. Petrescu, Studiul avifaunei şi habitatelor din Podişul Dobrogean în scopul dezvoltării
reţelei de arii protejate, Revista Delta Dunării III , Tulcea, 2006;
265. V. Oţel, J. B. Kiss, M. Marinov, Trophical spectrum of the Great Cormorant chicks in the colony
Martinca – Danube Delta, after three years of researches: 2001-2003, Scientific Annals of the
Danube Delta Institute for Reserch and Development , Tulcea – Romania, 2005;
266. V. Oţel, J.B. Kiss, Data concerning the food components of the Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) in
the Danube Delta, Colony Matrinca, Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea –
Romania, 2000-2001;
267. V. Pocora, C. Ion, Preliminary data concerning ornitophauna of the protected area Letea Forest,
268. V. Pocora, Data on the ornithofauna of Lacul Sărat – Grindul Letea (Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve), Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2007;
269. V. Pocora, Diurnal birds of prey (Aves) from Letea forest (the Danube Delta Biosphere Reservation,
Romania), Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa”, 2010;
270. V. Pocora, e. I. Pocora, Nesting bird species in Letea forest (the Biosphere Reservation of Danube
Delta), Analele Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, s. Biologie animală, Tom Liv, 2008;
271. Valenciuc N., Ion I., 1971, Quelques aspects de l’activite nocturne de chauves-souris de la Grotte
de Gura Dobrogei (Distr. De Constanţa), St. Şi Com. Muz. St. Nat., Bacău, 337-341;
272. Vasiuliu G.D., Şova C., 1968, Fauna Vertrebratica Romaniae (Index), Stud. şi Comun. Muz. Şi Nat.,
Bacău, 221-241;
273. Viţalariu Gh., colab., 1977, Contribuţii fitocorologice din Moldova şi Dobrogea, An. Şt. Univ. „Al. I.
Cuza” Iaşi, Ser. nouă, XXII, s. II, a. Biol.: 25-27;
274. Vl. Brădescu, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord. Diptera Fam. Syrphidae, Travaux – Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968;
275. X. Scobiola-Palade, L'entomofaune du "grind" Sărăturile - Sf. Gheorghe (Delta du Danube). Ord.
Hymenoptera (subord. Symphyta, Superfam. Vespoidea, Pompiloidea, Sphecoidea), Travaux –
Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. IX, 1968;
276. X. Scobiola-Palade, Nouvelles données concernant les espèces de Vespoidea, Pompiloidea et
Sphecoidea (Hymenoptera) du grind de Caraorman, Delta du Danube, Roumanie (II), Travaux –
Muzeul Naţional de Istorie Naturală “Grigore Antipa”, vol. XXXI, 1991;
277. Youngman P.M., 1982, Distribution and systematics of the European mink Mustela lutreola. In:
Acta Zoologica Fennica, vol. 166, 1-48;
278. Z. Baczo, S. Kovacs, A. Szabo, Important ornithological observations in Romania, Scientific Annals of
the Danube Delta Institute, Tulcea – Romania, 2009;
279. Zahariadi C., 1940, Plantes nouvelles ou rares pour la flore de Bessarabie et de la Dobrogea, Bul. de
la Sect. Sci., Acad. Roumaine, XXIII-ème: 1-10 + o foto;
280. Zahariadi C., colab., 1963, Contribuţii la flora şi vegetaţia Dobrogei, Com. Acad. R.P.R., XIII, 4: 391395;
281. Zanoschi V., colab., 1966, Contribuţii la flora Dobrogii, St. cerc. Biol., Ser. Bot., 18, 1: 55-57;
282. *** 2002. Vegetation of the Biosphere Reserve „Danube Delta” with Transboundary Vegetation
Map;
283. ***Boris Alexandrov, The Function of Wetlands, Theme 2 – Living Resources, P. 1 – 3;
284. ***Canadian Wildlife Service, 2009, Petroleum Industry Activity Guidelines for Wildlife Species at
Risk in the Prairie and Northern Region, Edmonton, Alberta, Environment Canada, Prairie and
Northern Region, 64 p;
285. ***Constantinescu, T.L., “Water quality of the Danube river and his impact on the Danube Delta
and the Black Sea”, National Administration “Romanian Waters, Bucharest, Romania;
286. ***Draft River Basin Management Plans Adapting the Plans to Climate Change, december 2008,
Water Framework Directive, ESB International;
287. ***European Commission, Fish/ 2006/ 09, Assessment of the status, development and
diversification of fisheries-dependent communities, Danube Delta Case Study Report, Romania;
288. ***Gâştescu, P., Ţuchiu, E., „The Danube river in the lower sector in two hidrologycal hypostases –
high and low waters”;
289. ***Institutul Naţional de Cercetare – Dezvoltare pentru Geologie si Geoecologie Marină –
GEOECOMAR, Raport final, „Mãrile sud-europene: evaluarea şi modelarea schimbărilor
ecosistemice (Southern European Seas: Assessing and Modelling Ecosystem changes - SESAME)”,
Bucureşti, 2009;
290. ***Ivan, O., Cultural change in a fishing village in the Danube Delta: the consequences of
environmental protecion and tourism”, PhD thesis - Summary, School of Anthropology and
Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, U.K. Department of Sociology and Social Work,
Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca, RO;
291. *** Loghin V., Utilizarea informaţiei satelitare în studiile de fundamentare a proiectelor de
cooperare transfrontalieră în bazinul inferior al Dunării, p. 296 – 302, publicat în: Forum Geografic –
Studii şi cercetări de geografie şi protecţia mediului Anul 2, Nr. 2, Anul 2003;
292. ***National Institute for Research and Development Danube Delta, National Institute for Research
and Developmennt for Environmental Protection, The Ministry of Environment and Forests,
november 2010, Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and
management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Contract of services
no. 2489 of 05.02.2010 (I.N.C.D.D.D. no. 413 / 2010), phase I: Evaluation of the current ecological
status of the wild species and natural habitats of conservative interest from DDBR and the analysis
of trends for 1990 - 2008, Danube Parks, South East Europe, Programme co-funded by the
European Union;
293. ***National Institute for Research and Development Danube Delta, National Institute for Research
and Developmennt for Environmental Protection, The Ministry of Environment and Forests,
november 2010, Reassessment of current functional zones of Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve and
management proposals of the core areas in Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Contract of services
no. 2489 of 05.02.2010 (I.N.C.D.D.D. no. 413 / 2010), phase I: Evaluation of the current ecological
status of the wild species and natural habitats of conservative interest from DDBR and the analysis
of trends for 1990 - 2008, Danube Parks, South East Europe, Programme co-funded by the
European Union;
294. ***Nesterenko, M., Dyakov, O., Drumea, D., Doroftei, M., Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and
Action Plan for Danube Delta Region – Romania – Ukraine – Moldova. Adapting to change, WWF
Danube Carpathian Programme - Ukraine, Center for Regional Studies - Ukraine, Ecospectr NGO Moldova, (Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, Romania;
295. ***Propuneri de exploatare a resurselor pescăreşti din RBDD în anul 2010, ARBDD;
296. ***WWF, Delta Dunării - Una dintre „perlele naturii“ din Europa, Studiu de caz.

REPORT 2.6 Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

Transcription

Similar documents

Delta 2000 re-emerging in community

monitoring the danube with adcon telemetry equipment – a case

P15/S1546/FUL - 1 Coopers Close, Littleworth

Jennifer Pitt - Colorado Mesa University

Foreword Programme Foreword Programme

The President`s Corner The Chaplain`s Corner

English - Ramsar

Jountoni5 - The Gamecock

Making Every Drop Count Brochure (DFC-5044)