SWOT for Prut Region (left bank)

Prut River Basin in
a trans-boundary context and
SWOT analysis for the left bank
Alexei Andreev, Valeriu
Balan, Aurel Lozan
Moldova Eco-network / PEEN context
SWOT for Prut Region (left bank):
strengths







Still high biodiversity as a potential for conservation.
Natural development processes in the Lower Prut River ecosystems.
Picturesque areas and rich hature-al-historical heritage, original
ethnic traditions, local foods and wines suitable for tourist product.
Area‟s location in a border region, with Romania (the EU border) and
Ukraine, along International corridor of PEEN
A knowledge / willingness of civil society organization, advanced local
authorities and public to conserve nature and heritage.
Old-time traditions of co-existence with nature (fishing, hinting, reed
and willow civilization, etc.).
Perspective cooperation platform for Ministry of Environment,
Moldsilva Agency and developmental projects in favor of nature.
SWOT for Prut Region (left bank):
weaknesses -1






Poor nature/land governance at local level.
Very low „de-facto‟ financial support of the environmental activities in
the area on behalf of the state (5-17% of Moldsilva‟ s budget is at the
expense of state, the rest – due to timber and non-timber activities).
Deficiencies in professional capacities of personnel dealing with
nature conservation, water/forestry and game/hunting activities.
Gaps in legal frame and conservational cooperation of national – local
authorities, poor cross-department and cross-sector cooperation.
Interest of local communities are not „de-facto‟ respected.
Non-compliance and lacks in legislation, including with regard to
authorities responsibilities in management and/or control of natural
resources use and control of illegal activities (logging, poaching).
SWOT for Prut Region (left bank):
weaknesses -2







Poor economics and wild (underdeveloped) market.
Lack of financial / fiscal mechanisms and economic motivation for
local communities in favor of conservation and wise use.
Political instability and prevalence of economic interest over the
nature conservation and sustainability considerations.
Lack of organization in game hunting and fish resources
regeneration,
The partial only biodiversity and other long-term considerations in
forest organization and forestry activities.
Inappropriate normative basis and policies in tourist sector, lack of
knowledge, infrastructure and personnel
Low informational campaign for the Lower Prut River biodiversity and
other resources.
SWOT for Prut Region (left bank):
opportunities







Perspective of conservation connectivity – EU, Pan-European
Ecological Network (PEEN), Romania and Ukraine.
Financing opportunities may be increased through EU funds.
Ability to cooperate, skill-share and transfer experience between
Moldovan, Romanian and Ukrainian counterparts at different levels.
Encouraging local communities to get income from diversification
(tourism + conservation) and changing mentality – step by step, in
favor of nature and human future.
Tourism cross-boundary development – step by step.
Launching cooperation between national/local authorities and other
stakeholders (NGOs, business, locals etc.), conservation and forestry.
Improving governance and law re-enforcement at local level and
using EU influences for that in conservational issues.
SWOT for Prut Region (left bank):
threats







Reducing support to conservation and civil society due to crisis and
crisis expectations.
Continuation of “transition period” with all incommodities, further
poverty, final loss of believing regarding sustainability and wise use.
On-going arable, grazing and forest lands desertification.
Climate change and desertification – low predictable changes in
“relations nature – human population” and linked disasters and illicit
activities.
Ecological crisis goes from latent to active stage.
Loss of developmental potential.
A way from lack of effectiveness in enforcement of legislation towards
????///
Wildlife in principle Protected Areas of
Moldova, species numbers: total /
threatened in the country/ globally
Lower
Dniester
Orheiul
Vechi
Unguri Holoşniţa
Lower
Prut Lakes
Pădurea
Domnească
Plaiul
Fagului
Codrii
Highest
plants
950 /
35 / 4
492 /
30 / 0
390 + /
45 / 4
564 /
25 / 0
650 /
30 / 0
723 /
70 / 0
734 /
58 / 0
Mammals
54 /
15 / 6
26 /
7/0
49 /
11 / 3
34 /
9/3
52 /
14 / 3
46 /
13 / 2
45 /
11 / 0
Birds
215 /
25 / 12
131 /
18 / 5
205 /
20 / 10
212 /
30 / 10
197 /
25 / 9
161 /
26 / 6
158 /
18 / 6
Amphibiens
& Reptiles
18 /
5 /2
15 /
3/0
20 /
3/1
15 /
3/ 1
19 /
3/2
17 /
3/1
17 /
3/1
Insects
-/
16 / 5
-/
-15 / 3
-/
7/3
-/
8/0
-/
8/1
-/
-14 / 3
-/
18 / 2
Comparative analysis of areas noted as posible
National Parks and Biosphere Reserves in
Moldova
Nistrul
de Jos
Orheiul
Vechi
UnguriHoloşniţa
Lacurile
Prutului
de Jos
Pădurea
Domnească
Plaiul
Fagului
Codrii
Ecosystem and landscape
diversity
Richness of flora & fauna
5
3
4
2
3
2
2
5
2
4
5
5
4
4
Species of internaţional
concern
Diversity of geology and
arhaeology obiects
Diversity of turist obiects
5
1
5
3
5
2
2
4
5
5
4
2
1
1
5
2
5
3
3
1
1
Diversity of conditions for
agriculture
Influense of transport
mainlines of development
Special conditions
5
2
4
3
1
0
0
4
3
4
5
2
2
1
5
4
4
−1
1
0
0
Perspective for recognition of
biosphere reserves
5
3
4
3
3
1
0
43
25
39
28
25
13
11
Indicator
Total
Special conditions

Pozitive:
–
–
–
–
–

character (features) of area needs (allows) a zoning coherent with
Seville Strategy;
conformity of zoning to Seville Strategy does not contradicts to
interests of human population;
arie protejată în context transfrontalier (posibilă rezervăție biosferei
transfrontalieră);
presence of national brands;
location near important zone of resorts.
Negative:
–
–
–
–
oil extraction;
poorly arranged railway;
development of a large industrial (economy) obiect (with law violation);
habit of local population to violate law in open mode.
Conformity to the zoning principles of
UNESCO Seville Strategy and crossboundary aspects
ZONING:
 Lower Dniester – YES;
 Unguri-Holoșnița – YES;
 Lower Prit Lakes – probable;
 Orheiul Vechi – probable;
 Pădurea Domnească – in case of extending that should be well argued;
 Plaiul Fagului – in case of extending that should be well argued;
 Codrii – low posible.
CROSS-BOUNDARY:



Danube Biosphere Reserve & Lower Prut Lakes;
Nizhnednestrovskii Natural National Park & Lower
Dniester;
Unguri – Holoșnița & a reserve in Ukraine.
MAB-Moldova Committee
recommendations on Biosphere
Reserves creation





1. Start creation of Biosphere Reserves in the Republic of Moldova on the
basis of Ramsar Sites the Lower Dniester and the Lower Prut Lakes,
and further – Unguri-Holosnita.
2. Extending the area of the Padurea Domnească Scientific Reserve under
a new status with inclusion of rural areas and Sută de Movile Landscape
Reserve would be the first step … .
3. Create … National Parks as the legal entities … that would be the basis
for the … Biosphere Reserves … .
4. Establish correlation between scopes of national environmental
programs and the available state financing basing on the international
obligations, inter alia regarding the Convention on Biological Diversity, and
using the National Environmental Fund for that in transparent mode.
5. Consolidate national environmental legislation … correlate provisions
related to Biosphere Reserves with the Seville Strategy … .
Adds to SWOT Analysis for the Lower
Prut Lakes: strengths








A series of projects done to raise awareness and mobilize local
authorities and public.
Existence of the Lower Prut Scientific Reserve (near 1600 ha only)
and the Lower Prut Lakes Ramsar Site (19152 ha).
National Ecological Network and PEEN:
– core area of international importance Prutul de Jos – Slobozia
Mare (2691 ha);
– core area of national importance Cahul – Manta (5150 ha).
Specific archaeological heritage incl. allowing to increase
international collaboration (e.g. Hungury).
Gradual decrease of negative influence (oil extraction, railway).
Suitability to High Nature Value Farmland concept.
Local traditions, feed, wines etc to be used in tourist product.
Giurgiulești port – potential source of tourists.
Adds to SWOT Analysis for the Lower
Prut Lakes: weaknesses






Strong neglecting the environmental and resource use law and
norms (grazing, poaching, arable use) became open and
habitual.
Technical decision for improving water regimes of the Lower
Prut Lakes is still absent.
Varying position of local administration and low control due to
electoral considerations.
Lack of zoning at least now.
No clear tourism strategy in the area (for fishing, hunting,
lake/river boating, sightseeing etc.), lack of facilities and
personnel engaged in environmental friendly tourism.
Long unused opportunities to cooperate with Danube BR(s).
Adds to SWOT Analysis for the Lower
Prut Lakes: opportunities






Drying up of a part of Cahul – Manta core area – increase of
ecosystem capacity.
EU neighborhood CBC program RO-MD-UA may become
more balanced and friendly to nature conservation.
EU may take into account position of science and civil society
to become insistent in environmental neighborhood policy.
It seems cooperation with Danube Reserve (Romania) is
activating.
Widening of Romania – Moldova cooperation in nature
conservation: towards effectiveness.
Black Sea program of Wetlands International is launched.
Adds to SWOT Analysis for the Lower
Prut Lakes: threats









Uncontrolled development of human activities in the area and
negative impact upon the Lower Danube environment.
Lands under grazing will be lost the both for nature and
agriculture (loss of capacity, salinization).
Silting and drying up of the Beleu Lake.
Loss of biodiversity and Ramsar Site property and status.
Further developmental disorientation of local people,
intellectual leader first of all.
Loss of capability to restore old traditions.
Further loss of nature-historical heritage.
Loss of tourist product.
Loss of economy development capacity, stagnation of poverty
.
Some peculiarities of PEEN
building






Still alive and relatively integral ecological corridor of the
international importance.
Increasing threats to biodiversity on behalf of local population
(poaching, illegal logging, grazing)
Bird migration mainline.
Management plan for mitigation of threats may be
implemented due to rehabilitation of some centralized irrigation
systems.
Corridor planning started in Moldova and NATURA-2000
implementation in Romania.
WE ALL MAY COOPERATE.
Lakes of the Lower Prut, RS 1029