From River Watch to River Manage Public engagement in Integrated River Basin Management in the Eastern Baltic

Transcription

1 From River Watch to River Manage Public engagement in Integrated River Basin Management in the Eastern Baltic 2 nd Project Meeting Daugava, Daugavpils, Latvia, November 2017 Latgola Hotel

2 Purpose of the Project Meeting 1. Update on the project (status vs. application) 2. Assessment of current river management and public engagement activities occurring in each country 3. Experience with Public Advisory River Teams (PARTs) 4. Challenges in Daugava River Basin Water flow, amelioration, drainage Human pressures Nature protection

3 co-funded by EU LIFE Programme Active since grass-root environmental NGOs from 11 BSR states individual members

4 Global transboundary rivers perspective

5 Baltic perspective

6

7 7 big rivers 46% flow, >50% - nutrients Nearly 55 million people Human pressure is highest in southern parts Around half of the catchment areas of the Nemunas, Vistula and Oder rivers are covered by agricultural areas Forests dominate the catchments of the Göta, Kemi, Neva and Daugava rivers. The proportion of inland lakes is high (>15%) in the Göta and Neva River. Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report

8 Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report

9 Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report Regional water trends

10 Daugava/ Western Dvina / Zapadnaya Dvina Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report The area is 86,500 km2 Length 1005 km long. Daugava begins in western Russia, Valdai Hills, and crosses territories of Belarus and Latvia where it flows into the Gulf of Riga. 38% of the catchment belongs to Belarus, 31% to Russia and 28% to Latvia. The rest of the Daugava catchment belongs to Lithuania and Estonia. Several large towns: Riga ( ), Ogre (27 000), Daugavpils (94 000), Belarus - Navapolatsk ( ), Polotsk (82 000), and Vitebsk ( ). Ecosystem influenced by dams and reservoirs of hydroelectric power plants: Plavinas, Kegums and Rīga. Polotsk, Vitebsk, Beshenkovichi, and Verkhnedvinsk to be constructed..

11 Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report Agricultural land

12 Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report Population density

13 Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report Trends in load, Nitrogen

14 Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report Trends in load, Phosphorus

15 Area specific load (2014, kg/km 2 ) Draft HELCOM PLC-6 Report

16 Joint river basin management: why and how? 1. Common challenges Pollution <- wastewater and agriculture Floods <- climate change Loss of biodiversity <- e.g. migration barriers 2. Legal requirements Water Framework Directive and national law HELCOM Convention on transboundary watercourses and intl. lakes 3. Variety of stakeholders Municipalities, industry, farmers, residents, ecologists 4. Available tools Bi- and multilateral agreements International river commissions (Narva/Peipsi, Odra, Vuoksi) Ongoing cooperation

17 Overall objectives of the Project 1. Improve a consistent and holistic implementation of EU and regional policies Strive towards reaching WFD s GES of rivers draining to the Baltic Sea as having immense importance for reducing pollution inputs, as well as for conservation of biodiversity. 2. Secure NGO and civil society participation and inclusiveness Explore possibilities for establishing a joint public advisory team for a transboundary Baltic river basin, with wide stakeholder engagement, to identify important actions needed for river management and to support reaching WFD water quality goals 3. Secure best use of public resources, both money and work Evaluate efficiency of pollution abatement measures within transboundary river basins

18 Envisaged project results (short-term) Existing pollution abatement measures within Nemunas, Daugava and Western Bug river basins are evaluated Joint Public Advisory River Team (PART) for the above transboundary basins are establishing and functioning International Conference on Transboundary River Basin Management in the context of reaching Good Ecological Status is arranged A methodology on potential riverine sources/inputs of litter is developed and tested at national and transboundary level CCB s River Watch (RW) Manual (including appendices) for public environmental monitoring is amended with a methodology for monitoring litter inputs; the amendments are translated into few Baltic Sea languages; Youth RW camp/expedition (including training for RW leaders) and testing of updated RW manual is done Public awareness material on riverine inputs/sources of litter are prepared and published

19 Activities: important for management Nemunas: plans for hydropower development in the lower and medium flow of the river (Lithuania), salmonid fish conservation and habitat restoration (especially relevant upstream in Belarus), impacts of large infrastructure projects (construction of new Nuclear Power Plant in Belarus, operation of large Industrial Animal Farms across the catchment), protection of eel population; Daugava: hydropower development in the medium and upper flow of the river (Belarus), impacts of large infrastructure projects (construction of new large Industrial Animal Farms especially in Pskov Region of Russia), protection of eel population; Western Bug: harmonisation of Ukrainian legislation with EU environmental acquis (e.g. WFD) and hence the need for respective capacity building, waste water management, especially in rural areas (Ukraine and Belarus), agricultural runoff

20 Activities: important for PARTs (1) Joint Public Advisory River Teams act as an informal platform to boost transboundary cooperation within shared river basins and expand cooperation and exchange of experiences among several river basins comprise of civil society representatives (NGOs, individuals) working within specific catchment area with water/river basin management related issues regularly meet to discuss actual water management agenda, establish thematic working groups to address relevant issues e.g. flood protection/emergencies, nature conservation, water pollution, etc. invite for its meetings representatives of national water management authorities, cooperate actively with relevant research institutions, provide broad dissemination of information on its activities, facilitate public awareness and capacity building for local residents on the state of river basins.

21 Activities: important for PARTs (2) Inception Phase, starting already 2016 (implemented with EU/Sida funding) preparatory work: (1) inventory of existing RBMPs across the selected basins (EU/non- EU); (2) inventory of previous efforts/projects addressing joint river basin management; (3) inventory/mapping of public initiatives within river basins; a workshop for all priority river basins (Daugava, Nemunas, Western Bug); Phase I Implementation: 2017 (NCM, Postkod, EU, Sida) establishment and launching joint Public Advisory River basin management Teams (PARTs) in pilot river basins: Nemunas (Belarus/Lithuania/Poland/Russia), Daugava (Russia/Belarus/Latvia), Western Bug/Vistula (Ukraine/Belarus/Poland activities in Ukraine will be funded from a different source); start-up of the thematic working groups within PARTs: on biodiversity (salmon, eel conservation), water pollution (nutrients, litter) and agriculture (runoff, IAF) arranging an international conference for major Baltic Sea transboundary river basins; Phase II, Follow-up: 2018 (to ensure sustainability of PARTs, to be financed with other sources) follow-up work with continuation of work of established PARTs and replicating this experience in other transboundary river basins (e.g. Narva, Gauja, Venta); support to regular meetings of established bodies.

22 Partnership Nemunas Daugava Western Bug LT Fund for Nature Green Planet (RU) PKE Gdansk (PL) CES (BY) Nerush (BY) Ecohome (BY) Env. Protection Club (LV) Peipsi Lake Project (RU) Friends of the Baltic (RU) CES (BY) PKE Gliwice (PL) CES (BY) Nerush (BY) World Lab (UA) Ecoterra (UA) Important: please involve more partners in the national work!

23 Old sins, 500 m from the border

24 Talking local agenda

25 True, Transboundary, Cross-sectorial

26 ervice/index.html One of the obvious problems: too many dams!

27 Variety of manmade and natural barriers:

28 Real cases that require evaluation

29 Nature is calling!

30 Microplastic emerging Baltic problem Cosmetics Paints & textiles Inefficient WWTPs >70% with riverine inputs

31 Mixed problem

32 Inefficient treatment (e.g. >60 yrs old WWTPs)

33 Screening of riverine/freshwater microplastic inputs

34 Common expertise and knowledge

35 Common challenge for all

36

37

38

39

40

41

42 High Five, Pripyat! (Pripyat, dai pyat!)

43 Östra Ågatan 53, SE Uppsala, Sweden ;