into the site google
Home Why get involved Actions Impact Environment Danube Delta Photo Gallery News Bystroe School Network

A story about a    
web-site called   
The Bystroe Canal in the Ukrainin Danube Delta - Questions and Answers
A short summary
Where is the Ukrainian Danube Delta and the Bystroe Canal ?
What are the natural, social and economic values of the Ukrainian Delta ?
What is planned and what has happened already ?
What are the socio-economic and ecoloqical consequences of the canal ?
What international treaties and agreements are concerned ?
What about the EU ?
Water Framework Directive (WFD)

    Ukraine-shoutd be involved in ttfe pioductio I v n,ingle river basin managementV df I i order to achieve the WFD 'good ecological and cherrlical status' objectives in the whole of the river basin, as the Danube is an international river bdsin district (RBD) according to Article 113.3 of the WFD. This means that - at the very least - the Danube riverine countries, in particular Romania should be concerned as project will prevent the achievement of the WFD objeptives in the RBD. Unclear whether Ukraine can be asked to subject the project to the derogations in Article 4 of the Directive and the public participation processes surrounding them
    The EC is currently presiding over the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR), so its role is to help achieve tfle- objectives above.

Ukraine's Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with the EU

    Sets common objectives in terms- of sustainable development of Ukraine via -gradual approximation of its policies to those of the EU. Basic approach to be followed by EU in doing so is defined on a document called Common Strategy on Ukraine. This document states that one of the 3 principle objectives is to meet common European challenges including environmental protection. This is also inked to conditions for EU funding for Ukraine (i.e. TACIS, etc. see below).
    Agreement regularly reviewed. Latest discussions confirm 'I IV nmental protection is a priority area for which APPROXIMATION WITH EU LEGISLATION IS ENVISAGED. In the case of the Bystroye project, thia is ielevunt in terms of-WFD, nature protection legqation (Birds & Habitats Directives), and EIA. Meaning that carrying the project forward shows NO WILLINGNESS AND NO COMITMENT TOWARDS SUCH-AN APPROXIMATION.
    Recent Wallslroem Ukraine's Environment Minister confirms that she is worried that the EIA is not up to 'international standards', and this should also be taken to refer to the EU ones (on, top of the Espoo ones mentioned above)

EU 'Neiqhbourhood' policy: Wider Europe_

    Relations with Ukraine (as shown above) need to be STRENGTHENED in-view of the recent EU Enlargement, in particular in terms of sustainable development In practice this~ could mean the extension of the internal market to Ukraine if the EU acquis, including on environmental protection, is used as a model for the LHaaine's institutional reforn This matches what is said on the 'Status' box in the row above. This will be linked to the provisions of further EU funding- for- Ukraine, 'rLg. European Neighbourhood InstrurlerJt if approved in the context of the new EU financial perspective
    The European Neighbourhood instrument will provide further funding for Ukraine-orrjop of TACIS if approved in file context of the new EU financial perspective, but only if approximation of the EU environmental acquis is fulfilled. Again carrying the-Byestroye plojectforward shows NO WILLINGNESS AND NO COMITMENT TOWARDS SUCH AN APPROXIMATION

EUTundinq investments in Ukraine for environmental protection

    Mainly TACIS and bilateral funding from Member States. In the future European Neighborhood Instrument if approved in the context of the new EU financial perspectiveThe EU is the largest donor to the Ukraine, over the last 10 years up to 2001 total assistance has amounted to 1.072 billion Euro from European Commission (EC) directly and IFT~mber States have paid directly 157 million Euro over 1996-1999. Further, 173 million Euro-have been allocated over 2002-2003.Over 1999-2002, a total of 5 million Euro U funds have been invested in the Ukraine SPECIFICALLY for 'Environmental protection and natural resources management'.Conclusion: The EUIEC should be- very- mrhappyabva -ttre-Bystroye prvjeu a this would 'destroy' direct environmental protection investments in the Ukraine. FurtFSer, it undermines the big financial effort made by thie-tf generally in the Ukraine, yvhich aims at helping it becoming a 'good' EU neighbors (see above)
Are there alternatives ?
What is WWF recommanding ?
What actions have been taken to protect the Ukrainian Delta up until now ?
What is WWF's track record with the Ukrainian Danube Delta ?
What actions have been or are planned to be taken bv WWF and other orqanisationslinstitutiohs to halt the construction ?
All the questions and answers presented in this section are property of WWF

0 users online, 1 guests online

username :

password :

Last forum post by codrin on May 6, 2006, 9:06 pm
This is the idea of a team who
made a vision come truth....

Who should fight to change the current situation ?
The Ukrainian Government
The Romanian Government
The United Nations
Devoted Active Citizens

50 visitors today, 968 visitors this month, 238952 visitors since 1 March 2005
© Copyrights 2005
All rights reserved to
Cosmin Petrut Atanasiu &
Codrin-Stefan Arsene