Two other options were suggested following a Ramsar and UNESCO mission to the Delta in October 2003. They recommended that 'in order to make a well-informed decislop, tile Government of Ukraine needs to have.. the results of a comprehensive environmental impact assessment comparing three main choices'. They recommend further that pre v~niing damage rather than repairing it ex post Is the cheapest option and ecological con, nation measures need to be planned and executed IN PARALLEL with the planning yf the construction of any waterway and their success in terms of the protection of species and habitats need to be monitored. The mission considered that choice A, the Bystroye anal, would represent the worst solution because the damage to the natural environment would be unacceptably high and the high costs of the required revel of compensation would outweigh the benefits. The mission selected option B(Ocheakovski) as the best short to mediurh term option. In the long term however they suggested that the best option was option C which is a plan to construct the waterway outside of the dynamic part of the delta area. This will be the most expensive in the short term (international funding may be possible if this taken) hut will have far lower maintenance cost in the future and have the least environmental impacts of the three options. In addition the missions suggests strongly that in addition to the ecological compensation measures, additional measures to improve the functioning of the Danube Biosphere Reserve need to be undertaken including strengthening of the capacity to support sustainable tourisrn.