odra river basin flood protection project ......7.3.3 hydraulic bottle-necks in the active...

E1139Volume 2

Government of Poland rZGW WroclawMinistry of Interior and Administration RZGW GliwiceOffice for Natural Disasters Recovery DZMiUWMinistry of Environment

ODRA RIVER BASIN FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

*~~~

,~~~~~~U

Main Report

August 2005

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ............................... 1....................................I

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND .11.2 EMERGENCY FLOOD RECOVERY PROJECT .31.3 STRATEGIC CONTEXT: THE ODRA 2006 PROGRAMME .41.4 THE ODRA RIVER BASIN FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT .51.5 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .51.6 THE EA TEAM.6

1.7 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT .6

CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................... 7

2.1 THE OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT .... 7................................72.2 PROJECT COMPONENTS ..................................... 72.3 THE RACIBORZ DRY POLDER ..................................... 9

2.3.1 General.92.3.2 Resettlement.92.3.3 Principal characteristics of the reservoir .102.3.4 The embankment and outlet works .102.3 .5 Ancillary works.102.3.6 Construction cost.12

2.4 THE MODERNIZATION OF THE WROCLAW FLOODWAY SYSTEM ................... ...................... 132.4.1 General .............................................................. 132.4.2 Sub-components of WFS .............................................................. 132.4.3 Cost of WFS .............................................................. 17

2.5 TOTAL COST AND BENEFITS OF THE ORFPP ........................... ................................... 172.5.1 Total cost of investment .172.5.2 Operational and maintenance costs .172.5.3 Effectiveness of the scheme .172.5.4 Project benefits.182.5.5 Economic viability.18

CHAPTER 3 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ................................ 19

3.1 LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SETTING .193.2 DECENTRALISED GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION .193.3 POLISH LAWS APPLICABLE .20

3.4 POLISH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS .213.5 THE EIA PROCEDURE .22

3.6 INTERNATIONAL TREATIES .23

3.7 APPLICABLE EU DIRECTIVES .23

3.8 WORLD BANK ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES .243.9 COMPLIANCE WITH POLISH LEGISLATION AND WORLD BANK POLICIES .25

CHAPTER 4 ANALYSES OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................... 27

4.1 THE WITHOUT PROJECT SCENARIO .274.2 THE WITH PROJECT SCENARIO .27

4.3 OVERALL PROJECT DESIGN ALTERNATIVES .27

!!

19 ........... e'po plO auljo luouwdolOAap 3!JOIS1H S'b'S

09.MI--- ..... .... aoX..Jo •... a. U! usluawnuO1N O1JO1SIH b'b'S

09.e ................ zioqoirea U! sal!s 3oJo4sLq pue leB!3olojo3YJV £'b'S09 .. ml3ooM punoJe pue U! sol!s lBziOoIoau,qJV Z'b'S

8. -.. - tsal!sjo Ajoisiq pue •0olo;BqoJia o,jo uoildu3osopJo .. I bt S

L9.' ''''''''6000R? DJlIJON g9Sg'5. '''.4.R/ UOI DA"9SUO ainljvU auj Ej5g

9.S... uos Sl U l S

5..pUv..o. u? .. at. S..fpUt ffUI/ID&' Jof suorlfln2a1 lv2a7 9 g g 9

..sawaads qisy u?!aI!wfo uoPnpou!a.i .iofsuVjj tl g g

19.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~vwzwfttff~u1svq iaAtzV gggg05 ....................... ................................... nz+ 4Int fsu?s uia(lvj g

.1 ''S,wJJqti put pDSUwa/s/(soxJ I j

Lb'' ' ... jopluo3-oiq e sP J1AIJ BIpo aql jo aloJ jBzL)qdBIoo32oq aqol Z'£'S

Li7.................... ....... swj3s,so33 u!BldpooU jo couloodiun ;)ql I-Es

LV'..............INMN~NO'dIANE3 IV'dfllVN 3H1L tS

Lb'.'''''''''''''''''''''''*'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''.''''''''. uoI1BJ3.J upuB LsU!JnlO 67'S

9t7- --- ................................................................. suotjteiunw wuo3 pue Zmnl3n }seuiju L'ZS

Sb' ''''.'''''''''''''alhlflaIJV 9'Z'Sbb'''''''''''''''''''''.''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' jplod zjoq!zw}j aql U! oi'najn'e puue asn pueI 5TS

bb'' '''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''...........................''... as..... puen uU 'Zt'ZS

bb'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''...............'''''.............. SOI!AI1U o1W U0 £'Z'S'

ot..................................... s33inosoi n1lemspunoOJ pue DoXjinsj uo i°l9!eumM° luilu 310d S-I S

ot ..................................................... laAll eJpo aqljo /(4!lvnb 3jlemA b'l'S

6 C .................. .................... ......... 'I'll'......'........... '.................... ... 710ip u g 'g 'CT T

.,, ..................................... SPOOJf3q}jfO ?idd aN 9,U} oi p9aZnq!djuoj , my joy sla d lA ( J'F' 9

gg.................................... &'''0olotdiozu u.tv1dpooZpuD iu.7wt!ilJD i , ITT9U/0DD[g

gg .................................................. ... '' ' ' U Ddpoog9au jo/oH 9U,Jf j0 9Udw oldAd(- Z I S

Jg uo.ilXdoissp 1Disouag 1'Zl S

V'V'.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sjlf'l;, IU~ I I S

l£'~~u(Iw - aax sv CbHLV'.1NZlNNO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~................... K1NN DLIANOKOIVODISAH US

6 Z .............................. ---.. . a usd aq ioj suo/ado uJs!l Z19 'b

8Z. ... suodo luDuruiilV I b

4ueuussessV 1e4ueWxuo-I.Au_ - 1s,fio-d uQ,lDeaJ.j pool.j qlSeg JeA!9 eJPO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5.4.6 Monumental water management structures on the Odra river in Wroclaw ..................................... 625.4.7 Legal protection .................................................................................... 645.4.8 Organization of conservation of archaeological heritage ................................................................ 64

CHAPTER 6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT AND THEIR MITIGATIONS ....... 65

6.1 TH E IM PA C T S .................................................................................... 656.2 IMPACTS OF THE ORFPP (ALL COMPONENTS COMBINED) . . 65

6.2.1 Safety of people and property .................................................................................... 656.2.2 Dam failure .................................................................................... 65

6.3 SOCIAL IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ DRY POLDER (COMPONENT A) . . 666.3.1 Changes in land use and resettlement .................................................................................... 666.3.2 Relocation of public utilities .................................................................................... 686.3.3 Risk of damage to cultural properties .................................................................................... 68

6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ DRY POLDER (COMPONENT A) ... 696.4.1 Risk of damage to natural habitats during construction .696.4.2 Impact of lower flood levels on natural habitats downstream of Raciborz .726.4.3 Risk of damage to Tworkowski Forest during reservoir operation .736.4.4 Risk of damage of river continuum and ecological corridor .766.4.5 High risk of drowning of animals .77

6.5 SOCIAL IMPACTS OF THE MODERNIZATION OF WFS (COMPONENT B) . . 776.5.1 Removal of homestead gardens and trees ....................................................................... 776.5.2 Risk of damaging archaeological monuments ....................................................................... 786.5.3 Risk of damaging historic water structures and retaining walls ...................................................... 78

6.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE MODERNIZATION OF WFS . . 786.6.1 Local ElAs required for detailed planning ....................................................................... 786.6.2 Risk of damage to Natura 2000 sites during construction ............................................................... 796.6.3 Damage due to dredging operations ....................................................................... 806.6.4 Impacts on small landscape elements ........................................................................ 82

CHAPTER 7 OTHER RELEVANT NON-PROJECT RELATED ISSUES ............ ........................ 83

7.1 COORDINATION OF PLANS REQUIRED ........................................................................ 837.2 FLOOD CONTROL AND PHYSICAL PLANNING ....................................................................... 837.3 IMPROVE INTEGRATION OF PLANNING OF INFRASTRUCTURAL WORKS . . 84

7.3.1 Integration of road designs in area upstreams of Wroclaw .847.3.2 Integration of design of new roads in Wroclaw area . 847.3.3 Hydraulic bottle-necks in the active floodplain .847.3.4 Expertise in ecology and environmental management . 867.3.5 Pollution from coal waste dump .867.3.6 Barriers for migrating fish .86

CHAPTER 8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................................................... 87

8.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE EMP .................................................................................... 87 l8.2 MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCLUDED IN DESIGN AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ... 87

8.2.1I General.878.2.2 Equipment sites and storage areas .888.2.3 Quarries and borrow pits .888.2.4 Embankment construction and earthworks .898.2.5 Dredging.908.2.6 Construction sites.918.2.7 Chance find procedures cultural heritage.91

iii I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . D redgI ng..................................................................................9

Odra River Basin Flood Protection Project - Environmental Assessment

8.3 STAND ALONE MITIGATION MEASURES ....................................................................... 92

8.3.1 Optimize reservoir operating rules to mitigate impacts on natural habitats ..................................... 92

8.3.2 Implement hydrobiological surveys and install monitoring network ............................................... 92

8.4 PROACTIVE COMPENSATORY MEASURES TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE

THE ODRA ECOLOGICAL CORRIDOR ....................................................................... 94

8.4.1 Criteria for identification of compensation measures ...................................................................... 94

8.4.2 Measures to strengthen the ecological corridor between Chalupki and Raciborz ............................ 94

8.4.3 Measures to strengthen the ecological corridor between Raciborz and Brzeg Dolny ...................... 94

8.5 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ....................................................................... 95

8.6 COST OF EMP ........................................................................ 95

8.7 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATING MEASURES . .......................................................... 96

CHAPTER 9 INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS ....................................................................... 103

9.1 INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE EMP .103

9.2 PROFILE DESCRIPTION ENVIRONMENTAL/SOCIAL SPECIALIST (PCU) .103

9.3 EMP/RAP TEAMS .104

9.4 PROFILE DESCRIPTION ENVIRONMENTAL/SOCIAL ENGINEERS RZGW/DZMIUW. 105

9.5 M&E CONSULTANTS .105

9.6 CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING .106

CHAPTER 10 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS AND DISCLOSURE ................................................ 107

10.1 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS DURING PROJECT PREPARATION ................................................ 107

10.2 CONSULTATIONS DURING THE SCOPING STAGE OF THE EA ................................................ 107

10.3 CONSULTATIONS DURING THE PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS OF THE EA ........................ 107

10.4 FINAL DISCLOSURE OF APPROVED EA ..................................................................... 108

LIST OF REFERENCES ..................................................................... 109

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 - Summary of construction cost, Raciborz reservoir (in million PLN) ................................. 12

Table 2.2 - Summary of resettlement cost, Raciborz reservoir (in million PLN) .................................. 12Table 2.3 - Summary of implementation cost Raciborz reservoir (million PLN) ................................. 12Table 2.4 - Cost of WFS (million PLN) ......................................................................... 17Table 2.5 - Breakdown of total cost of the project in million PLN ...................................................... 17Table 3.1 - Decentralised Government administration involved in Raciborz reservoir and WFS ........ 22Table 3.2 - Relevant Intemational treaties and conventions signed by Poland ..................................... 23Table 3.3 - Compliance of project with GOP legislation and WB policies ........................................... 26Table 5.1 - Average monthly rainfall in the Upper Odra catchments in mm ........................................ 31

Table 5.2 - Demographic conditions in three Upper Odra voivodships (2003) .................................... 43Table 5.3 - Employment in Upper Odra voivodships (total persons employed in sector) ..................... 43Table 5.4 - Economic activities in Upper Odra voivodships (relative contribution to GDP in %) ....... 44Table 5.5 - Total land use in ha and (%) .......................................................................... 44Table 5.6 - Land use in the Raciborz Polder .......................................................................... 45Table 5.7 - Agricultural land use in ha and (%) ......................................................................... 45Table 5.8 - Anadromous and potamodromous fish stock in the Upper and Middle Odra .................... 55Table 5.9 - Comparison of Polish categories of protected areas with IUCN classification system ...... 57Table 5.10 - List of historical hydraulic and bridge structures around Wroclaw ............ ..................... 64Table 6.1 - Potential Natura 2000 sites downstream of Raciborz affected by changes

in flood regime ......................................................................... 73Table 6.2 - Period of inundation and max. reservoir levels with various flood return periods

and maximum release ......................................................................... 74Table 8.1 - Summary of cost Environmental Management Plan ........................................................... 96Table 8.2 - Overview of environmental impacts, mitigation measures and monitoring activities ....... 97

i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 - Location of the Odra basin in Central Europe ..................................................................... I

Figure 1.2 - Map of the catchment area of the Odra River ..................................................................... 3

Figure 2.1 - Map of the Raciborz reservoir ....................................................................... 11

Figure 2.2 - Map of the Wroclaw Floodway System (list of works - see Annex C) ........... ................. 15

Figure 5.1 - Geomorphological map of area upstream of Wroclaw ......................... ............................ 34

Figure 5.2 - Map of upper Odra river catchment ....................................................................... 37

Figure 5.3 - Original (I 739-1751) and present course of the Odra river .............................................. 38

Figure 5.4 - Odra river flood hydrograph at Miedonia cross-section in 1997 ...................................... 39

Figure 5.5 - Conductivity isolines of water bodies in the area of Raciborz reservoir (pS cm-') ........... 42

Figure 5.6 - Composition of forests in flood plain between Raciborz and Wroclaw .......... ................. 52

Figure 5.7 - Wetlands, swamps and humid meadows between Raciborz and Wroclaw ....................... 52

Figure 5.8 - Barriers in th Upper and Middle Odra River blocking migration of fish .......................... 53

Figure 5.9 - Designated and potential Natura 2000 sites in the project area .............. ......................... 58

Figure 5.10 - Known archeological sites downstream of Wroclaw (in 1941) ............. ........................ 59

Figure 5.11 - Location of known sites of two New Stone age cultures in the Raciborz area .............. 61

Figure 5.12 - Location of Bronze age sites in the WWS project area ...................... ............................ 62

Figure 9.1 - Institutional structure for implementation EMP-RAP .................................................... 103

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ANNEXES

ANNEX A - Lists of plants and animals in the project area

Al. List of plants available in the project area

A2. List of invertebrates available in the project area

A3. List of amphibians available in the project area

A4. List of reptiles available in the project area

A5. List of birds available in the project area

A6. List of mammals available in the project area

A7. List of fish fauna available in the project area

ANNEX B - Impacts of the Raciborz reservoir on riverine ecosystemsin the Upper and Middle Odra river

ANNEX C - Project works in modernization of WFS

ANNEX D - Public consultation

Dl. Summary of meeting WWF and EA team on January 26TH, 2005

D2. Summary of comments on draft EA during public consultation meeting in Wroclaw,on June 30TH, 2005

D3. Summary of comments on draft EA during public consultation meeting in Raciborz,on July I ST, 2005

D4. Letter received from PTPP "pro Natura"

vii


ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

asi above sea level (Baltic Sea)

CITES Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species

CMW Conservator of Monuments in Wroclaw

CNS Conservator of Nature of Slaskie

COA Conservator of Antiquities

DEC Decision on Environmental Conditions

DZMiUW Lower Silesian Board for Amelioration and Water Management

EA Environmental Assessment

EC Electrical Conductivity (in milliSiemens cm-I)

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIB European Investment Bank

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EPP Emergency Preparedness Plan

EU European UnionFMP Flood Management Plan

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GOP Government of Poland

gwt Groundwater table

IKSO International Commission on the protection of the Odra

IMGW Institute for Meteorology and Water Management

IPE Independent Panel of Experts

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

Mm3 million cubic meters

MOA Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

MOE Ministry of EnvironmentNGO Non-Governmental Organisation

O&M Operation and MaintenanceONDR Office of Natural Disasters Recovery

OP Operational policy of World Bank

ORFPP Odra River basin Flood Protection Project

OTKZ Dam's Monitoring Centre of IMGW

OZMiUW Opole Board for Amelioration and Water Management

PAA Polish Angling Association

PCU Project Coordination Unit

PLN Polish zloty (PLN 1.00 = Euro 0.248 = US$ 0.299 as of June 1, 2005)

PNS Potential Natura 2000 Site (EU nature conservation network)

RAP Resettlement Action Plan

RZGW Regional Water Board

RZGWGL Regional Water Board Gliwice

RZGWWL Regional Water Board Wroclaw

SAC Special Area of Conservation (EU Habitat Directive)

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

SMOK System for Hydro-Meteorological forecasting

SPA Special Protected Area (EU Bird Directive)

WFD Water Framework Directive (EU)

WFS Wroclaw Floodway SystemWWF World Wide Fund for Nature

viii

Chapter 1 INTRODUCU7ON

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND

The Odra River, with a total length of 866 km is one of the two main rivers of Poland,see Figure 1.1. The river flows out of the Oderskie Mountains belonging to the CentralEuropean highlands in the Czech Republic. Part of the upper catchment is situatedin the Silesian-Moravian part of the Sudetes Mountains, which have elevations up to 1 400 m.The relief is steep and the underlying clay shale is rather impermeable. This, combinedwith high annual rainfall (up to 1 400 mm) mainly concentrated in summer, results in rapidrunoff. The excessive drainage is aggravated by urbanisation, large scale deforestationand drainage of agricultural lands in hilly areas.

. s-J rr ~tS>1 9 E;g ! R LATVUA

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. DANItrmca"6 ; .- ,' T r, r

_ *,: N A' L r Z

NORTH SEA - ' Tl..--*%

-4- ~ ~ ~ ~ LA4. "s W'- ~ 1fKo.u,

NE tLD(~~~~I "nC ;\a BEAX

Ht 2,\.,DELt8tHLAND _/ L..| W > 1 8ffL BLEt * - S i o--, -, URAYNA

Siwie1 g -'-' '

~81 r r_ , .y , ; _iUvT \OL@VFRANCE CSEfEM~QgG ;Iv

so~~~a

HRVATSKa

I, -- NVRCEG0 rIFA m

-. s5 -sJ t- aLA -I41 AgALtA n6LACK

N) * i(-q,,ls^ , =SIIR'i -.aLARJ ~ S

>~~~ eIl , D, I E-S*-; $IE~

- ~ ::~) EUAS

M E D f ir E dR 4 .N- ; 1 A N

Figure 1.1 - Location of the Odra basin in Central Europe

1


After crossing the border at Chalupki the Odra river changes from a mountain stream

into a mature river system meandering because of a low gradient into its natural floodplain.

However, since the start of industrialisation in the middle of the 19 th century, large parts

of the river have been heavily modified. A total of 27 weirs, barrages and sluices have been

constructed between Raciborz and Wroclaw to regulate and improve navigation. Meanders

have been cut off and canalised and numerous groynes have been built to force the river

within its main streambed. Because of these interventions, the total length of the river

has shortened by an estimated 25%, whereas the width of the active floodplain has been

reduced by 50% or more.

However, at a number of places there are still important remnants left of the natural river

system, including alluvial forests, wet and flooded meadows, oxbows lakes and various other

types of wetland. Thus, the river landscape still contains sizeable important floodplain

habitats, a unique feature in Central and Western Europe. On its course, the Odra passes

a number of major towns, including Kedzierzyn-Kozle, Krapkowice, Opole, Brzeg, Olawa

and Wroclaw. In the latter city the river branches into a number of narrow channels flowing

through the historic city centre with its numerous ancient, picturesque bridges, sluices

and other water works.

The Odra River Basin Flood Protection Project was designed in the wake of the devastating

floods and large-scale inundations of the floodplain in the summer of 1997. This truly

dramatic event which occurred during the month of July took 54 lives and caused wide-spread

damage and loss of property. The total area affected by the floods (about 65 000 ha) included

urban and residential areas, mainly situated in three voivodships in the Upper and Middle

Odra region: Slaskie (Upper Silesia), Opolskie and Dolnoslaskie (Lower Silesia). Municipal

infrastructure, buildings and property in a number of cities and communities were heavily

damaged, including those in the town of Wroclaw (pop. 650 000). The floods damaged

37 000 buildings, 866 bridges and over 2 000 km of roads. Economic life in the area came

to a complete standstill and educational, cultural and health institutions were inundated

and disrupted for a considerable period of time. Total damage was estimated between

PLN 8.5-12.0 billion (US$ 2.8-4.0 billion).

The inundations were caused by a combination of two subsequent flood waves. The first one

was a peak flood, following heavy rainfall (over 200 mm) in a short period of time. It affected

an extensive area in the upper catchment of the Odra, see Figure 1.2, during the period 3 to 10

July 1997. The second wave occurred after extreme heavy rainfall (over 400 mm in 4 days)

in the same period in the Sudetes mountain range along the Czech-Polish border,

the catchment feeding one of the main tributaries of the Odra, the Nysa Klodzka River.

The combination of these two flood waves dramatically exposed the deficiencies

in the existing flood prevention system.

The flood prevention system consists of river embankments, a number of retention reservoirs

and storage polders, and several diversion and navigation channels. Most flood protection

infrastructure, dates from the beginning of the 2 0 1h century and turned out to be inadequate

to cope with such heavy floods. In particular, the embankments protecting the urban

agglomerations along the Odra and Nysa Klodzka rivers proved inadequate to curb

the encroaching flood waters. Overtopping and breaching of the flood protection dikes

occurred on a large scale. Also, flood forecasting, monitoring and warning systems performed

poorly and communications in general failed largely.

2

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

le f5r yr or rr

Ve~W.Efti40 -- ->S /

an-emergency'an rehabilitatin p m , k n W the E eA ... REcy...

Proj.ect. Thi?-s project was,,. implemne ith the assistance of" -'-"'"'"'the ineatol commnit,"

and I ote Jintern hatioa dnr. Th programm cosite of the^ rearofebnket

and bridges,ur and o a fther lo oto srcatres. nt alsrncuedo the upgradn ofihevloo

Aforecasting mlonditodring antwrnn systems The im7,GPresovded systemi anowi planed

and opher itrational. Itnrs isporam considereeon of the motmdmfodwrnping systemsbinkthenwold

3

WAF%W0X0-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I I I | . . . . . . . . .L S


1.3 STRATEGIC CONTEXT: THE ODRA 2006 PROGRAMME

Meanwhile, on the initiative of the Regional Water Management Board in Wroclaw, studies

were started to develop a comprehensive flood-prevention strategy for the basin of Upper

and Middle Odra River (Winter J. and Zaleski J, 1998). These studies clearly revealed

that the existing flood protection system, even after repair and rehabilitation, is still below

standard and inadequate to guarantee safe passage of flood waters flows of the size of the July

1997-floods. It was felt that considerable additional investments would be required to reduce

flood risks to acceptable levels. It became also clear that the only realistic strategy to cope

with peak floods such as encountered in 1977 would only be guaranteed by the simultaneous

implementation of a number of measures:

1) Constructing retention reservoirs in the upper floodplain of the Odra, in order to create

temporary storage capacity for flood water hence reducing peak discharges downstream;

2) Improving and modernizing the existing flood protection system and dikes, particularly

in the densely urbanized and industrialized areas (high risk areas) in the floodplainbetween the Czech border and Brzeg Dolny, where a new weir and sluices complexin the Odra are built near Malczyce;

3) Increasing the carrying capacity of the Odra river channel and the Widawa flood relief by-

pass by removing a number of bottlenecks, and by widening of the riverbed.

After the floods of 1997 GOP has opted for cooperation at international level,i.e. with the two riparian countries (Germany and Czech Republic) sharing the Odra.

In August 1997, the three countries, already cooperating within the International Commission

on the Protection of the Odra against pollution (IKSO), took the initiative to extend

cooperation to the field of flood protection and land-use planning. Flood protectionof the populated Odra floodplain and modernization of the Odra water management system

was recognized as priority goals. For this purpose, GOP prepared the Odra 2006 Programme.

As 89% of the Odra catchment lies within Polish territory, this country agreed to bear 71%

of the cost of the programme, leaving 23% for Germany and 6% for the Czech Republic.

The Odra 2006 Programme (with total cost of PLN 9.0 billion) focuses on flood protection

and better water control, as well as on improvement of navigation and water quality. The

programme includes structural as well as non-structural measures. The structural measures

include:(a) reconstruction and modernization of dikes (PLN 365 m); (b) flood management

and river regulation structures (PLN 4 100 m); and (c) also sewage treatment plans to improve

the river water quality (PLN 3 600 m). The non structural measures include: (a) land use

planning (PLN 36 m); (b) environmental planning (PLN 242 million); (c) forestation(PLN 300 m); and (d) flood management monitoring (PLN 400 m).

Major flood protection works in the programme include the construction of a retention

reservoir at Raciborz and the modernization of the Wroclaw Floodway System (WFS).

The programme has been approved by the Polish Parliament (Sejm) under an Act of 6 July

2001. The programme will be implemented over a period of 15 years, between 2002

and 2016.

4

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.4 THE ODRA RIVER BASIN FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT

The present Odra River Basin Flood Protection Project (ORFPP) supports the implementationof the two main project activities from the Odra 2006 Programme that aim at flood protectionof the Middle Odra valley, especially of the densely populated area around Wroclaw. Hence,the Project's main objective will be to reduce frequency and severity of flooding in the projectarea. This will be achieved by the following main works:

1) Construction of the Raciborz dry polder, which will provide flood storage so that the flowrate downstream of the reservoir will be greatly reduced, thereby improvingthe effectiveness of the existing flood protection system in containing the flows;

2) Improving the security of the embankments within the Wroclaw area by strengtheningand heightening existing dikes and constructing new dikes near urban areas and increasingthe carrying capacity of the Odra and Widawa River, so that more floodwater could by-pass the city of Wroclaw.

The construction of the Raciborz dry polder will also result in delayed arrival of the peakflood at the confluence of tributaries, especially the Nysa Klodzka, which will greatly reducethe chance flood damage caused by the simultaneous arrival of two peak floods as happenedduring the devastating floods of 1997.

1.5 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The World Bank requires an Environmental Assessment (EA) for all projects proposedfor Bank financing, in order to ensure that these projects are environmentally soundand sustainable. The ORFPP was classified as Category A. which essentially comprisesthose projects that may have significant environmental impacts that are sensitive, diverseor unprecedented in nature and may affect an area broader than the direct project sites.The project would necessitate an EA in view of the use of water resources of an internationalwaterway, the scope of the expected impacts from construction and operation, requiringthe resettlement of two villages and the potential impacts on natural habitats, landscapeelements and cultural property found within the Odra floodplain.

The projects' feasibility studies included an Environmental Impact Review (EIR)of environmentally sensitive sites and related risks prepared by the project consultants.However, to meet the Bank's requirements, and in particular to work out mitigating measuresand prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP), it was decided that EIR's wouldhave to be upgraded to a full EA. Another consideration was that in view of the scale,magnitude and the potentially controversial nature of the Project, it was recommended to geta "second opinion" from a group of independent consultants.

The EA is an important tool for decision making. In the EA the projects' socialand environmental risks and impacts are evaluated in its area of influence, which is oftenlarger than the project area itself. Project alternatives are studied; negative and positiveenvironmental impacts are identified in relation to location, design, construction and operationof the project. Ways of preventing, reducing and mitigating adverse impacts are worked out,as well as measures to enhance the positive impacts of the project. The EA includes an EMPto be implemented under the project. The EA is restricted to the ORFPP and does not coverthe impacts of the entire Odra 2006 Programme.

5


1.6 THE EA TEAM

For the preparation of the EA the PCU recruited in November 2004 one internationalconsultant Mr Reitse Koopmans - teamleader (land & water management specialist)and two Polish consultants Prof Dr Wlodzimierz Czamara (hydrologist) and Dr Marek

Krukowski (ecologist). Valuable contributions were received of two other Polish consultants,

Prof. Wlodzimierz Wojciechowski (archaeologist) and Dr Jan Blachuta (ichthyologist).The team visited the project areas and all proposed sites of the project in the period

24 November-16 December 2004. Interviews with resource persons and stakeholders were

held and various institutions and local authorities were visited. The team participatedin a briefing on 9 December 2004 in Raciborz by the project consultant on the status

of the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) which was under preparation. Public consultation

meetings on the draft version of the EA were held on June 30 and July 1, 2005 in respectively

Wroclaw and Raciborz.

1.7 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Social impacts occur in both project areas. In Raciborz, where a dry polder will be constructed

for storing flood water during peak flows, the project will include the acquisitionof about 2 600 ha of land and the involuntary resettlement of the residents of two villages

consisting of 240 families, involving about 700 people. The social aspects of resettlementwere studied in detail and a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) has been preparedby the consultants involved in the Feasibility study. This Plan is presented in a separatedocument (Resettlement Action Plan, JacobsGIBB, July 2005).

The modernization of WFS may require some limited resettlement activities including

the removal and possible relocation of a complex of 77 ha of homestead gardensin the Widawa valley and some other facilities and buildings. Depending on the outcome

of the detailed designs it is still to be determined, which other works may require land

acquisition or relocation of facilities and people. These issues and their potential impacts

are only briefly addressed in this EA, but agreement with the investors has been reached

on the principles of mitigation and compensation during the completion of the final designs

in order to comply with the World Bank's Operational Policy on Involuntary Resttlement

(OP/BP 4.12). The final mitigation/compensation plan will then be included in RAP.

6

Chapter 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 THE OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT

The main objective of the project is to protect the population in the Upper and Middle sectionof the Odra River Floodplain against the loss of life and damage to property causedby extreme floods, such as the floods of 1997, which were the highest ever recorded.The project would protect more than 2.5 million people, major urban infrastructureand industrial and commercial establishments against flooding. Particularly, the project wouldprotect the city of Wroclaw, with its valuable historical sites and buildings, includingthe neighbouring densely populated urban and industrial areas. Implementation of the projectwould greatly reduce the risks and hazards of flooding in the Upper and Middle reachesof the Odra.

The project has been prepared on basis of feasibility studies for each of the projectcomponents. These studies have been used as the basis for the preparationof this Environmental Assessment (EA), but changes and adjustments during detailed designstudies (as far as available during the EA study) have also been taken into consideration:1) Feasibility study for the Raciborz Flood reservoir on the River Odra, Main Report,

& supporting Annexes (Hydroprojekt, JacobsGIBB), September 2003;

2) Feasibility study for the Modernization of the Wroclaw Water System, Main Report& supporting Annexes (Hydroprojekt, JacobsGIBB), February 2004.

2.2 PROJECT COMPONENTS

The project is designed to meet the above objectives; it would consist of the componentsdescribed below:

Component A- Construction of Raciborz Dry Polder (E 218.3 million)A dry polder would be created on the Odra river not far from the border with the CzechRepublic near the town of Raciborz to store flood water. Total capacity of the reservoirwould be about 185 Mm 3. Main benefits from the reservoir will be (i) a reduction in the Odrapeak flows downstream so that the effectiveness of the existing flood defense systemwill be greatly improved and (ii) a delay in the timing of the flood peaks at the confluenceof the Odra with the Nysa Klodzka, so that the adverse combination of the two floodsthat was so damaging in 1997 will become unlikely in the future. These two phenomena,in combination, will result in a considerable reduction in the frequency and severity of futurefloods.

The works comprise a 4.0 km embankment across the Odra valley with a maximum heightof 10.5 m above the Odra river bed. Right and left bank dikes will be constructedfrom the main embankment along the valley upstream for lengths of 9.15 km and 9.5 km.respectively. The total reservoir area would be about 26.3 km2. A spillway structurewill be provided that will have six gates (12 m wide and 8.5 m high), and seven 4.4 m x 3.5 mbottom outlets with inverts at the sill level (183.0 m).

The construction of the polder would involve purchase of land, properties and resettlementof people living in the polder area. The resettlement related cost are estimated

7


about C 63.3 million, which includes the purchase of land, properties and the relocationof about 700 people living in the polder area.

Component B- Modernization of Wroclaw Floodway System (£ 253.8 million)

Currently, Wroclaw is subject to inundation with floods greater than 2 200 m3/s.The maximum flow during the 1997 flood was estimated at 3 640 m3/s at Trestno

(upstream of Wroclaw). The Raciborz dry polder would offer partial but not complete flood

protection. The flood protection for Wroclaw city is provided, in conjunctionwith the Raciborz polder, by modernizing and upgrading the flood protection system along

the Odra channels passing through and around Wroclaw city, as well as increasing their

hydraulic capacity. The necessary works for WFS comprise of three sub-components:

B.1 Improvements to Odra dikes and embankments. These improvements comprise:

(a) works to reduce the risk of failure by piping; (b) raising embankments where necessary;

and (c) works to increase the stability and height of existing retaining walls, particularlyin downtown Wroclaw.

B.2 Improvements to the Odra Channels. These improvements, which are designedto increase the hydraulic capacity of the Odra river, comprise widening and/or deepeningof the channels and works for related hydraulic structures: (a) the Odra Flood Channel(b) the Old Odra river channel along the City Canal, including works at the Rozanka weirand four bridges; (c) the City canal; (d) the City Odra river channel, includingthe reconstruction of the weir at the Wroclaw I Power Plant and improved flood protectionfor Popowice harbor; and (e) the Odra river channel from the Old Odra/City Odra junctionto the Odra/Widawa confluence; and (f) works for Redzin barrage.

B.3 Flood relief through the Widawa Transfer. The design capacity of the existing Odra-

Widawa diversion will be increased to about 185 m3/s of flow in times of flood danger(320 m3/s under extreme conditions). This also requires an increase in the capacityof the Widawa river channel. These project works consist of: a new gated weir at the off-take

of the Odra-Widawa diversion channel; widening the floodplain of this channel;and the reconstruction of existing flood dikes, removal of some existing flood dikes,the construction of new flood dikes and the remodelling of one railway bridge and five road

bridges along the Widawa River. About C 13.2 million are included in the component to cover

the RAP implementation cost.

Component C- Improving Flood Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Supervision

of the EMP & RAP (C 26.6 million)The component would consist of the following sub-components: (i) improving flood

management in the Odra River Basin, (ii) continued support to improve the flood forecasting

system, to ensure that the system of hydro-meteorological forecasting, currently beinginstalled would remain operational, (iii) continued improvements in the flood protectionand management plans and assistance in development of projects in the floodsector, (iv) monitoring and evaluation of the project's impact, including the implementationand monitoring of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP), and the Resettlement Action

Plan (RAP) and (v) implementation of works identified under the EMP that are not included

in other components and that cannot be funded from other projects under the Odra 2006

Programme.

8


Component D- Project Management, Technical Assistance and Training (E 5.1 million)This component would support the Government in implementing the project and preparea follow-on project. It would include: (a) support for the operation of the Project CoordinationUnit (PCU) and implementing agencies, and financing of overall project management,as well as technical assistance in such areas as detailed design, contract administrationand construction supervision, procurement, and financial management; (b) a modestinstitutional strengthening program, including technical assistance and training. This wouldinvolve the financing of consulting services, and foreign visits, equipment and softwarefor project management.

2.3 THE RACIBORZ DRY POLDER

2.3.1 GENERAL

The Raciborz dry polder', with a flood storage volume of 185 Mm3 will be constructedin an area along the Odra between the town of Raciborz and the earlier constructed Bukowpolder. The dry polder is a reservoir for storage of peak floods and will be createdby constructing a 4.0 km long dam across the Odra valley. The dam will be constructedof local cohesive soils, with a toe drain at the downstream slope. Outlet worksand other appurtenant structures will be built in the river to facilitate navigation throughthe reservoir. Right and left bank dikes will be constructed from the main dam along the sidesof the valley upstream for a length of 8.8 km and 9.5 km respectively. For the constructionof embankments local available gravels and soil will be used. The total reservoir areais about 26.3 km2 . The plan of the reservoir is shown in Figure 2.1.

During normal flows the outlet gates in the control structure will remain openand the reservoir will be dry. During times of peak floods the gates will be used to limitoutflow to the minimum possible, subject to the constraint that the water level in the reservoirwill not exceed 195.2 m maximum storage level. The outlet structure will be designedto safely pass the Probable Maximum Flood, which has been estimated at 3 700 m 3/s.

The reservoir area is underlain by gravel deposits which are currently being extractedby mining companies. The gravel deposits in the polder area are likely to last for another30 years. Continuing gravel excavation would gradually increase the storage capacityof the reservoir by another 10 million m3 .

2.3.2 RESETTLEMENT

The creation of the reservoir will involve the resettlement of some 240 families from twovillages, Nieboczowy and Ligota Tworkowska that are situated in the proposed reservoir area.The recommended Resettlement Action Plan, which is based on the precepts of the WorldCommission on Dams, provides for continuing collaboration between RZGWGLand the affected families in participatory resettlement planning.

The term "dry polder" is used in this report to describe a flood retention reservoir which is only operationalduring high floods to store floodwater during a short period of time.

9


2.3.3 PRINCIPAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESERVOIR

Length of reservoir dike: 4.0 km

Length of left resp. right embankment: 9.5 km + 9.15 km

Embankment crest level: 197.5 m

Maximum embankment height: 10.5 m

Maximum flood storage level: 195.2 m

Flood storage area at max level: 26.3 km2

Permanent flood storage volume 185 Mm3

between normal and max level:

2.3.4 THE EMBANKMENT AND OUTLET WORKS

The embankment will be constructed of compacted earth fill material excavated from within

the reservoir area. The crest level will be 197.5 m, a maximum height of 10.5 m above the bed

of the Odra River and 2.3 m above the maximum reservoir level, meeting Polish regulations.

Both upstream and downstream faces will be protected by grass cover that will be established

on a layer of topsoil placed of the compacted fill. The embankment is homogenous except

for a downstream berm of gravel which is intended to provide drainage to the cohesive fill.

The outlet works comprise a gated structure consisting of a reinforced concrete fore bay

with a 115 m wide apron at 180.5 m level and concrete side walls, 5 bays each 12 m wide

with a sill set at 183 m level and one navigable flat sill at 180.5 m level. The bays

are separated by 7.4 m wide piers which house the gate operating mechanism.

There will be vertical lift gates and a reinforced concrete bridge over the bays. A reinforced

concrete stilling basin will be built downstream of the structure. The basin will be 115 m wide

and 55 m long, with side retaining walls. An outlet channel protected with gabions and riprap

will be provided to allow for water discharge into the river.

The spillway's openings are equipped with steel vertical flat gates, each 60 ton in weight

operated by hydraulic drives at both ends. A 600 kVA standby generator will be provided

at the outlet works in case of a power failure.

2.3.5 ANCILLARY WORKS

Ancillary works will comprise an outlet structure to the old City Odra branch flowing through

the city of Raciborz. This will enable the evacuation of extra water into the old Odra river bed

for environmental and aesthetic reasons. The natural Psina river outlet into the Odra in

the reservoir area will remain for discharge during normal flow. A new stormwater outlet

for this river will be created through the construction of a new channel outside the left

embankment and between the railway line to Chalupki. The channel will flow into the old

Raciborz City Odra.

A number of smaller tributaries and streams flowing from the neighbouring hills towards

the Odra (e.g. Plinc River) will be cut off during operation of the reservoir. Five small

pumping stations are planned to facilitate drainage of these small catchment areas when

the reservoir is filled.

The necessity of an auxiliary spillway construction to increase the safety of the dike in case

of mechanical malfunction of the outlet structure will be subject to further studies

and will be decided in the detailed design stage.

10

Chapter 2 -PROJECT DESCRIP77ON

.. ~~~~~~- I

sF - I ~~t '.- t 7

Map of the Raciborz reservir '. ; . . .

-Embankments of the reservoir- i --.- New stretch of the Odra_ 3 ar '£ -. ?

*-Psina stormwater flood channel $\ -

.. Boundary of the Wielikat ponds - ^' g \' .Ef Vulnerable natural habHtats- :-\\.>,-\) '

I1 Tworkowski Forest x t ,; x tj

3 - Meadows E of Niebor-zowy -;' _" ,- -

4-8Brzezie ponds . ; ' '- 5- Psina outlet ,; . >'- -4..-t' :-

Figure 2.1 - Map of the Raciborz reservoir


2.3.6 CONSTRUCTION COST

A summary of construction cost of the reservoir is given in Table 2. 1.

Table 2.1 - Summary of construction cost, Raciborz reservoir (in million PLN*)

No. Description Base case alignment

1 Embankment incl. spillway 192.8

2 Outlet structures 67.1

3 Drainage 33.4

4 Miscellaneous 10.6

5 General items 33.4

6 Physical contingencies 33.7

Total construction cost 371.0

*) 2002 cost exci taxes

The cost of resettlement of the population of two villages are presented in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 - Summary of resettlement cost, Raciborz reservoir (in million PLN*)

No. Description Without amortisation *) With amortisation

1 Buildings 160 91

2 Land 37 37

3 Additional houses for 75 families 7.5 7.5

4 Infrastructure at new site 5.8 5.8

5 Loss of business opportunities 2.1 2.1

6 Cemetery relocation 1.9 1.9

7 Other cost incl. M&E 0.8 0.8

8 Contingencies 21.5 14.6

Total resettlement cost 236.6 160.7

*) represents compensation against full market value

Table 2.3 shows the cost of implementation associated with the construction of the reservoir.

Table 2.3 - Summary of implementation cost Raciborz reservoir (million PLN*)

No. Description Cost

1 Detailed designs, tender documents and procurement 12

2 Site investigation and surveys 2

3 Client administration 28

4 Construction supervision 20

Total implementation cost 62

*) 2002 cost excl. taxes

Annual O&M costs are estimated at 1.4 million PLN, which is equivalent to less than 0.5%

of the capital cost.

12


2.4 THE MODERNIZATION OF THE WROCLAW FLOODWAY SYSTEM

2.4.1 GENERAL

Wroclaw is subject to floods exceeding 2 200 m3/s. The maximum flow during the 1997 floodwas estimated at 3 640 m3/s at Trestno, some 5 km upstream of Wroclaw. The Raciborz floodretention reservoir would offer partial but not complete protection against floods. GOPregulations require first class structures with a crest level of embankment at least risingto the water level of floods with a probability of once in 1 000 years, and second classstructures for floods with a probability of once in 333 years.

Adequate protection would in fact mean protection against a flood similar to the one in 1997.Allowing for a reduction in the peak flow on account of the Raciborz reservoir, the designflow at Brzeg Most (upstream of Wroclaw) was taken at 3 100 m 3/s. Flood protectionfor Wroclaw city is provided by modernizing and upgrading the flood control systemto such an extent that the system could adequately deal with such a flood.

2.4.2 SUB-COMPONENTS OF WFS

The modernization of the Wroclaw Floodway System comprises three main sub-components:

1) Improvement of the security of the existing Odra dikes and embankments

2) Improvement of the hydraulic capacity of the existing Odra channels

3) Construction of the Widawa Flood Relief channel

The location of main projects is shown in Figure 2.2 (description - see Annex C).

1. Improvements to Odra dikes

The improvements comprise: (i) works to reduce the risk of failure by piping, (ii) raisingembankment height where necessary, and (iii) works to increase the stability and heightof existing city boulevards.

The works will be carried out at the following locations':

* Flood levees of Kotowice-Siedlce (10.8 km) [1];

* Left side flood levees of Olawka Polder (9.3 km) [2];

* Flood levees of Blizanowice-Trestno Polder (6.1 km) [3];

* Ring-type flood levees of Opatowice and Nowy Dom (5.7 km) [4, 5];

* Flood levees along Groblice-Siechnice section (4.7 km) [20];

* Left side flood levees of Odra River along sections Popowice Kozanow, Maslice, PraczeOdrzanskie, Janowek with Water Treatment Plant (14.3 km) [13, 14, 15, 16, 17. 18];

* Right side flood levees along sections Janowice. Jeszkowice, Kamieniec Wr., Lany,Wojnow, Zalesie-Zacisze. Osobowice and Redzin (13.7 km) [6, 7, 8. 9, 10];

* Constructions of down-town junction boulevards (7.4 km) [22];

Figures in [square brackets] rely to the symbols of works used in Annex C and in Figure 2.2.

13


* Removal of the embankments of the Paniowice Polder (5.2 km), removal

of the embankment along Redzin-Lesnica section (2.7 km) and removal

of the embankment at Redzin barrage of total length 9.0 km [11, 12, 19].

2. Improvements to the Odra channel

These improvements, which are designed to increase the hydraulic capacity of the Odra

within the city's premises, comprise the following':

* Remodelling of Flood Canal: widening (50 m) and deepening (109.0 m asl) [25, 28, 29];

* Remodelling works of Odra River City Canal, including the widening, deepening,

construction of protected slopes and boulevards (2.7 km); the modernization of flood gate;

and the modernization of the City navigation lock [21, 24, 35, 36];

* Remodelling of Old Odra River Channel along Municipal Canal including the widening

of the river channel, reduction of guiding embankment at Rozanka navigation lock;

the rebuilding of the Rozanka weir; increasing capacity under Warszawski, Trzebnicki

and Osobowicki bridges; additional protection for Popowice river harbour [23, 26, 30, 31,

32, 33, 34, 37];

* Remodelling of South Odra river channel (City section), including the reconstruction

of the weir at Wroclaw I Power Plant [38];

* Remodelling of Odra River Channel from junction with Old Odra channel to Widawa

confluence including widening, dredging and construction of side slopes revetments [27];

* Remodelling of Redzin Barrage [39].

3. Widawa flood relief channel

The capacity of the existing Odra-Widawa diversion channel and the Widawa river floodplain

towards the confluence of the Widawa into the Odra will be increased to about 300 m3/s of

flow in times of flood danger. These project works include':

* Along the Odra-Widawa transfer channel the following works: a new gated weir at the off-

take of the Odra-Widawa Canal with an embankment spillway, the reconstruction

of existing flood levees (2.4 km), the construction of new flood levees (2.6 km),

the removal of existing flood embankments (2.2 km); the reconstruction of the existing

railway bridge on Miloszyce-Wroclaw Kowale trace and the reconstruction of the existing

road bridge at Swojczycka street [40, 41, 44, 45, 46];

* In the Widawa valley the following works are required: reconstruction of an existing road

bridge over Stara Widawa at Glowna Street, the reconstruction of existing bridges along

the Widawa river at Krzywousty Street, Sulowska Street bridge and Pegowski bridge,

the construction of new flood levees along the valley (23.9 km), the modernization

of existing flood levees (2.1 km), the removal of existing flood levees and the removal

of existing allotment gardens (77.0 ha) [42, 43, 44, 45].

Next page: Figure 2.2 - Map of the Wroclaw Floodway System(list of works - see Annex C)

'Figures in [square brackets] rely to the symbols of works used in Annex C and in Figure 2.2.

14

Map of the Wroclaw Floodway System

WJ Numbers of project worksConstruction of new embankmentsReconstruction of the existing embankments

/M i-4 . . Removal of the existing embankmentsRemodelling of riverbeds(widening and deepening)

i-r J

W~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ..

I 2~ 3 k

-4:~~~~~~~~~~~4

A-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


2.4.3 COST OF WFS

The implementation cost of WFS is estimated as PLN 682 million, made up as shownin Table 2.4

Table 2.4 - Cost of WFS (million PLN*)

Item Wroclaw Floodway System

Dike Channel capacity Widawa Total WFSimprovement increase transfer

Construction 253.5 254.9 87.3 595.7Social costs 0.2 9.4 26.0 35.6Administration 21.5 21.8 7.5 50.8& engineering

Total 275.2 286.1 120.8 682.1*) 2003 cost excl taxes

2.5 TOTAL COST AND BENEFITS OF THE ORFPP

2.5.1 TOTAL COST OF INVESTMENT

The implementation cost of the project is estimated as PLN 1 352 million, a breakdownis given in Table 2.5.

Table 2.5 - Breakdown of total cost of the project in million PLN

Issue Raciborz reservoir WFS TotalConstruction 371 596 967Resettlement 237 36 273Implementation 62 51 112Total 670 682 1 352

2.5.2 OPERATIONAL AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

Annual O&M cost for Raciborz reservoir is estimated at PLN 1.4 million/year.

Additional O&M cost for the modernized WFS including the Widawa transfer is estimatedat PLN 0.5 million/year.

2.5.3 EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SCHEME

Simulation modelling has shown that the project is effective in reducing flood levelsin the Odra for a large range of flood severity: it is particularly effective for floodswith a return period in the range 100-500 years. In particular it will provide almost fullprotection to the city of Wroclaw against future floods of similar magnitude as those of 1997.After completion of the Project, it is expected that flood damages such as inflicted in 1997will be reduced by 99%.

17


2.5.4 PROJECT BENEFITS

Benefits are categorised as primary, secondary and intangible. Primary benefits

are from the reduction in flood damage resulting from the construction of the project.

It is estimated that the cost of the damage inflicted by the 1997 flood between Raciborz

and Trestno (just upstream of Wroclaw) was PLN 4.5 billion. The value of the reduction

of the average annual damages due to the dry reservoir - the annual benefit - is estimated

at PLN 122 million. Secondary benefits are those from the exploitation of gravel

from within the reservoir. Intangible benefits are not measurable but real benefits

from the reduction in frequency and severity of flooding could be in the range of cost

of the damage inflicted by the 1997 floods.

2.5.5 ECONOMIC VIABILITY

The project has an economic internal rate of return of 17.3%. The secondary benefits of gravel

extraction in the Raciborz reservoir have been taken into account in this calculation.

18

Chapter 3 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK

CHAPTER 3 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVEFRAMEWORK

3.1 LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SETTING

Integration of the Republic of Poland into the European Union (EU) has been the main socio-economic and legislative issue that has dominated political life for the last decade. Polandapplied in 1994 for the membership of the EU together with a number of other Centraland East European countries. In 1997 a national strategy for integration was approvedin the Sejm (Lower house of Parliament) and in 1998 negotiations on Poland's accessto the Union started. This process was successfully concluded in May 2004 when Polandofficially entered the EU as a full member.

In order to meet the requirements of the so-called Community Acquis, a complex processof harmonizing existing Polish legislation with that of the EU was implemented.New legislation had to be promulgated in many fields. In 1999, during this transitional period,GOP also introduced a new decentralized government structure based on self-governanceon voivodship (provincial) level. At the national level, short-term and long-term strategiesfor socio-economic, infrastructural and human resources development of the various sectorswere prepared as guidelines for provincial development plans to be implementedafter accession. Also, a long-term strategy for sustainable development has been adopted,integrating environmental concerns into all sectoral policies.

Most new legislation and procedures, as well as newly established local authorities, are nowin place and an Agenda 2000 Programme for the transitional period 2000-2006 has beenadopted. Understandably, more time is needed to enhance capacities of the decentralizedgovernmental structures, and to transform the environmental and sectoral departmentsof the voivods into effective units. At present, spatial planning and environmental protectionmeasures are being designed at regional level, whereas their implementation and enforcementis the responsibility of local level (Powiat's and Gmina 's). For the latter, such tasksare completely new.

3.2 DECENTRALISED GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION

Decentralisation and reform of public administration during the nineties, includingthe adopted modifications in the legal system, dramatically changed the internal structure,the decision-making process and the management of public funds. The reform startedat the local (Gmina) level and later on the new responsibilities at higher levels were defined.This coincided with the pre-accession actions needed for integration into the EU. The reformresulted in an increase in the responsibilities of local authorities. The assignmentof responsibilities between the various levels of administration in Poland is still a matterof evolution.

1. Gmina

The Gmina covers all public matters of local importance that are not statutory responsibilitiesof other entities, such as landscape and land use management, environmental protection,sewerage, waste disposal and treatment, electricity, gas supply, public transportationand reforestation. Gmina's usually consist of a few rural communities and have a populationof 10 000-15 000 inhabitants on average.

19


2. Powiat

The Powiat governs a group of neighbouring communities or a town. The average number

of inhabitants of a Powiat is between 80 000-100 000. The main responsibilities are: transport

and public roads, town planning and buildings, water management, environmental protection

and nature conservation, agriculture, forestry, inland fisheries, public order and security, flood

control, fire protection and emergencies, labour market and unemployment. Powiats have

an important coordinating task between Gmina' s in implementing local programmes.They are involved in EIA's in the sectors which belong to their responsibility. Clearance

of EIA's is given by EIA commissions, which exist on voivodship and national level.

3. Voivodship

Provincial governments are the most important bodies to plan and implement a regional

development strategy. A Voivodship has a population between 1.5-5 million (2.4 million

on average) and has two parallel structures: (i) a regional branch of the central government

(urzad wojewodzki - voivod) and (ii) an independent democratically elected authority (sejmik

wojewodzki - marshal). They have their own budget and competence to accomplish statutory

tasks. Voivods are responsible for stimulating economic development, maintaining technical

and social infrastructure, securing public and private funds to finance public utility projects,

education, sustainable development and resource use, research & development, technology

and innovation, cultural heritage and culture. The self-governance structure can apply

for state-support in planning and implementing provincial programmes, in which case they

have to arrange an agreement with the Council of Ministers. Voivoids have an important

responsibility for environmental management and evaluation of EIA's and may give final

clearance.

3.3 POLISH LAWS APPLICABLE

Poland has adopted a national policy of sustainable development. Excessive pollution of air

and water is considered to be the main environmental threat at the short-and medium-term,

but the protection of the quality of natural resources and the preservation of natural habitats

also form major elements in this policy. Preventive measures, "polluter pays" principle,

and combating environmental pollution at source are the guiding principles of this policy.

Law enforcement and control of strict law-abidingness has become a major issue in this

policy. Legislation related to the project is shown below:

Direct Applicable Polish Environmental Laws:

* Environmental Protection Law (2001), which includes provisions on EnvironmentalImpact Assessment (EIA), and procedures for public consultation and public access

of to environmental information, amended on May 18, 20051;

* Historical Conservation and Protection Act (2003), which describes the objectivesand measures needed for the protection of cultural heritage and historic and archaeological

monuments;

* Nature Conservation Law (2004), which regulates the protection of the natural

environment, including the protection of valuable habitats, flora & fauna and Natura 2000

sites.

That amendment introduces amendments to other acts: o.a. Construction Law, Act on Land Use, Nature

Conservation Law etc.

20


Other Relevant Polish Laws:

* Water Law (2001), which describes the objectives and instruments for managementand conservation of surface and groundwater resources and of flood control risks;

* Odra River Act (2001), which defines the Odra 2006 Programme;

* Land Use Act (1 994),which describes the procedure to change land use and to obtain sitepermit for the selected location of the investment project;

* Building Law (1994), which describes the procedure to obtain a permit to startconstruction of an investment project.

3.4 POLISH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

The requirements for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prepared under Polish laware very comparable with those of the World Bank. The procedure is somewhat different,mainly because of the decentralized GOP administration. Under Polish Law EIAs are requiredfor the ORFPP at two different levels:

1) Local EIAs of sub-components are prepared in order to obtain site and constructionpermits from local authorities. The procedure includes an administrative decisionformulating environmental conditions to be reflected in the final designs. A recentamendment' to the Environmental Protection Law simplified the administrative procedurefor an EIA to a one-stage procedure instead of two-stage procedure. The amended Lawintroduces a mandatory administrative procedure for all investors to obtain a Decisionon Environmental Conditions (DEC). Such a decision is to be issued prior to theprocedure for the approval of final designs to obtain a construction permit for aninvestment project. The technical documentation should then properly address the issuesraised in the DEC. In addition the documentation should be in line with provisions of localland use plans and site permit. Thus, the procedure is strongly integrated in the entireapproval procedure for new investments implemented by the local and regionaladministration. EIAs are compulsory for all investments, which may change the land useand may have significant effects on the environment, especially for works to be conductedin or near special conservation areas, e.g. Natura 2000 sites;

2) EIAs on national or regional level are required for major national projectsand investments which may have impacts in more than one voivodship. This is the casein the ORFPP, where the impacts of the project will extend over the entire Upperand Middle Odra floodplain from Chalupki to Brzeg Dolny, which is an area belongingto three different voivodships: Slaskie, Opolskie and Dolnoslaskie. Accordingto the Ministry of Environment this EA study meets the requirements for a national ElAin compliance with Polish environmental legislation.

The Polish requirements are also comparable with the EA requirements as per EU CouncilDirective 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain publicand private projects on the environment (and as amended by Council Directive 97/11 /ECof 3 March 1997); and with Directive 2001/42 on the Assessment of the Effects of CertainPlans and Programmes on the Environment (Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)Directive).

On July 27. 2005

21


3.5 THE EIA PROCEDURE

The environmental procedure, as defined in the legislation, must address the following issues:

* The direct and indirect impacts of a project on the environment, human health, and quality

of human life, material assets and cultural heritage;

* The possibilities and ways of preventing and reducing adverse impactson the environment;

* The required scope of monitoring.

The Polish environmental protection law also sets out the elements that should be included

in an EIA report. The law requires notification and public consultation at the time

of the application for the Site Permit, as well as at the time of application for the Construction

Permit.

The Law also provides a formal framework for public comments on EIA's submitted

to authorities, and defines specific notification procedures for projects with trans-boundary

environmental impacts.

The procedure for ORFPP, to implement local EIAs and to obtain subsequently Site

and Construction Permits is rather complicated, since a number of lower administrative levels

are involved (see Table 3.1) as well as three different investors: (i) Component A,

the dry polder will be implemented by RZGWGL (Gliwice) and (ii) Component B,

the Modernization of WFS will be implemented by RZGWWL (Wroclaw) in cooperation

with DZMiUW (Wroclaw).

Table 3.1 - Decentralised Government administration involvedin Raciborz reservoir and WFS

Issue Investor Powiat Gmina

Raciborz reservoir RZGW-Gliwice . Lubomia (*)Wodzislaw

Kornowac

Raciborz KrzyzanowiceRaciborz

Wroclaw Floodway RZGW-Wroclaw Wolow Brzeg DolnySystem DZMiUW-Wroclaw Olawa (urban)

Olawa Jelcz-Laskowice

Olawa (rural)

Sroda Slaska Miekinia

Oborniki SlaskieTrzebnica Wisznia Mala

Swieta Katarzyna

Wroclaw (rural) Czernica

Dlugoleka

City of Wroclaw Wroclaw (*)

(*) lead Gmina

22


3.6 INTERNATIONAL TREATIES

Poland has signed most international treaties and conventions on environment, pollutioncontrol, nature and biodiversity conservation. The most relevant international treatiesand conventions signed are shown in Table 3.2 below.

Table 3.2 - Relevant International treaties and conventions signed by Poland

Treaty or Convention In Brief descriptionRamsar Convention 1971 Protection of wetlands

World Cultural and Natural 1972 Protection of major cultural and natural monumentsHeritage (Paris)

CITES convention 1973 Ban and restrictions on international trade in endangered(Washington) species of wild fauna and flora

Bern Convention 1979 Conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats

Bonn Convention 1979 Conservation of migratory species of wild animals

Convention of EIA in trans- 1991 Assessment of EIA in certain projects with trans-boundaryboundary context effects and notification and consultation procedures(Espoo convention)

Convention on Biological 1992 Conservation of biodiversity, sustainable use of itsDiversity (Rio de Janeiro) components and access to genetic resources

International Protocol on bat 1991 Protection of batsprotection in Europe(EUROBAT)

Helsinki convention 1992 Protection of the marine environment of the Baltic sea area(New HELCOM)

International Commission 1996 Prevention and long-term decreasing of pollution of Odraon the Protection of the Odra river systemagainst pollution

Aarhus Convention 1998 Free access to information and equal rights of publicparticipation in environmental issues

3.7 APPLICABLE EU DIRECTIVES

With accession into the EU, Poland is in the position to implement the majorityof the environmental acquis, which includes approximately 200 legal instruments.EU directives relevant for the project are the following:

* Habitat Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats, wild fauna & flora.The fundamental purpose of this directive is to establish a network of protected areascalled Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) throughout the Community in orderto maintain both the distribution and the abundance of threatened species and habitats;

* Bird Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. This Directive imposesstrict legal obligations on Member States to maintain populations of wild birds accordingto ecological requirements and to take special measures to conserve the habitatof threatened species through the designation of Special Protection Areas (SPA);

23


* Natura 2000 is the EU network of protected areas and includes both SACs accordingto the Habitat Directive and SPAs of the Birds Directive. GOP has published (MOE, May

2005) a list of areas in Poland, which are proposed to EU as Potential Natura Sites (PNS).

The list includes 4 PNS (3 SACs and 1 SPA site') situated in or near the Raciborz dry

polder and 6 PNS (4 SACs and 2 SPAs 1) downstream of Raciborz in the impact area

of the ORFPP. Approval for inclusion of the Polish PNS list in the European Natura

Network still has to be formalized, but according to the procedure all potential sites have

to be treated as protected areas under the Habitat and Bird Directives pending final EU

endorsement;

* EU Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC (WFD). This directive is an important

step towards sustainable use of water resources in Europe. Primarily throughthe development and implementation of River Basin Management Plans, the WFD

requires Member States to take measures to achieve the environmental objective of "good

status" for their rivers, lakes and coastal waters by 2015. Integrated River Basin

Management Plans will be prepared during the coming years;

* EU Council Directive 85/337/EEC on EIA. The requirements of the Polish

environmental legislation are in line with this EU Council Directive on the assessment

of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (and as amended

by Council Directive 97/1 1/EC of 3 March 1997);

* EU Council Directive 2001/42 on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Plans

and Programmes on the Environment (Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive).

This SEA Directive is an important step forward in European environmental law.

At the moment, major projects likely to have an impact on the environment must

be assessed under Directive 85/337/EEC. However, this assessment takes place at a stage

when options for significant change are often limited. Decisions on the site of a project,

or on the choice of alternatives, may already have been taken in the context of plans

for a whole sector or geographical area. The SEA Directive - 2001/42/EC - plugs this gap

by requiring the environmental effects of a broad range of plans and programmesto be assessed, so that they can be taken into account while plans are actually being

developed, and in due course adopted. The public must also be consulted on the draft

plans and on the environmental assessment and their views must be taken into account.

3.8 WORLD BANK ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES

The following environmental and social policies of the World Bank are applicable

on the project:

* Operational Policy 4.01 - Environmental Assessment. The World Bank requires an EA

for all projects proposed for Bank financing, in order to ensure that these projects

are environmentally sound and sustainable. The ORFPP was classified as Category A,

because of the scope of the expected impacts from construction and operation,the resettlement of two villages, the impacts expected on natural habitats, landscapeand cultural property and the use of the Odra as an international waterway. A preliminaryenvironmental analysis was carried out as part of the project feasibility studiesby the engineering consultants. A team of independent EA consultants (see paragraph 6)

reviewed this preliminary analysis and carried out additional studies, including detailed

assessment of potential impacts and prepared a full fledged EA, including EMPs.

partly overlapping

24


* Operational Policy 4.04 - Natural Habitats. In the Odra valley there are a numberof critical natural habitats of national significance. The Raciborz polder areas as wellas the downstream floodplains include sensitive and protected natural habitats,which will be impacted by the proposed project. Therefore OP 4.04 applies. Duringthe EA several consultations were held with national nature conservation organisationsin order to plan potential mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts of the projecton riverine habitats and wetlands, as defined by the Policy.

* Operational Policy Note 11.03 - Cultural Property. This Policy applies sincethe project involves large scale earth moving and dredging in parts of the Odra floodplainwith numerous old settlements and archaeological sites. Within the city of Wroclaw thereare many historic monuments including hydraulic structures and bridges which also mightbe affected by the reconstruction of water management structures.

* Operational Policy 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement. Two villages will be resettledaffecting some 240 families (about 700 people). Separate social studies have been carriedout and a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) has been prepared aimed at minimizingresettlement and offering adequate compensation or settlement alternatives in conformitywith World Bank policies and Polish law.

* Operational Directive 4.37 - Safety of Dams. The Raciborz dry polderwill be constructed upstream of a densely populated area. The Bank's O.P. 4.37 on DamSafety is therefore applicable. GOP will be constituting an independent panel of expertsto review the designs and the operational and maintenance aspects of the project.

* Operational Policy 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways. The project is situatedalong an international waterway which is shared by three countries: Czech Republic (6%),Poland (89%) and Germany (5%). The three governments are cooperating in the fieldof flood control, river management and water quality through the InternationalCommission on the Protection of the Odra (IKSO), which is based in Wroclaw. Lettersto notify the riparian states of the Odra River and the Odra Commission, advising themof the project scope, design details and environmental impacts have been sent.

* Bank Policy 17.50 - Public Disclosure. The EA report according to Bank Policy wouldbe made available to the Public by disclosure at public libraries or other places accessiblefor project affected groups, NGOs and private persons.

3.9 COMPLIANCE WITH POLISH LEGISLATION AND WORLD BANKPOLICIES

The present status of compliance of the project with Polish legislation and World Bankpolicies is indicated in Table 3.3. For Component A the local authorities have issued a sitepermit in July 2004 and the procedure for obtaining a construction permit, includingpreparation of a local EIA for this component is on-going and will be completed late 2005.For Component B, consisting of 13 contracting packages, 6 local EIAs will be preparedduring 2005 and 2006 and construction permits will be issued following the completionof final designs. Requirements on public consultations and disclosure of EIAs have beenfollowed and will be completed when the polish version of the national EIA reportis disclosed later this year. Actions have been taken to meet the other requirementsfor the project in order to be in full compliance with Polish legislation and World Bankenvironmental policies.

25


Table 3.3 - Compliance of project with GOP legislation and WB policies

Legislation/ Actions taken to complyPolicy

GOP Environmental Site Permit for component A approved (July 2004)

legislation Protection Law Complete local EIA to obtain Construction Permit for Component A

Complete disclosure and approve National EIA (MOE)

Prepare local ElAs for selected sub-projects under Component B

Implement disclosure and public consultation process ElAs

Historic Inventories of cultural and historic monuments Component A

Conservation completed (2005)& Protection Law Complete Archaeological inventory Component B as soon as final

design completed

Prepare Final designs in consultation with Conservatorof Monuments

Include chance-find procedure in contract documents

Nature Discuss with stakeholders and prepare detailed proposalsConservation for mitigation/compensatory measures for Tworkowski ForestLaw and affected PNS downstream of Raciborz to be included in project

(Component C5)

World Bank OP 4.01 - Overall EA and Public Consultations completedpolicy Environmental Prepare local ElAs for selected sub-projects under Component B

Assessment (EA)Follow up mitigation measures through implementation of EMP

Implement training and capacity building in environmentalmanagement

OP 4.04 - Implement Inventories, Monitoring, and Mitigation & Compensation

Natural Habitats measures for special conservation areas included in EMP

OP 11.03 - Archaeological inventory for Component A completedCultural Property Implement compensation/relocation of Historic and religious property

in component A (RAP)

Complete archaeological inventory for Component B after completionof final design

Include Chance find procedures in contract documents

OP 4.12 - RAP and Public Consultation Component A completedInvoluntary Complete RAP for Component B minimizing need for resettlement;Resettlement

Implement RAP

Monitor results

OP 4.37 - Install Independent Panel of Experts to review designs

Safety of Dams Prepare Emergency Preparedness Plan together with stakeholders

Modernize Flood Forecasting and prepare Flood Management Plans

OP 7.50 - Riparian states of the Odra River and IKSO have been notifiedProjects on about scope, details and environmental impacts of projectInternationalWaterways

BP 17.50 - Disclose full results of EA in libraries, web-sites etc.Public Disclosure

26

Chapter 4 ANALYSES OF ALTERNA TIVES

CHAPTER 4 ANALYSES OF ALTERNATIVES

4.1 THE WITHOUT PROJECT SCENARIO

Damages due to recurrent floods in the Odra River are very high. At least ten large floodsof the Odra were recorded during the last half of the 2 0 th century. The flood of 1997 wasby far the largest and most devastating ever recorded. During this dramatic event peak floodwaves in the Odra and the Nysa Klodzka tributary overtopped embankments on a large scale.As a result an area of 65 000 ha was inundated in three voivodships Slaskie, Opolskieand Dolnoslaskie. The event took the life of 54 people, about 1 10 000 persons hadto be evacuated and some 700 000 households were affected by inundation. Widespreaddamage was inflicted on property, infrastructure, especially in the historic city of Wroclaw.Other damages to be taken into account here are the effects of the floods on environmental"intangibles" such as cultural heritage and social aspects such as health and stress.Continuation of the existing situation with regularly incurring expenditures for flood damagecontrol during emergency situations and continuing investments for the rehabilitationof private and public infrastructure after the floods have subsided is an unacceptable option,especially taking into consideration the risk of loss of life in the densely populated floodplain.Therefore, a higher degree of protection against floods of major towns and population centresis needed.

4.2 THE WITH PROJECT SCENARIO

After completion of the Project, it is expected that flood damages such as inflictedby this disastrous flood will be largely reduced. Lower flood levels in the Odra for a largerange of flood severity together with modernized flood control structures and reinforcementof dikes on the most vulnerable locations will minimize the risks of inundations of urbanand industrial areas. In particular the project will provide almost full protection to the cityof Wroclaw against future floods of similar magnitude as those of 1997. Due to the predictedreduction in flood damage and secondary benefits of gravel extraction, the projecthas an economic internal rate of return of 17.3%.

4.3 OVERALL PROJECT DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

For overall project design three basic options were considered: (i) providing flood protectionby only raising the dikes along the river, (ii) constructing reservoirs on the tributariesof the Odra and (iii) raising dikes, where necessary, in combination with a "dry" polderat Raciborz. Option (i) is an extremely expensive solution and would have significant adverseenvironmental impacts since all existing Odra dikes would have to be raised above probablemaximum flood level and many km of new dikes to be constructed. Regarding option (ii),several retention reservoirs on Odra tributaries have already been constructed or are beingproposed/constructed as part of the Odra 2006 Programme and effectiveness of reservoirson Odra tributaries for flood control in the Odra floodplain is low. Option (iii), building a drypolder with a capacity of 185 Mm3 at Raciborz for temporary storage of flood peaks, is by farthe superior solution as it reduces the peak flow of large floods by about 20-50%and the corresponding water levels by about 0.5-1.0 m for more than 500 km of dikes.The first plan to build a reservoir upstream of Raciborz was prepared during the Prussianregime at the end of the 1 gth century. Subsequent follow-up concepts were developed duringthe 20 th century and all agreed on the suitability of the site for building a large retention

27


When the regulation of the Odra started and dikes were constructed there was a considerable

change in the flood and sedimentation regime of the river. Under natural conditions

the deposition of silt and clay was rather slow and occurred mainly in lateral direction.However, after 1750, when embankments were constructed at a large scale, the rate

of sedimentation accelerated to 0.9 cm/year between the embankments, and this increased

even further to 1.7 cm/year after 1950 (Czajka-Kaczka, 2003).

[.

q i q . . i-s4, ______ / -I.4I -- 't!. ,

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

X1;S'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Figure 5.1 - Geomorphological map of area upstream of Wroclaw

Bank failure during historic high floods resulted in the development of typical landscape

elements at the site of the breach. Usually a deep (6-lOrn) scour pond developed at such sites,

which later filled with groundwater and often surrounded by circle of woody vegetation.These formner dike breaches can be observed often in large number - for example,about 15 of these valuable landscape elements were recorded over a distance of 7 km between

Siedlce-Kotowice. They are often threatened by dike reconstruction, dumping of wasteand pollution of surface water, see Photo 5.2.

34

Chapter 5 BASELINE DATA

Photo 5.1 -Cut-of meander of Odra River near Kotowice (oxbow lake)with mature riverine forest

4>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;

Photo 5.2 -Water bodies formed by bank failures could be valuablelandscape elements, however they are often not recognizedand people use them to dump their waste

35


5.1.2.4 Recent geomorphologic history of the Wroclaw area

Wroclaw is strategically located in a stretch of the Odra floodplain, where the Olawa

and Widawa tributaries flow into the Odra, and where the main river splits into variousbranches, creating several islands. In this area, early settlers could find sufficient shelter

and good transport by boat, and control of several rivers was possible in this swampy area.

Numerous silted up former river beds gave Wroclaw the features of a city built on reclaimed

swamps: during springtime the city was often flooded after the melting of snowin the mountains, while flash floods could also occur in summer when the river peaked after

high rainfall in upstream regions.

To protect the city from floods, dikes were constructed, and with the development of the city

the surface of the terrain was systematically raised. The meandering river often switched its

bed after such floods, breaking through an old meander levee and following a new course

in the wide and flat valley. Former Odra river beds were filled up with materials

from the Widawa and Olawa sub-catchments. Previously, these rivers flowed into the Odra

River near the city of Olawa. A detailed geomorphology map of the area upstream

of Wroclaw is given in Figure 5.1.

5.1.3 HYDROLOGY AND GROUNDWATER

5.1.3.1 Catchment characteristics and floodplain morphology

The source of the Odra River - which has a length of 854 km - is at 634 m above sea level

(asl) in the Silesian-Moravian part of the Sudetes Mountain Range. The area is underlain

by relatively impermeable clay shale, and erosion by run-off has resulted in a dense drainage

network of mountain tributaries. All of them have relatively high gradients. Along the first

87 km the Odra River flows as a relatively undisturbed fast flowing mountain stream

in a Northeasterly direction through a rather straight valley towards the confluence

with the Opava River (see also Figure 5.2). Near the city of Ostrava, a large industrialized city

in the Czech Republic the river flows through a protected wetland reserve (Poodri Ramsar

site) of 5 500 ha in size, not far from the Polish border.

After 107 km the river enters Poland near Chalupki through the Moravian Gate, and changes

its course towards the Northwest. After this point it changes into a typical lowland river,

with a low gradient and a tendency to meander. The Odra then flows through the Silesian

Lowland plain through a several kilometres wide river floodplain in the direction of Wroclaw

and from there further towards the border with Germany at the confluence of Odra

with the Nysa Luzycka. The floodplain runs largely parallel to the Sudetes, located at some

100 km distance to the Southwest. At the Moravian Gate the altitude of the valley

is about 195 m asl, in the Scinawa Gorge about 90 m asl, declining to about 40 m at the mouth

of the Nysa Luzycka.

A large number of left bank tributaries, each with their catchment on Polish territory join

the Odra, including the most important tributary, the Nysa Klodzka. The relief in this part

of the catchment is steep, with elevations up to 1 400 m, and the underlying rocks are

relatively impermeable. The natural drainage system is therefore dense and the runoff

potentially rapid. The right bank tributaries such as Ruda, Klodnica, Mala Panewand Stobrawa do not have the character of montane rivers, and floodwaters from these streams

are less pronounced than those of the left bank tributaries.

36


~~~E' 'T Y

'CZH/

H I t: ^ ;QLAND' >

REPUBLIC'- - ' -...--

-, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V

~~~Fiue52 ,- MalfuprOr ie acmn

Nea Raibr the Psin Rive jon-h Orn fro thr th Odra flow aln two

. . 1~ l : ..T Y' '

in~~~~~ th beinn of1 th t cetuy Mos mendr wer cu of an srIghee

t e k. D nrmfCZECH Odr i c e . 'pst---8 LtU-', REPUBLI' .- -.. ' "

;~~~~ - -y' 2-:S t'

Bo ,qe ., .- 2. X/

eigure 5.2s LMa of upers cdan rer ctchm ws p l c

NeaoreRcbr the Psindorl Rivr jisteOr and fryreetl ompltedhere the draelose uralngw

channelspment as faraslRacirand Ke thEe (km s.T hi stre chisngly regulatedinbthe bgnn 4 o t , .entur Ms s w c o a straghtne

by1canalizationpndnmeroushtav groyneswreicnsruted to phsvrotec and stabflizes

theodinembsankments. Donrea ofm K oae t per Odra Fisocopetly camenati stream

human laivesorz prpetes Piarafetd River flodlins lk that Odaanormfhr the Odra River alongltwcannelusuall densel paiopulated forzlvret (km 92).This. sthet prsec stofngly rvregu atedthfeilalluvialegiainn has atcthed peopl siccaentur.Ms timners. Therecu occupied stherpriaghtenedsbcandsaliztioead bidnguetlmerous grones werba commnitrucesdln tohroe river Usuabilyze vilgstown emandkments. roadsstreamil ofnoze the sOmewat hisgomleerlyond schnalsted elevtream

of Opole (km 148) the river divides into a diversion channel, which was partially constructedbefore the Second World War and only recently completed. There is dense urbandevelopment on the island between these arms. Diversion channels are also located at Brzeg(km 197) and Olawa (km 213); the gradient from the Olza confluence to Kozle is low,being only 0.45%o.

5.1.3.2 Developments that have contributed to the severity of the floodsFlooding is a natural phenomenon in a floodplain. Floods only become catastrophic whenhuman lives or properties are affected. River floodplains like that of the Odra River valleyare usually densely populated for a variety of reasons. The presence of the river and the fertilealluvial plain has attracted people since ancient times. They occupied the riparian landsand started building settlements human uan communities along the river. Usually the villages,towns and major roads were built on the somewhat higher grounds such as the elevatedterraces on both sides of the river valley in order to protect property and infrastructurefrom flooding.

Construction of embankments for the purpose of flood protection started in the 1 5t and 1 6tcenturies Systematic improvements were not carried out before the middle of the 1 8th century,however, when emperor Frederic the Great began a large scale programme to regulatethe Odra River through cutting of meanders, canalization of riverbeds, constructionof embankments and protection against erosion by means of groynes. Swamps werereclaimed, and agriculture and human settlements mushroomed along the river.

37


5.1.4 WATER QUALITY OF THE ODRA RIVER

The quality of Odra water is regularly monitored, and monitoring results indicate that there

has been a gradual improvement in water quality of the Odra for most indicators measuredduring the last 10 years. This is the result of a massive programme to build and improvetreatment facilities for industrial and urban wastewater, but also the restructuring and closure

of old industrial establishments and mines has played a role. In most monitoring points along

the Middle Odra today, water quality meets at least class 2 standards. There are someexceptions in the vicinity of sources of pollution still present, but the general trend shows

a significant improvement in recent years. Biological contamination, however, is still

considerable, especially of organic compounds and coliform bacteria.

5.1.5 POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION OF SURFACE AND GROUNDWATERRESOURCES

A large dump of coal waste can be found about 1 km upstream of the Raciborz reservoir,near the village of Bukow, see Photo 5.3. The dump covers an area of about 20 ha of former

gravel pits excavated in the permeable gravels layers, not far from the Odra, River. Since

the early 1 960s coal waste has been disposed at this site, originating from a mine locatedat some 30 km distance. The mined material is transported to Bukow by rail, and over time

large quantities of spoil have been dumped at the site. The dumps are now about 40 m above

the surface of the terrain, and the lower part of this landfill is about 10 m below the water

table.

Part of the coal waste is currently being reprocessed at a nearby site by an internationalconsortium in order to recover another 10% of coal from these deposits. After processing,the spoils are then dumped into the same landfill and are partly covered by groundwater,but most of it is deposited above the groundwater table.

Mine tailings are not considered to be inert, and under aerobic conditions they pose a risk

for the environment. The physical and chemical properties of such coal waste depositsare highly variable, depending on the nature of the coal deposits. Sulphide minerals,especially pyrite (FeS2 ) are common in such tailings, and are usually present in significantconcentrations (up to several %). Under reduced (anaerobic conditions) and with a normal pH,

metals are fixed as sulphides and do not pose a threat. A major problem however is caused

by the oxidation of pyrite under aerobic conditions, whereby sulphides are oxidizedby microbiological processes into sulphates, and even into sulphuric acid (H 2SO4 ), leading

to a significant lowering of the pH.

Under such acid conditions, percolating rainwater can dissolve heavy metals in the minerals,such as copper, zinc, cadmium and lead. Easily dissolved metal oxides then spread rapidly

into the groundwater and surface water, leading to a strong contamination with heavy metals.

This could threaten fish and other aquatic life and pollute the aquifer used for drinking water.

Especially the layers stored under aerobic conditions (above the groundwater table) representa potential risk, since percolating rainwater can easily spread from here into the permeablegravel aquifer.

During the Environmental Assessment the Electrical Conductivity (EC) of open waterwas measured in Odra River, gravel pits, oxbow lakes and small streams at 25 locations.Unexpected high conductivities were measured (see Figure 5.5) at locations near the coal

waste dump, at several locations in the southern part of the reservoir. Another site where coal

40


T ... '.

Photo 5.3 - Mfinestone dump near Bukow within 700 m of the Raciborzreservoir

waste had been used as landfill near a bridge in the northern part of the reservoir also had veryhigh EC values. Highest EC values recorded at these locations were > 4.0 mS/cm(class Saline water), in the Wielikat ponds 2.7 mS/cm (class Slightly Saline water), whereasas a reference Odra water had an EC = 1.1I mS/cm and along the Plinc river and in seepageareas only 0.4-0.7 mS/cm was recorded. The high EC values indicate high salinities, probablycaused by a high sulphate content. It is strongly recommended to investigate this problemin order to quantify and to determine the suspected cause of the problem. pH values of surfaceand groundwater should be monitored in order to determnine how far pollution with heavymetals has progressed.

The presence of large bodies of surface water in many old gravel pits makes it possiblethat water contaminated with heavy metals can spread over a vast area downstreamof the tailings. As a result, the Wielikat fish ponds, reservoir (including the adjacentTworkowski forest), gravel pits and groundwater wells are all essentially at risk.Also, drinking water wells of the community of Lubomia, which currently serve some4 500 people and are located some 3 km downstream of the landfill, might be threathened.

5.1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS LOCAL AUTHORITIES

Remedial measures for such landfills in comparable situations in Germnany andthe Netherlands have proven to be very complicated and extremely costly. Local authoritiesin Gmina Lubomia should know potential consequences. Unfortunately, they are not awareof the situation and they do not consider the coal waste dump as posing a health riskfor the local population and fisheries. Also, there is no monitoring system in place to controlthe quality of percolating waters and the surrounding ground and surface water.

41


1 X, i.j M S ,...,..

_ _ _\1 e 1 ; ', Wsowua 2 km

--I\'' * 'U. A

Figure 5.5 - Conductivity isolines of water bodies in the area of Raciborz reservoir (,uS cm-')

42


5.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

5.2.1 DEMOGRAPHY

The project area is located in three voivodships: Slaskie, Opolskie and Dolnoslaskie,each of which has a strongly different character and history. Dolnoslaskie is by far the largestand has a population density of 145 people/km2 . Slaskie with its long industrial historyis strongly urbanized and has major industrial agglomerations. With 384 people/km 2 , it is alsothe most densely populated voivod. Opolskie, with 112 persons/kM2, has a more ruraland agricultural character, although some larger industrial sites can be found in towns alongthe Odra River. Details of demographic conditions are presented in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2 - Demographic conditions in three Upper Odra voivodships (2003)

Characteristic Dolnoslaskie Opolskie SlaskieArea of voivodship (kM2) 19 948 9 412 12 294Share of area Poland (%) 6.4 3.0 3.9Population in voivodship 2 898 313 1 055 667 4 714 982Urban (%) 71.6 52.5 61.0Rural (%) 28.4 47.5 39.0Share of population Poland (%) 7.7 2.8 12.0Population growth (per 1 000 pop.) -1.4 -0.5 -1.4Registered unemployed persons 278 271 83 436 323 200Rate of unemployment (%) 22.4 21.6 17.4

Source: Statistical offices GOP

5.2.2 EMPLOYMENT

Poland's most important socio-economic problem is the high rate of unemployment,which is estimated to be around 20% of the labour force. Increasing numbers of people fromall three voivodships work in the EU, since travel and work has become simpler since Polandjoined the EU. Many people from rural areas find work in the Danish and Dutch agricultureand construction sectors, and increasingly also in other EU countries. The greatest handicapfor working in the EU is that relatively few workers speak foreign languages.

Industry and commercial services provide most employment in Slaskie voivodships,while the number of people employed in these sectors is considerably lower in Dolnoslaskieand Opolskie. The agricultural sector provides a relatively significant amount of employmentin Opolskie voivodship (see Table 5.3).

Table 5.3 - Employment in Upper Odra voivodships (total persons employed in sector)

Voivodshp .Agriculture, Industry Commercial Non-commercialVoivodship fisheries & forestry & construction services services

Dolnoslaskie 99 320 226 519 188 188 165 025Opolskie 107 600 118 400 104 800 62 000Slaskie 212 600 741 200 613 400 267 800Soiurce: Statistical offices GOP

43


5.2.3 ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES

Table 5.4 provides information on the contribution of the various sectors to the national

economy. Industry, construction and services have by far the greatest contribution

to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). For Opolskie, agriculture is an important sector

and to a lesser extent, this is also the case in Dolnoslaskie.

Table 5.4 - Economic activities in Upper Odra voivodships(relative contribution to GDP in %)

Voivodship Services Industry Agriculture, fisheries& construction & forestry

Dolnoslaskie 62 32 5.8

Opolskie 58 30 11.6

Slaskie 54 44 1.6


5.2.4 LAND USE

More than 50% of the area of Dolnoslaskie and Slaskie is used for agriculture (see Table 5.5),

while in Opolskie this is much higher, as agricultural land use dominates about two thirds

of the voivodship. The loess and alluvial soils of the floodplain are especially interesting

for agricultural use because of their relatively high fertility, compared to the poor sandy soils

of the glacial plateau.

Forests extend over about 30% of all three voivodships. Forestry is important on the relatively

sandy and unfertile soils that extend over large areas of the glacial plateau. Most forests

are used for production. The Odra riverine forests, however, are not of interest for commercial

exploitation and should be considered as natural forests.

Table 5.5 - Total land use in ha and (%)

Voivodship Total area Agricultural land Forests Other uses

Dolnoslaskie 1 994 776 (100.0) 1 054 934 (52.9) 586 794 (29.4) 353 048 (17.7)

Opolskie 941 247 (100.0) 613 668 (65.2) 257 333 (27.3) 70 246 (7.5)

Slaskie 1 233 064 (100.0) 664 786 (53.9) 401 803 (32.6) 166 475 (13.5)


5.2.5 LAND USE AND AGRICULTURE IN THE RACIBORZ POLDER

Present land use in the Raciborz reservoir area is shown in Table 5.6. Arable land

and pastures cover about 71% of the area, while natural forests and waste land cover

about 17% of the area. The remainder is divided between residential areas, infrastructure,

open water and ongoing gravel excavations.

44


Table 5.6 - Land use in the Raciborz Polder

Land use Area in ha

Agricultural land 1 854 70.6Forest 147 5.6Bushes and thickets 14 0.5Surface water 185 7.0Gravel excavations 17 0.7Ditches 25 1.0Residential area 40 1.5Infrastructure 53 2.0Waste land 292 11.1Total 2 627 100

Source: RAP, 2005

More than 60% of the land within the reservoir area is owned by the State. State owned landconsists mostly of large plots (>10 ha) administered by various institutions. The remainingland is owned by private owners, most of them residents of the reservoir, but also by privateowners living outside the reservoirs and some private firms.

Agricultural plots belonging to residents are very small, and do not produce more thana supplement to the household income. Most of the residents have employment outside thereservoir area and are not active in the agricultural sector. Three quarters of the plots ownedby private persons are smaller than 0.5 ha. Some private people own several small plots.

5.2.6 AGRICULTURE

Most of the arable land in the three voivodships is used for the cultivation of crops such asmaize, wheat, rapeseed, sugar beet and other field crops (see Table 5.7). The area of orchardsis low and around a quarter of the land is used as meadows or permanent pasture. The acreageof arable land in the floodplain is expanding, since groundwater tables along the Odra Riverhave decreased and former meadows and hay lands have been converted to arable crops,especially field crops and fodder crops such as wheat and maize.

Table 5.7 - Agricultural land use in ha and (%)

Voivodship Agriculture Arable Orchards Meadows PastureDolnoslaskie 1 054 934 (100) 871 913 (82.6) 7 149 (0.7) 119 986 (11.4) 55 885 (5.3)Opolskie 613 668 (100) 481 205 (78.4) 4 150 (0.7) 77 785 (12.7) 50 528 (8.2)Slaskie 664 786 (100) 471 067 (70.8) 12 042 (1.8) 93 678 (14.1) 87 999 (13.2)Source: Statistical offices GOP

In the spatial planning of land utilization for agricultural use (as arable land) no considerationhas been given so far to potential flood risks. It has been reported that more than 20 000 haof arable land in the area between Chalupki (km 21) and Krapkowice (km 125) is notprotected against floods. These reports also state that 66% of the losses due to floods in 1958and 1972 were agricultural losses. However, this can not be an argument to protect these areas

45


with dikes, as it is more efficient to enforce the present rule that no arable agriculture

is allowed in land subject to (regular) flooding.

5.2.7 INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNICATIONS

In the past, most railways and roads were constructed on higher ground parallel

to the floodplain. In the vicinity of major cities, road and railway connections have been built

crossing the Odra valley. With a view to the flood risk, these roads and railways have been

built on embankments or dikes, which often form major obstacles for the floods to pass

and could increase flood risk if not properly integrated. It has been recognised that it

is important to coordinate these plans with flood protection activities.

5.2.8 NAVIGATION

The inland waterway system of Poland includes 1954 km of navigable waterways,of which the Odra River (695 km is navigable) has the greatest volume of transport. Inland

water transport is hindered by the poor condition of a large part of the infrastructure,

and by insufficient depth and difficult navigation conditions along parts of the river.

The Odra, together with the Gliwice Canal (constructed during the Prussian period), forms

a 742 km long waterway connecting the Silesian industrial area with the Szczecin

international harbour. The river is the only Polish waterway that is connected via the Spree

and Havel canal with the Elbe and the rest of the Western European waterway system. Bulk

shipments such as coal, ore, building materials and fertilizer form the majority of transported

materials. Container and Roll-on/Roll-of transport is increasing in Poland, but is not feasible

on the Odra in view of the small clearances under its bridges.

From March to November the Odra is navigable up to Kedzierzyn-Kozle for ships

up to 1 200 ton, but in the winter the presence of ice makes navigation impossible, especially

along the downstream section. The navigable stretch can be divided into three sections

(i) Kozle-Brzeg Dolny, 228 km, mainly canalized, easily navigable (class 3),

(ii) Brzeg Dolny-confluence of Nysa Luzycka river, 257 km, a section with problems due

to insufficient depth, (iii) Nysa Luzycka-Szczecin, 198 km easily navigable (class 2).

The section upstream of Kedzierzyn-Kozle towards the Czech border is not used for inland

transport, except by some recreational vessels and boats.

The bulk goods transported by ship consist of coal (10 million ton/yr), ore (2.5 million ton/yr)

and 2 million ton/yr of other goods. About 3.6 millions tons of bulk goods are shipped

to Germany on an annual basis. The total volume of shipments has been considerably reduced

since the 1980s due to closure of traditional heavy industries and mines along the river

and in Silesia. A dominant activity will remain the transportation of bulk products, such

as coal for the electric power plants along the river, and of gravel and sand for the building

sector. Currently about 10-12 vessels pass the Rozanka sluices in Wroclaw on a daily basis,

but there are also periods when no more than 50 vessels pass during one month (according

to the sluice master). New forms of transport on the Odra include large cruise ships with

tourists, usually coming from Germany. Their share is still small (estimated at 7 ships/yr),

but numbers may increase when facilities are upgraded.

Port and harbour facilities and stations for trans-shipment of goods are available, although not

all of them are in a good condition. There are 11 harbours open to all type of ships

and 18 industrial ports and shipment facilities with different technical levels.

46


5.2.9 TOURISM AND RECREATION

The historic city of Wroclaw attracts an increasing number of tourists from Germanyand many other places in the world. The Odra River channel network with its numeroushistoric bridges, control structures and sluices is one of the most attractive elementsin the city. Wroclaw is the only city in Poland and one of the few in Europe, which has somany hydrotechnical monuments. RZGW has recognized the important function of the riverand the associated infrastructure for stimulating tourism and has prepared a plan to promoteand expand the use of the various Odra channels around Wroclaw for tourist trips (by smallboats), a public network transport (water taxi for up to 50 persons) and small cruises (boats upto 200 passengers). A network of about 53 km (roundtrip) has been identified, with 6 existingharbours and 9 potential locations for building new mooring facilities.

5.3 THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

5.3.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF FLOODPLAIN ECOSYSTEMS

Like most natural river systems, the Odra River shows a significant variation in habitatsin lateral, longitudinal and vertical directions. Dynamic fluvial processes of alternatingerosion and sedimentation caused by periodic flooding, have created a wide transitional zonebetween land and water, with a large variety of aquatic and semi-aquatic and terrestrialhabitats. This zone is characterized by a high biological productivity and an extremely highbiological diversity.

These fluvial processes create new habitats on gravel and sand banks, which are over timesubjected to ecological succession and stabilisation, first by herbs and grasses, followedby shrubs and trees. Different types of floodplain forests develop, dependingon the frequency, duration and depth of flooding, the rate of sedimentation and on the organicand mineral composition of the soil, both in the catchment area and in the river valley.Softwood forests of willow and black poplar usually develop first on the fringesof the regularly flooded areas. Alder-ash forests develop in backswamps, and oak, elmand hombeam grow on the natural levees and less frequently flooded parts of the floodplain.Maturation of these habitats can take a considerable time, a process that could be abruptlyinterrupted by sudden events that change the morphology of the streambed, e.g. the cutting-off of a meander, or the forming of a new river channel, both of which could createcompletely new circumstances.

An exceptionally high biological diversity is usually found in riverine forests and associatedwetland complexes. It is estimated that about 70% of the breeding bird species of Polandcan be found in these habitats. The main threats to these riparian habitats are river-regulationand flood control projects, and the continued lowering of the ground water table as a resultof non-sustainable ground water extraction and drainage. In the Project area, the loweringof the ground water table leads to the replacement of riparian softwood stands byoak-hormbeam formations. Many floodplain forests in the Odra basin have already beenmodified, and shrubs and grassland associations now form the prevailing vegetation.

5.3.2 THE BIOGEOGRAPHICAL ROLE OF THE ODRA RIVER AS A BIO-CORRIDOR

The Odra and its floodplain provide important habitat for many species including migratoryfish that seasonally move upstream to spawning areas and nurturing grounds, whereas fish

47


spawn are transported downstream by the flow of the river. The Odra Valley is also

an important north-south migration route for many bird species, as well as for certain

mammals such as the otter and the beaver. This function of the river is of great importance

for the survival of fragmented and isolated animal communities along the Odra Valley, even

after the regulation and canalization works were completed, and the expansion of agriculture

that has taken place during the 20th Century. In spite of these alterations, the Odra River

and its valleys still constitute the last remnant of a major ecological structure in the largely

man-made landscape of the Central European Lowlands.

The Upper Odra Valley is located on the boundary between two geographical regions

in Europe: the continental region and the alpine (Carpathian) region. The border region

with Moravia has the warmest climate in Poland and functions as a "gate" for many

thermophilous and montane species that enter Poland through the Odra Valley. Examples

are some very rare and endangered plants as: Aldrovanda vesiculosa, Epipactis albensis,

Hacquetia epipactis, Salvinia natans, Scilla bifolia, Scrophularia scopoli, Symphytum

tuberosum, Trapa natans.

The entire stretch of the Upper and Middle Odra Valley is recognised as an important

international bio-corridor. The area can be divided into two parts: (i) the international

ecological corridor (code ECONET 1 9M) along the Upper Odra and (ii) international core

area (ECONET 1 7M) downstream of Opole.

The first corridor is strongly fragmented and deforested, and along this stretch only small

patches of forests, wet meadows, wetlands and oxbows remain. The active floodplain

has been strongly reduced and the natural river dynamics and processes have stopped in most

parts. Alluvial forest complexes are still found in the vicinity of Raciborz (Las Tworkowski

and Lezczok) and between Kedzierzyn-Kozle and Krapkowice (Leg Zdzieszowicki).

Meadows and wetlands were preserved only as small patches in the depressions of the former

meanders, often surrounded by arable land.

The second part of the corridor is covered by a more or less continuous forest belt starting

a few kilometres downstream of Opole up to Wroclaw. The active floodplain along this

stretch is also reduced, but is used as polders for flood protection, which has resulted

in a relatively higher diversity of habitats and biota. Floodplains and wet meadows, wetlands

and oxbows occur in rather large patches and in several places some large complexes of these

wet habitats can be found, i.e. in the area of the Nysa Klodzka confluence and between Olawa

and Wroclaw.

5.3.3 BIODIVERSITY

5.3.3.1 Ecosystems and habitats

The riverine habitats along the Odra Valley can be recognised according to their

physiognomic features as (i) aquatic habitats, (ii) open terrestrial habitats,and (iii) forest habitats. Basic characteristic are described below accordingto the classification of EU habitats. The habitats marked with (*) are priority habitats

according to the EUR 25 Manual.

48


1) Freshwater habitats

Standing water - oxbows and ponds:

3130 - Amphibious, short, annual pioneer vegetation of land interface zones of pondswith soils low in nutrients or which grow during periodic drying of these standing waters;3140 - Hard mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara ssp., which could occurin gravel pits;

3150 - Oxbows and ponds with more or less turbid waters, rich in dissolved bases(pH usually > 7) and nutrients, with free-floating surface communities of Hydrocharitionor in deeper parts of open waters, with associations of large pond weeds;

Sections of water courses with natural or semi-natural dynamics and no significantdeterioration of water quality:

3260 - Small and medium sized water courses with submerged or floating vegetationof Ranuncuilionfluitantis in some Odra tributaries;

3270 - Muddy river banks with annual pioneer nitrophilous vegetation along the wholestretch of Upper and Middle Odra River.

2) Terrestrial habitats

Natural and semi-natural grasslands:

6410 - Extensively used semi-natural tall-herb humid Molinia meadows with a fluctuatingwater table. In this rare habitat type many protected and threatened plant species occur.It is also an important breeding habitat for waterfowl birds, such as snipe, godwit,and corncrake;

6430 - Wet and nitrophilous, tall herb edge communities along water coursesand woodland borders;

6440 - Alluvial meadows with natural flooding regime;

6510 - Species rich lowland hay meadows on slightly to moderately fertilized soils.If management practices become intensive with heavy applications of fertilizer,the species diversity rapidly declines.

Reed beds and sedges phytocoenoses, not mentioned by habitat directive (92/43 EEC),forming an amphibious zone along the oxbows' or river banks or in the local depressions;

Mires andfens:

7140 - Transition mires with peat formations, which present a diverse range of plantcommunities. The most prominent communities are formed by medium-sized or smallsedges, accompanied by aquatic and amphibious communities. Nowadays this typeof habitat, which is an important breeding habitat for waterfowl, is very rare in the Upperand Middle Odra Valley;

7230 - Alkaline fens of small limestone loving sedge and brown moss communitiesdeveloped on permanently waterlogged soils. This habitat type has become extremely rare.

49


3) Forests

9170 - Sub-continental, Central-European Lime-Hornbeam forests and mesophilous

Oak-Hombeam forests on hydromorphic soils and soils with high water table, but only

infrequently flooded;

91E0* - Alluvial forests occurring in three subtypes:- Regularly inundated shrub galleries of Willows Salix spp. as a early succession stage

of alluvial forests from Salicetea purpureae class (not included in Habitat Directive92/43 EEC);

- Regularly inundated galleries of tall Willows Salix alba, S. fragilis and Poplar

Populus nigra, along lowland or sub-montane rivers;- More swampy Ash-Alder woods in depressions around oxbows or along streams;

91F0 - Riverine mixed forests with Elm along the main river, liable to regular, but not

so often flooding as gallery forests (91E0*). After the levees have silted up above flood

levels this type of forest is transformed into a mesophilous Oak-Hornbeam forest;

Alder forests, not mentioned by Habitat Directive (92/43 EEC), forming an amphibious

zone in a more advanced succession stage, along the oxbows or river banks or in local

depressions.

5.3.3.2 Fauna and flora

Floodplain systems belong to the most diverse and species-rich ecosystems of the temperate

zone. In the past centuries the Odra River has been subject to regulation works in order

to control flooding and to improve navigation. Construction of embankments and canalisation

of the riverbed has strongly affected the lateral biodiversity gradient, whereas dams and weirs

cut off the longitudinal connection. The highest faunistic and floristic diversity could be found

on the remnants of semi-natural wet tall-herb meadows, flooded meadows, oxbows with

surrounding wetlands and mature riverine mixed forests.

The most precious complexes of wet Molinia meadows are found on the left bank of the Odra

River between Siechnice and Wroclaw. These areas, which are associated with river meanders

and oxbows, provide habitat to many protected and threatened species: plants such

as Ophioglossum vulgatum, Gentiana pneumonanthe, Iris sibirica, Gladiolus imbricatus;

butterflies with scarce- and dusky large blue Maculinea teleius and M nausithous;amphibians such as fire-bellied toad Bombina bombina or birds like the white stork Ciconia

ciconia, corn crake Crex crex, bluethroat Luscinia svecica, barred warbler Sylvia nisoria,

red-backed shrike Lanius collurio or ortolan bunting Emberiza hortulana. Flooded meadows

from Cnidion dubii alliance are also scarce, but more widespread distributed along the Odra.

Oxbow lakes and accompanying wetlands are not common in the Odra Valley especially

in its upper part. Most of them have been cut off from the main stream and have become

terrestrial ecosystems. Oxbow lakes harbour threatened species like water chestnut Trapa

natans or Salvinia natans; amphibians and reptiles with great crested newt Tritlrus cristatus

and European pond turtle Emys orbicularis; numerous waterfowl birds such as ducks

(Anas ssp. and Aythya ssp.), mute swan Cygnus olor, little bittern Ixobrychus minutus, marsh

harrier Circus aeruginosus, crane Grus grus or warblers Acrocephalus spp. These habitats

are also used by bats Microchiroptera for feeding.

The elm-oak forests include bulbous spring plants such as snowdrop Galanthus nivalis,

Allium ursinum, Hacquetia epipactis and Scillia bifolia. The last two have their northernmost

distribution in the upper Odra Valley. Remnants of old growth stands are the most important

50


habitat for bird species, especially raptors like honey buzzard Pernis apivorus, black- and redkite Milvus migrans and M. milvus, white-tailed eagle Haliaeetus albicilla, lesser spottedeagle Aquila pomarina. The black stork Ciconia nigra and insectivorous birds like nightjarCaprimulgus europaeus, woodlark Lullula arborea , collared- and red-breasted flycatcherFicedula albicollis and F. parva are found in these habitats. The most important factorfor the survival of these species is the preservation of old and hollow tree stands for nesting.

The gallery forests along the embankments of the river are an important reservoirfor sustaining biodiversity. Old (nearly dead) willows or oaks are the habitat for insects:Cerambyx longicorn, Cerambyx cerdo and hermit beetle Osmoderma eremita. Steep scourgedflanks of river banks are breeding sites for kingfisher Alcedo atthis and sand martin Ripariariparia. Plovers and common tern Sterna hirundo prefer the sandy islands within the riveras breeding habitats, but most of these have disappeared due to canalisation of the river.

In Figure 5.6 the area of the various forest habitats in the floodplain between Raciborzand Wroclaw is presented. This has been done on basis of the data collected for thepreparation of the WWF Auen Atlas (2000). The graphs show that the area of willow-poplarin the active floodplain almost has disappeared and the acreage of elder-ash forests is limitedto 150-200 ha only.

Figure 5.7 shows that oxbows have largely disappeared in the active floodplain. Humidmeadows are still present but most of them are found within the by dikes protected floodplain.

Annex A provides a list of plants, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammalsfound in the Project area, including their classification according to Polish, internationaland EU criteria.

5.3.3.3 River basin fish fauna

Natural conditions

Trout can be found in the river from the source of the Odra River in the Czech Republic,over a short distance until the confluence with the Jicinka River. From there until the mouthof the Ostravica River, graylings are common and from there up to Kedzierzyn, it is the areaof barbel. Between Kedzierzyn and Brzeg Dolny the Odra River system has been significantlymodified as a result of the construction of 41 barrages and weirs. Living conditions for fishrequiring strong currents are retained only in short sections below these structures.

The basin of the Upper and Middle Odra River is asymmetrical. The left-side tributaries flowout of the Sudety mountains and carry a lot of water. Gradients in these streams are steepand most have rocky riverbeds. In the lower areas these streams maintain rather steepgradients and the riverbed usually consists of gravels. In the upper reaches they havethe character of a trout Salmo trutta trutta habitat, and in the lower stretches of a barbelhabitat. The left-side tributaries are therefore suitable spawning sites for rock breeding fish,and all the long-distance migrating Odra River fishes belong to this group.

The right-side tributaries downstream of the Olza River are lowland rivers with low gradientsand sandy riverbeds. Gravel is only locally found. These streams are not suitable for troutand in the lower reaches they provide typical habitat for bream. There are also potentialspawning sites for zahrte Vimba vimba. For the Atlantic salmon Salmo salar and trout,significant spawning sites are found only in the Olza and Ostravica rivers.

51


3500

3000

2500 -

z 2000-

@ 1500-

1000

500

Softwood Hardwood Transitonal Mesophile Elder-ash Wilow- PlantabonsPoplar

a Forests in geomorphological floodplain

* Forests within dikes

Figure 5.6 - Composition of forests in flood plain between Raciborz and Wroclaw

10000 -

8000 -

60004,

2000-

Reeds-sedges Wetand Other humid Oxbows Lakes Gravel pits

swamps meadow meadowscomplexes

[Wetlands in geomorphological floodplain

EWetlands within dikes

Figure 5.7 - Wetlands, swamps and humid meadows between Raciborz and Wroclaw

52


0 10 20 km

r,,WROCLAW

OPOL

LEGEND:

/ ~RIVER ' RACIB6.RZ ,p BARRIERS

Figure 5.8 - Barriers in th Upper and Middle Odra River blocking migration of fish

The Odra River and its tributaries are to a large degree regulated and controlled by numerousbarrages, see Figure 5.8. On the Odra River alone there are 41 barrages, and 23 of thesepresent major obstacles for the migration of fish: 4 have no fish pass at all, and the remainderhas been provided with chamber fish passes. However, the latter are either obsolete or poorlymanaged.

The present state of thefish fauna

The full list of the Odra River fish fauna contains 54 native species and lampreys(see Annex A7) and 19 purposely or accidentally introduced species. Sturgeon Acipensersturio has become extinct. In the Middle and Upper Odra River basins there are 45 native fishspecies. The Ukrainian lamprey Eudontomyzon mariae, allis shad Alosa alosa, twaite shadAlosafallax, lake minnow Eupalasiella perenurus, smelt Osmerus eperlanus, vendaceCoregonus albula, whitefish Coregonus lavaretus and lake trout Salmo trutta lacustrisare absent in this area.

53


Five species are critically endangered: sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus, zahrte Vimba vimba,

ziege Pelecus cultratus, spirlin Alburnoides bipunctatus and golden loach Sabanejevia aurata.

Three species are endangered: river lamprey Lampetrafluviatilis, barbel Barbus barbus

and nase Chondrostoma nasus. Highly endangered species are the group of rheophilic fish,

which spawn on the rocks and perform long, anadromous or potamodromous migrations.

Exceptions are the ziege and the golden loach.

Apart from the numerous obstacles in the Odra River blocking migration, fishes in the Odra

system have also suffered from poor quality river water. In recent years water quality

has considerably improved because of the implementation of many sewage treatment plants

in the basin, but the obstacles remain a major constraint to the recovery of the fish fauna.

Barrages block the migration of anadromous fish to the Odra tributaries with the highest

number of potential spawning sites: the upper Nysa Klodzka and Biala Ladecka Rivers

for the Atlantic salmon Salmo salar and trout Salmo trutta and the middle Nysa Klodzka

for the zahrte Vimba vimba.

The capacity of the existing fish passes at the barrages is insufficient. Fish migration

was studied in the chamber fish pass at the first barrage ending the freely flowing Odra River

in Brzeg Dolny (Waly Slaskie). The fish find the entrance to the fish pass and swim

into the chambers, but they are not able to pass through the last chamber on the upstream side.

Opportunities for fish passing through the barrages are higher during high water levels, when

the gates are opened. In July 2002 trout reached the mouth of the Nysa Klodzka River.

The list of fish fauna available in the project area is given in Annex A7.

Fish breeding and catches

There are many breeding ponds in the valley of the Upper and Middle Odra River. Some

of these are a major source for the introduction of exotic fish species, purposely

and accidentally.

Fish management along the Upper and Middle Odra and its tributaries is carried out

by the Opole and Wroclaw regional organizations of the Polish Angling Association (PAA).

Around 50 000 anglers are members of the PAA sections of these districts (22 000 in Opole

district and 28 000 in the Wroclaw district). Registered catches amount to 60 ton per year,

but is likely to be higher since registration is only obligatory since this year. The fish catches

include: bream Abramis brama, roach Rutilus rutilus, pikeperch Sander lucioperca and pike

Esox lucius. In the right hand tributaries catches are dominated by brown trout Salmo trutta

fario and chub Leuciscus cephalus, in the left hand tributaries they include mainly roach

and perch Percafluviatilis.

5.3.3.4 Plans for reintroduction of migrating fish species

The PAA has developed a programme for reintroduction and strengthening of the anadromous

and potamodromous fish species. Until 1994, the only potamodromous species introduced

to the Middle Odra River was the brown trout Salmo truttafario. Between 1995-2004

the number of species introduced to the Odra River increased to 11 (Table 5.8).

54


Table 5.8 - Anadromous and potamodromous fish stock in the Upper and Middle Odra19931 19941 19951 19961 1997 MI98 1999 20001 20011 20021 2003T 2004

Sal=o tnItta fano pstrW potokowy Brown troutChondrostoma nasus &Mnka NaseAspus aspius bole AspLeuciscus idus jai IdeLeuciscus cephalus IdelV ChubThymallus thymallus lipieO GraylingLota Iota miQtus Burbot________Sanmo tta tflta M tro wqdrowna TroutBarbus barbus brzana BarbelVilnt vidna cuts Zahrtb (Vinba)Sahno8aiar tosot Atlandc saimon =

Recovery programmes for the dual-habitat anadromous fish (Atlantic salmon, troutand zahrte) and the strengthening of the existing population of potamodromous fishis performed in three stages. The first stage is almost completed and consisted of increasingfish stock, first only until Brzeg Dolny, but later also in other tributaries upstream,e.g. the Widawa River. The next stage is currently being implemented, which will involveremoving obstacles in the Odra near Wroclaw and further upstream. After that furtherrestocking of the anadromous fish can take place using the storage reservoir in the NysaKlodzka River.

5.3.3.5 Legal regulations for angling and fishery in PolandThe Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MOA) is the responsible organizationfor breeding and catching of fish in inland waters. Angling and fisheries in Poland is regulatedby the Inland fisheries Act of 1985, while the Water Law of 2001 deals with the conditionsfor making public waters available for fisheries. Standards for water quality are definedin a decree of the Ministry of Environment of 2002, defining the habitat of fish livingin a natural environment.

5.3.4 CURRENT THREATS TO THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

The main existing threats for the natural environment (without project) in the Upperand Middle Odra floodplain are:

1) Changes in the natural river dynamics through canalisation of riverbeds, cutting-offof meanders, narrowing of the active floodplain by the constructing new embankments,which have stopped river morphological processes;

2) The stabilisation of groundwater (no fluctuation of groundwater levels during season)and reduction of flood water dynamics through the reduction of the active floodplainto a narrow strip of land along the riverbed;

3) Creation of ecological barriers for freshwater biota by building weirs, sluices and damsfor the purpose of navigation;

4) The lowering of groundwater tables and drying out of areas along the river throughincreased riverbed erosion along the downstream side of the numerous weirs and controlstructures built in the Odra;

5) Introduction of new invasive species from different catchments through connecting canalse.g. between the Elbe and Odra rivers;

55


6) Simplification of forest management through the promotion of monocultures of highlyproductive species, tree plantations of exotic species (mostly poplar hybrids) and felling

of large, uniform tree stands;

7) Long-term (historical) changes in land-use causing the reduction and conversion

of riverine ecosystems and habitats into agricultural land (by means of deforestation,

drainage, reversion of meadows into arable fields, promotion of large-scale farmingwith intensive use of agro-chemicals;

8) Urbanisation and industrialisation along the river (development of cities and villages,

building of new suburbs, factories and facilities in the floodplain e.g. in Raciborz, Opole

and Wroclaw);

9) Location of waste and spoil disposal areas that pollute groundwater and attractopportunistic and invasive species;

10) Fragmentation of the remnants of natural environment by the construction of motorways,

railways and electric power lines.

All these factors and processes have significantly modified the natural environment, reducing

or even excluding or extirpating some natural habitats and species.

5.3.5. NATURE CONSERVATION

5.3.5.1 Organisation

The legislative basis for Nature protection is based on the Nature Conservation Law (2004),

which distinguishes different categories of protected areas: National parks, nature reserves,

landscape parks, protected landscapes, protected species and "individual site protection".

National Parks enjoy the highest protection level and Protected Landscapes the lowest level

of protection. In Table 5.9 a comparison between the Polish protection categories with those

of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) is made. Nature

conservation policy issues are dealt with and supervised by MOE, but policy implementation

and legal responsibility rests with the decentralised Polish government institutions,

which can be a constraint.

The overall responsibility for nature conservation rests with the Principal Conservator

of Nature, who is an executive of MOE. His/her competence includes the preparation

and implementation of conservation management plans for Natura 2000 sites and of specific

protected habitats or species, for which they originally were prepared. The voivod's

Conservator of Nature, who represents the decentralized administration, is charged

with the implementation conservation management plans for nature reserves, landscape parks

and protected landscapes. They are supported in this task by advisory boards for Nature

Protection both on national and voivodship level.

Gmina' s are charged with responsibilities for protection and conservation of smaller nature

and landscape elements needing special protection. They are also chargedwith responsibilities for landscaping and removal of landscape elements.

56


Table 5.9 - Comparison of Polish categories of protected areaswith IUCN classification system

IUCN Polish Nature Conservation Law (NCL) RemarksStrict Nature Reserve Nature Reserve Not relevant in Upperand Wilderness area (only strict accordingly to old NCL!) and Middle Odra Valley

National Parks National Parks (majority) Not relevant in Upperand Middle Odra Valley

National Monuments Nature Reserves (minority!)and Landmarks Natural Monuments (very few)

Managed Wildlife Sanctuaries Nature Reserves, Natura 2000and Nature Reserves

Protected Land Landscape Parks Only the most valuableand Seascapes National Parks (rest of them) parts

Resource Reserves Landscape Parks

Multiple-Use Management Areas of Protected landscape,Area /Managed Resource Nature-Landscape complexes,Area Ecological grounds, Natural

Monuments (majority!)

5.3.5.2 The nature conservation law

The Nature Conservation Law identifies the new category of Natura 2000 sites, whichis based on the EU Habitat Directive and the EU Bird Directive. The law stipulates that anEIA should be prepared according to the procedure described in the Environmental Law(2001), for all investments that could have an impact on habitats or species. Potential threatsfor species and/or habitats should be avoided, mitigated or compensated in land, habitatrestoration and eventually species reallocation. During recent months there has beena discussion in the Polish Parliament to remove some important competences forimplementing the new Nature Conservation Law (2004), which now rest with the voivodstowards the Marshal administration.

5.3.5.3 Natura 2000

GOP prepared new environmental legislation following the requirements of the AcquisCommunautaire before accession to the EU. This included adopting the requirementsof the Birds and Habitats Directives of EU. One of the most important tasks was to preparea List of potential Natura 2000 sites, which could be included in the EU Natura 2000 network.Criteria to be used for site selection and inclusion are provided in the Habitat and BirdDirectives.

GOP submitted a draft list of Natura 2000 sites in May 2004 to Brussels. The list was heavilycriticised by Nature Conservation organisations and researchers, who submitted a shadow listin December 2004, based on criteria given in the Habitat and Bird Directive. In May 2005a revised list of Natura sites' was published, which included most of the areas identifiedin the shadow list. So far no formal approval has been obtained from EU on the GOP

See web site Ministry of Environment

57


0 10 20 km

WROqtA ' 7

4.

R.v ' - ^I - I. \RACIE.6RZ -

SPAC

SAC & SPA PROPOSED

Figure 5.9 - Designated and potential Natura 2000 sites in the project area

Natura 2000 List. In this EA study the areas on the official MOE list from May 2005 have

been taken into consideration and indicated as Potential Natura Sites (PNS). A detailedsummary of the various protected areas according to the Polish system and the EU directivesis given in Annex B. The location of the PNS areas in the Upper and Middle Odra Valley are

shown in Figure 5.9.

5.4 CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

5.4.1 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY OF SILESIA

Both the Raciborz reservoir area and the area around Wroclaw are located in a zone thathas been densely inhabited since about 4 500 B.C. During more than six millennia many types

of settlements have been established in the Odra floodplain. These were often established nearto the river on the higher natural levees or on an island in the Odra. In a dynamic natural riverlandscape without dikes, the river frequently changed its course, forming new levees

58


+~~~~~~

j. * . -es wei *Je4 3

. .

FIgure -KnwnarhelgialsiesdonsramofWrcln. . ,, , 4

admadrblts an smtern ole core wit a layr of seiens Seteet ca

therefor be foun evrwhr in th Holcen Odr flopan bewe the highe

^. , ~~ *, .-. 2 ..- -^2 - ¾j

, ,*, --- -,

Plira. T h ge t u.. . w

A &-: K.-r: - ' >' C,b _: -. r i . -~ >~;r

Figure 5.10 -Known archeological sites downstream of Wroclaw (in 1941 )

and meander belts, and smothering older courses with a layer of sediments. Settlements cantherefore be found everywhere in the Holocene Odra floodplain, between the higherPleistocene terraces. These higher grounds were often used as burial grounds.

The settlements include sites from all periods dating from the Stone Age (mainly Neolithic),Bronze Age (which continued for about 1 000 years), Iron Age (mainly from the periodof Roman influence) and the early Middle Ages (including the tribal period up to the I0 thcentury and the early Middle Ages (Piast period) up to around 1250 AD. Figure 5.10 showsthe (in 1941) known sites in a small stretch (about 8 km) on the right bank of the Odra, nearWroclaw, between Osobowice and Redzin. Since then many more sites have been identified.

59


>~~~~~~;z2,57

C, __ ,ots

e H~ - z5 -__

, , X, '-S

.. S~ _'c --,v!#

/2.57 1 4S

Figure 5.12 - Location of Bronze age sites in the WWS project area

The latest changes in the WFS are connected with the construction of the navigation canal

through and around the city. In the years 1792-1794 the Piaskowa and Mieszczanska locks

were built. In 1895-1897 the Szczytnicka lock was constructed in the Old Odra, and the Psie

Pole weir and two locks in the Miej ski Canal were rebuilt for the purpose of navigation. Ships

up to 400 ton could pass on the Old Odra, and on the City Odra vessels up to 175 ton could

pass. The big flood in 1903 and the need to improve navigation boosted the construction

of the flood relief and the navigation canal.

5.4.6 MONUMENTAL WATER MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES ON THE ODRA RIVERIN WROCLAW

A number of older water management structures in the WFS have developed into real

monuments, and are fine examples of the state of engineering and network managementof the 1 9 th and 2 0 th century. Among these are:

Piaskowa sluice: The technical and functional features of this sluice are characteristicfor locks built in the 18th and 1 gth century in Europe. At first they were made of wood

(1791-1794), but its present form took shape after re-building in 1820 and 1822. The sluice

can serve small ships only.

Mieszczanska sluice: The lock was built in 1791-1794. First it was made of wood,

but in 1874-1879 it was re-converted into a chamber lock with movable heads. It is a very

original concept, which increased the flow capacity.

62


City sluice: The construction and mode of operation of this sluice is typical for the endof the I9Oh century. The structure was built in 1892-1897 in order to serve the new waterway,which would avoid the Wroclaw city center where the Piaskowa and Mieszczanska sluicescould not cope with the increased shipments on the Odra. The original shape, the wayof operating of the chamber door and the building of the sluice master were retained.The structure protects the old city from high groundwater tables.

Psie Pole weir: Together with the Miejska lock the structure forms one barrage, which areoperated jointly. The construction is of the jack-spire type, which was common in Europeduring the 19t century. Weirs of this type were usually replaced by modem constructions.Flood gate: This structure - built in 1892-1897 - protects the industrial and housing areaswithout embankments on the left bank of the City Channel. The design was preparedby the famous constructor Eifel during the construction of the Panama Channel.The structure consists of a tray/drawer type protruded on carriages from a special chamberin the head. Characteristic is the very original design and the mode of operation, which worksby itself.

Redzin weir: The Redzin barrage, see Photo 5.4, is composed of two sluices built in 1918and 1934, and a three-span weir. The barrage is of unique construction, with an originaldesign to allow floating ice to pass.

Photo 5.4 - Redzin weir

On the voivodship list of historical structures there are a number of historical hydraulicand bridge structures, see Table 5.10. Any works related to those structures require previousformal approval of the Heritage Conservator.

63


Table 5.10 - List of historical hydraulic and bridge structures around Wroclaw

Item Location Structure Year of

Place Watercourse construction

1. Wroclaw Odra Popowice Harbour

2. Wroclaw Old Odra Rozanka Sluice 1901-16

3. Wroclaw Opatowicki Channel Opatowice Sluice

4. Wroclaw Widawa Krzywoustego Bridge

5. Wroclaw Old Odra Warszawskie Bridges 1916

6. Wroclaw Old Odra Trzebnickie Bridges

7. Wroclaw Old Odra Osobowickie Bridges 1897-98

8. Wroclaw Flood Channel Jagiellonow Bridge

9. Janowice, gm. Czernica Odra Hydropower Plant 1920-21

10. Janowice, gm. Czernica Odra Janowice Barrage 1911-17

11. Gajkow, gm. Czernica Janowicki Channel Road bridge 1913

12. Jeszkowice, gm. Czernica Janowicki Channel Road bridge over I sluice 1913

13. Jeszkowice, gm. Czernica Janowicki Channel Road bridge over 11 sluice 1917

5.4.7 LEGAL PROTECTION

There are several legal instruments to protect antiquities and archaeological and historic sites

and objects:

* Law on the protection of antiquities and archaeological objects (July 2003);

* Rules and procedures issued by the Ministry of Culture of June 2004, which concern

the conservation and restoration of archaeological sites and procedures concerning

the notification of implementation of construction works and earth moving activities.

These include a procedure for chance-finds;

* Act of June 1960 concerning the Administration Actions Code.

5.4.8 ORGANIZATION OF CONSERVATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE

The Law on Protection and conservation of cultural heritage is implemented and enforced

at two levels of government. At the national level, there is a General Antiquities Conservator,

who resorts under the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage. At voivodship level there

is an Antiquities Protection office, led by the Voivod Conservator of Antiquities,

with the Archaeological Conservator reporting to him. All decisions concerning antiquities

in voivodship are made by the Voivod's Conservator.

64

Chapter 6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT AND THEIR MITIGATIONS

CHAPTER 6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECTAND THEIR MITIGATIONS

6.1 THE IMPACTS

Potential social and environmental impacts of the project were screened by takinginto account the effects caused by the projects' location, design, construction and projectoperation. Those impacts could be on the project areas itself, but also in a much larger areawhich is defined as the area of influence. This is the entire 240 km of floodplain betweenChalupki and Brzeg Dolny, where the effects of the ORFPP will be felt. Downstreamof Brzeg Dolny the effects of the project however are negligible as simulation studies show.Moreover a new weir in the Odra is constructed at Malczyce, which is near Brzeg Dolny.

In describing the detailed impacts a differentiation should be made between:I) The combined impacts of the ORFPP (Component A +B+C-rD) on the area of influence;2) The impacts of the construction of the Raciborz dry polder (Component A)

on the reservoir area itself and the area upstream and downstream;3) The impacts of the dike (re)constructions and modernization of structures of the Wroclaw

Floodway System (Component B) on the project area, which covers the floodplainof the Odra River between km 220 and km 269 and of the Widawa River between km 0and km 22 and along the Odra-Widawa transfer channel (3 km).

6.2 IMPACTS OF THE ORFPP (ALL COMPONENTS COMBINED)

6.2.1 SAFETY OF PEOPLE AND PROPERTY

The most important impact of the project will be the very significant positive effecton the protection level of major population centres, industrial areas and property in thefloodplain of the Odra River between Raciborz and Wroclaw. The project will considerablyimprove the safety of hundreds of thousands of people living in this part of the floodplain,reduce the huge economic and financial risks of large floods like the 1997 event, preventlarge-scale damage to cultural heritage and historical monuments, and improve the feelingof safety and well-being of people.

6.2.2 DAM FAILURE

Since the project involves the construction of a dam and a dry polder (to be used as a reservoirfor temporary storage of peak flood flows) upstream of a densely populated area, dam safetyissues are of concern. Any damage or break of the dam could immediately affect nearbyvillages, as well as Raciborz city. In the unlikely event of dam failure it has been estimatedthat a possible flood wave could reach Raciborz (pop. 61 000) within one hour. T he next mainpopulation centre of Kedzierzyn-Kozle would be reached after 12 hours, which is howeversufficient for emergency warning and evacuation. Thus the population of Raciborz, locateda few kilometres downstream, would be especially at risk.

65


Mitigating measures:

* Concerns regarding dam and dike safety are addressed in three stages, including:

(i) the design, (ii) construction and (iii) subsequent operations of dam and dikes.

Given the importance of dam safety, it has been agreed that that an independent Panel

of Experts (POE) will be constituted to oversee the preparation and implementation

of the dam safety aspect under the project.

(i) At the design stage, the POE will convene and review the design of the structures and

make recommendations that would be incorporated in the design before the bidding

process for construction could take place.

(ii) At the time of construction, the contractor is responsible for implementing the prepared

designs, and the project "Engineer" is ensuring that the contractor is complying

with the dam safety aspects and other aspects of the designs. At this stage, in addition

POE will be involved to provided further assistance to the contractor and the client

if needed to ensure proper implementation of the safety criteria of the object. In addition,

the contractor is to prepare an emergency response plan which would set out a chain

on notification and responsibility in the event of a break and emergency.

(iii) At the stage of operation, safe operation and maintenance of the dam and dikes would

be the responsibility of implementing agencies, such as RZGWGL and RZGWWL

and DZMiUW. Under component C of the project, funds are available to strengthen

the capacity of these institutions especially in operation and maintenance of the structures

being built. Also, an emergency preparedness plans will be prepared under the component

for improving flood management in the Odra valley. In addition, the Polish national body

for dam safety monitoring, Dam Monitoring Centre (OTKZ) will be assessing

and monitoring annually technical and safety conditions of all dams in the country

including those built under the project.

Given the above described measures during project design, construction and subsequent

operation and maintenance, the Dam Safety issues under the project is safely addressed,

so no issue is outstanding to be mitigated.

6.3 SOCIAL IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ DRY POLDER (COMPONENT A)

6.3.1 CHANGES IN LAND USE AND RESETTLEMENT

The decision to use the Raciborz dry polder as a reservoir for storing peak floods

will be conflicting with most existing land uses within the proposed polder area,

such as housing, agriculture, public utilities, water supply, industrial and commercial

establishments. Most of these uses will have to be phased out, although certain uses can

be permitted after reservoir construction, albeit under strict regulations (e.g. agriculture -

meadows and pastures only, gravel extraction, establishment of certain types of forests

and wetlands, day recreation and military use). RZGWGL is in the process of acquiring

the reservoir area and one of the most negative impacts will be the required resettlement

of about 240 families (about 700 people) living in the villages Nieboczowy and Ligota

Tworkowska. RZGWGL has prepared a detailed Resettlement Action Plan (RAP), dated July

2005 to address the issues related to the relocation of these two villages.

66

Chapter 6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECTAND THEIR MIT1GATIONS

_, -- X '* "' - ~ -,**s : S f

-*~ ~~ * 1

if.

, , .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A

p~~~~~~~~~~~

Photo 6.1 - Aerial view of Nieboczowy village, planned for resettlement(photo P. Nieznanski, WWF Poland)

Photo 6.2 - Arable field dominating in the area of Raciborz reservoir

67


Mitigatine measures:

* Socio-economic studies have been carried out and a detailed Resettlement Action Plan(RAP) is prepared, which includes compensation measures and follow-up. Land

acquisition is underway and preparations are made to resettle families in a suitable

location nearby. For more details concerning the major socio-economic impacts, reference

is made to the RAP report (July 2005).

6.3.2 RELOCATION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

Another major impact will be the removal or relocation of some public utilities such

as electric power lines, transformers, telephone lines, drinking water wells, oil tanks,

sewerage systems and waste dumps etc. located within the proposed reservoir area.These will have to be either dismantled or relocated for safety reasons and not to contaminate

soil, surface water and groundwater resources in the area during operation of the reservoir.

Electric power lines for gravel extraction will have to be secured, so that they can withstand

floods in the reservoir. Existing waste dumps, containers, petrol stations and depots

of chemicals, oil and gas tanks, stores of fertilizer and other toxic substances could be major

sources of pollution of soil, surface water and groundwater. All these potential sources

of contamination will be removed and disposed off in a safe way.

The drinking water wells and related infrastructure in Tajchow, which is currently supplying

drinking water to several neighbouring villages (4 000 inhabitants) in the Gmina Lubomia

will be closed and RZGWGL and local authorities are jointly working on alternative

solutions. It is recommended to explore the option to connect the affected villages to the main

water supply system of the agglomeration of Wodzislaw, as other local water supply systems

tapping the floodplain aquifer might be contaminated by coal waste tailings from the Bukow

dump.

Mitigating measures:

* Remove all existing waste dumps, containers and depots of chemicals, oil tanks, fertilizer

and other toxic substances; action by RZGWGL, in cooperation with owners;

* Ban the construction or use of any new depots of chemicals, oil and oil productsand fertilizer in area;

* Enforce restrictions on mining companies allowing them to store only limited quantities

of oil products and chemicals used in mining operations at safe levels, whichis about 1.0 m above max. storage level (196.5 m asl);

* Waste should be disposed off at sites allocated for this purpose outside the reservoir area;

* Work out an alternative safe drinking water supply (wells and associated infrastructure)

in cooperation with the affected Gmina of Lubomia.

6.3.3 RISK OF DAMAGE TO CULTURAL PROPERTIES

The construction of the reservoir will involve construction of many kilometersof embankments and main dike. The amount of earthwork is estimated at 13.5 Mm3.

The identification of borrow areas for soils to be used for construction of embankmentsor any other earthwork will be based - amongst others - on a detailed inventory of known

archaeological sites. The inventory is recently completed by RZGWGL (May 2005)

and will be used by the engineering consultants to verify that no damage will occur

68

Chapter 6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECTAND THEIR MIT7GATIONS

to any archaeological site or monument in the area. Proper procedures for dealingwith "chance finds" will be incorporated in the contract documents. Given this factsit is expected that risk of damage to cultural heritage is minimized and safely addressed,so no issue is outstanding to be mitigated.

Mitiration measures:

* An archaeological inventory of known sites including location and detailed descriptionof the existing sites has been undertaken (May 2005);

* Earth moving plans will be prepared using the results of this inventory avoiding potentialdamage to these sites;

* "Chance find" procedures, will be incorporated in contract documents.

6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ DRY POLDER(COMPONENT A)

6.4.1 RISK OF DAMAGE TO NATURAL HABITATS DURING CONSTRUCTION

There is a considerable risk that during reservoir construction valuable natural habitatswill be destroyed by earth-moving equipment and other construction activities or usedas borrow areas. The most vulnerable natural habitats in the reservoir are the following:

; .,.

Photo 6.3 - Oxbow lake Sudol

69


Tworkowski forestThis is a protected PNS both under the Habitat and the Bird Directive. The forest

and its undergrowth vegetation and associated wet meadows can easily be damagedby earth-moving activities, construction equipment and vehicles. It cannot be regenerated

once disturbed. Therefore vehicles and other equipment will be banned from the area

and a buffer zone (width 100-200 m) around the Forest will be respected.

Sudol oxbow complex and associated wetlandsA large relatively undisturbed oxbow complexes with associated wet meadowsof about 150 ha near the city of Raciborz. The site has no special protection status,

but has an important function in the Upper Odra ecological corridor and is one of the last

large natural oxbow lakes with gallery forest and wet meadows. A small areaof the complex (about 1-2 ha) at the Western side will be lost due to the constructionof the embankment. The remaining area will be protected and no vehicles and equipment

will be allowed in the complex during construction.

Fringes of Wielikat pondsA few ha of characteristic trees and thickets along the road Lubomia-Bukow bordering

the embankment of the Wielikat ponds, together with the Tworkowski Forest a PNS, will

have to be removed due to construction of the polder embankment. Since these trees and

bushes perform an important function as bio-corridor between Tworkowski forest and

Wielikat ponds and they are situated within the PNS, some compensatory measures will

be taken to replace these trees and bushes by planting a comparable area with new ones.

Meadows East of NieboczowyA number of wet meadows East of Nieboczowy, situated in a typical mesotrophic seepage

zone below the steep hill on the eastern side of the valley runs the risk to be damagedduring embankment construction nearby. A number of protected plant species can

be found there (shown in the WWF Auen Atlas). The area to be protected will be indicated

in the field in order not to damage these unique ecosystems by construction activities.

Brzezie Ponds and meadowsThe Brzezie ponds are located a short distance (about 0.5-1 km) North of the planned main

dam. Although not situated inside the reservoir, the ponds and valuable fringes are close

to the dam site and might easily be damaged. The area will be clearly marked in the field

as a no-go area. There is also a risk that the water supply feeding the pond with a very

sensitive eco-system would be interrupted or altered. Measures will be taken to avoid

drying up of the water supply through constructing an alternative supply channel outside

the polder embankment. Contamination of this new channel with sewage waterfrom nearby residential areas will be avoided.

Natural drainage channels and tributaries of OdraClosure of natural drainage channels and Odra tributaries (Psina, Plinc and other small

streams) to the Odra and removal of thickets, hedges, forest elements, humid meadowsand haylands during construction will destroy or damage a number of valuable habitats.This will also increase isolation and fragmentation of remaining natural habitat complexes.On the left bank of the Odra there is currently a more or less continuous North-Southecological corridor connecting the Tworkowski forest through gallery forest along theOdra bank towards the Psina outlet and continuing along the Odra left bank to the Sudol

oxbow and wet meadows complex. This main structure will be protected and enhancedas an important bio-corridor.

70

Chapter 6 SIGNIFICANTIMPACTS OF THE PROJECTAND THEIR MITIGATIONS

~ A'"

-M ,, m L

Photo 6.4 - Brzezie ponds in the vicinity of the projected Raciborz reservoir.

Photo 6.5 - Fruits of the strictly protected water chestnut Trapa natans foundin the Brzezie pond is an indicator for 1-2 m deep, relativelywa6r , slightly eutrophic old oxbow lakes / ponds.

71


Mitisatinu measures:

* Create buffer zones sufficiently wide to protect the natural habitats described.The areas will be clearly marked prior to the start of the construction;

* Re-planting of lost tree lines and bushes around the Wielikat ponds;

* Take measures to avoid drying up of the water supply of Brzezie ponds through

constructing an alternative supply channel outside the polder embankment. Maintain

existing water quality.

6.4.2 IMPACT OF LOWER FLOOD LEVELS ON NATURAL HABITATSDOWNSTREAM OF RACIBORZ

Impacts downstream on natural habitats will mainly depend of maximum river levels during

flood events and these will largely be determined by the operational rules of the reservoir.

Therefore, to minimize impacts on natural habitats located downstream, it is beneficial

not to manage recurrent flood waves, with no risk for the flood defence system, so that they

could pass the Raciborz structure uncontrolled. The capacity of the Raciborz outlet structure

is designed that a flood with a return period of 10 year could pass undisturbed. RZGWGL

intends not to regulate flows less than 10 year return period flows. Thus the following

discussions on potential impacts on downstream natural habitats are based on the assumption

that only peak flows in excess of 10 year return period flood levels, would be temporarily

stored in the polder.

Simulations on inundation carried out by design engineering consultants indicate

that in the floodplain downstream of Raciborz there would be an overall reduction in flood

levels (with an average of 0.50 - 1.00 m) during large floods with a return period of more

than 10 year. Although less frequent, these floods are important for the survival of a number

of habitats, some of them belonging to the most precious and threatened ecosystems

in Poland. The main impact on floodplain habitats will be a drying out effect, caused by less

frequent flooding and lower groundwater tables. Ecosystems specialized to survive

and flourish under influence of occasional floods such as softwood forests and elder-ash

complexes would be affected and might eventually be replaced by less valuable dry meadows

and forms of hardwood forests not requiring flooding. Table 6.1 gives a list of potential

Natura 2000 sites, which might be affected. However, in order to determine the extent'

and nature2 of these impacts more data are needed, which are not available at the present time.

It should be realized that modelling cannot predict these events and potential impacts, which

only can be assessed by detailed inventories and mapping of the affected areas. Also, since

these impacts could only develop over a long period of time an adequate hydrobiological

monitoring system would be more useful not only to monitor the impacts, but also to adjust

the reservoir operating rules and to provide feedback to the Ministry of Environment.

The downstream effects on specific habitat situated in the active floodplain have been

identified by comparing inundations maps with the data available in the ecological database,

the Odra Auen Atlas (OAA) and PNS data. The predicted impacts are qualitatively indicated

in Table 6.1.

IFor assessment of impacts detailed relief maps (not available) and expected flood levels should be compared.

2 Detailed biological inventories are lacking, only a general inventory of natural habitats along the Odra is available (Odra

Auen Atlas,WWF, 2001)

72


Table 6.1 - Potential Natura 2000 sites downstream of Raciborzaffected by changes in flood regime

Name PNS Size Potential Natura 2000 Remarksin ha sites

SAC' SPA 2

1 Opolska Dolina Odry 3 740 X Impacts expected in some parts2 Grady Odrzanskie 20 461 X Minor impacts expected in some parts3 Grady w Dolinie Odry3 8 027 X Minor impacts expected in some parts4 Dolina Widawy 909 X Minor impacts expected5 Legi Odrzanskie 18 108 X X No impacts expected

Source: GOP, Ministry of Environment, published on web site, May 2005

Mitizatin, measures:

* The least negative impacts would be achieved when normal (average) floods and floodswith a probability up to once in 10 year would not be managed from the reservoirand could pass the Raciborz outlet gates uncontrolled. Limiting the retention of floodwaves to large floods only (e.g. floods with a lower probability then once in 10 year)would be possible provided this presents no additional risk for the flood defence system.

6.4.3 RISK OF DAMAGE TO TWORKOWSKI FOREST DURING RESERVOIROPERATION

The Tworkowski Forest (170 ha) situated in the proposed dry polder, is one of the lastremaining larger complexes of riverine natural forests along the Upper Odra River. The areais proposed by GOP together with the Wielikat Ponds as a Special Protection Area, accordingto the Bird Directive: Wielikat Ponds & Tworkowski Forest and a Special Areaof Conservation: Tworkowski Forest, according to the Habitat Directive.

The impact of floods on a complicated ecological system like the Tworkowski Forestand its associated flora and fauna depends on many factors and is difficult to predict.The Tworkowski Forest consists of three layers: (i) tree stands (mainly 10-25 m), (ii) shrubswith under storey (2-5 m) and (iii) ground herbaceous vegetation with tree saplings (0-1 m).Usually the shrub and ground vegetation is most affected by the floods and could die withindays, depending of the season. Most trees can reasonably survive a flood depth of 4-5 m deepand even benefit from deposition of silt and sediment during extreme floods, but thereare quite big differences in susceptibility among different tree species. Very importantis the duration of floods. Floods for more than 10 days however, will substantially damageor even completely destroy the shrubs and ground vegetation. Mature tree stands of elmor oak could survive 2-3 weeks of inundation, whereas willow and poplar usually surviveeven up to 2-3 months of flood. An important factor is also the season when the floods occur.Summer flood is rather not favourable for long inundations through high rate of metabolicprocesses and high demand of root system for oxygen during summer. Low velocityof the water flow or even its stagnation inside the reservoir during flood storage could leadto considerable damage.

SAC: Special Area of Conservation according to Habitat DirectiveSPA: Special Protection Area according to Bird Directive

3> 90% overlap with Grady Odrzanskie

73


A few principles applied during the preparation of operational rules for the reservoir could

reduce ecological impacts considerably:

1) Small floods (annual and recurrent floods up to 10 year) should pass the structure

uncontrolled;

2) During operation: duration of storage should be as short as possible;

3) During operation: release of stored flood water should start as soon as possible(after peak flow);

4) Stagnation in the reservoir should be avoided.

The design capacity of the Raciborz outlet structure is such that a flow of 1 000 m3/s could

pass uncontrolled. This is equal to a flood with a return period of once in 10 year. Thus when

these floods would not be managed, there would be no impact on the Tworkowski Forest.

In order to assess potential impacts during operation of the reservoir the engineering design

consultants have carried out inundation simulations (peak flood flow storage periodsand corresponding water levels) for different flood return periods (respectively once in 10, 50

and 100 years) and different discharge rates (ranging from 3 00-1 200 m3 /s). The simulations

are prepared on the assumption that floods stored in the reservoir are stored as short

as possible and that floods are released as soon as possible. The results of these simulations

are given in Table 6.2.

Table 6.2 - Period of inundation and max. reservoir levels with various flood return periodsand maximum release

Flood Return period Max. release Max. reservoir level Period during whichm3

/s m asl reservoir is in use days

Once in 10 year 300 194.2 24

500 191.8 7

800 187.2 2

Once in 50 year 600 194.8 10

800 192.7 8

1 000 190.3 7

Once in 100 year 800 194.4 8

1 000 192.3 7

1 200 187.4 6

Partial closure of the gates to reduce the outflow to 800 m3/s will store water in the reservoir

during 2 days. For a higher flow of 50 and 100 years and a release of 800 m3/s this

will be 8 days. For floods up to 10 year return period there would no impact on the

Tworkowski forest (average terrain level between 189-190 m asl). For larger floods, when

the reservoir is in operation the impacts, in terms of level and period of inundation period,

vary not very significant up to 100 year return period flood flow. For example, a 50 year flood

with an outflow of 800 m3/s (which is 20% less than the design outflow of 1 000 m3/s) would

inundate the forest for a maximum period of 8 days up to a depth of 3 m and a 100 year flood

for 8 days up to 5 m. For exceptional floods events - like the 1997 - flood the forest could

be inundated up to 6.0 m.

74

Chapter 6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECTAND THEIR MITIGATIONS

Photo 6.6 - Aerial view of Tworkowski Forest(photo P. Nieznanski, WWF Poland)

Photo 6.7 - Odra river and Tworkowski Forest near Ligota Tworkowska

75


Since detailed data on the composition of the forest and its flora and fauna as well as detailed

information on soils, hydrology and relief are lacking, a baseline survey of hydrobiological

conditions of the forest will be carried out. A monitoring network will be installed to follow

and evaluate possible changes in hydrology and ecology of the forest. On basis of the findings

the operational rules of the reservoir will have to be reviewed from time to time to balance

the requirements for maximum safety and reduction of ecological impacts. Therefore

it is proposed to engage the services of an ecologist, with a good background in floodplain

ecology, as part of the team responsible for developing and implementing Component Cl

(Flood management plans, including reservoir management).

Miti2atinz measures:

* Operational rules for the reservoir should only be prepared after taking into consideration

the recommendations from the ecological and hydrological studies on the effects

of reservoir operations on the areas downstream and inside the reservoir;

* Permanent monitoring of groundwater observation wells, within the reservoir area

and the Tworkowski Forest should be carried out to determine fluctuations in ground

water levels and groundwater behaviour in dry periods and during floods;

* Permanent observation plots for inventory and monitoring of habitats and bio-indicators

should be established in relation with the groundwater observation network;

* The species composition of tree stands, vitality and degree of maturity of forest

are important factors for the survival of the forest under such extreme conditions.

Since not much experience exists of the behaviour of such alluvial forests, a detailed

ecological inventory of the tree stand should be made together with an assessment of tree

vitality and fluctuations in groundwater levels;

* There might be a possibility, which should be explored to train the forest to withstand

artificial floods through partially filling the reservoir for short periods, during periods

of low risk;

* Engage the services of an ecologist, with a good background in floodplain ecology, as part

of the team responsible for developing and implementing Component C1

(Flood management plans, including reservoir management).

6.4.4 RISK OF DAMAGE OF RIVER CONTINUUM AND ECOLOGICAL CORRIDOR

Construction of the dry polder embankments and outlet structure might result in significant

site-specific impacts and blocking of the river continuum. Similarly this might occur due

to closure of the smaller Odra tributaries and natural drainage channels flowing through

the polder. Removal of associated thickets, hedges, forest elements, humid meadows

and haylands might further reduce the area of wildlife habitats and block ecological corridors

within the area connecting outside natural forest elements and lakes on both sides

of the valley. Interruption of the river continuum will be partly be mitigated by adequate

reservoir management (as discussed above) but the outlet structure and associated works

and embankments will form major obstacles for migration of flora and fauna. This will lead

to fragmentation of the important North-South international bio-corridor along the Odra River

and reduce migration. A mitigation measure will be to preserve and enhance natural

complexes on the left bank of the reservoir and to ban gravel exploitation West of the river,

which only leads to further destruction of landscape and natural environment.

76

Chapter 6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECTAND THEIR MITIGATIONS

Mitigatin' measures:

* Designate buffer zones along riverbed, Tworkowski Forest, Sudol oxbow and old Psinaoutlet as a protected zone;

* Establish a bio-corridor that connects the Tworkowski complex with natural elementsalong the Odra, the former Psina outlet and the Sudol complex, see Figure 2. 1;

* Integrate refuge hills (see Section 6.4.5) to maintain functional connectivity acrossthe Odra valley (E-W bio-corridor).

6.4.5 HIGH RISK OF DROWNING OF ANIMALS

During floods it is expected that a number of animals may drown in the reservoir, sincethe water level in the reservoir may rise rapidly. It is expected that most larger mammals,such as deer and boar hiding in the forest areas, will safely reach higher grounds beyondthe left and right embankments of the reservoir. However, for small mammals and reptilesthis could be difficult, in view of the speed of the rise in water level, which could be between0.20-0.30 m/h. In such circumstances a high percentage of small animals may perish.Therefore, it is proposed to use the soil deposits left during the gravel mining operationsto create refugee hills for animals and (lateral) bio-corridors.

Mitimatinif measures:

* Within the reservoir area there are many soil depots resulting from mining operations.During these operations the topsoil up to a depth of 3 to 4m depth is removed and placedinto special depots in order to reach the gravel layers below. These clay depots could beused to make a number of artificial refuge hills or ridges where small animals mightescape. The top part of these hills should be at least at an elevation of 196 m asl and havea minimum size of 0.3-0.5 ha. Preferably these hills should be covered with naturalvegetation and shrubs established mostly as result of natural succession processes. Theirsurface should be thoroughly shaped by machines, avoiding creation of new illegal wastedump places from gravel companies or others. The refuge hills could strengthen proposedlocal E-W bio-corridors. Integration of these hills with bio-corridors thereforeis recommended (see above Section 6.4.4).

6.5 SOCIAL IMPACTS OF THE MODERNIZATION OF WFS (COMPONENT B)

6.5.1 REMOVAL OF HOMESTEAD GARDENS AND TREES

About 2 000 homestead gardens covering about 77 ha will have to be removed, includingsheds, trees and other property. The compensation procedures, including possible reallocationof these gardens and associated infrastructure are worked out in detail in a separate document:Resettlement Policy Framework for Widawa Transfer Channel and Popowice-Kozanow.

Mitizatinmt measures:

* The reallocation and compensation of these gardens will be properly plannedand implemented under separate resettlement plan.

77


6.5.2 RISK OF DAMAGING ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONUMENTS

Archaeological sites and objects might be accidentally damaged during WFS project works.

Here, a distinction should be made between (i) known sites, which are the legally protected

sites and (ii) unknown archaeological sites and objects, which might be discovered during

earthworks. A detailed inventory of known archaeological sites will be prepared as part

of sub-project specific EIA preparation, which will be used by the engineering consultant

to prepare a plan for siting borrow pits and implementation of earth works. For the category

of unknown archaeological sites proper procedures for dealing with "chance-find"will be incorporated in the contract documents. This includes a notification of the Conservator

of Antiquities before the start of the works and a procedure to be applied after an unexpected

find during construction activities (usually earthworks and dredging). Compliance

with and enforcement of this procedure according to archaeologists is usually sufficient

to provide adequate protection to cultural heritage.

Mitizatinm measures:

* The archaeological inventory of known sites which is recently prepared should be used

together with other information to determine the final alignment of embankments,the location of borrow areas and the areas where other earth works (including dredging)

will be carried out;

* The Conservator of Antiquities should be notified before the start of the works.

6.5.3 RISK OF DAMAGING HISTORIC WATER STRUCTURESAND RETAINING WALLS

Especially within the city of Wroclaw a large part of the old flood protection system,

including many embankments and a number of bridges and sluices, are objects of historical,

cultural and touristic value. Special attention will be given to supervision during

(re)construction works design and construction to ensure prevention of irreparable damage

of these objects. Designs of retention walls along boulevards of Wroclaw to be reconstructed

will be in compliance with designs and criteria prepared by the Office of the Conservator

of Monuments of Wroclaw.

MitiQatine measures:

* All detailed reconstruction plans and designs should be thoroughly discussedwith technical specialists of the city of Wroclaw and the Conservator of Antiquities.

During construction there is permanent supervision and inspection needed by qualified

restoration experts.

6.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE MODERNIZATION OF WFS

6.6.1 LOCAL EIAS REQUIRED FOR DETAILED PLANNING

Compared to the Raciborz reservoir fewer negative impacts are to be expected

from the modernization of the Wroclaw Floodway System (WFS). This is mainly

due to the nature of this component, i.e. the reconstruction and improvement of an existing

flood protection system. However, the identified impacts are spread over a large area

and cannot be described in detail because detailed designs and specific locations

of the alignment, and details on earth-moving and dredging work, are not yet available.

78


For this reason it is important that, in due time, at local level, detailed EIAs should be carriedout to determine potential impacts. According to Polish law, local EIAs are compulsory for allproject works, with the exception of the reconstruction of existing embankments,when located outside PNS or other protected areas. Public participation is essential to enhancethe "transparency" of the envisaged works and to improve public acceptance. It would resultin improved quality of the plans.

6.6.2 RISK OF DAMAGE TO NATURA 2000 SITES DURING CONSTRUCTION

Some of the embankment to be (re) constructed are situated within the PNS "GradyOdrzanskie", the PNS "Grady w dolinie Odry" and the PNS "Dolina Widawy" or justbordering these nature reserves. At several places the chosen alignment requires fellingof parts of forest, tree lanes and bushes. Also vulnerable vegetation and topsoil in wetlandsand humid meadows could be damaged by earth moving and levelling operationsand this should be prevented. At a number of places the embankment is widenedat the expense of the alluvial forest, meadows and wetlands in order to avoid damage on farmland. It should be stressed that in these conservation areas the priorities shouldbe with conserving natural and landscape elements and not in the first place with agriculturalinterests. Negative effects on agriculture should be avoided where possible,but not at the expense of nature.

The existing embankments at the Widawa confluence near the oxbow complex southof Swiniary and in Widawa Valley will be opened up (works 19, 27 and 46 respectively).Excavation and removal of soil for reuse at other locations could cause substantial damageto forests, meadows and ecosystems, and this should be avoided.

Mitizating measures:

* Specify detailed mitigation measures during preparation of local EIAs during procedureto obtain construction permits.

Considerations to be included in the detailed design studies:

Borrow areas:* In the selection of borrow areas not only consideration should be given on type of material

and distance: potential damage to landscape, natural habitats and cultural historic aspectsshould be avoided;

* Location of borrow areas near known archaeological sites should be avoided;* Location of borrow areas in nature valuable areas indicated in the baseline survey

JacobsGibb, 2003, Annex V part 7 should be avoided, especially in PNS or other protectedsites;

* Location of borrow areas near former dike breach scours (lochs) should be avoided,since these places form important cultural historic and landscape elements,see also Section 5.1.2.3. There are at least 15 of such lochs over a distance of 8 kmbetween Siedlce and Kotowice, they have not been mapped as yet. For all plannedreconstruction works a detailed landscape and ecological inventory is recommendedto identify these and other valuable elements;

* Borrow areas in unprotected areas outside the dikes should be avoided unless situatedon farmland;

79


* Other nature valuable areas like wetlands, wet meadows and river dune areas should

be avoided.

Levelling and earthmoving:* Levelling of land and all earth moving outside the dike and natural areas inside

the embankment should be prohibited, with the exception of a working strip along

the embankment;

* All access roads to the work should be located on the landside of the dike.

Removal of vegetation and bushes:* Trees, vegetation and bushes should only be removed if conflicting with the flood

protection function of the embankment;

* Monumental lanes and/or protected trees on existing embankments solution should

be considered case by case and where feasible and desired alternative solutions should

be worked out (selection of an alternative alignment or design).

Removal of old embankments:* In order to enlarge the retention capacity of the floodplain existing embankments

will be opened up at several places to provide access to floodwater. Removal of soil

material from these dikes in forests and other nature habitats should be avoided, in order

to minimize disturbance and destruction of forests and natural habitats. In agricultural

areas, old embankments might be removed, unless they are protected for landscape

or cultural historic reasons.

6.6.3 DAMAGE DUE TO DREDGING OPERATIONS

The alluvial forests and wet meadows along the Odra floodplain and close to the river channel

might be affected by the dredging works to deepen and widen the river bed. The construction

of access roads and the deposition of excavated soil and sediments in forest areas can also

be detrimental for some of these vulnerable habitats, and this is to be avoided.

While deepening and enlarging of the Widawa River bed will result in an increase

of its conveyance capacity, it would also cause less frequent inundations of the river valley.

Other potential impacts could include improved drainage, felling of small parts of forest

(a strip of 100-200 m wide and 0.5 km long, upstream of Redzin barrage) close to the channel,

lowering of groundwater tables, drying of some wet meadows, temporary withdrawal of most

fish species from the affected stretch of the river and disposal of dredged material.

In the absence of detailed baseline data and design information, it is not feasible to predict

these impacts and develop appropriate mitigation plans. However, these impacts

will be studied in detail as part of the proposed local EIA required for obtaining site

and construction permits.

Mitigation measures:

* Natural or semi-natural forests and wet meadows should as much as possible be spared

and remain untouched. Operations on the embankments should be avoided as much

as possible in order to decrease the negative impacts of earth moving and excavation

equipment, loaders and lorries on natural ecosystems and landscape, which is usually

lasting. Felling of any dense tree complex is out of the question;

* Dredging operations should be done with suitable dredging equipment on the river

and the extracted silt would be loaded on barges to transport the material to a safe depot

80

Chapter 6 SIGNIFICANTIMPACTS OF THE PROJECTAND THEIR MITIGATIONS

-~~'<

p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .

Photo 6.8 - Trees which grow on the dike endanger the safety of embank-ment. On the other side, many of them are of high naturaland landscape value.

Photo 6.9 - Reconstruction of this embankment between Siediceand Kotowice might destroy some valuable habitats: wetmeadows and hardwood nivenine forests.

81


outside these areas. Long periods of high turbidity of the water which is very harmful

for the aquatic fauna should be avoided;

* Dredging should not be done during winter time;

* The work methodology for dredging should be properly described in the design

specifications and tender documents. This is also important in view of the fact

that the works will be implemented in a popular recreational area not far from Wroclaw

and any negative publicity or mistakes might damage the image of RZGWWL. It should

be both the responsibility of the Contractor and RZGWWL to ensure that these activities

do not cause environmental damage and minimize any nuisance.

Compensation:

* In order to compensate for the degradation of wet lands and forests along the Widawa

River and its confluence with the Odra it has been suggested to establish a renaturization

and nature education project in the Widawa Valley. Objective of such a project could

be to get practical experience in redeveloping natural habitats characterised by a large

biodiversity and situated in a protected area (e.g. PNS Dolina Widawy). Proposals along

the same line have also been forwarded by the NGO "Pro Natura" to create a number

of islands in the Odra River near the Widawa River outlet (see Annex D4). This combined

with the establishment of a nature education centre managed by one or more NGO's

specialized in nature conservation could attract school children, local residents and tourists

from neighbouring Wroclaw could help to make such a centre sustainable. These

suggestions could be worked out during the implementation of the Environmental

Management Plan (EMP), see Chapter 8.

6.6.4 IMPACTS ON SMALL LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS.

The (re)construction of embankments involving widening and heightening of dike profiles

might affect small landscape elements with natural value (small oxbows, river dunes,

monumental trees and characteristic lawns, small bushes, hedges and thickets) or with cultural

historic value (old dike breach scours, historic embankments, etc.). An inventory

of monumental trees inside the city of Wroclaw has been made, but landscape elements have

not been systematically surveyed. In order to prevent damage to these elements a review

would be made during preparation of local EIAs and existing procedures to protect

monumental trees and measures to protect landscape elements would be followed.

If protection is not possible some compensatory landscaping would be developed

(e.g. by planting trees) by involving a landscape architect in designing such measures.

82

Chapter 7 OTHER RELE VANT NON-PROJECTRELATED ISSUES

CHAPTER 7 OTHER RELEVANT NON-PROJECT RELATED ISSUES

7.1 COORDINATION OF PLANS REQUIRED

A potential risk is that insufficient coordination between the various agencies involvedin spatial planning and planning of flood protection works would reduce the overall benefitsof the project. An example is the plan for the construction of new embankments in the sectionbetween Turze and Opole in the Odra valley prepared by the Amelioration Department inOpole (OZMiUW). This plan includes the construction of new embankments near the Odra,narrowing the active floodplain to a maximum width of 600 m, and dredging and widening ofsome sections of the Odra riverbed, mostly upstream of Kedzierzyn-Kozle. The plan and itsimpact on flood levels have not been taken into consideration during the feasibility studies forthe current project. Implementation of the plan would considerably affect the predictedinundations in the Odra stretch between km 65 and km 145 and create new hydraulicbottlenecks. This type of conflicts should be avoided by improving the coordination betweenthe various authorities.

For that purpose, as described in Chapter 6, Component C l aims to support developmentof improved flood management plans and coordination with local authorities and stakeholdersto ensure consistency between local and regional flood management plans coveringa balanced approach to structural and non-structural measures.

7.2 FLOOD CONTROL AND PHYSICAL PLANNING

At various locations there have been recent spatial developments, which are conflictingwith the potential designation of the Widawa floodplain as flood relief channel. DZMiUWcomplains that it is handicapped in carrying out necessary works because of legal constraints.Formal designation of Widawa valley as an area with flood risk as defined by Article 82of the Water Act has not taken place and this should be done. This is essential beforeany flood protection plan can be implemented.

Currently a number of gminas along the Widawa valley (mainly Wroclaw and Wisznia Mala,but also Dlugoleka and Oborniki Slaskie) are developing residential and service areasat locations which are conflicting with the flood relief function. Embankments at the villageof Psary are found to be projected through a new residential area with villas at both sideof the dike (see Photo 7.2). At another place a residential area has been developednear to the river bed. At other places illegal industrial buildings, houses and a waste dumpwere found next to the river bed. Insufficient coordination between project investors and localadministration could lead to cost increases and increased flood hazards to communities. Thisshould be avoided. One of the related problems is that RZGWWL is responsible for floodcontrol but has no mandate in the Widawa valley, where water management falls under theAmelioration Authority (DZMiUW).

Good coordination between the project investors and local administration could avoidincreases in cost of flood protection works and decrease further flood hazards to communities.This should be done by giving a higher priority and a legal basis to flood control in spatialplanning. This activity would be supported under component C3 of the project.

83


7.3 IMPROVE INTEGRATION OF PLANNINGOF INFRASTRUCTURAL WORKS.

7.3.1 INTEGRATION OF ROAD DESIGNS IN AREA UPSTREAMS OF WROCLAW

At several places it was observed that designs for infrastructural works such as road

construction are insufficiently integrated with the plans for improved flood control.

The design of a Powiat road (Wroclaw) near to Blizanowice so far is insufficiently integrated

with the design for reconstruction of the embankments in the Polder Blizanowice-Trestno.

In the present design the Odra dike and the new road aligment (in fill) are projected parallel

to each other at short distance (100-150m) leaving a narrow arable strip of land between these

two dikes, which is for technical, economic and landscape reasons not a very attractive

solution.

7.3.2 INTEGRATION OF DESIGN OF NEW ROADS IN WROCLAW AREA

Comparable problems could be found in the area of the city of Wroclaw. Here the design

of the northern ring road of Wroclaw and the project Obwodnica Autostradowa (highway),

crossing both the Odra and Widawa valley (left bank km 16.0-17.0) should be properly

integrated and coordinated with the present flood control designs. It is unclear to what extent

the implementation of these projects will interfere or conflict with the functioning of flood

protection and flood relief works.

7.3.3 HYDRAULIC BOTTLE-NECKS IN THE ACTIVE FLOODPLAIN

Within the active floodplain of Odra and Widawa river a number of hydraulic bottle-necks

can be identified. The question is raised whether these narrow cross-sections and bottle necks

have sufficiently been taken into consideration in the evaluation of the results in the various

simulation and terrain models. The bottle necks identified are the following:

* Odra km 226.4 - width active floodplain only 1.0 km;

* Railway bridge and embankments crossing Odra valley between Kotowice and Czernica

(Odra km 230.7);

* Odra between km 240.0 and km 242.0 width active floodplain only 0.5 km;

* Powiat road (projected) over Odra near km 241;

* Reduction of retention area on the left bank of Odra valley through embankments

reconstruction of vast area of arable land around villages Trestno and Blizanowice

(part of No 3) and Opatowice (circular ring No 4);

* Railway bridge and embankments crossing Odra valley between Kotowice and Czernica

(Odra km 230.7) Odra between km 264 and km 267 (outflow of Widawa River);

* Narrowing of the Widawa valley by the projected embankments of the stretches

km 4.0-km 5.0, km 11.0-km 12.0 and km 18.0-km 21.5;

* Road bridges in Widawa valley (km 4, km 10, km 17) and projected motorway

in ca. km 13.

If required the selected alignments for dikes at above-listed points should be reviewed,

in order to increase the floodplain area. Laying backwards of alignment Odra dikes would

seem possible at some points near Siedlce and possibly in Trestno by excluding the few

84

Chapter 7 OTHER RELEVANT NON-PROJECT RELA TED ISSUES

b~~i7t a _

Photo 7 1 - Bridge over the old Widawa on the Poznan road with illegalurban and industrial encroachments blocking the safe passageof flood water.

.,i* A t,

Photo 7.2 - Widawa river near Psary - new villa situated on active floodplainunprotected outside the projected WWS embankments.

85


derelict industrial buildings at that site. Furthermore could the retention capacity be increased

of the Polder Blizanowice-Trestno by protecting only the settlements and not the agricultural

areas at Trestno and Opatowice.

Also along the Widawa Valley it is physically possible to position the embankments further

backwards from the river (for instance on the right bank upstream of Zgorzelisko/Gorlice,

at Krzyzanowice, near Widawa). This would enlarge the active floodplain of the Widawa

river and partly remove other bottlenecks.

7.3.4 EXPERTISE IN ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

RZGWWL, RZGWGL and DZMiUW are staffed with qualified and highly experienced

engineers in the field of engineering, water management, O&M, flood control and hydrology.

However, there is very little expertise in the field of river and floodplain ecology,

environmental legislation, (ground) water quality management, hydrobiology, fisheries

and environmental management in these organisations. This could negatively affect

the selected engineering solutions and the implementation of the project.

Charged with the planning, implementation and operation of a project of national importance

and taking into consideration the need for future compliance with the Water Framework

Directive (COM 2000/60/EC) and environmental legislation it is strongly recommended

to reinforce the RZGWs and the Amelioration Department in these fields and to enhance

the capabilities and expertise of the exisiting staff (i) through training, (ii) strengthening

of expertise in river and floodplain ecology and (iii) in hydrobiology, fisheries and water

quality management and (iv) environmental management, legislation and environmental

impact assessment. Under the project (component D), expertise of concerned agencies

would be strengthened in the fields mentioned above.

7.3.5 POLLUTION FROM COAL WASTE DUMP

Continued gravel mining in the Raciborz reservoir area could lead to the increased inflow

of polluted groundwater and surface water originating from a neighbouring coal waste dump

South of Bukow, 1.5-2.0 km from the Tworkowski forest. Tailings of this waste dump

have already spread over part of the surface waters in the reservoir area, and this process

will only accelerate by continued gravel excavation. This could cause further deterioration

of the quality of surface and groundwater in the entire reservoir. RZGWGL should request

environmental authorities to monitor the situation and take appropriate action before levels

become toxic for people and animals (fish).

7.3.6 BARRIERS FOR MIGRATING FISH

In the present situation the weir at the Wroclaw I Power Plant forms a major barrier

for migrating fish. The present structure has no fish passage, and also the new design

for reconstruction of the weir does not provide for a fish ladder or comparable structure,

since only reconstruction works are foreseen. Since most migrating fish prefer to use

the South City Odra River because of higher flow velocities in this branch, it would

be strongly advisable to provide a fish passage at this location. Also, the modernization plan

for the Redzin Barrage does not include a proposal for improvement of the existing,

but non-functioning fish ladder. Provision of such fish passes at these sites would certainly

be required in the years to come (within the EU Water Framework) and it is therefore

advisable to include these improvements (modernizations) at the present time.

86

Chapter 8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

8.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE EMP

This section presents an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) that outlines a programmeof activities to minimize or attenuate potential environmental impacts.

The main objective of the EMP is to:

1) Ensure that negative impacts identified in this EA are effectively eliminated, controlled,mitigated or compensated;

2) Provide guidance to the implementing organisations RZGWWL, RZGWGL, DZMiUW,and their Consultants and Contractors working on the Project, on appropriate measuresto be implemented to ensure that impacts are effectively eliminated, controlled, mitigatedor compensated;

3) Build capacity within the implementing organisations in environmental management;4) Provide training in environmental management to staff involved in construction

and in the operation of the project.

The measures to be implemented in the EMP can be grouped into three categories:1) Measures which can be included in design and construction bid (contract) documents;2) Stand alone mitigation measures;

3) Proactive compensatory measures to preserve and enhance the ecological corridor.

8.2 MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCLUDED IN DESIGNAND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS

8.2.1 GENERAL

Most potentially negative impacts of the project identified in this Environmental Assessmentcan be prevented or minimized by including appropriate measures in the detailed design,design specifications and tender documents. During construction, the civil works contractorsshould strictly abide by the Government of Poland's environmental regulationsand by the World Bank environmental procedures. At the same time, it is important to raiseenvironmental sensitivity and awareness of the personnel of contractors and sub-contractorsworking on the project. Under a proper supervisory system, and with appropriatespecifications and conditions for the incorporation of such measures, this should not bedifficult. If these guidelines are properly followed, environmental impacts resultingfrom project implementation would be relatively small. It requires the engineering consultantto incorporate comprehensive environmental protection measures into the contract document.

Contractors must comply with the environmental mitigation measures specified in WorldBank and GOP guidelines. At the same time, it is important to point out that environmentalsensitivity and awareness of sub-contractors and their workers needs to be raised.Under a proper supervisory system, with appropriate specifications and conditionsfor the incorporation of such measures, this should not be difficult.

87


8.2.2 EQUIPMENT SITES AND STORAGE AREAS

Mitigation. The contract documents should specifically address the following:

Spillage offuels:Plant and equipment sites, materials stores and temporary accommodation/office facilities

should not be located on land belonging to nature reserves, forests, protected habitats

or habitats with protected species or land that is or will be used for agricultural purposes

again. Floors of temporary workshops should be lined with concrete to avoid infiltration

of spilled oils and fuels into groundwater. Used oil should be collected for recycling

and must not be disposed of on-site, either in pits or otherwise.

Collection and the safe disposal of solid waste:Facilities for collection and safe disposal of solid waste should be provided at work sites

and workshops. All contractors' staff should be under strict instructions that both solid

and liquid wastes must be disposed of into designated facilities. Routine inspections aimed

at assessing the effectiveness of waste management systems should be undertaken

by the contractor's site engineer and the Resident Engineer, reporting to the environmental

units of the executing agency. Proper toilet facilities should be provided at workshops,

accommodations or and at quarries or borrow pits.

Sanitation and solid waste management:The contract documents should include measures requiring the provision of good sanitation

and solid waste management facilities and ensuring that good waste management practices

are enforced. This requires full scale control by the Contractor over his own workforce

and over the operations of his sub-contractors, and needs very clearly stated provisions

to be incorporated in the Contract Documents. Pertinent control measures need to be written

to specified standards, in accordance with World Bank and government regulations.

Monitoring. The contractor's site engineer, the Resident Engineer, the environmental

inspector of the executing agency will need to monitor that agreed standards of waste

management and sanitation are adhered to. This will require routine inspections, which may

be done every week, depending on the duration of the work.

8.2.3 QUARRIES AND BORROW PITS

Mitigation. The Contract Document should specifically address the following:

Removal of vegetation:The clearing of vegetation at these sites should be restricted to the area where actual

excavations will take place.

Restoration of landscape:Any quarries and borrow pits should be restored or rehabilitated to in as far as is possible

to their original conditions. This will require landscaping, covering with topsoil and re-

establishing a grass cover. Pits must be modified so that they are completely free draining,

except in riverbeds where they will be filled up naturally. The Contract Document should

explicitly describe that rehabilitation and restoration work of quarry sites and borrow areas

should be performed in accordance with the environmental mitigation measures of the World

Bank and GOP.

88

Chapter 8. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

Old disused embankments:Soil from former disused embankments in protected areas, or areas with valuable habitatsor culture historic objects, should not be excavated and used for construction of newembankments, but left untouched.

Additional sites:In case additional sites are required, the Contractors should obtain written approvalfrom the Resident Engineer (RE) before commencing activities at these sites. The RE mustbe satisfied that any such proposed site is acceptable on environmental grounds, as wellas on material quality grounds before giving approval.

Conflicts among owners and executing agency:Most sites will be in public ownership, and conflicts are therefore unlikely to happen. In casesites are identified on private land holdings, owners have to be adequately compensatedat prevailing market rates. Executing agency and contractors should deal with those whowill be adversely affected in a transparent and fair manner.

Monitoring. The environmental inspector of the executing agency and Resident Engineerwill have to monitor that property owners are compensated for material taken from theirlands, and that agreed rehabilitation processes for quarries and gravel pits have been followedby the contractors. The Contract Document should specify a mechanism whereby adequatefunds for these works are retained until the Engineer and, possibly, the executing agency'sEnvironmental Management Unit approves the restoration works executed by the Contractor.

8.2.4 EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION AND EARTHWORKS

Mitigation. The Contract Document should specifically address the following:Landscaping.Where earthworks have disturbed the landscape, this must be restored, as far as is possibleto its original state, particularly in scenic areas. This may include tree planting, coveringwith topsoil and sowing of grass or semi-natural mixtures. At places where bushes and treeshave been removed, shrubs such as blackthorn Prunus spinosa, hawthorn Crategus spp.or rose Rosa spp. could be planted, but only on the landward side of the embankment.

Old embankments:Soil from former disused embankments in protected areas or areas with valuable habitats,landscapes or culture historic objects should not be excavated and used for constructionof new embankments, but left untouched in situ.

Excavation, transportation of soil and construction material:Excavation, transportation of soil and construction will not take place in designatedNatura 2000 sites, protected areas or any other sites with protected habitats or ecosystemsor near archaeological and culture historic sites and monuments. In any other forestedor natural areas the contractor will try to avoid, minimize or restore damage to soil, vegetationand trees caused by transportation of soil and construction materials to places of construction.

Levelling.Levelling of topsoil in Natura 2000 sites, protected areas or any other areas with protectedhabitats or ecosystems or near archaeological and culture historic sites will not be permitted.

89


Removal of vegetation, cutting of bushes andfelling of trees:Removal of vegetation, shrubs and trees is allowed only along the new or former alignment

of embankments. Trees on existing embankments which are endangering the function of flood

prevention of the embankment can be removed, except in the case of monumental

and protected trees. In this case individual solutions will be sought in consultation with the

owner, the conservator of nature and a landscape architect. For felling of trees in Natura 2000

sites or protected sites, permission must be obtained from the nature conservation authority.

Buffer zones:Buffer zones around protected areas and sites must be respected by the Contractor.

Within these areas no vehicles or equipment will be allowed, in order to minimise disturbance

in these sites

Monitoring. A landscape architect working under the responsibility of the environmental

inspector of the executing agency will need to monitor that agreed standards of landscaping

and restoration works are being abided with. The Resident Engineer can only enforce

the contract. In the Design Phase therefore the Consultant must formulate the Contract

Document in such a way that earthworks are carried out in an environmentally acceptable

manner. Monitoring should be carried out thereafter by the RE and Environmental Inspector

of the Executing Agency. This will require routine inspections, which may be done every

week, depending on the duration of works.

8.2.5 DREDGING

Mitigation. The Contract Document should specifically address the following:

Widening and deepening of river channelThe preferred method of widening and deepening of the river channels is by means

of dredging. The excavated silt and sediments, which in some cases may be toxic, especially

near weirs (Redzin) should be deposited on barges and transported and off-loaded in a safe

depot, without risk of polluting soil, surface or groundwater. Measures should be described

to minimize loss of sediment and suspended materials during dredging operations

into the rivers downstream sections. This should include the shutting down of operations

in the event of sudden pressure drops (indicating leakage and potential spillage), and the use

of sediment curtains, where appropriate.

Disposal of sedimentThe location and conditions of a sufficiently large and safe depot for the storage of sediments

resulting from dredging operations, which might be contaminated with heavy metals, organic

compounds and substances, should be described in the design specifications and contract

documents.

Monitoring. The Environmental Inspector of the implementing agency and the Resident

Engineer will have to monitor that the agreed working methods are abided with.

90


8.2.6 CONSTRUCTION SITES

Mitigation. The Contract Document should specifically address the following:Disposal of spoil and construction waste.The Contract documents needs to identify sites for safe disposal of spoil and constructionwaste. In the Bill of Quantities a line item is needed for haulage of excess materialto designated spoil areas.

Monitoring. A detailed monitoring programme to be included in conditionsand specifications for each package.

8.2.7 CHANCE FIND PROCEDURES CULTURAL HERITAGE

Mitigation: The Contract Document should include or refer to the Polish procedureas described in the Act of 23rd of July 2003 concerning the relic protection and care for relicsand the regulations of June 2004 for chance finds of archaeological objects and sites.

Chance-find Procedure:1. In the case of a decision to start investment works, it is necessary to notify the appropriate

antiquities protection institution, attaching a detailed localization plan of the investment.2. The antiquities protection institution may - in exceptional cases (for example in the case

of this site being already examined by the institution) - name the archaeological worksperformer. However, it does not mean that the performer has to be acceptedby the investor. The investor has a right to appeal, in order to change the decision.If the archaeological works performer is not appointed or named by the investor,the investor or building works performer designated by the investor, asks the chosenarchaeological works performers for the price. If the cost of the works exceeds e 6 000,the performers are appointed in the course of Public Procurement. The above concernsonly state investors.

3. A chosen archaeological institute examines the area of the future earth works.The antiquities protection institution may oblige the investor to uncover the compactfoundation by removing (for example by bulldozers) the layer of humus, debris, etc.

4a. In the case when an examination of the area does not show the presence of objectsconnected with the archaeological site, the archaeological institution responsiblefor the supervision informs the appropriate conservation centre that the supervised areadoes not contain cultural relics. Following this, the conservation centre issues a permissionto start earth works.

4b. In case the examination of the area shows the presence of an archaeological site or tracesof cultural relics, the supervising institution informs the appropriate conservation centre.The conservation centre postpones any earth works connected with the investmentin the area of the archaeological site and orders to start digging works at the costof the investor. After finishing the works, the appropriate conservation centre issuesthe permission to continue works, based on the information (with proper documentation)from the supervising institution performing the archaeological works. However, theyalso express the need to be notified of any relics found in the course of deeper earth works(up to a few metres), in the deeper geological layers (for example Paleolithic objects).

The described procedure is a standard procedure.

91


8.3 STAND ALONE MITIGATION MEASURES

8.3.1 OPTIMIZE RESERVOIR OPERATING RULES TO MITIGATE IMPACTSON NATURAL HABITATS

The negative effects on natural habitats will depend to a large extent upon the way

of operation of the reservoir. Mitigation or damage reduction can be done by taking

into consideration the principle to minimize the retention of relatively small flood waves

with high probability, without increasing eventual flood hazards. In order to minimize

the negative effects on natural habitats RZGWGL has the intention to operate the reservoir

in such a way that only the infrequent flood peaks are stored i.e. those with a relatively low

probability or severe floods. The reservoir capacity is very small (185 million cubic meters)

thus it would not be possible to store total flood volumes for long duration, only reduction

in high peaks would be possible. Natural complexes which depend upon recurrent floods

would not be affected substantially and would benefit if frequent floods (with return period

up to 10 year or possibly more) are passed uncontrolled. The construction of the reservoir

and outlet structure does not impose any constraint in passing such floods undisturbed,

if such flood management regime is adopted. As a result (and as discussed in Chapter 6)

potential impacts on natural habitats inside and down stream of the proposed polder are likely

to be rather small, since they are restricted to peak floods with a return period of more

than 10 years. The impacts caused by lower flood levels of floods with a return period

of more than 10 years are difficult to predict and the only way to assess long-term impacts

is to monitor the hydrology and ecological conditions in the floodplain at sensitive locations.

8.3.2 IMPLEMENT HYDROBIOLOGICAL SURVEYS AND INSTALL MONITORINGNETWORK

In the absence of detailed information on terrain conditions (relief, soils, groundwater,

hydrology) and any historical information on impacts from past floods, it is not possible

to make an accurate assessment of the impacts on natural habitats and to design plans

to mitigate potential risks. Therefore, RZWG will be commissioning two separate

hydrobiological studies to monitor and analyse potential impacts on key natural habitats.

One study is to monitor those habitats inside and in the near vicinity of the proposed Raciborz

dry polder and the other study will monitor those habitats in the floodplain downstream

Raciborz until Brzeg Dolny and particularly focussed on those parts of the PNS Opolska

Dolina Odry, Grady Odrzanskie and Grady w Dolinie Odry and Dolina Widawy

(see Table 6. 1), which might be most affected.

The outline for these two studies is given below:

1) Hydrobiological study on impacts of reservoir management inside the reservoir

and focussed specifically on Tworkowski Forest and other affected natural habitats

in the Raciborz area; (alteration of flooding patterns, alteration of sediment regime, effects

on river and floodplain habitats, i.e. aquatic and terrestrial biotopes and wildlife)

* Detailed baseline inventory of physical conditions: (i) Relief map with absolute elevation

figures, (ii) Geology of alluvial layer (thickness of alluvial layer, soil type, etc.),

(iii) Description of water level regime (minimum water levels - WL, mean WL

and different flood stages before and after reservoir/polder construction);

92


* Detailed baseline inventory of natural habitats and biota: (i) Habitats includingrequirements of Habitat Directive, (ii) Aquatic and terrestrial biota (iii) Forest cadastreand management data;

* Installation of a hydrobiological monitoring network and assessment of bio-indicators;

* Monitoring during 6 years;

* Analysis of impacts by future management of polder on vegetation, wildlife and forestry;* Elaboration of improved polder management to avoid negative impacts, scope of negative

impacts which are inevitable, scope of necessary mitigation measures by area and typeof habitat;

* Elaboration of recommendations for improved reservoir operation rules to avoid negativeeffects.

2) Hydrobiological study on impacts of reservoir management downstreamof the reservoir and focussed specifically on affected natural habitats in the Odrafloodplain, including Natura 2000 sites between Raciborz and Brzeg Dolny; (alterationof flooding patterns, alteration of sediment regime, effects on river and floodplain habitats,i.e. aquatic and terrestrial biotopes and wildlife).

* Baseline inventory of physical conditions: (i) Relief map with absolute elevation figures,(ii) Geology of alluvial layer (thickness of alluvial layer, soil type, etc.), (iii) Descriptionof water level regime (minimum water levels - WL, mean WL and different flood stagesbefore and after reservoir/polder construction);

* Baseline inventory of natural habitats and biota: (i) Habitats including requirementsof Habitat Directive, (ii) Aquatic and terrestrial biota (iii) Forest cadastre and managementdata;

* Installation of a hydrobiological monitoring network and assessment of bio-indicators;* Monitoring during 6 years;

* Analysis of expected impacts of the operation of the Raciborz reservoir on vegetation,wildlife and forestry;

* Elaboration of recommendations for improved reservoir operation rules to avoid negativeeffects on areas downstream.

RZWG will be using these study results as one of the key determining factors to regulatedischarges from the polder with a view to maximise the ecological benefits withoutcompromising the safety of people. The cost of the hydrobiological studies includingmonitoring activities (spread over 6 years) is estimated at £ 480 000 and £ 600 000respectively.

93


8.4 PROACTIVE COMPENSATORY MEASURES TO PRESERVEAND ENHANCE THE ODRA ECOLOGICAL CORRIDOR

8.4.1 CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFICATION OF COMPENSATION MEASURES

Measures to mitigate or compensate unavoidable impacts on natural habitats and species

affected (inside and downstream of the dry polder), will have to be prepared in comparable

proportions considering the size and the nature of the habitats and species affected. One must

also bear in mind that the objective of Natura 2000 is to form a coherent European ecological

network. This means that it is not enough to develop a site which is of good quality

on its own, but the flora and fauna for which the site is meant should also be able to reach

the new site. Therefore measures under ORFPP will not only be aimed at the protected sites,

but also at the smaller areas that can act as corridors, narrow areas, for example riparian areas

along rivers and streams, and separate patches, so-called "stepping stones" such as ponds

and small woods, which must be located close enough to each other, so that organisms

can use them to migrate from one place to the other. Two types of activities to enhance

the ecological conditions in the impact area and to compensate for possible negative impacts

on natural habitats will be included in the EMP:

8.4.2 MEASURES TO STRENGTHEN THE ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORBETWEEN CHALUPKI AND RACIBORZ

This is as compensation for potential impacts to the Tworkowski forest and surrounding

natural habitats in accordance with the guidelines for compensation measures for Natura 2000

sites. This component will be implemented by RZGWGL in cooperation with WWF-Poland

and could include the following activities: (i) Strengthening of the Border Meander

Conservation and Re-naturalization project (WWF-Poland), by purchase of 50 ha to increase

the area of this original meander (PNS), (ii) Enhancement of the ecological belt between

Wielikat ponds and Tworkowski Forest, (iii) Preserving and strengthening of the corridor

at the left bank of the Odra between Tworkowski Forest, Psina outlet and Sudol complex,

(iv) alternative water supply for Brzezie ponds/wetland complexes. These measures would

be implemented under Component C5 of the project by RZGWGL in cooperation

with WWF-Poland. Implementation costs are estimated at e 800 000.

8.4.3 MEASURES TO STRENGTHEN THE ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORBETWEEN RACIBORZ AND BRZEG DOLNY

This component would include a number of measures to mitigate potential impacts on natural

habitats and species in the Odra section downstream of the Raciborz dry polder. Measures

have to be worked out on basis of the findings of the monitoring study and could include

some engineering works to improve hydrological conditions (e.g. by raising groundwater

tables, lowering terrain levels, opening up embankments, creating artificial islands and other

measures to mitigate negative impacts on affected habitats. Other measures could include

the purchase of land to restore natural habitats in order to compensate for losses elsewhere.

A number of measures are proposed for the Odra and Widawa Valley by the Polish Society

of Wildlife Friends "pro Natura" (NGO) and could be included in component C5.

(see Annex D4). Details have to be worked out during preparation of the local EIAs.

One of the other recommended measures is to establish a Nature Education Centre near

Wroclaw, for information and education on floodplain ecology and wetland restoration.

This in view of the limited awareness of the importance of protecting riverine forests

and habitats in Poland. Such a centre could be instrumental in creating environmental

94


awareness in floodplain ecology and associated fields among schoolchildren, students,engineers, authorities and general public. Exploitation of such a centre couldbe commissioned to one or more local or national nature conservation NGOs or the Cityof Wroclaw. RZGWWL and DZMiUW supported by nature conservation organizationsand WWF would implement this component. Tentatively a budget has been reservedof E 2.2 million (works to be implemented in 4 Natura sites estimated at e 500 000 per areaand e 200 000 for establishing a Nature Education Centre).

8.5 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

The monitoring programme has a dual purpose. It is designed (i) to monitor the contractor'swork during project implementation in order to check contractual compliance with specifiedmitigation measures, and subsequently (ii) to assess the actual environmental impactsof the project over the years following completion of dry polder and the modernizationprogramme of WFS.

The first type of monitoring will be done by the Engineering consultant and supervisedby the M&E consultants. What is required at this stage is a general outline of a monitoringprogramme, including the design of prompt feedback mechanisms and identificationof adequate lines of communication. Monitoring will be specified during the detailed designstage when the Consultant will produce the contract conditions and specifications for eachpackage. Specific items and issues will then be listed in the contract documents.

The second type of monitoring will be commissioned and carried out by localorganisations/consultants with sufficient experience in hydrological and ecologicalmonitoring (see also Section 8.3.2). Monitoring will be continued for a period of 6 years.Result of monitoring of impacts will have to be reviewed and evaluated from time to timeby the M&E consultants. Findings might be used to revise operation rules of the dry polderand the Widawa transfer channel.

8.6 COST OF EMP

The overall budget requirements, spread over the entire project period (from 2006 to 2011),for EMP implementation and monitoring is about 1% of the total project cost as can be seenbelow:

95


Table 8.1 - Summary of cost Environmental Management Plan

Nr Item Funding Cost in t

1 Hydrobiological study upstream Raciborz, including 6 year monitoring Comp C5 480 000

2 Hydrobiological study downstream Raciborz, including 6 year Comp C5 600 000

monitoring

3 Enhancement project upstream Raciborz purchase of land/engineering Comp C5 800 000

works

4 Enhancement project downstream Raciborz, Comp C5 2 200 000

including Nature Education Centre

5 PCU environmental/social specialist (50% EMP) Comp Dl 100 000

6 RZGW teams (3 x 3 persons), allowances (50% EMP) Comp C5 240 000

7 Training RZGWs in environmental management, 6 years x 30 000/yr Comp D2 180 000

8 Individual Consultants to be recruited, 6 years 50 000/yr Comp Dl 300 000

9 Fish passages Wroclaw Power Plant I and Redzin barrage Comp B2 300 000

TOTAL COST 5 200 000

8.7 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATING MEASURES

An overview of impacts and mitigation measures including responsibilities and monitoring

requirements is given at the end of this chapter in Table 8.2.

96

Table 8.2 - Overview of environmental impacts, mitigation measures and monitoring activitiesImpacts / issues 1 Mitigation measures Implementation Budget Responsibility Monitoring Frequency ofSchedule (Cost in E) Implementation Indicators monitoring1. Odra River Basin Flood Control ProjectVery significant positive effect Desirable outcome 2006-2011 500 million RZGWGL PCU Reduction in During floodson safety level of major of the Project Component RZGWWL ONDR areapopulation centres. Strong A+B+C+D DZMiUW inundated,reduction in risk of damages inundationand losses of private

period andand public property due to flood waterflooding, especially in city levelsof Wroclaw

Raciborz dry polder Dam break analysis 2006-2010 4.5 million RZGWGL IPE EPP and EMP During designDam failure Emergency Preparedness Component RZGWWL Project prepared and & constructionPlan (allur E PP),gencly Prearedness C1 IMGW - OTKZ Engineer implemented stages andFlood wave could reach Warning System SMOK Training of key annual duringRaciborz town (pop. 61 000) WarningderSystemtionwithin 1 hour risking loss Flood Management Plan stakeholdersof life and high damage (FMP) implementedof property Design review by Reservoir

Independent Panel of Experts design(IPE) reviewed byIPE

2. Construction of Raciborz dry polder (Component A)Changes in land use inside Detailed Resettlement Action 2004 - onward 63.3 million RAP M&E Land acquired See RAPthe dry polder and Plan (RAP); for RAP RZGWGL Consultants Personsresettlement of population Component resettledof villages Ligota Tworkowska A2and Nieboczowy

Table 8.Z cont.

Impacts I issues Mitigation measures Implementation Budget Responsibility Monitoring Frequency ofSchedule (Cost in C) Implementation Supervision Indicators monitoring

Removal and relocation Create alternative water 2006 - onward Component RZGWGL M&E New water Annuallyof public utilities: supply for 4 000 people A2 Gmina Lubomia consultants supply

- Closure of Tajchow drinking residents in Lubomia; installed

water wells Dismantling, removal of RZGWGL Number of

- Risk of pollution from existing services Relevant sources ofexisting waste, fuel infrastructure and storage Gmina's pollutionand chemical depots facilities removedand storage tanks

Risk of damage to sensitive No traffic and activities in 2006 - onward Component Construction M&E Contractors Permanent

natural complexes due to sensitive areas (no-go area) Al + A3 Supervision consultant violating by supervising

construction activities: Create buffer zones of 100- consultant, procedure consultant

- Tworkowski forest 200 m wide around these Contractors andQuarterly

- Sudol oxbow complex complexes sub-contractors by M&E

- Fringes of Wielikat ponds No earth movement and consultant

- Meadows E of Nieboczowy borrow pits- Brzezie ponds & meadows- Tributaries of Odra

Risk of damage to physical Inventory of known Inventory and Component RAP M&E Status of Permanent

cultural properties archaeological and cultural Plan: 2005 A3 consultants known by supervisingsites/objects archeological consultant

Update plan for earth moving Engineering sites Quarterlyand borrow areas ~~~~~~~~consultantsQurel

and borrow areas Number by M&E

Removal/relocation of historic of objects consultantmonuments /places of RZGWGL removedworship 2006 - onward COA' secured

Chance-find procedures to be Engineering Complianceincluded in tender documents consultants with chance-

&Contractor procedures

COA: Conservator of Antiquities of voivod

Table 8.2, cont.

Impacts / issues Mitigation measures Implementation Budget Responsibility Monitoring Frequency ofSchedule (Cost in fl Implementation Supervision Indicators monitoring

Potential damage to Reduce damage to forest 2006 - onward Component RZGW / IMGW IPE Operational HydrologyTworkowski alluvial forest by optimizing reservoir C1 & stakeholders rules prepared monthly(PNS) due to operation operations & implemented or as requiredof the reservoir Hydrobiological inventory 2006-2007 Baseline Consultants M&E Surface &(baseline study in first year) study & recruited from consultants ground water Ecologyand installation observation Monitoring Universities, levels bi-annuallynetwork 480 000 NGOs Water qualityMonitoring during 6 years 2006 - onward Forest Dept Bio-indicatorsEvaluation during year 3 supported by CNS' Bcidctrand year 6 ecologists Forest Mngt

Plan approvedPrepare Forest ManagementPlan

Reduction of flood levels Optimization of reservoir 2006 - onward Component RZGW / IMGW IPE Operational Permanentand area inundated, decrease operations Ci & stakeholders rules preparedof gwt2 in flood prone areas Hydrobiological inventory 2006 - onward Study & Consultants M&E anddownstream of Raciborz (baseline study) in sensitive monitoring recruited from consultants, implemented Hydrologyand up to Brzeg Dolny may areas, installation 600 000 Universities, Surface & monthlylead to degeneration of flood- of observation network Component NGOs ground water or as requiredsensitive natural habitats and monitoring C5 levelsand wetlands, including areas and evaluation of results Water quality Ecologybelonging to 4 PNSWaeqult EcogUpdating operational rules 2011 Component RZGW / IMGW IPE, MOE Bio-indicators bi-annually

C1 & stakeholdersMitigation/compensatory Componentmeasures (see next point) C5

'CNS: Conservator of Nature in Slaskie2 gwt: groundwater tables

Table 8.2, cont.

Impacts / issues Mitigation measures Implementation Budget Responsibility Monitoring Frequency ofSchedule (Cost in E) Implementation Supervision Indicators monitoring

Interruption of the river Prepare and implement Planning: 2006 Component RZGW M&E Plan prepared Permanent

continuum and blocking main a plan for enhancement Implementation: C5 Forest Dept consultant and approvedinternational ecological of bio-corridor of the Upper 2007 - onward 2 200 000 supported by CNS Plancorridor along Odra floodplain Odra in order to compensate + 800 000 ecologists implementedCutting off minor ecological for negative impacts recruited fromcorridors along the Odra of changed flood regime Universitiestributaries by the polder on natural forests and NGOsand reducing the migration wetland habitatsof biota and biodiversity

Drowning of wildlife and small Construct a number 2006 - onward Component RZGWGL M&E number Annuallyanimals during operation of artificial refuge hills Al Design consultants of refuge hills

or ridges in reservoir consultants constructed

3. Construction of Wroclaw Floodway System (Component B)

Removal, compensation Apply principles of Involuntary 2007 - onward Component RAP M&E Number Bi-annually

or relocation of homestead Resettlement: OP/BP 4.12 B3 RZGWWL consultants of properties

gardens and recreation Implement local ElAs when DZMiUW compensatedcentre in Widawa Valley detailed design is completed or removed

Removal of homesteadgardens in Kozanow

Removal of illegal landfilland illegal commercialor residential structuresin Widawa valley

Table 8.2, cont

Impacts / issues Mitigation measures Implementation Budget Responsibility Monitoring Frequency ofSchedule (Cost in e) Implementation Supervision Indicators monitoringRisk of damage to sites Inventory of known 2005 Components Archaeologist M&E Status of Permanentand objects of cultural archaeological sites B1, B2, B3 RZGWWL consultants known sites duringheritage due to earth-moving Update plan for borrow areas DZMiUW constructionand dredging operationsduring construction Supervision by qualified Engineering CwA Complianceexpert & Supervising with chance-

Chance-find procedures in 2006 - onward consultant findtender documents Contractor proceduresRisk of damage to historic Reconstruction plans to be 2005 - onward Component RZGWWL CMW Status of Permanenthydraulic structures (bridges prepared in compliance with 82 Engineering known sites duringand sluices) of the old designs and criteria of CMW' Consultants constructionprotection system and the of city of Wroclawretaining walls of boulevards Supervision and inspection Contractor M&Ein Wroclaw by restoration experts. Qualified expert consultantsPotential damage to SPA Include mitigation measures 2005 - onward Components RZGWWL M&E Contractors Permanent"Grady Odrzanskie", PNS in detailed design and B1, 83 DZMiUW consultant violating during"Grady w Dolinie Odry" & contract documents including: Engineering procedure construction"Dolina Widawy" and other - avoiding damage to SPA consultantvaluable habitats due to (re) & PNS through re-alignmentconstruction of embankments of dikes or applicationupstream of Wroclaw (Work of special constructionsNo 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 20, - limiting tree removal40, 45) and around the - creating buffer zonesoutflow of Widawa river (Work around sensitive areasNo 12, 19, 27, 42, 44) - no removal of soil

and vegetation from olddisused dikes in PNSand other valuable areas

- implement local ElAs

CMW: Conservator of Monuments in City of Wroclaw

Table 8.2, cont

Impacts I issues Mitigation measures Implementation Budget Responsibility Monitoring Frequency ofSchedule (Cost in E) Implementation Supervision Indicators monitoring

Risk of damage to terrestrial Application of environmental 2005 - onward Component RZGWWL M&E Contractors Permanent

and aquatic habitats due friendly engineering solutions B3 DZMiUW consultants violating during

to dredging operations in in sensitive areas & Engineering procedure dredging

Odra & Widawa valley (PNS) Detailed measures consultant operations

will influence fish fauna and to be described in detailedbank vegetation. design & contract documents

A number of small landscape Existing inventory of 2005 - onward Components RZGWWL M&E Contractors Permanent

elements with natural monumental trees in Wroclaw B1, B2, B3 DZMiUW consultants violating during

or cultural historic value, to be expanded to small & Engineering procedure construction

such as dike breach scours, landscape elements in WFS consultanthistoric embankments, small Follow existing proceduresoxbows or wetlands, river to protect monumental treesdunes, riparian trees, rows Include measures to protectof monumental other small landscapeor characteristic lawns could elements in detailed designbe affected or lost in entire & contract documentsWFS area If protection is not feasible,

include compensatorylandscaping measures

4. Recommended additional measures (other non-project related issues) -

Suspected pollution Monitor the (ground) water soonest RZGWGL in MOE pH of surface Monthly

of groundwater with heavy quality in reservoir on heavy cooperation with & groundwater

metals from Bukow coal metals (pH) and take Environmental near coal

dump appropriate action Dept of Slaskie dump and inWielikat Ponds

Insufficient coordination in Improve the legal and spatial 2005 - onward RZGWWL MOEflood control, spatial planning and technical integration DZMiUW and& infrastructural works (WFS) of projects other agencies

Fish migration hindered at Construct new fish passage 2007 - onward Component RZGWWL M&E Fish passages

Wroclaw Hydroelectric Plant at power plant B2 Engineering consultants designed and

No 1 and at Redzin barrage Improve/renew existing fish E 300 000 consultant operational

ladder at Redzin

Chapter 9 * INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS

CHAPTER 9 INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS

9.1 INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE EMP

The proposed institutional structure to implement the EMP is shown in Figure 9.1.The PCU will have the overall project coordination and management on a day to day basis.The PCU would consist of a project director, a deputy director, an environmental/socialspecialist and a technical specialist, in addition to a procurement specialist, a financialmanagement specialist, an accountant and support staff. The Technical specialistwill be responsible for the engineering aspects of the project and will be supportedby the design and supervising consultants and the M&E consultants. The Environmental& Social specialist will be responsible on a full-time basis for the implementation of RAPand the EMP.

I ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~PCUl

DeptDirector l

Environm nental 8 ............... eTechnilSocial Specialist RZGWGL Specilist

RAP-EMP 3 staff EMP-RAP Components A& ETechnical staff

RtZGWWL3 staff EMP-RAP

I F Technical staff I FM&E Consultant DZMiUW Design Consultant

l" 3 staff EMP-RAPExternal expertise Technical staff Supervising Consultant

Project

Figure 9.1 - Institutional structure for implementation EMP-RAP

9.2 PROFILE DESCRIPTION ENVIRONMENTAUSOCIAL SPECIALIST (PCU)

Responsibility

The environmental and social specialist of the PCU is responsible for the implementationof EMP and RAP. In this task he/she will be supported by the M&E Consultants,the Supervising engineering Consultant and external international and local experts.The environmental specialist will work closely together with the Technical specialist of PCU.Both specialists report directly to the Deputy Director of PCU.

103


Task description

* Manage and coordinate the implementation of EMP and RAP according to the agreed

standards required under Polish legislation and World Bank policies in order to minimize

social and environmental impacts of the project;

* Liaise and coordinate with the technical specialist of PCU responsible for implementation

of the engineering components of the project in order to get full compliance

with the planned mitigation and compensation measures of the investors (RZGWGL,

RZGWWL, DZMiUW), the supervising consultants and (sub)contractors, charged

with the implementation of the ORFPP;

* Select and train staff of RZGWGL, RZGWWL and DZMiUW in order to build capacity

in environmental and social affairs and promote a more integrated approach to water

management and flood control within these organisations.

Qualifications

* Education: M.Sc. in environmental, social sciences or land & water management;

* Experience: Preferably at least 5 years experience in management of integrated projects

involving a large social, institutional or environmental component;

* Experience or interest in change management and innovative approaches on floodplain

ecology, hydrology, environmental engineering, land use affairs or resettlement issues;

* Good communication and negotiation skills with proven experience in public participation

and social issues;

* Familiar with Polish environmental legislation;

* Age: preferably between 35 and 45 years

9.3 EMP/RAP TEAMS

Within RZGWGL, RZGWWL and DZMiUW the Environmental & Social specialist

will work together with a small team of 3 engineers within each of these organisations.

These engineers belong to the regular staff of these organisations, but next to their normal

duties they will be working on the implementation of RAP or EMP on a part-time basis.

They will receive special training under the project to perform these tasks. The teams

will be recruited from the regular staff of these organisations on basis of a special recruitment

procedure focussed on staff members shown interest in managing environmental

and resettlement issues. In consultation with the organisations adequate incentives

will be worked out in order to facilitate their career development. Selection criteria could

be as follows:

* Water management engineers interested in integrated approach of projects;

* Capable of working in small teams receiving special training;

* Motivated to initiate change processes;

* Social attitude (interested in public participation, active in public meetings etc);

* Good communication skills.

104

Chapter 9 INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS

9.4 PROFILE DESCRIPTION ENVIRONMENTALUSOCIAL ENGINEERSRZGW/DZMIUW

Responsibility

The environmental or social engineers within RZGWs or DZMiUW are responsiblefor the implementation of the social and environmental tasks described in the EMP or RAPwithin their respective organisations. They will assist and participate in activities aimedat building capacity in management of environmental and social affairs within the ORFPP.In this task they will be supported by the PCU, the M&E Consultants and externalinternational and local experts. They will report to their superiors in the own organisationas well as to the PCU environmental and social specialist.

Task description

* Supervise on behalf of the PCU the implementation of EMP or RAP activities,which are under the competence of their organization;

* Coordinate and assist in the input of external experts and M&E consultants in mattersconcerning the implementation of EMP or RAP;

* Assist in implementing all other activities to reduce or minimise of adverse socialor environmental impacts of the ORFPP;

* Assist in organizing and participate in training activities in environmental managementand resettlement affairs.

Qualifications

* Education: Preferably M.Sc. in environmental sciences, environmental engineering, watermanagement;

* Interested in working in environmental and social components of integrated projects;* Some experience in environmental management including some practice in social issues

(e.g. public consultations or negotiations);

* Age: preferably not older than 35;

* Professional skills: background in hydrology, water management and some knowledgeof EIA procedures, floodplain ecology, public consultations, or social affairs.

9.5 M&E CONSULTANTS

The M& E consultants will support the Environmental & Social Specialist in implementingthe EMP and will provide technical assistance and training to the various parties involvedin the implementation of the project: the water authorities (investors), the consultantsinvolved in supervision of the implementation, and the contractors and sub-contractorsinvolved in the implementation of the project. The M&E consultants will work underthe responsibility of the PCU and will be based in Wroclaw. The main task of the M&Econsultants in respect of the EMP and RAP are the following:

* To guide and supervise the EMP and RAP activities to ensure that socialand environmental impacts are effectively eliminated, controlled or mitigated;

105


* To guide and supervise local consultants and organisations recruited to implementbaseline inventories and monitoring work and the ecological enhancement project;

* To build capacity within the implementing organizations in environmental management

and managing resettlement issues;

* To provide training in environmental management to staff involved in construction

and in the operation of the project.

9.6 CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING.

Capacity building will be aimed at strengthening the RZGWWL, RZGWGL and DZMiUW

organizations in the field of integrated floodplain management and environmentalmanagement. Training in environmental management will be focussed on the implementing

agencies, but should not be restricted to these organizations. Project staff involved

in construction and operation of the project should also be trained. Various types of training

should be given, for various target groups and always tailored to the specific needs. Training

will deal with - among other things - nature friendly design and construction methodologies,

which are widely applied and accepted in Germany, France, the U.K. and the Netherlands.

106

Chapter 10 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS AND DISCLOSURE

CHAPTER 10 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS AND DISCLOSURE

10.1 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS DURING PROJECT PREPARATION

Polish law requires an elaborate procedure for public consultation and disclosure of any worksand construction. This procedure was initiated in a systematic way at the Gmina level throughannouncements and public hearings during 2002 as part of the preparation of feasibilitystudies, even though the project had already been under consideration for a long timeand the local population was aware of such plans. The consultations were undertakenon all project issues such as design, environmental impacts and social impacts of variousproject components. However, since resettlement was the major impact inside the Raciborzreservoir, whereas all people benefiting from flood protection were locatedon the downstream side, separate discussion and consultations were held with the peopleto be resettled during preparation of RAP.

10.2 CONSULTATIONS DURING THE SCOPING STAGE OF THE EA

During the preparation of the EA study there were two stages of consultations: (i) duringthe scoping stage of the study and (ii) during presentation of the findings. During the scopingstage it was decided not to organize a separate public meeting on environmental issues,in view of earlier public meetings on resettlement. In stead of this the EA team had individualmeetings with the various stakeholders, including, the Lubomia Gmina, the ArchaeologicalConservator in Wodzislaw Slaski, the Archaeological Department University of Wroclaw,the Forestry Department in Rudy Raciborskie, WWF Poland, WWF Auen Institute of Rastatt,Germany and various individual experts in nature conservation, geology, soils, ecology,fisheries, and forestry. In December 2004 the EA team attended a resettlement workshopin Raciborz discussing findings of RAP. On January 25th, 2005 the team had a brain stormingmeeting with representatives of WWF on ecological impacts (see Annex DI). Preliminaryfindings and recommendations of the EA were discussed with representatives of RZGWGL,RZGWWL and DZMiUW on March 10 and April 28, 2005.

10.3 CONSULTATIONS DURING THE PRESENTATION OF FINDINGSOF THE EA

After approval of the draft EA version PCU distributed about 40 printed copies of the EAto local authorities and relevant stakeholders in the project. The draft EA was also publishedon the websites of RZGWGL, RZGWWL, DZMiUW on June 15th for a period of 4 weeks.Advertisements in local newspapers in Wroclaw and Raciborz were published with invitationsto the public to participate in two public consultation meetings: (i) a Public Consultationmeeting organized by RZGWWL, DZMiUW in Wroclaw on 30 June 2005 discussingthe impacts of WFS; in this meeting which was held in the Agricultural University 52 personsattended, mainly representing nature conservation organizations and the scientific community.Local authorities and press were not represented. Discussion mainly focused on legal issues,absence of adequate spatial plans and ecological concerns regarding natural habitatsin the Odra and Widawa valley; (ii) a second Public consultation meeting organizedby RZGWGL on July 1, 2005 in the Art Hall in Raciborz, discussing the impactsof the Raciborz dry polder. This meeting was attended by 51 persons, including 7 journalists,a large group of farmers with land in the dry polder, some representatives of the DefenseCommittee and a few NGOs. The discussions in this meeting focused on the social impacts

107


of the project, but also environmental concerns were raised. A summary of the Publicconsultation meetings is given in Annex D2 and D3 of this Report.

A number of letters were received from regional and local authorities, NGOs and a miningcompany. The issues raised and feedback received was very useful in the preparationof this Report. A number of valuable suggestions were included in the EA (see also Annex Dfor further details). Further elaboration of the suggestions and ideas will be needed, during

detailed design and preparation of local EIAs which will be prepared for several projectcomponents of ORFPP.

10.4 FINAL DISCLOSURE OF APPROVED EA

The final text of the EA Summary will be disclosed on the websites of RZGWGL, RZGWWLand DZMiUW. After approval by the Ministry of Environment the Main EA Reportwill be published on the website of this Ministry.

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

1) Badura, J. and B. Przybylski, Morphologic and age correlation of terraces of main riversin Lower Silesia, National Institute of Geology, Warsaw, 2000.

2) CIDA-WARR, Programme for the Oder 2006, Pre-feasibility Study, prepared by RocheConsultants, September 2001.

3) Czajka-Kaczka, A. The rate of sedimentation on regulated river floodplains: the UpperVistula and the Upper Odra River, Southern Poland, Ph.D. thesis, University of Silesia,2004.

4) Dolnoslaskie Voivoidship 2004, Subregions, Powiats and Gmina's, Statistical officeWroclaw, 2004.

5) Dworak, T. and W. Hansen, The European flood approach, International ConferenceTowards natural flood reduction strategies, Warsaw, September 2003.

6) FAO, Gateway to land and water information: Poland national report, Rome, 2001.

7) Gediga, B., Fortified settlements of the Lusatian peoples in Wroclaw-Osobowice,Wroclaw, 1976.

8) Gelderse Poort, Land der lebendigen Fliisse, Die Auenlandschaft de Gelderse Poort,Deutsch-Niederlandisches Landschaftsentwickelungsproject, 2002.

9) Glowacinski, Z. (ed.), Red list of threatened animals in Poland, Krakow, 2002.

10) Glowacinski, Z. and J. Nowacki (eds.), Red book of threatened animals in Poland -Invertebrates, Krakow, 2002.

11) Hilton-Taylor, C. (ed.), Red list of threatened species, IUCN, 2000.

12) Hoffmann W, Die vorgeschichtlichen Funde von Breslau-Oswitz und RansernKr. Breslau, Altschlesien, vol 10, p. 7-25, 1941.

13) IKSO, Common strategy for flood control, Wroclaw, 2002.

14) Kacki, Z. (ed.), Endangered vascular plants of Lower Silesia, Wroclaw, 2003.15) Kazmierczakowa, R. and K. Zarzycki (eds.), Red book of vascular plants in Poland,

Krakow, 2001.

16) Kulczycka-Leciejewiczowa, A., Neolithic settlement in SW Poland, Wroclaw, 1993.17) Matuszkiewicz, W. The guide for the designation of plant communities in Poland,

Warszawa, 2001.

18) Mlynarska-Kaletynowa, M., Wroclaw in the 12 h-13th century. Social and economicalchanges, Wroclaw, 1986.

19) Nowak, A. and K. Spalek (eds.), Red book of vascular plants in Opolskie voivodship,Opole, 2003.

20) Official Journal of the European Union, page 894-897, 23 September 2003.21) Panstwowy Instytut Geologiczny, Geological Map of Poland, scale 1:200 000, Warschau,

1994.

22) Regional Water Management Authority Wroclaw, Feasibility Study for the RaciborzFlood Reservoir on the River Odra, Main Report and Technical Annexes, October 2003,Jacobs, in cooperation with Hydroproject, Hydroproject-Wroclaw and JacobsGibb.

109


23) Regional Water Management Authority Wroclaw, Feasibility Study for the RaciborzFlood Reservoir on the River Odra, Modernization of Wroclaw Water System, FinalReport and Technical Annexes, February 2004, Jacobs, in cooperation with Hydroproject,Hydroproject-Wroclaw and JacobsGibb.

24) Sarnowska, W., Unietic culture in Poland,v. II, Wroclaw, 1975.

25) Witkowski, A. Blachuta, J., Kotusz, J. and T. Hesse, Red list of Polish freshwaterichthyofauna, Chronmy Przyrode Ojczysta, 55 (4), pp. 5-19, 1999.

26) Witkowski,A. Blachuta, J., Kotusz, J. and J. Kusznierz, Lampreys and fishes of the Upperand Mid Odra Basin, Silesia, SW Poland, The present situation, Acta Hydrobiol, 42 (3/4)

p. 283-303, 2000.

27) Wojciechowski, W., Neolithic deposits from Gajkow, Wroclaw voivodship, SilesiaAntiqua, vol. 38: p. 7-19, 1996.

28) WWF Oder Auenatlas, WWF Auen Institute in cooperation with WWF Germany, 2000.

29) WWF Poland (ed.) in cooperation with Birdlife-Poland, Naturalist Club, Polish Societyfor Nature Protection "Salamandra", Natura 2000 Shadow List in Poland, Warsaw,December 2004.

30) Zaleski, J and J. Winter, Strategy of Modernization of Oder River Water System.Programme for the Oder 2006, Scientific Publisher PWN, Warsaw-Wroclaw 2000.

31) Zarzycki, K. Wojewoda W. and Z. Heinrich (eds.), List of endangered plants in Poland,

Krakow, 1992.

32) Zastawny, J. Grassland and Pasture crops, Country Pasture /Forage Resource profiles,FAO, Rome, 2002.

110

ANNEXES

ANNEX A

LISTS OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECT AREA

Al. List of plants available in the project area

A2. List of invertebrates available in the project area

A3. List of amphibians available in the project area

A4. List of reptiles available in the project area

A5. List of birds available in the project area

A6. List of mammals available in the project area

A7. List of fish fauna available in the project area

ANNEX A * LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECT AREA

A1-6. List of plants, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals available in project area

0 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0C_ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~C o0 0 0 wULp. Takson Name (english) m B 0 c E

(D 0 __ E..

Al. PLANTS

1 Ophioglossum vulgatum Adders-tongue S (a) VU/NT + _2 Salvinia natans floating watermoss I S V VU + + +3 Matteucia struthiopteris ostrich fern S VU ?4 Hacquetia epipactis hacquetia S EN +5 Angelica archangelica garden angelica S + + +6 Viola stagnina fen violet S (a) V VU ? +7 Centaurium erythraea common centaury S + +8 Gentiana pneumonanthe marsh gentian S (a) V VU +9 Dianthus superbus large pink S (a) V VU/EN ? ?10 Nymphea candida S NU ? +11 Trollius europaeus globeflower S (a) VU/CR ?12 Hepatica nobilis liverleaf S +13 Batrachium trichophyllum thread-leaved water-crowfoot S +14 Trapa natans water chestnut S (a!!!) V/CR ENNU + + +15 Elatine triandra three-stamened waterwort S NU VU ? +16 Utricularia vulgaris greater bladderwort S + +17 Rosa gallica red rose S (a) VNU VU + +18 Daphne mezereum mezereon S + ? +19 Digitalis grandiflora yellow foxglove S + +20 Lindemia procumbens IV S (!!!) /CR VU/CR ? ?21 Galanthus nivalis snowdrop V S NT + + +22 Leucoium vemum spring snowflake S NT + +?23 Iris sibirica siberian iris S (a) V VU/RE + +24 Gladiolus imbricatus gladiolus S (a) VU +25 Scilla bifolia alpine squill S CR +

ANNEX A * LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECT AREA, cont

> C (A 0 (o L.o e c 0 ' 0

Lp. Takson Name (english) o n wm m E I m Y Yj Y. 6.0D 0 (U ..J

26 Lilium martagon martagon lily S LC +

27 Muscari comosum tassel hyacinth S (a) R/CR CR/RE +

28 Omithogalum umbellatum garden star-of-bethlehem S LC +? +?

29 Colchicum autumnale meadow saffron S (a) LC + +

30 Cephalanthera damasonium white helleborine S R VU +

31 Neottia nidus-avis bird's-nest orchid S VU +

32 Epipactis helleborine broad-leaved helleborine S + + +

33 Epipactis albensis S NU DD/EN + +

34 Epipactis purpurata violet helleborine S R VU + + +

35 Dactylorhiza majalis broad-leaved marsh orchid S (a) NT + +

36 Dactylorhiza maculata western marsh-orchid S (a) V VU +? +?

37 Listera ovata common twayblade S +

38 Platanthera bifolia lesser butterfly-orchid S LC +

39 Hedera helix (common) ivy P + + +

40 Menyanthes trifoliata bogbean P vu +

41 Nuphar lutea yellow water-lily P + + +

42 Nymphea alba white water-lily P LC + +

43 Asarum europaeum asarabacca P +

44 Galium odoratum woodruff P +

45 Primula elatior oxlip P +46 Vibumum opulus guelder-rose P + + +

47 Ribes nigrum black currant P + +

48 Frangula alnus alder buckthorn P + +

49 Vinca minor lesser periwinkle P + + +

50 Helichrysum arenarium helichrysum P + +

51 Allium ursinum ramsons P + +

52 Convallaria majalis lily-of-the-valley P + +

ANNEXA LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECTAREA, cont.

Lp. Takson Name (english) m a L. E Dz

A2. INVERTEBRATES

1 Cerambyx cerdo cerambyx longicorn _ 11 IV S (a) VU VU + +2 Osmodemrna eremita hermit beetle 11 II* IV S (a !!!) VU VU + +3 Eriogaster catax 1111 IV S EN +4 Maculinea teleius scarce large blue 11 11 IV S (a) (LR)NT LC +5 Maculinea nausithous dusky large blue 11 11 IV S (a) (LR)NT LC + +6 Argiope bruennichi S + + +7 Helix pomatia III V +

A3. AMPHIBIANS

1 Triturus vulgaris smooth newt _ S (a) + + +2 Tnturus cristatus great crested newt 11 11 IV S (a) + +3 Pelobates fuscus common spadefoot 11 IV S (a) + +4 Bombina bombina fire-bellied toad 11 11 IV S (a) DD (E) + + +5 Bufo bufo common toad IlIl S (a) + + +6 Bufo calamita matterjack toad 11 IV S (a) ? +7 Bufo viridis green toad 11 IV S (a) (R) + + +8 Hyla arborea common tree frog 11 IV S (a) NT + + +9 Rana lessonae pool frog Il IV S (a) + + +10 Rana esculenta edible frog IlIl V S (a) + + +11 Rana ridibubda marsh frog IlIl V S (a) (R) + + +12 Rana temporaria common frog IlIl V S (a) + + +13 Rana arvalis moor frog _ _ IV S (a) (R) + + +


0 0 4 ***SD

Lp. Takson Name (english) u) c '

0) 0 !- (U_

A4. REPTILES

1 Lacerta agilis sand lizard _1 IV S + + +

2 Lacerta vivipara common lizard IlIl S + + +

3 Anguis fragilis slow worm IlIl S (R) + + +

4 Natrix natrix grass snake IlIl S (R) + + +

5 Vipera berus adder IlIl S + ? ?

6 Emys orbicularis european pond turtle _ 11 IV S (a !!!) (LR)NT EN + ?

A5. BIRDS

1 Podiceps cristatus great crested grebe S + + +

2 Podiceps grisegena red-necked grebe IlIl S ? + +

3 Podiceps nigricollis black-necked grebe IlIl S ? + +

4 Tachybaptus ruficolus little grebe IlIl S + + +

5 Phalacrocorax carbo cormorant Ill P ? +? +

6 Botaurus stellaris bittern III 2 I S LC ? + +

7 Ixobrychus minutus little bittern 11 2 I S (a) VU + + +

8 Nycticorax nycticorax night heron 11 I S (a !!!) Z LC ? ? ?

9 Ardea cinerea grey heron IlIl P, H ? + +

10 Egretta alba great white egret IlIl I S ? ?

11 Ciconia nigra black stork 11 I S (a T!!) Z ? +? +

12 Ciconia ciconia white stork 1I S (a) + + +

13 Cygnus olor mute swan Il 11/2 S + + +

14 Anser anser greylag goose Il 11/1 111/2 H ? ? +

15 Anasacuta pintail III 11/1 111/2 S(a) EN ? +? +?

16 Anas clypeata shoveler III 11/1 111/2 S (a) ? + +

17 Anas querquedula garganey IlIl Il/1 S (a) + + +

18 Anas strepera gadwall IlIl Il/1 S + + +

19 Anas crecca teal III 11/1 111/2 H ? + +

20 Anas platyrhynchos mallard III 11/1 111/1 H + + +

21 Aythya ferina pochard III 11/1 111/2 H NT + + +

22 Aythya nyroca ferruginous duck III 2 . S (VU) EN I_ I_?_I + +

ANNEXA * LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECTAREA, cont.

0 0~~~~~~~

Lp. Takson Name (english) o c D

I m m a .I_

23 Aythya fuligula tufted duck iII Il/ 111/2 H + + +24 Bucephala clangula goldeneye III 11/2 S (a) +? +25 Mergus merganser goosander III 11/2 S (a) + +26 Netta rufina red-crested pochard III 2 S LC ? + +27 Pemis apivorus honney buzzard 11 I S + +28 Milvus migrans black kite 11 2 2 I S (!!!) Z NT + +29 Milvus milvus red kite 11 2 2 I S (!!!) Z NT + +30 Haliaeetus albicilla white-tailed eagle 11 1 I S (!!!) Z NT LC + + +31 Circus aeruginosus marsh harrier 11 I S (a) + + +32 Circus pygargus Montagu's harrier 11 S (a) ? ?33 Accipter gentilis goshawk 11 S ? + +34 Accipter nisus sparrowhawk 11 S + +35 Buteo buteo buzzard 11 S + + +36 Aquila pomafina lesser spotted eagle 11 2 I S (!!!) Z LC +37 Falco subbuteo hobby 11 S (a) ? + +38 Falco tinnunculus kestrel 11 S (a) + + +39 Perdix perdix partridge III 1I/1 11I/1 H + + +40 Coturnix cotumix quail III 2 11/2 S DD + + +41 Phasianus colchicus phaesant Il 11/1 Ill/1 H + + +42 Grus grus crane 1I S (a) + +43 Fulica atra coot IlIl I/1 111/2 H + + +44 Gallinula chloropus moorhen III 11/2 S + +? +?45 Porzana porzana spotted crake 11 2 I S (a) DD ? + +46 Porzana parva little crake 11 2 I S NT ? ? +47 Crex crex corn crake 11 I S (a) NT DD + + +48 Rallus aquaticus water rail III 11/2 S + + +49 Charadfius dubius little ringed plover 11 S + ? +50 Charadrius hiaticula ringed plover 11 2 S (a) VU ? ?51 Vanellus vanellus lapwing III 11/2 S (a) + + +52 Actitis hypoleucos common sandpiper IlIl S ? ? +?53 Scolopax rusticola woodcock III 2 11/1 111/2 H DD +? +

ANNEX A * LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECT AREA, cont.

_> >O (0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~C 0 0 (

Lp. Takson Name (english) o u

0 0o CU .- n w a. I E

54 Gallinago gallinago snipe Ill Il/ 111/2 S (a) ? + +55 Limosa limosa black-tailed godwit III 11/2 S (a) ? + +56 Tringa totanus redshank ll S ? + +57 Tringa ochropus green sandpiper 11 S (a) ? +58 Larus canus common gull Il 11/2 S + ? +59 Larus ndibundus black-headed gull III 11/2 S + + +60 Stema hirundo common tern 11 I S (a) + ?61 Columba oenas stock dove Il 11/2 S ? + +62 Columba palumbus wood pigeon Il/1 Ill/1 H + + +63 Streptopelia decaocto collared dove III 11/2 S + + +

64 Streptopelia turtur turtle dove Il 11/2 S DD (R) + + +65 Cuculus canorus cuckoo ll S + + +

66 Athene noctua little owl 11 S (a) ? ? ?67 Glaucidium passennum pygmy owl 11 2 i S (a) NT ? ? ?68 Strix aluco tawny owl 11 S + + +

69 Tyto alba barn owl 11 S (a) ? ? ?70 Asio otus long-eared owl 11 S + + +

71 Aegolius funereus Tengmalm's owl 11 2 1 S (a) LC ?72 Capnmulgus europaeus nightjar 1 S ? +73 Apus apus swift ll S + + +?74 Alcedo atthis kingfisher 11 S (a) + + +

75 Upupa epops hoopoe 1 S (a) DD ? +? +76 Dendrocopos leucotos white-backed woodpecker 11 I S (a) NT ?77 Dendrocopos major great spotted woodpecker 11 S + + +78 Dendrocopos medius middle spotted woodpecker 11 I S (a) + + +79 Dendrocopos minor lesser spotted woodpecker 11 S + + +80 Dendrocopos syriacus syrian woodpecker 11 S ? ?81 Dryocopus martius black woodpecker 11 S (a) ? + +82 Jynx torquilla wryneck il S + + +

83 Picus canus grey-headed woodpecker 11 S (a) + + +

84 Picus viridis green woodpecker 1 S (a) ? + +

85 Alauda arvensis skylark II 11/2 S + + +

ANNEX A * LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECT AREA, cont.

,. 0

0) (Lp. Takson Name (english) 0 a 2 i

c o o B a Z.

86 Galerida cristata crested lark IS DD ? + +87 Lullula arborea woodlark liI S ? +? +88 Delichon urbica house martin 11 S + + +89 Hinundo rustica swallow 11 S + + +90 Riparia riparia sand martin 11 S + + +91 Anthus campestris tawny pipit 11 S + + +92 Anthus pratensis meadow pipit 11 S ? + +93 Anthus trivialis tree pipit 11 S + + +94 Motacilla alba white wagtail 11 S + + +95 Motacilla cinerea grey wagtail 11 S ?96 Motacilla flava yellow wagtail 11 S + + +97 Troglodytes troglodytes wren 11 S + + +98 Prunella modularis dunnock S + ? +?99 Erithacus rubecula robin 11 S + + +

100 Luscinia luscinia thrush nightingale 11 S + +101 Luscinia megarhynchos nightingale 11 S + + +102 Luscinia svecica bluethroat 11 S NT ? + +103 Oenanthe oenanthe wheatear 11 S ? + +104 Phoenicurus ochruros black redstart 11 S + + +105 Phoenicurus phoenicurus redstart 11 S ? + +106 Saxicola rubetra whinchat 11 S (R) + + +107 Saxicola torquata stonechat il S + + +108 Turdus iliacus redwing III 11/2 S 7 7109 Turdus merula blackbird III 11/2 S + + +110 Turdus philomelos song thrush III 11/2 S + + +111 Turdus pilaris fieldfare IlIl S + + +112 Turdus viscivorus mistle thrush III 11/2 S ? ? ?113 Acrocephalus anundinaceus great reed warbler 11 S + + +114 Acrocephalus palustris marsh warbler 11 S + + +115 Acrocephalus schoenobaenus sedge warbler 11 S + + +116 Acrocephalus scirpaceus reed warbler li S + + +

ANNEX A LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECT AREA, cont

> U) U)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~) (0 0

Lp. Takson Name (english) 0 o =00 E El

117 Hippolais icterina icterine warbler S + + +

118 Locustella fluviatilis river warbler 11 S + + +

119 Locustella Iuscinioides Savi's warbler 11 S + + +

120 Locustella naevia grasshoper warbler 11 S + + +

121 Muscicapa striata spotted flycatcher 11 S ? + +

122 Phylloscopus collybita chiffchaff 11 S + + +

123 Phylloscopus sibilatrix wood warbler 11 S + + +

124 Phylloscopus trochilus willow warbler 11 S + + +

125 Regulus ignicapillus firecrest 11 S + + +

126 Regulus regulus goldcreast 11 S + + +

127 Sylvia atricapilla blackcap 11 S + + +

128 Sylvia borin garden warbler 11 S + + +

129 Sylvia communis whitethroat 11 S + + +

130 Sylvia curnuca lesser whitethroat 11 S + + +

131 Sylvia nisona barred warbler 1 S ? + +

132 Filcedula albicollis collared flycatcher 1 S + + +

133 Filcedula hypoleuca pied flycatcher 11 S ? + +

134 Filcedula parva red-breasted flycatcher 1 S +? +

135 Panurus biarmicus bearded tit 11 S LC ? ? ?

136 Aegithalos caudatus long-tailed tit ll S + + +

137 Parus ater coal tit 11 S ? +

138 Parus caeruleus blue tit 11 S + + +

139 Parus cristatus crested tit 11 S ? + +

140 Parus major great tit 11 S + + +

141 Parus montanus willow tit 11 S ? + +

142 Parus palustris marsh tit 11 S + + +

143 Sitta europaea nuthatch 11 S + + +

144 Certhia brachydactyla short-toed treecreeper 11 S + + +

145 Certhia familiaris treecreeper 11 S + + +

146 Remiz pendulinus penduline tit ll S + + +

147 Oriolus oriolus golden oriole 11 S + + +

148 Lanius collurio red-backed shrike 11 _ I S + + +

ANNEXA -LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECTAREA, cont

Lp. Takson Name (english) o'

. m m a. I IE

149 Lanius excubitor great grey shrike 11 S + + +150 Corvus corax raven 1 P + + +151 Corvus comix hooded crow 11/2 P + + +152 Corvus frugilegus rook 11/2 P ? + +153 Corvus monedula jackdaw 11/2 S ? + +154 Garrulus glandarius jay 11/2 S + + +155 Pica pica magpie 11/2 P + + +156 Stumus vulgaris starling 11/2 S + + +157 Passer domesticus house sparrow S + + +158 Passer montanus tree sparrow 111 S + + +159 Carduelis cannabina linnet II S + + +160 Carduelis carduelis goldfinch 11 S + + +161 Carduelis chloris greenfinch 11 S + + +162 Carpodacus erythrinus scarlet rosefinch 11 S + + +163 Coccothraustes coccothraustes hawfinch 11 S + + +164 Fringilla coelebs chaffinch 111 S + + +165 Pyrrhula pyrrhula bullfinch 111 S ? + +166 Serinus serinus serin 11 S + + +167 Emberizia calandra corn bunting 111 S (R) + + +168 Emberizia citrinella yellowhammer 11 S + + +169 Emberizia hortulana ortolan bunting 1 I S (R) + + +170 Embezia schoeniculus reed bunting _ S + + +


> W (U)o o 0 @ Lp. Takson Name (english) t0 c m n

c o F Ew0 _jEm m I m) I 0. Q 0.

A6. MAMMALS

1 Erinaceus europaeus western european hedgehog III S (a) + + +2 Erinaceus concolor eastern european hedgehog S (a) + +?3 Sorex araneus eurasian shrew Il S + + +

4 Sorex minutus eurasian pigmy shrew III S (R) + + +

5 Neomys fodiens eurasian water shrew IlIl S + + +

6 Crocidura suaveolens lesser shrew ll S + + +

7 Talpa europaea european mole P + + +

8 Myotis daubentonii Daubenton's bat 11 IV S + +9 Myotis dasycneme pond bat 11 2 11 IV S (a !!!) VU EN +10 Myotis nattereri Natterer's bat 11 IV S + +11 Myotis mystacinus/brandtii whiskered / Brandt's bat 11 IV S + +12 Myotis myotis mouse-eared bat 11 11 IV S (LR)NT +13 Pipistrellus pipstrellus common pipistrella IlIl IV S + +14 Pipistrellus pygmaeus soprano pipistrella 11 IV S +15 Pipistrellus nathusii Nathusius's pipistrella 11 IV S + +16 Nyctalus noctula noctule 11 IV S + +17 Nyctalus leisleri Leisler's noctule 11 2 IV S (LR)NT VU +18 Eptesicus serotinus serotina 11 IV S + +19 Plecotus auritus brown big-eared bat 11 IV S + +20 Plecotus austriacus gray big-eared bat 11 IV S +

21 Barbastella barbastellus western barbastelle 11 2 11 IV S VU DD +22 Sciurus vulgaris red squirrel IlIl S NT (V) +23 Glis glis fat dormouse IlIl S (a) (LR)NT NT + +?24 Muscardinus avenallarius hazel dormouse IlIl IV S (a) (LR)NT (R) +25 Mustela erminea ermine IlIl S +26 Mustela nivalis least weasel IlIl S + +27 Lutra lutra common otter 11 11 IV P NT + +

28 Castor fiber eurasian beaver IlIl i V P NT + +

29 Micromys minutus harvest mouse P (LR)NT (R) +30 Arvicola terrestris european water vole P +31 Apodemus sylvaticus long-tailed field mouse P +

ANNEXA -LIST OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS IN THE PROJECTAREA, cont.

0 0 L Lp. Takson Name (english) L) L)LU to _(U .J E

32 Cervus elaphus elk 111 H +33 Capreolus capreolus western roe deer 111 H +34 Sus scrofa wild boar H +35 Vulpes vulpes red fox H +36 Meles meles eurasian badger 111 H + + +37 Mustela putorius european polecat 111 V H +38 Martes martes european pine marten III V H +39 Martes foina beech marten 111 H + + +40 Ondatra zibethica muskrat H +41 Lepus europaeus european hare 111 H +

Explanations(signes in columns):

i. Bern Convention: I - Annex I (strictly protected flora species)11 - Annex 11 (strictly protected fauna species)III -Annex Ill (protected fauna species)

ii. Bonn Convention: I - Annex I11-Annex 11

iii. CITES: I - Annex I11-Annex 11

iv. Bird directive 7914091EEC: I - Annex I (bird species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special protection areas - SPA)I1/1 - Annex I1/111/2 - Annex 11/2111/1 -Annex 111/1111/2 - Annex 111/2

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


v. Habitat directive 92143/EEC: II - Annex II (animal and plant species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areasof conservation - SAC)

IV - Annex IV (animal and plant species of community interest in need of strict protection)V - Annex V (animal and plant species of community interest whose taking in the wild and exploitation may be subject

to management measures)*- priority species

vi. Polish status of protection: S - strictly protected taxa and: (a) - active protection methods required;(!!!) - priority of protection over any other form of management

P - partly protected taxaH - species protected by hunting/game law (intermittent protection)Z - protected buffer zone arround species localities

vii. classification based on IUCN Red List categories (mainly on ver. 3.1. from 2000) where particular symbols depicting differences in extiction risk:sources (in accordance):IRL (international red list) - on line IUCN red list database: www.redlist.orgPRL (Polish red lists) - List of threatened plants in Poland 1992; Polish red data book of plants 2001; Red list of threatened animals in Poland 2002RRL (regional red lists) - Endangered vascular plants of Lower Silesia 2003; Opolskie voivodship's red data book of plants 2002;

Red list of vascular plants of upper Silesia 1996categories (in brackets "old" one):RE - regionally extinctCR - critically endangeredEN (E) - endangeredVU (V) - vulnerableNT - near threatened (also used LR - lower risk)LC - least concern (also used LR - lower risk)DD - data deficientLR - lower risk NT + LC (wider category from ver. 3.0.)(R) - rare

viii. localities of listed taxa in three sections: Racib Res - Raciborz reservoir; WWS - Wroclaw Water System; Imp. Area - the impact area between Raciborz and Olawa+ - occurence? - probably occurence

A7. List of fish fauna available in project area

Latin name Polish name English name RL I RG I HG MGNATIVE SPECIES

1 Petromyzon marinus minog morski Sea lamprey CE LITH RH LAC2 Eudontomyzon mariae minog ukrainski Ukrainian lamprey EN LITH RH POT3 Lampetra fluviatilis minog rzeczny River lamprey EN LITH RH LAC4 Lampetra planeri minog strumieniowy Brook lamprey NT LITH RH POT5 Acipenser sturio jesiotr zachodni Sturgeon EX LITH RH LAC6 Anguilla anguilla wegorz Eel CD EUR LAC7 Alosa alosa aloza Allis shad EN RH LAC8 Alosa fallax parposz Twaite shad CE RH LAC9 Barbus barbus brzana Barbel EN LITH RH POT10 Carassius carassius karas Crucian carp LC PHYT LI11 Gobio gobio kielb Gudgeon LC PSAM RH12 Romanogobio albipinnatus kielb bialopletwy Whitefin gudgeon NT LITH RH13 Tinca tinca lin Tench LC PHYT LI14 Rhodeus amarus rozanka Bitterling NT OSTR LI15 Abramis brama leszcz Bream LC PHLI EUR POT16 Abramis bjoerkna krap White bream LC PHLI EUR17 Abramis ballerus rozpior Blue bream LC LITH RH18 Vimba vimba certa Zahrte (Vimba) CE LITH RH POT19 Rutilus rutilus ploc Roach LC PHLI EUR20 Scardinius erythrophthalmus wzdrega Rudd LC PHYT LI21 Chondrostoma nasus swinka Nase EN LITH RH POT22 Aspius aspius bolen Asp LC LITH EUR POT23 Leucaspius delineatus slonecznica Sunbleak LC PHYT LI24 Eupallasiella perenurus strzebla blotna Lake minnow CE PHYT LI25 Phoxinus phoxinus strzebla potokowa Minnow LC LITH RH26 Leuciscus leuciscus jelec Dace LC LITH RH27 Leuciscus cephalus klen Chub LC LITH RH POT28 Leuciscus idus jaz Ide LC PHLI RH POT29 Pelecus cultratus ciosa Ziege CE EUR POT30 Albumus albumus ukleja Bleak LC PHLI EUR31 Albumoides bipunctatus piekielnica Spirlin, Schneider CE LITH RH32 Cobitis taenia koza Spined loach LC PHYT EUR33 Cobitis elongatoides koza dunajska DD34 Sabanejevia aurata koza ziotawa Golden loach CE35 Misgumus fossilis piskorz Weatherfish NT PHYT LI36 Barbatula barbatulus sliz Stone loach LC LITH RH37 Silurus glanis sum Wels NT PHYT EUR38 Esox lucius szczupak Pike LC PHYT EUR39 Osmerus eperlanus stynka Smelt VU EUR40 Coregonus albula sielawa Vendace VU LITH LI41 Coregonus lavaretus sieja Whitefish EN LITH EUR POT

Latin name Polish name English name RL RG HG MG

42 Thymallus thymallus lipien Grayling VU LITH RH POT

43 Salmo salar losos Atlantic salmon CD LITH RH LAC

44 Salmo trutta trutta troc wedrowna Trout CD LITH RH LAC

45 Salmo trutta lacustris troc jeziorowa Lake trout CE LITH

46 Salmo trutta fario pstrag potokowy Brown trout LC LITH RH

47 Lota Iota mietus Burbot VU LITH EUR POT

48 Pungitius pungitius cierniczek Ninespined stickleback LC PHYT LI

49 Gasterosteus aculeatus ciernik stickleback LC PHYT EUR

50 Cottus gobio glowacz bialopletwy Bullhead VU LITH RH

51 Cottus poecilopus glowacz pregopletwy Alpine bullhead VU LITH RH

52 Perca fluviatilis okon Perch LC PHLI EUR

53 Gymnocephalus cemuus jazgarz Ruffe LC PHLI EUR

54 Sander lucioperca sandacz Pikeperch LC PHYT EUR

EXOTIC SPECIES

1 Cyprinus carpio karp Carp Y

2 Carassius auratus karas srebrzysty Goldfish Y PHYT LI

3 Ctenopharyngodon idella amur Grass carp Y EUR

4 Pseudorasbora parva czebaczek amurski Stone moroco Y LI

5 Hypophthalmichthys molitrix tolpyga biala Silver carp Y LI

6 Hypophthalmichthys nobilis tolpyga pstra Bighead carp Y LI

7 Ictalurus nebulosus sumik karlowaty Y

8 Clarias geriepinus sum afrykanski Y

9 Umbra krameri mulawka dunajska European mudminnow Y PHYT LI

10 Umbra pygmea mulawka wschodnio- Eastern mudminnow Y LIamerykanska

11 Coregonus peled peluga Northern whitefish Y LITH LI POT

12 Coregonus muksun muksun Y

13 Thmallus baicalensis lipien bajkalski Baical black grayling Y LITH

14 Hucho hucho glowacica Danube salmon Y LITH RH POT

15 Salvelinus fontinalis pstrag zrodlany Brook char Y LITH RH

16 Oncorhynchus mykiss pstrag teczowy Rainbow trout Y LITH RH POT

17 Microptenus salmoides bass wielkogeby Large-mouth bass Y PHYT

18 Lepomis gibbosus bass sloneczny Pumpkinseed Y LI

19 Oreochromis niloticus tilapia nilowa Nile tilapia Y

Explanation:RL - Polish Red list:

EX - extinct; CE - Critically endangered; EN - endangered; VU - vulnerable;CD - conservation dependent; NT - near threatened; LC - least concern; DD - data deficient; Y - alien.

RG - Reproductive guild:LITH - lythophils; OSTR - ostracophils; PHLI - phytolithophils; PHYT - phytophils; PSAM - psammophils.

HG - Habitat guild:EUR - euryokous; LI - lithophilous; RH - rheophilious.

MG - type of migration:LAC - long-distance migrators, anadromous; POT - potadromous

ANNEX B

IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINEECOSYSTEMS IN THE UPPER AND MIDDLE ODRA RIVER

I

ii

i

I

ANNEX B* IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS

Details of potentially affected sites by the construction and operation of the Raciborz reservoir

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals RemarksI bank area habitat types protection/proposal Raciborz reservoir

1. Meander Odry / ca. 25 / L+r ca. 170 ha S-P; o OChK; not sufficient No impact InternationalBoundary (habitats level of protection ecological corridorMeander of Odra code: 3150, Potential Natura of upper Odra -river 3270) site (SAC) 19m ECONET PL

"GranicznyMeander Odry"(PLH 240013)165.6 ha

2. Wielikat / ca. 35 I R ca. 700 ha W ZPK Wielikat No direct impact, Monitoring of water InternationalWielikat Ponds (636.96 ha); but during quality (verifying ecological corridor

not sufficient level construction phase of the possible of upper Odra -of protection possibility of minor influence of coal 19m ECONET PLPotential Natura damages waste deposit sitesite (SPA) "Stawy (the vicinity in Bukow);Wielikat i Ligota of the lateral Water outflowTworkowska" embankment) system from(PLB 240004) Possibilities Wielikat pondsca. 972.5 ha of reverting/damage should be studiedIBA PL121 of water outflow and thoroughly(Important Bird system of Wielikat designedArea) ponds by creation

of the barrier (lateralembankment)

ANNEX B -IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals RemarksI bank area habitat types protection/proposal Raciborz reservoir

3. Las Tworkowski c ca. 35 L ca. 170 ha F-U; G-C, W Not protected! Risk of damage Creation of buffer InternationalTworkowski (habitats Potential Natura during construction zone during ecological corridorForest code: 91 FO) site (SAC) "Las kolo During Operation construction; of upper Odra -

Tworkowa" of Raciborz Ecological and 19m ECONET PL125.9 ha reservoir: hydrological Largest surviving

Flooding by floods monitoring; remnants of partlywith return period Improvement active alluvial forestmore than 8-10 ovemem between Ostravayears foofrwatersystem and Kedzierzyn-yearsfor priods within forestKoeof 8-14 days, complexKziedependingof reservoirmanagement

4. Starorzecza w ca. 40-45 I L ca. 150 ha S-P; c; o, W. Not protected! Risk of damage Creation of buffer InternationalSudole / Oxbows 0 during construction zone during ecological corridorin Sudol Flooding by floods construction of upper Odra -

with return period Conversion I 9m ECONET PLmore than 8-10 of arable fields into Largest oxbow lakeyears for periods meadows, complex in Upperof 8-14 days, especially along Odra valleydepending the Odra channelof reservoir and present Psinamanagement outlet;

Improvement andstrengtheningof ecologicalconnection with LasTworkowski

Ecological____ ____ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ___ ____ ___ m o n ito ring _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

ANNEX B * IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont.

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals Remarks/ bank area habitat types protection/proposal Raciborz reservoir5. Laki na E od ca. 40 km / R ca. 20-30 ha m Not protected! Partly within Protection of the International

Nieboczowa Raciborz reservoir remnants of the wet ecological corridor(Nieboczowych) / and beneath meadows along of Upper Odra -Meadows E of the lateral dike the ailway road 19m ECONET PLNieboczowa Risk of damage (below and over it) The total area(Nieboczowych) during construction Avoiding possible of meadows

damages (ground diminished in lastexcavation for years, but there aredikes; building still some remnantsof the main dam in small valleysand left lateral dike) along the railway

road6. Stawy w Brzeziu ca. 45/ R ca. 50 ha F-A; m; W; 0 Not protected! Inundation Creation of buffer InternationalI Brzezie Ponds Trapa natans probability reduced; zone around ponds ecological corridorand Meadows Situated just behind against of Upper Odra -around them th andmencroachment 1 9m ECONET PL

of Raciborz of reservoirreservoir.:investments

possibility (building of theof damage during main dam);the construction Ecologicalof the main dam. and hydrological

Supply by natural monitoringstreams will be of ground waterblocked by the level and qualityreservoir

ANNEX B * IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals Remarks/ bank area habitat types protection/proposal Raciborz reservoir

7. Lezczok / ca. 55-60 I R ca. 600 ha G-C; F-A, m, Nature reserve No direct impact International

Lezczok Ponds W, O LP "Cysterskie ecological corridor

Trapa natans Kompozycje of Upper Odra -Krajobrazowe Rud ~~~~19m ECONET PL

(habitats Wielkich" Outside the active

code: 3130; Wekc"flood plainMisgurnus Potential Naturafossilis) site (SAC) "Stawy

Lt,zczok"(PLH 240010)583.1 ha

8. Leg w Starym ca. 85-90 I R ca. 50 ha F-A Not protected! Impact is that Detailed study International

Kozlu / Riverine LP "Cysterskie probability of local water ecological corridor

Forest in Stare Kompozycje of flooding resources and their of Upper Odra -

Kozle Krajobrazowe Rud is reduced almost management 19m ECONET PL

Wielkich" to zero Ecological Small but importantand hydrological remnant ofmonitoring deciduous swampyof ground water forest betweenlevel Kedzierzyn-Kozle

and KuzniaRaciborska

ANNEX B * IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals Remarks/ bank area habitat types protection/proposal Raciborz reservoir9. Leg ca. 100-110 I ca. 800 ha S-P; F-U; G- OChK; not sufficient Impact is that Detailed study InternationalZdzeszowicki / L C; m; o; W; 0 level of protection probability of local water ecological corridorZdzieszowicki Upstream part of of flooding resources and their of Upper Odra -Riverine Forest the potential Natura is strongly reduced management 19m ECONET PL

sites (SAC) Improvement of Largest remnant"Opolska Dolina water system within of riverine forestOdry" forest complex complexes in the(PLH 240013) (ditches etc.) Upper Odra Valley3 739.7 ha Ecological and between Opole

hydrological and Polish-Czechmonitoring of borderground water level

Verification of theStradunia polderconceptdownstream of LegZdzieszowickiforests (accordinglyto OAA floodedarea reduced abouthalf)

10. Dolina Odry ca. 100-110 / ca. 1 000- S-P; F-U; G- Not protected! Minor changes in Ecological Internationalpomiqdzy Zuzela L+R 1 500 ha C; o; W; 0 Downstream part of flood regime and hydrological ecological corridora Rogowem Potential Natura predicted monitoring of upper Odra -Opolskim I Odra site (SAC) "Opolska of ground water 19m ECONET PLvalley between Dolina Odry" (PLH levelZuzela and 240013) 3 739.7 haRogow Opolski

ANNEX B - IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals Remarks/ bank area habitat types protectioniproposal Raciborz reservoir

11. Dolina Odry ca. 162-182 / ca. 2 500 ha S-P; F-U; G- Upper part of Minor changes in Ecological International core

pomie,dzy L+R C; o; W; 0 Natura sites (SPA) flood regime and hydrological area of middle Odra

Zelazna a "Grady Odrzanskie" predicted monitoring - 19M ECONET PL

ujsciem Nysy (PLB 020003) (drying of small of ground water

Klodzkiej / Odra 20 461.3 ha forest area) level

valley between IBA PL090 Improvement of

Zelazna and (Important Bird water system within

Nysa Klodzka Area) forest complex

confluence (ditches etc.)

12. Dolina Odry ca. 182-197 / ca. 2 500 ha S-P; F-U; G- Upper part of Minor changes in Ecological International core

pomiedzy L+R C; c; o; W; 0; Natura site (SPA) flood regime and hydrological area of middle Odra

ujsciem Nysy Trapa natans "Grady Odrzanskie" predicted monitoring - 19M ECONET PL

Klodzkiej a (PLB 020003) (drying of some of ground waterBrzegiem (habitats 20 461.3 ha small meadows and level

Opolskim / Odra code: 3150, IBA PLO90 wetlands area Improvement

valley between 3270, (Important Bird around Stobrawa of water system

Nysa Klodzka 6440,91 FO; Area) confluence) within forestconfluence and Gobio (ditches etc.)

Brzeg Opoiski I ~~~~~~~Uppermost part of (ice t.alCerambyxa potential Natura site

Ceramby (SAC) "Grady w

ceauidoe, dolinie Odry"nausithous, M . tele ius) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

ANNEX B IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont.

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals Remarks/ bank area habitat types protection/proposal Raciborz reservoir13. Dolina Odry ca. 200-222 I ca. 5000 ha S-P; F-U; G- Not sufficient level Inundated area will Ecological International corepomie,dzy I+R C; m; c; o; W; of protection be reduced and hydrological area of Middle OdraBrzegiem 0 especially monitoring - 19M ECONET PLOpolskim a (habitats Middle section of in the Olawa-Lipki of ground water

Olawa / Odra code: 3150 Natura Site (SPA) polder levelvalley between 3270, "Grady Odrzanskie" ImprovementBrzeg Opolski 6440,91 F, (PLB 020003) of water systemand Olawa 20 461.3 ha within forest

Gobiointu, IBA PLO90 complex -Cerambyx (Important Bird restoration of waterCeramby Area) system (ditchesMaculinea Nature Reserves etc.)nausithous, "GrodziskoM. teleius) Ryczynskie"

1.75 ha;"Kanigora" 4.36 ha;"Zwierzyniec"8.96 ha;

UE "LakaZimowitowa"

Uppermost part ofPotential Naturasites (SAC) "Gradyw dolinie Odry"8 026,9 ha

ProposedLP "Dolina Odry II"

ANNEX B - IMPACTS OF THE RACIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont.

No Name Location (km) Estimated Dominant Legal status of Impact of the Mitigation proposals Remarks/ bank area habitat types protection/proposal Raciborz reservoir

14 Dolina Odry ca. 222-250 c ca. 8 000 ha S-P; F-U; Downstream Minor changes Ecological International core

pomie,dzy Olawa L+R G-C; m; c; o; section of Natura in flood regime and hydrological area of Middle Odra

a Wroclawiem/ W; 0 site (SPA) "Grady predicted monitoring - 19M ECONET PL

Odra valley (habitats Odrzanskie" of ground water

between Olawa code: 3150 (PLB 020003) level

and Wroclaw 3270, 20 461.3 ha Improvement

6440,91 F0; IBA PLO90 of water system

Gobio (Important Bird within forestalbipinnatus, Area) complex -Cerambyx Uppermost part restoration of water

cerdo, of potential Natura system (ditchesMaculinea site (SAC) "Grady etc.)nausithous, w dolinie Odry"M. teleius) 8 026.9 ha

Proposed LP____________ "Dolina Odry II?"

15 Widawa valley L+R 909 Habitats Potential Natura Minor changes in Ecological International core

near outlet to code: site (SAC) "Dolina flood regime and hydrological area of Middle Odra

Odra Valley 3150, 6440, Widawy" predicted monitoring - 19M ECONET PL

9170, 91F0 of ground water Large complex offorests and wet

Improvement of meadows in thewater system within Widawa and Odraforest complex - valleysrestoration of watersystem (ditches

_____________________________________________________________ ~~~~etc.)

ANNEX B -IMPA CTS OF THE RA CIBORZ RESERVOIR ON RIVERINE ECOSYSTEMS, cont.

Symbols in columns:Location (km) I bank:

L, I = left; R, r = right; CAPITAL letter for dominant side;Dominant habitat types:

- Forest: S-P = Salici-Populetum; F-U = Ficario-Ulmetum (Ulmenion minoris); G-C = Galio-Carpinetum; F-A = Fraxino-Alnetum & Ribeso-Alnetum- Meadows: m = Molinion; c = Cnidion; o =other flood meadows- Wetlands with reeds and sedges vegetation: W- Oxbows / ponds with hydrophytes: 0The most important habitats are underlined

I

i

I

ANNEX C

PROJECT WORKS IN MODERNIZATION OF WFS

i

I

I

ANNEX C -LIST OF WORKS IN MODERNIZATION OF WFS

Project works in modernization of WFS

Nr Work1 Improvement of Kotowice-Siedlce embankment2 Heightening of left side Olawka polder embankment3 Improvement of Blizanowice-Trestno embankment4 Improvement of Opatowice embankment5 Heightening of Now Dom embankment6 Heightening and improvements to the Janowice embankment7 Construction of new Jeszkowice embankment8 Improvement of Kamieniec Wroclawski-Wojnow embankment9 Improvement of the Zacisze-Zalesie embankment

10 Improvement of the Rozanka embankment11 Reconstruction of the Redzin embankment12 Reconstruction of the Lesica embankment13 Improvement of the Szczepin embankment14 Construction of the new Kozanow embankment1 5 Improvement of the Kozanow embankment16 Improvement of the Maslice embankment1 7 Heightening of the Pracze Odrzanskie embankment18 Construction of new embankment and improvement to existing one at Janowek WWTP19 Removal of the Paniowice polder embankment20 Completion of the Siechnice-Groblice embankment21 Construction of a new boulevard along City Channel22 Repairs to boulevards within Downtown Water System23 Protection of Popowice harbour24 Increasing of City Channel capacity25 Increasing of Flood Channel capacity26 Increasing of Old Odra capacity along City Channel27 Increasing of Odra river bed capacity downstream of old Odra to Widawa river confluence28 Increasing of Flood Channel capacity under Swojczycki bridge (Chrobrego)29 Increasing of Flood Channel capacity under Jagiellonski bridge capacity including sill

construction30 Increasing of capacity under Warszawski road bridge31 Increasing of capacity under Warszawski railway bridge32 Increasing of capacity under Trzebnicki bridge33 Increasing of capacity under Osobowicki bridge34 Increasing of capacity under Poznanskie railway bridges35 Modernization of the existing Flood Gate36 Modernization of the City Navigation lock, incl. reconstr. of gates for high water discharge37 Development of Rozanka barrage38 Reconstruction of permanent sill at Wroclaw I Power Plant39 Improvement of hydraulic conditions at Redzin barrage40 Flap gated weir 3 x 20m opening41 New spans of road and railway bridge over Odra-Widawa Channel42 New spans of road bridge over Widawa valley43 Increasing of capacity under the bridge over Old Widawy in Psary44 Construction of new embankments in Widawa valley45 Heightening and widening of the embankments in Widawa valley46 Removal of the embankments in Widawa valley

ANNEX D

PUBLIC CONSUTLATION

Dl. Summary of meeting WWF and EA team on January 26TH, 2005

D2. Summary of comments on draft EA during public consultation meetingin Wroclaw on June 3 0 TH, 2005

D3. Summary of comments on draft EA during public consultation meetingin Raciborz on July 1 ST, 2005

D4. Letter received from PTPP "pro Natura"

IiiiI

i

I

ANNEXD* PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Dl. Meeting WWF and EA team on January 26th 2005, Wroclaw

Present:

Mr Georg Rast - Hydrologist WWF GermanyMr Piotr Nieznanski - WWF Poland Odra ProjectDr Marek Krukowski - EA teamMr Reitse Koopmans - EA team

Objective: Scoping session, what are problems and possible suggestions to be includedin EA-ORFPP?

General recommendations WWF:

* Key issue: - Let small floods happen!* Influence on Upper Odra (Meander) - reduction of retention not taking into account

in hydro model for Racib6rz;* New embankments in Opole woi. not taken into consideration;* Dry reservoir is recommended - but strengthening of ecological corridor needed;* Operational rules in the reservoir have to be changed to reduce impact on forest habitats

inside and downstream of reservoir;* Detailed study recommended - depth of flooding in riparian forest;* Detailed inventory (soils, relief, hydrology, ecology) needed.

Las Tworkowski

* Study on potential impacts of flow velocity inside reservoir needed;* Possible training of the forest (manage artificial flooding);* Potential compensation measures.

Lezczok lakes and ponds

* Flood protection plans (1998) not taken into account;* What is the influence of Racib6rz dry Polder on the tributary river Plinc river

and Legon river?

Others

* Recommended dike opening south from Kozle (km 87) close to Brzezce;* Flood protection system should be discussed in IKSO.

Leg Zdzieszowicki

* Potential ecological impacts - due to lowering of flood level and frequency;* Calculation for 5 years water needed.

Concrete proposals for mitigation/compensation of impacts ORFPP, short-term:* Study on effects of Raciborz reservoir management on hydrological effects downstream

of the reservoir (alteration of flooding patterns, alteration of sediment regime, effectson river and floodplain habitats, i.e. aquatic and terrestrial biotopes and wildlife);

* Elaboration of recommendations for improved reservoir operation rules to avoid negativeeffects;

ANNEXD * PUBLIC CONSULTATION, cont.

* Study on effects of reservoir management on hydrological effects in the reservoir(alteration of flooding patterns, alteration of sediment regime, effects on river

and floodplain habitats, i.e. aquatic and terrestrial biotopes and wildlife);

* Elaboration of recommendations for improved reservoir operation rules to avoid negative

effects;* Special interest is to be put on N2000-site "Las Tworkowski"

(see note of EU on consideration of shadow list for N2000 sites);

* Integration of requirements and description of improved reservoir operation rules

for minimizing negative effects for both sections (downstream of and withinthe reservoir), e.g. minimizing flood wave alteration for minor floodswhich are elementary for functioning floodplain ecosystems downstream, i.e. no retention

for floods less than 10 % probability or, even better, minimizing retention of flood waves

with no risk for flood defence system downstream based on advanced flood forecasting

and warning;* Description of negative effects which are not avoidable.

As these studies require active involvement of governmental water administration a review

by independent experts is strongly recommended.

According to Water Framework Directive - WFD (COM 2000/60/EC), the reservoir must

provide passage facilities to secure river continuum processes, i.e. fish passage and flowing

conditions in Odra riverbed upstream the barrage.


D2. Summary of comments on draft EA during public consultation meeting on June 30 th, 2005, 11.00 hrs,at the Agricultural University of Wroclaw

Issue/Question Raised by whom Answer/Covered by EA

On EIA procedure:There is inconformity between overall EA (World Bank) P. Nieznanski This EA is prepared on basis of designs in feasibility studyand EIA procedures described in Polish law. - WWF Poland and some updates; local ElAs of sub-components will be needed

WWF Poland' upon completion of final designs.Public consultation process is divided in discussion J. Engel The selected solution is a compromise between wishes of 3 investorsabout two separate components (A & B), - WWF Poland and various requests of different parties and local communities.which functionally cannot be separated.Misleading information on participants of consultations K. Smolnicki Will be corrected in final version EA.during feasibility study in Annex EA. - Lower Silesian

Ecological FoundationA Strategic Impact Assessment for the whole ORFPP J. Engel Out of scope for this meeting.project would be needed. - WWF Poland

Comment received in letter

ANNEXD- PUBLIC CONSULTATION, cont.

On Project concepts (WFS):

Other methods and solutions for the flood protection P. Nieznanski Have been investigated during feasibility studies, but out of scopeof Odra valley. - WWF Poland in this meeting.

Was the final choice of option IV based on EIA J. Engel No, but environmental and social considerations played an important role.

procedures of the initial four options considered - WWF Polandin feasibility study.

What are the selection criteria used in selecting the final J. Engel Technical, social and environmental considerations mentionedoption of ORFPP. - WWF Poland in feasibility study. Details are out of scope for this meeting.

Relation between ORFPP and previous project to install R. Gawlik Out of EA scope. Will be updated in SMOK (Component C2).full digital flood forecasting system, predicting and - Eko-Unia Associationmodelling of floods on the Odra and Wisla River basins.

The need for the evaluation of flood protection effects R. Gawlik Out of scope for this meeting.of SMOK and other projects promoted by World Bank. - Eko-Unia Association

Could modernisation of WFS prevent the flood losses J. Engel Yes, provided Raziborz dry polder could be completed soonest,comparable to this from 1997. - WWF Poland since flood risks for Wroclaw have increased after modernization

WWF Poland' of embankments in Kedzierzyn-Kozle and Opole.

What is the influence of the weirs and barrages W. Jankowski Out of scope for this meeting. The issue has been studied in detailand other hydraulic structures on the flood water passage - Pro Natura during feasibility study.through WFS.

Why was impact of projected Kamieniec Zabkowicki A. Dubicki EA is restricted to options studied in feasibility studies.reservoir on the reduction of flood peak in WFS - IMGW Warsawnot included in EA.

' Comment received in letter

ANNEXD * PUBLIC CONSULTATION, cont

On design:Possibility to obtain additional benefits for natural A. Adamski Interesting and valuable comment, which has to be worked outenvironment by optimizing designs widening - Pro Natura during preparation of local ElAs.Odra Channel between Redzin and Widawa outlet Pro Natura1 See attached letter Pro Natura(task no 27) and modernization Olawka polder(task no 8).

The absence of co-ordination of embankments' A. Adamski The road infrastructure is not coordinated with design preparedmodernisation with the plans of new bypass road - Pro Natura for ORFPP (component B - WFS).Bielany-Lany-Dlugoleka. Pro Natural See attached letter Pro NaturaOn agricultural land use:Purchase of land as compensation measure W. Jankowski Land to be purchased should have potential for development of naturaland promoting of pastures and haylands - Pro Natura habitats; EA recommends no arable cropping in unprotected partsas a replacement of arable fields on flood plain areas. of the floodplain.On impacts on natural habitats and biota:The basis of the EA should be detailed field inventories J. Engel There were several field visits on the area of WFS and Raciborzof species. - WWF Poland reservoir. The detailed list of protected biota is included into Main Report.There is a need for inventories of natural habitats P. Nieznanski The need for detailed inventories was described in EA. Detailed ElAsin the area covered by the ORFPP (WFS component). - WWF Poland are prepared on basis of detailed field surveys for two works (No 1 & 3)

VvWF Poland' of which final designs recently have been completed.The impact of enlargement (deepening and widening) W. Jankowski Could only be covered by EA in general terms, since designsof Odra riverbed on protected species. - Pro Natura were not ready. Assessment of detailed impacts during local EIA.

Comments received by letter

ANNEXD PUBLIC CONSULTATION, cont

On Natura 2000 sItes:

EA does not include the comparative analysis J. Engel EA was prepared for the option IV which was selected during feasibility

for all considered variants of ORFPP - WWF Poland study on basis of technical, social and environmental criteria

(accordingly to article 6 of Habitat Directive). by engineering consultant (2004).

No detailed description and quantification of impacts J. Engel Impossible because of lack of data.

on Natura 2000 sites (area, habitats, species) in order - WWF Poland This will be subject of detailed hydro-biological surveys and installation

to maintain adequate protection level as required of monitoring networks in those parts of Natura 2000 sites influencedby Nature Conservation Law. by the ORFPP (from Raciborz down to Brzeg Dolny).

Detailed mitigation and compensation measures P. Nieznanski Local ElAs will be prepared upon completion of final designs of WFS.

could be based only after the preparation of the detailed - WWF Poland The need for detailed inventories is described in EA. Some proposals

EIA for Natura 2000 sites. presented in EA are based on the knowledge and experienceof consultants.

Impacts of modernization of WFS on Natura 2000 site P. Nieznanski Local ElAs will be prepared upon completion of final designs of WFS.

"Dolina Widawy". - WWF Poland The need for detailed inventories is described in EA.

Impacts of modernization of WFS on Natura 2000 site WWF Poland The impact area of ORFPP extends from Raciborz reservoir

"Grady Odrzanskie". to Brzeg Dolny. The need for detailed survey was described in EA.

The absence of EIA on Natura 2000 sites K. Swierkosz The EA indicates the need for local ElAs for all investments

("Grady Odrzanskie", "Dolina Widawy"). - Polish Ecological Club having potential impacts on Natura 2000 sites. Some general remarksare included into EA.

The plans for reconstruction of Widawa valley K. Swierkosz Detailed designs are under preparation and not yet completed.

and enlargement of capacity of flood channel - Polish Ecological Club In opinion of Hydroprojekt representative no enlargement of Widawa

and dredging of Widawa riverbed are vague and unclear. riverbed is foreseen. Only some general mitigation measures

In the past (2004) renaturization of Widawa River are mentioned in EA. Potential impacts/mitigation and possible

has been promissed. renaturization of Widawa River should be covered by local EIA.

Localization of planned borrow pit Oborniki Slaskie Gminal Not covered by EA but it needs local EIA.

in the area of Paniowice polder Conflicting situation with Natura 2000 site "Dolina Widawy".

New bridge proposal on the Widawa river Oborniki Slaskie Gminal Not covered by EA but it needs local EIA.

(road Wroclaw-Oborniki Slaskie) Conflict with Natura 2000 site "Dolina Widawy".

' Comments received by letter


D3. Summary of comments on draft EA during public consultation meeting on July 1st, 2005,10.00 hrs,at the Strzecha Community Centre in Raciborz

Issue/Question Raised by whom Answer/Covered by EA

On EIA procedure:Insufficient information has been provided to local D. Serwacinska Invitations have been sent to 31 government organisations and 9 ngo's.and regional NGOs about public consultation procedure. - Center of Natural Others were invited by advertisement in local weekly magazines

Heritage of Upper Silesia and publication on website RZGW.Has a DTM (Digital Terrain Model) for the modelling P. Nieznanski No, it is questionable whether DTM is sufficiently accurate to assessof inundated area in the Odra valley been used? - WWF Poland detailed impacts on Natura sites.What can be done about the loan in case of very adverse P. Nieznanski Not very likely development in view of major benefits of ORFPPimpacts on Natura sites caused by the project requiring - WWF Poland of which the Raciborz polder is essential component. However the loandrastic changes or even complete or partly cancellation could be only be partly used if certain components would be cancelled.of the Raciborz reservoir.

On project concepts:Questions the economic justification of ORFPP for flood R. Madej Project is justified by detailed hydraulic studies and economic analysesprotection of Raciborz and Wroclaw; justification - Defence Committee during feasibility study Further discussion is out of scope of this meeting.for the Raciborz reservoir project could not be based Village Nieboczowyon the results of 1997 flood.Questions the justification of reconstruction of old R. Madej Out of scope for this meeting.embankments after 1997 flood. Insufficient modernization - Defence Committeeworks of Ulga (bypass) channel in Raciborz have been Village Nieboczowycarried out. L. Wandelberger

- village administratorof Nieboczowy

The impact of Raciborz reservoir on inhabitants R. Madej Defence Committee alternative was rejected during feasibility study. Socialof Nieboczowy village - the residents proposal - Defence Committee impacts are covered by RAP, which will be discussed in other meeting.for the alternative embankment of the polder Village Nieboczowy Out of scope for this meeting.and protection of Nieboczowy village, reservations L. Wandelbergeron RAP, relocation of Nieboczowy, excluding Lapacz. - village administrator

Nieboczowy

ANNEXD - PUBLIC CONSULTATION, cont.

On Reservoir operation:

Why is reservoir designed to pass only once in 10 year P. Nieznanski Technically it is possible that floods up to 10 year flood could pass

flood and not less frequent floods. - WWF Poland uncontrolled. Operational rules will be prepared by balancing minimalecological impacts and maximum safety for people and property.Discussion on this subject is included in EA.

How to minimize the adverse impacts downstream A. Adamski The need for optimization of operational rules for Raciborz reservoir

of Raciborz reservoir on Natura 2000 sites - Pro Natura is described in EA. The EA should be supported by quantitative data

(especially on riverine habitats). P. Nieznanski on reduced flood frequencies and reduction of inundated area of riverine

- WWF Poland habitats during flood events, to be determined by hydro-biologicalinventories and monitoring studies of downstream Natura 2000 sites.

D. Serwacinska- Center of NaturalHeritage of Upper Silesia

On wet option:

What are the prospects for the wet option (stage l1l) A. Adamski The polder will be dry reservoir, at least in the next few decades.

of Raciborz reservoir, which will be disastrous - Pro Natura What will be done in future is for next generations to decide.

development for the Tworkowski Forest.

Why is the dry reservoir designed as a wet reservoir? J. Engel The structure is designed to operate a dry reservoir, but eventually could- WWF Poland be converted into a permanent structure, which is navigable for ships.

The damage of Tworkowski Forest in the wet option D. Serwacinska The decision has been taken that reservoir will be a dry one. Not relevant..

(after 50 years). - Center of NaturalHeritage of Upper Silesia

A wet reservoir will create possibilities for recreation P. Klima There will be a dry reservoir; recreation potential of wet reservoir is low,

and tourist development (sailing etc.). - Raciborz city councillor because permanent damming reduces safety and there will be problemswith maintaining water quality (eutrophication and pollution of surfacewater).

In case of wet reservoir there is no compensation D. Serwacinska Not relevant.for the problems of downstream erosion and its influence - Center of Naturalon the floodplain. Heritage of Upper Silesia

Need of compensation measures and enhancement of D. Serwacinska Not relevant.Odra valley biocorridor in the case of wet reservoir (300 m - Center of Naturalwide new bio-corridor). Heritage of Upper Silesia

ANNEXD * PUBLIC CONSULTATION, cont

The higher benefits for flood protection of the dry polder D. Serwacinska Confirmed by feasibility study.than wet option. - Center of Natural_ Heritage of Upper Silesia

On groundwater pollution:

No solution is given for impact of coal dump disposal near Defence Committee Predicted impacts are described in EA but problem needs detailed study.Bukow on environment. for Protection against Responsibility is with Voivod, not RZGW. This issue was first recognizedResettlement Village by the EA consultants team.Nieboczowy

The impact of Raciborz reservoir on ground water. J. Engel Partly covered by EA - some predictions of the impact of coal dump- WWF Poland on water quality near Bukow.

On socio-economic development:

What is contribution of Czech Republic into ORFPP. P. Klima Czech side is informed on project details, but no involvement- Raciborz city councillor in implementation.

The inadequate consultation process with Nieboczowy P. Klima Out of EA scope. Covered by RAP.inhabitants. - Raciborz city councillorWill there be any impact of the Odra-Danube channel. P. Klima This project is shelved (not feasible) and outside scope of discussion.

- Raciborz city councillorHow many jobs will be created during construction P. Klima Temporary employment will be created during construction of dry polderof the Raciborz polder. - Raciborz city councillor (during 6 years). For details reference is made to RZGWGL.

Gmina Krzyzanowice'The cooperation between EA team and municipal P. Klima During field visits as far as possible.and powiat authorities. - Raciborz city councillorOn agricultural land use

Farming should continue as before by farmers, Gmina Krzyzanowicel EA recommends only allowing use as meadows and pastureswho have land in the polder. and no cultivation of arable crops, in order to reduce risk of crop lossesduring operation of the reservoir.

Comments received by letter

ANNEXD PUBLIC CONSULTATION, cont.

On gravel exploitation: _______*

Gravel exploitation at the left bank of Odra river A. Hajduk Expanded gravel exploitation at left bank is in conflict with conservation

should not be banned in view of economic development - Powiat office in Raciborz of Natura 2000 site Las Tworkowski and preserving and enhancing

of region. Gmina Krzyzanowice' the biocorridor along the Upper Odra Valley.

UTEX-Terra Sp.(Mining Cie)'

On natural habitats and biota: .

The impact of the dry polder on the ecological corridor A. Adamski Some compensation measures described in EA.

connecting natural habitats in the Upper Odra valley. - Pro Natura

Insufficient compensation measures for the interruption D. Serwacinska Some mitigation and compensation measures for Raciborz dry polder

of ecological corridor by Raciborz reservoir - Center of Natural are described in EA, others have to be worked out in future.

(especially on forest habitats). Heritage of Upper Silesia

The impact of construction of Raciborz reservoir K. Polak This is largely covered by EA.on natural habitats and biota. - Municipality of Raciborz

The impact of long term inundations on natural habitats K. Kardyka Partly covered by EA. Little experience from similar situations. In view

inside Raciborz reservoir - Municipality of Raciborz of high level of uncertainty this should be studied with long term monitoringnetwork.

On Natura 2000 sites:

The impact analysis of Raciborz reservoir on riverine J. Engel EA recommends in view high level of uncertainty to study impacts

habitats and biota - WWF Poland by installing long-term monitoring network. Consultants prepare ToRfor survey and monitoring of all Natura 2000 sites influencedby the ORFPP (from Raciborz reservoir down to Brzeg Dolny)as a part of Main Report

Need for mitigation and compensation measures Krzyzanowice Gmina Proposals for mitigation and compensation measures for impact on Forest

for the Tworkowski Forest authority are described in EA.

On Environmental Management:

Under what legal authority will the environmental P. Nieznanski PCU will be responsible for implementation of EMP and be assisted

management plan be implemented - WWF Poland in this task by M&E Consultants. PCU reports to Ministry of Internal Affairsand Administration and Ministry of Environment

Comment received in letter

ANNEXD PUBLIC CONSULTATION

D4. Letter from Polish Society of Wildlife Friends "pro Natura" (Wroclaw)

POLSKIE TOWARZYSTWO PRZYJACIOL PRZYRODY "pO NATURA"POLISH SOCIETY OF WILDLIFE FRIENDS p

Podwale 75, 50-449 Wroclaw, Poland tel/fax: (+48) (71) 343 41 22 ext. 326 email: [email protected]

Comments on the Environmental Assessment

for the "Odra River Basin Flood Protection Project"

Component B - Modernization of the Wroclaw Floodway System

1) In the Project, the possibility to take advantage of planned actions in order to obtain additionalbenefits for the natural environment is not utilized.

a) When widening the Odra river channel between the Redzin barrage and the Widawa river outlet(task no. 27), it is possible to create a number of islands in the course of the river (by leavingseveral fragments of the river's present bank (5-15 m wide) in the widened channel);

b) Two additional islands may be created by connecting with the river upstream sections of twoartificial oxbow lakes of the Odra river (one on the right bank, and one on the left bank) locatedalong a stretch of about 2 km downstream the Bystrzyca river outlet.

c) The raising of the left-bank embankment of the Olawka polder (task no. 2) makes it possibleto consider the project of renaturization of the downstream section of the Szalona river (a left-bank tributary of the Olawa river) along a stretch of about 2-3 km at the level of Radwanie.The renaturization would involve an adequate change in the course of the river channeland a change in the shaping of banks (details to be determined).

2) An essential drawback of the Project is an insufficient integration of planned actions with otherprojects planned in the same area, in particular projects relating to the construction of roads.The duplication of the alignment of flood embankments planned to be modernized and the courseof roads planned to be constructed (the road Bielany-Lany-Dlugoleka) causes unnecessary lossesin nature (including Natura 2000 sites, e.g., under the modemization of the embankment of theTrestno-Blizanowice polder - task no. 3) and unnecessarily increases investment costs. A methodwhich would allow these losses to be avoided may be to plan road embankments to be used asnew flood embankments.

Prepared by:ArturAdamski, MA.Polish Society of Wildlife Friends "pro Natura"75 Podwale St., 50-449 Wroclawe-mail: [email protected]

PRESIDENTPTPP "pro Natura"

Roman Guziak, MEng