- General(active tab)
- Site information
- Monitoring maintenance
- Performance
- Design & implementations
- Lessons, risks, implications...
- Policy, general governance and design targets
- Socio-economic
- Biophysical impacts
General
National Id
Bulgaria_02
Site name
Vesselina river, Mindya village
Summary
WWF Danube Carpathina program, together with local people from Mindya village in the region of Veliko Turnovo, restored the connection of Veselina River, a tributary of Yantra, with its former meander near the village.
Light or indepth?
Light
NUTS Code
Северен централен (Severen tsentralen)
RBD code
BG1000
Transboundary
0
Contact
Jovanka Ignjatovic
Source(s)
Sponge Measure(s) implemented in the case study
Longitude
25.8261
Latitude
43.03027
Site information
Climate zone
warm temperate dry
Precipitation
500
Mean rainfall unit
mm/year
Temperature
11,5
Runoff
2,40000009536743
Mean runoff unit
600 - 750 mm
Runoff coefficient
0,140000000596046
Average imperviousness
30
Type
Case Study Info
Average slope range
10.0
Vegetation class
Woodland
Monitoring maintenance
Monitoring impacts effects
1
Monitoring location
Unknown
Administrative annual cost information
Less than 1000 for Monitoring
Monitoring parameters
Macrozoobentos, macrophytes and phytobenthos
Monitoring upstream station
BG1YN06295MS180
Monitoring downstream station
BG1YN86291MS189
Performance
Performance impact estimation method
Catchment outlet
Performance impact estimation information
Monitoring of the natural riparian habitats
Design & implementations
Application scale
River
Installation date
2008-09
Lifespan
50
Age
5
Performance timescale
1 - 4 years
Project area
700000
Area subject to Land use change or Management/Practice change (ha)
18
Size
1300
Size unit
m
Design capacity description
N/A info
Constraints
The river meander was cut off back in time, thus the river dug nearly 150 cm deeper into its bed.
Favourable preconditions
Natural riparian vegetation preserved.
Community involvment
Yes
Design contractual arrangement
| Arrangement type | Responsibility | Role | Name | Comments |
|---|
Design consultation activity
| Activity stage | Key issues | Name | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Public awarenes campaign
|
|||
|
Pressconference
|
|||
|
Booklet
|
Design land use change
| Land use change type | Comment |
|---|
Design Authority
| Authority type | Authority name | Role | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
|
NGO
|
WWF Bulgaria
|
Initiation of the measure
|
|
|
Local water authority
|
Municipality Veliko Turnovo
|
Implementation
|
|
|
National water authority
|
Danube River Basin Directorate
|
Implementation
|
|
|
Farmers
|
'Hunting and Fishing Association in Mindya
|
Implementation
|
|
|
NGO
|
Water Engineering Veliko Tarnovo
|
Implementation
|
|
|
Private property owners
|
Foundation DOEN
|
Financing
|
Lessons, risks, implications...
Key lessons
Relatively small budget was required for implementation
Success factor(s)
| Success factor type | Success factor role | Comments |
|---|---|---|
|
Financing possibilities
|
secondary factor
|
|
|
Existing staff and consultant knowledge
|
main factor
|
|
|
Attitude of relevant stakeholders
|
secondary factor
|
Barrier
| Barrier type | Barrier role | Comments |
|---|---|---|
|
Existing technical standards
|
main barrier
|
Cutting the existing dyke required reliable technical solution
|
Driver
| Driver type | Driver role | Comments |
|---|---|---|
|
Organisation committed to it
|
main driver
|
WWF Bulgaria
|
Policy, general governance and design targets
Policy description
River bed trained and many old meanders are isolated and drying; Decline and fragmentation ofatural riparian habitats.
Policy target
| Target purpose |
|---|
|
Improved Biodiversity
|
|
Peak-flow reduction
|
|
Increase Water Storage
|
Policy pressure
| Pressure directive | Relevant pressure |
|---|
Policy area
| Policy area type | Policy area focus | Name | Comments |
|---|
Policy impact
| Impact directive | Relevant impact |
|---|
Wider plan type
| Wider plan type | Wider plan focus | Name | Comments |
|---|
Requirement directive
| Requirement directive | Specification |
|---|
Socio-economic
Direct benefits information
N/A info
Ancillary benefits information
Favorable conditions for development of recreation and tourism in the region
Costs investment information
N/A info
Costs operation maintenance
N/A info
Costs maintenance information
Less than 1000 for Post-project management and maintenance
Total cost
76000
Costs total information
Total budget
Ecosystem improved biodiversity
1
Information on Ecosystem improved biodiversity
Birds and fish habitats improvement; Riparian forest habitats improvement.
Ecosystem provisioning services
0
Information on Ecosystem provisioning services
Not relevant
Ecosystem impact climate regulation
No specific impact
Information on Ecosystem impact climate regulation
Not relevant
Biophysical impacts
Information on retained water
N/A info
Information on increased water storage
Optimization of groundwater level
Information on runoff reduction
N/A info
Ecosystem erosion control
1
Information on Ecosystem erosion control
Decreased bottom erosion in main river bed
Water quality overall improvements
N/A info
Information on Water quality overall improvements
N/A info
Soil quality overall soil improvements
Neutral impact-no change in SQ status
Information on Soil quality overall soil improvements
N/A info