ArticlePDF Available

The Romanian wetland inventory project

Authors:
  • research and education

Abstract and Figures

The present work shows an overview on the results of the national wetland inventory project carried out in Romania in 1997 – 2000 period. Using a standard file for wetland characterization there were gathered recent and historical data on the ecological, legal, administrative etc. status of several dozens of sites. The available information was analyzed in order to select those wetlands from Romania that are eligible for inclusion in the List of Wetlands of International Importance. Based on the results of the analyses there have been selected 30 wetlands of prior conservative interest, out of which 12 could fulfill the criteria for Wetlands of International Importance.
Content may be subject to copyright.
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
161
30.
THE ROMANIAN WETLAND
INVENTORY PROJECT
Zsolt TÖRÖK
"Danube Delta" National Institute for Research and Development
165 Babadag street, Tulcea - 820112, ROMÂNIA
E-mail: torok@indd.tim.ro
BSTRACT.
The present work shows an overview on the results of the national wetland inventory project carried
out in Romania in 1997 2000 period. Using a standard file for wetland characterization there were gathered
recent and historical data on the ecological, legal, adminstrative etc. status of several dozens of sites. The
available information was analysed in order to select those wetlands from Romania that are eligible for inclusion in
the List of W etlands of International Importance. Based on the results of the analyses there have been selected 30
wetlands of prior conservative interest, out of which 12 could fulfil the criteria for Wetlands of International Importance.
Key words: Wetlands, Potential Ramsar Sites, Standard Files For Wetland Characterization, Romania.
INTRODUCTION
In 1996 the Romanian Ministry of Waters, Forests and Environment Protection launched the National
Strategy for Conservation of Biodiversity prepared with the financial support of the Global Environmental
Facility. The chapter on wetland conservation was compiled by the Danube Delta National Institute for
Research and Development (DDNIRD). One of the objectives of the respective strategy was: Conservation
of Romanian ecosystems and habitats by creating a national network of protected areas.
In order to achieve some of the wetland-related objectives of the above mentioned strategy DDNIRD has
developed the first national inventory of the Romanian wetlands, with the financial support of the Ministry of
Waters, Forests and Environment Protection (research project No. B1/1997, then No. A15 / 1998-2000) and of
the Ramsar Small Grant Fund for Wetland Conservation and Wise Use (project code SGF97/Ro).
The present work provides a general overview on the results of the studies carried out in 1997 – 2000 period
in the frame of the national wetland inventory project, representing a summary of the narrative part of the
final report of the project entitled Study of Romanian wetlands in preparation for new Ramsar sites
(financially supported by the Ramsar Convention Bureau).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The investigations, carried out in the 1997 2000, included the assessment of the actual status of wetlands
currently existing in the whole country. For the detailed description of the target sites there have been used a
standard file for wetland characterisation, which was based on the Ramsar Information Sheet and completed with
several supplementary specific aspects that were supposed to be useful in site-evaluation process. These
standard sheets were completed with the most recent available data on the studied wetlands. Also, relevant
historical data were also taken into account during the analyses.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In the development period of the projects, central authorities dealing with environmental issues were usually
and officially dealing with 492 protected areas with a total surface of 1,140,390 ha (representing 4.8% of the
national territory). The list included 153 wetlands of various types. In some publications were listed
586 protected areas in Romania [7]. Recently after the ending of the projects there has been published
Act 5 / 2000 which states that there are 827 areas protected on national level [10]. Till 2000, there was only
A
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
162
one Romanian wetland included in the Ramsar List: the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR), which
has 580,000 ha. This area includes the predeltaic wetlands, the Danube Delta and the Razim-Sinoe
lagoonary system. At the beginning of 2000 DDBR was the only protected area with administrative authority
and an official and implemented management plan).
The studies prepared for the National Strategy for Conservation of Biodiversity have shown that huge areas
from Romania are covered by wetlands, as follows:
Main types of wetlands Total surface covered by each type
Natural lakes 132,730 ha
Artificial inland waterbodies (fishponds, etc.) 142,182 ha
Open waters of channels, rivers, etc. 199,100 ha
Floodplains 2,438,200 ha
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve 580,000 ha
TOTAL surface covered by wetlands 3,492,212 ha
In the first phase of the national project there has been designed the standard file for wetland
characterization (Annex 1). This document was distributed to the entities involved in the project and
various specialists from all over the country have provided the required data in the same format.
Based on the field investigations, reports prepared by various governmental bodies, non-governmental
entities and other supplementary information we have completed the list of the most important wetlands of
Romania. Table 1 shows the list of the selected wetlands.
Table 30-1
The list of the most notable wetlands of Romania (in alphabetical order)
No Name of the site Part of Romania County Type
1. Bistret Lake area southern Dolj
2. Bugeac-Baciu area south-eastern Constanta
3. Calarasi area southern Calarasi
4. Cefa fishponds western Bihor PRS
5. Cipau-Iernut area central Mures
6. Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve eastern Tulcea RS
7. Fizes valley central Cluj
8. Ier valley western Bihor
9. Insula Mica a Brailei eastern Braila PRS
10. Iron Gates area south-western Caras-Severin PRS
11. Jijila-Măcin area south-eastern Tulcea PRS
12. Lacul Rosu eastern Neamt PRS
13. Lower Buzau area eastern Braila and Buzau
14. Lower Mures area western Arad PRS
15. Lower Prut area eastern Galati and Vaslui PRS
16. Mohos-Sfanta Ana area central Harghita PRS
17. Plopeni Lake south-eastern Constanta
18. Poiana Stampei area central Suceava
19. Prejmer swamp central Brasov
20. Reci swamp central Covasna
21. Sar river valley central Mures
22. Sarat-Slatina lakes eastern Tulcea
23. Stanca-Costesti Lake eastern Botosani
24. Techirghiol Lake south-eastern Constanta PRS
25. Tur area north-western Satu Mare
26. Upper Tisa area north-western Maramures PRS
27. Valsan river central Arges
28. Vladeni area north-eastern Iasi PRS
29. Voslobeni swamps central Harghita
30. Zau de Campie lake central Mures
Abbreviations. PRS = Potential Rasmar Site; RS = Ramsar Site.
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
163
SOME OF THE MOST NOTABLE ROMANIAN WETLANDS LOCATED OUTSIDE OF
THE DANUBE DELTA BIOSPHERE RESERVE
In the next pages there brief data on some of those wetlands which were selected in order to decide upon
the opportunity to propose them for inclusion into the List of Wetlands of International Importance.
Cefa fishponds. The fishponds from Cefa are placed close to the Romanian-Hungarian border. Specialists
involved in the wetland inventory project identified 125 species of birds living in the area [8]. In the vicinity of
the fishponds there is one of the last mixed colonies of Grey Herons, Little Egret and Night Herons. In 1998
at about 300 nests (of the three species) were identified in the respective forest [8]. Being in transboudary
area, species nesting at Biharugra fishponds (Hungarian part of the lake system) are feeding at Cefa fishponds.
Vladeni area. The lakes from Vladeni area are the most important resting places on the Eastern Romanian
migratory route of the birds. Recent investigations have shown the presence of 130 species of birds in
Vladeni area, out of which 50 are vulnerable species on European level and 7 species are endangered on global
level [8]. The lakes are wintering places for several aquatic birds, like greylag (2,000 specimens), whitefront
(2,200 specimens), teal (1,800 specimens), mallard (1,500 specimens) etc.
Techirghiol Lake. Techirghiol Lake is a very saline lake, placed in the close vicinity of the Black Sea shore.
Few species are nesting at the lake, but many rare and endangered birds are wintering in this area:
White-headed Duck ( 75 - 150 specimens ), Red-breasted Goose (1,000 - 4,000 of specimens), Lesser
Whitefront (few hundred specimens), etc. During the winter, big flocks of Whitefront (20,000 specimens) are
usually present at the lake.
Jijila-Măcin area. In this area there are Jijila Lake, Sarat Lake and Slatina Lake which are key sites on the
main Eastern-European migrating route. This area is crossed practically by all birds flying along the Prut river
and the lower Danube.
Plopu-Beibugeac Lake. Plopu-Beibugeac Lake is in the close vicinity of the Danube Delta, being one of the most
important wintering sites of various geese : Whitefront ( 15,000 specimens ) and Red-breasted Goose
(600 - 1,000 specimens).
Insula Mica a Brăilei. Insula Mica a Brăilei is the biggest natural floodplain of the Lower Danube area,
which was not converted to agricultural or forestry polder.
Iron Gates area. This region includes several small islands, gorges and Nera swamp. Because its peculiar
flora and fauna, its representativeness and uniqueness the Iron Gates area is one of the important sites
which should be included in the Ramsar List.
Lower Prut area. Lower Prut area stretches along the Romanian - Moldavian border, representing the
remnant part of the former floodplain of Prut river. In this 110 km long area of about 8250 ha, there have
been identified 230 species of birds [5]. This area is one of the key sites for migrating birds, which follow the
Prut river line during autumn and spring.
Upper Tisa area. The Romanian floodplain of Tisa river is part of a proposed, transboundary Ramsar Sites,
which also includes wetlands from Ukraine, Slovakia and Hungary. The Upper Tisa area has a typical
central-European flora and fauna, adapted to ecological conditions occurring in mountains and hilly areas [9].
Lacul Rosu. Lacul Rosu is the most renowned lake behind natural barrage from Romania. One of the
striking features of the lake is the presence of vertical logs (former trees) in the water (unique in Romania,
and eastern Europe, too). Being in a remote and relatively isolated region, the lake has undisturbed flora and
fauna.
Mohos-Sfânta Ana area. This potential Ramsar Sites comprises Mohoş Swamp and Sfânta Ana Lake.
Mohoş Swamp is a typical oligotrophic system, representing a refuge area for various highly stenobiotic
species (adapted to very specific ecological conditions and supporting very limited variations of the
environmental factors). Sfânta Ana Lake is the biggest Romanian lake of volcanic origin, being a typical lake
for the Eastern Carpathians.
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
164
Lower Mures area. Lower Mures area includes a seasonally flooded forests, temporary and permanent
ponds and pools. The total surface of the area if about 2,500 ha. This site has good ecological status,
providing proper conditions for at least 45 species of birds, most of them nesting in this area. Lower Mures
area represents a typical central-European floodplain forests.
OVERVIEW ON THE MAIN WETLAND-CATEGORIES OCCURRING IN ROMANIA
Oligotrophic marshes
Distribution. Oligotrophic marshes are distributed in the upper areas of the mountains, at the level of
beech forests and coniferous forests. In Romania there were identified about 200 oligotrophic marshes
(See Figure 30-1). They cover a total surface of 1,800 ha. The most important regions with oligotrophic
marshes are: Dorna river basin (the biggest number of oligotrophic marshes of Romania), Lucina-Fundul
Moldovei basin (some isolated marshes in hilly ares), Oaş-Maramureş region (typical North-Carpathian
oligotrophic marshes), Călimani Mountains (marshes in various stages of evolution from oligotrophy to
eutrophy), Harghita-Ciucului Mountains (the biggest oligotrophic marshes from Transilvania), Şandru Mare
Mountains (isolated groups of oligotrophic marshes on rocks of Neozoic age), upper basin of Sebeş river (the
biggest and most typical oligotrophic marshes of the Southern Carpathians ), Semenic Mountain (area with
6 marshes without the typical oligotrophic flora elements), Someşul Cald region (several marshes on the
lower parts of the coniferous forest belt), Someşul Rece region (marshes occurring on the highest altitudes in
Romania) [6].
Conservative value. Romania has the southernmost typical oligotrophic marshes from Europe (those from
the Balkans are not typical ones). This sites represent refuges for many species of plants which have their
southern limit of general distribution in Romania. Some of the most notable species are: Sphagnum
wulfianum, Thuidium lanatum, Paludella squarrosa, Betula nana etc. Beyond these, there are many relict
species of the glacial period, as Dinocharis intermedia, Elosa woralli, Lecane ploenensis etc. [6].
Ecological status. Most of the oligotrophic marshes maintained their former ecological status. Some of the
sites are heavily impacted by peat-exploitation, as in case of Poiana Stampei (site located in Dorna river
basin). [6].
Eutrophic marshes
Distribution. Eutrophic marshes occur in natural depressions of mountain and hilly regions. In Romania
there were identified more than 200 eutrophic marshes (See Figure 30-2). They cover a total surface of
about 5,200 ha. The most important regions with eutrophic marshes are [6]:
- Ciuc region: the widest and most exploited marshes of Romania;
- Gheorgheni region: many marshes heavily impacted by human activities;
- Covasna region: marshes occurring along the Negru river;
- Bârsei region: wide marshes with diverse flora;
- Făgăraş region: marshes, mostly without peat, occurring along the Olt river
b). Conservative value. The Romanian eutrophic marshes occurring in the mountain areas represent [6]:
- southernmost limit of the area of distribution of many plant species, as: Meesea hexasticha, Paludella
squarrosa, Betula humilis, Pedicularis sceptrum-carolinum etc.
- southernmost limit of the European distribution of some species, as: Calamagrostis neglecta, Saxifraga
hirculus, Spirea salicifolia, Cnidium dubium etc.
There are also endemic species inhabiting this marshes, as Armeria alpina and Ribes heteromorphum.
c). Ecological status. Most of the eutrophic marshes are heavily impacted by human activities. Peat-
exploitation affects mostly the sites from mountain areas. Drainage of the marshes in order to create
agricultural fields was a common practice in the last two hundred years. The most striking example is that of
Ecedea Marsh. The site, located in the lower basin of Crasna river, was of about 30,000 ha, being the
biggest Romanian eutrophic marsh. This area was totally drained at the end of the XIXth century [6].
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
165
Figure 30-1. Distribution of oligotrophic marshes in Romania.
(Adapted map to Pop E., 1955: Mlaştinile noastre de turbă şi problema ocrotirii lor, Ocrot. Nat., vol. 1, pp. 57-105)
Figure 30-2. Distribution of eutrophic marshes in Romania.
(Adapted map to Pop E., 1955: Mlaştinile noastre de turbă şi problema ocrotirii lor, Ocrot. Nat., vol. 1, pp. 57-105)
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
166
Open stagnant waters
This category includes natural and artificial lakes (reservoirs, fishponds etc.). The total surface of this types
of wetlands is about 275,000 ha [4].
Natural lakes have a total surface of about 133,000 ha [3]. As origin, these lakes were included in several
categories, depending on what natural processes were responsible for their establishment: fluviatile erosion,
marine abrasion, land-slide, earth fall, dissolution of easily-soluble rocks, suffusion and setting, eolian
accumulation, glacial and nival erosion and accumulation etc. [1].
The artificial lakes have various functions. The total surface covered by this type of wetlands is 142,000 ha [2].
The fishponds cover about 12,700 ha. Reservoirs of hydroenergetical interest cover 86,500 ha. Waterbodies
with more than one function (drinking water and industrial water supplies, water for agricultural fields) have a
total surface of 42,000 ha. Almost 600 ha are covered by artificial waterbodies which have other functions [2].
Distribution. Natural lakes of the Danube Delta and the lakes placed in the close vicinity of the Danube river
cover a surface of about 111,000 ha. The rest is represented by lakes of the Romanian Plain and only
relatively small surface is covered by natural lakes in mountain or hilly areas. The biggest artificial lakes of
Romania are those at the Iron Gates 1 (10,000 ha) and Iron Gates 2 (40,000 ha). The biggest number of
artificial lakes occur in the hydrographic basins of Olt, Prut and Siret rivers. For example, Olt river has
25 lakes along its course, only, not to mention those along its tributary rivers.
Conservative value, ecological status. Natural lakes have certain conservative value as breeding areas
(invertebrates, vertebrates), refugees for many plant and animal species. Although some of the reservoirs
and fishponds are wintering sites of many thousands of birds, these artificial systems broke up the natural
watercourses, replacing the running systems with stagnant (lentic) ones. Practically all the lakes are affected
by eutrophication, most of the artificial lakes by intense siltation too.
Running waters and floodplains
Romanian running waters have a total length of 78,905 km [4]. The total surface of the open running waters,
channels, canals is 199,100 ha, almost 30% belonging to the Danube and its neighboring systems (68,100 ha of
open waters).
The river basins cover a total surface of 23,750,000 ha [4]. Most of the rivers drain the waters into the
Danube. The main hydrological basin belongs to Siret river (4,289,000 ha). Only 548,000 ha belong to those
small rivers from the southeastern part of the country which have direct contact with marine waters or the
Razim-Sinoe lagoonary complex [4].
The I grade catchment area or the Danube has 3,325,000 ha, including the Danube Delta and those river
islands which were converted to agricultural polders (as Insula Mare a Brailei, Insula Mare a IalomiŃei etc.) [4].
River sections and floodplains which are potential Ramsar Sites. There are only few sectors of the main
Romanian rivers with the ecological status close to the natural one. The respective areas are eligible for
inclusion in the List of Wetlands of International Importance. These sites are: the Upper Tisa area (3,710 ha),
the Lower Mureş area (2,500 ha), the Iron Gates area (part of the Iron Gates National Park of 115,656 ha),
Insula Mică a Brăilei (17,529 ha) and the Lower Prut area (about 8,250 ha).
The Lower Danube Green Corridor. This formal system includes 36 sites of various dimensions. The total
surface of the areas is 888,879 ha and includes three types of sites:
a) Protected areas (total surface: 713,485 ha);
b) Areas proposed to be protected (total surface: 22,427 ha);
c) Areas proposed for ecological reconstruction (total surface: 162,000 ha).
There have already been taken measures to gather actual data on the sites which will be included in this
ecological network, most of the areas being in transboundary regions.
FINAL NOTE
Some of the above presented information have been modified after 2000 due to data resulted from more
recent investigations carried out since the finish of the national wetland inventory project. The reason for
publishing the present paper is to provide for the public a short the summary of one of those documents
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
167
which were used as scientific background in the early 2000s for designing more detailed studies focused on
national and international wetland-issues and on achieving specific, wetland-related objectives of the
Romanian governmental strategy for biodiversity conservation.
REFERENCES
1. ştescu P., 1971, Lacurile din România, Edit. Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti, pp 1 – 372.
2. ştescu P., 1996, Principalele lacuri de acumulare din România pe categorii de folosinŃă (manuscris). “Raport
pentru SecŃiunea Zone Umede a Strategiei NaŃionale de Conservarea BiodiversităŃii”, Bucureşti, pp. 511 - 528.
3. ştescu P., 1996, Principalele lacuri naturale din România (manuscris). “Raport pentru SecŃiunea Zone Umede a
Strategiei NaŃionale de Conservarea BiodiversităŃii”, Bucureşti, pp. 503 - 507.
4. ştescu P., 1996, Repartizarea pe bazine hidrografice de ordinul 1 a suprafeŃelor acoperite cu lucii de apă şi lunci
(manuscris). “Raport pentru SecŃiunea Zone Umede a Strategiei NaŃionale de Conservarea BiodiversităŃii”.
Bucureşti, page 1.
5. Glăvan T., 1999, Lunca Prutului Inferior (judeŃul GalaŃi), “Raport final contract individual de prestări servicii încheiat
cu I.N.C.D.D.D.”, GalaŃi, p. 36.
6. Pop E., 1955, Mlaştinile noastre de turbă şi problema ocrotirii lor, “Ocrot. nat.., vol. 1, Bucureşti, pp. 57 - 105.
7. Toniuc N., Oltean M., Romanca G., Zamfir M., 1992, List of protected areas in Romania (1932-1991). “Octor. nat.
med. înconj.”, t. 36, nr. 1, Bucureşti, pp. 23 – 33.
8. ***, 1998, Studiul ornitofaunistic al unor zone umede din România pentru a fi propuse noi situri Ramsar, “Raport final
contract de cercetare-dezvoltare” (executant: Societatea Ornitologică Română; beneficiar: Institutul NaŃional de
Cercetare-Dezvoltare Delta Dunării). Cluj.
9. ***, 1999, The Upper Tisa Valley (eds. Hamar J. and Sarkany-Kiss A.). “TISCIA” monograph series, Szeged, pp. 1–502.
10. ***, 2000, Legea nr. 5 din 6 martie 2000 privind aprobarea Planului de amenajare a teritoriului naŃional – SecŃiunea a III-
a – zone protejate, “Monitorul Oficial”, nr. 152. Bucureşti.
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
168
APPENDIX 30-1.
STANDARD FILE FOR CHARACTERIZATION OF ROMANIAN WETLANDS
- Short version -
1. Date:
Subject Years/Months/Days
Field investigations
Date of completion of the present file
2. Data on the person who completed the standard file:
Name: ............................................................. ; First name: .....................................................
Organization, institute: ...............................................................................................................
County: .................... Locality: ................................. Address ...................................................
Tel.: .............................; Fax: .……………………. e-mail: ............................................................
3. Name of wetland: .............................................................................................................
4. Name of county (counties) where the wetlands is situated: ............................... .
5. Topographical data: name of locality of which administrative territory includes the wetland (in parentheses the name of
the county; distance between the wetland and the locality, in km; direction from locality - N, S, E, W, etc.):
.................................... (...................; ..... - km; ...........)
6. Geographical coordinates of the wetland:
Northern limit Southern limit Eastern limit Western limit Central point
Coordinate
s
.....
o
.....' ...." .....
o
.....' ...." .....
o
.....' ...." .....
o
.....' ...." .....
o
.....' ...." N
.....
o
.....' ...." E
7. Hidrographical and geomorfological unit to which the wetland belongs (in parentheses the % of the wetland which
belong to the respective unit):
Hidrographical unit: ................................... (..... %), ................................... (....... %).
Geomorphological unit: .............................. (..... %), .................................. (........ %).
8. Altitude of the analysed area (in m above sea level). Min.: ..........; Max.: ........ Average: .........
9. Habitat type to which the wetland belongs: ................................................... (details at end of file)
10. Dimensions of the wetland:
Total surface of the wetland: ........... ha; out of which % belong to : ..........; ........... (administrators)
Open waters (stagnant waters): ............... ha; out of which % belong to: ........... (administrators)
Length of water-courses (running waters): ......... km; out of which % belong to: .......... (admin.)
11. Hydrological characteristics of the wetland (details on codes D, I, N, P, T, S at the end of File)
Presence of water in aquatic systems (tick the proper rectangle):
a). permanent waters
b). temporary waters
c). basin which could dry once in several years:
Type, importance and periodicity of input of water (tick the proper rectangle):
Type of input D. I. N. P. T. S.
rainfall:
spring from the shore:
underwater springs:
watercourses (rivers):
water from flooding:
Type, importance and periodicity of output of water (tick the proper rectangle):
Type of output D. I. N. P. T. S.
watercourses
underground infiltration:
evaporation:
used by organisms:
used by man:
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
169
Importance of periodical phenomena in case of aquatic systems (tick the proper rectangle):
Type D. I. N. P. T. S.
Variation of water-level:
Drying:
Water quality: .....................................................................................................................................
Average water-depth: ...... m; Max. water-depth: ..........m; Average multiannual water-temperature. ......
Time of retention of water inside the aquatic system: ............................................................................
12. Hydrological value of the wetland (tick the proper rectangle):
a). supply for underground water
b). control of flooding
c). accumulation of sediments
d). stabilization of shoreline
13. Water chemistry (detailed characterization: oxygen content, pH, nutrients, pollutants, etc.)
14. Origin of wetland: natural or artificial
15. Climate of the area:
Average, multiannual temperature: ...............
Minimal temperature (absolute values): ...........; Maximal temperature (absolute values): .........
Average temperature during winter: .............; Average temperature during summer: ......…....
Average rainfall (multiannual average): .........; No. of days with temperatures below O
O
C: .......
Date of first frost: .........................
16. Geomorphological description of the wetland (text)
17. Geology of the area (tick the proper rectangle):
Type of substratum:
a). magmatitic of granite type
b). magmatitic of basalt type
c). magmatitic of andezite type
d). other magmatitic type (riolit, dacit, etc.)
e). metamorphic rocks of calcareous type
f). metamorphic rocks of dolomitic type
g). metamorphic rocks of other type
(amfibolites, gneiss, conglomerate, etc)
h). rocks from sedimentation (loess, fluviatile,
lacustrine, glacial deposits etc.)
i). other types of rocks
18. Pedology of the wetland: (text describing the types of soils)
19. Global ecological characteristics of the wetland (if possible, provide a map of 1:25,000 scale):
Detailed characterization of:
- main habitats occurring in the wetland (details at the end of Standard File);
- importance of habitats for local plants or animals (aquatic birds, shoreline birds, amphibians etc.);
- ecological status of the habitats;
- main types of vegetation and their characteristics (reeds, shoreline vegetation, forest patches, etc.);
- importance of substratum (mud, sand, rocky substratum, etc.);
- comparative analysis of the ecological status of the habitats (in past and in present).
20. Biocoenotical characteristics of wetland: (if possible, provide a map of 1:25,000 scale)
Detailed analysis of communities of wild plants and/or animals. For example:
- present status of fish communities;
- present status of aquatic bird communities;
- present status of bird communities living in the forests;
- comparative analysis of the past and present status of the communities of plants and/or animals.
21. Type of ownership (if possible, provide a map of 1:25,000 scale)
Type of property Surface (ha) % of total wetland No. of owners
State
Local authority
Church
Private persons
Mixed property
International waters
Other type of ownership
TOTAL
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
170
22. Administration of the wetland (if possible, provide a map of 1:25,000 scale):
Administrator Surface (ha) % of wetland No. of administrators
Private person
Industrial exploitation unit
Agricultural exploitation unit
Forestry company
Fishing company
Transportation company
Touristical company
Educational institute
Church
Local administration
State administration
Army
Hunting and fishing society
NGO
Other type of administration
23. Use of wetland (for details on codes -D, I, N, P, T, S- see EXPLANATIONS at the end of File):
This chapter contains data on the type of exploitation. If possible the areas of different exploitation will be quantified,
mentioning the % of the area. In case of qualitative data, tick the proper rectangle:
Observation:
Type of land-use D. I. N. P. T. S.
1. abandoned lands
2. intensive agriculture (general)
a) grazing
b) pisciculture
c) animal stocks (cattle, ship, etc.)
d) hunting in managed areas
e) wood exploitation
f) water for irrigation
g) agricultural land
h) flooded polders
3. extensive agriculture (general)
a) pisciculture in natural waters
b) reed exploitation
c) extensive zootechny
d) hunting in natural areas
4. drinking water
5. water for industrial use
6. water for medical purposes (balneology)
7. industrial exploitation of the land
8. electric powerplant
9. waste waters
10. waste materials
a) industrial waste
b) waste materials from localities
11. transportation
12. tourism
a) public swimming pool, etc.
b) training area (sports)
c) sport fishing
d) land for cultural-educational purposes
d) "green" tourism
13. nature conservation
a) water level control
b) control of wild animals
c) improvement of water quality
14. human settlement
15. land for military purposes
16. site of religious importance
17. archaeological site
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
171
24. Global status of the wetland: (details on the used codes at the end of Standard File)
General status of the area D. I. N.
a. Natural zone
b. Zone whit almost natural status
c. Zone managed by man
d. Zone of c. type, in the present without human interventions
e. Zone resulted from and maintained by management practices
f. Zone resulted from but not maintained by management practices
g. Ecologically reconstructed areas
25. Status of the wetland from the point of view of degradation (details on codes at the end of File)
Status of surfaces belonging to the wetland D. I. N.
Undegraded areas
Slightly degraded areas
Moderately degraded areas
Heavily degraded areas
26. Threatening factors in the area: (details on the used codes at the end of Standard File)
Areas threatened by D. I. N.
abandoning of land
grazing
over-grazing
burning of vegetation
intensive agriculture
use of chemical (agriculture)
excessive agricultural practice
excessive control of pests
irrigation
pisciculture
fishing (generally)
introduced indigenous species
introduced alien species
dams, hidrotechnical building
Areas threatened by D. I. N.
dragging
underground water input
flooding
forestry
forest plantation
grazing in forest
hunting
poaching
excessive collection of biological materials
(specimens, eggs, etc.)
habitat destruction (generally)
industrial exploitation
urbanization
excessive tourism
27. Legal status of the wetland (circle the proper answer):
1. unprotected
2. core area of a Biosphere Reserve
3. buffer area of a Biosphere Reserve
4. economic area of a Biosphere Reserve
5. included in a National Park
6. botanical scientific reserve
7. zoological scientific reserve
8. geological scientific reserve
9. paleontological scientific reserve
10. mixed scientific reserve
11. other type of reserve area: ............
28. Management plan of the area:
existing, but not implemented management plan: Yes / No
existing and implemented management plan: Yes / No
management plan in preparation: Yes / No
there is an official proposal for protection of the area: Yes / No
29. Body responsible for enforcing the environmental legislation in the area: (name and address)
30. Administrative authority responsible for the wetland: (name and address authority):
31. Present ecological education in the area:
there is educational center in the wetland: Yes / No
there are watching towers in the area: Yes / No
there are publications, brochures focused on the area: Yes / No
there area facilities for pupils visiting the area: Yes / No
frecvency of visitors: ..................……………; total number of visitors/year: ..................
32. Current scientific research (tick the proper rectangle):
Scientific researches: existing (please give details); not existing
33. Bibliographical references: (provide name of author; title, publication year; review/volume; etc.)
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
172
34. List of plant/animal species from the wetland:
No. Species,
ssp., var.
form
Type of
habitat
Relative
abun-
dance
No. of
speci-
mens
Level of
local
threatening
Presence
on local
level
Long-
term
dynamic
Unique
ness
Obs.
1
2
Etc.
Relative abundance is coded by: C = common taxa; RC = relatively common taxa; R = rare taxa; FR =
very rare taxa; SP = taxa which occur sporadically
Presence on local level is coded by: s = permanently present taxa; mi = migratory taxa (nesting in the
wetland); ia = taxa wintering in the area; pm = partially migrating taxa; pa = taxa migrating through the
wetland (occurring only in spring and autumn); er = erratic taxa (occurring occasionally)
Long-term dynamic of the taxa is coded by: cr = taxa with increasing population; de = taxa with
decreasing population; ex = taxa extinct from the area; fl = taxa with fluctuating populations
EXPLANATIONS: Terms used in the Standard File for characterization of Romanian Wetlands
Abbreviations:
D. the phenomenon/type has dominant character in the wetland;
I. the phenomenon/type has big influence in the wetland;
N. the phenomenon/type has little influence in the wetland;
P. the phenomenon/type has permanent character in the wetland;
T. the phenomenon/type has temporary character in the wetland;
S. the phenomenon/type occurs only sporadically in the wetland.
Section 9 (Types of wetlands) will be completed with name of the types listed below. In case of doubt,
types from "Major habitat type" will be used.
Major habitat type Special type of habitat
Wet meadows
Marine waters
Marine coastal areas 1 – sandy marine coastal areas; 2 – rocky marine coastal areas
Lagoons 1 – lagoons with saline waters; 2 - lagoons with brackish waters; 3
lagoons with brackish and salt waters; 4 – lagoons with freshwater
Marshes 1 – marshy areas; 2 – saline marshes; 3 - freshwater marshes; 4 –
oligotrophic freshwater marshes; 5 – mesotrophic freshwater marshes; 6
eutrophic freshwater marshes; 7 - forested freshwater marshes; 8 -
freshwater marshes in mountains; 9 - freshwater marshes with reed
Peatlands
Pools 1 - permanent pools; 2 – temporary pools
Temporary lakes
Saline lakes
Brackish lakes
Freshwater lakes 1 - in floodplains; 2 oxbows; 3 - lakes of glacial origin; 4 - lakes from
snowmelt; 5 - artificially created lakes; 6 - lakes in gravel pits; 7 - lakes
of volcanic origin; 8 - karst-lakes; 9 - lakes in the Danube Delta; 10 -
lakes behind natural barrages; 10 - lakes of "crov"-type
Temporary watercourses
Permanent watercourses 1 - eukrenon; 2 - hypocrenon; 3 - epirhythron; 4 - metarhythron; 5 -
hyporhythron; 6 - epipotamon; 7 – metapotamon
Springs 1 - reocrene springs; 2. limnocrene springs; 3 - helocrene springs
Geothermal waters
SCIENTIFIC ANNALS OF THE DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TULCEA – ROMANIA, 2002
173
Section 19. (Global ecological characteristics). (In case of doubt, "Major habitat type" will be used).
Major habitat type Special type of habitat
Broad leaved forests 1 - oak (Quercus robur) forests; 2 forests with Quercus robur and Quercus
petrarea; 3 - forests with Quercus petrarea
; 4
forests with Quercus petrarea
and beech; 5 – beech forests; 6 mixed forest (beech - coniferous trees)
Coniferous forests 1 - spruce fir; 2 – pine; 3 – fir
Silvosteppe
Bushy areas
Steppe
meadows 1 - alpine meadows; 2 - subalpine meadows; 3 – mezofilous meadows
Rocky areas
Rocky steeps
Gorges
Karst
Inland sandy areas
Anthropic areas
managed meadows
Arable land 1 – corn; 2 – maize; 3 - radish, horse radish; 4 – potato; 5 - plants for the textile
industry; 6 - annual cultures of other type; 7 - multiannual cultures
Orchard
Vineyard
Forest plantations
Park, kitchen gardens
Localities
Roads
... A comparison of the floras and bioindicators of the two Ramsar wetlands in Israel, the Hula Nature Reserve in the rift valley below sea level, and the Afek Nature Reserve [70] on the Mediterranean coast may also provide a direction for future research. The mechanism and criteria have been developed for the well-studied regions of the Mediterranean basin [71,72] in the context of climate aridization and anthropogenic transformation. Further areas of work may be the expansion of the use of bioindication in the monitoring of small water bodies in Israel for a better understanding of ecosystems' state and identification of potential objects of protection. ...
Article
Full-text available
Lake Hula, the core of one of the most extensive wetland complexes in the Eastern Mediterranean, was drained in 1951–1958. However, about 350 hectares of papyrus marshes were allocated in the southwestern part of the previous lake and became the Hula Nature Reserve status, the first of two wetlands in Israel included in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance. The list of algae and cyanobacteria species of Lake Hula was compiled by us for the first time based on data from publications of 1938–1958, as well as our research in the Hula Nature Reserve, obtained within the framework of the monitoring program for 2007–2013. The list includes 225 species and intraspecies of algae and cyanobacteria belonging to eight phyla. The dynamics of the species richness of algae and cyanobacteria flora for 1938–2013 are shown. Species-bioindicators of water quality have been identified, and the change in their composition by ecological groups for a period of about a hundred years has been shown. Based on the species richness of algae communities, water quality indices were calculated with particular attention to changes in trophic status during the study period. The algae flora of Lake Hula and Hula Nature Reserve was found to be similar, but bioindication has revealed an increase in salinity and organic pollution in recent years.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.