1. Open complaint to the European Commission1
New river regulation projects along the Danube in Croatia
contravene EU environmental law
and threaten planned Transboundary Biosphere reserve “Mura-Drava-Danube”,
Natura 2000 sites and protected areas
1
Supporting information to the NGO letter to the European Commission about the planned new river regulation projects
on Mura, Drava, Danube, Sava and Neretva rivers in Croatia dated 02nd February 2011

2. To: On behalf of the NGOs:
Mr. Janez Poto nik, Commissioner, DG Environment Mr Andreas Beckmann
Mr. Štefan Füle, Commissioner, DG Enlargement WWF-DCPO
Ottakringerstrasse 114-116
Rue de la Loi, 200 A-1160 Vienna
B-1049 Brüssel
Mr Tibor Mikuska
Croatian Society for Bird and
Nature Protection
Gunduli eva 19a
HR-31000 Osijek
Zagreb, Vienna, Budapest, Radolfzell, akovec,
Koprivnica, Virovitica, Osijek, 4 July 2011
Ongoing and planned regulation of the natural Danube river between Croatia and Serbia
a) Regulation projects threaten intact river ecosystem within planned Natura 2000 sites, protected
areas and the planned Transboundary UNESCO Biosphere Reserve “Mura-Drava-Danube”
b) The projects confirm outdated river management in Croatia, which is not in line with EU legislation,
international standards and the “Joint Statement on Guiding Principles for the Development of Inland
Navigation and Environmental Protection in the Danube River Basin”
Dear Commissioners,
On behalf of the signed NGOs we would like to call your attention to the ongoing and planned destruction of
natural values along the Danube River between Croatia and Serbia, within future Natura 2000 sites, protected
areas and the planned five-country Transboundary UNESCO Biosphere Reserve “Mura-Drava-Danube”.
The regulation projects, current status and impacts
Croatian Water Management Authorities2 are planning heavy structural works for improving the navigability
of the Danube River in Croatia. The first project includes over 92 spots along a 53 km long river stretch
between Croatia and Serbia where new groins, embankments and dredging are planned (Annex 1, regulation
study for download: http://puo.mzopu.hr/UserDocsImages/Elaborat_14_05_2010_1.pdf). The second project
includes a 4 km river stretch where new embankments are planned.
The regulation projects on the Danube River clearly demonstrate that the Water Management Authorities of
Croatia are trying to maintain the outdated system of river management practices and to gain approval of
further major works before Croatia joins the EU and EU legal provisions – including the EU Water
Framework Directive, EU Habitats and Bird Directives – come into force.
These projects are in clear violation of the Joint Statement on Guiding Principles for the Development of
Inland Navigation and Environmental Protection in the Danube River Basin3 (adopted by the
Danube Commission, Sava Commission and International Commission for the Protection of the Danube
River) and its specific recommendations on integrated planning principles which facilitate the fullfilment of
relevant EU environmental legislation. The Joint Statement specifically calls for completing procedures for
the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for projects as
well as ensuring that there are no technically viable, environmentally better and not disproportionately costly
alternative means to achieve the required objective, in line with the requirements of Article 4(7) of the Water
Framework Directive.
2
Ministry of Regional Development, Forestry and Water Management; Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure; Croatian Waters and Agency
for Inland Waterways
3
http://www.icpdr.org/icpdr-pages/navigation_and_ecology_process.htm
2

3. Description of natural values
The Danube stretch and its floodplains between Hungary, Croatia and Serbia – from the mouth of Sio River in
Hungary downstream Ilok in Croatia – is the best preserved and most natural river section in the whole
Pannonian basin. The floodplain area extends over 100,.000 hectares and includes the wetlands of Kopacki rit
in Croatia4. This site holds the highest density of breeding pairs of White-tailed Eagles in continental Europe
(up to 15 pairs per 10 km2) and regularly supports over 20,000 waterbirds. The whole area in Croatia is a
Ramsar site and part of the National Ecological Network (HR1000016 Podunavlje and Donje Podravlje
including several sub-sites), a future NATURA 2000 site. The most valuable areas are already protected as
Nature Park Kopacki rit (IUCN category V) and Special Zoological Reserve (IUCN category Ib). The area in
Serbia is protected as the Special Nature Reserve “Gornje Podunavlje” and a Ramsar site. The whole area is
part of the future five-country Trans-Boundary Biosphere Reserve “Mura-Drava-Danube”. Commitment to
establishing this joint reserve was signed recently by the ministers responsible for environment and nature
protection of Austria, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia and Slovenia at a meeting hosted by the Hungarian EU
Presidency at Gödöllö near Budapest on March 25, 2011 (Annex 7).
Projects and threats
Croatian Water Management Authorities plan to change the natural flow of the meandering courses of the
Danube River and divert it into a unified regulated river corridor. This regulation corridor, which was defined
about 30 years ago in former Yugoslavia, describes a constant width of the Danube riverbed at 300-450 m in
this river section. According to the project studies, the main purpose of these plans is to improve navigation
and flood protection.
First project (rkm 1380-1433)5, 6
This project aims to regulate 53 km of the natural Danube stretch between Croatia and Serbia – from the
Croatian-Hungarian border (at 1433 rkm) downstream to the mouth of Drava river (at 1380 rkm) by
construction of a series of river training structures and by extracting sediments from the riverbed.
Construction of at least 92 new river training structures (72 T-groins, 15,5 km of new embankments and 2
parralel structures) are planned between Croatia and Serbia, though most of the works are envisaged on
Croatian territory. In 2010, the Croatian Agency for Inland Waterways started the Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) preparation. The EIA in Croatia is still ongoing (as far as we are aware, no similar
process has yet started in Serbia). However, parts of this project (e.g. from 1405-1406 rkm) have already
been approved by the relevant Croatian ministries (e.g. Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical
Planning and Construction) and implemented in 2008 and 2009 without any previous EIA or SEA nor
Transboundary Impact Assessment with Serbia according the ESPOO Convention. Implementation of the
project has continued in the first half of 2011 with construction of a new embankment at Kazuk area in
Croatia (1412 rkm) (see Annex 2).
Second project (rkm 1321-1325) 7
During 2010, the Croatian Agency for Inland Waterways announced a second project for the regulation of a
4-km long Danube stretch (from 1321-1325 rkm). On 8th September 2010, the Ministry of Environmental
Protection, Physical Planning and Construction issued a permit without any EIA or SEA nor Transboundary
Impact Assessment with Serbia according to the Espoo Convention.
Environmental and political problems resulting from these projects (see also Annex 3)
According to the project studies, the main purpose of the plans is to improve the conditions for navigation and
flood protection. However, no justification is given for such massive technical interventions along the
Danube. On the contrary, there are no settlements or infrastructure that are threatened by flooding, nor
do modern approaches to navigation require such measures.
As the projects date back to former Yugoslavia (the current "Croatian" regulation study is based on the
regulation plan developed by the Jaroslav erni Institute in Belgrade in the 1980s), no alternative options
have been investigated to this regulation project nor has “state of the art” practice in river management in line
with EU legislation been considered. No technically viable, environmentally better and not
disproportionately costly alternative means, in line with the requirements of Article 4(7) of the Water
Framework Directive, have been investigated.
4
www.ramsar.org
5
http://puo.mzopu.hr/UserDocsImages/Elaborat_14_05_2010_1.pdf
6
http://puo.mzopu.hr/UserDocsImages/Uputa_06_07_2010_1.pdf
7
http://puo.mzopu.hr/UserDocsImages/Rjesenje_08_09_2010_2.pdf
3

4. No Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been carried out for the project taking into account the
full scale of impacts of the planned measures, nor any transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment
according to the Espoo Convention between Croatia and Serbia. No cost-benefit analysis has been
undertaken, especially demonstrating the economic needs for and benefits of an improved navigation route.
On 16 February 2011 the EU Parliament has issued a resolution8 on the 2010 progress report on Croatia
which demands in relation to the planned regulation of the Danube to “respect the landscape context, which is
unique in Europe”, and “to apply EU rules on development authorisation from the outset”. The
regulation projects as they stand now are in clear conflict with these demands.
We are very much concerned about these projects as they are based on an outdated approach of Croatian
Water Management Authorities to regulate the Danube River according to the once defined river regulation
corridor and on false arguments for navigation and public safety. The main purpose of the projects is to
maintain a system of outdated water management practises in Croatia, part of an overall strategy of Croatian
Water Management Authorities to regulate all natural river stretches across the country (see NGO letter dated
2nd Februray 2011).
The fact that current river management practice in Croatia is outdated, environmentally and economically
unsustainable and not in line with the legal requirements of the Water Framework Directive is well known
from the results of the EU Twinning project „Implementation of Water Framework Directive in
Croatia“, which was carried out between 2007 and 2009 in Croatia and which concluded, among other
things, that “Croatia’s water administration is still focusing on traditional, technical oriented measures and is
not really aware of the paradigm shift that took place in member states”9 (Annex 4).
The fact that Croatian Water Management is not willing to change its practice has also been documented on
the Drava River. In 2009 the European Commission conducted a Fact Finding Mission to Croatia and
two international experts were hired to assess river management projects and impacts along the Lower Drava
River. Though the experts clearly recommended in their report not to “carry out this planned project” but
to develop and apply modern “state of the art” practices on the Drava in line with EU laws and to “stop
sediment extraction”, Croatia Water Management Authorities have already started to implement the
regulation project on the Drava river since 2010 in at least five locations (see photo documentary Annex 2).
Moreover, illegal gravel extraction on the Croatian part of the Drava at Pitoma a (176 rkm) has been
ongoing since 2007 (see letter to the European Commission dated 24th June 2009).
Our recommendations
We, the undersigned NGOs, still see considerable lack of political will and interest of Croatian Water
Management Authorities to implement sustainable river management in practice in line with Croatian and EU
environmental law and according to international standards. This is disconcerting in light of the green light
that was recently given by the EU Commission and EU Council for Croatia’s accession to the EU.
Implementation of these projects along the Danube would prevent the achievement of EU priorities related to
river basin management and the maintenance of valuable ecosystem goods and services, including flood
management, sustainable forestry, provision of drinking water and sustainable navigation along the Danube.
Given the ongoing resistance of the water management sector of Croatia to find an appropriate strategy
for the development of the rivers in compliance with the EU environmental acquis and harmonised and
sustainable river basin management planning, we therefore ask the European Commission within the
monitoring of Croatia’s commitments to fulfill EU standards and laws by the time of its accession to the
European Union to immediately urge Croatia, respectively the Ministry of Regional Development,
Forestry and Water Management, the Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure as well as the
Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction, to:
Desist from taking any further decisions or steps regarding the implementation of these projects
and to impose a moratorium on these river regulation and sediment extraction. Current regulation
works as recently documented along the Danube e.g. at Kazuk (1412 rkm) or along the Drava must
be stopped immediately (see Annex 2).
8
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2011-0059+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN
9
http://www.wfd-croatia.eu/userfiles/file/Activity%20reports%20final/Project_results__engl.pdf
4

5. Initiate a round table between all relevant stakeholders to discuss and review current projects and
practices and find sustainable alternatives in line with Croatian and EU law.
In particular, we ask the EU Commission to urge the relevant Croatian ministries and institutions to:
Comply with the EU Water Framework Directive, Floods Directive, Habitats and Birds
Directives (Natura 2000), with protected areas and the Joint Statement on Guiding Principles for
the Development of Inland Navigation and Environmental Protection in the Danube River Basin in
the development of these projects. No works should be done instead of following these requirements
even before accession of Croatia.
Investigate alternative forms of navigation development and “state of the art” practice in river
management. Technically viable, environmentally better and not disproportionately costly
alternative means, in line with the requirements of Article 4(7) of the Water Framework Directive
must be investigated.
Carry out a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as well as transboundary Environmental
Impact Assessment according to the Espoo Convention together with Serbia.
Carry out a thorough cost-benefit analysis, especially demonstrating the economic needs for and
benefits of an improved navigation route.
Carry out a cost-benefit analysis to calculate the short and long term costs of the project, the costs
of maintenance of the navigation route and the costs if the ecological services will decrease, or
disappear along the Danube.
Develop a study on the hydro-morphological and ecological alterations which must follow the
suggestions of Article 4.7 of the Water Framework Directive.
Guarantee participation of relevant stakeholders, including NGOs and affected population from the
beginning in the further development of these projects.
We are prepared to provide further and more detailed information if required and would be happy to support
and discuss alternative options with all relevant stakeholders that can ensure the future sustainable
development of the rivers as a treasure of Croatian and European natural heritage.
Yours sincerely,
Andreas Beckmann Martin Schneider-Jacoby Irma Popovic Darko Grlica
WWF DCPO EuroNatur Dujmovic Drava League Croatia
WWF Medpo/Croatia
Helena Hecimovic Tibor Mikuska
Goran Safarek Ecological Society of Croatian Society for Bird Ana Bajsic
Baobab Croatia Koprivnica and Nature Protection ZEO Nobilis Croatia
Goran Cizmesija Jasmin Sadikovic Ivan Grlica Gábor Figeczky
ZEUS Croatia Green Osijek Croatia Natural History Society WWF Hungary
Drava
5

6. cc:
Mr Karl Falkenberg, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Michael Leigh, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Ladislav Miko, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr François Wakenhut, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Stefan Leiner, European Commission, DG Environment
Mrs Pia Bucella, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Julio Garcia-Burgues, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Peter Gammeltoft, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Jorge Rodriguez-Romero, European Commission, DG Environment
Mrs Marieke Van-Nood, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Timo Makela, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Nicholas Hanley, European Commission, DG Environment
Mrs Anne Burrill, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr François Delcueillerie, European Commission, DG Environment
Mr Paul Vandoren, Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Croatia
Mr Richard Masa, Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Croatia
Mr Davor Percan, Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Croatia
Mr Hannes Swoboda, Member of the European Parliament
Mr Božidar Pankreti , Croatian Ministry of Regional Development, Forestry and Water Management
Mr Božidar Kalmeta, Croatian Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure
Mr Jasen Mesi , Croatian Ministry of Culture
Mr Branko Ba , Croatian Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction
Mr Tomislav Mihoti , Croatian Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure
Mr Danijel Mileta, Croatian Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure
Mr Miroslav Ištuk, Agency for Inland Waterways
Mr Jadranko Husari , Croatian Waters
Mr Nikola Ružinski, Croatian Ministry of Environ. Protection, Physical Planning and Construction
Mr Zdravko Krmek, Croatian Ministry of Regional Development, Forestry and Water Management
Mr Zoran Šiki , Croatian Ministry of Culture
Mrs Kornelija Pintaric, Croatian Ministry of Culture
Mr Davorin Markovic, State Institute for Nature Protection Croatia
Mr Oliver Dulic, Serbian Ministry of Environment, Mining and Spatial Planning
Mr Srdjan Jovicic, Serbian Ministry of Environment, Mining and Spatial Planning
Mr Dusan Petrovic, Serbian Ministry of Trade, Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management
Mr Jovana Stanisljevic, Serbian Ministry of Trade, Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management
Mr Dejan Komatina, ISRBC-International Sava River Basin Commission
Mr Phil Weller, ICPDR – International Commission for the protection of the Danube River
Mr Tobias Salathe, Ramsar Bureau, Gland, Switzerland
Mr Nick Bonvoisin, Espoo Convention
6

7. Annex 1 – Overview map of planned regulation along the Danube and Drava Rivers and extract of the
Danube regulation study
Whole study for download - http://puo.mzopu.hr/UserDocsImages/Elaborat_14_05_2010_1.pdf
7

8. 8

9. 9

10. 10

11. Annex 2 - Photos of current regulation works along Danube and Drava Rivers (date: June 2011)
Newly built embankment at Kazuk/Danube (1412 rkm)
Newly built embankment at Dalj/Danube (1352 rkm)
11

12. Newly built embankment (14 rkm)/Drava where Sand Martin colony of 400 pairs was destroyed
Newly built embankment (25 rkm)/Drava
Newly built embankment (44 rkm)/Drava
12

13. Annex 3 – Environmental, legal and political implications of the regulation project
The regulation plan for the Danube:
dates back to the socialist times of former Yugoslavia and is in clear contradiction with the
principles of sustainable development and environmental protection of the EU.
would cause irreversible deterioration of the current “ecological status” and natural values of
the Danube River and clearly contravenes EU environmental legislation (including the Water
Framework Directive, the Habitats and Bird Directives) and Croatian environmental law
(Nature Protection Act).
is clearly not in line with the Danube River Basin District Management Plan conclusions 10,
Joint Statement on Guiding Principles for the Development of Inland Navigation and
Environmental Protection in the Danube River Basin and its specific recommendations, as
well as so called “Platina manual” (Manual on good practices in sustainable waterway
planning)11 whose development was funded by the European Commission. The Croatian
regulation projects envisage the maintenance of shipping corridor through disconnection of
the river from its floodplain completely neglecting the ecosystem functions, services and
benefits provided by wetlands to the humans.
threatens European endangered habitats and species within planned Natura 2000 sites and
sites of the National Ecological Network (www.cro-nen.hr/nem) such as 91E0*: Alluvial
forests (priority habitat), 3270: Rivers with muddy banks; species included in Annex II of the
Habitats Directive such as Schraetzer, Streber; as well as species included in the Annex I of
the Birds Directive such as Great Egret, Little Egret, White-tailed Eagle, Black stork and
Kingfisher.
endangers the best preserved still meandering river stretches in the Middle Danube incl. vast
wetland areas and alluvial forests, including protected areas and wetland areas of
international importance (Ramsar sites) in Croatia. Trough the disrupption of natural hydro-
morphological processes the project would have major impact on protected areas as the
Nature park and Special Zoological Reserve Kopacki rit in Croatia, as well as Special Nature
Reserve Gornje Podunavlje in Serbia, both protected as Ramsar sites and part of the declared
Transboundary UNESCO Biosphere Reserve “Mura-Drava-Danube”.
10
http://www.icpdr.org/icpdr-pages/danube_rbm_plan_ready.htm
6 http://www.icpdr.org/icpdr-pages/platina_manual_waterway.htm
13

14. Annex 4 - Key findings of the EU Twinning project „Implementation of Water Framework Directive in
Croatia“, which was carried out between 2007 and 2009 in Croatia12
„In regard to flood management, Croatia’s water administration is still focusing on traditional,
technical oriented measures and is not really aware of the paradigm shift that took place in Member
states. Intensive technical oriented flood protection and maintenance activities, especially in the
Pannonian region, have caused already significant ecological damages and will put the rivers at
risk to fail the Water Framework Directive objectives (see 2.1 and 4.3). In the field of renaturation
of rivers enormous efforts are made in Member State countries showing that ecology and flood
protection can go hand in hand. In addition these integrated flood management concepts proved to
be more cost-effective than traditional technical solutions”.
“Morphological alterations turned out to play an important role, especially in the Pannonian part of
the country. Results compiled by the Twinning Project clearly indicate that a large number of rivers
are strongly degraded and are at high risk of failing the objectives (see Activity 2.1). Nevertheless
Croatia’s water administration still focuses on technical river regulation (canalization, diking).
Thus, the current maintenance of rivers contradicts Croatia’s efforts to harmonize its
environmental legislation with the EU water acquis”.
“In terms of hydromorphology Hrvatske Vode should reduce maintenance of rivers (e.g. no
removal of all bank vegetation), apply soft engineering techniques and follow the “give space to the
rivers”- approach (see also 1.7). For flood protection an approach that focused on strengthening
dikes should be substituted by an approach that develops flood storage areas and provides
ecological and recreational benefits”.
“River regulation measures are frequently deteriorating the status of rivers. Those investments
should be reduced significantly. The resources could be used more efficiently for investments in the
urban wastewater sector”.
The current approach of river maintenance focusing on flood protection does not comply with
objectives of the WFD, especially considering its ecological dimension. Therefore budget
reallocations between different water management activities need to be efficiently coordinated in
order to increase effectiveness before considering exemptions. Linked to this, further interference
with natural river morphology that is transforming natural river courses into uniform canals,
leads to significant degradation of the ecological status, which is against WFD objectives (see 4.3).
The present way of maintenance and morphological alterations is not only cost intensive, but will
also result in considerable costs for river renaturation in order to achieve the good ecological
status/potential. Reduced river maintenance however, would lead to an improvement of the
ecological status and would also enable the use of remaining funds for other restoration measures”.
12
http://www.wfd-croatia.eu/userfiles/file/Activity%20reports%20final/Project_results__engl.pdf
14

15. Annex 5 - National and international press coverage from June 2011 on planned Danube regulation
See international WWF press release, dated 17. June 2011 - http://wwf.panda.org/?uNewsID=200699
Internet links
International
1. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jsQeX8SFYIp7tdZYIVO-
tgBvvs0A?docId=CNG.7cb7d99990eea60a7a2805cbbc294dbf.2c1
2. http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110621/environment/Croatia-s-waterway-
management-plans-destroying-Europe-s-Amazon-WWF.371631
3. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110617/sc_afp/croatiaenvironmentwaterwwfeu_20110617160734
4. http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/croatia-environment.ap7
5. http://www.terradaily.com/reports/WWF_says_Croatia_is_destroying_Europes_Amazon_999.html
6. http://auscro.com/general-news/2011/06/wwf-says-croatia-is-destroying-europes-amazon-2/
7. http://vidamaestros.blogspot.com/2011/06/wwf-says-croatia-is-destroying-amazon.html
8. http://www.poland.us/wiadomosc,13,275793.html
9. http://www.earthknowledge.net/index.php/knowledgeportal/36674-massive-destruction-of-europes-
amazon-planned-ahead-of-croatias-accession-to-the-eu
10. http://www.eurocharity.gr/en/story/7814
11. http://europetopnews.com/35305/wwf-says-croatia-is-destroying-europes-amazon-2.html
Austria
12. http://derstandard.at/1308186306225/Kopacki-rit-Flusslandschaft-an-der-Donau-droht-die-
Austrocknung
13. http://fm4.orf.at/stories/1684242/
14. http://www.biorama.at/naturschutzgebiet-kopacki-der-amazonas-europas/
15. http://www.liferadio.at/news/view/browse/30/article/14/wwf-warnt-vor-zerstoerung-von-donauauen-
in-kroatien/
16. http://www.kleinezeitung.at/nachrichten/chronik/2766885/wwf-warnt-vor-zerstoerung-donauauen-
kroatien.story
17. http://www.salzburg.com/online/nachrichten/chronik/WWF-warnt-vor-Zerstoerung-von-Donauauen-
in-
Kroatien.html?article=eGMmOI8Vf1wbVrCMWQCHWTjc1pEBOQnvQvJCOyR&img=&text=&mo
de=
18. http://www.heute.at/news/welt/Kroatien-WWF-warnt-vor-Zerstoerung-von-
Donauauen;art414,570761
19. http://www.nachrichten.at/nachrichten/ticker/Umwelt-Naturschutz-Wasser-Schifffahrt-Kroatien-
CEE;art449,652441
20. http://www.volksblatt.at/index.php?id=7605&tx_posapaxmlimport_pinews[uid]=55163
15

16. 21. http://www.pr-inside.com/de/wwf-warnt-vor-zerstoerung-von-donauauen-in-kroatie-r2662679.htm
22. http://www.oekonews.at/index.php?mdoc_id=1060033
23. http://relevant.at/chronik/europa/141873/wwf-warnt-vor-zerstoerung-donauauen-kroatien.story
24. http://www.austria.com/wwf-warnt-vor-zerstoerung-von-donauauen-in-kroatien/apa-1144311562
25. http://www.meinwienheute.at/allgemein/2011/06/17/CMS1308318253588/
Croatia
26. http://www.dnevno.hr/vijesti/balkan_express/eu_je_najveca_opasnost_za_dunav_dravu_i_muru_u_p
osljednjih_30_godina/325638.html
27. http://www.tportal.hr/vijesti/hrvatska/134504/Moramo-zaustaviti-unistavanje-Mure-Drave-i-
Dunava.html
28. http://www.alertonline.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=88:vladine-planove-
regulacije-rijeka-udruge-ocjenjuju-neprihvatljivima&catid=2:hrvatska&Itemid=4
29. http://www.poslovni-savjetnik.com/hrvatska/eko-aktivisti-pozvali-europu-u-pomoc-protiv-
devastacije-mure-drave-i-dunava?quicktabs_5=2
30. http://www.tjednik.hr/vijest/vijesti/7585/EKO-udruge-Moramo-zaustaviti-uni-tavanje-Mure-Drave-i-
Dunava-
31. http://www.hrt.hr/index.php?id=475&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=119940&tx_ttnews[backPid]=474&cHash
=67c848031c
32. http://www.monitor.hr/clanci/eko-aktivisti-zaustaviti-projekte-na-muri-dravi-i-dunavu/152234/
33. http://www.h-alter.org/vijesti/ekologija/stetni-planovi-regulacije-rijeka
34. http://www.slavonija-info.com/vijest/osijek/6100-eko-aktivisti-ele-zaustavljanje-projekata-na-muri-
dravi-i-dunavu.html
35. http://www.glas-slavonije.hr/mvijest.asp?rub=3&ID_VIJESTI=10446
36. http://www.glas-slavonije.hr/mvijest.asp?rub=3&ID_VIJESTI=10447
37. http://www.zamirzine.net/spip.php?article10810
38. http://www.tportal.hr/vijesti/hrvatska/134716/Reformirajte-Hrvatske-vode-i-novac-dajte-
proracunu.html
Germany
39. http://eu-koordination.de/umweltnews/news/wasser-meere/930-flusszerstoerungqeuropas-amazonasq-
in-gefahr
40. http://www.sonnenseite.com/index.php?pageID=6&article:oid=a19484
Serbia
41. http://www.balkanmagazin.net/kolumna/energetske_vesti/zaustaviti_projekte_na_muri_dravi_i_duna
vu.xhtml
16

17. 42. http://www.pressonline.rs/sr/Green/Zastita_zivotne_okoline/story/165210/Novinari+u+poseti+rezerva
tu+biosfere+na+Dunavu.html
43. http://www.economy.rs/planeta/8259/zastitimo-planetu/WWF-i-Euronatur-zajedno-upozoravaju-na-
regulacije-reka-Dunava--Drave-i-Mure.html
44. http://www.serbia-
energy.com/serb/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1027:novinari-u-poseti-
rezervatu-biosfere-na-dunavu&catid=6:aktuelnosti-iz-energetike&Itemid=11
45. http://www.serc.org.rs/aktuelnost/529/Novinari-u-poseti-rezervatu-biosfere-na-Dunavu-
46. http://www.chapter4.rs/vest.php?id=wwf-i-euronatur-zajedno-upozoravaju-na-regulacije-reka-
dunava--drave-i-mure
47. http://www.zelenasrbija.rs/region/409-novinari-u-poseti-rezervatu-biosfere-na-dunavu
48. http://vesti.aladin.info/2011-06-15/730296-novinari-u-poseti-rezervatu-biosfere-na-dunavu
49. http://www.smedia.rs/vesti/webpresek.php?id=277187&vest=Novinari-u-poseti-rezervatu-biosfere-
na-Dunavu
Slovenia
50. http://www.dnevnik.si/tiskane_izdaje/dnevnik/1042453565
51. http://www.siol.net/svet/znanost_in_okolje/2011/06/okoljevarstveniki_nasprotujejo_hrvaskim_projek
tom_na_muri_dravi_in_donavi.aspx?vote=1
Some selected newspaper articles (in german)
Der Standard
17

18. News (largest weekly newspaper in Austria)
18

19. Raifeissenzeitung
19

20. Annex 7 – Signing of the five-country Ministerial Declaration between Austria, Croatia, Hungary,
Serbia and Slovenia for the establishment of a Transboundary UNESCO Biosphere Reserve “Mura-
Drava-Danube” (25. March 2011, Informal Ministerial Meeting within Hungarian EU Presidency/
Gödöll
See international WWF press release, dated 25. March 2011 -
http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?199772/Worlds-first-five-country-protected-area-to-conserve-Europes-
Amazon
20