This document provides a progress report for Activity 5.3 of the 3rd IDMP CEE Workshop on natural, small water retention measures. It discusses the status of developing guidelines on increasing landscape water retention through natural and technical measures. A draft of the guidelines has been improved with technical examples from Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, and Slovenia. The main difficulties have been making the examples sufficiently representative of different countries and measures. Plans are to further enrich the final draft with literature from additional partner countries and better address non-technical measures and integration with water management plans. Challenges may include finding examples for these areas, but the original structure and outputs are expected to be delivered.

1. Activity number 5.3
Tomasz Okruszko, Ignacy Kardel – WULS, Poland
Waldemar Mioduszewski – Institute of Technology and Life Sciences, Poland
Janos Feher – University of Debrecen, Hungary
Vladimir Mosny – Hycomp, Slovakia
Daria Istenic, Anja Potokar – Limnos, Slovenia
3rd IDMP CEE Workshop
Budapest, 2 & 4 October 2014
Natural, small water retention measures

2. • What has been done since the 2nd IDMP CEE
workshop till now (April 2014 – October 2014)?
Progress Report

3. 1. Introduction – why do we need to increase the landscape retention?
2. What are the technical and non-technical measures to increase the
landscape retention?
3. How to choose the catchment for the retention measures?
4. How can we evaluate the results in the terms of flood protection, drought
mitigation and biodiversity increase?
5. How can we incorporate the natural landscape retention in the RBMP,
FPMP and DMP?
6. Experiences and critical analysis from already implemented projects in
Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Slovenia including best examples on
combined effects and involvement of stakeholders.
7. Conclusion – what is the best action plan?
Structure of the guidelines
3 rd round of drafting till Budapest

4. Development of template
for example (with
feedback and resending)
PL WULS/ITE (prof Waldemar
Mioduszewski)
Best example from Poland (3)
Aug 2014 PL WULS (dr Ignacy Kardel)
Best example from Slovakia ) - drafts
Aug 2014 SK
Best example from Slovenia (3)
Sep 2014 SLO
Best example from Hungary (1)
Aug 2014 HUN

5. Example in Word

6. • At what stage of the final output(s) are you at the
moment?
Improved draft (close to final in the indicated chapters), with
good but technical examples
• What were the main difficulties you encountered?
How did you solve them?
So far output still too much biased with Polish experience,
problems with examples how the NWRM can be incorporated
to WMPlans, not enough non technical measures.
Progress Report

7. Small water retention vs. Natural retention
• Natural water retention
– Permanent or temporary water bodies and measures that enable water
retention on site (of its origin)
– Natural appearance enabling diverse ecosystem services (not only water
retention)
– Activities focusing on prolongation of the water cycle by increasing the
capacity to retain rainwater (slow drain), stop pollution and reducing
energy losses of water and sediment movement.
• Small water retention means not only the retention of surface water with water or
damming up watercourses, but also agricultural practices, phyto land improvement
and afforestation to increase the retention of soil, regulation of rivers such as
changes in cross-section troughs and longitudinal slope and the use of natural
floodplains and landscape depressions.

8. • Have there occurred any changes from the original
plan? Why?
Not yet, except the delay in Milestone 4
• Where do you find links with other IDMP CEE
activities?
Urgent need to look for the possible incorporation of finding or
examples from soil retention and forests in order to beter
represent non technical measures.
Progress Report

9. • What are your plans for the final period
(October 2014 – March 2015)?
New iteration of the final draft, enrichment with the literature
from partner countries. Still hope for1-2 examples from non
partners.
• What will be your final output(s)?
As planed
• What kind of challenges/problems do you expect?
Non technical measures, any example of integration with
WMPlans
Plans

10. • Will there by any change from the original plan?
Why?
Can happen in the Chapter 5, final titles of the chapters can
be adjusted to the final contents
• In what aspects would you like to continue your
activity ? Do you have any concrete proposals for
follow-up projects and funding sources?
Yes

11. 1. Introduction – why do we need to increase the landscape retention?
2. What are the technical and non-technical measures to increase the
landscape retention?
3. How to choose the catchment for the retention measures?
4. How can we evaluate the results in the terms of flood protection, drought
mitigation and biodiversity increase?
5. How can we incorporate the natural landscape retention in the RBMP,
FPMP and DMP? (probably will face some changies).
6. Experiences and critical analysis from already implemented projects in
Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Slovenia (others?) including best
examples on combined effects and involvement of stakeholders.
7. Conclusion – what is the best action plan?
Structure of the guidelines
Drafted till end of November