•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Transboundary co-operation in the fields of flood protection

with Hungarian eyes

•

•

• Kálmán Papp

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Why is so important the flood protection?

•Mementos from heavy floods •Mementos from heavy floods on the Tisza river

•

•

•

•Tiszabecs 1998.

•Flood caused damages

•Upper Tisza region •during the flood

•Cofferdam protection

•Tiszalök barrage •during the flood

•The dyke at Tiszasüly 1

•The dyke at Tiszasüly 2

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Geographical context •

•

•The Danube river basin in Central- Europe

•Most international basin in the world•17 riparian countries •Basin area: 801.463 km ²

••

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Basin area: 801.463 km ²•Hungary and its 7 neighbours (Austria,

Slovakia, Ukraine, Roumania, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) share 77,7 % of the basin area (605700 km²)•Longitude: 2.857 km (HU stretch: 417 km)

•COOPERATION IN THE DANUBE RIVER BASIN

•EU aims:

• Sustainable use of water

• ICPDR :Coordination of the

Danube basin aims

•National aims:

•Consideration of the special flood prevention circumstances

•Implementation of EU WFD and Flood Directive

•

•Tisza River Basin

•Longitude: 966 km•Longitude: 966 km•Catchment:157 186 km2

•Long lasting floods•Very short lead time

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Historical context •

•

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Developments after the I. World War

•Permanent Technical Commission for the Water Regime of the Danube (CRED)(CRED)•C.R.E.D. worked in the period 1924-1938.•Liquidation of the water boards•Initiated bilateral and trilateral frontier water agreements among the interested•states•Central topic: flood protection

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•The first frontier water agreements•Hungarian-Roumanian General Water Agreement 1924.•Hungarian -Austrian Frontier Water Agreement 1927.•Hungarian -Austrian Frontier Water Agreement 1927.•Hungarian-Czecho-Slovakian Frontier Water Agreement 1937.•Hungarian-Roumanian-Czecho-Slovakian Technical Commission for Transcarpathia

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Frontier water agreements •after the II. World War

•1950. Hungarian- Soviet Agreement (renewed in 1981. ended in 1993.)(renewed in 1981. ended in 1993.)•1950. Hungarian- Roumanian Agreement (renewed in 1969. and in 1986.)•1954. Hungarian-Czecho-Slovakian• Agreement (renewed in 1976.)•1955. Hungarian-Yugoslavian Agreement•1956. Hungarian -Austrian Agreement

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•New frontier water agreements •after the political regime changes

•1993, 1997. Hungarian-Ukrainian Agreement •Slovakia became the partner in the former

Hungarian-Czecho-Slovakian Agreement • Serbia became the partner in the former Hungarian-Yugoslavian Agreement•1994. Hungarian-Croatian Agreement•1994. Hungarian-Slovenian Agreement•2003. New Hungarian-Roumanian Agreement

•The structure of the frontier water commissions

•By catchment principle: –e.g. Tisza Subcommission in HU-SK relation–Danube and Dráva Subc. in HU-CRO relation

•By technical or administrative principle: –Water Management Subcommission–Hidrometeorological Subcommission–Hidrometeorological Subcommission–Financing Subcommission

•Important tasks of water commissions:

•- water level and volume measurements•- checking the state of the dykes and the hydrotechnical

constructions•- flood protection•- agreement of development and technical plans•- water balance•- water quality measurements and evaluation•- regulate activities, create subcommissions, working groups.

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian- Austrian Water Commission•Most traditional agreement and Commission•Catchment areas: Lake of Fert ı, Ikva, •Pinka, Hanság, Rába, Lapincs rivers•Operational and preparatory activities •managed by the Water Subcommission•(agreed licencing of flood protection works)•Working Group for Water Quality ControlThe Commission evaluated flood

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian-Slovakian Commission • of Frontier Waters

•Danube Subcommission (flood protection)•Ipoly Subcommission (flood protection)•Ipoly Subcommission (flood protection)•Tisza Subcommission (flood protection)•Water Quality Control Subcommission•Financial Expert Group•Hydrological Expert Group (forecast)•WFD Expert Group

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian-Ukrainian Frontier Water •Agreement

•Water Demage Mitigation Group of ExpertsExperts•(Yearly inspection of dykes, canals and water management constructions, mutual acceptance of development plans)•Water Quality Control GoE•Hydrological and Water Management GoE

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian-Roumanian Water •Commission

•Flood and Inland Water SubcommissionSubcommission•(Yearly inspection, special regulation)•Hydrometeorological Subcommission•(Flood forecast)•Longterm WM PlanningSubcommission

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian-Serbian Water• Management Commission

•The 1955. HU-YUG Agreement is considered valid by both partiesInterruption of co -operation by civil •Interruption of co -operation by civil

war•Water Demage Mitigation Subcommission •(Yearly flood protection inspection, icebreaker cooperation on Danube)•Water Management Subcommission•Water Quality Control Subcommission

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Permanent Hungarian-Croatian Water• Management Commission

•Danube and Drava Basin SubcommissionSubcommission•(flood protection competence, development of flood forecasting, new Drava Atlas)•Mura Subcommission• (flood protection competence)•Water Quality Control

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Permanent Hungarian-Slovenian Water• Management Commission

•Working Group of Water Management•Working Group of Water Management• cofinancing of the construction and maintanence of Kebele/Kobijlski Reservoir•Working Group of Water Quality Control

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Best practice examples examples

•

•

Lónyay-fõcs.

Tisza

Tisza

Feke

te-Tisza

Kaszó

Tara

c

Borsa Nagyág

Tisza

Talabor

Latorca

Ung

Ljuta

Turja

Tapoly

Ond

ava L a

borc

Bodro

g

Tisza

UNGVÁR központ

Garbolc

Vásáros-namény

Técsı

Krasznaátjátszó

LáposmezıRahó

Kaszómezı

Nagybocskó

Rahóátjátszó

Körösmezı

Királymezı

Dragobrat

Huszt(Tiszakirva)

Huszt

Husztátjátszó

Ökörmezı

Alsókalocsa (Rókarét)

Alsókalocsa átjátszó

Dolha

Nyéresháza

Szolyva

Vezér-

szállás

Sóhát

Malomrét

Nagyberezna

Turjamezı

Polena

Alsóhideg-patak

Fülöpfalva

Repenye

Toronya

Zalomiszko

Alsóverecke

Alsóremete

Munkács

Pláj

átjátszó

Záhony

Tiszabecs

Sonkád

Dombrád

Szabolcs-veresmart

Tiszabercel

KótajTunyog-

TOKAJ

Jelmagyarázat:Vízgyőjtı határ

Országhatár

Csapadék és léghı- mérséklet

Vízállás

Vízállás USGS

Vízállás TACIS

Csapadék USGS

Csapadék TACIS

Vízminıség

T vm r k zpontá é ı ö

Tivadar

SZLOV KIAÁ

UKRAJNA

•Kárpátalján 35 db távmérı állomás:�25 db vízrajzi • (10 URH, 15 Mőhold.)�10 db hidromet.• (5 URH, 5 Mőholdas)

•Hazai területen 33 db távmérı állomás:•19 db vízrajzi•2 db hidrometeorológiai•3 db ultrahangos vízhozammérı•5 db automata talajvízkút•3 db automata szivattyútelep•1 db torkolati mőtárgy

• Common Hungarian- Ukrainian hydrographic telemeasuring system

Almás

Meleg-Szamos

Hideg-Szamos

Kis-Szamos

SzamosBe

szterce

Visó

Lápos

Szamos

Kraszna

Túr

Tisza

Iza

Kolozsvár

NYÍREGYHÁZA KÖZPONT

Zilah

Dés Beszterce

Alsószopor

Ágerdımajor

Nagyecsed

Kocsord

Császárszállás Csenger

V.oroszi

Garbolc Nagybocskó

NAGYBÁNYA

Alsószõcs

Magyarlápos

MacskamezõNagybúny

Kántor-jánosi

Tunyog-matolcs

Sülelmed

Naszód

Szamosújvár

Smida

Polana Horea

Béles

Borsa

Hídalmás

ROM

NIA

Á

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•HU-UA Telemeasuring System• In HU territory: 19 hydrographic stations• 2 hydromet.stations

» 3 URH water discharge st.» 5 aut. groundwater wells» 5 aut. groundwater wells» 3 aut. pumping stations» 1 outlet structure

• In UA territory: 10 URH hydrogr. stations• 15 satellite hydrogr.stations

» 5 URH hydromet. stations» 5 satellitehydromet. st.

•

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian technical assistance for •neighbouring countries I.

•• In 2001: dyke breach on Upper Tisza in • In 2001: dyke breach on Upper Tisza in Hungarian • territory. Hungarian assistance for pumping out the excess water in Ukrainian territory (1 month).•• In 2001 and in 2008: Hungarian Government

provided support to Ukraine for the development

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian technical assistance for •neighbouring countries II.

• In 2004: pumping provided on Serbian territory• by the Lower Tisza Directorate (Szeged) • by the Lower Tisza Directorate (Szeged) •• In 2005: dyke breach on Temes/Timis river in• Roumania. The Hungarian Flood Protection Service with mobile pumps helped to free a flooded Roumanian pumping station and then• together with Roumanian colleagues pumped out the water from the flooded territory.

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian icebreakers on the Serbian •and Croatian Danube river section

•By a special contract Hungarian icebreakersused to provide technical assistance forused to provide technical assistance forYugoslavian authorities on the Danube(1964/65, 1985/86). Other occasionspreparedness were provided.

•This bilateral cooperation continuedtrilaterally•(HU-SE-CRO)

•Special expert group meets every December

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Hungarian-Slovenian Transboundary •Cooperation

•Heavy floods in 1998 and 2005 on Kebele/•Kobijlski watercourse•Common study on the Kebele/Kobiljski •Common study on the Kebele/Kobiljski •catchment to stop the the high floods•(Vodnogospodarski in štitut Ljubljana• VIZITERV Budapest)•INTERREG IIIA SLO-HU-CRO Neighbourhood Programme 2004-2006• cofinancing of the construction and maintanence of Kebele/Kobiljski Emergency Reservoir

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Financing of Kebele/Koiljski• Emergency Reservoir

•EU support by the Structural Fund:1.090.949 EUREUR• from this sum for Hungary: 690.130 EUR• for Slovenia: 400.819 EUR•Hungarian contribution: 414.077 EUR•Slovenian contribution: 969.859 EUR•Total cost: 2.474.885 EUR

•Ratio of financing: 44% HU, 56% SLO

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Results:

• Flood protection of 3 Hungarian and 5 Slovenian settlement solved by the project• The reservoir retains 40% of the • The reservoir retains 40% of the 1%probability• flood for 3-5 days•Provides regulated conveyance of floods on the River Lendva and its tributaries•Provides possibility for water quality control

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Multilateral •Multilateral Cooperation

•Tisza Water Forum 2001-2004.•

•WG I. National characteristics of the Tisza River Basin (Yugoslavia)•WG II. Description of the flood control situation by countries (Romania)•WG III. Increase of lead time available for preparation (Hungary)•WG IV. Definition of the design flood levels (Slovakia)•WG IV. Definition of the design flood levels (Slovakia)•WG V. Implementation of the necessary measures (lUkraine)•WG VI. Environmental impact assessment (Slovakia)•WG VII. International co-operation, legal framework (Hungary)•WG VIII. Integrating the outputs (Romania)

•Tisza Water Forum Summary•

•Five lateral ministerial meeting initiated in 2001

•Concrete results in 4 Working Groups, but could not achieve concrete common projectcould not achieve concrete common project

• Tisza River Basin Flood Control Concept(2002)

• Contacts with EU

• The results of the Forum were integratedinto the ICPDR Tisza Group activity (2004)•

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•ICPDR Co-operation in the field •of flood protection

•1994. Sofia Convention on the Cooperation for the Protection and Sustainable Use of the Danube Danube •2000. Action Plan for Sustainable Flood Prevention • 2002. Flood Protection Working Group•2004. Adoption of Action Plan•2007. EU Flood Directive•2008. First Report on Achievements for the Public•2009. Overview of flood monitoring systems

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Targets of Flood Action Plan

•Improvement of forecasts•Preparation and coordination of sub-basin action plansbasin action plans•Fora for expert knowledge exchange•Recommendation for common approach and evaluation of flood risks

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Cooperation by the EU Flood Directive

•2007. Issue of EU Flood Directive• Aim: to reduce risks•2011. Preliminary Flood Risk

•2007. Issue of EU Flood Directive• Aim: to reduce risks•2011. Preliminary Flood Risk •2011. Preliminary Flood Risk Assesment•2013. Flood risk management maps•2015. Flood risk management plans

•2011. Preliminary Flood Risk Assesment•2013. Flood risk management maps•2015. Flood risk management plans

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•ICPDR projects and programs

•TISAR 2007: Joint implementation of WFD and Flood D. in the Tisza river basinbasin• (Development of Flood Mgmt. Strategy)•UNDP/GEF Tisza MPS: testing wetland and floodplain management• (3 demonstration projects with flood

component: practical implementations

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Other international •projects

•Danube Floodrisk: Risk mapping and data collection by 8 riparian countries data collection by 8 riparian countries (ICPDR)•Ceframe: Central European Flood Risk Assesment for the Lajta river (HU-AT-SK) •Pro Raab: Development of flood forecasting on the Rába river (HU -AT)

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Conclusions

•The flood protection is very important in transboundary relations (monitoring, forecast, risk (monitoring, forecast, risk assesment, emergency cooperation must be developed). •The bilateral and multilateral cooperation must be harmonized.•The bilateral projects must be developed to regional ones depending from situation.

•Zagreb, 13-14. December 2011.

•Thank you for your •Thank you for your kind attention !