See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/316989129

Târnave Rivers (Transylvania, Romania) ecological management proposal

Article  in  Studia Universitatis Vasile Goldis Arad, Seria Stiintele Vietii · June 2005

CITATIONS READS
4 73

2 authors:

Angela Bănăduc Doru Bănăduc

Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu
115 PUBLICATIONS   182 CITATIONS    130 PUBLICATIONS   358 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Natura 2000 View project

SIDPOP - Support instrument for decision making in POP management: case study Mureş Catchment area View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Doru Bănăduc on 17 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SV Studia Universitatis

TÂRNAVE RIVERS (TRANSYLVANIA, ROMANIA)

ECOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL

ANGELA CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC*, DORU BĂNĂDUC

„Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Ecology and

Environmental Protection, 31 Oituz St., RO - 550337 Sibiu, e-mail banaduc@yahoo.com
Rezumat
PROPUNERE PENTRU MANAGEMENTUL ECOLOGIC AL RÂURILOR
TÂRNAVE (TRANSILVANIA, ROMANIA) Lucrarea îşi propune stabilirea
măsurilor de reabilitare, conservare şi management ecologic a râului Târnava, având ca
fundament ştiinţific rezultatele evaluării stării ecologice şi a monitoringului râului pe
baza analizelor structurii comunităţilor acvatice (macronevertebrate bentonice şi peşti)
şi a parametrilor fizico-chimici ai apei (temperatură, pH, duritate totală - DT, oxigen
dizolvat - OD, consum biochimic de oxigen la cinci zile - CBO 5 , consum chimic de
oxigen - CCO-Mn, N total, P total, Cl-, SO 4 2-, NO 3 -, PO 4 3-, Pb, Zn, Cu, Cd şi Mn).
Sunt reliefate categoriile majore de impact antropic asupra râului (poluarea apei şi a
sedimentelor; lucrări hidrotehnice - acumulări de apă, regularizări, îndiguiri, desecări şi
devieri ale albiei; exploatarea substratului albiei; exploatarea terenurilor riverane),
consecinţele acestora asupra râului precum şi măsurile de redresare ecologică specifice
şi de conservare optime pentru acest râu (respectarea capacităţii naturale de suport a
râului, utilizarea eficientă a apei ca resursă, controlul poluării apei şi a sedimentelor,
refacerea zonelor umede conexe, refacerea vegetaţiei caracteristică luncii, etc.).
Abstract
TÂRNAVE RIVERS (TRANSYLVANIA, ROMANIA) ECOLOGICAL
MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL
This work intend to establish the Târnave rivers ecological rehabilitation, conservation
and management measures, based on scientific ecological assessment and monitoring
of these rivers aquatic communities structure (benthic macroinvertebrates and fish) and
of the physical and chemical water parameters (temperature, pH, total hardness (TH),
dissolved oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), chemical oxygen
demand (COD-Mn), Cl-, SO42-, NO-3, PO43-, total N, total P, Pb, Zn, Cu, Cd and
Mn.
1
The major categories of human impact on the rivers are highlighted (water and
sediments pollution; hydrotechnical works - dams; river channels, marshes and
floodplain drainages, cut of meanders, river banks reshaping and embanking,
tributaries deviations; river bed mineral exploitation; riverine land exploitation), and
also their consequences on the rivers and the specific ecological rehabilitation
measures and the optimum conservations measures for these rivers.
Cuvinte-cheie: sistem lotic, monitoring integrat, evaluare ecologică, reabilitare
ecologică, conservare, Târnava Mare, Târnava Mică, Târnava.

INTRODUCTION

The impetus for such type of work has arisen from the hydrobiologists’ major
concern over the declining quality of rivers as complex resources, on the Romanian
territory, over the past seven decades.
In any historical period and in almost all geographic regions, water was a priceless
resource but always was handled by people with divergent interests, different methods
and with significant different spatial and temporal effects.
The Târnava River Watershed (Fig. 1) is placed in the inner part of the Romanian
Carpathians arch, drain the Transylvania Depression, respective its southern division
the Târnavelor Plateau, and vary substantial in climate, geology, relief, hydrology and
anthropogenical impact.
With a watershed surface of 6157 km2, a length of 249 km and a dropping
elevation of about 1250 m, Târnava River is one of the main tributary of the Mureş
River, representing 21% of its watershed. It is properly formed at the confluence of
Târnava Mare River (3606 km2 watershed surface, 221 km length) and Târnava Mică
River (2049 km2 watershed surface, 191 km length) near Blaj locality. The first one
springs on the western slopes of the volcanic mountain mass Harghita Şumuleului at
1441 m altitude and the second one on the southern slope of the volcanic mountain
mass Saca (1777 m) at 1190 m altitude.
This study unit is divided unequally into two main physiographic areas: the smaller
mountainous part in the eastern, high-elevation part (between Târnava River springs
and Praid/Brădeşti locality) and the larger one, the Târnavelor Plateau in the central
and western, lower-elevation part (between Praid/Brădeşti locality and the confluence
with Mureş River).
The precipitations conditions and the subterranean water sources, provide a
relatively constant multi annual average water flow (Târnava Mare 14.7 m3/s, Târnava
Mică 9.8 m3/s). Târnava River, flow into the Mureş River near Mihalţ locality, with a
multi annual average water discharge of about 25 m3/s. The multi annual average
alluvial suspensions discharge is about 20 kg/s, the most of them coming from the
2
upper part of the basin. The river slope is generally reduced and the major riverbed is
developed, reaching few kilometers in the periods of maximum floods (for example the
flood of 1970). Both rivers are more of meandering streams particularly where winds
across Târnava Plateau, excepting the anthropogenic modified sectors. (TUFESCU
1966, BADEA et al. 1983, POSEA et al. 1983, CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC et al. 2001,
DOBROS, 2005).

Fig. 1: The Târnava River Watershed study unit location (BADEA et al. 1983 - modified).
Stream habitats vary from cool, clear, and forested headwater streams that have
coarse volcanic bedrock with high slope gradients in the mountainous physiographic
area, to intermediate coarse substrates in the Sub-Carpathian area, to warmer, sluggish,
meandered, and less/not forested streams banks with low slope gradients and sandy-
silty substrates in the Târnavelor Plateau.
Both watersheds are dominated by very similar land uses, forestry/small rural
localities characteristics in the mountainous areas and agriculture/industry/medium
sized localities (of maximum 65000 inhabitants) characteristics in over two third of the
watersheds (lower) areas.

3
 In the upper sectors of Târnava Mare River the natural hydrological conditions are
affected by Zetea Dam Lake management and by hydro technical works (cut of
meanders, marshes and floodplain drainages, river banks reshaping and embanking -
the last ones realised in 1970 period), and extensive deforestation, intensive agriculture
and the riverain (industrial and urban) wastewater discharges affected the natural
hydrobiological conditions in the lower sectors.
Although the macroinvertebrates communities and the fish communities may have
a high degree of natural variability, they can be useful indicators of the aquatic
ecosystems status/health (CHAPMAN 1992, KNOBEN et al. 1995, Hauer & RESH
1996, CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC 2000, KARR 1981, MOYLE & Herbold 1987,
BĂNĂDUC 2000, BĂNĂDUC & CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC 2002). Also, is
recommended macroinvertebrates and fish be given consideration in biological water-
quality surveys of streams because they generally are discerned by the public to be
ecologically relevant, and they are in direct relation to legislative mandates because of
human health and endangered species concerns. These taxonomic groups analyze are
essential for a lotic system management establishment (CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC &
BĂNĂDUC 2001).
These rivers dimensions, natural and economic importance, variable and
aggressive types of human impact, justify such a study for this area.
With their almost parallel courses in similar relief units and with many physico-
chemical and hydrological similarities, these two rivers offer an important opportunity
for a comparative study concerning the cause-effect interrelations among
macroinvertebrates associations, fish associations, their environment and the
anthropogenic impact.
This river basin constituted early in time (prehistory) a zone where the local high
potential for human activities was intensively used. Historically, important human
impact presence on the river started in the 1200 - a.Ch. period, when boulders and sand
exploitation, river banks modification, tributaries deviations, floodplains and marshes
drainages, and both sewage waste and industrial pollutants discharges get started for
more than seven centuries till the present. (CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC et al. 2001).
Especially in the last five decades period the human impact was heavily increased,
causing visible disruption in the ecological functioning of the river and research was
needed to assess the appeared ecological effects, to find new management actions for
the new situation and to predict some aspects of the lotic system future evolution.
In spite of the fact that these rivers were, are and will be very important in the
urban and rural development in both valleys watersheds, and in the development of the
Târnăveni, Odorhei, Cristuru, Sighişoara, Dumbrăveni, Mediaş, Copşa Mică and Blaj
localities complex industry by serving as main water supply, and an important human
impact presence it has to be aspect, seldom acknowledged is the fact that this area was
not approached through integrated studies till the present.
4
 The “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu/Ecology and Environment Protection
Department, Sibiu Natural History Museum and Ecotur Sibiu N.G.O. specialists, chose
to allocate important resources to Târnava River Watershed ecological assessment,
along 1999 - 2005 period, at its end a volume come into being (CURTEAN-
BĂNĂDUC et al. 2005).
As a result of this work/volume (MOMEU & PÉTERFI 2005, MOUNTFORD &
AKEROYD 2005, CUPŞA 2005, SÎRBU 2005, GHEOCA 2005, GHEOCA &
GHEOCA 2005, CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC 2005 a, b, ROBERT & CURTEAN-
BĂNĂDUC 2005, ISTRATE 2005, BĂNĂDUC 2005, BĂNĂRESCU 2005) have
been documented, the presence of a varied types of human impact in the Târnava River
environment, and a future obvious necesary objective was identified related with a
better understanding of the dynamics of a Târnave rivers proper management, as a
catalyst for the enhancement and protection of wildlife habitat in the area, to induce
actions to improve water quality for different human uses and wildlife, and to facilitate
discussion on the future of this watershed anthropisation.
This last dynamic, creative and cooperative assessment results have to be offered
to the landowners, the businesses groups, the governmental agencies, and the local
communities to stimulate the creation of a professional basin management plan, a real
watershed community, where all can have access to the best possible natural areas and
resources.
This assessment summarizes the findings of a special designed new studies in the
area, represent a snapshot of our current knowledge regarding Târnava Mare, Târnava
Mică and Târnava rivers watersheds management, develop the knowledge and
understanding concerning this watersheds and provide a context for moving forward
with these rivers restoration, protection, mangement, and also generate the need for
new studies.
Basically, the intent of this paper work is to provide a first Târnava Basin -
management wide perspective and a framework for action based on many recent
studies that have been completed in this area.
No doubt that this new data, will develop knowledge and understanding of the
status and conditions of these watersheds management and will continuing to evolve.
This study based on previous medium (six years) term river assessments
(BĂNĂDUC 2005, CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC 2005 a, b, ROBERT & CURTEAN-
BĂNĂDUC 2005) of the benthic macroinvertebrates, fish, habitat conditions and of
the local human impact, intend to provide an identification and evaluation of the
responsible causal factors and of the alternatives, which can gain consensus on a
strategy for developing a river sustainable management plan, for mitigating human
impact and controlling its effects on environment, public health and welfare, including
remedial objectives and response actions.

5
METHODS

The presence and the effects of the human impact relative to a reference ecological
state, was analysed in terms of relative biologic integrity, biodiversity indexes
(Margalef, Shannon-Wiener, Simpson, equitability, Belgian Biotic Index (BBI),
Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) (DE PAUW at al. 1992, ROSENBERG & RESH,
1993), based on a variety of benthic macroinvertebrates (59 species - 12 plecopterans
species, 35 trichopterans species, 12 ephemeropterans species) and fish (25 species),
and on 17 physical and chemical water parameters (temperature, pH, total hardness
(TH), dissolved oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD 5 ), chemical oxygen
demand (COD-Mn), Cl-, SO 4 2-, NO- 3 , PO 4 3-, total N, total P, Pb, Zn, Cu, Cd and Mn),
which were used as ecological river state indicators (BĂNĂDUC 2005, CURTEAN-
BĂNĂDUC 2005 a,b, ROBERT & CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC 2005).
The 23 studied stations (Fig. 2) were chosen according to: the valley morphology,
the type of rivers substratum, the confluence with the main tributaries, the relative
undisturbed areas and to the human impact presence bias (riverine land use, hydro
technical works, urban and industrial pollution sources).

Fig. 2: The quantitative sampling stations on Târnava Mare River ( TM), Târnava Mică River
( Tm) and Târnava River ( T), based on which the management analise was realised.
Generated data during this phase filled previously existing data gaps in order to
provide a comprehensive understanding based on which was evaluate the possible
remedial alternatives for the human and ecological risk situations. The biological
monitoring was used to characterize the response of the aquatic environment to multiple

6
disturbances, considering that the integrity of the biota inhabiting the river ecosystems
provides a direct and integrated measure of the integrity or health of the river.
In the end with these offered alternatives is developed a specific case proposal,
concerning Târnava River natural resources restoration, conservation and management.
The assessments of the river ecological state and the identified emerging problems,
finally select the river sectors in terms of different specificity and priority for receiving
an efficient specific management, based on specific goals, quantifiable objectives and
actions.
In examining the river biotic and abiotic characteristics, the researches has
determined that primary contributors to the natural conditions disturbances are the river
water pollution, the hydrotechnical works, and the riverbed mineral overexploitation.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Water polution impact

Habitat, water as direct resource, recreational activities
A wide range of natural resources and natural resource services are affected or
potentially affected by the release of different pollutants.
Historically, the river has received both sewage waste and industrial pollutants for
more than seven centuries, accidental and permanent release of hazardous substances
has occurred persistent at least in the last five decades, the anthropogenicaly impact
being in this period drastically higher from this point of view.
The main sources of river contamination include inactive and active hazardous
waste disposal sites and technical instalations, combined sewer overflows, sewage
effluent, and tributaries entering the river. The main released pollutants (organic
substances in different degrees of decomposition, phito-sanitation products, chemical
zootechnics disinfectants, suspensions, nitrites, nitrates, detergents, oil products,
sodium chlorite products, organic solvents, synthethic resins, SO 2 , SO 3 , NO 2 , CO, Cr,
Pb, Zn, Cu, Cd) are direct/indirect and many of them over the legal limits
concentrations, discharging accidentally and/or permanently from many important
riverine sources (machines, textile, leather, wood, food, zootechnical, metalurgy,
ceramic, enamel, glass, building materials, silk, wool, glue, carbide, sulphur acid and
plastics industries) of eleven main localities (Zetea 5000 inhabitants, Odorheiu
Secuiesc 40000, Cristuru Secuiesc 11185, Sighişoara 36000, Dumbrăveni 8900,
Mediaş 65000, Copşa Mică 5189 - Târnava Mare River; Praid 7050, Sovata 10500,
Târnăveni 30000 - Târnava Mică River; Blaj 21350 - Târnava River).
It have to be highlighted that not all this (and especialy other smaller localities)
localities have water cleaning plants and sewage systems, not enough sewage sistems
and/or deteriorated sewage sistems; a lot of water cleaning plants works under the
necesary standards; a lot of illegal waste deposits exist on the river banks.
7
 The quantity and concentration of the hazardous substances and the frequency of
the releases are sufficient to cause injury to natural resources (sediment, water, biota),
resulting the main anthropogenic Târnava River ecological problem with different long
term effects.
The affected resources with their sundry ecological and human services (habitat,
water as a direct resource, recreational activities, etc.) are described further in the
pollutants contamination impact context.
The river provide habitat for macroinvertebrates and fish communities, including
feeding, breeding and nursery services.
The bioassessment using these groups of organisms reveal that TM 6 -TM 12 and
Tm 4 -Tm 9 sectors are considerably affected from this point of view by the elevated
hazardous substances concentrations, particularly damaging the aquatic organism
populations.
Concerning the time scale, important pollution levels were registered through the
local biocoenosis reaction starting around 1960 and the river has undergone a
progressive loss of biodiversity as a result of habitat degradation or loss.
The Târnava River represents the cheapest high quality direct water resource in
the area only in its upper third part (TM 1 -TM 5 and Tm 1 -Tm 2 sectors).
The significant modifications of the analyzed invertebrate and fish associations
reflect that downstream Odorhei locality (TM 6 -TM 12 sector on Târnava Mare River)
and downstream Sovata locality (Tm 4 -Tm 9 ), the rivers are no more appropriate to be
used as reliable and cheep source of water. Beginning with these hot spots, the water
pollution in these rivers act as a constraint on the economic and social development of
the downstream localities: Cristuru Secuiesc, Sighişoara, Dumbrăveni, Mediaş, Copşa
Mică, Blaj and Târnăveni. The improved raw water quality for the water supply can
improve the local economy efficiency and public health standards.
The Târnave rivers, except its mountainous part (TM 1 -TM 5 and Tm 1 -Tm 3 ), and its
environment are no more appropriate to support both consumptive and non-
consumptive recreational activities such as recreational fishing, with no health
hazards coming from fish consumption, swimming, boating, and wildlife viewing,
activities with (for the moment) a theoretical hi touristic potential in the area.
Hydrotechnical works impact
River channels, marshes and floodplain drainages, cut of meanders, river
banks reshaping and embanking, tributaries deviations
River water and sediments, serve as medium for the transport of energy and
nutrients, and as habitat for various aquatic biota. Both the services for transport of
energy and nutrients and as habitat, were affected due to hydrotechnical works impact.
Basically, in their actual construction form the long term negative impact is higher
then the short/medium term positive “economic” one, due to: the economic over
evaluation on long time scale of arable and grazing land, and the extensions of their
8
surfaces through elimination of the wetlands “unprofitable land”; the wrong idea of
unhealthiness (fog, mosquitoes, fear of water) generally attaching to wetlands; the
widely-held opinion that wetlands were useless, owing to a lack of understanding
concerning their complex role in maintaining fundamental ecological balances and
exchanges between terrestrial and aquatic ecosistems.
Historically, the first important human impact presence on the Târnave rivers was
due to the building and later industrial developing and urbanization of the Odorhei,
Cristuru, Sighişoara, Dumbrăveni, Mediaş, Copşa Mică, Târnăveni, Blaj localities on
their banks. Manny drainage works in the river’s floodplain, marshes and secondary
channels and tributaries deviations were initiated, to build and develop this towns
started with the XII century. Today, these rivers, drastically affected by such human
activities, in both terms of biotope and biocoenosis modifications, pass through these
anthropogenicaly affected sectors.
In the modern period, activities like cutting meanders, embanking of some river
sectors and some ponds and wetlands connected with the river drainage, were
promoted in order to ensure increased arable land surfaces.
The natural resources (sediment, water, biota) have been adversely affected by all
these hydrotechnical works construction and management. These human activities
have had major negative consequences for aquatic biocoenosis, causing the loss of
many natural ecosystems, loss of biodiversity, as well as the disturbance of the natural
ecological balance within the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
Actually the hydrotechnical works in the Târnava River Basin area include major
river banks reshaping and embankments, floodplain and marshes drainages and
tributaries deviations.
The river continuum, booth in structure and functions is also disturbed in the
present in numerous sectors by the river bed “cleaning” activities, realized by the local
administrations and Romanian Waters Administration, actions which affect the
assimilative and self cleaning capabilities of the rivers biocoenosis and by the clear
cutting of the trees and bushes which formed in the past a continuous “functional green
corridor” on the river banks. These ex riveraine green corridors with no more buffer
functions are missing on long distances, also (mainly) due to the arable land extensions
in the river proximity.
Dams
The Zetea Dam construction and management (the water abstraction and the flow
regulation) determine the river hydrologic natural regime modification and also river
bed and channel modifications. These major disturbancing factors induced on a spatial
and temporal scale an anthropogenically variability of habitats and associated biota,
more accentuated in TM 3 -TM 4 sector.
The variable rainfall pattern and the occurrence of sporadic droughts, exacerbate
the impact of water abstraction on the instream and riparian habitats. The resulted
9
cessation of surface flow in a naturally perennial river during the dry season and during
droughts with loss of fast flowing instream habitat types in the main stem of the river,
had detrimental consequences for the associated biota.
The habitat integrity changes effects are particularly severe for the aquatic
organisms (shrinking or destroying the spawning territory and the breeding success of
the local/valuable characteristic aquatic fauna) inducing biocoenosis changes.
Not only the major in stream hydrotechnical constructions have important
influence on the river habitats and its asociated biota. For example the small concrete
hydro technical works in the river bed (TM 1 ) induced a decrease in the local biotic
integrity.
Mineral resource overexploitation impact
Environmental impact also coming from gravel mining activity in the Târnava
River. Important river bad rocks/boulders and sand exploitation start in the XII century
period to supply with construction materials the building of the important medieval
city of the area. These activities continuing, more than that the river bed exploitation
activities increased significantly in the last five decades.
Natural resources (sediment, water, biota) have been adversely affected by the
mineral river bed overexploitation. The exploitations influences are the banks and river
bed increased erosion, reshaping and elevation changings, the downstream excessive
siltation and decrease of water quality.
If we consider that restoration of aquatic ecosystems can be defined as "return of
an ecosystem to a close approximation of its condition prior to disturbance" the term
restoration meaning the reestablishment of predisturbated aquatic functions and related
physical, chemical and biological characteristics (CAIRNS et al. 1992), a holistic
process which is not the sum of simply creation/reallocation/enhancement activities, it is
obvious that it can't be achieved through isolated manipulation of individual elements.
It is necessary that such an ecological restoration task to be approached only in the
conditions of the ecological integrity proper management, ecological integrity
including a critical range of variability in biodiversity, ecological processes and
structures, regional and historical context, and sustainable cultural practices (GWIN et.
al. 1999, LEWINS 1989, RACE & FONSECA 1996, ZEDLER 1996).
In the actual budgetary constraints circumstances the single reasonable approach
on short and medium term, is a sectorial one (including pollution, hydrotechnical
works and riverbed mining overexploitation), which finally attempt to go back in time
the Târnava River ecological state/restoration till the middle of the eighteen century.
This period back is considered as appropiate because in it existed the most agresive
human impact and also exist some comparable data about this past period due to the
activity of Transylvanian Society for Natural Sciences of Sibiu (***, 1859-1940).
As long as the last integrated studies all over the world reflect that old fashioned
hydrotechnical works construction manner conduct to a continuous increasing stresses
10
on aquatic ecosystems, a higher and higher level of financial efforts to exploit the
rivers related resources and a certain decreasing of the quality of human life for present
and future generations, finally we must accept the need for ameliorations to the already
constructed dams, even destroyed some of them and also the river embankments.
Due to the present unsustainable mentality and so called „technical” education of
the decision makers, we will exclude here the radical but the most efficient actions
which are able to change the present wrong situation artificially created, of
river/riverine form without functions or altered functions in an artificial configuration,
in a natural self-regulating system that is long term economic beneficial due to its
ecologically integration.
The potential for the recovery of natural resource damages of Târnava River is
substantial even in the actual technical-administration “hostile” environment, if the
following minimum five amelioration actions levels will be included:
Water and sediment pollution remedies
The well known not general compliance with the Romanian and international
regulations governing waste water management and a lack of adequate effluent dilution
appeared to be the major cause of the Târnava River degradation. Also, in such a case
when the river does not have an abundant supply of water for dilution and the effluent
treatment conditions are not sufficient, and past and present response actions, have not
sufficiently restored the injured river natural resources, nor are they expected to
preclude the continued release of hazardous substances, the further actions are needed:
- the environmental Romanian and international laws must be unconditioned
respected by everybody;
- increasing water consumption efficiency through general contour meters
utilization and a reliable transport pipe system;
- keeping inactive the hazardous waste sites;
- the creation of a hazardous waste site evaluation unit, staffed by biologists, which
represents wildlife interests, involved in the process of identify and clean up inactive
and active hazardous waste sites;
- developing a potential resource damage claim against the major polluters;
- the physical and chemical standards used to characterize and manage wastewater
treatment in Romania are inadequate and must be changed to protect the downstream
environment in the vicinity below wastewater works;
- countermeasures against the accidental oil spills;
- the protected and semi protected river sectors must be large and dense enough to
allow the river self cleaning capacity to be active enough to face the human impact
pressure, as a long term cheapest alternative to the present one “polluted water pass
away to the downstream effluent”;
- the healthy river biocoenosis must be managed like a biological capital whose
interests is collected through reducing the expenses for water cleaning technologies.
11
 Hydrotechnical works impact remedies
- activities for the river assimilative capacity restoration, including land acquisition
and wetlands areas restoration;
- the Gura Râului Dam management strategy must be based on the equitable
allocation of water resource. It must include not only the minimum water flow
necessary for the downstream users (domestic, industrial, agricultural, etc) - the
servitude discharge, but the minimum discharge required in downstream watercourse
sectors, to provide the natural conditions for the existing aquatic ecosystems - the
sanitation discharge too;
- revitalization of the best traditions for land protection and use (ecological
systematization of riverbanks, protection of lands near the river channel);
- the impact of inevitable wetlands loss, as long as wetlands may legally be
destroyed and in the conditions of the fall in annual precipitation in the last quarter of
century, can be mitigated and compensated through restoration, creation, or
enhancement of other wetlands. This strategy should produce the “no net loss” of
wetlands (ZEDLER 1996, RACE & FONSECA 1996);
- protect and restore sectors of typical local ecosystems.
River bed mineral exploitation remedies
- rational gravel mining activity, based on riverbed exploitation quantities under
the annually riverbed regeneration rate and filtering the used industrial water for the
sand or gravel washing.
Riverine land exploitation
- determine of incentive policies for cultivation of multy-year cultures (vineyards,
orchards, forests);
- rehabilitation of riverine forest corridor, with interdiction of the arable land
extension in the minimum 5-10 m riverine corridor along the river banks;
- prohibiting access to the upper parts of the catchment areas (limiting damage
from the water erosion) so that spontaneous perennial vegetation could regenerate in
the best conditions;
- rotating rational sylviculture and grazing activities, having regard to seasonal
conditions, especialy on the river banks.
Protected species and areas
- sheltered from all human or man-related aggression, the protected habitats are
needed. Thus would make an excellent observatory and serve as a reference for the
monitoring of a subnatural ecosystem as compared to other much deteriorated
surrounding environments. The larger a protected area the better it could fulfill its
conservation function, since it integrated a set of habitat often used for complementary
purposes by the same species and it enabled the present species to live in sufficient
numbers to obviate too much inbreeding;
12
 - a properly conceived protection is useful aid to direct and indirect economic
development of the rural communities;
- complementarity should exist, between local development and conservation, a
demonstration that could be achieved in the context of rational use of wildlife;
- protection of key, rare and/or endangered species.
Technical aspects
- the implementation of a management plan with the participation of associations,
groups of farmers, NGOs, and groups of specialists of different disciplines including
works for improvement of forests, pastures, improvement of practices for use of
terrain, control of erosion, etc.;
- the creation of a (functional) interdisciplinary professional watershed council;
- the criteria and indicators determination for monitoring the relevant structures;
- review the management plan periodically in concordance with the E.U. Water
Directive.
Aspect subjective difficulties and barriers
The “arguments” with which the local or/and national authorities will reject as
“impossible” for the moment the implementation of such an ecological rehabilitation
will be the lack of necessary funding and may be the actual disharmonization of legal
frame work, in fact the basically problems are their wrong understanding of the
problem as a hole, their indecision and the fact that they didn’t use sufficient or
integrated professional advisory services.
Târnava River situation is a common one among the Romanian rivers. At the
present, in spite of the “good examples” of destroying and wetlands resources
overexploitation of the Western European, North American countries and ex
communist countries, with their destructive and economically long term unprofitable
effects, and of the good examples of the last two decades of reshaping the human-
wetlands relationships (which include even the destroying of some dams and
embankments!), of the actual developed countries, the Romanian specialist involved in
the water management are astonishing determined to follow the same wrong wetlands
management strategies which were “successfully” collapsed and were or are changing
in the western countries. If our “specialists” have no capacity to learn from others
mistakes and experiences, claiming again and again false economic considerations ..…
we will learn from ours but on ours expenses too.
Based on Romanian disappointioning last 60 years of experience, it is idealistic to
think that these rivers ecological restoration can be complete especially in our life time
even if this complex action will start now. The long term human impact effects, the
decision makers „understanding” concerning nature, economic and social
interrelations, will make possible these rivers ecological restoration possible only in
the conditions of our E.U. criteria and regulations observance in both the environment
and economic fields.
13
CONCLUSIONS
Târnave rivers were in different degrees, in different hystoricall periods, under
long term human impact pressure that threatened its structure, functions and its
capabilities to offer priceless services to the riverine human communities.
The impact assessment was realized through the 17 studied/affected water phisico-
chemical parameters and biotic resources including a variety of benthic
macroinvertebrates and fish, belonging to 84 species and subspecies.
The main antropogeneticaly disturbance factors of the last seven century are
mainly the river water and sediment pollution, hydrotechnical works and river bad
mineral exploitation, with major increasingly effects in the last five decades.
As a human impact direct consequence, the river system habitats have become in
some sectors severely modified or/and degraded, aquatic organisms contaminated with
various pollutants and river and riverine biological communities changed.
Although there is a considerable number of damaging practices and activities
affecting Târnava River resources, the potential for the recovery of natural resource
damages of Târnava River is substantial, including many possibilities to recovery
them, in case of an ecological rehabilitation implementation strategy. Past and present
response actions, carried out or planed do not or will not sufficiently remedy the injury
to natural resources without further integrated actions.
It is essential to take action at the right level in all human impact cases, so that the
sole considerations would not be only the short term interest of industry, urbanization
and agriculture. The guvernamental institutions with controll prerogatives must
assume their attributions, blocking the wrong initiatives or intentions or if is
appropriate to facilitate their amendation.

REFERENCES

BADEA L., et al., Geografia României I, Geografia Fizică, Edit. Academiei Române,
Bucureşti, 1-662, 1983.
BĂNĂDUC D., Fish associations - habitats quality relation in the Târnave rivers
(Transylvania, Romania) ecological assessment, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol.
Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 123-136, 2005.
BĂNĂDUC D., Ichthyofaunistic criteria for Cibin River (Transylvania, Romania)
human impact assessment. Trav. Mus. natl. Hist. nat. “Grigore Antipa”,
Bucureşti, Vol. XLII, 356-372, 2000.
BĂNĂDUC D., CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC A., A biotic integrity index adaptation for a
Carpathian river assessment, Acta oec., Sibiu, vol. IX 1-2, 81-99, 2002.
BĂNĂRESCU P.M., Ichthyological investigations in the drainage area of the Mureş
River, 1948-1997, Transylvanian Review of Systematical and Ecological
Research, vol. 2, Sibiu, 137-144, 2005.
14
CAIRNS J.Jr., BEST G., BREZONIK P.L., Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems,
National Research Council - American National Academy of Sciences,
National Academy Press Washington D.C. 1-576, 1992.
CHAPMAN D., Water quality assessment; a guide to the use of biota, sediments and
water in environmental monitoring, UNESCO/WHO/UNEP, Cambridge, 1-
629, 1992.
CUPŞA D., Preliminary note on the aquatic Oligochaeta from the Târnave rivers,
Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 43-50, 2005.
CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC A., a, Study regarding Târnava Mare and Târnava Mică rivers
stonefly (Insecta. Plecoptera) larvae communities, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol.
Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 75-84, 2005.
CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC A., b, Târnava Mare River ecological assessment, based on
the benthic macroinvertebrates communities, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res.,
vol. 2, Sibiu, 109-133, 2005.
CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC A., BĂNĂDUC D., Cibin River management, scientific
foundation proposal, Acta oec., vol. VIII nr. 1-2, Sibiu, 2001.
CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC A., BĂNĂDUC D., SÎRBU I., Impactul antropic asupra
Târnavelor şi Ampoiului, Sibiu, 1-86, 2001
CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC A., BĂNĂDUC D., SÎRBU I., Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol.
Res. - The Târnava River Basin, vol. 2, Sibiu, 1-182, 2005.
DE PAW N., GHETTI P.F., MANZINI D.P., SPAGGIARI D.R., Biological
assessment methods for running water, River Water Quality. Ecological
Assessment and Control, Commission of the E.C., EUR 14606, 217-248, 1992.
DOBROS V., Aspects concerning the liquid flow in Târnava Mică River Basin,
Transylv. Rev. Syst. and Ecol. Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 1-4, 2005.
GHEOCA V., Preliminary note concerning the terrestrial mollusk fauna of the Târnava
hydrographic basin, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 61-66, 2005.
GHEOCA V., GHEOCA D., The accumulation of the heavy metals in the tissues of
Helix pomatia from locations with industrial/town pollution, Transylv. Rev.
Syst. Ecol. Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 67-74, 2005.
GWIN, S.E., KENTULA M.E., SHAFFER P.W., Evaluating the Effects of Wetland
Regulation through Hydrogeomorphic Classification and Landscape Profiles.
Wetlands 19, (3), 477-489, 1999.
HAUER R.F., RESH V., Benthic Macroinvertebrates, Methods in Stream Ecology,
Acad. Press, San Diego, 339-370, 1996.
ISTRATE P., An ecological survey of the Cerambicidae (Coleoptera) in the geographic
basin of the Târnava Mică Valley, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. - The
Târnava River Basin, vol. 2, Sibiu, 99-108, 2005.
KARR J.R., Assessment of biotic integrity using fish assemblages: Fisheries, vol. 6,
21-27, 1981.
15
 KNOBEN R.AE., ROOS C., ORISCHOT M.C.M., Biological Assessment Methods for
Watercourses, UN/ECE T.F. Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 3, 1-86, 1995.
LEWIS R., III, Wetland restoration terminology: Suggestions for standardization.
Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science, Vol. II. EPA
600/3/89, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 1989.
MOMEU L., PÉTERFI L.Ş., The structure of Diatom communities inhabiting the
Târnava Mică and Târnava Mare rivers, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res., vol. 2,
Sibiu, 5-12, 2005.
MOUNTFORD O., AKEROYD J., A biodiversity assessment of saxon villages region
of Transylvania, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 31-42, 2005.
MOYLE P.B., HERBOLD B., Life-history patterns and community structure in stream
fishes of western North America: Comparisons with eastern N. America and
Europe, In W.J. Matthews and D.C. Heins (Editors), Community and
Evolutionary Ecology of N. American Stream Fishes. Univ. of Oklahoma
Press. Norman, Oklahoma, 25-32, 1987.
POSEA, G., et al., Enciclopedia Geografică a României, Edit. Ştiinţifică şi
Enciclopedică, Bucureşti, 1-847, 1983
RACE M.S., FONSECA M.S., Fixing compensatory mitigation: Ecological
Applications 6(1):94-101, 1996.
ROBERT S., CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC A., Aspects concerning Târnava Mare and
Târnava Mică rivers caddis fly larvae communities, Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol.
Res., vol. 2. Sibiu, 89-98, 2005.
ROSENBERG D.M., RESH V.H., Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic
macroinvertebrates, Chapman & Hall, London, 1993.
SÎRBU I., The freshwater molluscs from the Târnava rivers basin (Romania), Transylv.
Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res., vol. 2, Sibiu, 51-60, 2005.
TUFESCU V., Subcarpaţii şi depresiunile marginale ale Transilvaniei, Edit. Ştiinţifică,
Bucureşti, 1-253, 1966.
ZEDLER J., Ecological issues in wetland mitigation: Ecological Applications 6(1), 33-
37, 1996.
*** Verh. u. Mitt. d. sieben. Ver. f. Naturwiss. zu Hermannstadt, 1859-1940.

* Corespondence: Curtean-Bănăduc A., ”Lucian Blaga” University, School of

Siences, Dept. of Ecology and Environmental Protection, 31 Oituz St., RO - 550337
Sibiu, e-mail banaduc@yahoo.com, angela.banaduc@ulbsibiu.ro

16

View publication stats