Bukovica I and Bukovica II - public debate

Public consultation on EIA for small hydro power plants Bukovica I and Bukovica II has been held on 15th February in Municipality of Savnik. A large number of representativies of local communities and CSOs attended the public debate.

The public hearing was attended by Milija Čabarkapa in front of NGO Green Home, also  he represented the Coalition 27, which consists of twenty environmental organizations from Montenegro. On that occasion he pointed out the following:

  • By EIA Study is not presented how the ecologically acceptable flow was determined, whether by general or special assessment in accordance with the Rulebook on determination of the ecologically acceptable flow. Also, the Professional companie which prepared EIA Study used obsolete hydrological data from the past century that can not be considered relevant for the EPP's own assessment.
  • By EIA Study „flood wave“ is not determinate in accordance with the Rulebook on  determination of ecologically acceptable flow and flood wave is not given as a measure to prevent, reduce or eliminate negative impacts during the exploitation of sHPPs. The flood wave is determined in the period when the first higher flows after the summer drought occur in natural flow conditions (September, October or November).
  • The EIA Study should have presented a detailed scientific hydrobiological study which was supposed to examine the negative impacts on the natural ecosystem of the catchment area of Bukovica with experimental and exemplary data.
  • The current state of the environmental segments is not shown by scientifically-based methods, i.e. as required by the impact assessment procedure, and therefore it was not possible to properly implement chapters 7 and 8, which refers to the the environmental protection and environmental monitoring.
  • Alternative solutions have not been made in accordance relevant regulation.
  • Ecological consent should not be given since the realization of sHPPs projects on the Bukovica river would lead to a permanent devastation of the river and the destruction of the living world in them. Also, destruction of the centuries-old heritage of the inhabitants, memorial, ambient and landscape values would be destroyed.