*3.3. Di*ffi*culties of Managing Environmental Flows in the Amur Basin*

In the Amur basin, the main stakeholders pushing for the development of environmental releases from the already existing reservoirs are NGOs and scientists. Understanding the difficulties connected with environmental flow assessment and integration into hydropower management, NGOs have chosen a strategy to prevent initial damage instead of mitigating it after dam construction. Attempts to assess and develop environmental flows were made in 1993 [49], 2007–2010 [64], and 2013 [65]. However, as of 2019, the requirements for environmental flows from the reservoirs on the Zeya and Bureya rivers to sustain the freshwater and floodplain ecosystems below the dams had not been prescribed in the "Reservoir Operating Rules". Solving this problem is difficult due to the lack of knowledge of the biological resources of these freshwater ecosystems. In addition, for the Zeya River, there is no data on the initial conditions of the river ecosystem. This obstructs the assessment of the effectiveness of any implemented environmental flows. All these factors result in difficulties in assessing the damage caused by existing dams and developing adequate measures for its minimization and compensation.

#### **4. Discussion**

This section discusses how the work in the Amur basin compares to work in other basins and the possible reasons for notable variations in strategy, tactics, and outcomes. It explores aspects such as an assessment of alternatives to hydropower development, the timing of the strategic assessments and further implementation of their results, the protection of river ecosystems by establishing protected areas at undeveloped river stretches, environmental flows, and different strategies for their integration into reservoir management.

#### *4.1. Amur and Baikal: Di*ff*erent Approaches to Alternatives*

In different basins, the focus of key elements of strategic assessments could be quite different depending on local circumstances or changes in the global energy development context. In 2014–2018, members of the Rivers without Boundaries International Coalition (RwB) were involved in a basin-wide analysis of potential hydropower impacts in Lake Baikal and the Selenge River basin, shared byMongolia and Russia. Mongolian authorities, supported by the World Bank, wanted to develop feasibility studies for two specific large dams, while the RwB members and local communities in Mongolia and Russia (as well as the World Heritage Committee) insisted that a strategic environmental assessment should first be carried out to determine the limitations for water infrastructure development in the basin and to explore available alternatives. In contrast to the analysis of alternatives in the Amur River basin, which focused on a comparison of impacts from different hydropower development scenarios, the emphasis of the analysis requested for the Lake Baikal basin was on a comparison of intended hydropower against alternative means to improve the energy supply system of Mongolia, including the deployment of solar, wind, and transboundary transmission grids, pumped storage, and other storage technologies. So far, Mongolia has agreed to conduct a regional environmental assessment for the Baikal–Selenge basin and has committed to undertake a thorough analysis of alternative technologies to the proposed hydropower dams [66]. This type of shift in focus from an analysis of dam siting to optimize hydropower development to considering alternative generating technologies at the energy system level is seen by the expert community as an important necessity (see, e.g., advice for donor governments [12], handbook on paradigm shifts in energy system planning [15], analysis of emerging trends in the Greater Mekong Subregion [67].

#### *4.2. Basin-Wide Stragic Assessment: Experience in the Amur and Elsewhere*

In the same decade that the WWF&En+ strategic assessment took place in Amur, many other basin-wide strategic environmental assessments (and other EIAs) have been carried out in different large transboundary basins [68]. Some of those assessments have been much more elaborate and detailed than the express analysis undertaken for Amur and were sanctioned and funded by intergovernmental organizations, governments of basin countries, donor agencies, and other relevant sources of authority. A detailed comparative study is needed in the future on the specific place and role of such SEA efforts in public education and decision-making processes [69]. Policy outcomes informed by environmental assessments vary dramatically. Shortcomings in the "Environmental Impact Report of Hydropower Development in the Upper Reaches of the Ayeyarwady River in Myanmar", performed by the Changjiang Institute of Survey, Planning, Design, and Research (CISPDR) in 2011 and subsequently highlighted by an independent review by International Rivers, contributed to the continued freezing of the controversial Myitsone dam [70]. Meanwhile, in another important case, a state-of-the-art presentation of overwhelming evidence on the negative consequences from damming the Mekong River did not stop those dams from being developed by Laos with investment from various international funders [71]. In a recent case in Myanmar, a key player, the Energy Ministry, in 2018 removed its endorsement from the final report of the most elaborate and balanced country-wide SEA, allegedly yielding to pressure from foreign firms with licenses for large hydropower development on major rivers [72]. Nevertheless, there are many examples from Vietnam, India, Pakistan, and Nepal where the recommendations of an SEA were not challenged and were partly used in decision-making. However, long-term perspectives and systemic findings of SEAs often contradict short-term interests of policy-makers and confront the shortcomings of projects already designed and invested in by developers.

The reason for the relative success of the Amur basin-wide assessment in helping to prevent further development of the most harmful hydropower projects is that it was undertaken at the earliest stages of planning, when potential project proponents were exploring project opportunities and had not yet invested heavily in a preferred option. Another important factor was the continuity of institutional knowledge and capacity building among Russian conservation NGOs and the expert community, who had, since 1990, preserved evidence on hydropower impacts that was collected during earlier

assessments. Finally, little formal involvement from governmental bureaucratic mechanisms also likely contributed to the relative ease with which the assessment outcomes were internalized by various stakeholders. Even the pledge by the company to withdraw from the Transsibirskaya dam project on the Shilka River was a voluntary action without any legal obligations or dangerous consequences.

Through the activities of the Rivers without Boundaries International Coalition, the methodology and experiences from the Amur River assessment have been shared and thoroughly discussed with experts and CSOs from China, Australia, Netherlands, Myanmar, Thailand, Nepal, and Brazil. Various elements of the methodology could be applied to designing basin-wide assessments in other regions. However, even such a simple methodology requires indices to be modified for different river basins to represent the main impact factors. New factors may also need to be added, such as water withdrawal, which was very modest in the case of the Amur basin but may be significant in other regions.

#### *4.3. Conservation of River Ecosystems by Protected Areas*

The movement to set aside undeveloped river stretches [73] and preserve free-flowing rivers has a long history with a growing and diverse number of precedents and supporters [74,75]. This discussion will focus only on efforts to use traditional protected areas to protect river ecosystems in East Asia. In China, extensive efforts have been undertaken by civil society to prevent the damming of the Nu River (called Thanlwin or Salween downstream in Myanmar) and to preserve the last undammed stretches of the Yangtze–Jinsha River (e.g., Tiger Leaping Gorge). Both river stretches are immediately adjacent to the "Three Parallel Rivers of Yunnan PAs" World Heritage Site, which was explicitly designed to not include riverbanks to avoid conflict with planned hydropower [76]. Nevertheless, World Heritage status has been an important factor slowing and temporarily halting hydropower development in these stretches, but there are signs it may restart in the near future since no explicit "red lines" have been drawn to limit such development in perpetuity [77].

Another example is the Upper Yangtze Rare and Endemic Fish National Nature Reserve, the last undammed stretch in the Yangtze midflow, whose boundaries were redrawn twice in 2005 and in 2011 to make way for hydropower development [78]. The first revision excluded the most valuable habitats to give way for the giant Xiangjiaba and Xiluodu hydropower projects. However, the second revision of the reserve's borders, which allowed the construction of the Xiaonanhai dam and two more dams upstream of Chongqing City, was reversed in 2015 after wide public discussion initiated by Friends of Nature and other Chinese NGOs. The presence of the Endemic Fish National Nature Reserve has been central to the argument made by NGOs and is at the heart of the reasoning in the decision announced by the Ministry of Environmental Protection to further limit dam development [79]. The Endemic Fish National Nature Reserve, while not offering absolute protection, was still an important factor in the safeguarding from damming of the last undeveloped stretch of the Yangtze, but it has limited value in terms of preserving the biodiversity of migratory fish, since it is located on a fragmented river between large dams. For example, the cascade of dams blocking a spawning habitat has led to an ongoing decline in the number of adult Chinese sturgeon in the Yangtze River and the sea, from more than 32,000 before 1981 to 2500 in 2015, and extinction in the wild is possible within the next decade [80].

On the Amur River main channel, the development of the Taipinggou National Nature Reserve in China and Verkhneamursky (Upper Amur) Wildlife Refuge in Russia has provided a certain degree of protection to the two river stretches most susceptible to damming and has played an important role in an overall multifaceted effort to preserve the main channel of the Amur as a free-flowing river.

Taking into account the timing and dynamics of investors' decision-making has been an important factor in the success of this conservation effort. The creation of such protected areas has become possible because the intention of various stakeholders to develop large hydropower at a given site was not constant over long periods, but reemerged sporadically. Attempts to dam the Amur main stem were repeated in 1986–1993, 2000, 2007, and 2016, while during the periods in between, hydropower design was not a focus of interest for any investors or politicians. In addition, in Russia, the stakeholders who are likely to benefit the most from hydropower development are not local (e.g., hydropower companies, investors, national agencies), and the opportunity to build a dam is not seen as an essential economic opportunity by the majority of local communities or even local authorities. In contrast, in China, specific river stretches are formally assigned to large energy companies for development upon agreement with local municipalities, and this dramatically decreases the chances for successful gazetting of protected areas at such sites with the consent of local authorities.

Since freshwater biodiversity faces a severe crisis driven by impacts from large infrastructure, this approach is considered highly valuable, and work continues with CSOs globally to make business, governments, and intergovernmental bodies recognize it as an important and urgent measure to protect free-flowing rivers [29].

#### *4.4. Compensatory Measures to Reduce Dam Impacts on Freshwater Ecosystems*

The best tactic to protect fragile freshwater ecosystems is to avoid harmful hydropower construction by conducting a strategic environmental assessment, maintaining free-flowing rivers, and proposing careful dam siting, design, and operation. For existing dams or dams under construction, measures to minimize and compensate for their negative impacts to maintain and restore ecosystems should be implemented. Downstream effects of dams can be minimized through the provision of environmental flows and fish passages. Ecosystem restoration can be achieved through improved species, habitat, or catchment management interventions. Compensation measures implemented at different hydropower projects tend to be more effective when planned at an early stage with a basin-wide view of the situation.

On the Russian tributary of the Amur River, a program for ecosystem conservation was undertaken alongside the construction of the Lower Bureya dam (320 MW). The "Bureisky Compromise" environmental program was implemented by the hydropower company RusHydro, the local government, the UNDP implementing a project of the Global Environmental Fund (UNDP/GEF), and ecologists. The project activities were aimed at minimizing the negative impact of the Lower Bureya dam's construction on the biodiversity of the terrestrial ecosystem. In Russia, this was the first time such an environmental compensation program had been used when constructing a large dam [81]. However, the program did not include measures aimed at conserving freshwater ecosystems or species, and no study was undertaken to design environmental flow releases. As a result, the feasibility for freshwater ecosystem conservation of the Lower Bureya and Middle Amur was not assessed.

Examples of reportedly successful dam reoperation with environmental flow releases are known from several rivers of the world, including from the Three Gorges dam on the Yangtze River, China [82]. These releases, which have been provided since 2011, are successfully contributing to carp spawning [83]. However, potential improvements that could be achieved on the Yangtze via introducing environmental flows may offset only a small part of the negative impacts on freshwater biodiversity caused by extensive hydropower development. Another example of a high-resolution environmental flow assessment is the 102-MW Gulpur Hydropower Project on the Poonch River (Pakistan). The assessment resulted in decisions such as (1) reducing the dewatered section by relocating the weir closer to the powerhouse, (2) releasing environmental flows, (3) implementing a management plan for the Poonch River National Park, and (4) establishing a fish hatchery used to stock the reach downstream of the Gulpur tailrace with native fish. Additionally, the construction of two more dams on the Poonch River was cancelled due to incompatibility with the preservation of the river ecosystem in the National Park [9].

#### **5. Conclusions**

Hydropower and other water infrastructure development have caused a dramatic worldwide decline in the number of connected, free-flowing rivers due to haphazard planning and disregard for environmental and social values [5]. Clear limits should be placed on the allowable alteration of a large river system by water infrastructure development so that a basin can retain its vital natural processes, species diversity and abundance, vital ecosystem services, and associated cultural values.

Long-term conservation of freshwater ecosystems can only be achieved on a system scale. In most cases, a strategic assessment of hydropower has to be performed at the basin level to be successful, rather than being limited to the project implementation site, although this has certain trade-offs in the ability to achieve all-inclusive public participation. Stakeholder analysis and proper engagement are as important for environmental assessments as scientific research. Public participation has been the key process in hydropower development, even when no formal public consultation procedure was implemented by dam project proponents.

To mitigate potential conflicts emerging at the Transsibirskaya dam, WWF-Russia and En+ Group launched a basin-wide research project at the transboundary Amur basin. The ultimate goal of the strategic assessment was to evaluate different options and identify hydropower dam location options with the least environmental impacts for the whole basin, as well as maximize the social and economic benefits to the region. To achieve this, a new methodology for the rapid environmental assessment of hydropower development in large river basins was developed. This methodology can be applied before any investments or construction takes place and is able to assess and rank options using three main factors that determine the environmental impacts of hydropower.

As a result of the project and despite the expected economic benefits from the Transsibirskaya dam, the En+ Group company stated that the joint assessment showed that a dam on the Shilka River would be an unbalanced/unsustainable option due to its environmental and social impacts. The company and its Chinese counterparts have not pursued the development of this dam any further. At the same time, development of the Lower Bureya hydropower dam proceeded smoothly without major conflicts with environmental CSOs because it was characterized by low expected impacts on the freshwater ecosystem of the Amur. Thus, the design of a common roadmap with the expectations and aspirations of both energy companies and civil society groups decreased conflict and allowed stakeholders to concentrate on identifying mutually acceptable development options.

Based on this experience, the timing and sequence of the assessment tools used is the key factor in mitigating impacts from hydropower development. Starting earlier and fully incorporating the perspectives of affected stakeholders improves the chances that optimal decisions are made and that the least negative impacts are suffered by companies, communities, and natural ecosystems. The effectiveness of initial avoidance and mitigation of hydropower impacts at early planning stages is far higher compared to applying measures after dam construction.

Applying the newly developed methodology, which includes all possible development scenarios combining existing and potential large dams in the Amur basin, it was concluded that maintenance of the free-flowing Shilka River is essential for sustaining the ecological health of the Amur basin as a whole, and the Transsibirskaya dam scored among five of the most environmentally damaging development scenarios.

Other results of the research illustrated the following:


#### *5.1. Long-Term Protection of Rivers and Ecosystems*

The creation of protected areas in places suitable for damming can constrain hydropower development at ecologically sensitive sites and lead to long-term protection of wild rivers and surrounding terrestrial ecosystems. The chances of success depend on the timing of the nature reserve planning vis-à-vis the hydropower project cycle and the attitudes toward hydropower held by the local population and authorities responsible for protected area development. The threat of hydropower, which certainly blocks access to many traditionally used resources, often causes local communities to proactively support nature reserve creation, despite the restrictions it imposes on land use. This approach has led to the successful establishment of three nature reserves in places suitable for hydropower dams in the Amur River basin and thus should be considered replicable at least in this large basin. Efforts to mitigate dam impacts in the Amur basin were more successful than in the Yangtze basin for a variety of reasons, such as modest prospects for hydropower development in the Amur basin, fewer obstacles in the legal system in Russia, and the difference in the hydropower development process in Russia and China. Nevertheless, the general utility of this approach has been demonstrated in the Yangtze River basin as well, albeit with less obvious long-term outcomes for basin-wide ecosystem conservation.

## *5.2. Minimization of and Compensation for Negative Impacts*

For existing dams or dams under construction, measures to minimize and compensate for negative impacts and maintain and restore the affected ecosystems should be implemented. Downstream impacts can be minimized through the provision of environmental flows. Currently, requirements for environmental flow releases for the reservoirs on the Zeya and Bureya rivers have not been developed. In Russia, environmental flow releases are not implemented in practice for most reservoirs. Since the legislative framework does not force water management stakeholders to implement measures for the conservation and restoration of freshwater ecosystems, it is difficult to assess the damage caused by existing dams and to develop adequate means for its minimization and compensation. Another reason for the lack of integration of environmental flow releases is the lack of influence and interest on the part of societal groups who could potentially benefit from them. Another problem is the lack of proper monitoring and the shortage of data on the initial state of the ecosystem, without which it is difficult to assess the effectiveness of the environmental flow regime if it is implemented.

#### *5.3. Building Additional Tools*

The conservation methodologies developed and employed so far should be complemented in the Amur basin by detailed mapping of the distribution and connectivity between biodiversity hotspots [84]. As the first step in this work, the "Fishes of the Amur" Atlas was published [85]. The underlying database on the distribution and abundance of fish species will be used in the future to supplement basin-wide rapid assessments with a component taking into account the distribution and migration of fish species.

All conservation tools should be used in an interrelated manner in one robust planning process. To produce a conservation and development master plan for the Amur aimed at sustaining a healthy free-flowing river ecosystem, a comprehensive strategic environmental assessment of the current river basin management system and various plans for future development (including hydropower) is necessary. Of course, this arduous task is complicated by the division of our basin between China, Russia, and Mongolia, but must be undertaken to build a new "ecological civilization" together and achieve harmony between nature and humans.

**Supplementary Materials:** The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/11/8/1570/s1, Figure S1: Delineated 214 units/stretches with attributed characteristic of respective elementary sub-basins, Table S1: Calculation of the main factors of dam impact by river sections, Table S2: Primary data on hydropower dams and rivers for the production of calculations on the analyzed sections.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, E.A.S.; Methodology, E.A.S. and E.G.E.; Software, E.G.E.; Validation, E.A.S., E.G.E., and O.I.N.; Formal Analysis, E.A.S.; Investigation, E.A.S. and E.G.E.; Resources, E.A.S. and E.G.E.; Data Curation, E.G.E.; Writing-Original Draft Preparation, E.A.S.; Writing-Review & Editing, O.I.N.; Visualization, E.G.E. and O.I.N.; Supervision, O.I.N.; Project Administration, O.I.N.; Funding Acquisition, E.A.S.

**Funding:** This research was funded by World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF-Russia) grant number WWF001281/RU009627-19ru/GLM, the Whitley Fund for Nature grant number 3, and the Whitley Fund for Nature supporting "Keep the Rivers Free and Wild" Project coordinated by the Rivers without Boundaries Coalition.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
