FISHERMEN’S SHELTERS HERITAGE IN THE DANUBE DELTA; ALTERNATIVES TO CONTINUE A TRADITION

FISHERMEN’S SHELTERS HERITAGE IN THE DANUBE DELTA; ALTERNATIVES TO CONTINUE A TRADITION

Marius Voica Ion Mincu University of Architecture and Urban Planning, Bucharest, Romania marius.voica@uauim.ro

Madalina Sbarcea Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, Tulcea, Romania madalina.sbarcea@ddni.ro

ABSTRACT The Danube Delta represents an immense natural water filter and an area with very particular geographic, ecological, biodiversity and social features, as well as a place with specific human-landscape interactions. This paper tackles a meaningful theme, namely the tradition, continuity and change in using the isolated fishermen’s shelters spread across the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve territory, considering the current legislative and administrative background, the Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy framework and exploring possibilities to reconfigure this existing infrastructure in ways that might mitigate depopulation and promote slow tourism. The addressed case study displays a project nominated for a national competition of ecological wooden houses. The proposal demonstrates resource efficiency, engaging both passive principles in the architectural concept (shape, orientation, roof configuration, natural insulation, transitional spaces) and active systems (solar and PV technology, reed pellets heating plants, natural sewage treatment systems).

The proposed project aims to bring forward best practices that can be replicated for sustainable development of the built environment in the Danube Delta.

INTRODUCTION The Danube Delta is an area with a multiple protection status (UNESCO world heritage site, Ramsar site, Natura 2000 sites) because of its impressive biodiversity and unique landscape, but is also the place in which the man belonging to the traditional communities has moulded his habitat.

The Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve is almost entirely rural, being organised in 26 villages and one town, Sulina, all of them providing homes for toughly 15.000 inhabitants.

Considering Danube Delta’s ancestral human settlements, besides from the particularities that derive from existing in such an exotic landscape, a different kind of frame structures

the layout of the village, mostly since the geographical constraints limit the access of automobiles. In consequence, there is no need for the division of space between man and vehicle, the space is simply discovered by foot, on the sand-covered country lanes. Finding themselves in the midst of endless successions of land and water, deltaic villages tend to exist on a different scale than what we are accustomed to finding in other localities, a more “human scale”, preserved by a certain degree of isolation [1]. The functions are resolved in a simple and honest manner, and although the range of building materials to choose from is quite narrow, the local architecture is enriched by its aesthetics and its subtle blending with the surroundings, thus creating a very specific atmosphere and giving the illusion of timelessness.

Reeds are ecologically and economically very important in the delta. They provide a vital habitat for inveretebrates, amphibia, fish, birds and mammals whilst acting as natural water filters [2]. Reed is also the traditional material for roof thatching (Fig. 1), providing an aesthetically pleasant, energy efficient covering for the local houses. However, reed roofs are increasingly difficult to be mounted, because less and less trained labour force is available (either due to emigration or decrease in interest of younger generation in this particular skill/job).

Figure 1 – Roof thatching techniques

Since the Danube Delta is 80% covered by water from the three main arms of the Danube (Chilia, Sulina and Sfantu Gheorghe) and the secondary drainage network of channels, canals, swamps lakes etc, the settlements are scarce and population density is low - less than 20 inhabitants/km², compared with national average of 83,82 inhabitants/km2 [3]. Although all the rural settlements face issues like ageing population, loss of population and unemployment [4], the villages in the core area of the Delta face a higher degree of isolation, especially during the winter. However, difficult accessibility has played a part in preserving the vernacular architecture in the area (e.g. Letea village, Fig. 2) by making it less attractive for tourism developers that imprint a change in the built environment, which is not necessarily in the desirable direction (with respect to cultural and natural context).

Figure 2 – Traditional houses in Letea village

In other villages though, the built environment suffered uncontrolled transformation, especially throughout the years before the specific regulations for the DD were installed in practice. This transformation is generated mostly by tourism-related facilities, built without consideration to the neighbouring traditional houses and of which, many have an appearance that is completely uncharacteristic to the area, determined by the imported architectural style, the façade and roofing materials and the unusual scale of the building, rendering it aggressive to its surroundings [5] (Fig.3).

Figure 3 – Aggressive tourism development in Crisan village and Sulina

Since ancient times, fishing has been the main occupation of the Danube Delta inhabitants and although today the supply of fish has diminished and changed in quality, it continues to be basic trade. Fishing continues to be an important source of income for people who live in the delta, but a decline in the quantity of available fish, together with other changes related to natural resources management is cause for concern for commercial fishermen. (2) Sport fishing is increasing in popularity, providing an opportunity for new services to be offered in the area.

Fishermen used to be away from home for entire fishing seasons, so they built shelters in the areas where they fixed their fishing spots.

On the other hand, the Danube Delta is an international center of attraction, due to its exotic landscape and priceless resources of flora and fauna, therefore one of the most economically promising activities is tourism, that remains yet unexploited to its full potential. However, the delicate matter of developing touristic activities without perturbing the fragile balance of deltaic ecosystems has brought forth concepts like eco-tourism and the need to establish a better relationship between the buildings and their surroundings [5].

The aim of this paper is to provide an argument for supporting traditional fishing in the Danube Delta combined with slow, active and locally-engaged tourism and to bring forward a suggestion of a modern reinterpretation of the traditional fishermen shelters, with increased functionality, comfort but also integration with contemporary provisions for sustainable development in the Danube Delta.

FISHERMEN’S SHEDS IN THE DANUBE DELTA The Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve is an area of high ethnic diversity, hosting populations of Romanians, Russian Lipovans, Ukrainians, and Turkish-Tartars. Although significant differences exist between these populations, those that fish for a living have common traits related to a very specific fishermen lifestyle and to the wetland environment. In his

1916 book providing a comprehensive overview of fishery in Romania at that time, Grigore Antipa depicts the life of fishermen along the Danube [6]. This is a way of living that requires physical and mental training and a certain ability to face hardship. By the nature of his work, the fisherman is constrained to longer periods of solitude, in close connection with nature and being exposed at every moment to nature’s whims and perils. If some fishermen are fortunate enough to practice their routine in waters close to their village, in order to be back home by sunset, most of them have to leave their houses and families during the entire fishing season, needing to work in remote areas or to move around from place to place.

When preparing for a leave, the fisherman and his fellows get the boat ready, water-proofing it with traditional techniques, then load the fishing tools and his “mobile household” items needed for the long, several months, trip.

Depending on the time the fishermen have to spend in a place, they build temporary or more durable shelters. The shape and type of shelters varies by circumstances and is dependent on the nature of the spot (local building materials) and number of dwellers (Fig. 4).

Nature provides the necessary resources and man only carries the tools to mould his shed.

Shelters and huts are for shorter stays and warmer seasons - made mainly from bare reeds, on a simple, primitive structure. The longer-term sheds are made of reeds, on a wooden structure, with or without clay. These homes have the advantage of being very light and do not sink when the soil is soaked during the floods. Also, shelters can be made of wicker, adobe (the adobe load bearing walls being the most common in the Danube Delta) or compacted soil between wooden boards. The roof is always thatched with reed, handcrafted by the Romanian or German techniques.

However, times have changed, new regulations have been put in place in the Delta, and with it, the fishermen had to also change their ways – starting from tools that were no longer allowed to be used, different types of boats available for movement, nature protection policies and fishing zoning. The fishermen’s sheds became less necessary and, consequently, less used and even started raising concerns about turning into hotspots for illicit fish trade from poaching.

Nonetheless, fishing is not merely a subsistence activity, as it carries a lot of meaning to local communities, being deeply ingrained in their way of life. This is suggested by specific customs, found in DDBR settlements, that were kept for smooth running of fishing activities.

Sustainable management policies supporting renaturation and banning industrial-scale fishing require fishermen to engage in other activities, for example, in ecological tourism.

Some of the locals have reoriented themselves to tourism related jobs, working in touristic facilities that have grown in number in the past years, since the Danube Delta is becoming a more attractive destination, but this process still raises certain challenges.

Fishing may be practiced, but only for household consumption, and the surplus sold only to the Delta accommodation units. Another possibility is to incentivize people to shift from fishing to other activities by providing compensatory wages. However, this turned out to be a challenging course of action, as most fishermen (over 1,500) refused the offer and as a result lost their job. Many of them are not willing to attend the professional reconversion trainings offered by the Labour Employment Tulcea County Agency, eventually losing the status of unemployed and choosing to work on the black market or start poaching. For many fishermen, poaching brings higher revenues, although poachers are in perpetual conflict with the authorities who strive to eliminate this practice. Moreover, many jobless people are not registered as unemployed, preferring to live on agriculture subsidies, fishing or informal work at various employers. If adequately trained, the Delta inhabitants might cease this practice and turn to low-impact tourism and handicrafts [4].

Modern fishery faces also new types of challenges emerging from social contrasts among the members of the community. Different understanding and positioning towards the same

activity lead to variable environmental impacts. In the same community, fishing represents both a way of life, as it is the case for the older fishermen and a (possibly) profitable business for young fishermen [7].

Another conflict situation was generated by the fish concession system that reduced fishermen to employees of the new owners of former common resources, not providing social, economic and legal protection of individual fishermen (through structures such as unions, for instance). Because of almost non-existent participatory governance of the area, the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Authority (DDBRA) is often negatively perceived by locals as an entity with many rights (planning, zoning, management) but little responsibility for locals’ livelihoods, leaving many local people feeling abandoned or as low-priority in management authorities’ agenda [8].

The large number of stakeholder institutions and confusion surrounding their conflicting or overlapping roles further aggravates hostility towards the institutionalized management of the delta and its resources [9] .

Although the fishermen’s shelters may not be as visible now as they were in the past, some of them still exist and the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Authority has taken action to reconfigure this type of establishments in line with contemporary standards, regulations and sustainable development prospects. Many of these still standing shelters are built informally, by the fishermen and have low compliance with nowadays safety or hygiene standards. Another issue is that the buildings themselves have no official legal status, not holding a building permit or any type of approval from the land manager (DDBRA) and are most frequently used for informal agriculture, animal breeding or unauthorized fishing.

Figure 4 – Traditional fishermen’s shelters in the Danube Delta

By creating new, updated fishermen shelters that would support a future vision where locals are empowered to continue their traditional fishing activities (Fig. 6), while diversifying them and combining them with complementary activities in line with nature conservation policies (such as small scale fish processing and ecotourism), DDBRA aims at reviving the local traditions and supporting an increase of people’s livelihoods.

The proposed fishermen shelters infrastructure is going to provide durable alternatives to the old ones that have turned into improvised shacks with a grotesque mix of materials proving little resemblence to the original, authentic sheds (Fig. 5).

Figure 5 – Fishermen shelters that now have little to do with their original ancestors and that deppreciate the landscape by using improper building materials

Figure 6 – Fishermen on the Danube Delta channels

A NEW CONCEPT FOR FISHERMEN’S SHELTERS The fishermen’s shelters and traditional buildings specific to the Danube Delta were located in isolated areas, away from the villages’ heart serving as a home during the fishing seasons. The architectural solution proposed will provide shelter and housing for 6-12 fishermen from one of the fisheries in Maliuc village.

The blueprint is organised with the following functions (109 square meters gross floor area):

- kitchen, dining, and socialization spaces; - sleeping space; - toilets and showers; - technical room for boilers, fishing tools, and a cold room for fish storage; - a veranda for fishing tools preparation, socialization, and dining.

Figure 7 – Ground floor proposed for fishermen’s shelters (Competition rendering)

The concept has started from the basic function (housing) and is adapted to the typology of the traditional plan used in the Danube Delta, including the in between space, represented by the porch and the space for socialization.

The structure is entirely made of timber, starting with the pilotis foundation (locust wood treated in the soil insertion area), the structure of the walls, terrace, and roof (wooden rafters), and ending with the reed cover and the insulating panels from straw. The proposed wood structure has a demonstrated performance in an excessively humid environment, being also lightweight and low maintenance.

The project is modular, mostly using natural materials and is easily adaptable for different locations. It is fully recyclable and re-usable after the end of its life cycle. Neither concrete nor other hard-to-recycle materials are used.

The house is energy efficient, the architectural concept using both passive methods, such as orientation, shape, configuration, efficiently used natural insulation, intermediate space, and active methods, sensibly using the resources, such as solar and photovoltaic panels, pellet heating system (uses dried straw – usually fired in the Danube Delta for plant regeneration), as well as natural filters and purification systems.

Figure 8 – Energy efficiency concepts

Figure 9 – Energy, heating and wastewater scheme

The proposed solution intends to become a good example of flagship that can be multiplied for supporting fishermen but also future ecological and eco-low-tourism endeavours in the Danube Delta, where all stakeholders should rationally manage resources and protect the environment, as well as benefit from tourism and mobility on the Delta channels.

Figure 10 – New concept for fishermen’s shelters (Competition rendering)

OPPORTUNITIES / SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS The Danube Delta Integrated Development Strategy (DDIDS) (10), elaborated by the World Bank in cooperation with local stakeholders raises Empowerment of inhabitants as one of its five strategic principles, cutting across the strategy pillars. In support of Pillar II: Improving the economy, action related to fishery, such as allocating fishing and fish sale rights to resident fishermen (property rights) instead of current fish collecting points system, is promoted. “The monopolistic fishery marketing system seems to reduce profits for fishers and that has led to decreased availability of good quality fish in the local market. It is generally

perceived that professional fishing is becoming a less attractive profession, as it implies hard work and too little benefit.

Better connections with the tourism sector may be created by promoting household and village level fish processing”. Also, DDIDS reaffirms that “relocating of increasing the number of fishermen involves building specific infrastructure”.

A priority type of intervention for fishery and aquaculture in the Delta refers to diversifying the activities of fishermen who practice commercial fishing by providing services for sustainable recreational / sport fishing, by: improving ecotourism venues to accommodate the needs of sport fishers; establishing dedicated areas in the core Delta for traditional and recreational fishing; supporting small scale fish processing or building fishery shelters with berthing facilities to support traditional commercial fishing activities. One of the identified sources of funding for such actions is the Operational Programme for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs (OP FMA).

Therefore, integrated planning and multi-level cross-sector policies in support of fishery and aquaculture as sustainable, viable economic activities in the Danube Delta are necessary, with increased attention to balancing bottom-up and top-down views and initiatives.

Valorizing by reinterpretation old fishermen shelters is an action that reinforces local cultural values and bears net-positive impact towards the DDIDS vision for the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve: “an attractive area - with precious biodiversity and vibrant business environment, with small/medium scale economic activities both in traditional and modern fields - where people live in harmony with nature; integrating economies of tourism, farming and fishery; and supported by urban service centers.”

In the context of an endangered patrimony of vernacular architecture in the delta, but also of a stringent need for upgrading overall living conditions, the presented project keeps traditional features such as local materials, shapes, proportions or signature-elements and combines them with modern facilities that provide comfort for the inhabitants and ecological approach.

We reaffirm that such an initiative, replicated on a larger scale, contributes both to continuing a tradition that is at risk of becoming obsolete, supports diversifying basic economic activities with complementary ecotourism related ones and promotes sustainable development of the built environment in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, with respect to both traditional occupations, traditional architecture and natural resources.

BIBLIOGRAPHY [1]

A. Serbescu. Danube Delta - An architectural reserve? In: Thatch Traditional houses from the Danube Delta (ed. B. Andresoiu B). Bucharest: Igloo Media, 2008, pp. 40– 44.

[2]

P. Gastescu, R. Stiuca. Danube Delta. Biosphere Reserve. Constanta, Romania: Editura Dobrogea, 2006. (in Romanian).

[3]

The World Bank. Report on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the Danube Delta Integrated Development Strategy, 2015.

URL: http://www.mdrap.ro/userfiles/delta_dunarii/rezultate_proiecte/7_Raport SEA_en.pdf (visited on 2018-04-02)

[4]

N. Damian, B. Dumitrescu. «Sustainable development prospects for the Danube Delta rural communities». In: Romanian Journal of Geography 53.2 (2009), pp.153– 163.

[5]

M. Sbarcea, M. Tudor. «Tradition and modernity in Danube Delta’s architecture.

Contemporary intervention towards sustainable settings». In: Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 17.3 (2016), pp. 1194–1202.

[6]

G. Antipa. Fishery and fishing in Romania. Bucharest, Romania: Editura Academiei Romane, 1916.

[7]

N. Vaidianu, M. Paraschiv, I. Saghin, C. Braghina. «Social-ecological consequences of planning and development policies in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Romania». In: Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 10.3 (2015), pp. 113–124.

[8]

K. Van Assche, R. Beunen, J. Jacobs, P. Teampau. «Crossing trails in the marshes: rigidity and flexibility in the governance of the Danube Delta». In: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 54.8 (2017), pp. 997–1018.

[9]

S. Bell, I. Nichersu, L. Ionescu, E. Iacovici. «Conservation versus livelihood in the Danube Delta». In: Anthropology of East Europe Review 19.1 (2001), pp. 11–15.

[10] The World Bank. Danube Delta Integrated Sustainable Development Strategy.Report. 2015. URL: http://www.mdrap.ro/userfiles/delta_dunarii/draft_Danube_Delta_Strategy.pdf (visited on 2018-04-02)