On 12 December this year, the standing commission of Odesa Regional Council on ecology, natural-resource use, land relations, administrative-territorial organisation, prevention of emergencies and elimination of their consequences, and defence work held a meeting.

Such a long commission name indicates that it considers a wide range of issues that can even conflict with one another.

For example, when the interests of unscrupulous business intersect with the need to protect natural resources. Sometimes what Ukrainian entrepreneurs try to make money from harms, and even destroys, Ukraine’s environment. Unfortunately, local representatives of the authorities often defend business interests rather than environmental interests. They also involve the military, without whose permission many issues simply cannot be resolved during the full-scale war.  

There were only two items on the agenda. Yet only one was high-profile: a request from the private company Institute of Marine Aquaculture concerning the possibility of operating the channel between the Black Sea and Burnas Estuary. To lobby this issue, the businesspeople enlisted regional councillors, representatives of local authorities and even the military leadership.

By contrast, members of the regional commission prohibited publication of the discussion, citing the war as justification — the head of the NGO Green Leaf , Vladyslav Balinskyi, was removed from the meeting.

But we will tell you who is really behind the attempts to use the channel and what they are trying to achieve.

Darkness is always afraid of light

The Russian Federation’s aggression has significantly changed Ukrainians’ lives, both directly and indirectly. Ukrainians are quite justifiably restricted in certain actions, including disclosure of information or coverage of certain events. For example, one must not immediately publish information about Russian missile or drone strikes so as not to help the enemy adjust its fire, or film the locations of military units or troop deployments.

Unfortunately, representatives of the authorities — among whom there are still many people with pro-Russian views — use these restrictions skilfully, deciding at their own discretion what may be made public and what is prohibited. The meeting of the regional council commission on 12 December became one such event closed to disclosure, even though it was considering an issue that was highly manipulative and important at the same time.

When Green Leaf NGO head Vladyslav Balinskyi came to film the regional council commission meeting, Russian-speaking people with unclear positions stood in his way, threatening repeatedly that his Ministry of Defence accreditation could be revoked.

The ban was explained by saying that only invited people could attend the meeting, while the press and civic activists were not allowed. Another argument was that the military personnel invited to the meeting objected to being filmed, even though the event was taking place deep in the rear, in the Odesa Regional Council building. After lengthy negotiations, Balinskyi was eventually allowed in. But not for long.

Commission members led by former Party of Regions member Valentyn Volkanov actively opposed the filming, claiming that it should have been arranged separately in advance. For several minutes, Odesa councillors, speaking Russian, explained why an event involving military personnel could not be filmed. Eventually Volkanov put a proposal to move the meeting into closed session to a vote. The regional councillors readily supported it.

Clearly, those present did not want details of the meeting disclosed to the wider public. After all, they were considering permission for a private company to conduct economic activity in a border region during Russia’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine.     

We will clear the channel in exchange for mullet fishing

Institute of Marine Aquaculture LLC owns a plot at the second kilometre of the Black Sea sand spit, between the sea and Burnas Estuary, in Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi district. The site contains a hydraulic structure, or channel. Before the full-scale war, the company had the right to catch fish there.

When Russia’s full-scale invasion began in February 2022, all activity in this area was prohibited for security reasons. These included protection of the border zone and prevention of espionage by the Russian Federation, among other concerns.

Military security there is currently provided by the Danube Operational Group of Forces, headed by Brigadier General Volodymyr Otroshchenko. Incidentally, he was present at the commission meeting on 12 December.

Precisely because of martial law and Russia’s full-scale attack, even the state conservation institution Tuzly Estuaries National Nature Park is prohibited from maintaining the hydrological regime in the area: the military block park employees’ work to restore water exchange and carry out patrols.

According to the park’s director, Iryna Vykhrystiuk, the person who lobbied for this ban on the national park from the spring of this year was former head of the Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi District Council Hryhorii Melnychenko. He was, incidentally, detained by law enforcement officers in August 2023 over illegal appropriation of property. Notably, the park was patrolled even last year, when the security situation in the region was much worse.

For some reason, however, regional councillors and the military want to give a private company permission to operate, seeing no particular risks: 

“For the second year in a row they (Institute of Marine Aquaculture LLC — ed.) supposedly have had no access to their property, just like everyone else in this area. But now, under the pretext that the estuary must be saved, this company is asking for access. And they are even using the military to achieve it,” says Iryna Vykhrystiuk, who attended the commission meeting. She stresses that if restrictions currently exist, they should apply to everyone.

However, restoring the hydrological regime is by no means what concerns the Institute of Marine Aquaculture: in exchange for ‘saving’ the waterbody, it is asking for a quota to catch mullet. And what a quota — 500 tonnes per season. 

“Such a quota does not exist. There is not, and in the coming years there will not be, that quantity of mullet because it was barbarically depleted in the past, including by the same Institute of Marine Aquaculture company. Besides, they do not have the areas needed to catch such an enormous quantity of fish. Where are they going to catch it? On the territory of the Nature Reserve Fund?” Iryna Vykhrystiuk emphasises.

Mohylnikov’s company installed traps for catching mullet, 2016. Poaching under the supervision of border guards.

In her view, no emergency is currently occurring in the estuary, despite claims that such an emergency makes it necessary to permit economic activity by the Institute of Marine Aquaculture. Moreover, work to clear the channel in the shallow Burnas Estuary has only a local effect. Such explanations are merely manipulation:

“There are certain criteria. If this is an emergency condition, prove it. If this is an emergency situation, then we involve all existing natural-resource users and business representatives who lease these land plots on the sand spit, and we work together for one purpose. But without demands for fishing quotas.”   

Iryna Vykhrystiuk stresses that public coverage and recording of such events is always undesirable for unscrupulous representatives of the authorities who lobby interests in profiting from the environment while hiding behind claims of protecting it. That is precisely why filming — and even Vladyslav Balinskyi’s presence at the commission meeting — was prohibited.  

So who are these members of the regional council commission?

Misappropriation of public funds and pro-Russian views

Let us briefly analyse the activities of several members of the Odesa Regional Council commission on ecology, natural-resource use, land relations, administrative-territorial organisation, prevention of emergencies and elimination of their consequences, and defence work.

Let us start with the commission chair, Valentyn Volkanov, who proposed holding the event behind closed doors. He has been in politics for a long time: in 2010 Volkanov became a regional councillor for Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions; in 2015 he switched sides and represented the Petro Poroshenko Bloc; and in 2020 he was elected for the For the Future party, which is associated with oligarch Ihor Kolomoiskyi’s Privat group. Kolomoiskyi, incidentally, is currently under investigation.

Valentyn Volkanov. Photo from the internet

Valentyn Volkanov and his wife came under law-enforcement scrutiny over the alleged misappropriation of UAH 24 million in public funds. Earlier, they had also been notified of suspicion over alleged corporate raiding. According to media reports, between 2017 and 2021 the Volkanov couple allegedly appropriated public funds allocated by the state for the repair and development of municipal and social facilities.

Volkanov’s fellow For the Future party member Tryfon Antov is listed on the Myrotvorets website as a distributor of Kremlin propaganda and an opponent of the Ukrainian church’s independence from Russia. Antov called the Orthodox Church of Ukraine ‘unclean’.

This is not his first term as a councillor: in 2015, Antov was elected to Odesa Regional Council from the Nash Krai party, which was under the influence of former Party of Regions MP Anton Kisse. Notably, he ran as someone temporarily unemployed. One might wonder what he lives on.

Tryfon Antov. Photo from the internet

Another commission member is retired councillor Oleksii Kobylnikov. Born in Russia, he ran in 2020 for the pro-Russian Opposition Platform — For Life party. The party’s activities are now banned in Ukraine, while its leader, Viktor Medvedchuk — a close associate and godfather to Russian President Vladimir Putin — is in Russia after being exchanged for Ukrainian prisoners of war.

Oleksii Kobylnikov. Photo from the internet

In 2015, Kobylnikov was elected as a regional councillor for the Vidrodzhennia party, one of whose leaders was former Party of Regions politician Vitalii Khomutynnik.

Yet these facts did not change the situation: Kobylnikov did not resign his mandate and is even involved in addressing security issues in Odesa Oblast, as are his no less ‘tainted’ colleagues. Apparently, these figures do not trouble the military either, including Volodymyr Otroshchenko, commander of the Danube Operational Group of Forces.

Are poachers hiding behind the mask of estuary rescuers?

LLC Institute of Marine Aquaculture was registered in 2015 in the village of Lebedivka, Odesa Oblast. The company’s current owner is listed as Sofiia Ilchyshyn, a resident of Lviv Oblast. But one of the company’s original co-founders was Valentyn Mohylnikov, a member of the Tatarbunary District Council from the Batkivshchyna party who was convicted of a corruption offence. Incidentally, the company was previously called Granite-2 Cooperative.

Valentyn Mohylnikov. Photo from the internet

Screenshot from the register of persons who committed corruption offences National Agency on Corruption Prevention

At Tuzly Estuaries National Nature Park, Mohylnikov is well known as a poacher. Several years ago, park employees repeatedly documented mullet traps installed by companies controlled by Mohylnikov — Institute of Marine Aquaculture and Granite Cooperative. Incidentally, Mohylnikov has attracted attention not only as an alleged poacher but also as a controversial Odesa property developer.

As for Institute of Marine Aquaculture, today’s ‘rescuers’ of the estuary came under law-enforcement scrutiny in 2021 for damaging protected natural areas. Company representatives illegally blocked the breach-channel with a sand embankment, obstructing fish migration to the Black Sea and water exchange between the sea and Burnas Lake.

Moreover, when Institute of Marine Aquaculture was still called Granite-2 Cooperative, Andrii Ivasiov, acting director general of the state enterprise Experimental Mullet Hatchery, worked for the company. This information is stated in his declaration for 2017. 

And one more important remark. Oleksii Niedov was sent to represent the interests of Institute of Marine Aquaculture LLC at the commission meeting. He is one of the founders of the law firm Legal Force. His partner is Vasyl Domushchi, a lawyer with an extensive biography.

In 2016–2017, Domushchi worked at the State Tax Inspectorate of Odesa’s Malynovskyi district; in 2019, he was legal counsel for the Odesa City Council municipal institution Municipal Property Service; and from 2020 he became a member of Horodnie Village Council for Odesa mayor’s party Trust in Deeds. The village of Horodnie is located in Bolhrad district in southern Odesa Oblast.

Screenshot from the YouControl system

In other words, representatives of the authorities are effectively hidden behind the facade of the private company Institute of Marine Aquaculture. Having apparently secured the support of regional councillors and the military, they are trying to open the way to mullet fishing for themselves, despite security risks and environmental harm.