The EU Habitats Directive and the German Natura 2000 Network of Protected Areas as Tool for Implementing the Conservation of Relict Species

2009 ◽  
pp. 323-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Zimmermann ◽  
Mareike Vischer-Leopold ◽  
Götz Ellwanger ◽  
Axel Ssymank ◽  
Eckhard Schröder
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Relict Species ◽  
Eu Habitats Directive ◽  
The Eu

scholarly journals Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments

PeerJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. e10067
Author(s):  
Iulia V. Miu ◽  
Laurentiu Rozylowicz ◽  
Viorel D. Popescu ◽  
Paulina Anastasiu
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
National Level ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Spatial Prioritization ◽  
Biogeographical Region ◽  
Very High ◽  
The Eu

Background The European Union strives to increase protected areas of the EU terrestrial surface to 30% by year 2030, of which one third should be strictly protected. Designation of the Natura 2000 network, the backbone of nature protection in the EU, was mostly an expert-opinion process with little systematic conservation planning. The designation of the Natura 2000 network in Romania followed the same non-systematic approach, resulting in a suboptimal representation of invertebrates and plants. To help identify areas with very high biodiversity without repeating past planning missteps, we present a reproducible example of spatial prioritization using Romania’s current terrestrial Natura 2000 network and coarse-scale terrestrial species occurrence. Methods We used 371 terrestrial Natura 2000 Sites of Community Importance (Natura 2000 SCI), designated to protect 164 terrestrial species listed under Annex II of Habitats Directive in Romania in our spatial prioritization analyses (marine Natura 2000 sites and species were excluded). Species occurrences in terrestrial Natura 2000 sites were aggregated at a Universal Traverse Mercator spatial resolution of 1 km2. To identify priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites for species conservation, and to explore if the Romanian Natura 2000 network sufficiently represents species included in Annex II of Habitats Directive, we used Zonation v4, a decision support software tool for spatial conservation planning. We carried out the analyses nationwide (all Natura 2000 sites) as well as separately for each biogeographic region (i.e., Alpine, Continental, Pannonian, Steppic and Black Sea). Results The results of spatial prioritization of terrestrial Natura 2000 vary greatly by planning scenario. The performance of national-level planning of top priorities is minimal. On average, when 33% of the landscape of Natura 2000 sites is protected, only 20% of the distribution of species listed in Annex II of Habitats Directive are protected. As a consequence, the representation of species by priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites is lessened when compared to the initial set of species. When planning by taxonomic group, the top-priority areas include only 10% of invertebrate distribution in Natura 2000. When selecting top-priority areas by biogeographical region, there are significantly fewer gap species than in the national level and by taxa scenarios; thusly, the scenario outperforms the national-level prioritization. The designation of strictly protected areas as required by the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 should be followed by setting clear objectives, including a good representation of species and habitats at the biogeographical region level.

scholarly journals Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iulia V. Miu ◽  
Laurentiu Rozylowicz ◽  
Viorel D. Popescu ◽  
Paulina Anastasiu
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
National Level ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Spatial Prioritization ◽  
Biogeographical Region ◽  
Very High ◽  
The Eu

AbstractBackgroundThe European Union strives to increase protected areas of the EU terrestrial surface to 30% by year 2030, of which one third should be strictly protected. Designation of the Natura 2000 network, the backbone of nature protection in the EU, was mostly an expert-opinion process with little systematic conservation planning. The designation of the Natura 2000 network in Romania followed the same non-systematic approach, resulting in a suboptimal representation of invertebrates and plants. To help identify areas with very high biodiversity without repeating past planning missteps, we present a reproducible example of spatial prioritization using Romania’s current terrestrial Natura 2000 network and coarse-scale terrestrial species occurrence.MethodsWe used 371 terrestrial Natura 2000 Sites of Community Importance (Natura 2000 SCI), designated to protect 164 terrestrial species listed under Annex II of Habitats Directive in Romania in our spatial prioritization analyses (marine Natura 2000 sites and species were excluded). Species occurrences in terrestrial Natura 2000 sites were aggregated at a Universal Traverse Mercator spatial resolution of 1 km2. To identify priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites for species conservation, and to explore if the Romanian Natura 2000 network sufficiently represents species included in Annex II of Habitats Directive, we used Zonation v4, a decision support software tool for spatial conservation planning. We carried out the analyses nationwide (all Natura 2000 sites) as well as separately for each biogeographic region (i.e., Alpine, Continental, Pannonian, Steppic and Black Sea).ResultsThe results of spatial prioritization of terrestrial Natura 2000 vary greatly by planning scenario. The performance of national-level planning of top priorities is minimal. On average, when 33% of the landscape of Natura 2000 sites is protected, only 20% of the distribution of species listed in Annex II of Habitats Directive are protected. As a consequence, the representation of species by priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites is lessened when compared to the initial set of species. When planning by taxonomic group, the top-priority areas include only 10% of invertebrate distribution in Natura 2000. When selecting top-priority areas by biogeographical region, there are significantly fewer gap species than in the national level and by taxa scenarios; thusly, the scenario outperforms the national-level prioritization. The designation of strictly protected areas as required by the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 should be followed by setting clear objectives, including a good representation of species and habitats at the biogeographical region level.

Protected lepidopteran species (Insecta: Lepidoptera) in North-East of Romania

2011 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-123
Author(s):  
Constantin Corduneanu
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Natural Habitats ◽  
Natural Protected Areas ◽  
North East ◽  
Lepidopteran Species ◽  
The Government ◽  
Eu Habitats Directive ◽  
The Eu

Protected lepidopteran species (Insecta: Lepidoptera) in North-East of Romania In the present paper references on the lepidopteran species in need of protection, specified in the EU Habitats Directive, as well as the species included in the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 57/2007 on the regime of the natural protected areas, the conservation of the natural habitats of flora and fauna have been made. Information is provided on the distribution and status of the protected population of Lepidoptera from Botoşani county (North-East of Romania).

scholarly journals Public Participation in the Establishment and Management of the Natura 2000 Network—Legal Framework and Administrative Practices in Selected Member States

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herwig Unnerstall
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Preliminary Evaluation ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Member States ◽  
Administrative Practices ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe Natura 2000 network is one of the most important instruments for biodiversity conservation in the EU. Public participation at its establishment and its management is an idea often promoted for improving implementation and hence conservation results. The Habitats Directive being the legal basis for the network does not pay attention to the issue of public participation—leaving the task to the Member States. This paper analyses and compares the legal basis and administrative practices of a number of Member States in regard to public participation at different stages of development of the network. It distinguishes different of types of public participation and makes a preliminary evaluation of them.

scholarly journals Evaluating European Conservation Areas and Proposal of New Zones of Conservation under the Habitats Directive. Application to Spanish Territories

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 398
Author(s):  
Víctor Rincón ◽  
Javier Velázquez ◽  
Javier Gutiérrez ◽  
Beatriz Sánchez ◽  
Ana Hernando ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Biodiversity Conservation ◽  
Multicriteria Analysis ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Conservation Areas ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Geostatistical Methods ◽  
Castilla Y Leon

The European Union (EU) ensures the conservation of biodiversity through the Natura 2000 Network, which establishes the classification and selection of protected areas at European level. Unfortunately, member countries cannot make the best zoning decisions for biodiversity conservation because there are no clear and uniform parameters to designate Natura 2000 sites. Due to this, it is convenient to evaluate the importance of the criteria for biodiversity conservation through a general assessment, which could establish relevant criteria that can be analysed through geostatistical methods combined in multicriteria analysis. This paper aims to consider biodiversity importance values taking into account land use, so that it is possible to develop a zoning proposal which verifies or corrects the suitability of the designated areas for the Natura 2000 Network in Castilla y León, Andalucía and Madrid (Spain). The choice of these regions allows us to compare areas with a high variability of population density, making possible to compare the potential protected areas with respect to the population living in each area. This assessment has been performed using basic and easily adaptable criteria of biodiversity conservation, so it could be applied in other European territories. In this way, clear and uniform parameters for zoning will be used, being possible to detect the best protected areas. One of the most important purposes of the Natura 2000 Network is to increase connectivity between territories; our work proposes new areas that could be linked to currently protected territories, to favour the achievement of this purpose of the Natura 2000 Network.

Mitigation, Compensation and Conservation: Screening for Appropriate Assessment under the EU Habitats Directive

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 329-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald McGillivray
Keyword(s):  
Conservation Laws ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Ecological Compensation ◽  
District Council ◽  
Eu Habitats Directive ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIncreasingly, development is facilitated through the provision of mitigation and compensation measures. One reason for this is to get round ever more stringent conservation laws. In this article I consider this general issue through one particular lens: the role and scope of appropriate assessment under the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC). Appropriate assessment is a key part of the Directive's regime for conserving Natura 2000 sites, being the threshold for a relatively stringent public interest test and ecological compensation requirement. One particular issue is how mitigation or compensation measures should be addressed through appropriate assessment. I consider this issue, looking in particular at the only reported case which deals with this: R (Hart District Council) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and others. I suggest that Hart may be seen as wrongly decided at the time, and that more recent case law casts further doubt on its correctness. Drawing on other work, I suggest how decision-makers might answer the question raised in Hart differently and the scope to do this under the Habitats Directive.

scholarly journals Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 3110 in Poland: Monitoring, classification and trends

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 215-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Kolada ◽  
Ryszard Piotrowicz ◽  
Elżbieta Wilk-Woźniak ◽  
Piotr Dynowski ◽  
Piotr Klimaszyk
Keyword(s):  
Conservation Status ◽  
Natural Habitat ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Habitat Directive ◽  
Eu Habitats Directive ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Soft water lakes, or so-called lobelia lakes, which are inhabited by a specific vegetation composed of isoetids, have been subjected to intense research aimed at evaluating their condition and conservation status for many years in Poland. At the time of Poland’s accession to the European Union and the implementation of the EU Habitats Directive, these lakes were classified as natural habitat 3110. In accordance with the provision of the Habitat Directive a comprehensive methodology for monitoring and classification of the state of this habitat has been developed. Using this methodology, two monitoring trials (in 2009–2010 and again in 2016–2017) were carried out at 45 and 43 sites of the 3110 natural habitat, respectively. These studies confirm the high sensitivity of these poorly buffered aquatic ecosystems to all external influences, both natural and anthropogenic. The overall conservation status of the 3110 habitat in Poland showed a relatively high stability, with similar proportions of sites classified as favourable (FV), unfavourable inadequate (U1) and unfavourable bad (U2) between 2009–2010 (35%, 49% and 16%, respectively) and 2016–2017 (33%, 56% and 11%, respectively). Out of 43 sites examined in 2016–2017, 29 remained unchanged compared with the results of the previous survey concerning their overall status. Results of the monitoring research also allow for the observation and evaluation of mechanisms and directions of changes in the functioning of these ecosystems. Based on the experiences from two series of monitoring conducted so far, the methodology has been assessed as appropriate for the assessment of the conservation status of the 3110 natural habitat, however, some modifications and additions have been suggested.

scholarly journals Foraging Behavior of Bottlenose Dolphins in the Shannon Estuary, Ireland as Determined through Static Acoustic Monitoring

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 275
Author(s):  
Mathijs Carmen ◽  
Simon D. Berrow ◽  
Joanne M. O’Brien
Keyword(s):  
Foraging Behavior ◽  
Bottlenose Dolphins ◽  
Industrial Area ◽  
Acoustic Monitoring ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Foraging Area ◽  
Special Area ◽  
High Conservation ◽  
Eu Habitats Directive ◽  
The Eu

The Shannon Estuary in Ireland is home to a resident population of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and is designated as a Special Area of Conservation under the EU Habitats Directive. It is an important industrial area, with numerous deep-water berths for shipping. Despite its high conservation value, there are few published studies on habitat use or foraging behavior of the Shannon dolphins throughout the year. The present study assessed the year-round presence and foraging activity of bottlenose dolphins at different locations in the middle and inner estuary using static acoustic monitoring. Dolphin presence was found to decrease with increased distance from the estuary mouth, i.e., where the estuary meets the Atlantic Ocean, while at the same time, foraging was found to be considerably higher in the upriver areas, suggesting the inner estuary was an important foraging area. Model predictions for seasonal, tidal and diel foraging were highly variable across locations, indicating that changes in dolphin behavior occurred over relatively small geographical scales. These results indicate that conservation efforts should consider the Shannon Estuary as a dynamic aggregation of habitats and future development initiatives should attempt to mitigate disturbance to the dolphins during important foraging periods on seasonal and diel scales.

scholarly journals Conservation priorities for terrestrial mammals in Dobrogea Region, Romania

ZooKeys ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 792 ◽  
pp. 133-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iulia V. Miu ◽  
Chisamera Gabriel B. ◽  
Viorel D. Popescu ◽  
Ruben Iosif ◽  
Andreea Nita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Environmental Changes ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Conservation Priorities ◽  
Terrestrial Mammals ◽  
Core Areas ◽  
Mammal Distribution ◽  
Intensive Sampling ◽  
Mammal Diversity

Based on species occurrence records of museum collections, published literature, and unpublished records shared by mammalian experts, we compiled a distribution database for 59 terrestrial mammals populating the extensively protected Dobrogea Region of Romania. The spatial patterns of mammal distribution and diversity was evaluated and systematic conservation planning applied to identify priority areas for their conservation. The spatial analyses revealed that intensive sampling was not directly correlated to mammal diversity but rather to accessibility for inventory. The spatial prioritisation analysis indicated a relatively aggregated pattern of areas with a high or low conservation value with virtually no connecting corridors between them. The significant overlap between Natura 2000 sites and national protected areas induced an over-optimistic vision of the effectiveness and representativeness of existing Natura 2000 network for species found in Annexes II and IV of the Habitats Directive. These results represent a key step in identifying core areas for the protection of mammal diversity and dispersal corridors for improved connectivity, and to guide future conservation efforts in increasing the effectiveness of the existing protected areas in the context of environmental changes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document