scholarly journals How to Select Potential Sites of Community Importance to the Natura 2000 Network: The Issue of Criteria

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanisław Tworek ◽  
Małgorzata Makomaska-Juchiewicz ◽  
Grzegorz Cierlik
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Habitat Type ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Habitat Types ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Practical Usefulness ◽  
Relative Value ◽  
Level Of Knowledge ◽  
Selection Of

AbstractTworek S., Makomaska-Juchiewicz M., Cierlik G.: How to select potential sites of community importance to the NATURA 2000 network: the issue of criteria. Ekológia (Bratislava), Vol. 33, No. 2, p. 127-137, 2014.In this paper, on the basis of experience gained at the elaboration of the Proposal of Natura 2000 network in Poland, we analyse the usefulness of criteria recommended in Annex III of the Habitats Directive (HD) for selecting proposed Sites of Community Importance (pSCI), i.e. potential Special Areas of Conservation. These are sites important for conservation of habitat types and species (except for birds), listed in Annexes I and II of the HD. The recommendations should allow arriving at the estimates of relative value of the selected areas vis-a-vis the national resources of each habitat type and species. These are, however, neither objective and quantified nor easy to apply criteria; because most of them rely on best expert judgement, which is subjective to a great extent. Moreover, the practical usefulness of the criteria is related to the level of knowledge of the distribution and size of resources of the habitat types and species of European importance. Our experience of selecting pSCI at national level indicates that this stage of work calls for more precise criteria than these recommended in the HD. We present our proposal of domestic criteria, which make easier the preliminary selection of pSCI that were tested in work with local experts responsible for regional proposals of sites to the Natura 2000 network in Poland. Because of the far-reaching consequences entailing the designation of Natura 2000, we would like to encourage a widespread discussion on criteria for selecting pSCI.

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 Variation in Deadwood Microsites in Areas Designated under the Habitats Directive (Natura 2000)

Forests ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 486
Author(s):  
Leszek Bujoczek ◽  
Stanisław Zięba ◽  
Małgorzata Bujoczek
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Regression Model ◽  
Logistic Regression Model ◽  
Habitat Type ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Managed Forests ◽  
Habitat Types ◽  
Living Tree

The continuing decline in biodiversity presents a major environmental protection challenge. The conservation of sufficiently extensive and diverse habitats requires an array of coordinated actions, often involving large areas. While a set of conservation objectives have been defined for the Natura 2000 network, no universal methods of accomplishing them have been specified, and so they must be designed by individual Member States. Deadwood volume and the density of large deadwood pieces are widely used for evaluating the quality of forest habitat types designated under the Habitats Directive. In the present study, data from 5557 sample plots were used to evaluate the mean values of the two deadwood indicators as well as the ratio of deadwood volume to living tree volume for each of the 13 habitat types in Poland. In addition, a logistic regression model was constructed to evaluate the effects of terrain, site, and tree stand characteristics as well as protection type on deadwood volume in Natura 2000 areas. Mean deadwood volume varied greatly between habitat types, with the lowest values found for Central European lichen Scots pine forests (91T0–2.5 m3 ha−1) and Old acidophilous oak woods (9190–4.4 m3 ha−1), and the highest for Riparian mixed forests (91F0–43.1 m3 ha−1) and Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine levels (9410–55.4 m3 ha−1). The ratio of deadwood volume to living tree volume ranged from approx. 1%–17%. Additionally, the presence of large deadwood differed among habitat types: in some, there were no deadwood pieces with a diameter of ≥50 cm, while their maximum density was 6.1 pieces ha−1. The logistic regression model showed that the likelihood of a habitat type to have a ‘favorable conservation status’ as defined by deadwood abundance (a threshold of at least 20 m3 ha−1 according to Polish manuals on habitat type evaluation) increased with sample plot elevation, site fertility, and moisture, as well as stand age and volume. Positive effects were also observed for forests under strict and active protection versus managed forests. Planned efforts are necessary to enhance the quality of habitats with insufficient deadwood, especially in managed forests. Special attention should be given to areas that are readily accessible due to gentle terrain and low site moisture. Furthermore, younger stands on less fertile sites may require intervention to promote deadwood accumulation. We recommend retaining a certain proportion of mature stands until natural death and decomposition. Increasing the density of large deadwood is currently one of the most pressing conservation needs in most habitat types.

scholarly journals Vegetation units of wetland and terrestrial habitats: the case study of Spercheios River and Maliakos Gulf (Sterea Ellas, Greece), a Natura 2000 Site

Hacquetia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria A. Sarika ◽  
Anastasia N. Christopoulou ◽  
Sevasti D. Zervou ◽  
Andreas C. Zikos
Keyword(s):  
Habitat Type ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitat Types ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Mediterranean Countries ◽  
Terrestrial Habitats ◽  
Natura 2000 Site ◽  
Priority Habitat ◽  
First Time

Abstract The vegetation of the European Natura 2000 protected area of Spercheios river and Maliakos gulf, that includes Mediterranean sclerophyllous shrublands, as well as riverine and coastal habitats, was studied during 2000 and 2014–2015. The vegetation was analysed following the Braun-Blanquet method. Twenty six plant communities were recorded, one of which (Pistacio terebinthi-Quercetum cocciferae) described for the first time. The communities belong to fifteen alliances, fourteen orders and eleven phytosociological classes. The distinguished vegetation units are described, presented in phytosociological tables and compared with similar communities from other Mediterranean countries. Eleven different habitat types were identified. Two of them (“Quercus coccifera woods” and “Reed beds”) are Greek habitat types, while the rest are included in Annex I of the Directive 92/43/EEC. Three of the latter (1420, 2110, 3170) have a scattered presence in the Natura 2000 network in Greece, while one (3170) is a priority habitat type.

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.

Obligaciones de los Estados miembros en materia de gestión de los Espacios Natura 2000 derivadas de los apartados 1 y 2 del artículo 6 de la Directiva Hábitats

2014 ◽  
pp. 2455-2494
Author(s):  
Juan José PÉREZ PÉREZ
Keyword(s):  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Natural Habitats ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Ecological Requirements ◽  
Wild Fauna ◽  
Community Interest ◽  
European Court ◽  
La Red

LABURPENA: Habitaten Zuzentarauaren bidez, Natura 2000 Sarea sortu zen. Europar Batasuneko kontserbazio-eremu berezien sare ekologiko koherentea da, fauna- eta flora-espezie basatien zein Europar Batasunerako garrantzitsuak diren habitat naturalen kontserbaziorako. Estatu kideek zuzentarauaren 6. artikuluan xedatutako lan batzuk egin behar dituzte. Arau hori funtsezkoa da, Natura 2000 Sareko eremuen kudeaketari dagokionez. Lan honetan, ez zaio heltzen eremu horietan eragina izan dezaketen planen eta proiektuen ebaluazioa egiteko betebeharra aztertzeari, oso espezifikoa baita. Hain zuzen ere, Batzordeko erreferentziazko dokumentazioaren eta Europar Batasuneko Justizia Auzitegiaren jurisprudentziaren azterketa oinarri hartuta, honako hauek azaltzen saiatuko da lan honetan: zer jasotzen den babestu beharreko habitaten eta espezieen eskakizun ekologikoak betetzeko neurrietan, eta zein diren hartu beharreko neurri egokiak habitat eta espezie horiek hondamendi edo aldaketa nabarmenik ez izateko, eta zuzentarauaren helburuak betetzeko. RESUMEN: La Directiva Hábitats crea la Red Natura 2000, una red ecológica europea coherente de Zonas Especiales de Conservación existente en la Unión para la conservación de especies de fauna y flora silvestres y de hábitats naturales de importancia comunitaria. Los Estados miembros tienen que acometer unas tareas contempladas en el artículo 6 de la Directiva, precepto fundamental en cuanto a la gestión de los lugares Natura 2000 concierne. En este trabajo, sin abordar, por su especifidad, la obligación de evaluar planes y proyectos que puedan afectar a estos lugares, y analizando documentación de referencia de la Comisión y la jurisprudencia del TJUE, se intenta explicar en qué consisten esas medidas de conservación necesarias que respondan a las exigencias ecológicas de los hábitats y especies a proteger, así como las medidas apropiadas para evitar, en esos hábitats y especies, deterioros y alteraciones con efectos apreciables en los objetivos de la Directiva. ABSTRACT: The Habitats Directive established the Natura 2000 network, a coherent European ecological network of special areas of conservation that exists in the European Union for the conservation of species of wild fauna and flora and natural habitats of Community interest. Member states have to undertake some tasks contemplated in article 6 of the Directive, an essential provision as far as the management of Natura 2000 sites is concerned. This work, without tackling the duty to assess plans and projects that might affect these sites because of their specifity, and analyzing the documentation of reference of Commission and the caselaw of the European Court of Justice, tries to explain those necessary measures of conservation that meet the ecological requirements of habitats and species to protect together with the appropriate measures to avoid in those habitats and species, deteriorations and alterations in so far as such disturbance could be significant in relation to the objectives of the Directive.

scholarly journals Prepoznavanje i kartiranje šumskih staništa Natura 2000 u Hrvatskoj (I) – 91E0*, aluvijalne šume s crnom johom Alnus glutinosa i običnim jasenom Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae)

2019 ◽  
Vol 143 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 264-264
Author(s):  
Ivana Plišo Vusić ◽  
Irena Šapić ◽  
Joso Vukelić
Keyword(s):  
Practical Importance ◽  
Habitat Type ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Alnus Glutinosa ◽  
Pedunculate Oak ◽  
Floodplain Forests ◽  
Habitat Types ◽  
Black Alder ◽  
Habitat Classification

Habitat type 91E0 in Croatia extends to approximately 80,000 ha. It contains 16 types according to the National habitat classification of Croatia (NHC). They are based on phytosociological principles and are aligned with the level of association. They are: E.1. Riparian alluvial willow forests (Salicion albae Soó 1930), poplar (Populion albae Br.-Bl. 1931) and white alder forests (Alnion incanae Pawl. in Pawl. et al. 1928) Riparian alluvial willow and poplar forests (Salicion albae, Populion albae) E.1.1.1. – Salicetum albae-fragilis Soó (1930) 1958 E.1.1.2. – Salicetum albae Isller 1926 E.1.1.3. – Salici-Populetum nigrae (R. Tx. 1931) Meyer Drees 1936 E.1.2.1. – Populetum albae (Br.-Bl.) Tchou 1947 E.1.2.2. – Populetum nigro-albae Slavnić 1952 Alluvial white alder forests (Alnion incanae) E.1.3.1. – Equiseto hyemali-Alnetum incanae M. Moor 1958 E.1.3.2. – Lamio orvalae-Alnetum incanae Dakskobler 2010 E.2. Floodplain forests of pedunculate oak, black alder and narrow-leaved ash (Alnion glutinosae Malcuit 1929, Alnion incanae) Swamp and floodplain forests of black alder narrow-leaved ash (Alnion glutinosae) E.2.1.4. – Frangulo-Alnetum glutinosae Rauš (1971) 1973 E.2.1.6. – Carici elongatae-Alnetum glutinosae W. Koch 1926 ex Tx. 1931 E.2.1.7. – Leucojo-Fraxinetum angustifoliae Glavač 1959 E.2.1.9. – Carici acutiformis-Alnetum glutinosae Scamoni 1935 Alluvial and wetland forests of black alder, elms, narrow-leaved and common ash (Alnion incanae) E.2.1.1. – Fraxino angustifoliae-Ulmetum laevis Slavnić 1952 E.2.1.2. – Carici remotae-Fraxinetum excelsioris W. Koch 1926 ex Faber 1936 E.2.1.3. – Carici brizoidis-Alnetum glutinosae Horvat 1938 E.2.1.5. – Pruno-Fraxinetum angustifoliae Glavač 1960 E.2.1.8. – Stellario nemorum-Alnetum glutinosae Lohmayer 1957 The article contains a description, area of distribution in Croatia, and diagnostic indicators for each type. For each type related types are listed, the corresponding code according to EUNIS-classification, and literature in which is described in more detail. This article has practical importance because it helps in the identification and mapping of forest habitat types, and these tasks are currently being implemented in the Croatian forestry.

scholarly journals Foraging Success and Foraging Habitat Use by Cattle Egrets and Little Egrets in the Camargue, France

The Condor ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katia Lombardini ◽  
Robert E. Bennetts ◽  
Christophe Tourenq
Keyword(s):  
Habitat Use ◽  
Habitat Type ◽  
Foraging Success ◽  
Foraging Habitat ◽  
Mixed Species ◽  
Habitat Types ◽  
Southern France ◽  
Bubulcus Ibis ◽  
Egretta Garzetta ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract We examined habitat use by Little Egrets (Egretta garzetta) and Cattle Egrets (Bubulcus ibis) that nest together in mixed-species colonies in the Camargue of southern France. We explored the relative use of seven habitat types in relation to their availability and tested the hypothesis that selection of habitat types was related to foraging success, with the prediction that increased foraging success in a given habitat corresponded with increased use of that habitat type. Ricefields and other agricultural habitats were used more than expected by Cattle Egrets, an invasive species in southern Europe; whereas Little Egrets, which are native to the Camargue, tended to select natural freshwater marshes and lagoons. Results were consistent with the hypothesis that increasing use of habitats corresponded with higher foraging success for both species. However, when this analysis was restricted to habitats with sufficient numbers of birds to enable estimates of biomass intake, the association was no longer apparent for Little Egrets.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document