scholarly journals The contribution of Earth observation technologies to the reporting obligations of the Habitats Directive and Natura 2000 network in a protected wetland

PeerJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. e4540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrián Regos ◽  
Jesús Domínguez

Background Wetlands are highly productive systems that supply a host of ecosystem services and benefits. Nonetheless, wetlands have been drained and filled to provide sites for building houses and roads and for establishing farmland, with an estimated worldwide loss of 64–71% of wetland systems since 1900. In Europe, the Natura 2000 network is the cornerstone of current conservation strategies. Every six years, Member States must report on implementation of the European Habitats Directive. The present study aims to illustrate how Earth observation (EO) technologies can contribute to the reporting obligations of the Habitats Directive and Natura 2000 network in relation to wetland ecosystems. Methods We analysed the habitat changes that occurred in a protected wetland (in NW Spain), 13 years after its designation as Natura 2000 site (i.e., between 2003 and 2016). For this purpose, we analysed optical multispectral bands and water-related and vegetation indices derived from data acquired by Landsat 7 TM, ETM+ and Landsat 8 OLI sensors. To quantify the uncertainty arising from the algorithm used in the classification procedure and its impact on the change analysis, we compared the habitat change estimates obtained using 10 different classification algorithms and two ensemble classification approaches (majority and weighted vote). Results The habitat maps derived from the ensemble approaches showed an overall accuracy of 94% for the 2003 data (Kappa index of 0.93) and of 95% for the 2016 data (Kappa index of 0.94). The change analysis revealed important temporal dynamics between 2003 and 2016 for the habitat classes identified in the study area. However, these changes depended on the classification algorithm used. The habitat maps obtained from the two ensemble classification approaches showed a reduction in habitat classes dominated by salt marshes and meadows (24.6–26.5%), natural and semi-natural grasslands (25.9–26.5%) or sand dunes (20.7–20.9%) and an increase in forest (31–34%) and reed bed (60.7–67.2%) in the study area. Discussion This study illustrates how EO–based approaches might be particularly useful to help (1) managers to reach decisions in relation to conservation, (2) Member States to comply with the requirements of the European Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), and (3) the European Commission to monitor the conservation status of the natural habitat types of community interest listed in Annex I of the Directive. Nonetheless, the uncertainty arising from the large variety of classification methods used may prevent local managers from basing their decisions on EO data. Our results shed light on how different classification algorithms may provide very different quantitative estimates, especially for water-dependent habitats. Our findings confirm the need to account for this uncertainty by applying ensemble classification approaches, which improve the accuracy and stability of remote sensing image classification.

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herwig Unnerstall

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.


Author(s):  
Juan José PÉREZ PÉREZ

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Christiernsson ◽  
Gabriel Michanek ◽  
Pontus Nilsson

Fishing operations likely to have a significant effect on a marine Natura 2000 area shall be subject to prior assessment and authorisation according to Article 6.3 of the Habitats Directive. This provision, partly also article 6.2, and in particular the cjeu case law, implies that this prior control should be applied rather often in practice, even for recurrent fishery irrespective of when the first fishing operation occurred in an area. Article 11 of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation entails that Sweden and other Member States apply Article 6 of the Habitats Directive within the entire exclusive economic zone, to both own and foreign fishing vessels. A Member State is also, under certain preconditions, empowered to impose restrictions on fishery not supported by article 6 of the Habitats Directive, especially within the 12 nautical miles zone. A Member State is not formally hindered from excluding fishery from prior assessment and authorisation if instead general requirements on fishery in legislation can ensure that no future fishing operation is likely to have a significant effect on the Natura 2000 area. However, cjeu case law indicates that it would be difficult to fulfil that precondition.


Author(s):  
Rossano Bolpagni ◽  
Mattia M. Azzella ◽  
Chiara Agostinelli ◽  
Andrea Beghi ◽  
Eugenia Bettoni ◽  
...  

<p>The existence of strong potential synergies between the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Habitats Directive (HD) is widely acknowledged. Indeed, ensuring favourable conservation conditions for aquatic habitats and species of conservation concern is closely related to the achievement of a good ecological status in water bodies. However, since these two sets of European laws are generally applied without any coordination, an inefficient use of resources may adversely affect their goals. The main negative outcome is an increase in the cost of monitoring programs for collecting data in nature (<em>i.e.</em>, physical and chemical parameters, species and habitats, plant communities). The use of macrophytes as a bioindicator, as imposed by the WFD, may instead help to integrate data on aquatic EU habitats and enhance knowledge of such habitats outside the Natura 2000 network. The aim of present study was to evaluate the usefulness of data collected in WFD monitoring surveys as a means of inferring the occurrence and the distribution of lacustrine aquatic habitats in countries belonging to the European Union (EU). The main aim of the analysis was to identify the depth gradient distribution of diagnostic macrophyte <em>taxa</em> in two EU habitats (3140, <em>i.e.</em>, <em>Chara</em>-dominated benthic communities, and 3150, <em>i.e.</em>, natural eutrophic lakes) using data collected in lakes in Lombardy (northern Italy), some of which are included in the Natura 2000 network (10 out 16). While recognizing the limitations of the data collected within the two frameworks, the results confirmed the marked usefulness of WFD data as a means of enhancing the knowledge available on lacustrine aquatic habitats in the EU. WFD data can actively help to improve the basic information on aquatic habitats, thereby more effectively supporting regional strategies for biodiversity conservation as well as recovery programs.</p><p> </p>


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 398
Author(s):  
Víctor Rincón ◽  
Javier Velázquez ◽  
Javier Gutiérrez ◽  
Beatriz Sánchez ◽  
Ana Hernando ◽  
...  

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.


2009 ◽  
pp. 323-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Zimmermann ◽  
Mareike Vischer-Leopold ◽  
Götz Ellwanger ◽  
Axel Ssymank ◽  
Eckhard Schröder

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document