important plant areas in central and eastern europe - Plantlife

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Section 5 Methodology summary Criteria lists: the Criterion A list is based mainly on European threatened species and Criterion C has a wide range of threatened habitats. Criterion B was based on indicator species density maps produced from the CKFF database for each EUNIS level 2 habitat. Data and fieldwork: much of the existing data was available in digitised form (“Flora of Slovenia” database at CKFF with over 3 /4 million records) and was used to select potential sites for field verification.Two field seasons were carried out in 2003 and 2004 by members of the Slovenian Botanical Society. Site selection strategy: the Natura 2000 network proposed for vascular plant species, forest and non-forest habitat types served as a rough basis.The existing and new field data were assessed using GIS software to select the best sites and verified with expert opinion. In the preliminary assessment c. 300 IPAs of varying sizes were identified. Many of the smaller sites were included within large boundaries, which produced a final count of 57 IPAs. Key issues: Slovenia is already well covered with legally protected sites under the Natura 2000 network (approx. 36% of the national territory), and the IPA system also considers additional species and habitats from the Bern Convention, which enlarges the potential area for “best preserved nature”.The main aim of the ‘maximalistic’ approach to IPA selection and boundaries is not so much to achieve legal protection of sites but to help raise public awareness of the importance of high biodiversity and to illustrate the Slovenian method as compared to other approaches in Europe. Protection and management of IPAs in Slovenia Total IPAs with National National protection European International IPAs no legal protection of IPAs (lower level) recognition recognition protection of IPAs of IPAs of IPAs (excl. (high level) Natura 2000 57 35 (20 have National Regional Park (2) SAC* (45) Ramsar (2) proposals for Park (1) Landscape Park (20) increased Nature Monument (2) Biosphere protection) Nature Reserve (3) Reserve (1) Thirty-five IPAs are currently without any protection in the form of Nature Parks or Reserves, but in 20 of them some form of protection is planned. On the other hand only 12 sites, do not currently overlap completely or partly with SACs.Almost 800 km 2 of the Julian Alps IPA are covered by the Triglav National Park, and a slightly smaller area is covered by the 20 IPAs, which overlap Landscape Parks.Two IPAs overlap an area of 200 km 2 of the Regional Parks and less than 30 km 2 in four IPAs are covered by Nature Reserves or Nature Monuments. 1420 km 2 of 45 IPAs are also SACs and there is also a substantial overlapping of IPAs with SPAs. Major habitats at IPAs in Slovenia Forest and grassland are major habitats occurring at over half of IPAs. Heath and scrub habitats are also a common feature, occurring at over 50% (alpine/sub-alpine 6, temperate 15, maquis 2, riverine scrub 27). Inland water habitats also form a significant feature of IPAs (littoral habitats 23, running water 11, standing water 7).Wetland habitats are frequent (sedge/reed beds 12, bogs 5, base-rich fens 5, valley mire/poor fens 5). Coastal, marine and inland rocky habitats also occur at IPAs. *SAC - sites officially proposed to the EU. 64
Slovenia Qualifying criteria for IPAs in Slovenia Criterion No of Criterion A No of Criterion No of IPAs Criterion No of A IPAs Tax. Group IPAs B C IPAs Total sites 44 Vascular 44 Total 36 Total 48 with A plants sites with sites with species B C richness* habitats Ai 2 Bryophytes 0 A A2(1) Ci 35 Aii 44 Lichens 0 B B2(1) Cii 48 Aiii 1 Fungi 0 C C1(7), C2(11) C3(23) Aiv 0 Algae 0 D D1(5), D2(5) D3(5), D5(12) HD* 41 E E1(5), E2(22), HD* 48 species E3(23), E4(3), habitats E5(22) BC* 39 F F2(6), F3(15), BC* 1 species F5(2), F9(27), habitats FA(19) G H I G1(23), G3(15), G4(23) H2(4), H5(3), H4(3), H5(3), I1(6) References C˘us˘in, B. (ed.), 2004: Natura 2000 v Sloveniji, Rastline. Zaloz˘ba ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana. 172 pp. Jogan, N., M. Kotarac & A. Les˘nik (eds.), 2004: Opredelitev obmoc˘ij evropsko pomembnih negozdnih habitatnih tipov s pomoc˘jo razs˘irjenosti znac˘ilnih rastlinskih vrst: [Konc˘no poroc˘ilo]. Naroc˘nik: MOPE, ARSO, Ljubljana. CKFF, Miklavz˘/Dravskem polju. 1002 pp. http://www.natura2000.gov.si/projektivec/k oncno_porocilo_habitati.pdf Skoberne, P. & S. Peterlin (eds.), 1988: Inventar najpomembnejs˘e naravne dedis˘c˘ine Slovenije (1. del: vzhodna Slovenija). Zavod SRS za varstvo naravne in kulturne dedis˘c˘ine, Ljubljana. Skoberne, P. & S. Peterlin (eds.), 1991: Inventar najpomembnejs˘e naravne dedis˘c˘ine Slovenije (2. del: osrednja Slovenija). ZRSVNKD, Ljubljana. 607 pp. Wraber T. & P. Skoberne, 1989: Rdec˘i seznam ogroz˘enih praprotnic in semenk SR Slovenije.Varstvo narave (Ljubljana) 14-15: 1-429. HD* = Habitats Directive; BC* = Bern Convention; B richness* codes = EUNIS Level 1&2habitat codes Six Criterion A species have only one IPA identified to date, and 29 threatened species have less than ten IPAs identified to date. 13 Criterion C habitats have only one IPA identified to date, and 42 threatened habitats have less than ten IPAs identified to date. Key threats to IPAs in Slovenia Abandonment of grassland areas and rapid changes in land management threaten many IPAs in Slovenia.Tourist development also threatens several sites and development (urban, transport and industrial) is a significant threat. Invasive plant species also affect some of the IPAs. 65
Page 1 and 2:
IMPORTANT PLANT AREAS IN CENTRAL AN
Page 3 and 4:
Acknowledgements Academy of Science
Page 5 and 6:
Contents BRANO MOLNAR Contents Exec
Page 7 and 8:
Executive Summary Executive Summary
Page 9 and 10:
Executive Summary Recommendations:
Page 11 and 12:
Introduction MONICA SARBU DANKA PET
Page 13 and 14: Introduction Transparency is one of
Page 15 and 16: Introduction DANA TURONOVA Threats
Page 17 and 18: Methodology BRANO MOLNAR BRANO MOLN
Page 19 and 20: Methodology Lichens There were 34 l
Page 21 and 22: Methodology IPA site selection crit
Page 23 and 24: IPA database The online IPA databas
Page 25 and 26: Summary of IPA data 149 threatened
Page 27 and 28: Summary of IPA data IPAs and Key Bi
Page 29 and 30: Summary of IPA data Damaging forest
Page 31 and 32: Summary of IPA data IPAs and land u
Page 33 and 34: Summary of IPA data Number of IPAs
Page 35 and 36: Belarus Methodology summary Criteri
Page 37 and 38: Belarus OLEG MASLOVSKY Recommendati
Page 39 and 40: Czech Republic Criteria lists Crite
Page 41 and 42: Czech Republic Qualifying criteria
Page 43 and 44: Estonia Estonia By Mart Külvik, An
Page 45 and 46: Estonia Apart from nature conservat
Page 47 and 48: Poland Poland By Zbigniew Mirek Pol
Page 49 and 50: Poland Habitats and land uses No. o
Page 51 and 52: Romania Romania By Anca Sârbu Roma
Page 53 and 54: Romania Habitats and land use: No.
Page 55 and 56: Romania ANCA SARBU References: Jala
Page 57 and 58: Russia JONATHAN RUDGE Ongoing work
Page 59 and 60: Slovakia Methodology summary Criter
Page 61 and 62: Slovakia Of the 154 IPAs in Slovaki
Page 63: Slovenia Slovenia By Nejc Jogan Slo
Page 67 and 68: IPAs in South East Europe IPAs in s
Page 69 and 70: Bulgaria PETKO TSVETKOV Criteria an
Page 71 and 72: Croatia TONI NIKOLIC Criteria and m
Page 73 and 74: Macedonia Criteria and methodology
Page 75 and 76: Serbia and Montenegro DANKA PETROVI
Page 77 and 78: Serbia and Montenegro Current IPA s
Page 79 and 80: IPA Projects in other countries AND
Page 81 and 82: Habitats and land uses ANCA SARBU
Page 83 and 84: Habitats and land uses BRANO MONLAR
Page 85 and 86: Habitats and land uses IPAs and for
Page 87 and 88: Habitats and land uses Sustainable
Page 89 and 90: Existing legislation & programmes I
Page 103 and 104: Contacts Contacts Plantlife Interna
show all

important plant areas in central and eastern europe - Plantlife

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?