important plant areas in central and eastern europe - Plantlife
important plant areas in central and eastern europe - Plantlife important plant areas in central and eastern europe - Plantlife
Section 5 National IPA team IPA Coordinator: Danka Petrović (University of Montengro) Team members from the following organisations: University of Montenegro and the Natural History Museum Main Funders: REC through the ‘Plants Across the Borders’ Project Serbia and Montenegro – Montenegro By Danka Petrović Montenegro covers an area of almost 14,000 km 2 and has two biogeographic zones, the Mediterranean and the Alpine, with a strong Mediterranean influence. Montenegro borders Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia (FYR), Croatia and Serbia. Montenegro has a high degree of plant diversity with many national and Balkan endemics, and the natural and semi-natural habitats are characterised by forest (oak, beech and coniferous), grasslands, and coastal habitats on the Adriatic. Serbia and Montenegro is a member of the Council of Europe. Background to the project This project represents the first phase of IPA identification in Montenegro. The available data have been collated, potential sites identified, site reports written for eight IPAs, and an assessment of plant conservation policy in Montenegro completed. Further work to revise national criteria lists and to collect new data needs to be carried out. Several institutions, NGOs and individuals have expressed interest in continuing with the project. Potential IPAs and cross-border IPAs of Montenegro Current IPA statistics Total number of potential IPAs: 8 Number of cross-border IPAs: 1 with Macedonia (FYR) and 1 with Albania 74
Serbia and Montenegro DANKA PETROVIĆ Criteria and methodology Criterion A = 44 species were used Ai (2),Aii (10),Aiii (6),Aiv (26) Criterion B not applied in current project due to lack of data Criterion C=49threatened habitats were used Ci (6), Cii (43) The main challenges to applying the methodology were the lack of a national red lists, the representation of species and habitats in European legal documents, the translation of European habitat systems into the national classification system, and the age of the available data. However potential sites were identified using the available data, and the gaps and priorities for future fieldwork were assessed. Protection, threats and conservation issues Protected areas cover 7.2 % of Montenegro but there are still many problems with the protection of wild plants. Infrastructure and tourism are major threats, as are deforestation and lack of financing for forestry management, abandonment of land and depopulation of rural areas, poor agricultural practises and over exploitation of wild plant resources. Recommendations ■ Enlargement of the national IPA team. ■ Inclusion of lower plants and fungi in the identification of IPAs. ■ National IUCN Red Lists for threatened species should be prepared. ■ Workshops and training programmes aimed at building capacity should be held for the following subjects: • Application of IUCN Red List criteria; • Application of European habitat classification systems; • Key European and global legal frameworks, e.g. Bern Convention. ■ Carry out targeted fieldwork to provide new data and verify old data. ■ Mapping of relevant habitats. ■ Inclusion of IPAs in the national protected area network with appropriate management, beginning with the most threatened site. References Petrović, D. 2003 Report on the National Analysis of the Potential IPA Network in Montenegro, January 2003 (REC Project REREP 4.3.23.1) Petrović, D. 2004 Report on the National Analysis of the Potential IPA Network in Montenegro, September 2004 (REC Project REREP 4.3.23.1) Bijeli Nerini Bijeli Nerini is an IPA containing many threatened species, water and forest habitats, including high water quality indicator species and a quarter of the moss species known in Montenegro. The site is not currently protected. 75
- 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 and 64: Slovenia Slovenia By Nejc Jogan Slo
- Page 65 and 66: Slovenia Qualifying criteria for IP
- 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: Macedonia Criteria and methodology
- 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 91 and 92: Existing legislation & programmes I
- Page 93 and 94: Existing legislation & programmes I
- Page 95 and 96: Existing legislation & programmes I
- Page 97 and 98: Existing legislation & programmes I
- Page 99 and 100: Existing legislation & programmes I
- Page 101 and 102: Existing legislation & programmes I
- Page 103 and 104: Contacts Contacts Plantlife Interna
Serbia <strong>and</strong> Montenegro<br />
DANKA PETROVIĆ<br />
Criteria <strong>and</strong> methodology<br />
Criterion A = 44 species were used<br />
Ai (2),Aii (10),Aiii (6),Aiv (26)<br />
Criterion B not applied <strong>in</strong> current project due to lack of data<br />
Criterion C=49threatened habitats were used<br />
Ci (6), Cii (43)<br />
The ma<strong>in</strong> challenges to apply<strong>in</strong>g the methodology were the lack of a national red lists,<br />
the representation of species <strong>and</strong> habitats <strong>in</strong> European legal documents, the translation<br />
of European habitat systems <strong>in</strong>to the national classification system, <strong>and</strong> the age of the<br />
available data. However potential sites were identified us<strong>in</strong>g the available data, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
gaps <strong>and</strong> priorities for future fieldwork were assessed.<br />
Protection, threats <strong>and</strong> conservation issues<br />
Protected <strong>areas</strong> cover 7.2 % of Montenegro but there are still many problems with the<br />
protection of wild <strong>plant</strong>s. Infrastructure <strong>and</strong> tourism are major threats, as are<br />
deforestation <strong>and</strong> lack of f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g for forestry management, ab<strong>and</strong>onment of l<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
depopulation of rural <strong>areas</strong>, poor agricultural practises <strong>and</strong> over exploitation of wild<br />
<strong>plant</strong> resources.<br />
Recommendations<br />
■ Enlargement of the national IPA team.<br />
■ Inclusion of lower <strong>plant</strong>s <strong>and</strong> fungi <strong>in</strong><br />
the identification of IPAs.<br />
■ National IUCN Red Lists for<br />
threatened species should be prepared.<br />
■ Workshops <strong>and</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g programmes<br />
aimed at build<strong>in</strong>g capacity should be held<br />
for the follow<strong>in</strong>g subjects:<br />
• Application of IUCN Red List criteria;<br />
• Application of European habitat<br />
classification systems;<br />
• Key European <strong>and</strong> global legal<br />
frameworks, e.g. Bern Convention.<br />
■ Carry out targeted fieldwork to<br />
provide new data <strong>and</strong> verify old data.<br />
■ Mapp<strong>in</strong>g of relevant habitats.<br />
■ Inclusion of IPAs <strong>in</strong> the national<br />
protected area network with appropriate<br />
management, beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g with the most<br />
threatened site.<br />
References<br />
Petrović, D. 2003 Report on the National<br />
Analysis of the Potential IPA Network <strong>in</strong><br />
Montenegro, January 2003<br />
(REC Project REREP 4.3.23.1)<br />
Petrović, D. 2004 Report on the National<br />
Analysis of the Potential IPA Network <strong>in</strong><br />
Montenegro, September 2004<br />
(REC Project REREP 4.3.23.1)<br />
Bijeli Ner<strong>in</strong>i<br />
Bijeli Ner<strong>in</strong>i is an IPA conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g many threatened species, water <strong>and</strong> forest habitats,<br />
<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g high water quality <strong>in</strong>dicator species <strong>and</strong> a quarter of the moss species known<br />
<strong>in</strong> Montenegro. The site is not currently protected.<br />
75