important plant areas in central and eastern europe - hirc.botanic.hr ...
important plant areas in central and eastern europe - hirc.botanic.hr ... important plant areas in central and eastern europe - hirc.botanic.hr ...
Section 4Protection and management of IPAsIPAs have been identified both on protected and currently unprotected land.The followingtable illustrates the number of IPAs that are currently in protected areas. However, thereare many different levels of protection, and legal protection does not necessarily mean thatthe specific management requirements of plants and habitats are addressed. Data are beingcollected on the level of management at IPAs and these will be used to prioritise anyfuture action.Where appropriate IPAs that are not currently protected will be proposed asprotected areas or proposed for inclusion in conservation management schemes.Number of IPAs with existing protection (whole site or partial)Unprotected Total no. High level Lower level European Internationalprotected national national recognition recognition of(all or protection protection of IPAs IPAs (notpart) of IPAs of IPAs (SAC & SPA necessarilyprotected) protected)Belarus 2 8 4 4 Not Ramsar (2)applicable BiosphereReserve (1)Czech 7 68 66 17 SAC (68) Ramsar (15)RepublicEmerald (27) BiosphereReserve (3)Estonia 5 103 5 67 SAC (98) Ramsar (18)SPA (51) BiosphereReserve (1)Poland 19 97 59 – SAC (67) Ramsar (3)SPA (51) BiosphereReserve (1)Romania 66 210 182 6 Not Ramsar (22)applicable BiosphereReserve (2)Slovakia 36 118 79 76 SAC (121) Ramsar (16)SPA (78) BiosphereReserve (5)Slovenia 35 22 1 27 SAC (45) Ramsar (2)(20 of these Biosphereproposed for Reserve (1)protection)[Higher level protection are designations such as National Park or Zapovednik depending on national systems;lower level protection are designations such as nature reserve or Zakaznik etc, based on national systems; somesites have overlapping types of national and regional protection; SAC = Special Area of Conservation under theEU Habitats Directive; SPA = Special Protection Areas under the EU Birds Directive]26
Summary of IPA dataIPAs and Key Biodiversity AreasImportant Bird Areas (IBAs) and Prime Butterfly Areas (PBAs) like Important Plant Areas(IPAs) are not in themselves legal site designations.There is a significant overlap betweenthese sites and any future conservation action and policy should recognise the highoverall biodiversity value of these sites.Total IPAs IBAs which are also PBAs which are alsoIPAs (total IBAs) IPAs (total PBAs)Belarus 10 4 (19) 2 (7)Czech Republic 75 3 (16) 3 (15)Estonia 107 8 (52) 3 (7)Poland 109 31 (89) 4 (16)Romania 274 9 (44) 5 (16)Slovakia 154 14 (32) 9 (13)Slovenia 57 10 (14) 10 (20)Threats: threats to IPAs, either to the site as a whole or to qualifying species or habitats,were assessed for their extent, potential damage and timescale, to produce a threatrating of ‘high’,‘medium’ or ‘low’. Details of threat rating are given in the IPA Site SelectionManual for Europe (Anderson, 2002).The table and graph below highlight the factorsthreatening IPAs and their threat rating. Details of the threats breakdown for eachcountry are given in Section 5.Key threats to IPAsFlooding, often made worse by changes in land use, presents aserious threat to many IPAs.27
- Page 1 and 2: IMPORTANTPLANT AREAS INCENTRAL ANDE
- Page 3 and 4: AcknowledgementsAcademy of Sciences
- Page 5 and 6: ContentsBRANO MOLNARContentsExecuti
- Page 7 and 8: Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryT
- Page 9 and 10: Executive SummaryRecommendations:IP
- Page 11 and 12: IntroductionMONICA SARBUDANKA PETRO
- Page 13 and 14: IntroductionTransparency is one of
- Page 15 and 16: IntroductionDANA TURONOVAThreats to
- Page 17 and 18: MethodologyBRANO MOLNARBRANO MOLNAR
- Page 19 and 20: MethodologyLichensThere were 34 lic
- Page 21 and 22: MethodologyIPA site selection crite
- Page 23 and 24: IPA databaseThe online IPA database
- Page 25: Summary of IPA data149 threatened s
- Page 29 and 30: Summary of IPA dataDamaging forestr
- Page 31 and 32: Summary of IPA dataIPAs and land us
- Page 33 and 34: Summary of IPA dataNumber of IPAs w
- Page 35 and 36: BelarusMethodology summaryCriteria
- Page 37 and 38: BelarusOLEG MASLOVSKYRecommendation
- Page 39 and 40: Czech RepublicCriteria listsCriteri
- Page 41 and 42: Czech RepublicQualifying criteria f
- Page 43 and 44: EstoniaEstoniaBy Mart Külvik, Anne
- Page 45 and 46: EstoniaApart from nature conservati
- Page 47 and 48: PolandPolandBy Zbigniew MirekPoland
- Page 49 and 50: PolandHabitats and land usesNo. ofI
- Page 51 and 52: RomaniaRomaniaBy Anca SârbuRomania
- Page 53 and 54: RomaniaHabitats and land use:No. of
- Page 55 and 56: RomaniaANCA SARBUReferences:Jalas,
- Page 57 and 58: RussiaJONATHAN RUDGEOngoing workBel
- Page 59 and 60: SlovakiaMethodology summaryCriteria
- Page 61 and 62: SlovakiaOf the 154 IPAs in Slovakia
- Page 63 and 64: SloveniaSloveniaBy Nejc JoganSloven
- Page 65 and 66: SloveniaQualifying criteria for IPA
- Page 67 and 68: IPAs in South East EuropeIPAs in so
- Page 69 and 70: BulgariaPETKO TSVETKOVCriteria and
- Page 71 and 72: CroatiaTONI NIKOLICCriteria and met
- Page 73 and 74: MacedoniaCriteria and methodologyCr
- Page 75 and 76: Serbia and MontenegroDANKA PETROVI
Section 4Protection <strong>and</strong> management of IPAsIPAs have been identified both on protected <strong>and</strong> currently unprotected l<strong>and</strong>.The follow<strong>in</strong>gtable illustrates the number of IPAs that are currently <strong>in</strong> protected <strong>areas</strong>. However, thereare many different levels of protection, <strong>and</strong> legal protection does not necessarily mean thatthe specific management requirements of <strong>plant</strong>s <strong>and</strong> habitats are addressed. Data are be<strong>in</strong>gcollected on the level of management at IPAs <strong>and</strong> these will be used to prioritise anyfuture action.Where appropriate IPAs that are not currently protected will be proposed asprotected <strong>areas</strong> or proposed for <strong>in</strong>clusion <strong>in</strong> conservation management schemes.Number of IPAs with exist<strong>in</strong>g protection (whole site or partial)Unprotected Total no. High level Lower level European Internationalprotected national national recognition recognition of(all or protection protection of IPAs IPAs (notpart) of IPAs of IPAs (SAC & SPA necessarilyprotected) protected)Belarus 2 8 4 4 Not Ramsar (2)applicable BiosphereReserve (1)Czech 7 68 66 17 SAC (68) Ramsar (15)RepublicEmerald (27) BiosphereReserve (3)Estonia 5 103 5 67 SAC (98) Ramsar (18)SPA (51) BiosphereReserve (1)Pol<strong>and</strong> 19 97 59 – SAC (67) Ramsar (3)SPA (51) BiosphereReserve (1)Romania 66 210 182 6 Not Ramsar (22)applicable BiosphereReserve (2)Slovakia 36 118 79 76 SAC (121) Ramsar (16)SPA (78) BiosphereReserve (5)Slovenia 35 22 1 27 SAC (45) Ramsar (2)(20 of these Biosphereproposed for Reserve (1)protection)[Higher level protection are designations such as National Park or Zapovednik depend<strong>in</strong>g on national systems;lower level protection are designations such as nature reserve or Zakaznik etc, based on national systems; somesites have overlapp<strong>in</strong>g types of national <strong>and</strong> regional protection; SAC = Special Area of Conservation under theEU Habitats Directive; SPA = Special Protection Areas under the EU Birds Directive]26
Change language