LYNX slideshow€¦ · Title: LYNX slideshow Author: Dr Roger Catchpole Keywords: Aspen International Created Date: 7/2/2015 12:35:49 PM

Natura 2000 Biogeographical Process

Continental, Pannonian, Black Sea and Steppic Region




Continental, Pannonian, Black Sea and Steppic

Kick-off Seminar

Luxembourg, 29 June – 1 July 2015

Coastal Working Group



Selected habitats:

Open sea and tidal habitats:

•Estuaries (1130)

•Coastal lagoons (1150)

Shingle and stony beaches:

•Annual vegetation of drift lines (1210)

•Vegetated sea cliffs of the Mediterranean coasts with endemic Limonium spp. (1240)

Salt marshes and salt meadows:

•Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand (1310)

•Mediterranean salt meadows (Juncetalia maritimi; 1410)

Sea dunes:

•Embryonic shifting dunes (2110)

•Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (grey dunes; 2130 *)

•Humid dune slacks (2190)



Case 1: Strandja Nature Park, Bulgaria (MAB)

– Problems: mass tourism, development plans for linear urbanisation, harmful agricultural subsidies

– Solutions: using the Aarhus Convention, scientist and voluntary work, ecotourism, planting orchards, slow food initiatives, promoting local cultural heritige

– Participated in making a Joint Transnational Action Plan on Coastal Sand Dunes (Italy, Greece, Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria)



Life project SandLife 2012-2018

Objectives:

– habitat restoration

– raising awareness

– communicating new management methods

Activities:

– opening sand habitats & restarting of succession

– controlling invasive species

Lessons learnt:

– military training areas are important for biodiversity

– comprehensive information for the local community is crucial

– it is important to change the Swedish CAP payments to enable farmers to continue grazing on patchy sandy grasslands



Priority issues selected by the group members

Involvement of municipalities

Public awareness

Local development and nature

Transbourdary cooperation

Cross-sectorial approach

Filling knowledge gaps (e.g. in the Danube Delta)

Implementation of comprehensive planning

Climate change

Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services



Involvement of local municipalities:

Involvement is very important as municipalities are often the primary landowner and decisive body

Municipalities are concerned with revenue and support investment more than with nature and environment

However: income often flows out of the community

It is important to change the mindset and the image of what is „development”

Solutions: Communication through excursions, fieldtrips and training courses,

provision of information, organising local councils, workdays and lobbying both through politicians and through voters

Comprehensive spatial planning is needed (especially in new EU countries), sometimes the top-down approach is necessary

Emphasis should be on far-sighted approach rather than short-term economic gain

Development should be sustainable!



Public awareness:

Solutions: Things may change, e.g. degrowth debates are appearing and investments

don’t need only to be short-sighted. Planning can suport far-sighted growth.

More EU financial mechanisms and instruments are needed for public awareness and communication on nature conservation.

Baltic Sea Black Sea

Local resistence towards change that is coming from the outside

Landowners welcome any investment

Top-down decisions are often rejected

Not enough money is available for the proces of stakeholder engagement (rather than projects)

Nature is not considered a priority for financing (but infrastructure is)

Stakeholder involvement in projects is voluntary and should therefore be motivated



Local development and nature:

Conflict between development needs and nature conservation objectives

Solutions: Proper spatial planning should be executed (rather

than just on paper)

Strategic Environmental Assessment should be properly done

Environmental Impact Assessment is good for locating a project, but not as a yes/no decisive method

Increase the understanding of the benefits of Natura 2000.This is easier when there is an obvious shortage of ecosystem services.



Transboundary cooperation:

Issues to be addressed:

– Garbage

– Nutrients

– Migrating species (e.g. grey seal)

– Invasive species

Solutions: Utilising regional conventions, EU initiatives and

agreements such as:

– Garbage in the Danube Delta could be tackled through the Danube Convention (but: there is also garbage coming from Crimea!)

– Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

– Ramsar initiative for the Black Sea



Cross-sectorial approach:

Contraditions in planning, financing and priorities

– E.g perverse subsidies in the CAP, ineligibility of majority of small farmers for subsidies related to ecological measures

Solutions: Coordination and biodiversity proofing within:

– Transport

– Tourism

– Agriculture

• Improving the Common Agricultural Policy

• Supporting small-scale farming

– Forestry

– Fisheries and Hunting

– Pollution management

– Water management

• River Basin Management Plans



Lack of knowledge:

E.g. on the Black Sea Coast (and in the Danube Delta)

There is a need for a clear and better interpretation of the habitat types in the Habitats Directive (e.g. regarding estuaries)

Romania has a problem with the interpretation manual (e.g. the definition of the `Estuary` as a terrestrial habitat is only used in the Baltic Sea it is needed to add the Black Sea as another exception)

Solutions: Information exchange updated interpretation manual

Evaluation of the effects of projects should be carried out, in order to evaluate what went wrong and why

Sharing best practice on site management and effects of practices should be collected when making new projects (no need to re-invent the wheel)

Simple data should be collected (e.g. habitat maps around the Danube in Romania)



Lack of comprehensive planning:

In Denmark: planning will probablz be weakened there will be risk of construction in coastal zones

In Romania: plans exist but are not implemented

Natura 2000 protection often has low importance in coastal planning activities

Solutions: Integrated Planning Approach, e.g.:

– Following the Integrated Coastal Zone Management Directive

Better enforcement of EU and national regulations is needed



Climate change:

Climate change is not sufficiently mentioned in the seminar input document

Climate change raises many sectorial conflicts

There are direct effects such as:

– species distribution

– coastal processes

– weather changes

– erosion

And indirect effects such as:

– coastal protection

– wind turbine farms and other renewable energy installations (e.g shale gas extraction)

– increased production of wood chips

Solutions: Mitigate the effects of climate change through maintaining

Favourable Conservation Status of habitats

Improve the dispersal possibilities for plants and animals

Plan for potential new substitute sites for sites that will be lost through sea level rise



Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services:

Obligation under CBD, an Aichi target and Action 5 under 2020 Biodiversity Strategy

Natura 2000 is here to protect rare species and habitats and deals with unique features, while ecosystem services are mass services

Not all habitats of conservation importance are of economic value

Solutions: Promote experience and exchange of knowledge on

mapping methods

Raise awareness regarding the intrinsic value of nature as well as the value of habitats and ecosystem services (provisioning, regulating and cultural)

Pay more attention to ecological aspects of local traditions



Planning for action

Romania will organise a follow-up seminar for Pannonian, Black Sea and Steppic grassland habitats in autumn 2015 (tbc).

The Sand Life Project will share best (and worst!) practice in municipality involvment.

It would be useful to create a database of good and bad management practices and which habitats they are successful in.

– We propose that the LIFE Platform/ Natura 2000 Communication Platform cases should be searchable by management practice.

Strandja Nature Park will communicate to other nature parks the benefits of being part of the Slow Food movement (and other community involvement methods)

We will communicate the benefits of Natura 2000 though promoting successful projects (e.g. ADEPT NGO working with farmers) and awareness raising campaigns (e.g. Natura 2000 Day)

– Bulgaria has prepared a Communication Strategy for Natura 2000 for 2014-2020 with concrete actions and will share it through the Natura 2000 Platform

0



Planning for action We should designate more transboundary sites. Bulgaria and Romania will

strive to communicate better regarding transboundary management plans (which is challenging due to lack of a Natura 2000 administrative body in Romania)

We should apply for more transboundary projects )e.g. using regional strategies

We should make better use of the experience from the HELCOM Convention

Best practice presented at the seminar will be publicised

We shall discuss the possibility of utilising scientific funds for data collection and inventories as part of conservation projects

There should be greater inclusion of biodiversity in plans and strategies

– We should praise and promote plans which include environmental measures

We should support municipalities to set aside land for nature in due time before coastal habitats are being flooded by sea level rise



Thank You!

Documents

LYNX slideshow€¦ · Title: LYNX slideshow Author: Dr Roger Catchpole Keywords: Aspen International Created Date: 7/2/2015 12:35:49 PM