assessment of conservation status in protected areas in ... · assessment of conservation status in...

A future task in good hands

Assessment of conservation status in protected areas in the EU

and Germany

Dr. Sandra BalzerDepartment Biotope Protection

and Landscape

Ecology, Unit Natura 2000

Bonn, 01.04.09, Balzer, BfN, I 2.2

Content

Protected areas

Conservation status

Assessment

Examples

Conservation & Management


Protected areas in the EU and Germany

Protected areas

Conservation status

Assessment

Examples


Long history

for

nature protection

in Europeseveral categories of protected areas, e.g. nature reserves, biosphere reserves, national parcspercentage of nature reserves in Germany in 1999: 2,3 %german oldest nature reserve „Siebengebirge“ until 1923

After implementation

of Habitats and Birds

Directiveimplementation of existing nature reserves into the networkNatura 2000percentage of protected areas – Natura 2000 in 2008 in Germany: 15,3% (terrestrial area)percentage of nature reserves in Germany in 2007: 3,5 %


Natura 2000 in Germany: 15.3 % (terrestrial

area)

SCI / SAC –

Habitats Directive

9.3 % of the

terrestrial

area 4,622 SCI/SAC‘s

3.3 mio

ha + 2.1 mio

ha marine

SPA –

Birds

Directive11.2 % of the

terrestrial

area 736 SPA‘s

4 mio

ha + 2 mio

ha marine


©

G. Ellwanger

©

G. Ellwanger

©

E. Schröder

©

E. Schröder

Annexes of Habitats and Birds

Directive

Number

in EU

Number

in Germany

Habitat typesAnnex I

231 91

SpeciesAnnex II

911 133

SpeciesAnnex IV

950 132

SpeciesAnnex V

approx. 200 87

BirdsAnnex I

approx. 190 approx. 100

Protection under Natura 2000


©

P. Leopold

©

G. Ellwanger

© A. Ssymank

Site selection for Natura 2000

Comparable criteria for site selection in the EU on a scientific basis for species and habitats:representativitySize of area and populationrate of isolation / rangegeographical distribution of sites / coherence


Habitat area within sites

Total habitat area in Sites of Community Importance (SCI) in Germany 2.56 Mio ha

marine

and intertidal

1,20 Mio

ha

46,8 %habitats

coastal

habitatsdunes, salt

meadows

0,04 Mio

ha

1,6 %

inland

dunes:

0,01 Mio

ha

0,5 %

aquatic

habitats

0,17 Mio

ha

6,6 %

heath

and scrub-vegetation

0,06 Mio

ha

2,2 %grasslands

0,20 Mio

ha

7,6 %

bogs

and swamps

0,06 Mio

ha

2,3 %

rocky

habitats

and scree

0,03 Mio

ha

1,1 %

forests

0,80 Mio

ha

31,2 %

forestsMarine and intertidal habitats

other

habitats

22 %© RANA – F. Meyer


Definition of conservation status

The conservation status of a natural habitat means the sum of influences affecting the long-term natural distribution, the structure and functions as well as the long-term survival of its typical species.

The conservation status of a natural habitat will be taken as ‘favourable’

when:

its natural range and areas it covers within that range are stable or increasing, andthe specific structure and functions which are necessary for its long-term maintenance exist and are likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future, andthe conservation status of its typical species is favourable

Art. 1 (e), habitats directive

Protected areas

Conservation status

Assessment

Examples



Conservation status – different spatial levels

conservation status

at local

level/ within

sites:

parameters: e.g.structure

& functions

habitat

quality

at national level/biogeographical

level:

parameters: e.g.rangefuture

prospects

Different spatial levels require different assessment parameters


Map of the biogeographical regions in EU

altantic

continental

alpine

mediterranean

boreal

macaronesian

pannonic

steppe

black

sea

Protected areas

Conservation status

Assessment

Examples



Reporting – assessment scheme

Parameter Conservation Status

Favourable('green')

Unfavourable – Inadequate ('amber')

Unfavourable - Bad('red')

Unknown(insufficient information to make an assessment)

Range Stable (loss and expansion in balance) or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference range'

Any other combination

Large decrease: Equivalent to a loss of more than 1% per year within period specified by MSORMore than 10% below ‘favourable reference range’

No or insufficient reliable information available

Area covered by habitat type within range

Stable (loss and expansion in balance) or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference area' AND without significant changes in distribution pattern within range (if data available)


Large decrease in surface area: Equivalent to a loss of more than 1% per year (indicative value MS may deviate from if duly justified) within period specified by MS ORWith major losses in distribution pattern within range ORMore than 10% below ‘favourable reference area’


Specific structures and functions (including typical species)

Structures and functions (including typical species) in good condition and no significant deteriorations / pressures.


More than 25% of the area is unfavourable as regards its specific structures and functions (including typical species)


Future prospects (as regards range, area covered and specific structures and functions)

The habitats prospects for its future are excellent / good, no significant impact from threats expected; long-term viability assured.


The habitats prospects are bad, severe impact from threats expected; long-term viability not assured.


Overall assessment of CS All 'green'OR

three 'green' and one 'unknown'

One or more 'amber' but no

'red' One or more 'red'

Two or more 'unknown' combined

with green or all “unknown’© RANA – F. Meyer


U

U

U

U

U

assessment

Assessment of habitat types

parameterrange

area

specific structures and functions (typical species)

future prospects

overall assessment


Conservation status – necessary information

Habitatsits natural range Its area covered within the natural rangethe trend of natural range, area covered (stable or increasing)the specific structure and functions which are necessary for its long-term maintenance exist (conservation status)the conservation status of its typical species

SpeciesIts population the trend of population, habitat of the species (stable or increasing)conservation statushabitat of the species (sufficiently large habitat)


Data sources in Germany

parameter in/out

range area/ population

structure

& functions

future

prospects

site

description i + + + +

habitats/ biotope

mapping

i/o + + (+) (+)

species

inventories

i/o + + (+) (+)

monitoring

(statistical

Art. 11 approach)

i/o + (+)

expert

mapping i/o + + + +

national forestry

inventory

i/o + (+) (+) (+)


Assessment matrices

a link between site-based assessments of conservation status and the overall assessment on the biogeographical level is useful some member states of the EU have defined the favourable conservation status in its subcategories in assessment frames which are individually designed for the species and habitatsthe assessment matrices are based on scientific work and expert judgement

Protected areas

Conservation status

Assessment

Examples



9130 Asperulo-Fagetum beech forests

9110 Luzulo-Fagetum beech forests


Assessment

frame

for

Luzulo-Fagetum

beech

forests (EU-Code 9110)

Habitat structures A Excellent

B Good

C Average or reduced

Stages of forest development/ Spatial structure

Minimum 3 development

stages: the maturity stage is present on one a minimum percentage of the area of the assessment unit

Minimum 2 development

stages: the maturity stage is present on one a minimum percentage of the area of the assessment unit

If

A or

B does

not

apply

Habitat trees and old trees

≥6 pieces/ha ≥3 pieces/ha <3 pieces/ha

Dead wood >3 pieces/ha

lying

and

standing

dead

wood

>1 piece/ha

lying

or

standing

dead

wood

≤1 piece/ha

lying

or

standing

dead

wood

Remark: minimum percentage is fixed at regional level (federal states)


Assessment

frame

for

Luzulo-Fagetum

beech

forests (EU-Code 9110),

Part 2: Species

composition

Typical species APresent

B Present to a great

extent

C Partly present

Trees and bushes species

percent of the typical trees and bushes

>

90 %

percent of the typical trees and bushes

>

80 %

percent of the typical trees and bushes>

70 %

Herbal layer(incl. cryptogamic species)

species combination in the herb layer is characteristic for the habitat

typical species combination in the herb layer is slightly modified

typical species combination in the herb layer is highly modified

Fauna the occurrence of value-giving species can upgrade the result of the assessment


Assessment

frame

for

Luzulo-Fagetum

beech

forests (EU-Code 9110),

Part 3: Negative impacts

Negative impacts A Little

B Medium

C Strong

•

Damage to soil and water resources •

Damage to forest vegetation and structure •

Occurrence of characteristic indicator species •

Fragmentation and disturbance

No observable alteration of the typical abiotic

conditions, structures and species composition of the habitat

No significant alteration of the typical abiotic


Significant alteration of the typical abiotic



Species of habitats directive: e.g. Hermit beetle (Osmoderma eremita)

Minimum population:Not less

than

1,000 individuals

Habitat:Lives

in dead

wood

of

deciduous

trees

Population:Ø

11 adult

individuals

per year

and tree

Occurences:in 201 Natura 2000-sites


Assessment frame for Osmoderma eremita

Populationsize of metapopulation (number of populated trees combined with Diameter Breath High, DBH)reproduction (evidence of larvae in different development stages)

Habitat StructuresHabitat of individual populations (single trees) (vitality of the tree, DBH, quality parameters of the tree cavity)Habitat of the meta-population (populated trees) (number of potential breeding trees, age pattern of trees, crown closure)

Adverse impactsindividual populations (cavity opening, duff-quality, shading)meta-population (continuity)

© RANA – F. Meyer


Results of assessment

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

marine & costal

limic

open terr.

bogs

rocky habitats

forests

FV U1 U2 XX

Sum over all biogeographic

regions

in Germany

32

16

21

48

29

43

groups of habitats


© A. Ssymank

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

inte

nsiv

e la

nd-

use

(agr

o-/fo

rest

ry e

tc.)

wat

erm

anag

emen

t,w

ater

bal

ance

chan

ges

inla

nd-

use/

succ

essi

on

pollu

tion

infra

stru

ctur

es,

hous

ing

etc.

(are

a an

dqu

ality

)di

rect

eutro

phic

atio

n,nu

trien

t inp

ut

neob

iota

&co

mpe

titio

n

othe

r

Threats and pressures

n = 3688

Threats

and Pressures

of habitat

types


conservation status – management options

favourable A excellent conservationB good conservation

no need for further actions

critical, revision of management plansC average or reduced conservation

unfavourable

Possibilities to get a better conservation status:

unfavourable conservation status, because of quantative loss of area:• new site proposals

unfavourable conservation status, because of qualitative loss of area:• restoration or development


Management planning in Natura 2000

•

site description and actual/historical land-use

•

mapping habitats and species present

•

assessment of conservation status

•

setting conservation objectives & analysing possible conflicts

•

designing measures: conservation, restoration, administrative, contractual and legal measures

•

discussion & solutions with land-users

•

ways of implementation (timetable, financing etc.)

•

efficiency control & and updating

land use(land-owners and users)

bird species strictly protectedAnnex IV-species

objectives to maintain and restore FCS for habitats and

species

Protected areas

Conservation status

Assessment

Examples



BfN-handbooks and information material

CD-Rom with German Natura

2000-sites

German Interpretation manual of habitats and species handbooks

Broschure

and book on Germany’s

National

report 2007

www.bfn.de


9160 Sub-Atlantic and medio-European oakhornbeam forests (Carpinion betuli)

RANA –F. Meyer

RANA –F. Meyer


9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine levels (Vaccinio-Piceetea) 9420 Alpine Larix decidua and/or Pinus cembra forests


Thank you very much for your attention!

S. Balzer

assessment of conservation status in protected areas in ... · assessment of conservation status in...

Documents