Progress on ongoing work on Article 17 reports

Transcription

1 Progress on ongoing work on Article 7 reports Expert Group on Reporting under the Nature Directives Brussels, 7 November 008 Carlos ROMÃO, Doug EVANS, Iurie MAXIM

2 . Summary of results from internet consultation. Initial results of the biogeographic assessments 3. Content of the technical report

3 Consultation process on Article 7 Report 8 July 5 September 3. click to view the comment. see how the comment was evaluated. click to view the list of comments

4 Main statistics During the consultation period,994 visitors from 700 network locations spent in total 730 hours visiting the site

5 Geographical distribution of the visitors

6 Users registered in the web tool 70 registered users: 8 ETC/BD 48 National Data Coordinators 04 other stakeholders: stakeholders from DE 9 from FI 8 from AT, NL & PT 7 from UK from IT 5 from BE, EL & PL 3 from CY, ES, EU & SK from CZ, LT, LU, LV & SE from EE, FR, HU, MT & HR

7 Main visitors of the site coming from known networks Institution: Visits Institution: Visits Bundesamt für Naturschutz DE 9 Instituto de Conservacao da Natureza PT 9 Agricultural Network NL 73 National Board of Waters and the Environment FI Skov og Naturstyrelsen - DK 57 Commission Europeenne BE (EU) 53 Energis UK - UK 5 ARCOR AG - DE 48 European Environmental Agency DK (EU) 47 Institute of Nature Conservation/Ministry of the Flemish Community - BE Landesamt für Statistik und Datenverarbeitung - DE Education Highway Oberösterreich - AT 3 Naturhistorisches Museum Wien - AT 3 Umweltbundesamt Wien - AT Czech Ministry of Environment/Prague CZ 3 Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences SE Gouvernment of North Rhine-Westphalia DE Natuurmonumenten NL Länsstyrelsen Västra Götalands SE 7 Naturvårdsverkets SE 7 C.R.P. Gabriel Lippmann LAN at Lambert Sciences LU Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik DE Ministrstvo za Javno Upravo SI 5 Slovak Environmental Network - Zpnet SK 5 Zavod Republike Slovenije za Varstvo Narave SI 5 Kornyezetvedelmi es Vizugyi Miniszterium HU 3 Amt der OÖ Landesregierung AT WCMC 000 UK (INT) Forum Umweltbildung Umweltdachverband AT 0 Latvian Environment Geology and Meteorology Agency LV Riista- ja Kalatalouden Tutkimuslaitos FI 0 Universidade do Porto PT 0 University of Crete EL 0 5 0

8 Comments and correction of data 3 MS requests to correct their species data, 34 performed (not possible to update maps) 4 MS requests to correct their habitat data, performed (not possible to update maps) 95 Comments for species 84 Comments for habitats 5% of comments addressed the regional assessment performed by ETC/BD 75% of comments addressed the MS assessments performed by countries 5% of comments were taken on board by changing the regional assessment 70% of comments were integrated in the Data Sheet Info 5% of comments were not relevant and reason provided

9 Users commenting in the web tool 4 MS National Data Coordinators: DE: 33 species / 3 habitats (only comments) FI: species / 3 habitats (only corrections) HU: 3 species / habitat (only corrections) SK: species (only corrections)

10 Users commenting in the web tool 0 stakeholders from 0 MS provided comments: from CY: 4 species / 38 habitats (Federation of Env. NGOs, Game and Fauna Service) from PL: 44 species / 35 habitats (Naturalist Club) from NL: species / 44 habitats (Naturmonumenten, Staatsbosbeheer) 5 from DE: 0 species / habitats (mostly BfN, others comment each) from SE: 9 species (Swedish Hunters Association) from UK: 8 species (Buglife, Herpetological Conserv. Trust) from FI: species / habitats (FI Ass. for Nat. Cons., Univ. Helsinki) from EE: habitats (Estonian Fund for Nature) 3 from AT: 5 species / habitat (Natural History Museum, Vienna; Alka Kranz) from IT: species (Lutria snc)

11 . Some results of the biogeographic assessments

12 HABITATS - Overall Conservation Status at biogeographical level In number of assessments MMED 3 3 MMED 3 3 MMAC MMAC MBAL MBAL MATL MATL PAN MED PAN 3 0 MAC MED CON BOR MAC ATL CON ALP BOR 34 3 ATL ALP In percentage of assessments 0% 0% 40% 0% 80% 00%

13 SPECIES - Overall Conservation Status at biogeographical level In number of assessments MMED 7 MMED 7 MMAC 3 MMAC MBAL 3 4 MBAL 4 MATL 53 MATL 5 3 PAN MED PAN MAC MED CON BOR MAC ATL CON ALP BOR ATL In percentage of assessments ALP % 0% 40% 0% 80% 00%

14 Example of biogeographical assessments: Rocky habitats 4 assessments

15 EU overall conservation status of all habitats in all regions by group sclerophyllous scrub rocky habitats 0 35 heath & scrub 4 0 grasslands freshwater habitats forests dunes habitats coastal habitats bogs, mires & fens % 0% 40% 0% 80% 00%

16 EU overall conservation status of all species in all regions by group Plants Mammals Invertebrates Fish Amphibians & Reptiles % 0% 0% 30% 40% 50% 0% 70% 80% 90% 00%

17 Agriculture-related habitats FV U U XX XU NA Non-agricultural habitats n = 499 Agricultural habitats n = 0

18 3. Content of the technical report

19 The Technical Report is a web based report a portal to provide assess to data, information and assessments at both national and biogeographical level

20 Introduction: about the Article 7 reporting Summary of national results, based on MS assessments Summary of biogeographical results, based on both MS and ETC/BD assessments Summary of measures for species conservation Summary of measures for Natura 000 Data quality and completeness Conclusions

21 Example conservation status results can be analysed from several perspectives overall conservation status assessment at MS level and EU regional level, compared across Biogeographical/Marine Regions Species and Habitat groups Annexes Countries 4 files produced, all together they comprise,87 charts

22 Habitats 9 of the 000 graphs produced Coastal and Halophytic habitats Dunes Habitats Freshwater habitats Heath and Scrub Habitats Sclerophyllous habitats Grasslands Bogs, Mires and Ferns Rocky habitats Forests

23 data sheet for each habitat type () and for each species (89)