Conservation status of species and habitats in EU. Healthcheck for Europe s protected nature

Transcription

1 Healthcheck for Europe s protected nature 1

2 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*) : (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to numbers or these calls may be billed. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet ( Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2010 ISBN doi: /49675 European Union, 2010 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Belgium PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER THAT HAS BEEN AWARDED THE EU ECO-LABEL FOR GRAPHIC PAPER ( 2

3 Healthcheck for Europe s protected nature 1

4 2

5 Content Checking the status of Europe s nature 4 A history of innovation in conservation 6 The results : cause for concern 10 In the spotlight 1: reconciling agriculture and conservation 12 In the spotlight 2: the role of Natura 2000 and LIFE 14 In the spotlight 3: climatic changes adding to pressure 16 Conservation reporting: a learning process 18 Conservation in focus 1: Beech forests (Luzulo-Fagetum) 20 Conservation in focus 2: Seals 21 Conservation in focus 3: European pond turtle (Emys Orbicularis) 22 Conservation in focus 4: Large carnivores 23 3

6 Checking the status of Europe s nature Sand dunes near Egmond aan Zee, Netherlands EU Member States have, for the first time, systematically assessed Europe s most endangered animals, plants and natural habitats. Most of the species and habitats examined were found to have unfavourable conservation status and many were in decline. There is therefore a clear need to step up conservation efforts. This health-check of Europe s natural diversity is part of regular reporting under one of the EU s main legal acts on nature protection, the Habitats Directive. Twenty-five Member States gave feedback, for the period (i.e. before Romania and Bulgaria joined the Union). Over 1,000 species of animals and plants were assessed, as were more than 200 habitat types, both on land and in the marine environment. The directive, which came into force in 1992, heralded the beginning of strong and innovative EU action on nature conservation. The Natura 2000 network of protected areas is the prime instrument. Taking the concept of nature conservation beyond nature reserves, the network aims to strike a balance between human activity and wildlife in a living and changing landscape. It covers almost one fifth of the EU land area and around 130,000 km 2 of the marine environment, and is still growing. 4

7 Reporting One of the primary objectives of EU nature policies is to ensure that the long-term future of key species and habitats is secure, a situation described as favourable conservation status. This requires regular monitoring and assessment. National authorities carried out the reporting by looking at the range, area, structure and functions of habitats and, for each species, the range, population, and area of its habitat. Future prospects, threats and pressures were identified for both species and habitats. Findings The reports show, for example, that dunes, bogs, and grasslands are the habitat groups with the worst conservation status. Habitats associated with traditional agricultural practices are in particular need of conservation action. Climate change is already having noticeable effects in half of wetland habitats. It is clear that threats to invertebrate groups are especially widespread, and that much more knowledge is needed about the marine environment. A learning process The report clearly indicates that conservation efforts need to be boosted for many habitats and species. However, the picture is not all negative. There has never been a comparable body of work of this scale and the findings will be invaluable for biodiversity policy for years to come. It should also be remembered that the species and habitats looked at have been identified as the most at risk so it is perhaps unsurprising that not many have good status. In addition, conservation measures can take a long time before they start to show noticeable effects. The process of making these reports was not easy, but valuable lessons have been learnt that will be applied in the next reporting cycle. The results will act as a benchmark for future assessments and provide for a more accurate picture of the state of Europe s biodiversity. The findings highlight the critical importance of conservation actions at EU level, in the establishment and development of the Natura 2000 network and beyond, and reveal an urgent need to intensify ecological restoration efforts at both national and European levels. The knowledge gained will help to direct resources in future. 5

8 A history of innovation in conservation 6

9 The European Union and its Member States have developed strategies to ensure the survival of biodiversity and preserve nature. The first EU-wide nature protection policies came into force 30 years ago with the adoption of the Birds Directive in 1979, establishing special protected areas for birds. Policy makers extended the approach with the Habitats Directive in 1992, which required Member States to designate special areas of conservation. The Habitats Directive identifies the most at-risk and valuable natural resources. Some 200 habitats and 1,000 species of animals and plants are listed, and the goal is to ensure their long term sustainability known as favourable conservation status. The two main means to achieve these goals are the Natura 2000 network of conservation sites, incorporating the areas created under the earlier Birds Directive, and a strict system of species protection. Natura 2000 is not a network of nature reserves. It works on a broader principle of conservation and sustainable use, aiming for harmonious co-existence between human activities and nature. Economic activities such as farming, tourism, fishing, and forestry are encouraged, providing they are done in a nature-friendly manner. Assessing conservation Monitoring of habitats and species is integral to the Habitats Directive as it is essential to get a clear picture of the trends of key habitats and species. The legislation specifies that reports must be made every six years. The first set of reports, covering , concentrated on progress in establishing the areas of conservation across Europe. In 2007, Member States reported for the first time on the conservation status of the key habitats and species for the period and the findings have been collated into the 7 European Beech forest

10 Biogeographic regions Alpine : mountain chains with high altitudes and cold, harsh climates, forests and rock peaks, including the Alps, Pyrenees and Apennine mountains. Atlantic : Europe s western coastal areas, with flat lands and cliffs, plus major river estuaries. The Gulf Stream system brings mild winters and cool summers. Black Sea : the western and southern shores of the Black Sea, extending through Bulgaria and Romania. The Danube delta is a maze of marshes, lakes and islands, sheltering a wide range of fauna. Boreal : Europe s far north, extending into the Arctic Circle. Forests cover 60% of this region, which shelters thousands of migratory birds. Continental : the heartland of Europe much of it agricultural spanning 11 countries from France to Poland. Hot summers contrast with cold winters. Macaronesian : made up of Europe s volcanic islands in the Atlantic Ocean : the Azores, Madeira and the Canaries. Covering only 0.3% of EU territory, this region is home to 19% of habitat types of EU concern. Mediterranean : Europe s hot, dry, southern countries, with mountains, grasslands, islands and extensive coastlines. Pannonian : the steppes of Hungary and southern Slovakia, the dry grasslands of the Carpathian basin. Steppic : stretching from Bucharest (Romania) in the west, across the lower section of the floodplain of the Danube and to the north of the Black Sea, with low-lying plains and wetlands. 8

11 Article 17 report named after the article in the directive that details reporting requirements. In the report, conservation status is defined as the combination of influences on habitats or species that affects their long-term distribution, structure, function and abundance. Three grades of status are used favourable, inadequate and bad the last two both counting as degrees of unfavourable status. Twenty-five Member States reported results using a standard methodology. In total, they cover some 1,180 species and 216 habitat types. There are nine groupings of species : mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, anthropods, molluscs, vascular and non-vascular plants and others. There are also nine habitat types : forests; rocky habitats; bog, mires and fens; grasslands; two types of scrubs; freshwater habitats; dunes and coastal habitats. The status of these different types of species and habitats were assessed by the national authorities across 11 biogeographical regions (see page 8). The results were compiled and analysed by biogeographical region by the European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity and released in July Assessments of individual species and habitats and national reports can be found at the Eionet web-based technical report of Article 17. The website address is listed in the links page of this brochure (see page 24). 9

12 The results : cause for concern Scandinavian bogs are acidic, low nutrient peatlands The overall findings of the report paint a worrying picture only a small proportion of the habitats and species looked at were in a favourable conservation state. Overall, only 17% of both habitats and species assessments were deemed favourable. For habitats, some 37% of assessments indicated bad status and a further 28% were inadequate. Meanwhile for species, 22% were assessed as bad and 30% inadequate. In addition, there was a significant proportion of uncertainty, with the status of some 18% of habitats and 31% of species assessments classified as unknown. The Alpine region had the highest proportion of favourable habitats and the Atlantic region the lowest. For species, the Boreal region had the highest proportion of favourable assessments and the Continental region the lowest. Dunes, bogs and grasslands were the habitat groups with the worst conservation status. Assessment of conservation status of habitats Unfavourable - Bad (37%) Unfavourable - Inadequate (28%) Unknown (18%) Favourable (17%) 10

13 There were more unknown assessments for species than for habitats, and these were very high in some regions, notably in the Mediterranean and marine regions, where no information was given for up to 45% of species assessments. By species For most biogeographical regions, over 20% of species assessments indicated bad status. By habitat Out of the 701 habitat assessments made, there were substantial variations across the different biogeographical regions. More than 30% of mollusc and arthropod assessments were bad, with molluscs the worst. Half of the assessments of both marine and freshwater molluscs were bad, while terrestrial snails were better. However, the mollusc group is relatively small, with 81 species. Dunes, bogs/mires/fens and grasslands were the habitat groups reported to have the worst conservation status. Rocky habitats such as scree slopes or caves have the best conservation status. A higher percentage of priority habitats those where the need for conservation has been identified as particularly high were evaluated as in bad status, compared with non-priority habitats. This was most noticeable in coastal habitats. Future prospects is one of the four parameters of conservation status. It was assessed as unfavourable for more than 50% of the habitat assessments. The highest percentage of the favourable assessments was for vascular plants. By region There was less variation between the biogeographical regions for species than for habitats. The Boreal region had the highest proportion of favourable species assessments, at 32%, while the Atlantic had the lowest at 7%. The Atlantic also had the highest proportion of bad assessments for species, while the Pannonian region had the highest proportion of unfavourable (inadequate or bad) assessments. Assessment of conservation status of species Unfavourable - Bad (22%) Unfavourable - Inadequate (30%) Unknown (31%) Favourable (17%) Some 33% of habitat assessments in the Alpine region were favourable, the highest of any terrestrial area, and the area also had the lowest percentage of bad and unfavourable assessments. At the other end of the scale, the future prospects for habitats in the Atlantic area were not good, with no favourable assessment. 11

14 In the spotlight 1: reconciling agriculture and conservation Habitats depending on farming are doing badly significant finding in the report is that habitats depending on traditional agricultural A practices show a worse conservation status than non-agricultural habitats only 7% show favourable status, compared to 21% for other types of habitats. Pressures in agricultural areas include the abandonment of pastures, over- or under-grazing, unbalanced fertilisation, pesticides, changing cultivation practices, afforestation and the removal of landscape features such as hedges. Although agriculture can have many negative environmental impacts, some farming activities are essential to preserving habitats, such as low intensity grazing in grasslands. By region Apart from Macaronesia, which has very few habitats dependent on agriculture, the highest percentage of those in favourable status was found in the Continental regions with 9%, followed by the Alpine and Boreal regions which both had 7%. With a high proportion of intensively-farmed farmland, the Atlantic region had the worst results. No habitats dependent on agriculture in this region were reported with favourable status. 12

15 For grasslands, the proportion of bad assessments was around 80% in the Atlantic, Boreal and Pannonian biogeographical regions. In the Atlantic and Pannonian regions no grassland habitats were in favourable status. The way forward Much is already known about how to maximise the conservation status of grasslands. They usually require appropriate levels of grazing, low fertilizer inputs and stocking densities, and late mowing. However, conservation-friendly farming must also become financially sustainable if it is to become more widespread. Biodiversity concerns are being integrated into agricultural policy. Reforms of the EU s Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) have progressively decoupled payments to farmers from production and rewarding farmers for providing environmental benefits. These benefits need to be increased further to show effect in conservation terms. 13

16 In the spotlight 2: the role of Natura 2000 and LIFE 14

17 The Natura 2000 network is the biggest network of protected areas in the world and its establishment is a big step towards halting the loss of biodiversity in Europe. However, the report comes too early to assess the full impact of the network on conservation status. By the end of 2008, Natura 2000 consisted of more than 25,000 sites, almost one fifth of the EU s land surface a total area larger than Spain and Italy combined plus 130,000 km 2 of the marine environment. The network is still under construction, and restoration measures sometimes take a considerable time before they have noticeable effects. However, the reports do already confirm some positive impacts of the network and the related LIFE Nature programme, which funds individual conservation and restoration projects for specific habitats or species. Several countries reported that the status of a particular habitat or species, although unfavourable, is improving. Positive signs Examples of successful actions include plant species such as the endemic and highly endangered Lake Constance forgetme-not in Austria, and habitat types in the United Kingdom such as bog woodland and Caledonian forest. Other efforts have had a wider effect. Since 1992, a number of LIFE projects in Italy, Slovenia, Spain, Greece, Austria and France have been successful in restoring or maintaining populations of the brown bear. Once found all over Europe, these large carnivores are extinct in many areas. However, the situation for the species is now improving, with over half of the Member States reporting positive trends for population and range of the bears. In addition to the direct effects of LIFE projects on individual species or habitats, they are developing innovative conservation practices that can be applied elsewhere. However, the contribution of LIFE Nature projects and the Natura 2000 network are difficult to quantify. Many projects only target species and habitats at a local or regional scale, usually on a single site, while others include the complete distribution range of the species or habitats. Extinct in many parts of Europe, the situation is improving in some areas for large carnivores such as brown bears, thanks to conservation efforts 15

18 In the spotlight 3: climatic changes adding to pressure 16

19 Climate change is already having a major negative impact on habitats and species, and many Member States highlighted it as a major threat in the Article 17 reporting. Climate change was noted as having a significant impact for 19% of habitats (42 habitats) and 12% of species (144 species). Bogs, mires, fens and wetlands areas in general were noted as being the most strongly influenced by climate change, followed by dunes. Amphibians were the species most widely noted as being sensitive to climatic changes. Although the group of rocky habitats only includes two habitats where climate change is given as a reason for trends, it includes glaciers, which are perhaps the habitat most directly threatened by changing climate and where the link is well established. One or more Member States identified climate change as a reason for reported trends in range or population of 12% of the 1,158 species assessed. The figure is highest for amphibian species, which usually live in wetland areas, with 45% affected. Climate change adds an additional threat to biodiversity and ecosystems and adds to other pressures. Shifting climatic zones will cause complex changes to the distribution and functioning of habitats and species. It is likely that as climate change becomes more noticeable, more habitats and species will show an impact. This means that the effect of climate change on conservation status should be carefully examined in the next reporting cycle. 17 Climate change impacts are expected to increase in future

20 Conservation reporting: a learning process Pilot whales at the coast of Tenerife, Canary Islands Spain The completion of the first Article 17 report is an important step in nature conservation across the EU. For the first time, the conditions of the EU-25 Member States most endangered habitats and species have been assessed using a standard methodology. The data submitted by the different Member States varied considerably, both in quality and in the period over which it was collected. In many instances data simply does not exist particularly for trends and future prospects. The reports indicate clearly that measures to protect Europe s most endangered nature need to be strengthened. Action is also required to ensure better coordination between countries when collecting data and compiling the report in future. Overall, Member States reported some 13% of regional habitat assessments and 27% of regional species assessments as unknown, especially for species in southern Europe and in the marine area. This is a high level of uncertainty which needs to improve in future. 18

21 Marine assessments One significant conclusion to emerge from the reporting process is that much better knowledge is needed about the marine environment. Marine conservation is still very much a developing area. A lack of data on marine habitats and species leads to a much higher percentage of unknowns than in the terrestrial assessments. Among terrestrial species, 27% were assessed as unknown, compared with 57% of marine species. In addition, data quality for marine populations was given as poor almost twice as often as for terrestrial species some 60% for marine species compared with 35% for land species. One example is the LIFE SCANS project assessing the population of small cetaceans in the North Sea and European Atlantic continental shelf waters and projects under LIFE+, the latest generation of the programme, are helping to identify and designate new Natura 2000 marine areas. More initiatives like this are needed in order to get a clearer picture of the situation of marine species and habitats. Next steps With no precedent, producing these reports was difficult. However, the process will become easier as monitoring systems become more developed. A review system is under way to develop better ways to compile and integrate data. A number of EU marine projects co-funded by LIFE are being developed in order to address these shortcomings, encouraging international cooperation and providing valuable data and know-how on which to base future policy recommendations. With its clear link to legislation and country coverage, the Article 17 report is unique and it will underpin biodiversity policy for years to come. The benchmark is set for when the reporting process is next repeated, in The data will give a point of comparison and enable a clearer picture of changes, good or bad, to biodiversity in the future. 19

22 Conservation in focus 1: Beech forests (Luzulo-Fagetum) Beech forests are widespread across Europe, particularly in the continental area. They are habitats for large carnivores, bats, bird species, moss, fungi and insects. They constitute an important natural resource, providing timber and other ecosystem services as well as leisure facilities, and they play a major part in the natural recycling of water and air and the absorption of CO 2 from the atmosphere. The major pressure on these vital habitats is the replacement of beech forests with non-native trees, such as conifers, for commercial forestry. The practice encourages the takeover of such habitats by non-native species reducing forest biodiversity. The removal of dead trees during replanting causes the loss of microhabitats and fungi, plant and moss species. In addition, increasing deer populations in some areas are destroying plant and tree growth. The use of heavy machinery, pollution and climate change are additional threats. Natura 2000 has encouraged the development of guidelines on forestry management and monitoring regimes. The focus is on natural regeneration, less intensive management, encouraging native species of trees and improving the habitats of species within forests. Financial incentives and EU funding mechanisms are available in some areas, such as incentives for forestry owners to keep old wood in the forests. In the Article 17 reporting, nine out of 27 beech forest assessments (national/biogeographic) showed positive trends. 20 A Beech Forest in Denmark in autumn

23 Conservation in focus 2: Seals Although seals are widespread and relatively numerous, their populations declined significantly in Europe during the 20 th century and they still face serious pressure. Seals generally live in coastal areas in heavily-fished waters. In the past, huge numbers of seals were killed to prevent economic losses to fisheries and some controlled hunting still takes place. Other threats to seals include disease epidemics and pollution, especially oil spills, entanglement in nets, and disruption to their food supplies. Efforts to conserve Europe s seals include bans on hunting in most areas, the designation of specific zones where fishing is banned, and technical solutions such as seals-friendly fishing gear. After the sharp declines of the past, seal populations are rising again in many areas. In the Article 17 reports, harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) showed positive population trends in eight out of 15 national assessments by biogeographic regions. Meanwhile grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) population trends were positive in 13 out of 18 assessments. Common seals on the Scottish coast 21

24 Conservation in focus 3: European pond turtle (Emys Orbicularis) The European pond turtle is a small reptile found in southern and central Europe. Due to significant long-term declines in population, the species features in the 2009 European red list of threatened species part of the global reference for species at risk of extinction, prepared by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) for the European Commission. The species is classified as vulnerable across the EU the status just below endangered. The Article 17 reports confirm the poor conservation status of these turtles and the urgent need for targeted action. The species features in 21 national assessments from 13 different Member States, across six biogeographic regions. The results in four biogeographic regions come out overall as bad in the Alpine, Atlantic, Boreal and Continental regions. The assessments in the Mediterranean describe conditions for the species as unknown, but not favourable. Only the national assessments in the Pannonian region from Hungary and Slovakia indicate a favourable conservation status. Threats to the turtles include habitat loss due to urbanisation, road construction, wetland drainage, and over exploitation of water resources. Other pressures include water pollution and competition from the non-native red-eared slider terrapin (Trachemys Scripta), a popular pet that has become widely established across Europe. 22 European pond turtle

25 Conservation in focus 4: Large carnivores Large carnivores such as bears, wolves, wolverines and lynx move over wide areas, and each individual needs hundreds of square kilometres of habitat. As the human population has grown in Europe, these animals have lost their habitats and have been hunted extensively. By the early 20th century many species neared extinction. However, thanks to concerted conservation efforts over the last 30 years, most of these species are recovering. Successful approaches foster co-existence with human activities and minimise conflicts. The Large Carnivores Initiative, a major Europe-wide effort to increase knowledge of the animals and encourage international cooperation, began in The initiative created an online information system and a series of publications on each species type. It also developed more accurate mapping of species distribution and laid down general principles for conservation and population management. The Article 17 reports confirm that such efforts are working for several species. Thirteen out of 25 national wolf (Canis lupus) assessments showed rising population trends, as did 11 out of 20 brown bear (Ursus arctos) studies. European grey wolves in the Bavarian forest national park 23

26 EU nature protection on the web : For more information about Article 17 conservation status assessments and the EU s policies on nature protection, go to the following websites : Composite Commission Report : Technical Article 17 report : National summaries : ms-reports_ &vm=detailed&sb=title Habitats summaries : Species summaries : The Habitats Directive : Natura 2000 : 24

27 European Commission Healthcheck for Europe s protected nature Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union pp. 21 x 21cm ISBN doi: /49675 How to obtain EU publications Free publications: via EU Bookshop ( at the European Commission s representations or delegations. You can obtain their contact details by linking or by sending a fax to Publications for sale: via EU Bookshop ( Priced subscriptions (Official Journal of the EU, Legal cases of the Court of Justice as well as certain periodicals edited by the European Commission) can be ordered from one of our sales agents. You can obtain their contact details by linking or by sending a fax to Photo credits: istockphoto: cover, p. 4, 6, 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23 Jantonio Rivas: p. 15 Photodisc: p. 16, 17

28 KH EN-C 26