6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 1 EU Reporting obligations according to Habitats and Birds Directive RO2004/IB/EN-09 Thomas Ellmauer

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 1

EU Reporting obligations according to Habitats and Birds Directive

RO2004/IB/EN-09

Thomas Ellmauer

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 2

Content

Reporting Obligations under the Nature Directives

How to prepare the Article 17 report (Example from Austria)

Working Session: Assessing Conservation Status for Habitat types and species

Monitoring acc. to Article 11

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 3

System of Nature Directives

ProtectionConservation Measures /Derogation Regulation

Evaluation Monitoring/ Reporting

Adaptation Amendment of Annexes

EU-Biodiversity

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 4

Reporting Obligations

Red: Form available

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 5

Report on Art. 6(4)

If, in spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of social or economic nature, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. It shall inform the Commission of the compensatory measures adopted.

Where the site concerned hosts a priority natural habitat type and/or a priority species the only considerations which may be raised are those relating to human health or public safety, to beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment or, further to an opinion from the Commission, to other imperative reasons of overriding public interest.’

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 6

Report on Art. 6(4)

Alernative solutions ?

Imperative reasons of overriding public interest ?

Does the site host *species or * habitats?

Authorisation may be granted: Compensation Measures have

to be taken

Authorisation must not be granted

yes

yes

no

no

yes

no

review plan or project, consider alternatives

Commissioninformation

CommissionOpinion

human health, safety, or important environmental benefits

yes

no

other imperative reasons of overriding public interest

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 7

Report on Art. 6(4)

Obligation: Information of the Commission of the compensatory measures adopted

Form: Provided by the Commission

Praxis: 42 cases reported in 2004-2006; Assessment of effects frequently vague and too general; scarce information on concrete impacts; mix up of mitigation and compensation measures; compensatory measures not related to the impacts

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 8

Report on Art. 6(4)

Form

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 9

Derogation Regulation

Birds Directive, Art. 9:Member States may derogate from the provisions of Art. 5, 6, 7 and 8

(protection, trading, hunting) where there is no other satisfactory solution for some reasons

Habitats Directive, Art. 16Member States may derogate from the provisions of Art. 12, 13, 14 and

15 (protection, exploitation, trading) where there is no other satisfactory solution for some reasons

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 10

Derogation RegulationReasons reported in Art. 9 of Birds Directive

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 11


Permitted actions

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 12


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 13


HaBiDes: In order to streamline reporting required by Birds and Habitats Directive and by the Bern Convention, the EC developed a web based application

First Version already developed, system not in place yet

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 14


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 15

Derogation Reporting

Derogation Form

Species (dropdown list with species from Annex IV and V of Habitats Directive) Region (checkbox; NUTS 2) License: Valid From (date picker) - Valid Until (date picker) Bio-geographical region (checkbox) Alternatives assessed (text area) Conservation Status (radio-button) Permitted Activities (checkbox) Permitted Method (checkbox) Reason for Granting Licence (checkbox) Licensed: Individuals (textbox for number), Eggs (textbox for number), Breeding Sites (textbox for number),

Resting Places (textbox for number), Others Actually taken: Individuals (textbox), Eggs (textbox), Breeding Sites (textbox), Resting Places (textbox),

Others Impact on Population and scientific sources used Supervisory Body and Measures (text area) Sensitive information (radio-button): Yes/No Comments and Notes (text area)

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 16


Habides – approximate timing Decision on the implementation of an online derogation

reporting system (Habides) in the „Reportnet“-system of EEA – October 2008

Technical development of Habides to start – January 2009

Testing period of the Habides tool – March/April 2009 Finalising of the tool – Mid 2009

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 17


Composite Report Art. 9

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 18


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 19


Composite Report Art. 16

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 20

Article 12 report

Member States shall forward to the Commission every three years a report on the implementation of national provisions.

2005-2007: last report (full calendar years)2008-2010: upcoming report

A scheme has been agreed between the Commission and the ORNIS committee for the second report covering the periode 1984-1987

The report provides almost no information on the status or trend of birds

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 21

Article 12 reporting

Agreed reporting scheme

1. Species covered by the directive (art. 1): 2. Protection of habitats (art. 3 & 4)2.1 State of progress for the classification of SPAs 2.2 Targeted measures drawn up per SPA during reporting period2.3 Actions undertaken outside SPAs during reporting period2.4 Targeted measures taken for birds habitats in wider countryside (e.g. agri-environmental

schemes, etc.)3. Protection of species (Art. 5, 7, 8 & 9)3.1 General system of protection (art. 5)3.2 Hunting and capture of bird species (art. 7)3.3 Means, arrangements or methods used for the large-scale or non-selective capture or killing of

birds (art 8).3.4 Synthesis of derogations from provisions of Articles 5, 6, 7 and 83.5 Authorisation of sale of bird species referred to in Annex III/2 (art. 6)3.6 Introduction of species of bird which do not occur naturally in the wild state in the EU (art. 11).4. Encouragement of research (Art. 10).4.1 Research efforts completed during reporting period or on-going4.1 Research efforts completed during reporting period or on-going4.2 Education, information and communication in relation to bird protection 5. Texts of the main provisions of national law (Art. 18).6. Other complementary information relevant to the conservation of wild birds

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 22

Article 12 report

Composite Report: very week conclusions, data missing, evaluation of measures hardly feasible

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 23

Article 12 report

SPAs (Art. 12)

SPAs (Barometer)

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 24

Article 12 report

the reporting format or guidelines are insufficient or insufficiently precise;

the reports produced by the Member States do not always fully respond to the guidelines, and/or are late or incomplete; and

the information is not sufficiently validated at EU level, and cannot be compared to independent data on trends and status to assess effectiveness.

Alignment and synchronisation of reporting under Art. 12 BD and Art. 17 HD

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 25

Article 12 report

Loyal Cooperation: Agreement on the streamlined approach in the frame of the committees

Modification of the provisions

__|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|_‘94 ‘96 ‘98 ’00 ’02 ‘04 ’06 ’08 ’10 ’12 ‘14 ’16 ’18

1994-2000 2001-2006 2007-2012 2013-2018

’99-’01‘96-’98 ’05-’07’02-’04 2008-2012 2013-2018‘93-’95

2013:1st common report

Harmonising the timing of progress reports

BirdsDirective(Art.12)

HabitatsDirective(Art.17)

Reports

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 26

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 27

Article 17 report

Article 17 of Habitats Directive asks Member States to report every 6 years about the measures taken under the Directive

1st report: 1994-2000: unstructured report about

establishing Natura 2000

2nd report: 2001-2006: using a template (DocHab-04-

03/03-rev.3)

3rd report 2007-2012: using monitoring data

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 28

Article 17 report

Decision of the Habitats Committee concerning a reporting format (DocHab 04-03/03 rev-3)

Appendix A: General reporting format Appendix B: Reporting format species Appendix C: Evaluation matrix species Appendix D: Reporting format habitat types Appendix E: Evaluation matrix habitat types

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 29

Article 17 report

General reporting format

1. Legal framework2. State of designation of Natura 20003. Management tools4. Conservation measures (Art. 6(1))5. Measures to avoid deterioration (Art. 6 (2))6. Appropriate assessment (Art. 6. (3,4))7. Financing (Art. 8)8. Measures taken to ensure coherence (Art. 10)9. Measures taken to establish a surveillance system (Art. 11)10. Measures taken to ensure the protection of species (Art. 12-16)11. Supporting measures

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 30

Article 17 report

Habitat types Species

Range Range

Area Population

Structure and function (incl. Typical species

Habitat

Future prospects Future prospects

Assessment of Conservation status:Parameter acc. to Art. 1 e, i

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 31

Article 17 report

Conservation Status

Natura 2000

favourable unfavourable

A B C

favourable

unfavourable poor

unfavourable bad

Biogeographical Region

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 32

Article 17 report

Two or more 'unknown' combined with green or all

“unknown’One or more 'red' One or more 'amber'

but no 'red'

All 'green'OR

three 'green' and one 'unknown'

Overall assessment of CS

No or insufficient reliable information available

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

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

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


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

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

Specific structures and functions (including typical species)


Large decrease in surface area (> 1% per year) within period specified by MS ORWith major losses in distribution pattern within range ORMore than 10% below ‘favourable reference area’

Any other combinationStable or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference area' AND without significant changes in distribution pattern within range

Area covered by habitat type within range


Large decrease (> 1% per year)OR More than 10% below ‘favourable reference range’

Any other combinationStable or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference range'

Range

Unknown(insufficient information to

make an assessment)

Unfavourable - Bad('red')

Unfavourable –Inadequate ('amber')

Favourable('green')

Parameter Conservation Status


“unknown’One or more 'red' One or more 'amber'

but no 'red'

All 'green'OR

three 'green' and one 'unknown'

Overall assessment of CS


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

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

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


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

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

Specific structures and functions (including typical species)


Large decrease in surface area (> 1% per year) within period specified by MS ORWith major losses in distribution pattern within range ORMore than 10% below ‘favourable reference area’

Any other combinationStable or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference area' AND without significant changes in distribution pattern within range

Area covered by habitat type within range


Large decrease (> 1% per year)OR More than 10% below ‘favourable reference range’

Any other combinationStable or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference range'

Range


make an assessment)


Unfavourable –Inadequate ('amber')

Favourable('green')


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 33

Article 17 report


“unknown”One or more 'red' One or more

'amber' but no 'red'

All 'green'OR

three 'green' and one 'unknown'Overall assessment of CS


Severe influence of pressures and threats to the species; very bad prospects for its future, long-term viability at risk.

Any other combination

Main pressures and threats to the species not significant; species will remain viable on the long-term

Future prospects (as regards to population, range and habitat availability)


Area of habitat is clearly not sufficiently large to ensure the long term survival of the species OR Habitat quality is bad, clearly not allowing long term survival of the species


Area of habitat is sufficiently large AND habitat quality is suitable for the long term survival of the species

Habitat for the species


Large decline (> 1% per year) AND below 'favourable reference population' OR More than 25% below favourable reference population ORReproduction, mortality and age structure strongly deviating from normal (if data available)


Population(s) above ‘favourable reference population’ AND reproduction, mortality and age structure not deviating from normal

Population


Large decline (>1% per year)OR more than 10% below favourable reference range


Stable or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference range'

Range


make an assessment)


Unfavourable -Inadequate('amber')

Favourable('green')



“unknown”One or more 'red' One or more

'amber' but no 'red'

All 'green'OR

three 'green' and one 'unknown'Overall assessment of CS


Severe influence of pressures and threats to the species; very bad prospects for its future, long-term viability at risk.


Main pressures and threats to the species not significant; species will remain viable on the long-term

Future prospects (as regards to population, range and habitat availability)


Area of habitat is clearly not sufficiently large to ensure the long term survival of the species OR Habitat quality is bad, clearly not allowing long term survival of the species


Area of habitat is sufficiently large AND habitat quality is suitable for the long term survival of the species

Habitat for the species


Large decline (> 1% per year) AND below 'favourable reference population' OR More than 25% below favourable reference population ORReproduction, mortality and age structure strongly deviating from normal (if data available)


Population(s) above ‘favourable reference population’ AND reproduction, mortality and age structure not deviating from normal

Population


Large decline (>1% per year)OR more than 10% below favourable reference range


Stable or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference range'

Range


make an assessment)


Unfavourable -Inadequate('amber')

Favourable('green')


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 34

Article 17 report

Evaluation of Parameters

Trends 0=stable += increasing - = decreasing

Reference Values Favourable Reference Range Favourable Reference Population Favourable Reference Area

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 35

Article 17 report

Natural Range (based on Art. 12 working group)

Describes roughly the spatial limits within which the habitat or species occurs. The range includes areas that are not permanently used.

Requirements: Surface area: in km2

Trend Favourable Reference Range: Range within which all

significant ecological variations are included and which is sufficiently large to allow the long term survival (at least the size when the Directive came into force)

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 36

Article 17 report

Future Prospectis the species/habitat type viable on the long run?

Requirements: Non

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 37

Article 17 report

PopulationAmount of individual organisms of a given species

Requirements: Distribution map Size: should be measured as exactly as possible Trend: (6% resp. 1% per year or other) Structure: Parameter of population such as age structure,

mortality, growth rate, despersion, density, sex ratio etc. Favourable reference population

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 38

Article 17 report

Habitatecological or environmental area that is inhabited by a particular

animal or plant species.

Requirements: Estimate of area in km2

Trend Suitable Habitat for the species: Area of habitat which the

species could potentially occupy

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 39

Article 17 report

Area covered

plot of habitat type occurrences

Requirements: Distribution map Surface area in km2

Trend (6% resp. 1% per year or other) Favourable reference area

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 40

Article 17 report

Structures & functions

Requisites of the habitat and ecological functions (incl. typical species)

Requirements: Assessment according to the matrix

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 41

Article 17 report

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 42

Article 17 report

IT tool

C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\Thomas El

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 43

Article 17 report

Article 17 consultation tool

http://biodiversity.eionet.europa.eu/article17/

CIRCA-Webpagehttp://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/env/monnat/library

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 44

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 45

Article 17 report - Austria

Austria is a Federal State Nature Conservation is governed by the 9

Federal Provinces

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 46


Preparation of Article 17 report

Contracting BodyFederal Provinces and Ministry for EnvironmentContractor: UmweltbundesamtProjectteam: Umweltbundesamt & 23 SubcontractorsSteering Group: Minstry Federal States Member to the SWG

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 47


1.466 Data sources: Biotope mappingsInventoriesScientific papersMonographsThesisProject reportsData basesInformation from experts

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 48


390.295

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

Species: 172.587Habitat types: 217.708

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 49


Data management

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 50


5 ´

3 ´

Distribution maps Presence-Absence of recent occurences (within the reporting period)

10 x 10 km

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 51


Making thresholds for actual and historic

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 52


Distribution Maps

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 53


Range Actual Historic Potential Favourable

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 54


Favourable Reference Range

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 55


vor 19801980-1995nach 1995

FlussperlmuschelTrend

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 56


Future ProspectsGood prospects: no threat (=LC)Poor Prospects: suspected decrease of population and habitats

(NT, VU)Bad Prospects: very likely decrease of population and habitats

(CR, EN)

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 57


Population units Number of individuals Number of pairs Number of flowering stems , tufts shoots Number of reproduction units (mass of spawn) Number of colonized trees Number of localities …

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 58


Favourable Reference Population Generally only for highly endangered species

(RE, CR, EN) Relative Numbers (>, >>)

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 59


HabitatWhen we draw a habitat polygon on a map, we are formalizing the relation between the occurence of a species and the environmental conditions

Habitat models can be based onMappingStatistical calculated predictionIntuition of the experts knowledge

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 60

Habitats of Beetles

Exact mapping of habitats

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 61

Habitats of Bat Species

8 km

Deciduous and mixed

forests

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 62

Modelling of Bird-Habitats

The more specific the habitat requirements of a species,the better the habitat modelling using collateral data

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 63


Areal photographsScale: 1:10.000Basis for mapping

Infrared imagesDetailed interpretetion

Satelite imagesLANDSAT TM; Multispectral; Pixel size 30 mPreselection of areas

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 64

Delineation of habitat types

9130 Neutrophilous beech forests

7110 Active raised Bogs

6410 6410 Molinia meadowsMolinia meadows

6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands

Settlements

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 65


A B C

Structure and function

Area of the stand regeneration minimum resistance minimum space minimum

Composition of tree-layer natural near natural modified

Stock structure natural near natural modified

Utilization high intensity medium intensity low intensity

Dead wood high medium low

Indicative species none some many

Game damage acceptable warning light unaccepatable

A B C

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 66


Typical Species Diagnostic Species Indicator species

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 67


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 68


Continental RegionAlpine Region

20%

39%

29%

12%

FV U1 U2 X

15%

45%

33%

7%

FV U1 U2 X

Habitat types

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 69


Continental RegionAlpine Region

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Range Area Structure &Function

FutureProspects

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Range Area Structure &Function

FutureProspects

Habitat types

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 70

Article 11 Monitoring

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 71

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 72

Article 11 monitoring-concept

Questions to be answered:

Was the trend of range or habitat area negative throughout the reporting period (<6 %) ?

Are the parameter range, area and structure or function in a favourable status (compared to reference values) ?

Are the future prospects good ?

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 73


What will not be answered by the monitoring

Size and trend of Range Reference Values

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 74


Basis for the conceptual work: Data from the Article 17 report

Occurrences in a Grid-System (3x5 Minutes) Exact location only exceptional (biotope mappings …) No population-data

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 75


Main unit of habitat types or species is not known

Because of time constraints

Start the monitoring Make basic investigation parallel Check the monitoring design

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 76


What is an occurrence?

Species: Locality with appropriate habitat where the species very likely occurs and which is clearly separated from another occurrence

Habitat type: Clearly delineated polygon

Need for assessing the frequency of habitats and species

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 77


Sampling approach

Complete sampling: Less than 100 occurrences. Advantage: no statistics needed

Representative Sampling: Necessary if main unit is too big; Recording of a representative sample. Statistical Tests needed.

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 78

The sample size is dependent on:

Level of Significance: Probability that a measured difference is real

Power: Probability to detect a differential

Effect size: measure of the strength of the relationship between two

variables

Standard deviation

Correlation between the observed dates


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 79

Sample size

Simulation of decreasing and increasing areas

Low Variability (StDev = 12): N = 40; > 95% of test positiv (0.05)medium Variability (StDev = 18): N = 60; > 80% of tests positiv (0.05) High Variability (StDev = 24): N = 80-100; > 80% of tests positiv (0.05)High Variability (StDev = 24): N = 60-80; > 80% of Tests positiv (0.1)Very high Variabiltiy (StDev = 30): N = 70-80; > 80 % of tests positiv (0.15)


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 80


Amount of sampling units Very high variablity: 100 High variability: 85 Medium variability: 70 Low variability: 60

Rotation of sampling unitsEvery cycle 10% of sampling units renewed

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 81


Sampling units of clearly defined size (e.g. 1x1 km)

helps

To identify occurrences

To record dynamic processes

To stabilise the variability

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 82

Article 11 concept

Grid – sampling unit

3 minuteslatitude

5 minutes longitude

1 km

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 83

Example 6410 – Molinia grasslandsblue: actual occurrence alpin; red: actual occurrence continentalgreen: random selection of 60 quadrants.

Step 1 Random selection of quadrants

Article 11 concept

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 84

Step 2Random selection of sampling units 1000x1000m

Article 11 concept

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 85


Habitat types Species

Range: Status, Trend, Reference Range

Range: Status, Trend, Reference Range

Area:Status, Trend, Reference Area

Population:Status, Trend, Reference Population

Structur and Function (incl. typical species):Status

Habitat: Size and Status

Future prospects:Prognosis

Future prospects:Prognosis

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 86

Article 11 monitoring - concept

Similarities Complete sampling vs. representative sampling Fixed sample units

Differences Sample units Sample size Selection of sample units Rotation of sample units Synergy effects

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 87

Monitoring of Forests since 1961 Quadratic tracts systematically distributed over Austria

in a regular grid system of 3,89 x 3,89 km. Sampling units for sample plots per tract each 300 m2. 11.000 sample plots

Article 11 - Austrian Forest Inventory

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 88


Tract200 m

Sampling Units300 m2

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 89

Indicators relevant for Forest-Biodiversity Vegetation type (PNV, Herb-vegetation) Tree layer composition Diameters of trees Volume and structure of Deadwood Natural regeneration Game impact on regeneration


6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 90

Article 11 monitoring –concept

Personal resource within reporting period

Habitat types 6.212 d (4.349)Species 28.571 d (19.979)

Personal resource per yearHabitat types 1.035 d (725) = 4 MJ (2,9)Species 4.761 d (3.330) = 19 MJ (13,3)

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 91

Article 11 monitoring - concept

First estimation of total costs:App. 18 Mio € per cycle= 3 Mio € per year

Documents

6.-7.4.2009 | Folie 1 EU Reporting obligations according to Habitats and Birds Directive RO2004/IB/EN-09 Thomas Ellmauer