An overview on Biogeographic Seminars in the countries of EU 10, the Pannonian region and Hungary CEEWEB Policy office Hungary Ildikó Arany, Natura 2000 coordinator

May : 10 new Eu member states Obligation to submit the National Lists of proposed Sites of Community Interest Biogeographic Seminars for each regions

Alpine: May, 2005, Slovenia Slovenia, Slovakia, Poland

Pannonian: September, 2005, Sarród, Hungary Hungary, Slovakia, Czech Republic

Continental: April, 2006, Darova, Czech Republic Poland, Czech Republic, Slovenia Additional seminar for Poland in the future

Boreal: 5-7 December, 2005, Lilaste, Latvia Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania

Mediterranean: „mini-seminar” Cyprus and Malta 6th December 2006, Brussels

Participation in the Biogeographic Seminars European Commission European Topic Centre Official delegation of the national governments Independent experts Land users’ organisations Observers NGOs

NGO participation in the Biogeographic Seminars is coordinated by the European Habitats Forum Network of European nature conservation NGO networks committed to the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of habitats and species in Europe Possibility to meet with DG Environment regularly Support the implementation of (among others) the EU Habitats and Birds Directives Coordination of NGO representation and participation on biogeographic seminars

Role of CEEWEB Mandate from EHF for NGO biogeographic secretariat for EU 10 Connection between regional NGOs and EHF, DG Environment, European Topic Centre Preparation work for NGOs

Concept (together with WWF) Distributing Information (booklet) Preparatory meetings in the biogeographic regions for NGO representatives from the region

clarify and understand the biogeographic seminar process, how to be effective review existing information and data, National Lists and Shadow Lists clarify and agree preparations at national and regional levels try out how the Seminar will happen agree on and check modalities for the Seminar (nomination, registration, observers, feed back)

Pannonian Biogeographical Seminar from NGO point of view September Sarrod, Fertő-Hanság National Park (Neusiedlersee) Hungary

NGO meetings: 1st meeting: 13. April 2005, Budapest, CEEWEB Office participants: Arnika (Czech Rep.) Daphne (Slovakia) Planta Europa BROZ (Slovakia) Birdlife Hungary WWF Hungary Eötvös Loránd University of Science (Hungary) Ecological Isnstitute for the Sustainable Development (Hungary) WWF Austria CEEWEB

NGO meetings: 2nd meeting: September 2005, Budapest, CEEWEB Office participants: WWF Austria Veronica (Czech Republic) Latvian Fund for Nature Milvus Group (Romania) ONG Ecotur (Romania) WWF Hungary Birdlife Hungary CEEWEB

NGO participants in the seminar Three official NGO representatives: Mojmir Vlasin (Veronica) from the Czech Republic, Viktória Kavrán (WWF Hungary) from Hungary Jan Seffer (Daphne) from Slovakia Two NGO observers: Angela Curtean-Banaduc (ONG Ecotur, Sibiu) from Romania Pranas Mierauskas (Lithuanian Fund for Nature) from Lithuania

NGO preparation for the seminar in Hungary NGOs’ role in site selection: SPAs: BirdLife Hungary, pSCIs: MoE, NGOs reactive role Data collection from scientific publications, NGOs, universities, research institutes, NPs (many overlapping with data sources of MoE) Using results of ETC pre-evaluation is crucial Data synthesis, short comments for each species and habitats

Phases of the seminar 1.General questions To clarify methodology and rules of decisions 2.Reference Lists To decide, which hab & spec are relevant 3.Sufficiency/Insufficiency quantity/quality/coherence of sites more investigations or revision of proposals

General issues Shape and size of pSCIs for vertebrate animals, especially for bats and large carnivores Age of records Fragmentation of sites

General issues Taxonomic problem of species groups Question of site boundaries Deleting species near ectinction from the Reference List

Pre-evaluation and sum-up by the European Topic Centre Backup material of the Hungarian authority was fairly good. Preparedness of NGOs was acknowledged.

Evaluation of Reference Lists and sufficiency of National Lists Hungary: Most of the NGO proposals were accepted (decision insufficiency or scientific reserve). Military areas were problematic in Hungary Forests under-represented North-East Hungary underrepresented (mainly forests)

To be continued – decisions about future bilateral negotiations Hungary was to send its revised proposal (improved NL) by June 2006 to the Commission (not happened so far) NGOs would like to be involved in the bilateral negotiations by lobbying both towards the governments and the Commission / European Topic Centre, by sending their list of accessory proposed sites. No official agreement on NGO contribution

all information should be collected only from correct scientific source and strong arguments There should be cooperation between the NGOs from different MSs during the seminar. Lessons learned; experiences that can be utilised in preparing for the future Biogeographic Seminars

Thank you for your attention