BENATUR BEtter management and implementation of NATURa 2000 sites Massimiliano Costa Province of Ravenna & Authority for Management of Parks and Biodiversity of Romagna - Italy Brussels, November 12 th 2013 Round Table: “Better management of Natura 2000 sites: challenges and chances for the future” Management of Natura 2000 sites: implementation of Conservation Measures and Action Plans at local and transnational level

Short Project Summary BE-NATUR aims at favoring the better management and implementation of Nature 2000 sites in the SEE eco-region, focusing in particular on wetlands (rivers, lakes, coastal shores), their habitats and species. The exchange of knowledge and best practices within the consortium was the basis for the definition of a Gap Analysis and a Transnational Joint Strategy for the better management and improvement of Natura 2000 network and for the definition of some Joint Transnational Action Plans for the conservation of species and habitats common to the Partners areas and typical of South East Europe, to concretely implement the EU legislative framework, also by elaboration of National Action Plans and by making several Pilot Projects effecting the Plans.

- To reduce gaps among the PPs areas with regard to the implementation of EU Directive “Habitat” and “Birds”, management levels, knowledge on management practices. Objectives - To influence policies of environment protection (Joint Transnational Action Plans and start up of procedures for their adoption at national level as National Action Plans). - To improve the environmental quality through integrated approaches and cooperation activities. - To establish a good balance between social-economic development and environmental protection both through concrete interventions. - To improve the level of protection of target habitats and species and strengthen the public-private cooperation to boost long lasting environmental conservation.

Gap Analysis Gap Analysis evaluates the needs for an adequate conservation of Natura 2000 sites and proposes possible activities to solve the priority problems affecting a good management, divided in four categories: Basic Output Legal and institutional frameworks Management and organizational structures Ecological assessment Costs and financial gaps

Legal and institutional frameworks The designation process of sites was often carried out by local authorities without having the adequate technical, ecological and economical background. Especially in last entering Countries, many important habitats sites or species range areas are not included in the Natura 2000 Network. Revise the selected Natura 2000 sites and check if all relevant sites have been nominated.

Legal and institutional frameworks Missing national legislative competences lead to different implementations and regulations in the provinces when federal legislative structures are given. In most of the Countries, the Impact Assessment is not a strong enough procedure, because there is no sufficient integration of Impact Assessment into legislation, because responsibility is fragmented, because the authorities in charge are often technically incompetent. Integrate Impact Assessment legally and coordinate at European level the legal implementation of Impact Assessment within the Federal States, Regions, Provinces.

Management and organizational structures Missing national legislative competences lead to different implementations and regulations in the provinces when federal legislative structures are given. There is a big diversification on authorities charged with Natura 2000 sites management in the different Countries (Federal States, Regions, Provinces, Municipalities, Parks, Universities, specific Authorities, Agencies…) with a big difference in knowledge and competence. Set priorities and provide clear managing structure of Natura 2000 sites, at European level, to avoid diversity and inadequate managements.

Management and organizational structures It is very important to increase the quality by providing specific training for site managers, technical offices and administrative bodies, in order to implement the conservation of Natura 2000 sites. It is also important to improve the role and strengthen the position of managing structures, by legal implementation, reinforcement and organisation of the offices, awareness campaign, involvement of stakeholders.

Management and organizational structures Simplify the bureaucratic fulfillments and the decisional processes to grant the authorizations as key issues to Natura 2000 social sustainability. The Impact Assessment is a complicate process and needs a high competence; an inadequate competence can cause two consequences: So, it is very important to organise offices and to train the Natura 2000 managers to obtain adequate and effective assessments. - a lack of compensatory measures and a damage for habitats and species; - an excess of commitments and the consequent loss of sustainability of Natura 2000 policies.

Management and organizational structures Almost no mechanisms are available to evaluate the effectiveness of management on the national and regional level. In some many cases there are not Conservation Measures or Management Plans for Natura 2000 sites or the available ones are widely insufficient. Develop concepts and mechanisms to evaluate the effectiveness of the management on a regular basis as a result indicator. Implement a tracking tool of the management planning process (Status: not available, in preparation, implementation, evaluation, in revision) as a performance indicator on the national/international level.

Monitoring Develop at European level new monitoring concepts that facilitate an evaluation of the conservation status with limited resource, to elaborate a cost efficient sampling design and a reduced set of significant indicators. Need to coordinate at European level the monitoring activities, by directives, guidelines and trainings, to obtain comparable and homogeneous data.

Costs and financial gaps the financial gap is around 80% The European Commission estimates that annual management costs for effective biodiversity conservation may come up to about € 80,00 per hectare. The financial gap analysis indicated that partner regions spend about € 15,00 per hectare; so the financial gap is around 80% However, it becomes apparent that there is an “informational gap” regarding socioeconomics of Natura A significant number of partners were not able to estimate actual or needed expenditure for effective management, thus suggesting that the institutional and human resource capacities of authorities planning and managing Natura 2000 sites is still weak. Anyway, the lack of financing considerably influence the Natura 2000 sites, habitats and species conservation and management and also the Natura 2000 perception.

Costs and financial gaps The Conservation Measures are a compulsory tool for Natura 2000 sites, according to the article 6 of the Directive 92/43/EEC. The implementation of Conservation Measures needs financing for: -routine management of habitats and species carried out by the management authorities; - routine management of habitats carried out by landowners; -capital expenditure: direct interventions or purchase of land; -indirect interventions: plans, manuals, monitoring, workshops, awareness; -compensation of farmers and landowners for lacking income.

Actually, the managing authorities of Natura 2000 sites do not have definite and sure financing for carrying out the activities of the Conservation Measures. Costs and financial gaps This lack of financing prevents and conditions also the implementation of Management Plans and of Action Plans.

Methods and experiences to implement Directive 92/43/EEC and 09/147/EU: overview on the preparation of Joint Transnational Action Plans for habitats and species

Joint Transnational Action Plans (JTNAPs) on common target habitats and species Seven JTNAPs were prepared by group of partners, according to the Directive 92/43/EEC, about common habitats and species, typical of the South East Europe and selected by the partners from a list of common elements. The JTNAPs were elaborated with a new transnational approach, according to the Transnational Strategy developed within the BeNatur project. The JTNAPs contain many activities that must be actualized on the routine management or that can be held in further projects or that needs financing for compensations.

Joint Transnational Action Plans HabitatsPartners involved Coastal and halophytic habitats & dunes (1130, 2110, 2120, 2130, 2250) Veneto Region - IT Province of Ravenna - IT Danube Delta National Institute Research – ROM Torre Guaceto – IT Strandja Nature Park – BG Freshwater habitats and forests (3130, 91E0, 92A0) Cacak - SRB Timis Council – ROM ETANAM - GR Alkaline fens and Cladium fens (7210*, 7230) AREC – AT VIETU - AT Lake Balaton - LBDCA – HU Common Habitats SpeciesPartners involved Liparis loeseliiAREC – AT VIETU – AT Lake Balaton - LBDCA – HU Emys orbicularisStrandja Nature Park - BG Torre Guaceto – IT Phalacrocorax pygmeus ETANAM - GR Province of Ravenna - IT Veneto Region - IT Danube Delta National Institute Research - ROM Lake Balaton - LBDCA - HU Cacak - SRB Ciconia ciconiaNimfea - HU Timis Council – ROM Strandja Nature Park - BG Common Species Bold: the group coordinator

Step chart Step 1: Identify a coordinator and agencies to be involved in the development and implementation of Action Plans Step 2: Identify and prioritize the habitats and species in need of an AP Step 3: Identify working groups and sources of information for the habitats and species Step 4: Produce a status report as a background document for the AP Step 5: Produce the actual AP using a standardized format Step 6: Implement the AP (with Pilot Projects and after the project…) Step 7: Monitor the implementation and impact of the AP (after the project…) The carrying out of steps 6 and 7 needs suitable financing. Joint Transnational Action Plans

Pilot Projects as examples of best practices The Joint Transnational Action Plans were firs carried out by the “Pilot Project”, foreseen by BeNatur project. Each partners made at least one “Pilot Project” to carry out one of the activities contained in the JTNAP. Pilot Projects were divided into direct or indirect interventions. Both the types of interventions need financing, for capital expenditure (direct interventions) or for routine management (indirect interventions).

Examples of direct interventions: - restoration and preservation of habitats; -preservation or reintroduction of animal or vegetal species. Examples of indirect interventions: -management plans for Natura 2000 sites; - drawing up of specific manuals for the conservation of habitats and species; - specific monitoring actions; -Specific workshops on the conservation of habitats and species. The repetition of pilot project (as best practices) and the general carrying out of JTNAP activities need suitable financing. Pilot Projects

Need to get financial support for capital expenditure and routine management The local authorities in charge for the management and conservation of Natura 2000 sites don’t have sure financing for conservation activities (routine management, capital expenditure, compensations) at National or local level. They can compete for LIFE financing for capital expenditure or emergency maintenance. LIFE financing are not sure and need, however, a high percentage of co-financing (50% for habitats and species of annex I and II; 25% for priority habitats and species) that is almost never available at local level.

Need to get financial support for capital expenditure and routine management The local authorities in charge for the management and conservation of Natura 2000 sites can also compete for financing of the Environment Axis of the Common Agricultural Policy. Also those financing are not sure and need, as the LIFE ones, a percentage of co-financing (average 20-25% plus VAT) that is almost never available at local level.

Need to get financial support for capital expenditure and routine management The local authorities managing Natura 2000 sites can also give binding orientations for the financing allocated by Common Agricultural Policy for private farmers and landowners, to direct the interventions for habitats and species conservation and to direct the compensation measures for lacking incomes for farmers. The local authorities managing Natura 2000 sites are almost never the manager of Common Agricultural Policy financing, that are managed by Regions, Provinces, Local Action Groups.

Need to get financial support for capital expenditure and routine management The first need is to have sure financing for the annual essential conservation activities, by National Governments, Federal States, Regions. As we have seen, t he European Commission estimates that annual management cost for effective biodiversity conservation may come up to about € 80,00 per hectare. The financial gap analysis of BeNatur project indicates that partners’ Regions spend about € 15,00 per hectare; so the financial gap is around 80%

Need to get financial support for capital expenditure and routine management The capital expenditure and emergency maintenance for conservation activities could yet be financed by LIFE program, but: - lower level of co-financing or none co-financing at all (now the possibility to co-finance is the worst difficult for local authorities); - severe selection of project (the selection now is necessarily done more by the possibility to find the 50% than by the goodness of projects); - simpler audit reports; - simpler technical reports, when activities are inside Management/Action Plans or Conservation Measures.

Need to get financial support for capital expenditure and routine management The capital expenditure, emergency maintenance and compensations for conservation activities or measures could also be financed by Common Agricultural Policy (Environment Axis), but: - more clear and univocal destination to Natura 2000 sites management authorities for Management Plans or Conservation Measures implementation; - charging on the local authorities managing Natura 2000 sites the distribution of Common Agricultural Policy for private conservation activities and for compensations for lacking incomes, to apply directly the activities of the Management/Action Plans and the Conservation Measures

A good group of experts in nature conservation in South East Europe The trainings for experts, the field trips with the analysis of the threats and of the management problems and activities, the groups work for the Joint Transnational Action Plans formed a very good group of technicians expert on nature conservation. This group can work in the future and also cooperate with other subjects, in order to find solutions for management of natural sites and conservation of habitats and species. Outputs give immediate results for a better management

The Future… The project could continue in a sort of “BeNatur 2”, handling with other habitats and species of the two EU Directives and typical of South East Europe, chasing the aims of the Gap Analysis and of the Transnational Joint Strategy, effecting some activities of the JTNAPs and of the Monitoring Tool. The project will be presented in Höör (Sweden) the November, 20 th 2013, at the National Forest Agency (project Nature Hardwoods) trying to disseminate the results of cooperation. focus on river and freshwater habitats flooding areas, temporary wetlands, wet meadows and the colonial waterbirds (herons, cormorants, ibis) nesting on trees or reedbed. For the “remake” of the project, many Partners would like to focus on river and freshwater habitats, with main care for the flooding areas, temporary wetlands, wet meadows and the colonial waterbirds (herons, cormorants, ibis) nesting on trees or reedbed.

Examples of further common Habitats and Species for JTNAPs 3130Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea 3150Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition — type vegetation 3170* Mediterranean temporary ponds 3270Rivers with muddy banks with Chenopodion rubri p.p. and Bidention p.p. vegetation 6410Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae) 6440Alluvial meadows of river valleys of the Cnidion dubii Common Habitats Lutra lutra - * Mustela lutreola - Pelecanus onocrotalus - * Pelecanus crispus - Plegadis falcinellus - Platalea leucorodia -* Aythya nyroca - Chlidonias hybridus – Acrocephalus melanopogon – colonial waterbirds nesting on trees or reedbeds in general Triturus carnifex - Triturus cristatus - Triturus dobrogicus - Triturus karelinii – Rana latastei * Acipenser naccarii - Rutilus frisii - Scardinius graecus - Misgurnus fossilis - Sabanejewia aurata - Sabanejewia larvata Cordulegaster heros - Leucorrhinia pectoralis - Lindenia tetraphylla - Ophiogomphus cecilia Marsilea quadrifolia - Aldrovanda vesiculosa - Gladiolus palustris Common Species

Examples of activities forecast by the Be-Natur project’s tools, useful for other or new projects… Specific trainings for technicians and managers working on the management of Natura 2000 sites Management activities for conservation provided for the JTNAPs Monitoring activities effectiveness using the Monitoring Tools methods Revision of Natura 2000 sites perimeters to include flooding areas or other wet habitats Information and awareness campaign about Natura 2000

Application on SEE or other financing programs split into two projects if the next South East Europe program involving more partners from the remaining Countries The Be-Nature 2 could also be split into two projects if the next South East Europe program will be really divided into different geographical ranges, involving more partners from the remaining Countries of each sub-area. converted into an international LIFE+ project We hope… Otherwise, it could be converted into an international LIFE+ project about the conservation and restoration of flooding areas along rivers and their habitats and species. This kind of project, with some priority elements, could obtain a 75% financing. We hope… it would be necessary to involve partners from other SEE projects, along the Danube river or the Po river This kind of “Be-Natur 2” could not involve all the partners of Be-Natur, because not in all the involved protected areas there are the described habitats and species, typical of freshwater wetlands and rivers, so it would be necessary to involve partners from other SEE projects, along the Danube river or the Po river.

Thank you Thank you Massimiliano Costa Province of Ravenna & Authority for Management of Parks and Biodiversity of Romagna - Italy Brussels, November 12 th 2013 Round Table: “Better management of Natura 2000 sites: challenges and chances for the future” Management of Natura 2000 sites: implementation of conservation measures and action plans at local level