1. European Biodiversity Monitoring and the reporting according to Art 17
Gerald Dick, WWF
for the European Habitats Forum

2. European Habitats Forum (EHF)
Founded in 1991, EHF enables close co-operation between 14 NGO networks at the European level
EHF provides input and advice to DG Environment & focuses on biodiversity policy, the establishment of Natura 2000 and implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives
EU benefits from the input of NGOs, active at the local level
, particularly relating to the implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives and the establishment of the Natura 2000 network. The EHF meets with DG Environment twice a year after the Habitats Committee meetings and provides a co-ordinated means of communication between DG Environment and European nature conservation NGOs.

3. Background of Report
The Habitats Directive has a six-year cycle for reporting
Second report now covers 2001 and 2006.
First assessment of conservation status for all species and habitats of Community interest.
This is not limited to the Natura 2000 network.
Article 1 of the Habitats Directive indicates clearly that the overall situation of species and habitats needs to be assessed and monitored in order to judge if it is favourable or not.
Official country reports are due 20 June 2007

4. Purpose of Report
Influence guidance of reporting (Scientific Working Group of Habitats Committee, European Topic Center)
Showcase how reporting forms are working
Defining Gaps and make proposals for improvement
Highlight Species & Habitats and their Conservation Status
Make sure MS take the monitoring serious

5. Overall Aim
To support a robust EU-reporting scheme to secure monitoring as basis for biodiversity conservation
By:
Testing the format
Providing best practice examples
Providing preliminary results on FCS (favourable conservation status)

6. 19 Species, 8 Habitats, 9 Countries
Amphibians & Reptiles: Toad species, Sand lizard, Loggerhead turtle
Mammals: Brown bear, Lynx, Wolf, Lesser Horseshoe bat
Plants, Ferns & Mosses: Early gentian, Petalwort, Mosses
Birds: Stone curlew, Great white egret, European nightjar, White tailed eagle, Bearded vulture
Habitats: Peat bogs, Fens, Mires, Calcareous rock, grassland, Cork oak forest
Countries: Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Spain, UK, (Switzerland)

7. 19 Species (5 Birds) Burhinus oedicnemus Casmerodius albus Lynx lynx
Caprimulgus europaeus
Haliaeetus albicilla
Gypaetus barbatus
Ursus arctos
Bombina bombina
Bombina variegata
Lacerta agilis
Bufo calamita
Lynx lynx
Caretta caretta
Canis lupus
Rhinolophus hipposideros
Gentianella anglica
Petallophyllum ralfsii
Sphagnum warnstorfii
Sphagnum capillifolium
Drepanocladus vernicosus

8. 8 Habitats Active raised peat bogs (7110)
Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae (7210)
Transition mires and quaking bogs (7140)
Stable Buxus sempervirens formations on calcareous rock slopes (5110)
Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion (7150)
Petrifying springs with tufa formation (7220)
Alkaline fens (7230)
Quercus suber forests (9330)

9. Methodology
Used the official EU-reporting format and guidance documents
Included birds because:
Objective of FCS for birds and their habitats as well
Likely to be a similar monitoring system for birds in future
Results based on best practice case studies, using expert/specialist knowledge for those species and habitats
Undertook analysis at the country level but in some cases, used this to undertake an analysis at the biogeographic level

10. Main Results
Trends
Percentage of trend classes for the categories “range”, “population”, “habitat for the species” and “area covered by habitat”.

11. Main Results Reasons for trends
Percentage of different trend classes for the categories “range”, “population”, “habitat for the species” and “area covered by habitat”.

12. ! Main Results Conservation Status
Overall assessment: Percentage of conservation status classes, combining all assessments.

13. Challenges
Biogeographical assessment for unconnected parts of biogeographic regions (Alpine)
The significance of trans-border populations in relation to country specific information
Migrating marine species cause specific problems in terms of data availability / FCS judgement and taking a country specific approach
For many Species/Habitats lack of data

14. 10 Steps towards effective monitoring
Streamlining monitoring requirements for various EU policies when using biodiversity data (nature conserv., water mgmt., rural development)
Fully integrating civil society
Paying special attention to the evaluation of the countries‘ reports when setting FRV
Integrating NGO‘s recommendations for setting FRV‘s

15. 10 Steps towards effective monitoring
Integrating biogeographic implications (transboundary effects)
Establishing relationship to Natura 2000 and species
Improving the data
Guiding on marine habitats & species
Conducting biogeographic monitoring seminars
Establishing a similar procedure for Bern

16. Copies of the Monitoring Report can be obtained from IUCN
Downloaded

17. Thank you for your attention!!