annex vii - factsheets grassland habitat...

ANNEX VII - Factsheets grassland habitat group

Annex to the Input Document for the Second Alpine Natura 2000 Seminar 21 – 23 June 2017, Padova, Italy

1

Contents_Toc484784654 6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-

Brometalia) ( * important orchid sites) ...................................................................................... 2

6230 * Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas (and

submountain areas, in Continental Europe) ............................................................................... 7

6410 Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae) 12

6430 Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels

.................................................................................................................................................. 17

6510 Lowland hay meadows (Alopecurus pratensis, Sanguisorba officinalis)........................ 22

6520 Mountain hay meadows .................................................................................................. 27

62D0 Oro-Moesian acidophilous grasslands ............................................................................ 32

2

6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) ( * important orchid sites)

x Selected for first round of Biogeographical Seminar

Selected using ‘Low hanging fruit’ approach

Habitat summary

The assessments of six countries led to the overall conservation status in the Alpine region being unfavourable-inadequate. In the Alpine biogeographical region habitat 6210 is broadly distributed in the Pyrenees, Alps, Carpathians, Apennines, Dinaric Mountains and mountains of Bulgaria; it is scattered in Sweden. Italy (32.6 %) and Romania (25 %) reported the largest habitat area. Improving the conservation status of the habitat requires in particular ensuring the suitable intensity of agricultural management – grazing, cutting, or a combination of both. The site-specific objectives and local/regional land use and livestock husbandry traditions, practices and techniques should be taken into account. Agricultural support schemes, including agri-environmental measures, could be used for management funding. Habitat restoration is needed in Slovenia, Austria, Spain, and Slovakia, as the actual habitat area is lower than the reference value.

Habitat description

Dry to semi-dry calcareous grasslands of the Festuco-Brometea. This habitat is formed by steppic or subcontinental grasslands (Festucetalia valesiacae) and, on the other hand, by grasslands of more oceanic and sub-Mediterranean regions (Brometalia erecti); in the latter case, a distinction is made between primary Xerobromion grasslands and secondary (semi-natural) Mesobromion grasslands with Bromus erectus; the latter are characterised by their rich orchid flora. Abandonment results in thermophile scrub with an intermediate stage of thermophile fringe vegetation (Trifolio-Geranietea). As important orchid sites, these grasslands are a priority habitat.

Distribution in the Alpine region and coverage by Natura 2000 network

The habitat is broadly distributed in the Pyrenees, Alps, Western Carpathians, Apennines, Dinaric Mountains and mountains of Bulgaria. Sweden and Romania reported scattered occurrence. In Poland the entire national habitat area is located in Natura 2000 sites; in Bulgaria a very large part is located in Natura 2000 sites. Around half of the habitat area in the Alpine region is represented in the Natura 2000 network.

3

Natura 2000 sites in the Alpine region

Country Habitat area /km2/ Coverage /%/ Number of sites

Austria 7.5-15 30-60 19

Bulgaria 173.68 98 13

Croatia 93.96 N/A 14

France 250-295.14 45-54 98

Germany 23.12 83 23

Italy 418.78 36 175

Poland 2.00 100 8

Romania 300-800 33-89 9

Slovakia 75-100 49-65 116

Slovenia 48.00 73 6

Spain 227.00 43 59

Sweden 0.20 40 3

Total 1,619 - 2,197 42 - 58 543 The table above shows the size of the habitat area in Natura 2000 sites and its proportion compared to habitat area in the whole biogeographical region (‘coverage’) as reported by MS in the 2013 Article 17 report. The number of sites was extracted from the 2015 Natura 2000 database.

Biogeographical conservation status assessment

The assessments of six countries, including Italy, which hosts a significant part of the habitat area, led to the overall conservation status of this habitat type in the Alpine biogeographical region being unfavourable-inadequate and deteriorating. The only favourable conclusion was from Romania, but this was given lower weight due to unreliable data. Unfavourable-bad status was concluded by Spain, Slovenia, Sweden, and Poland. The previous assessment was unknown but unfavourable in most of the reporting countries.

4

Legend: MS – Member State; Overall asses – Overall assessment; % MS – percentage of the surface area in the respective Member State compared to whole biogeographical region; Ref. – reference value; Struct & func. – structure and functions; Future prosp. – future prospects; Curr. CS – current conservation status; Prev. CS – previous conservation status; Nat. of ch. – nature of change; EU27: assessment on the level of all EU Member Countries; Concl. – conclusion; Target 1 – target 1 of the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy.

Conservation status FV Favourable U1 Unfavourable - inadequate U2 Unfavourable - bad XX Unknown

Trend 0 = stable; + = increase; - = decrease; x = unknown

Qualifier = stable; + positive; - negative; x unknown

Nature of change

a – genuine change; b – change due to better data or improved knowledge; b2 – due to taxonomical review; c1 – due to different methods to measure or evaluate; c2 – due to use of different thresholds; d – no information about nature of change; e – due to less accurate or absent data; nc – no change

Target 1 contribution

A – favourable assessments; B – improved assess.; C – deteriorated assessments; D – unfavourable and unknown assessments that did not change; E – assessments that became unknown.

Pressures, threats and proposed measures

The main pressures and threats are succession (biocoenotic evolution) linked to lack of grazing or mowing and the consequent accumulation of organic material, and intensive grazing or mowing and fertilisation. Quite large groups of pressures are related to other human activities, namely improved access, roads and paths, outdoor sport, leisure and recreational activities, human habitation, and removal of terrestrial plants.

5

Code Pressure name AT BG DE ES FR IT PL RO SE SI SK

A02 Modification of cultivation practices L

A02.01 Agricultural intensification L M

A02.03 Grassland removal for arable land L

A03.01 Intensive mowing or intensification H

A03.03 Abandonment / lack of mowing H M

A04 Grazing M

A04.01 Intensive grazing L L M H M

A04.01.05 Intensive mixed animal grazing M

A04.03 Abandonment of pastoral systems, lack of grazing H M H H H H

A05 Livestock farming and animal breeding (without grazing) M

A05.02 Stock feeding L

A06 Annual and perennial non-timber crops M

A07 Use of biocides, hormones and chemicals L

A08 Fertil isation H M H M H

B01 Forest planting on open ground L L M L

B01.01 Forest planting on open ground (native trees) L

B01.02 Artificial planting on open ground (non-native trees) M

B02 Forest and Plantation management & use M

B07 Forestry activities not referred to above M

C01 Mining and quarrying M

C01.01 Sand and gravel extraction H

C01.01.01 Sand and gravel quarries L

C01.04 Mines L

D01 Roads, paths and railroads M M

D01.02 Roads, motorways L M M

D02.01 Electricity and phone lines L M

D05 Improved access to site M M

E01 Urbanised areas, human habitation L M M

E01.03 Dispersed habitation M

E04 Structures, buildings in the landscape L M

F04 Taking / Removal of terrestrial plants, general L L M

G01 Outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities M M M

G02 Sport and leisure structures L M

G02.02 Skiing complex M

G03 Interpretative centres M

G05.01 Trampling, overuse M

H05.01 Garbage and solid waste L

I01 Invasive non-native species L L

J01.01 Burning down M

J02.01 Landfil l , land reclamation and drying out, general L

J02.05 Modification of hydrographic functioning, general M

K01.01 Erosion M

K02 Biocenotic evolution, succession H H H H M

K02.01 Species composition change (succession) M M

K02.02 Accumulation of organic material M H Legend: L Low intensity M Medium intensity H High intensity

The most important measure proposed was the maintenance of grasslands. Two or more countries also proposed establishing protected areas or sites, adapting crop production, other agriculture-related measures, legal protection of habitats and species, regulation of natural resources and land exploitation, and other spatial measures.

6

Code Measure name AT BG DE ES FR IT PL RO SE SI SK

1.1 No measures needed for the conservation of the habitat/species X

1.3 No measure known/ impossible to carry out specific measures M

2.0 Other agriculture-related measures M H H

2.1 Maintaining grasslands and other open habitats H H L H H H H H H

2.2 Adapting crop production H M H

6.0 Other spatial measures M H

6.1 Establish protected areas/sites H M H L H

6.3 Legal protection of habitats and species H H

6.4 Manage landscape features H H

7.4 Specific single species or species group management measures H

9.1 Regulating/Management exploitation of natural resources on land H H Legend: L Low importance M Medium importance H High importance

Reason for selection for the first Alpine seminar

The habitat type was selected for the first Alpine seminar because of its high Priority Index value. Habitat 6210 scored 198 because of high values in all three criteria. The habitat occurs in eleven countries (criterion A). Unfavourable-bad overall conservation status was reported in four countries (Spain, Poland, Sweden, and Slovenia) and unfavourable-inadequate status in six countries. Countries also reported negative trends in six cases (criterion C).

The Priority Index was calculated using information from the reports of Member States based on requirements of Article 17 of the Habitats Directive for the period 2001–2006. It is based on three parameters: A) Number of Member States where the habitat type is present; B) Unfavourable conservation status of the habitat type (U2 – 2 points; U1 & XX – 1 point each); and C) Trend information: number of negative trends for parameters ‘Area of the habitat type’ and qualifiers for ‘Structure & functions’. The index is then calculated using the formula: A*(B+C).

Priority conservation measures needed

For the improvement of the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region, it is essential to ensure the suitable intensity of agricultural management. Active management of the habitat includes grazing, cutting, or a combination of both. Grassland management objectives will vary from site to site, and within one site different goals may be set for different areas. When planning the management of the habitat, it is important to take into account site-specific objectives and targets as well as local/regional land use and livestock husbandry traditions, practices and techniques (Calaciura & Spinelli, 2008). Agricultural support schemes, including agri-environmental measures, could be used for funding the management of this habitat. In addition, habitat restoration is needed in Slovenia, Austria, Spain, and Slovakia, as the actual habitat area is smaller than the reference value. Restoration includes removal of scrub and trees, followed by cutting of herbaceous vegetation and/or reintroduction of grazing. In the initial period after scrub removal, more frequent cutting or more intensive grazing is usually necessary needed in order to eliminate resprouting of scrub, suppress tall vegetation, and restore the habitat structure. After this transitional period, regular management is usually sufficient. The restoration of abandoned grasslands is usually expensive and agricultural subsidies are not sufficient for these activities. Therefore, additional sources of funding should be used.

Links

http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/article17/reports2012/habitat/summary/?period=3&group=Grasslands&subject=6210&region=ALP

Calaciura, B. & Spinelli, O. 2008: Management of Natura 2000 habitats. 6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) (*important orchid sites). European Commission, Technical Report 2008 12/24, 38pp. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/habitats/pdf/6210_Seminatural_dry_grasslands.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/habitats/pdf/6210_Seminatural_dry_grasslands.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/habitats/pdf/6210_Seminatural_dry_grasslands.pdf

7

6230 * Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas (and submountain areas, in Continental Europe)



Habitat summary

The assessment of Italy led to the overall conservation status of this priority habitat type in the Alpine region being unfavourable-bad and deteriorating. In the Alpine biogeographical region habitat 6230 is distributed in the Pyrenees, Alps, Apennines, Dinaric Mountains, Carpathians, and mountains of Bulgaria. The largest part of the habitat area was reported by Romania (50.6 % of habitat area in Alpine region). Improving the conservation status of the habitat requires in particular regular grazing or mowing of suitable intensity and restoration of abandoned grasslands. The habitat in general requires extensive grazing that prevents invasion by trees and scrub, but is not so intensive as to cause the eutrophication of the habitat. Mowing is also a feasible technique. For regular management, agricultural subsidies can be used. Restoration includes removal of shrubs and trees and alien species and the introduction of suitable agricultural management. Habitat restoration is needed in Austria and Italy, because the actual area is smaller than the reference value.

Habitat description

Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas (and submountain areas in Continental Europe) are compact, dry or medium-humid grasslands with the characteristic grass Nardus stricta. Closed, dry or mesophile perennial Nardus grasslands occupy siliceous soils. Vegetation is highly varied, but the variation is characterised by continuity. Species-rich sites should be interpreted as sites which are remarkable for a high number of species. In general, the habitats which have become irreversibly degraded through overgrazing should be excluded.


The main distribution in the Alpine biogeographical region is related to the Pyrenees, Alps, Dinaric Mountains, and Western Carpathians. The habitat also occurs in Sweden, Romania, Bulgaria, and the Apennines.

8


Country Habitat area /km2/

Coverage /%/

Number of sites

Austria 40-250 11-70 36

Bulgaria 381.70 99 9

Croatia 14.26 N/A 6

France 200-254.69 36-46 62

Germany 1.24 95 11

Italy 364.28 71 209

Poland 3-5 60-100 17

Romania 1,000-2,000 45-91 23

Slovakia 100-140 50-70 44

Slovenia 64.40 89 7

Spain 45.00 70 8

Sweden 0.90 90 8



The assessment of Italy led to the overall conservation status of this habitat type in the Alpine biogeographical region being unfavourable-bad and deteriorating. Poland and Sweden also concluded unfavourable-bad. France and Romania indicated favourable conservation status; five other countries conclude unfavourable-inadequate status. The overall assessment changed from unfavourable-inadequate in the previous period to unfavourable-bad. However, this is not a genuine change, but is due to new knowledge and the use of different methods. However, the change in trend from stable to negative in Germany and Slovenia was reported as genuine.

9





Nature of change





The countries reported a broad range of pressures, the most important being abandonment of pastoral systems and mowing as well as fertilisation. The main pressures and threats are either abandonment of grazing (linked to succession) or agricultural intensification (linked to fertilisation and intensive grazing). This habitat can also suffer from afforestation, trampling, skiing complexes, removal of plants, outdoor sport, leisure and recreational activities, and forest planting on open ground.

10


A01 Cultivation M

A02.01 Agricultural intensification H H

A03.03 Abandonment / lack of mowing M M

A04 Grazing H M

A04.01 Intensive grazing H M M

A04.01.05 Intensive mixed animal grazing M

A04.03 Abandonment of pastoral systems, lack of grazing M M H M H H M

A05.01 Animal breeding, M


A07 Use of biocides, hormones and chemicals L

A08 Fertil isation H M H H H L

B01 Forest planting on open ground L H L M M L

B01.02 Artificial planting on open ground (non-native trees) M L


C01.01.01 Sand and gravel quarries L

D01 Roads, paths and railroads M

D01.02 Roads, motorways M

E01 Urbanised areas, human habitation M M

E04 Structures, buildings in the landscape M

F04 Taking / Removal of terrestrial plants, general M M L

G01 Outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities M L M

G01.02 Walking, horseriding and non-motorised vehicles L

G01.03 Motorised vehicles M

G01.04.01 Mountaineering & rock climbing L

G01.06 Skiing, off-piste M

G02 Sport and leisure structures M M

G02.02 Skiing complex M H

G05.01 Trampling, overuse H M

H05.01 Garbage and solid waste M

H07 Other forms of pollution H

J02.01 Landfil l , land reclamation and drying out, general M

J02.04 Flooding modifications M

J02.05 Modification of hydrographic functioning, general M

J03.02 Anthropogenic reduction of habitat connectivity L

K01.01 Erosion M L

K01.02 Silting up M

K01.03 Drying out M

K02 Biocenotic evolution, succession H M M

K02.02 Accumulation of organic material L

K06 Other forms or mixed forms of interspecific floral competition M Legend: L Low intensity M Medium intensity H High intensity

The most important measure proposed is the maintenance of grasslands. Two or more countries also proposed establishing protected areas or sites, adapting crop production, other agriculture-related measures, regulation of natural resources and land exploitation, management of landscape features, and other spatial measures.

11



2.0 Other agriculture-related measures M H M M H

2.1 Maintaining grasslands and other open habitats H H L H M H H H H H

2.2 Adapting crop production H M M H

4.2 Restoring/improving the hydrological regime M


6.1 Establish protected areas/sites H M H H L H

6.3 Legal protection of habitats and species H NA

6.4 Manage landscape features M H

9.1 Regulating/Management exploitation of natural resources on land H H Legend: L Low importance M Medium importance H High importance


The habitat type was selected for the first Alpine seminar because of its high Priority Index value. Habitat 6230 scored 198 because of high values in all three criteria. The habitat occurs in eleven countries (criterion A). Unfavourable-bad overall conservation status was reported by three countries (Italy, Poland, and Sweden); unfavourable-inadequate status was reported by five countries, and unknown status by one country (Spain). Six countries reported negative trends (criterion C).



Improving the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region requires in particular regular management of suitable intensity and restoration of abandoned grasslands. Grazing and mowing are the most frequent recommendations for the management of the habitat. Appropriate grazing intensity and organisation varies considerably across European regions and countries. The habitat in general requires extensive grazing which prevents invasion by trees and scrub, but which is not so intensive as to cause the eutrophication of the habitat. Mowing is also a feasible technique which is applied mostly on the lower altitude sites. In some regions it is also usual to combine grazing and mowing. Additional fertilisation is usually prohibited on the habitat or is very restricted, because it can cause the eutrophication of the habitat and may induce a change towards mesic grasslands (Galvánek & Janák, 2008). For regular management, agricultural subsidies can be used. If necessary, several restoration measures may be applied together; their application is generally much more complicated than regular management. This includes removal of shrubs and trees, removal of any alien species (including invasive ones), and starting of suitable agricultural management. The management will probably be more intensive in the transitional period; later it should be intense enough for long-term maintenance of the habitat. The grazing intensity should be determined based on site conditions. Habitat restoration is needed in Austria and Italy, because the actual area is smaller than the reference value. More knowledge about habitat structure and functions in Spain is needed.

Links


Galvánek, D. & Janák, M. 2008: Management of Natura 2000 habitats. 6230 *Species-rich Nardus grasslands. European Commission, Technical Report 2008 14/24, 20 pp.

12

6410 Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)



Habitat summary

The assessments of France, Italy, Sweden, and Slovenia led to the overall conservation status in the Alpine region being unfavourable-bad. Habitat 6410 is widespread in the Pyrenees, Alps, Dinaric Mountains, Carpathians, and the mountains of Bulgaria and Scandinavia. Romania reported the largest habitat area (85.9 %). Improving the conservation status of the habitat requires in particular the management of surface and groundwater. Habitat maintenance requires regular mowing, once a year, at a later time than mesophilous meadows. Restoration measures include removal of scrub and trees, removal of invasive species, and restoration of the hydraulic regime. Habitat restoration is needed in Italy, Austria, France, Slovenia, and Slovakia, because the habitat area is smaller than the reference value.

Habitat description

Molinia meadows of plain to montane levels, on more or less wet nutrient-poor soils (nitrogen, phosphorus). They stem from extensive management, sometimes with a mowing late in the year, or they correspond to a deteriorated stage of draining peat bogs. Two types are distinguished: 1) Molinia meadows on neutro-alkaline to calcareous soils with a fluctuating water table, relatively rich in species (Eu-Molinion); soil is sometimes peaty and becomes dry in summer; and 2) Molinia meadows on more acid soils of the Junco-Molinion (Juncion acutiflori) except species-poor meadows or on degraded peaty soils. In some regions, these grasslands are in close contact with Nardetalia communities. For the Molinia meadows of river valleys, a transition toward Cnidion dubii alliance is observed.


The habitat is widespread in the Pyrenees, Alps, Dinaric Mountains, Carpathians, and the mountains of Bulgaria and Scandinavia. It is absent in the Apennines. A relatively high proportion of the habitat area is located in Natura 2000 sites; the entire habitat area is protected in the Natura 2000 network in Italy and Sweden.

13


Country Habitat area /km2/

Coverage /%/

Number of sites

Austria 10-15 10-15 46

Bulgaria 3.66 97 4

Croatia 11.66 N/A 15

France 20-30 31-46 46

Germany 4.28 43 21

Italy 40.89 100 114

Poland 0.005-0.02 0.5-2 1

Romania 1,000-1,500 59-88 15

Slovakia 0.4-0.6 14-21 19

Slovenia 45.00 90 12

Spain 0.43 34 38

Sweden 3.20 100 12



The assessments of France, Italy, Sweden, and Slovenia led to the overall conservation status of this habitat type in the Alpine biogeographical region being unfavourable-bad. Four countries – Austria, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Poland – indicated unfavourable-inadequate status; the situation of the habitat is favourable in Germany, Spain, and Romania. Knowledge of habitat structure and functions is not sufficient in Austria, Germany, and Spain, which assessed this parameter as unknown. The overall conservation status for the region has not changed from the previous reporting. The overall qualifier changed from stable to negative – six countries indicated this change, but only two (Austria and Slovenia) consider it genuine.

14





Nature of change





Countries reported a very high number of different pressures. The main pressures are modification of cultivation practices (lack of mowing or grazing or, on the contrary, intensification and fertilisation), grassland removal for arable land, vegetation succession, human-induced changes in hydraulic conditions (including water abstractions and drying-out), groundwater pollution, but also urbanisation, discharges and landfills, quarries, and forest plantations.

15


A01 Cultivation M

A02 Modification of cultivation practices M M H L

A02.01 Agricultural intensification H L H

A02.03 Grassland removal for arable land H M

A03 Mowing / cutting of grassland H

A03.01 Intensive mowing or intensification L H

A03.02 Non intensive mowing M

A03.03 Abandonment / lack of mowing H M M H M

A04 Grazing M M L

A04.01 Intensive grazing M L

A04.01.01 Intensive cattle grazing L

A04.01.03 Intensive horse grazing M

A04.02 Non intensive grazing M

A04.03 Abandonment of pastoral systems, lack of grazing M H



A07 Use of biocides, hormones and chemicals M L

A08 Fertil isation M M M L H L

A10 Restructuring agricultural land holding M

B01 Forest planting on open ground H M M


C01 Mining and quarrying H

C01.01 Sand and gravel extraction M

D01 Roads, paths and railroads L M

D01.01 Paths, tracks, cycling tracks M

D01.02 Roads, motorways L M

D02.01 Electricity and phone lines L

D05 Improved access to site M

E01 Urbanised areas, human habitation M M H

E01.01 Continuous urbanisation M

E01.03 Dispersed habitation L M

E02 Industrial or commercial areas L M

E03 Discharges H

E04.01 Agricultural structures, buildings in the landscape M M

G01 Outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities L M

G01.03.02 Off-road motorized driving L

G02 Sport and leisure structures L

G02.01 Golf course L



H01 Pollution to surface waters (l imnic & terrestrial, marine & brackish) M

H01.03 Other point source pollution to surface water L

H01.04 Diffuse pollution to surface waters via strom overlows or urban run-off L

H02 Pollution to groundwater (point sources and diffuse sources) H L

H02.06 Diffuse groundwater pollution due to agricultural and forestry activities M

H05 Soil pollution and solid waste (excluding discharges) M L


I01 Invasive non-native species L L

J01 Fire and fire suppression L

J02 Human induced changes in hydraulic conditions L H H L

J02.01 Landfil l , land reclamation and drying out, general H H L

J02.01.02 Reclamation of land from sea, estuary or marsh L

J02.01.03 Infil l ing of ditches, dykes, ponds, pools, marshes or pits M L

J02.05 Modification of hydrographic functioning, general L

J02.07 Water abstractions from groundwater M

J02.10 Management of aquatic and bank vegetation for drainage purposes L

K01.01 Erosion L M

K01.03 Drying out L

K02 Biocenotic evolution, succession H M

K02.01 Species composition change (succession) L M

K04.01 Competition (flora) L

M01 Changes in abiotic conditions M

M01.02 Droughts and less precipitations M Legend: L Low intensity M Medium intensity H High intensity

16

All countries reported maintenance of grasslands as the most important proposed measure. A large number of countries also indicated the establishment of protected areas or sites as highly necessary. Other measures proposed as also being highly necessary are: adapting crop production, restoration of hydrological regime, management of landscape features, legal protection of habitats and species, regulation of natural resources and land exploitation, and other spatial measures.


2.0 Other agriculture-related measures M L

2.1 Maintaining grasslands and other open habitats H H L M H H H H H H

2.2 Adapting crop production L H H

4.0 Other wetland-related measures H

4.2 Restoring/improving the hydrological regime H M

6.0 Other spatial measures M

6.1 Establish protected areas/sites H H H L H H

6.3 Legal protection of habitats and species H NA M

6.4 Manage landscape features L H H

9.1 Regulating/Management exploitation of natural resources on land H

Legend: L Low importance M Medium importance H High importance


The habitat type was selected for the first Alpine seminar because of its high Priority Index value. Habitat 6410 scored 187 because of high values in criteria A and B. The habitat occurs in eleven countries (criterion A). Unfavourable-bad overall conservation status was reported by four countries (France, Italy, Sweden, and Slovenia), and unfavourable-inadequate status by four countries. Countries reported also negative trends in four cases (criterion C).



For the improvement of the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region, the management of surface and groundwater is especially crucial for this habitat type. Drainage and fertiliser application should be avoided. Habitat maintenance requires regular mowing; these grasslands should be mown once a year, and at a later time than the mesophilous meadows (July–August). It is recommended that these meadows are mown by light machinery, adjusted to wetland conditions. The hay should be collected and removed from the area after mowing. Fertilisation and grazing are not recommended; very low-intensity grazing in autumn is acceptable (Hegedüšová et al., 2015). Restoration measures include removal of scrub and trees from abandoned sites, removal of invasive species and – if needed – restoration of the hydraulic regime. The regular management of the habitat could be funded from agricultural subsidies; the restoration measures require additional funds. Habitat restoration is needed in Italy, Austria, France, Slovenia, and Slovakia – these countries reported a smaller habitat area than the reference value.

Links http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/article17/reports2012/habitat/summary/?period=3&group=Grasslands&

subject=6410&region=ALP Hegedüšová, K., Ružičková, H. & Janák, M. 2015: Manažmentový model pre bezkolencové lúky. - In:

Šefferová Stanová, V. (ed.): Manažmentové modely pre údržbu, ochranu a obnovu mokraďových biotopov. – Štátna ochrana prírody Slovenskej republiky, Banská Bystrica: 85-102.

17

6430 Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels



Habitat summary The assessments of Italy, Bulgaria, and Spain led to the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region being unfavourable-inadequate and stable. In the Alpine biogeographical region habitat 6430 is distributed in Scandinavia, the Pyrenees, Alps, Dinaric Mountains, Carpathians, Apennines, and the mountains of Bulgaria. Romania reported the largest habitat area (59.9 %). Improving the conservation status of the habitat requires management of low intensity and frequency; maintenance or restoration of the hydrological regime is needed. Ideal management is irregular mowing once every 3–5 years. This blocks the encroachment of shrubs, and does not suppress the dominant forbs typical of the habitat. More frequent mowing may lead to changes in the species composition towards communities of the Calthenion sub-alliance. Grazing is not very suitable for this type of vegetation. The removal of invasive alien species could be necessary as well. Habitat restoration is needed in Spain, which reported a smaller habitat area than the reference value.

Habitat description Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels grow on wet and nitrogen-rich woodland and water-course edges, belonging to the vegetation alliances Senecion fluviatilis, Aegopodion podagrariae, Convolvulion sepium and Filipendulion, or in montane to alpine levels to the vegetation class Betulo-Adenostyletea. These tall herb communities could also develop in wet meadows, left to lie fallow, without any cutting.

Distribution in the Alpine region and coverage by Natura 2000 network The habitat is broadly distributed in Scandinavia (Sweden; scattered in Finland), the Pyrenees, Alps, Dinaric Mountains, Carpathians, Apennines, and the mountains of Bulgaria. The habitat is quite well represented in the Natura 2000 network (more than 50 % of habitat area). The entire national habitat area is located in Natura 2000 sites in Bulgaria, Italy, and Slovenia; and a large part is located in Natura 2000 sites in Finland, Romania, and Spain.

18


Country Habitat area /km2/ Coverage /%/ Number of sites

Austria 25-50 13-25 72

Bulgaria 48.97 100 11

Croatia 0.57 N/A 13 Finland 7-10 70-100 4

France N/A N/A 96

Germany 13.65 57 39

Italy 156.85 100 234

Poland 10.00 91 22

Romania 1,000-1,500 59-88 48

Slovakia 4-6 20-30 111


Spain 1.64 96 36

Sweden 55.00 100 46



The assessments of Italy, Bulgaria, and Spain led to the overall conservation status of this habitat type in the Alpine biogeographical region being unfavourable-inadequate and stable. The range and habitat area are considered favourable. Missing knowledge was indicated for individual parameters by Austria, Spain, and France. The overall conservation status for the region has not changed against previous reporting.

19





Nature of change





The countries reported an extremely broad range of pressures. The main pressures are agricultural intensification (fertilisation, use of chemicals and related surface-water pollution, grassland removal for arable land), management of aquatic and bank vegetation for drainage purposes, removal of hedges and scrub, invasive non-native species, forest management, and sports and recreational activities.

20

Code Pressure name AT BG DE ES FI FR IT PL RO SE SI SK

A01 Cultivation M L

A02.01 Agricultural intensification H

A02.03 Grassland removal for arable land H M

A03.01 Intensive mowing or intensification L


A03.03 Abandonment / lack of mowing M

A04 Grazing M M

A04.01 Intensive grazing M L

A04.01.02 Intensive sheep grazing L


A07 Use of biocides, hormones and chemicals M

A08 Fertil isation H M L

A10.01 Removal of hedges and copses or scrub H

B01 Forest planting on open ground L L

B02 Forest and Plantation management & use H M

B06 Grazing in forests/ woodland M

C01.01 Sand and gravel extraction M M




E01 Urbanised areas, human habitation M


E01.02 Discontinuous urbanisation M

E01.03 Dispersed habitation L

E02 Industrial or commercial areas M

E03 Discharges M


E04.01 Agricultural structures, buildings in the landscape M

G01 Outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities H M


G01.04.01 Mountaineering & rock climbing L

G01.06 Skiing, off-piste L

G02 Sport and leisure structures M


G05.01 Trampling, overuse M M

H01 Pollution to surface waters (l imnic & terrestrial, marine & brackish) H


H05 Soil pollution and solid waste (excluding discharges) M


I01 Invasive non-native species H M M

J01 Fire and fire suppression H

J02 Human induced changes in hydraulic conditions M L

J02.01 Landfil l , land reclamation and drying out, general L

J02.01.02 Reclamation of land from sea, estuary or marsh H

J02.01.03 Infil l ing of ditches, dykes, ponds, pools, marshes or pits M L

J02.05 Modification of hydrographic functioning, general M M L

J02.05.02 Modifying structures of inland water courses M

J02.10 Management of aquatic and bank vegetation for drainage purposes H L

K01.01 Erosion L M L

K01.03 Drying out L

K02 Biocenotic evolution, succession M

K02.01 Species composition change (succession) L

K04.01 Competition (flora) M

L05 Collapse of terrain, landslide M

M01 Changes in abiotic conditions M

M01.02 Droughts and less precipitations M

X No threats or pressures X X Legend: L Low intensity M Medium intensity H High intensity

21

The maintenance of grasslands and establishing of protected areas or sites are the most important measures proposed. Two or more countries also proposed adapting crop production, other agriculture-related measures, restoring of hydrological regime, and other spatial measures. Legal protection of habitats and species, managing water abstraction, regulation of natural resources and land exploitation, management of landscape features, and forestry measures (not specified) were also mentioned as necessary.

Code Measure name AT BG DE ES FI FR IT PL SE SI SK

1.1 No measures needed for the conservation of the habitat/species L X

1.2 Measures needed, but not implemented NA

2.0 Other agriculture-related measures M M NA

2.1 Maintaining grasslands and other open habitats H M H M H H

2.2 Adapting crop production M M

3.0 Other forestry-related measures H

4.1 Restoring/improving water quality H

4.2 Restoring/improving the hydrological regime H H

4.3 Managing water abstraction H


6.1 Establish protected areas/sites H M M M H H H

6.2 Establishing wilderness areas/ allowing succession M


6.4 Manage landscape features H

9.1 Regulating/Management exploitation of natural resources on land H Legend: L Low importance M Medium importance H High importance


The habitat type was selected for the first Alpine seminar because of its high Priority Index value. Habitat 6430 scored 72 because of high values in both criteria A and B. The habitat occurs in twelve countries (criterion A). Three countries (Bulgaria, Spain, and Italy) reported unfavourable-inadequate status.



For the improvement of the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region, management of low intensity and frequency and the maintenance or restoration of the hydrological regime are needed. Ideal management is irregular mowing once every 3–5 years. This blocks the encroachment of shrubs, and does not suppress the dominant forbs typical of the habitat. More frequent mowing may lead to changes in the species composition towards communities of the Calthenion sub-alliance. Grazing is not very suitable for this type of vegetation (Galvánek et al., 2011). The removal of invasive alien species could be necessary as well. Habitat restoration is needed in Spain, which reported a smaller habitat area than the reference value.

Links


Galvánek, D., Hrivnák, R. & Janák, M. 2011: Tall-herb communities on wet grasslands. – In: Šefferová Stanová, V. & Plassman Čierna M. (eds): Management models for grassland habitats. _ Daphne, Bratislava: 22-23.

22

6510 Lowland hay meadows (Alopecurus pratensis, Sanguisorba officinalis)



Habitat summary

The assessments of Italy, Spain, Slovenia, Austria, France, and Germany led to the overall conservation status in the Alpine region being unfavourable-bad and deteriorating. In the Alpine biogeographical region habitat 6510 is distributed in the Pyrenees, Alps, Apennines, Carpathians, Dinaric Mountains, and the mountains of Bulgaria. The largest proportion of habitat area (37.8 %) was reported by Slovakia. Improving the conservation status of the habitat requires suitable habitat management (non-intensive mowing) and maintenance or improvement of the hydrological regime. The priority conservation measure is a combination of mowing once or twice a year, with occasional extensive grazing of localities with a high biomass production. The habitat restoration should focus on reducing nutrient load, restoration of the water regime, removal of scrub and trees from abandoned sites, and the introduction of regular management. Restoration measures are needed especially in Austria, France, Italy, and Slovenia, which reported a smaller habitat area than the reference value.

Habitat description

Species-rich hay meadows on lightly to moderately fertilised soils of the plain to submontane levels, belonging to the Arrhenatherion and the Brachypodio-Centaureion nemoralis alliances. These extensive grasslands are rich in flowers and are not cut before the grasses flower, and then only once or twice per year. Wet to dry sub-types occur. If management practices become intensive with heavy applications of fertiliser, the species diversity rapidly declines.


In the Alpine biogeographical region the habitat is distributed in the Pyrenees, Alps, Apennines, Carpathians, Dinaric Mountains, and the mountains of Bulgaria. The habitat has quite a low representation in the Natura 2000 network; only in a few countries is a large part of the national habitat area located in Natura 2000 sites: Bulgaria (61 %), Germany (70 %), and Slovenia (79 %).

23


Country Area /km2/

Coverage /%/

Number of sites

Austria 20-25 20-25 32

Bulgaria 8.14 61 9

Croatia 27.10 N/A 4

France 25.00 45 31

Germany 2.46 70 11

Italy 74.77 12 142

Poland 15-20 8-10 22

Romania 400-500 31-38 8

Slovakia 180-320 11-19 151


Spain 78.00 26 53

Total 938-1,188 21-27 468 The table above shows the size of the habitat area in Natura 2000 sites and its proportion compared to habitat area in the whole biogeographical region (‘coverage’) as reported by MS in the 2013 Article 17 report. The number of sites was extracted from the 2015 Natura 2000 database.


The assessments of Italy, Spain, Slovenia, Austria, France, and Germany led to the overall conservation status of this habitat type in the Alpine biogeographical region being unfavourable-bad and deteriorating. Bulgaria, Romania, and Slovakia reported favourable conservation status, while Poland indicated unfavourable-inadequate status. The overall conservation status for the region has changed from unfavourable-inadequate to unfavourable-bad, but this change is assessed mostly as not genuine. The change of overall qualifier from stable to negative is genuine as indicated by Germany, France, and Slovenia.

24





Nature of change





The countries reported a broad range of pressures. Pressures and threats related to agricultural abandonment are: abandonment of grazing and mowing, vegetation succession, and accumulation of organic material. Other important pressures related to agricultural intensification are: intensive grazing and mowing, fertilisation, grassland removal for arable land, and cultivation. Other important pressures include: forest planting, sand and gravel extraction, roads, paths, improved access, urban habitation, and sport and recreation.

25

Code Pressure name AT BG DE ES FR IT PL RO SI SK

A01 Cultivation H M M

A02 Modification of cultivation practices H H L L

A02.01 Agricultural intensification M H

A02.03 Grassland removal for arable land H M M H

A03 Mowing / cutting of grassland H H

A03.01 Intensive mowing or intensification H L H H


A03.03 Abandonment / lack of mowing M M M

A04 Grazing H H M L L

A04.01 Intensive grazing M M M

A04.03 Abandonment of pastoral systems, lack of grazing M L

A06.02 Perennial non-timber crops M

A07 Use of biocides, hormones and chemicals L L

A08 Fertil isation H H M H M M

A10 Restructuring agricultural land holding M

B01 Forest planting on open ground M


B02 Forest and Plantation management & use M



D01.02 Roads, motorways L M L


E01 Urbanised areas, human habitation M M M M



E03 Discharges M



F04 Taking / Removal of terrestrial plants, general M

G01 Outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities L M



G02 Sport and leisure structures L



G05.01 Trampling, overuse L




I02 Problematic native species L

J02 Human induced changes in hydraulic conditions M

K01.01 Erosion L M

K01.03 Drying out L

K02 Biocenotic evolution, succession L M M

K02.01 Species composition change (succession) M


Most countries identified maintaining grasslands and other open habitats as highly necessary measures. The establishment of protected areas is considered also highly relevant. Other proposed measures include legal protection of the habitat, management of landscape features, and regulation of natural resources exploitation.

26

Code Measure name AT BG DE ES FR IT PL RO SI SK

2.0 Other agriculture-related measures M

2.1 Maintaining grasslands and other open habitats H H L H M H H H

2.2 Adapting crop production H M M NA

6.0 Other spatial measures M NA

6.1 Establish protected areas/sites H H NA H H

6.3 Legal protection of habitats and species H NA M

6.4 Manage landscape features M H

7.4 Specific single species or species group management measures L

9.1 Regulating/Management exploitation of natural resources on land H M Legend: L Low importance M Medium importance H High importance


The habitat type was selected for the first Alpine seminar because of its high Priority Index value. Habitat 6510 scored 170 because of high values in all three criteria. The habitat occurs in ten countries (criterion A). Unfavourable-bad overall conservation status was reported by six countries, and unfavourable-inadequate status by one country (Poland). Countries also reported negative trends in five cases (criterion C).



For the improvement of the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region, it is in particular necessary to ensure suitable habitat management (non-intensive mowing) and maintenance or improvement of the hydrological regime. The habitat depends on a balance between water regime, nutrient regime, and vegetation management. The water regime is very important for this habitat type – it needs an aerated root zone during the growing season and adequate water supply in early summer. Because the floods also supply the habitat with nutrients, the quality of surface water is crucial – especially its nitrogen and phosphorus content. Therefore, reducing diffuse pollution of surface waters in the wider surroundings is important. The priority conservation measure is a combination of mowing once or twice a year, with occasional extensive grazing taking place in localities with a high biomass production. An important principle to follow is to leave the hay to dry on the site, so that the organisms inhabiting it can get away. In the case of agriculturally unused meadows, it is necessary to maintain at least the rotating method of management – mowing, grazing and fallow. Extensive grazing by cattle or sheep is the most appropriate for larger areas. Based on experimental observations, a short period of grazing is recommended (max. 4 weeks). Even more appropriate is the rotation of grazing and mowing (Škodová et al., 2011). Habitat restoration should focus on reducing nutrient load (e.g. by second cut), restoration of the water regime, removal of scrub and trees from abandoned sites, and the introduction of regular management. Restoration measures are especially needed in Austria, France, Italy, and Slovenia, which reported a smaller habitat area than the reference value. Conversion to other types of land use (ploughing, urbanisation) should be avoided.

Links

http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/article17/reports2012/habitat/summary/?period=3&group=Grasslands&subject=6510&region=ALP Škodová, I., Ružičková, H. & Janák, M. 2011: Lowland hay meadows. – In: Šefferová Stanová, V.

Plassman Čierna M. (eds.): Management models for grassland habitats. Daphne, Bratislava: 14–15.

27

6520 Mountain hay meadows



Habitat summary

The overall conservation status in the Alpine region is unfavourable-bad and deteriorating; this assessment was due to the reporting of five countries, with Italy having the highest impact on the conclusion. In the Alpine biogeographical region habitat 6520 is widespread in the Pyrenees, Alps, Dinaric Mountains, Carpathians, and the mountains of Bulgaria; it has more discontinuous distribution in Sweden. Romania reported the largest part of the habitat area (73.1 %). Improving the conservation status of the habitat requires suitable management on a large spatial scale and avoidance of intensive management. The most effective management is the combination of mowing once a year with subsequent grazing by small groups of cattle. Restoration is especially needed in France, Austria, Italy, Slovenia, and Slovakia, where the reported habitat area is smaller than the reference value. Restoration measures include removal of scrub, trees and dead herb biomass and the start of mowing and grazing.

Habitat description

Species-rich mesophile hay meadows of the montane and sub-alpine levels (mostly above 600 metres) usually dominated by Trisetum flavescens and with Heracleum sphondylium, Viola cornuta, Astrantia major, Carum carvi, Crepis mollis, C. pyrenaica, Bistorta major, Silene dioica, S. vulgaris, Campanula glomerata, Salvia pratensis, Centaurea nemoralis, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Crocus albiflorus, Geranium phaeum, G. sylvaticum, Narcissus poeticus, Malva moschata, Valeriana repens, Trollius europaeus, Pimpinella major, Muscari botryoides, Lilium bulbiferum, Thlaspi caerulescens, Viola tricolor ssp. subalpina, Phyteuma halleri, P. orbiculare, Primula elatior, and many others.


The habitat is broadly distributed in the Pyrenees, Alps, Dinaric Mountains, Western Carpathians and the mountains of Bulgaria. Distribution is more discontinuous in Sweden and Romania. The habitat is quite well represented in the Natura 2000 network; the entire national habitat area is located in Natura 2000 sites in France.

28


Country Area /km2/

Coverage /%/

Number of sites

Austria 10.00 20 29

Bulgaria 148.03 87 14

Croatia 0.31 N/A 4

France 55.00 100 70

Germany 7.78 60 15

Italy 149.69 22 156

Poland 100-150 33-50 16

Romania 1,000-3,000 26-79 43

Slovakia 7-10 56-79 26

Slovenia 80.00 79 6

Spain 6.31 49 10

Sweden 1.80 62 32

Total 1,566-3,619 30-70 421 The table above shows the size of the habitat area in Natura 2000 sites and its proportion compared to habitat area in the whole biogeographical region (‘coverage’) as reported by MS in the 2013 Article 17 report. The number of sites was extracted from the 2015 Natura 2000 database.


The overall conservation status of this habitat type in the Alpine biogeographical region is unfavourable-bad and deteriorating, with all parameters except Range considered as unfavourable-bad. The overall assessment is driven by Italy; other countries also reported unfavourable-bad status: Austria, Spain, France, and Sweden. Romania indicated favourable status. Other countries reported unfavourable-inadequate status. The value of habitat area reported by Romania seems unrealistic, especially in relation to the map of distribution provided. The overall conservation status for the region has not changed against previous reporting. The overall qualifier changed from stable to negative, but this change is not considered genuine, but is due to better knowledge and the use of different assessment methods. Only Germany indicated a genuine change of overall qualifier.

29





Nature of change





The main pressures are modification of cultivation practices (agricultural intensification in mowing or grazing and grassland removal for arable land, or, on the contrary, lack of mowing or grazing linked to vegetation succession), cultivation itself, fertilisation, and human-induced changes in hydraulic conditions.

30


A01 Cultivation H L

A02 Modification of cultivation practices M H H M M L

A02.01 Agricultural intensification H H

A02.03 Grassland removal for arable land H

A03 Mowing / cutting of grassland H

A03.01 Intensive mowing or intensification H L M


A03.03 Abandonment / lack of mowing H M H H

A04 Grazing H H M M

A04.01 Intensive grazing M M M

A04.01.04 Intensive goat grazing M

A04.03 Abandonment of pastoral systems, lack of grazing M H M

A08 Fertil isation H M M M M M

B01 Forest planting on open ground M L






E01 Urbanised areas, human habitation M M L


E01.02 Discontinuous urbanisation M


E04 Structures, buildings in the landscape L


G01 Outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities L




G02.02 Skiing complex M M





I02 Problematic native species M

J02 Human induced changes in hydraulic conditions L H

K01.01 Erosion L M

K01.03 Drying out L

K02 Biocenotic evolution, succession L H M M

K02.01 Species composition change (succession) M L

K04.01 Competition (flora) L


The maintenance of grasslands is reported as the most important proposed measure. Five countries also proposed establishing protected areas or sites. Other important measures include adapting crop production, other agriculture-related measures, legal protection of habitats and species, regulation of natural resources and land exploitation, and other spatial measures.

31




2.1 Maintaining grasslands and other open habitats H H L H M H H H H M

2.2 Adapting crop production M H

6.0 Other spatial measures M NA

6.1 Establish protected areas/sites H H H L H


6.4 Manage landscape features H



The habitat type was selected for the first Alpine seminar because of its high Priority Index value. Habitat 6520 scored 253 because of high values in all three criteria. The habitat occurs in eleven countries (criterion A). The unfavourable-bad overall conservation status was reported by five countries; unfavourable-inadequate status was also reported by five countries. Countries reported in total eight negative trends.



For the improvement of the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region, it is crucial to implement suitable management measures on a large spatial scale and to avoid intensive management, including fertilisation. The most effective way of maintaining the species structure of mountain hay meadows is the combination of mowing once a year with subsequent grazing. Grazing, however, should not be done by small groups of cattle grazing the vegetation for a short time at the beginning of the growing season, and then after the first or second mowing (the autumn grazing of fresh grass). Mulching twice a year, while leaving the biomass on the site, is the preferred way of maintaining the meadows with a lower biomass production at lower altitudes, especially where the hay has no use. It is not suitable for grasslands at higher altitudes with frequent rains where decomposition of a large volume of biomass is slower. If the meadows are only mown, it is appropriate to fertilise them (Hegedüšová et al., 2011). Restoration measures include removal of scrub, trees and dead herb biomass and the introduction of mowing and grazing. Restoration is especially needed in France, Austria, Italy, Slovenia, and Slovakia, where the reported habitat area is smaller than the reference value.

Links


Hegedüšová, K., Ružičková, H. & Janák, M. 2011: Mountain hay meadows. – In: Šefferová Stanová, V. & Plassman Čierna M. (eds): Management models for grassland habitats. Daphne, Bratislava: 16-17.

http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/article17/reports2012/habitat/summary/?period=3&group=Grasslands&

http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/article17/reports2012/habitat/summary/?period=3&group=Grasslands&

32

62D0 Oro-Moesian acidophilous grasslands

Selected for first round of Biogeographical Seminar

x Selected using ‘Low hanging fruit’ approach

Habitat summary

The assessment of Structure & functions in Bulgaria led to the overall conservation status in the Alpine region being unfavourable-inadequate. In the Alpine biogeographical region habitat 62D0 is distributed only in the mountains of Bulgaria. Improving the habitat conservation status requires improvement of the habitat structure and functions in Bulgaria. The regulation of grazing, monitoring of the habitat state, and implementation of the regulations for the national parks are mentioned by Roussakova (2015) as the main measures to be taken. The location of almost the entire habitat area in Natura 2000 sites and in National and Nature Parks could facilitate implementation of these measures.

Habitat description

Alpine and sub-alpine grasslands developed over crystalline rocks and other lime-deficient substrates or on decalcified soils at 1600–2900 m above sea level on high mountains of the Central Balkan Peninsula. The communities are dominated by grasses such as Festuca paniculata, Bellardiochloa violacea, Festuca airoides, Calamagrostis arundinacea, Fstuca nigrescens, and Agrostis capillaris. The Balkan endemics Festuca balcanica, F. riloensis, F. valida, Sesleria comosa and Carex bulgarica also occur in these communities.


Distributed in high mountains of the Central Balkan Peninsula, including the Balkan Range, Rila, Pirin, Slavyanka, the Central Rhodopes, Ossogovska Planina, and Belassitza. In the Alpine biogeographical region of the EU it is only found in Bulgaria. The habitat is very well represented in the Natura 2000 network – around 96 % of the habitat area is located in Natura 2000 sites in Bulgaria.


Country Area /km2/

Coverage /%/

Number of sites

Bulgaria 320.15 96 12

Total 320.15 96 12

The table above shows the size of the habitat area in Natura 2000 sites and its proportion compared to habitat area in the whole biogeographical region (‘coverage’) as reported by MS in the 2013 Article 17 report. The number of sites was extracted from the 2015 Natura 2000 database.

33


The conservation status in the Alpine region is unfavourable-inadequate and stable, in spite of the favourable range and area in the only reporting country, Bulgaria. The Parameters Structure & functions as well as Future prospects were assessed as unfavourable-inadequate. This habitat was reported for the first time in the Article 17 reporting for 2013; there are no data to identify changes. According to the Bulgarian Red Data Book (Roussakova, 2015), this habitat is vulnerable.





Nature of change





Bulgaria reported five pressures of medium intensity influencing this habitat type: intensive grazing, structures and buildings (also related to sport and recreation), waste disposal, and taking of plants. As specified in the Red Book of Bulgaria (Roussakova, 2015), the stands of this habitat were used as pastures. Until 15 years ago, as a result of overgrazing, they were replaced by the vegetation dominated by the grass Nardus stricta. After the intensity of the grazing decreased, besides restoration of original habitat, a revival of the shrub vegetation can be observed. Erosion is mentioned as a threat as well.

Code Pressure name BG

A04.01 Intensive grazing M


F04 Taking / Removal of terrestrial plants, general M

G02 Sport and leisure structures M

H05.01 Garbage and solid waste M Legend: L Low intensity M Medium intensity H High intensity

34

Bulgaria specified four measures, three of them are considered highly necessary: maintaining grasslands, establishing protected areas, and regulating/managing the exploitation of natural resources. Other, unspecified agriculture-related measures are also considered necessary.

Code Measure name BG


2.1 Maintaining grasslands and other open habitats H

6.1 Establish protected areas/sites H


Reason for selection as ‘Low Hanging Fruit’ (LHF) habitat in the Alpine region

Applying the methodology to identify LHF habitats in the Alpine region, habitat 62D0 had an LHF score of 1.036. This habitat type was classified as LHF because to achieve improvement, it is sufficient to change from a stable to an improving trend in the category U1 (unfavourable-inadequate). It is normally much easier to improve a trend than to achieve a change in category. The habitat type was also included as LHF because of its high representation in Natura 2000 sites (96.5 % of the habitat area) and the fact that only one parameter (Structure & functions) in one country (Bulgaria) needs to be improved in order to achieve overall improvement. In addition, Bulgaria did not report any pressure of high intensity.


For the improvement of the overall conservation status in the Alpine biogeographical region, improvement of the habitat structure and functions in Bulgaria is necessary. The pressures reported by Bulgaria should be addressed: intensive grazing, building activities in the high-mountain landscape, taking/removal of plants, sport and leisure activities, and solid waste. The regulation of grazing, monitoring of the habitat state, and implementation of the regulations for the national parks are mentioned by Roussakova (2015) as the main measures to be taken. The location of almost the entire habitat area in Natura 2000 sites and in National and Nature Parks could facilitate implementation of these measures.

Links

http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/article17/reports2012/habitat/summary/?period=3&group=Grasslands&subject=62D0&region=ALP

Roussakova, V. (2015): Subalpine acidophilic xerophytic grasslands. – In: Biserkov, V., Gussev, Ch. (eds): Red Data Book of the Republic of Bulgaria. Vol. 3 – Natural habitats. http://e-ecodb.bas.bg/rdb/en/vol3/27E4.html

http://e-ecodb.bas.bg/rdb/en/vol3/27E4.html

http://e-ecodb.bas.bg/rdb/en/vol3/27E4.html

annex vii - factsheets grassland habitat...

Documents