best life nature projects 2014

8/18/2019 Best LIFE Nature projects 2014

1/52

Environment

projects 2014Best LIFE Nature

LIFE Nature

B E S

T L

I F E N

A TU R E P R O J

E C T S


2/52

LIFE NATURE | B E S T L I F E N A T U R E P R O J E C T S 2 0 1 4

EUROPEAN COMMISSIONENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE-GENERAL

LIFE (“The Financial Instrument for the Environment and Climate Action” ) is a programme launched by the European Commissionand coordinated by the Environmen t and Climate Action Directorates-General . The Commission has delegated the implementa-tion of many components of the LIFE programme to the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME).

The contents of the publication “Best LIFE Nature Projects 2014” do not necessarily re ect the opinions of the institutions ofthe European Union.

Authors : João Pedro Silva (Nature and Biodiversity Senior Expert), Justin Toland (Editor), Jon Eldridge, Kirsten Heppner, TimHudson, Wendy Jones, Derek McGlynn, Stephen Nottingham, Joanne Potter (NEEMO GEIE), Christophe Thévignot (NEEMO GEIE,Communications Team Coordinator). Managing Editor : Hervé Martin (European Commission, Environment DG, LIFE Environ-ment Unit). LIFE Focus series coordination: Simon Goss (DG Environment, LIFE Communications Coordinator), Valerie O’Brien (En-vironment DG, Publications Coordinator). Technical assistance: Ruth Brauner (NEEMO GEIE) The following people also workedon this issue : Laszlo Becsy, Ioan Craciun, Muriel Drukman, Arnoud Heeres, Dorte Pardo-Lopez (DG Environment). Production:Monique Braem (NEEMO GEIE-AEIDL).Graphic design : Daniel Renders, Anita Cortés (NEEMO GEIE-AEIDL). Photos database :Sophie Brynart (NEEMO GEIE-AEIDL).Acknowledgements : Thanks to all LIFE project bene ciaries who contributed comments,photos and other useful material for this report. Photos : Unless otherwise speci ed; photos are from the respective projects.For reproduction or use of these photos, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders. Cover photo: LIFE07NAT/BG/000689/D.Gradinarov.

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Free publications:• via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);• at the European Commission’s representations or delegations. You can obtain their contact details on the Internet (http://

ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.

Priced publications:• via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).

Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the O cial Journal of the European Union and reports of cases before the Courtof Justice of the European Union):• via one of the sales agents of the Publications O ce of the European Union (http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/

index_en.htm).

Europe Direct is a service to help you nd answers to your questions about the European Union.Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

Luxembourg: Publications O ce of the European Union, 2015

ISBN 978-92-79-51702-0ISSN 2315-1412doi:10.2779/869829

© European Union, 2015Reuse authorised.

Printed in BelgiumPrinted on recycled paper that has been awarded the EU Ecolabel (http://ec.europa.eu/ecolabel/)


3/52


F O R E W O R D

Josefn OlssonPolicy ImplementationDepartment

Swedish EnvironmentalProtection Agency

T

his is the seventh year that the LIFE Nature Best Awards have been grantedto the most exemplary projects nanced within the framework of the Euro-

pean Union’s LIFE programme. To increase the pro le of the awards, this year theywere presented alongside the winners of the LIFE Environment Best Awards at aceremony at EU Green Week in Brussels.

It was a great honour to be asked to coordinate the process by which the National

Focal Points of the Member States selected the ‘Best of the Best’ LIFE Nature pro-

jects. For the second year in a row, the winners included LIFE Information and Com-munication (LIFE INF) projects with a nature conservation theme, as Dirk Schaapexplains below. We would like to thank our fellow National Focal Points for theircontribution. The “Best of the Best” projects - from Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and

Spain, as well as a Greek LIFE INF project - demonstrate exemplary ways of usingLIFE funding to restore habitats, conserve species and support biodiversity, in line

with the goals of EU nature and biodiversity policy.

Dirk SchaapLIFE Information &

Communication “Best of the Best”coordinator 2014Netherlands Ministry ofInfrastructure and theEnvironment

Foreword

A

s National Focal Point for the Netherlands, I had the privilege of coordinat-

ing the selection process for completed LIFE Information & Communication

(LIFE INF) projects. LIFE INF projects with a nature conservation theme were as-sessed according the following criteria: nature conservation impact; relevance toenvironmentally relevant issues; quality of communication actions; multiplier e ect;networking activities; innovative campaigning methods; impact on the target group;

and their regional, national, or international impact..

Amongst the many outstanding projects, we identi ed four deserving of specialrecognition. We selected one “Best of the Best” project: a far-reaching awareness

and education campaign about marine mammals in Greece. In addition, the three

“Best” projects successfully communicated important messages about sustainable

salmon shing (Finland), the Natura 2000 network (Czech Republic) and alterna-tives to invasive alien plant species in horticulture (Belgium).

As well as having a profound impact in their own right, these projects serve as anexample to those communicating nature conservation messages across the EU.

More e ective communication can multiple the impact of every euro spent on na-ture conservation, helping to safeguard the future of our natural capital.

P h o t o :

E u r o p e a n

C o m m

i s s i o n

P h o t o :

N a t u r v å r d s v e r

k e t

1


4/52

2

L I F E E N V I R O

N M E N T B E S T A W A R D W I N N E R S 2 0 1 3

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

LIFE08 NAT/E/000055 3

LIFE NATURE

BEST AWARD

WINNERS 2014

B E S

T L

I F E N

A TU R E P R O J

E C T S

LIFE08 NAT/E/000072 10

LIFE08 INF/B/000052 15

Foreword .......................................................... ...............................................1The LIFE Best Awards.............................................................................4

BEST OF THE BEST PROJECTS ......................................................... ....6

Bulgaria: Lifting the imperial eagle from the brink ............ ...7

Hungary: Captive breeding helps in meadow viperconservation...............................................................................................10

Spain: Restoring estuarine habitats affected by invasive

species .........................................................................................................13

Romania: Learning to live with brown bears ...........................17Greece: Spreading the word on marine mammals ..............20

BEST PROJECTS ................................................................. .......................24

Germany: Protecting bogs and Bronze Age heritage .........25

Greece: Conserving coastal dunes with junipers..................27Bulgaria: Engaging local support for plant flora network29Denmark: Securing the long-term future of priority

habitats on Helnæs ..............................................................................31

Spain: Coordinated river conservation in the Ter basin ....33

Latvia: Restoring raised bog habitats ........................................35

Romania: Conserving the lesser spotted eagle .....................37

Slovenia: Finding practical ways to live with wolves.........39Sweden: Managing invasive raccoon dogs to protectnative biodiversity .................................................................................41

Belgium: Preventing the spread of invasive ornamentalplants ............................................................................................................43

Czech Republic: Improving acceptance of Natura 2000 ...45

Finland: Promoting sustainable salmon fishing ...................47

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3578http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3576http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3501http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3554http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3554http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3501http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3576http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3578


5/523

6 LIFE07 NAT/D/000233

ReHa FederseemoorRestoration of habitats inthe Federsee bog (ReHaFederseemoor)

7 LIFE07 NAT/GR/000296

JUNICOAST Actions for the conserva-tion of coastal dunes with

Juniperus spp. in Crete andthe South Aegean

8 LIFE08 NAT/BG/000279

BulPlantNet A Pilot Network of SmallProtected Sites for PlantSpecies in Bulgaria Usingthe Plant Micro-reserveModel

9 LIFE08 NAT/DK/000465

TOTAL COVER HELNÆSRestoring semi-naturalhabitat types to a totalcover of site Helnæs

10 LIFE08 NAT/E/000072

Riparia-TerRecovery of riparian habi-tats of the Ter river

11 LIFE08 NAT/LV/000449

Raised BogsRestoration of Raised BogHabitats in the EspeciallyProtected Nature Areas ofLatvia

12 LIFE08 NAT/RO/000501

CAPRConservation of Aquila

pomarina in Romania

13 LIFE08 NAT/SLO/000244

SloWolf Conservation and surveil-lance of conservation sta-tus of wolf (Canis lupus)

population in Slovenia

14 LIFE09 NAT/SE/000344

MIRDINECManagement of theinvasive Raccoon Dog(Nyctereutes procyonoides)in the north-Europeancountries

15 LIFE08 INF/B/000052

AlterIAS

Increase awareness tocurb horticultural introduc-tions of invasive plants inBelgium

16 LIFE08 INF/CZ/000443

INFOMSUni ed information andcommunication system

for nature conservation inNUTS II Moravia-Silesia

17 LIFE10 INF/FI/000052

Saimaan lohikalojenPromoting sustainablesalmon shing practiceson Lake Saimaa

1 LIFE07 NAT/BG/000068

BSPB LIFE+ SAVE THERAPTORSConservation of imperialeagle and saker falcon inkey Natura 2000 sites inBulgaria

2 LIFE07 NAT/H/000322

CONVIPURSRAKConservation of Hungar-ian meadow viper (Viperaursinii rakosiensis) in theCarpathian-basin

3 LIFE08 NAT/E/000055

Estuarios del Pais VascoRestoration of habitats ofCommunity interest in theBasque Country’s estuaries

4 LIFE08 NAT/RO/000500

URSUSLIFEBest practices anddemonstrative actions

for conservation of Ursusarctos species in EasternCarpathians

5 LIFE09 INF/GR/000320

ThalassaThalassa Campaign: Learn,

Act, Protect/Awareness,Educational and Participa-tion Campaign for MarineMammals in Greece

BEST OF THE BEST PROJECTS

BEST PROJECTS

LIFE07 NAT/GR/000296 7

LIFE09 INF/GR/000320 5

LIFE08 NAT/RO/000501 12

LIFE08 NAT/BG/000279 8

LIFE08 NAT/LV/000449 11

LIFE08 NAT/RO/000500 4

LIFE08 NAT/SLO/000244 13

LIFE09 NAT/SE/000344 14

LIFE08 INF/CZ/000443 16

LIFE10 INF/FI/000052 17

LIFE07 NAT/BG/000068 1

LIFE08 NAT/DK/000465 9

LIFE07 NAT/H/000322 2LIFE07 NAT/D/000233 6

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3335http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3335http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3335http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3348http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3348http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3348http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3541http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3541http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3541http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3552http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3552http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3576http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3576http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3542http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3542http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3560http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3560http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3554http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3554http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3784http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3784http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3501http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3501http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3505http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3505http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4033http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4033http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3578http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3578http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3775http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3775http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3348http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3775http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3560http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3541http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3542http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3554http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3784http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3505http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4033http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3552http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3335http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3335http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3552http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4033http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3505http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3784http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3554http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3542http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3541http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3560http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3775http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3348http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3775http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3578http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4033http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3505http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3501http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3784http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3554http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3560http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3542http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3576http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3552http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3541http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3348http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3335


6/52

Winners of the LIFE Nature Best Awards 2014


INTRODU

CTION The LIFE Best Awards

The LIFE Best Awards recognise exemplary projects that demonstrate good practiceand the benefits of achieving results that can be replicated across Europe. The LIFENature Best Awards were presented at EU Green Week, whose theme this year was‘Nature – our health, our wealth’.

P h o t o :

E C / P a t r i c

k M a s c a r t

4

T he objective of the LIFE Nature Best Awards is to

identify and raise awareness of those projects whoseresults, if widely applied, could have the most positive im-pact on the implementation of EU nature and biodiversitypolicy.

The selection of projects completed by the end of 2014 fol-

lowed the procedure established in the rst year of the awards(for projects completed in 2008). The external monitoringteam (NEEMO) drew up a long list of candidates, based on pro-

ject evaluations, followed by internal assessment of the mostoutstanding projects by the European Commission. From thislist of “Best” projects, the National Focal Points jointly made a

nal selection of “Best of the Best” projects.

Project selection is based upon scoring of both short-termand long-term bene ts. The former include conservationstatus improvement and short-term leverage e ect; the lat-ter: long-term sustainability, leverage e ect, and regional/national/international impact.

Patricia Zurita, CEO of BirdLife International, presented theawards for the Best LIFE Nature projects. At the ceremony in

As Figure 1 shows, the 117 winners of the LIFE NatureBest Awards since their inception have come from 24di erent EU Member States. Finland has had more win-ners (12) than any other country, closely followed by

Spain (11) and Greece (10). Greece also ties rst withGermany for most “Best of the Best” nature projects,with four apiece. All four countries are represented inthe 2014 awards.

Where the winners come from


7/52

F i n l a n

d S p

a i n G r e

e c e

B e l g i u

m

P o r t u

g a l F r a

n c e

G e r m

a n y A u

s t r i a

D e n m

a r k

H u n g

a r y

R o m a

n i a

S w e d e

n

U n i t e d

K i n g d

o m E s t

o n i a I r e

l a n d

B u l g a

r i a C y

p r u s

C z e c h R e p u

b l i c I t a l y

P o l a n

d

S l o v e n

i a L a t

v i a

L i t h

u a n i a

N e t h e r

l a n d s

S l o v a k

i a C r o

a t i a

L u x e m

b o u r g M a

l t a

2

0

4

6

8

10

12

LIFE NAT BestLIFE NAT Best of Best

Angelo Salsi, Head of the LIFE and CIP Eco-innovation Unit, EASME, presents the first LIFE Nature Community Award to Ana Oregi Bastarrika,Minister of Environment and Territorial Planning of the Basque Government


Fig. 1: LIFE Nature Best Project winners 2008-2014 by Member State

P h o t o :

E C / P a t r i c

k M a s c a r t

5

Brussels in June 2015, she praised the LIFE programme asa “catalytic fund that is making such a di erence in terms ofimplementation of the [EU’s] nature directives.”

She said, “Tonight we are here to acclaim the exception-al work of 17 LIFE [Nature] projects from 13 di erent EUMember States. A wide range of species have bene ttedfrom their work, from large carnivores to marine mammals,from raptors to reptiles, and smaller species that are easilyoverlooked [...] All of these are a huge, vital part of Europe’srich biodiversity.”

Ms Zurita added that the importance of the habitats onwhich these protected species depend is brought home bythe work of many of the evening’s winners: “The conserva-

tion of bogs, grasslands and other key habitats is not onlygood for nature, it is good for society thanks to the ecosys-tem services they provide: a source of material, cultural andspiritual sustenance.”

Five of the 17 projects were classed as Best of the Best.These wereBSPB LIFE+ SAVE THE RAPTORS (pp. 7-9),CON-VIPURSRAK (pp. 10-12), Estuarios del Pais Vasco (pp.13-16),URSUSLIFE (pp. 17-19) and Thalassa (pp. 20-23).

Citizens’ choice

Angelo Salsi, former Head of the LIFE Nature Unit (DG ENV)and now Head of the LIFE and CIP Eco-Innovation Unit,EASME, presented a plaque to the winner of the rst LIFECommunity Award for nature. The winner was chosen by

public vote from the ve “Best of the Best” projects. Estu-arios del Pais Vasco received the most votes for its work torestore estuarine habitats in the Basque Country. The pro-

ject’s actions to eradicate the invasive alien plant speciessea myrtle ( Baccharis halmifolia ) are a valuable support forthe implementation of the EU Regulation on Invasive Alien Species .

Mr Salsi took the opportunity to thank the people in the eldcarrying out LIFE projects. “They’re doing their best to makeour Europe a much better place to live in [...] That’s wherethe real work is happening,” he said.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3578http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/invasivealien/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/invasivealien/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/invasivealien/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/invasivealien/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3578http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361


8/52


P h o t o :

L I F E 0 8 N A T / R O / 0 0 0 5 0 0 / D e s p i n e

l D r a g o m

i r

BEST OFTHE BEST PROJECTS

6

B E S

T L

I F E

N A TU R E P R O J

E C

T S


9/52

A successful LIFE project has arrested the near terminal decline of the imperial eaglein Bulgaria by reducing threats, improving habitats and supporting novel ways ofspreading the conservation message.


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T SBulgaria: Lifting the imperial

eagle from the brink

P h o t o :

D . G

r a d i n a r o v

7

The imperial eagle ( Aquila heliaca ) is one of the rarestraptors in Europe. In Bulgaria, by 2007 there were just 20 breeding pairs, compared with an estimated near2 000 pairs at the beginning of the 20th century. Wide-spread persecution (poisoning and shooting) of birds ofprey in the 1960s and 1970s accelerated the decline. Theimperial eagle, as a lowland inhabitant that is less wary ofpeople than other raptor species, was particularly a ected.

The project BSPB LIFE+ SAVE THE RAPTORS (LIFE07 NAT/BG/ 000068 ) was launched to improve the conservation status ofthe imperial eagle and the saker falcon ( Falco cherrug ), anotherraptor threatened with extinction in Bulgaria (see box). Projectactions helped increase the number of breeding eagle pairs (to25 by the end of the project, rising to 28 in 2015).

Early results influence direction

An important aspect of the project involved satellite track-ing of imperial eagles. This helped the coordinating bene-ciary (Bulgarian Society for the Protection of Birds - BSPB)improve its knowledge of the target species, particularly ofwintering and breeding patterns. Tracking the birds’ ightpaths also reveals where they might experience perse-cution – 12% of tagged eagles were shot and 8% werepoisoned. One young individual was believed to have beenkilled in Sudan, one of the southernmost areas of its range,which also stretches to Russia and the Baltic states in thenorth. Importantly, thanks to the satellite transmitters twopoachers in Bulgaria who had killed eagles were sentencedand ned.

Artificial nests and satellite tracking have helped improve the breeding success of the imperial eagle in Bulgaria

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3361


10/52

A juvenile imperial eagle

BEST OF

THE BEST PRO

JECTS


Despite the best e orts of this LIFE project, the sakerfalcon is still extremely rare in Bulgaria. During thecourse of the project, it was observed only 64 timesduring the breeding season and the 50 aluminium and30 wooden nesting boxes provided for the species wereinstead put to use by common kestrels, hobby falcons,ravens and buzzards.

P h o t o : S v e

t o s l a v

S p a s o v

8

The tracking data proved invaluable from the early stag-es of SAVE THE RAPTORS. In fact, information about eaglemovements led to a change in the focus of the project whenthe evidence showed that the majority of eagle fatalitieswere caused by collisions with electricity pylons. “Beforethe project we thought that it was shooting and poisoning,but then we realised that electrocution was the main causeof death,” explains Stoycho Stoychev, the conservation di-rector of the BSPB. In fact, the evidence from the project’stracking programme showed that up to two-thirds of youngimperial eagles are electrocuted by overhead cables. As aresult, BSPB “started to target the most critical sites,” saysMr Stoychev.

This meant furthering an already established relationship

with the electricity company that operates the mid-voltagepower lines in south-east Bulgaria in order to insulate morepoles than initially planned. The SAVE THE RAPTORS teamwas able to insulate 595 hazardous electricity poles withina 5 km radius of imperial eagle nests, nearly trebling theinitial goal of 200 nests.

Moreover, the success of this collaboration has led thepower company EVN Bulgaria Elektrorazpredelenie EADand BSPB to develop a follow-up project, LIFE for safe grid(LIFE12 NAT/BG/000572 ). This foresees the insulation ofmore than 3 000 pylons and the rerouting of 50 km of ca-bles underground in imperial eagles territories.

Habitat improvements

The imperial eagle population in Bulgaria has also beenadversely a ected by the impact of intensive logging of

single trees in lowland farming areas, which had reducedthe number of suitable nesting sites. To address this prob-lem the LIFE project planted around 6 000 poplar trees on12.6 ha of land (some of which was purchased through theproject). It also erected 37 arti cial nests to meet immedi-

ate demand and help those juveniles that are inexperiencedat nest building and for whom it is an energy-consumingprocess. Five of these nests are already occupied by youngpairs breeding for the rst time.

Imperial eagles feed on a range of prey from hedgehogsand hares to ravens and other smaller birds. The projectspeci cally targeted its main hunting sites including openpasturelands, the habitat of the European souslik ( Spermo-

philus citellus ) – a small ground squirrel that represents amajor source of food for the raptor. Much pastureland, how-ever, has either been cultivated or abandoned over recentdecades, adversely a ecting the souslik and other wildlife.The project thus sought to maintain areas of pasturelandthrough the purchase of ocks of sheep and a team of hors-es that are managed by the Fund for Wild Flora and Fauna,Bulgaria. Sheep farms were established in the regions ofSakar and Ponor totalling more than 700 sheep combined.Another partner, the Central Balkan National Park, cleared

juniper trees from 50 ha of pasture land under its control.

Following meetings with government o cials a new com-pensation measure was introduced for farmers who man-

age their land as pasture near eagle-breeding sites. So fararound 20 farmers managing a total of 240 ha of agri-cultural land have applied for this subsidy, which is set at€324 per hectare. Moreover, the BSPB purchased 75.92 haof riverside forests and pastures with souslik colonies forlocal farmers to manage in ways favourable for the impe-rial eagle.

Reviving visitor interest and local pride

The project supplemented these habitat improvementmeasures with the creation of three arti cial feeding sites.The carcases of local livestock and the remains of abattoirsare laid out for the eagles in fenced o enclosures to pre-vent jackals and wolves from feeding on them. At severalof these sites, hides are being built as part of the A er-LIFE

Saker story

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4762http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=4762


11/52

The project has mobilised a network of volunteers to help guard eagles’ nests during the breeding season


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T S

The valuable work of the project has also been rec-ognised at the annual Natura 2000 Awards. The BSPBwon the ‘Conservation’ category in 2014 for its work‘Saving the imperial eagle from electrocution in Bul-garia’. A special awards presentation took place at thelocal produce festival in Topolovgrad.

P h o t o : S v e

t o s l a v

S p a s o v

9

from a nest and tried to care for it himself. He also mentionsthat someone who stole an egg to paint for Easter laterparticipated in conservation measures.

These direct communication experiences were also matchedby dissemination activities targeted at the media that helpedraise the issue of raptor conservation on a national level, in-cluding a BSPB video on the imperial eagle. The project alsotrained around 400 teachers and 40 educationalists, as wellas nding novel ways of communicating with young people,such as commissioning a gra ti artist to create a 20 m highmural on the front wall of a school building in So a.

plan. Here, eager wildlife photographers will be able to takepictures of the imperial eagles feeding.

Such measures are part of the long-term strategy to en-courage eco-tourism to the area.

Whilst a lack of o cial gures make it di cult to ascertainthe exact number of visitors to the raptor regions, “tour op-erators tell us that there has been an incredible increase inthe number of tours,” says Svetoslav Spasov, the leader ofthe LIFE project. The owner of a hotel in Topolovgrad, nearkey breeding areas, has become an uno cial ambassadorfor the project, telling guests about the need for conserva-tion and encouraging them to visit the town’s imperial eagleexhibition centre. The centre, which was renovated underthe project, welcomes foreign visitors and local schoolchil-dren alike, allowing them to learn about the endangeredeagle, its feeding habits and ight paths.

The municipality of Topolovgrad, near the border with Turkey,

continues to be a great supporter of the goals of the project, part icularly due to the enthusiasm of Diana Georgieva,a former schoolteacher. She was instrumental in foundinga festival of local produce – cheese, milk and wine – thatfosters interest in the maintenance of pastureland and thusthe conservation of imperial eagles. The festival has grownyear on year; the third edition took place in September 2015.

Ms Georgieva taught at the town’s school and some of herformer pupils have also become involved in eagle conser-vation. From March to June, the BSPB organises a rota ofguards for the breeding nests and a few ex-pupils have vol-unteered for this task in return for a small daily al lowance.Volunteers are also coming to the project by less conven-tional routes. Mr Stoychev says that he asked one youngchap to join its e orts a er he misguidedly took a edgling

9

Natura 2000 Award

Project number: LIFE07 NAT/BG/000068

Title: BSPB LIFE+ SAVE THE RAPTORS - Conservation of imperialeagle and saker falcon in key Natura 2000 sites in Bulgaria

Benefciary: Bulgarian Society for the Protection of Birds/ BirdLifeBulgaria

Contact: Svetoslav Spasov

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.saveraptors.org

Period: 01-Jan-2009 to 31-Dec-2013

Total budget: 2 046 000

LIFE contribution: 1 534 000



12/52

LIFE’s CONVIPURSRAK project developed a captive breeding programme, restored vitalhabitat and raised awareness about the plight of the Hungarian meadow viper.


BEST OF

THE BEST PRO

JECTS Hungary: Captive breeding

helps in meadow viperconservation

P h o t o :

B á l i n t H a l p e r n

0

Intensive farming practices and a decline in suitablegrassland habitats have made the Hungarian meadowviper ( Vipera ursinii rakosiensis ) Europe’s most endangeredsnake. Over the past half century it has disappeared fromAustria, Bulgaria and Romania (though a new populationwas recently found in Transylvania) and numbers have beendrastically reduced in Hungary, leaving just two small iso-lated populations in the country: at Hanság in north-westHungary and Kiskunság in the plains between the Danubeand Tisza rivers.

The plight of the species has been known for some time: itwas granted protected status in Hungary in 1974. EU acces-sion has given Hungarian organisations the opportunity to

access LIFE funds to support conservation work. As a result,the 2004-2007 LIFE project, HUNVIPURS ( LIFE04 NAT/HU/000116 ), launched a captive breeding programme atthe Hungarian Meadow Viper Conservation Centre, whichwas established on a small farm on newly restored habitatin Kiskunság. It also carried out an extensive habitat pur-chase and restoration programme.

The CONVIPURSRAK project (LIFE07 NAT/H/000322 ) wasset up to build on the successes of this initial project, in-creasing the population of Hungarian meadow vipersthrough continued captive breeding and direct release. Theproject also helped extend the viper’s habitat by almost 400ha, more than 80 ha of which was purchased and added

CONVIPURSRAK carried out captive breeding and release supported by habitat improvement actions to increase the Hungarian meadow viper population

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2665http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2665http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2665http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2665


13/52


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T S

P h o t o : N

E E M O E E I G / E r i c

E v r a r d

11

to the area controlled by the National Park administra-tions of Hanság and Kiskunság. On this land, project work-ers removed invasive alien plant species such as commonmilkweed ( Asclepias syriaca ) and tree of heaven ( Ailanthusaltissima ) as well as trees from forestry plantations, in or-der to ensure the long-term continuation of grassland habi-tat for the Hungarian meadow viper. In cleared areas, thereseeding of grass also took place.

In total, the habitat reconstruction increased the area ofcontinuous potential viper habitat to more than 1 600 ha inHanság. At Kiskunság, the project purchased land in upperPeszéradacs meadows, the site of the main viper popula-tion. The CONVIPURSRAK team drew up management plansfor both of these park areas that included bans on the use

of machinery and fertilisers, and obligations for tenantfarmers to adopt extensive grazing practices.

Captive breeding

At the centre in Kiskunság, the work of breeding and track-ing released individuals is continuing. Each new-born viperis photographed and the number of scales recorded. An IDcard is then produced for each one, displaying its assignednumber and visual markings.

A female viper can give birth on average to 10 o springevery year – however, the weight of the pregnant individualis measured and sometimes following several years of giv-ing birth, the mother is unable to regain su cient weight toproduce a large number of young. In such circumstances,

the centre may decide not to mate the female the followingyear in order that she has greater time to bulk up again.But it depends on the individual; hence the centre keeps anupdated database of the breeding history of the captured

vipers. “Larger specimens are able to breed annually, so wepair them accordingly,” explains Bálint Halpern, who coordi-nated both LIFE viper projects.

The vipers are not released until they are two or three yearsold and fully grown in order to give them the best chance ofsurvival. Moreover, they are released in “small groups so asnot to attract the attention of foxes and badgers or harriersand buzzards,” says Mr Halpern. The target of 400 individu-als released into the wild has now been reached (around300 were released in the framework of the project).

Some of those released were implanted with radiotelem-etry tags that allow the centre to track their movementsand better understand the behaviour of the species. Thetags are inserted surgically under anaesthesia a couple ofmonths ahead of release. On release, the centre providesthe snakes with an arti cial burrow to aid their transitioninto their new surroundings. If such burrows were not pro-vided, the released vipers would spend too long searchingfor burrows, increasing their exposure to the risk of preda-tion from birds.

Mr Halpern and his team have nevertheless discoveredthrough the radiotracking of individuals that the releasedvipers nd the old burrows of rodents and rarely return tothe arti cially-created ones. Comparisons of movements

The captive breeding centre in Kiskunság


14/52


BEST OF

THE BEST PRO

JECTS

P h o t o :

B á l i n t H a l p e r n

2

also show that individual vipers follow the established pathsof other vipers, quite o en spreading out in a radial pattern.Females o en share the same burrows.

During the course of the project 43 released individuals wererecorded among the 204 vipers detected, suggesting that theprogramme of reintroductions is working well. There is alsoevidence that these released vipers are reproducing.

Wide-reaching communication

A key aspect of the project and the ongoing work of thecentre is the bene ciary MME BirdLife Hungary’s coopera-tion with Budapest Zoo and the Schönbrunn Zoo in Vienna.Not only does Budapest Zoo provide the centre with several

types of crickets to feed to the captured vipers, but it hasalso devoted exhibition space to the conservation needs ofthe species. The enticingly named ‘House of Venom’ at thezoo in Budapest allows visitors to learn about this nativeviper species on their doorsteps, see a few specimens upclose and even touch one – well, the mounted embalmedbody of one.

The zoo estimates that at least half of its annual one mil-lion visitors enter the snake house (which is also home to a

Komodo dragon). “It’s quite an e cient way of doing com-munication, because when people come to the zoo they areopen minded,” enthuses Mr Halpern.

Not content with merely observing the enclosed individuals,interested parties and zoologists can arrange to visit theConservation Centre at Kiskunság and see for themselvesthe conservation work that it is carrying out. To this end thecentre introduced new education facilities under the recentLIFE project and now frequently welcomes school parties.Students also can help with the feeding and marking of thevipers. In this way, the project bene ciary is achieving its ex-pressed goal of raising awareness of the endangered snake.

The project also produced two 25-minute documentary

lms, ‘Aristocrat of Snakes’ and ‘Snake in the Hand’, alongwith a 52-minute nature movie, ‘Vipera Life, a serpent’stale’, and a series of short lms aimed at a general au-dience. Furthermore, the bene ciary gave more than 100lectures across the country.

As a result of both LIFE projects, the future conservationstatus of the Hungarian meadow viper is looking morepromising. In neighbouring Austria, land owners of viablehabitats for the species have agreed to reduce the intensityof land use and the bene ciary is hopeful that reintroduc-tions could begin within a few years. The CONVIPURSRAKproject team also visited known habitats in the Transylva-nian region of Romania, resulting in 46 sightings, along withhabitats of related subspecies of meadow viper in Moldovaand France, and similar vipers in Ukraine and Croatia. Theteam were eager to further their understanding of how vi-pers are surviving.

Moreover, eld studies of the viper’s habitats in Hungaryshow that the restored grasslands are supporting Orthop-tera (grasshoppers and crickets) and small mammals fa-vourable for the species. The high diversity of Orthoptera

– 50 species were found in the 10 known and potentialhabitats in Kiskunság – is a good indicator of the habitatquality, providing abundant food for the vipers.

A female viper can give birth to up to 10 offspring in one year

Project number: LIFE07 NAT/H/000322

Title: CONVIPURSRAK - Conservation of Hungarian meadow viper(Vipera ursinii rakosiensis ) in the Carpathian-basin

Benefciary: Magyar Madártani és Természetvédelmi Egyesület

Contact: Bálint Halpern


Website: www.rakosivipera.hu



LIFE contribution: 1 670 000

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3364


15/52

The Estuarios del Pais Vasco project removed extensive areas of an invasive plant spe-cies from three Natura 2000 network sites in the Basque Country. This enabled severalhabitats of EU importance to recover, benefitting native flora and migrating birds.


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T SSpain: Restoring estuarine

habitats affected by invasivespecies

P h o t o :

B a s q u e

G o v e r n m e n

t –

D e p a r

t m e n

t o f e n v i r o n m e n t a n

d t e r r

i t o r i a

l p o l

i c y

13

Invasive alien species are a major threat to a range ofhabitats in the Basque Country. The most harmful ofthese is sea myrtle ( Baccharis halimifolia ), a native of theeast coast of North America, which was introduced intoEurope as an ornamental plant. This salt-tolerant shrubhas successfully established in marshes, dunes, sea cli sand other habitats all along the European Atlantic coast.It forms dense masses of vegetation that displace native

ora, with implications for endangered species as well asreducing the capacity to deliver ecosystem services.

As part of its wider campaign against invasive species, theDepartment of Environment and Territorial Policy of theBasque Government initiated a LIFE project ( LIFE08 NAT/ES/000055 ) to eliminate sea myrtle from three Natura

2000 network sites: the Biosphere Reserve of Urdaibai andthe Lea estuary, both in Bizkaia province, and the Txingudi-Bidasoa marshes in Gipuzkoa province.

Building upon the ndings of a pilot study in Urdaibai, theLIFE project demonstrated best practice methodologies ona large-scale to restore habitats a ected by sea myrtleincursion; targeting six Annex 1-listed Habitats Directivehabitats, including particularly vulnerable Mediterraneansalt meadows. Furthermore, the project coordinated man-agement e orts across the Basque Country, raised theawareness of the general public and other stakeholdersabout the problems caused by invasive plant species, andput in place a framework to further the project’s objectivespost-LIFE.

This LIFE project tackled the threat to estuarine habitats in the Basque Country from invasive alien plant species



16/52


BEST OF

THE BEST PRO

JECTS

P h o t o :

B a s q u e

G o v e r n m e n

t –

D e p a r

t m e n t o f e n v i r o n m e n

t a n

d t e r r

i t o r i a

l p o l

i c y

4

Specialist work

“Removing Baccharis halimifolia is specialist work, so it isnot possible to use volunteers,” says project manager Mar-

ta Rozas. “Very speci c methods are required and the useof glyphosate herbicide means workers need permits. Weworked with one forestry company throughout the project.They learned how to deal with this species, which is impor-tant for the continuation of the work in other areas.” A teamof ve forestry workers did most of the shrub clearancein the Txingudi-Bidasoa marshes, with up to 35 working atUrdaibai.

The LIFE project’s plan for eliminating the sea myrtle fo-cused on preventing the female plants from producing seed.

Flowering occurs from around September to November andthe species is wind pollinated. “The male bushes have yel-low owers, and the female bushes have white owers thatappear about two weeks later,” says the project’s technicalcoordinator Estela Beteta, of associate bene ciary Ihobe.“It’s one of the most productive plant species. Each femaleadult plant can produce up to one and a half million seeds.The seeds are very small and have a white tail. Most ofthem stay around one hundred metres from the plant, butthey can travel up to ve kilometres. On windy days, whenthere were big patches before the project, you could seeseeds in the wind and it looked pretty impressive.” This rainof seeds has now stopped in the project areas.

At the Bidasoa Islands in the Txingudi estuary, membersof the LIFE project team explain the methodology used atall the sites. “These two Islands are one of most importantproject sites,” says Ms Rozas. She holds up a picture to com-pare with the view across the water. The change in the land-scape is dramatic. A dense thicket of 4 m high bushes allalong the shore has been replaced by a mosaic of restoredhabitats, including reed beds.

Cutting and uprooting

On stepping ashore from the boat on one of the BidasoaIslands, the scale of the work becomes evident. “In the rstyear, the trees were cut and a diluted herbicide was appliedby brush to all the stumps,” says Ms Beteta. Dead branchesare piled up in some of the low-lying areas. Chemicals arenecessary because of the high rate of regrowth. “The Uni-versity of the Basque Country did experiments to prove thelevel of danger from the glyphosate herbicide used was low,with no risk to ora or wildlife,” adds Ms Rozas.

The vast seed production means that there are a lot ofseeds in the soil. “In the second year, the seeds germi-nated and formed very dense stands of little plants overthe whole island. These were pulled out by hand,” says Ms

Beteta. “When pulling the seedlings, it is very important totake out the whole root because if a little piece remains itcan regrow. If the soil is dry it is di cult to do this, but if thesoil is wet it is easier. So it is recommended to pull seedlingsduring the winter or on rainy days.” If the seedlings are leto grow into their second year they are much more di cultto pull out, because of vigorous horizontal root growth.

Sea myrtle seed has a high germination rate and is viablefor one or two years, with a small amount viable for longer.Therefore, a further year of seedling pulling was usuallycarried out. Vigilance is required for several years, however,

as a few germinating plants can re-establish a new popula-tion. The plants grow quickly, gaining 30 to 40 cm annually,and reach sexual maturity in two years.

Restoring habitats and ecosystem services

A er the seedlings are removed, bare patches of soil remain.Native species return in most cases, as they are present inthe soil’s seed bank. Ms Beteta points out at one location:“The rst native species re-establishing here is orache ( Atri-

plex prostra ta ), which colonises bare soil and so is the rststage of the natural restoration. Reeds are colonising thewetter bare soils.” Other Key species for habitat recovery,such as sea rush ( Juncus maritimus ), common reed ( Phrag-mites australis ) and sea couch ( Elytrigia atherica ), havegood recolonisation ability.

Sea myrtle (Baccharis halimifolia) forms dense masses of vegetation thatdisplace native coastal flora


17/52


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T S

P h o t o :

N E E M O E E I G / A i n h o a

D a r q u

i s t a d e

15

In areas where natural regeneration is weaker, however, theproject planted around 9 500 seedlings of native shrubsand trees. Jon Zulaika, of the Provincial Council of Gipuzkoa,is carrying on the work, post-LIFE, on the islands, includ-ing the planting of seedlings in green protective sleeves.He points out French tamarisk ( Tamarix gallica ), the speciesmost commonly planted here, and other species, includingoak on higher and drier ridges.

Dense stands of sea myrtle cause a build-up of sediment,due to plentiful branching from low on the stem. In themarshes, this makes the land drier and less saline becausethe tide does not wash over it as much. This has a nega-tive impact on habitat characteristics, biodiversity and otherecosystem services such as water regulation, with implica-

tions for ooding elsewhere in the estuary. Recovering habi-tats therefore also helps maintain the essential goods andservices that the ecosystem provides.

“We calculated that during the project, in the three sites, wehave cut more than 500 000 adult plants and have takenout ve million seedlings,” says Ms Beteta. “In the projectareas, we treated 780 hectares in total.”

An oasis for migratory birds

Changes in vegetation structure caused by invasive plantshave a negative impact on migratory birds. In addition tosea myrtle, problem species include pampas grass ( Corta-

deria selloana ), saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina patens )and pokeweed (Phytolaca americana ). “We are on the borderwith the Pyrenees here,” says Ms Beteta, pointing to moun-tains on the skyline. “Birds come from the north and passhere going to southern Spain and Africa, so a lot of birdspecies, around 250 every year, cross this area. It is veryimportant for resting, nesting and breeding.”

The endangered species particularly bene tting from theproject’s activities in the three areas include the aquaticwarbler ( Acrocephalus paludicola ), which needs well-con-served reed beds, and Eurasian spoonbill ( Platalea leuc-orodia ). “Through the bird monitoring work at Txingudi, weknow that the situation for birds on the two islands in theestuary is better than ve years ago. There are more spe-

cies and also a greater number of birds,” says Ms Rozas.

LIFE Community Award

The Estuarios del Pais Vasco project won the very rst an-nual LIFE Nature Community Award, at Green Week 2015 inBrussels; being chosen by the public vote amongst the Bestof the Best projects featured in this brochure. The projectteam attribute this success to a campaign of mobilising sup-porters’ votes, but mainly to their e ective dissemination ac-tivities that raised the awareness of people throughout theBasque Country to the threats posed by invasive plant species.Various actions were targeted at the general public, local au-thorities and specialists, including a touring exhibition, on-site

The project cut more th an half a million invasive sea myrtle plants and removed over five million seedlings


18/52


BEST OF

THE BEST PRO

JECTS

6

information panels, lea ets, educational visits to schools, lec-tures at the University of the Basque Country, and a technicalsymposium.

The LIFE project set up the ‘International Commission formonitoring and exchange of expertise on Baccharis halimi-

folia ’, with representatives from the Basque Country regions,local administrations and France. “This is one of the mostimportant results of the project,” says Ms Beteta, “that wemanaged to involve further administrations and that they arenow working withBaccharis halimifolia in other sites alongthe coast. The lessons learned during the project are now be-ing applied in other places.”

Arising from the International Commission was a technical

manual on the control of sea myrtle, which outlined controlmethods for use worldwide. “Now we are producing post-LIFEa smaller publication especially for local authorities and for-estry workers,” says Ms Beteta: “The methodologies are ex-pensive to implement, so it is very important to show how toapply them properly.”

“Today it is not possible to buy Baccharis halimifolia at gardencentres in Spain, because under Spanish law it is regulated asan invasive exotic species,” says Ms Rozas. “In France, how-ever, the plant is still cultivated in gardens.” The project teamis con dent that sea myrtle will be one of the species coveredby the new ‘EU Regulation on Invasive Alien Species’. This willharmonise the legal situation across the EU and help in coor-dinating international e orts to manage this invasive species.

Actions after LIFE

One of the other areas where the project’s methods are beingimplemented is the coastal cli s of the Jaizkibel Natura 2000network site, in two priority for conservation habitats listedin the Habitats Directive: ‘Dry Atlantic coastal heathers withErica vagans ’ and ‘Calcareous fens withCladium mariscus ’.These have recently been cleared of sea myrtle.

Bare soil areas are recovering naturally, helped by replanting.“Seed from the heather was collected, heated to 70-80°C foraround three hours to simulate the res that naturally stimu-late germination, and the seedlings grown in our nurseries,”explains Mr Zulaika.

Similarly, the nursery operated by the Provincial Council ofGipuzkoa has grown sawtooth sedge (Cladium mariscus ) andthe seedlings used on the Bidasoa Islands. The city authori-ties of Irun and Hondarribia are also collaborating in this pilotproject. Meanwhile, plant nurseries operated by local authori-ties in other Basque regions are also being used to propagatenative species for replanting.

“Unlike clearing Baccharis halimifolia , replanting can be doneby volunteers,” says Mr Zulaika. Parties of students have beenplanting sawtooth sedge alongside a stream that runs down aravine to the sea, for example. A small dam has been installedto raise the water level, to encourage the small seedlings toestablish.

The project has reduced the capacity for sea myrtle to spreadalong the Basque coast, and has mapped its distribution inother Basque Country estuaries to help prioritise future work.“One of the most important project outcomes has been toestablish collaborations between the Basque government,regional and city authorities,” concludes Ms Rozas: “E ectivecoordination and greater awareness within all these authori-ties will ensure thatBaccharis halimifolia is controlled at the

regional level.”

Project number: LIFE08 NAT/E/000055

Title: Estuarios del Pais Vasco - Restoration of habitats of Commu-nity interest in the Basque Country’s estuaries

Benefciary: Department of Environment and Territorial Policy,Basque Government

Contact: Marta Rozas Ormazabal


Website: www.euskadi.net/life_estuarios

Period: 01-Jan-2010 to 31-March-2014


LIFE contribution: 926 000

Dead sea myrtle branches and native species planted at Txingudi



19/52

URSUSLIFE helped maintain the population and conservation status of the Carpathianbrown bear in Natura 2000 sites in three counties in Romania, mapping bear presenceand habitats and taking practical steps to reduce coexistence conflicts.

P h o t o :

B e r d e

L a j o s


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T SRomania: Learning to live with

brown bears

17

Romania is home to an estimated 40% of the total EUbrown bear (Ursus arctos arctos ) population. Around

one-third - between 1 500 and 2 300 - of those bears arefound in the mountainous counties of Vrancea, Covasna andHarghita in the south-eastern Carpathians. The Environmen-tal Protection Agencies of the three counties joined forceswith two NGOs (Association for Biodiversity Conservationand Association for Conservation of Natural Values) to de-liver a highly successful LIFE project that built on the ear-lier work of the Vrancea Environmental Protection Agency- including the LIFE projects Vrancea 30/11/2005 ( LIFE02 NAT/RO/008576 ) and Carnivores Vrancea II ( LIFE05 NAT/RO/000170 ), which focused on brown bear, wolf and lynxconservation..

“We have learned from the rst two projects: it’s a natu-ral growth,” says project administrator Ioan Mihai Pop, “Wewanted to enlarge the area in which we were working, but

there was too much work involved in dealing with three largecarnivores across three counties. “We asked which is the

most problematic from an administrative point of view andwe assessed it was the bear,” recalls Mr Pop. The brown bearthus became the focus of the URSUSLIFE project ( LIFE08 NAT/RO/000500 ), which carried out a number of targetedactions as part of its wider objective of brown bear conser-vation. One of the most important of these was identifyinga new method to estimate the size of the bear population.

How many bears?

The URSUSLIFE team produced a set of ‘Guidelines for esti-mating the brown bear population size’. Targeted at wildlifemanagers, they focused on non-invasive methods that gavea realistic idea of population abundance, such as monitoringof presence signs on road transects, camera trapping andmonitoring of females with cubs. During the project, pres-

This bear cub was injured when it was hit by a train. URSUSLIFE mapped potential hotspots for collisions and bear-human conflict in three counties ofRomania

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=1984http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=1984http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2956http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2956http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3559http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2956http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=2956http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=1984http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=1984


20/52


BEST OF

THE BEST PRO

JECTS

Another important action to reduce bear mortality in-

volved mapping bear dens. The project recorded a total of76 dens and 64 den areas in a GIS database, allowing thedata to be correlated with other GIS models. “If someonewants a logging permit, we can look at the maps and seeif there is a den. If there is a den, the permit is refused,”explains Mr Pop. The maps also help game managersavoid disturbing bears during hibernation.

8

ence signs were recorded across 850 km of transects andmore than 360 camera traps were set (these were activefor 1 800 days in total). The Guidelines were approved bythe Romanian Ministry of Environment and Climate Change

and are now being incorporated into a national action planbeing developed under the auspices of an ongoing LIFE pro-

ject (LIFE FOR BEAR -LIFE13 NAT/RO/001154 ). “We triedto include measures in the guidelines that are not too com-plicated...taking the good parts of the existing method andimproving it,” explains Mr Pop.

Tackling habitat fragmentation

Another aspect of URSUSLIFE focused on methods for pre-venting the degradation and fragmentation of brown bear

habitat. Relevant eld data were collected and centralisedin a GIS database and core bear areas mapped. With thisbaseline information, the project was able to use spatialmodelling to identify potential ecological corridors betweenthese core habitats. Eleven areas were identi ed as prior-ity sites for action in future conservation or restoration ofecological connectivity. These corridors were correlated withthe road and railway network in order to generate complexmaps representing the cumulative e ect of ecological bar-riers. These were used to highlight the potential threats tothe connectivity of the Natura 2000 network sites in theproject and other areas of high quality habitat. Simpler ver-sions of the maps raised public awareness of the threatsbears face.

Analysis of the data showed a signi cant increase in habitatfragmentation. This has informed a ‘Practical guide for pre-venting brown bear’s habitat degradation and fragmenta-

tion and ensuring the connectivity of Natura 2000 networksites in Romania’ that was published by the project.

Preventing bear-human conflict

The project installed 124 protection systems (some 30 peryear) around sheepfolds, cattle farms, crops and beehives.The systems - consisting of an electric fence, plus audio,visual or olfactory deterrents - were a demonstration actionto encourage other farmers to adopt such non-lethal meth-ods of reducing bear damage.

“Bears have seasonal movement related to the distributionof food resources,” explains Mr Pop. “In the summer theystay up in the mountains; in the autumn they reside in thebeech and oak forests lower down. The transition area inbetween is typically where con icts occur. There are plumsand other fruit, corn, animals they can eat; they can escapeif they have to, the forest is close. The transition areas arevery good places to get fat for the winter.”

Each installed system was monitored and instances of beardamage recorded to optimise the protection of apiaries, crops

and livestock. Results fed into a methodology for the imple-mentation of protection systems, published by the project.

“In almost all the areas in which we put electric fences, inthe next year another farmer got at least one electric fence.It was the power of good example,” says Mr Pop. “The hardpart was persuading farmers to return the fences!” The UR-SUSLIFE team is expanding use of protection systems inthe ongoing project WOLFLIFE ( LIFE13 NAT/RO/000205 ).It is also lobbying the Romanian government to support anationwide protocol for their use.

To complement the protection systems and ensure bear-human coexistence, the project established a team for theanalysis of risks raised by the presence of bears in inhabit-ed areas. This Risk Assessment Team (RAT) was called in 52

Mapping bear dens

The project installed 124 non-lethal systems for protecting livestock andcrops from bear damage. Increased use of electric fences by farmers not

participating in the project showed the power of good example



21/52

P h o t o :

N E E M O E E I G / J u s

t i n T o l a n d


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T S

Ioan Mihai Pop highlights the challenge of relocating‘problem’ bears: “We put in this cage the rst female thatwe trapped during the URSUSLIFE project, in 2011. Onefemale and two cubs in the same cage. We were driv-ing them through the city and they were making a lot ofnoise and everybody was wondering what was going on.The cubs were ghting because it was such a small spaceand the vehicle was rocking like a boat!”

19

times across the three counties because of damage causedby bears. Lessons from the cases investigated informed aMethodology for assessing risks related to bear presence.

The RAT also worked closely with the Animal Mobile RescueUnit (ARMU) established by the 2005 LIFE project, Carni-vores Vrancea II to relocate ‘problem’ bears and rehabilitateinjured ones. During URSUSLIFE, ARMU expanded its range

to cover the three counties where the project worked. AtRAT’s request ARMU relocated a total of nine bears awayfrom inhabited areas. The rescue unit also intervened in 17cases of bears captured in illegally-placed snares.

Injured adult bears are taken to a bear rehabilitation centre inLepsa village and released back into the wild as soon as theyare t enough. “Usually a er one day,” explains URSUSLIFEproject manager, Silviu Chiriac. Orphaned or abandoned cubsare taken to a Centre for Orphan Bear Rehabilitation run bythe Association for Nature Values Conservation. Thanks toLIFE, the capacity and e ectiveness of this centre has beenincreased. A total of 37 orphaned or abandoned bear cubswere ‘rewilded’ by this rehabilitation centre during URSUSLIFE.For rehabilitation to be a success you have to ask “does thebear you have put back into the population behave like a ‘real’

animal? Is it reproducing?,” explains Mr Pop. “Several femalesthat have been taken to the centre have been observed withcubs since they were rehabilitated,” he says.

Bear-friendly products

To lessen negative attitudes toward bears and Natura 2000amongst local people, the project established a ‘bear-friendly’ label to promote local products made in peacefulcoexistence with brown bears.

“We want to help the people from this area add value totheir activities and this was the solution: to join the bearwith pastoral activity,” explains Mr Chiriac. Makers of cra s,clothes, cheese and other produce participate in the scheme.

“These are all local suppliers who make the products to or-der. it’s artisanal: you telephone and they make it,” he says.

Many awareness-raising activities focused on young people,with good results. More than 2 000 children took part in apicture competition run by the project, for instance. Attitudesurveys of local people were conducted at the start and endof URSUSLIFE. The result was “an improvement in the areain which we worked intensively on communicating with thepublic,” says Mr Pop.

Lessons and legacy

The project’s actions improved coexistence and have ledto a slowdown in the decline of the brown bear populationand an expansion of brown bear habitat in Romania. Guide-lines and methods are now being implemented more widely.“With our experience in rehabilitating animals people call usfrom other NGOs, other environmental protection agencies.If they have problems with lynx, deer, bears or whatever,they ask us what they should do,” notes Mr Pop. The projectteam has also applied lessons from LIFE to a transboundarylarge carnivore conservation project with partners in Hun-

gary and Ukraine. Lessons from URSUSLIFE are also beingapplied in its own work on WOLFLIFE, such as the need toinvolve hunters more in conservation activities.

Bear scare

Project number: LIFE08 NAT/RO/000500

Title: URSUSLIFE - Best practices and demonstrative actions forconservation of Ursus arctos species in Eastern Carpathians, Romania

Benefciary: Vrancea Environmental Protection Agency

Contact: Silviu Chiriac


Website: www.carnivoremari.ro/lifeursus


Total budget: 515 000

LIFE contribution: 386 000

Silviu Chiriac shows the cage in which injured or ‘problem’ bears aretransported to the bear rehabilitation centre in Lepsa village



22/52

LIFE Thalassa successfully combined awareness raising, environmental education andparticipatory actions to engage people in efforts targeting the protection of marinemammals in Greece.

P h o t o :

F r é d é r i c L a r r e y

/ T h o m a s

R o


BEST OF

THE BEST PRO

JECTS Greece: Spreading the word

on marine mammals

0

Thalassa was a sea goddess in Greek mythology, andis the Greek word for “sea”. It is also ttingly, the ab-breviated title of the LIFE Information and Communication(INF) project addressing marine mammals (whales, dol-phins, porpoises and monk seals) and their natural habitatsin Greek seas.

Fourteen di erent threatened or critically endangered Euro-pean marine mammal species, included in Annex IV of theEU Habitats Directive, have been recorded in the Greek seas.Of these, nine species are especially signi cant, as they livepermanently in these waters. They include the Mediterra-nean monk seal ( Monachus monachus ), the bottlenose dol-

phin ( Tursiops truncatus ), Risso’s dolphin ( Grampus griseus ),Cuvier’s beaked whale ( Ziphius cavirostris ) and the spermwhale (Physeter macrocephalus ).

The long-term viability of the populations of the targetedseals and cetaceans, however, is in imminent danger fromhuman-related activities (see box). The most notable threatsare from illegal shing, collisions with ships (both intendedand accidental), and ingestion of solid debris. The dangersvary according to the species type. Latest scienti c data forMediterranean monk seals, for instance, indicates, the twomain environmental problems are accidental entanglementin shing gear (bycatch) and deliberate killings.

A Mediterranean monk seal swimming in the sea off Greece


23/52

P h o t o :

P . D e n

d r i n o s

/ M O m


B E S T

O F

T H E

B E S T

P R O

J E C T S

In the last two decades, 1 460 cetaceans have been re-ported stranded on the Greek coasts, and a total of 147animals have died due to human activities:Thirty-one Cuvier’s beaked whales died as a consequenceof the extended use of military low frequency sonar;whereas for dolphins the cause of death was accidentalentanglement.For eight sperm whales, the cause of death was collisionwith large vessels. Another study, on the stomach contentof seven cetaceans, showed that two animals died fromthe ingestion of plastic bags and debris.

Source: MOm website, www.mom.gr

Researchers in Greece, the main stronghold of the Mediter-ranean monk seal, a species classed as ‘critically endan-gered’ by the IUCN, have been involved in the gathering ofscienti c data for the species. According to MOm’s PanosDendrinos (a marine biologist and monk seal expert), thereis “hope” for the monk seal, which was last assessed in2008 (IUCN, 2010): “At the moment its conservation statusremains ‘critically endangered’, but we have evidence thatthe Mediterranean monk seal is recovering in Greece, and

that its population is expanding to other eastern Mediter-ranean countries,” he says.There were thought to be around 300 individual monk sealsin Greek waters, he notes, explaining that the latest data,however, indicate there has been a “slight increase in recentyears”. “More and more animals are appearing near hu-man settlements, which means we have more informationabout them,” he says, adding: “The situation is still fragile ofcourse. But, there is hope for these animals.”

21

The LIFE Thalassa project ( LIFE09 INF/GR/000320 ) soughtto increase awareness amongst the Greek population aboutmarine mammal species, their importance for marine ecosys-tems, the imminent threats they face, and the conservationactions necessary to ensure their long-term viability. It alsoaimed to establish a more active and environmentally-friend-ly attitude and behaviour amongst the target audiences andkey stakeholders, to better manage the marine environment.

‘Learn, Act, Protect’

The “Thalassa Campaign, Learn, Act, Protect” was coordinat-ed by MOm/ the Hellenic Society for the Study and Protec-tion of the Monk seal. The non-governmental organisationwas established in 1988, by a team of scientists from theUniversity of Athens, including Panagiotis (Panos) Dendri-nos, MOm’s general coordinator, and the project’s scienti cadvisor. The NGO’s work involves research, dra ing andimplementating conservation strategies and managementplans for the species, lobbying for the establishment ofprotected areas, surveillance and the guarding, rescue andrecovery of injured seals. The World Wide Fund for Nature(WWF) Greece was an associated bene ciary of the project

and there were two further partner organisations, the Pela-gos and Tethys research institutes.

Thalassa was “the rst organised information campaign inGreece about all marine mammals,” says Mr Dendrinos, ex-plaining that this is especially signi cant, because unlikemany other countries, Greece doesn’t have a long traditio

best life nature projects 2014

Documents