life project number life12 nat/cy/000758 final report ... · the protocol can be found in annex...

(Projects submitting final reports after 1 January 2014 must use this format.)

LIFE Project Number

LIFE12 NAT/CY/000758

FINAL Report

Covering the project activities from 01/09/2013 to 28/02/2017

Reporting Date

28/02/2017

LIFE+ PROJECT NAME

LIFE-RIZOELIA: Improving the conservation status of the priority habitat

types *1520 and *5220 at the Rizoelia National Forest Park

Project Data

Project location Cyprus

Project start date: 01/09/2013

Project end date: 28/02/2017 Extension date: -

Total Project duration 42 months

Total budget € 766,746

Total eligible budget € 766,271

EU contribution: € 574,703

(%) of total costs 74,95%

(%) of eligible costs 75%

Beneficiary Data

Name Beneficiary Department of Forests, Cyprus

Contact person Mr Takis Tsintides

Postal address Loukis Akritas 26, 1414, Nicosia, Cyprus

Visit address Loukis Akritas 26, 1414, Nicosia, Cyprus

Telephone +35722805500

Fax: + 35722781419

E-mail [email protected]

Project Website http://www.life-rizoelia.eu/

2

Instructions:

The final report must be submitted to the Commission no later than 3 months after the project

end date.

One paper and one electronic version of the report is sufficient for the Commission. These

documents must be sent in identical versions also to the monitoring team. The report must

also be sent to the national authority.

Please refer to the Common Provisions annexed to your grant agreement for the contractual

requirements concerning a final report.

List of abbreviations

AB: Associate Beneficiaries

AEIC: Athalassa Environmental Information Centre

AGB: Above-Ground Biomass

BGB: Below-ground biomass

CB: Coordinating Beneficiary

DE: Department of Environment

DF: Department of Forests

EC: European Commission

EMT: External Monitoring Team

EU: European Union

FR: Final Report

FU: Frederick University

IAPS: Invasive Alien Plant Species

IPCC: Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change

IR: Inception Report

MR: Midterm Report

NCU: Nature Conservation Unit

OUC: Open University of Cyprus

PFM: Project Financial Manager

PM: Project Manager

PMT: Project Management Team

PMTL: Project Management Team Leader

PR: Progress Report

RFS: Rizoelia Forest Station

RNFP: Rizoelia National Forest Park

SC: Scientific Committee

SCo: Scientific Coordinator

SDF: Standard Data Form

ShC: Stakeholder Committee

TESSA: Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment

TG: Temperate grassland

TSW: Temperate scrub/woodland

3

1. List of contents

2. Executive Summary (maximum 5 pages)

The project titled ‘Improving the conservation status of the priority habitat types *1520

and *5220 at the Rizoelia National Forest Park’ (acronym LIFE-RIZOELIA, LIFE12

NAT/CY/000758), aimed to promote and enable the long term conservation of the habitat

types ‘*5220 – Arborescent matorrals with Ziziphus’ and ‘*1520 – Gypsum steppes

(Gypsophiletalia)’ in Cyprus, by quantifying and halting natural and anthropogenic

pressures and threats that contribute to the long term degradation of these habitats. The

project was implemented within Rizoelia National Forest Park (RNFP), of which the

greatest part (92.3%) is included in the Natura 2000 Network (CY6000006 – Ethniko

Dasiko Parko Rizoelias). The project has been successfully completed within foreseen

timeframe, i.e. from September 2013 – February 2017.

The project was efficiently and timely implemented, according to the project’s approved

work plan, without substantial divergences from the initial proposal. The successful

implementation of the project was based on the efficient management of the project at the

administrative level by the Project Management Team (PMT). The ‘Project Management

Manual’ (IR - Annex 7.2.7) and the ‘Project Financial Management Guide’ (IR – Annex

7.5.7) contributed to the sound management of the project. The operation of the PMT,

having the advice of the Stakeholders Committee (ShC) and the Scientific Committee

(SC), secured the effective cooperation among all beneficiaries for the successful

implementation of the project.

Regarding the technical part of the project, all Preparatory Actions (Actions A) were

completed successfully. There was a small delay (no more than two months the maximum)

on the implementation of Actions A.2, A.4 and A.5, which however had no impact neither

on the progress of the project nor to its budget or objectives. The reason of the delay, in

each case, is explained in detail in the technical part of the current report. Preparatory

actions provided the necessary information to the beneficiaries in order to properly

implement the conservation actions. The outcomes of the Preparatory Actions are:

• Four high resolution color maps presenting habitat types within RNFP, distribution of

Acacia saligna and Oxalis pes – caprae and proposed locations for ‘C’ actions –

Action A.1.

• A Report on population structure of the priority habitat type *1520 – Action A.2.

• Two Monitoring Plans (one for each habitat type) – Action A.3.

• Two Management Plans (one for each habitat type) – Action A.4.

• Two Action Plans (one for each habitat type) – Action A.5.

• A Feasibility study on *5220 habitat re-creation – Action A.5.

• Expansion of the targeted Natura 2000 site and update of the Standard Data Form

(SDF).

4

All Conservation Actions (Actions C) have been successfully implemented according to

the proposal of the project, as well as following the guidelines of the deliverables of the

preparatory actions, or the suggestions of the SC. The outcomes of the Conservation

Actions are:

• Soft-fencing of 1300 m for the demarcation of habitat type *1520 in selected areas –

Action C.1, successfully limiting the illegal passing of vehicles within the habitat area.

• Treatment of more than 10000 stems of Acacia saligna, within an area of 6,8 ha (42%

of the total distribution area of Acacia in RNFP) for the control of this Invasive Alien Plant

Species (IAPS). Both the number of individuals treated and the coverage of the area

exceeded the foreseen numbers according to the initial proposal of the project – Action

C.2.

• 26900 m2 of dry herbaceous vegetation was cleared and 36000 m2 of fire traces

(clearings using agricultural tractor) were created on parts of the perimeter of RNFP for

fire prevention – Action C.4.

• Closure of 3,4 km (1 km was foreseen in the project proposal) of road network to limit

public access for fire prevention – Action C.4. This measure successfully limit vehicle

access to specific areas.

• Production of 2900 saplings of Ziziphus lotus, 1008 saplings of Asparagus horridus,

1010 saplings of Phagnalon rupestre, 598 saplings of Thymbra capitata and 660 saplings

of Noaea mucronata for the needs of Actions C.3 and C.6 – Action C.5.

• Dispersal of 13000 seeds of Gypsophila linearifolia, 1100 seeds of Campanula

fastigiata and 9000 seeds of Herniaria hemistemon for the restoration and enhancement of

habitat type *1520 – Action C.3. Enhancement took place in three localities covering 0,46

ha in total (0,1 ha was foreseen in the project proposal). Restoration took place in two

localities, covering an area of 0,56 ha (0,1 ha was foreseen in the project proposal).

• Planting of 815 saplings (541 Ziziphus lotus, 115 Asparagus horridus, 45 Noaea

mucronata, 39 Thymbra capitata and 75 Phagnalon rupestre saplings) for the restoration

of habitat type *5220 – Action C.3. Final success rate (percentage of established plants in

the field) was 29,4% for Ziziphus lotus, 28,7% for Asparagus horridus, 60% for Noaea

mucronata, 79,5% for Thymbra capitata and 92% for Phagnalon rupestre, contributing

towards the successful restoration of 1,97 ha of *5220 habitat type.

• Planting of 2085 plants (1194 Ziziphus lotus, 366 Asparagus horridus, 141 Noaea

mucronata, 156 Thymbra capitata and 228 Phagnalon rupestre saplings) for the re-

creation of habitat type *5220 – Action C.6. Final success rate was 30,7% for Ziziphus

lotus, 56,3% for Asparagus horridus, 87,9% for Noaea mucronata, 98,1% for Thymbra

capitata and 92,1% for Phagnalon rupestre, contributing towards the successful re-

creation of 1,95 ha of *5220 habitat type.

Regarding the Monitoring of the impact of the project actions, the progress of the

Conservation Actions was monitored and evaluated by the Project Manager (PM) and the

SC, based on the ‘Conservation Monitoring Protocol’ (Action D.1). The final evaluation of

the Protocol can be found in Annex 7.1.12. A study on the impacts of the project on the

local economy and the ecosystems services was carried out (Action D.2). The Rapid

Appraisal analysis of TESSA toolkit revealed that the most important ecosystem services

supported by the study area are: i. Nature-based recreation and ii. Carbon related services

5

involved in the Global Climate Regulation. Moreover, a short questionnaire of 12

questions with c.20 min duration about perception and attitudes of the local population

towards the conservation activities and Natura 2000 sites was created as a basis for

information collection from the urban areas around the park. Although many of the

respondents had heard of the N2K network (49%), they were uncertain about its aims and

role in nature conservation (70% of the respondents). The overall majority of the

respondents (95%) believe that there are multiple benefits in nature conservation, and the

majority (73%) does not think that nature conservation imposes too many restrictions on

land development. 79% of the respondents welcomed the proposed changes carried out by

the LIFE-RIZOELIA project, regarding visitor related infrastructure and public awareness.

The Public awareness and dissemination of results Actions (Actions E) were properly

implemented according to the initial proposal of the project. All dissemination actions

followed the foreseen schedule of the project. The following activities contributed to the

dissemination of the project’s outcomes:

• Publication of five press releases – Action E.1.

• Publication of five articles in newspaper/magazines – Action E.1.

• Implementation of two Local Workshops in Aradippou Municipality – Action E.1.

• Installation of four habitat information boards – Action E.1.

• Installation of four notice boards – Action E.1.

• Publication of three newsletters – Action E.1.

• Publication of a project’s leaflet – Action E.1.

• Development of project’s website – Action E.2.

• Production of promotion material (hats and pens) – Action E.2

• Participation in eight scientific conferences – Action E.3.

• Publication of Layman’s Report – Action E.4.

Furthermore, some outside LIFE activities took place regarding conservation actions and

dissemination of the project’s actions and results which however did not affect its progress

or budget. These activities are:

• Mapping of all habitat types, including plantations, within RNFP (not only targeted

habitat types) – Action A.1.

• Mapping of Oxalis pes – caprae – Action A.1.

• Pilot control of Oxalis pes – caprae – Action C.2.

• Estimation of Acacia saligna seed bank in RNFP – Action C.2.

• Stakeholders participated on 9/2/2016 in re-creation activities of the habitat type

*5220 in Alona area – Action C.6.

• Production and dissemination of a flyer – Action E.1.

• Publication of two more articles and press releases – Action E.1.

• Promotion of the Final Info-Day through the media – Action E.1.

• Participation in four more scientific conferences – Action E.3.

• Presentation of the project in the Mediterranean Kick off Seminar through the Natura

2000 Seminars of the Mediterranean Biogeographical Region on 26th-28th May 2014

– Action F.5.

6

• Participation of the LIFE-RIZOELIA project at the Green Week Satellite Event and at

the European Natura 2000 Day organized in Cyprus in 2015 and at the Final Info Day

of the LIFE+ project JUNIPERCY.

• Co-organization, with other LIFE projects implementing in Cyprus, of the ‘LIFE

Nature Platform Meeting on the management of Mediterranean habitat’ on 9-10

October 2014 at Polis Chrysochous.

• Co-organization with LIFE-FORBIRDS project of an event celebrating the European

Natura 2000 Day on 21/5/2016 in Cyprus.

In conclusion, the project successfully:

• minimized the threats of habitat fragmentation, fire, competitive vegetation,

extended road network and leisure activities on the targeted habitat types

• precisely mapped all habitat types within RNFP

• determined and describe the composition and structure of habitat type *1520 in

Cyprus

• expanded the Natura 2000 site ‘Ethiko Dasiko Parko Rizoelias’

• contributed to the long-term conservation of the targeted habitats

• identified the most important ecosystem services provided by the Park.

Referring to the financial part of the project, the project covered the 98.8% of the total

budget of €766,746.

The FR is accompanied by 34 annexes, of which 16 are deliverables of the project and 18

are additional files with information on the project’s progress.

3. Introduction (1 page) The project titled 'Improving the conservation status of the priority habitat types *1520

and *5220 at the Rizoelia National Forest Park' (LIFE12 NAT/CY/000758) has been

implemented within the framework of LIFE+ program of the European Union (EU). The

primary aim of the project was to promote and enable the long-term conservation of the

habitat types '*5220 - Arborescent matorrals with Ziziphus' and '*1520 - Gypsum steppes

(Gypsophiletalia)' in Cyprus, by quantifying and halting natural and anthropogenic

pressure and threats that contribute to the long-term degradation of these habitats. The

project was carried out within Rizoelia National Forest Park, of which the greatest part is

included in the Natura 2000 Network (CY6000006 – Ethniko Dasiko Parko Rizoelias).

The specific objectives of the project were:

• To contribute to the consolidation and dissemination of a knowledge base for the

protection, restoration, monitoring and evaluation of targeted priority habitat types,

• To increase habitat connectivity for arborescent matorral with Ziziphus (*5220),

• To reduce the risk of fire affecting both targeted priority habitat types,

• To eradicate competitive vegetation for both priority habitats and

• To manage leisure activities and accessibility in the park in a favourable manner to the

conservation of the priority habitats.

The main stakeholders affected from the current project are the park visitors, the local

authorities and local people. The visitors of the habitat areas have been informed about the

habitat’s value and the undertaken conservation efforts through the dissemination material

of the project, as well as the Notice Boards and the Habitat Information Boards. A socio-

7

economic study, prepared by the end of the project, documented the positive effects of the

project on the local people and the local economy as well as on the ecosystem services of

the targeted site. The results corroborated the importance of RNFP for ecosystem services

provision in addition to biodiversity support, with direct and indirect benefits to the local

community. The implementation of TESSA Toolkit revealed that RNFP supports climate

regulation services (global climate, local climate and air quality); and recreation and

aesthetic benefits. Moreover, questionnaire survey revealed that although that the public

knows of the concept, understands restrictions imposed by, and dangers to nature

conservation from development, however, many are not still aware of the mission and

vision of Natura 2000 sites nationally.

The expected results achieved by the project are:

• The consolidation and dissemination of knowledge on:

- The composition and structure of habitat type *1520.

- The anthropogenic impact on the ecological conditions of both targeted habitats

(*5220 and *1520).

- The effective participation and governance methods for the conservation of the

targeted habitat types.

- The effective monitoring and conservation methods through the elaboration of

management plans, action plans and monitoring plans.

• The habitat demarcation and detailed mapping of the targeted habitat types,

• The restoration of 1,97 ha of habitat type *5220,

• The restoration and enhancement of habitat type *1520 (0,56 ha and 0,46 ha,

respectively),

• The re-creation of habitat type *5220 (1,95 ha) and

• The expansion of the Natura 2000 site ‘CY6000006 - Ethniko Dasiko Parko Rizoelias’

and the update of the respective SDF.

4. Administrative part (maximum 3 pages)

4.1 Description of the management system

The Coordinating Beneficiary (CB) and Associate Beneficiaries (AB) covered all aspects

of the project’s managerial needs by assigning explicit roles and obligations to team

members based on their available personnel, skills and experience. A balanced workload

for each one was planned in order to assure optimal quality of results, time management

and budget control. PMT had the overall control of the project implementation and

project beneficiaries’ obligations and activities were well described in the Project

Management Manual. The personnel of each beneficiary that has worked on the project

during the reporting period is presented in Annex 7.2.1 of this report: List of personnel

involved in the project.

The project was divided into two phases (Fig. 1): The preparatory phase (including the

activities from Actions A.1-A.5) and the conservation phase (including the activities from

Actions C.1-C.6). Project monitoring activities (Actions D.1, D.2 and F.2), management

activities (Actions F.1, F.3-F.6), public awareness and dissemination of results (Actions

E.1-E.4) started from the beginning of the project and most of them lasted until the very

end.

8

Figure 1. Workflow and management chart.

The CB of the project was the Department of Forests (DF) of the Ministry of

Agriculture, Rural Development and Environment, the competent authority for both the

management of state forest land and the implementation of national forest legislation and

policy. Moreover, it is the competent authority for the Natura 2000 sites within state

forest land.

Three more partners contributed to the implementation of the LIFE-RIZOELIA project:

- Department of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and

Environment (DE).

- Frederick University: Nature Conservation Unit (NCU) of Frederick University.

- Open University of Cyprus (OUC): The Terrestrial Ecosystems Management Lab of

OUC.

The project’s organigram has been fully developed, according to the project proposal.

The management structure was formed by three distinct levels:

• The Administration Level: Administration and coordination of the project

implementation was covered by the PMT. The PMT was also responsible for the

overall monitoring of the project.

• The Advisory Level: This is covered by the SC and ShC (Actions F.3 and F.4). The

aim of the two committees was to empower the scientific support of the project and to

enhance the participation and collaboration of all possible stakeholders who may be

interested in the project’s actions and results.

• The Implementation Level: This level involved the project partners that actively

support the project through the work of their staff and partners and aimed to achieve

all task and objectives, as described in the initial project proposal.

9

Day-to-day management and project coordination was carried out by the PMT, as stated

above. The members of the PMT and the members of ShC were detailed described in MR

(#4.1).

The PM and the PMTL in order to organise and co-ordinate the implementation of the

project arrange several meetings and contacts with the project partners (Administration

Level). Specifically:

- In order to ensure the smooth start of the project, the CB arranged a preliminary

meeting before the official start with the AB of the project on 27/08/2013 at the

premises of the DF.

- Five more official meetings of the partners took place on 26/09/2013 at Rizoelia

National Forest Park (RNFP), on 13/02/2014 at DF, on 17/07/2014 at RNFP, on

08/09/2014, 04/02/2015, 14/01/2016 and 27/09/2016 at DF.

- Several unofficial meetings have taken place between the PM and the PMTL, or the

PM with the representatives of each partner.

- The Project Management Manual, which was prepared at the beginning of the project

was an additional tool to the sound management of the project (see I.R., #5.1.18).

- The PFM has prepared the Project Financial Management Guide, as an auxiliary tool

for handling economic issues of the project. A Financial Management Team has been

established, consisting of the PFM and a representative of each project partner.

Moreover, the PM was in continuous contact (at least once a week) either by email or by

telephone with Mr. Charalambos Christodoulou (DF), Mrs Anna Savvides (DE) and Dr.

Paraskevi Manolaki (OUC) regarding running issues of the project implementation

(Implementation Level).

As regards the Advisory Level, all foreseen project activities have been implemented:

- The 1st official meeting of the SC was held in the premises of the DF on 06/02/2014.

They had the opportunity to get informed on the project goals and actions. The

members of the SC visited the project area on 07/02/2014. The external scientific

experts have given instructions and directions on scientific aspects of the work

undertaken for this project (see I.R., Annex 7.2.8).

- The 1st official meeting of the stakeholders took place at the Rizoelia Forest Station on

28/01/2014. The ShC was nominated during this meeting. The role of the ShC was to

assist the project by providing necessary support and guidance to overcome external,

political, administrative, and managerial issues that may arise. The ShC had also an

advisory role on all administrative and technical matters with specific emphasis on

the information campaign and the relations with local people and groups of interest.

During the first meeting of the ShC, the stakeholders were informed on the targeted

habitat types, the main aims of the project and the project actions. The stakeholders

were interested in the actions for the conservation of the two habitat types, especially

of 5220* habitat type since this is well known to occur at the area. The stakeholders

stated the significance of Ziziphus lotus shrubs and their fruits for people and fauna

during the past, and reported that the reduction of the species stands has been

obvious, over the last decades. They agreed with the foreseen conservation measures

of the project and argued that during the re-creation or enhancement of the habitat,

plantations of other species like thyme (Thymbra capitata) will improve not only the

flora of the area but also the fauna. They also referred to the need for elimination of

Acacia saligna, whose invasion is obvious in the RNFP. The minutes of the meeting

can be found in Annex 7.2.9 of IR.

- The 2nd meeting of the ShC took place at the Rizoelia Forest Station (RFS) on

11/11/2014. Stakeholders were updated on the project progress. The meeting included

10

touring of the ShC members within RNFP in order to see the progress of the

conservation actions such as the control of Acacia saligna and the enhancement of the

two priority habitat types, in place. The stakeholders made specific comments on the

conservation actions of the project. Specifically, they suggest to carefully shape the

basin of the planted saplings in order to collect as much water as possible during

rainfall and to plant local species during the restoration of 5220* habitat type. Both

comments have been seriously considered by the project beneficiaries. Additionally,

they were informed on the dissemination activities and they also saw the boards

which were ready to be established in RNFP. The minutes of the meeting can be

found in Annex 7.2.14 of MR.

- An unofficial meeting of the SC took place on 14-15/01/2015 during the experts’

workshop. During the workshop, they had the opportunity to be informed on the

project progress. The proceedings of the workshop can be found in Annex 7.2.3 of

MR.

- The 3rd meeting of the ShC took place on 20/10/2015. Stakeholders were updated on

the project progress since their last meeting a year ago. The meeting included touring

of the ShC members within the RNFP in order to see the progress of the conservation

actions such as the enhancement of the two priority habitat types and the re-creation

of *5220 habitat type, in place. During the meeting, the stakeholders made specific

comments on the conservation actions of the project. Specifically, they suggest

several ways in order to overcome the high mortality of Ziziphus lotus saplings, either

in the nurseries or in the field, i.e. to try producing saplings through asexual

reproduction (i.e. by cuttings), establishing saplings in places with high soil moisture,

planting seeds in the field without the hard coat (only the embryo) (this is one of the

methods employed in the nursery) etc. The PMTL (Mr Takis Tsintides) mentioned

that this may be the strategy of the specific species and the results, either in the

nurseries or the field, might be more than enough. The above suggestions are outside

of the current project’s activities. However, the project partners tried to investigate

some of them using their own time and budget. The minutes of the meeting can be

found in Annex 7.1.1 of PR.

- The 2nd official SC was held at the premises of the DF on 11-12 April 11 2016, with

the participation of the members of the SC, as well as the personnel from associated

beneficiaries directly involved in the project. A detailed overview of the project’s

progress for all Actions (A, C, D, E, and F) was given by the SCo Dr. Ioannis

Vogiatzakis during the first day of the meeting. During the meeting, the Conservation

Monitoring Protocol was assessed by the external experts (time was given to the

experts to send any comments at a later stage). Following the discussion in the office,

the participants had the opportunity to visit the RNFP where they had the chance to

see the project area and the implementation of the concrete conservation actions.

During the 2nd day, participants had the opportunity to visit various locations within

the districts of Larnaca and Nicosia where Ziziphus lotus is found principally in

isolated individuals surrounded by an agriculture matrix/landscapes. The minutes of

the meeting can be found in Annex 7.2.2 of this report.

- The 4th meeting of the ShC took place at the RFS on 01/11/2016. Stakeholders were

informed on the outcomes of the project versus the expected results indicated in the

project proposal. During the meeting, the PM referred to the contribution of the

member of the ShC and the Municipality of Aradippou to the implementation of the

project. Finally, the stakeholders discussed about the organization of the Final Info-

Day during the last month of the project and explored ways to attract the local people

11

to participate to the event. The minutes of the meeting can be found in Annex 7.2.3 of

this report.

Within the framework of the Overall project operation and monitoring of the project

progress (Actions F), Networking with other LIFE and/or non-LIFE projects was

included (Action F.5). The action brought together scientists from similar projects, i.e

LIFE04 NAT/CY/000013 (Conservation management in NATURA 2000 sites of Cyprus)

and LIFE00 NAT/E/007304 (Cabo de Gata - Improvement of the management of the SCI

and SPA 'Cabo de Gata-Níjar'). Unfortunately, there was no response from scientists of

the project LIFE03 NAT/E/000059 (Hábitats N-E Murcia - Integral management of the

habitats of Northwest region of the Murcia Province), despite the repeated efforts of the

SCo in collaboration with the member of the SC Dr. Reyees Tirado. Therefore, only one

visit of the project partners abroad took place. The LIFE-RIZOELIA team (Andreas

Nearchou – DF, Constantinos Kounnamas - FU) visited Almeria on 15-18 December

2015. OUC could not participate in this visit at the selected dates. The visit was hosted by

Dr. Francisco Javier Cabello Piñar (University of Almeria), and was also facilitated by

the Oficina Administrativa Del Parque Natural Cabo de Gata-Níjar. The LIFE-

RIZOELIA team visited LIFE00 NAT/E/007304 targeted areas, where concrete

conservation actions implemented. The report from the visits of team members to similar

projects areas can be found in Annex 7.2.2 of MR. Within the framework of the same

action, an experts’ workshop was organised and successfully implemented on 14-15

January 2015. During the first day, a workshop on ‘The impact of climate change on

priority habitat types’ viability’, took place at the premises of the Ministry of Agriculture,

Rural Development and Environment. The second day, included visit of the experts at

RNFP, in order to get familiar with the results of the actions which have been

implemented or those which are in progress. The workshop was attended by 45

participants, including the three experts of the SC, two external experts (Dr. Salvatore

Pasta and Dr. Costas Thanos) and two experts from Cyprus (Dr. Panos Hadjinicolaou and

Mrs Kyriaki Ioannou). Initially, four external experts were invited and accepted to

participate in the workshop. Unfortunately, there was a last-minute cancelation of two

experts (Kyriacos Georgiou and Javier Cabello), which they were replaced by the two

experts from Cyprus, without affecting the scientific quality of the workshop. The

proceedings of the workshop, the invitation, the agenda and the list of participants can be

found in Annex 7.2.3 of MR.

Action F6 (After-LIFE Conservation Plan) started implementing during the final stage of

the project (from November 2016). The Plan describes the activities foreseen to be

undertaken after the end of the project, the timeframe, the budget and the responsible

beneficiary in order to secure the long-term conservation of the targeted habitat types.

The deliverable can be found in Annex 7.3.2 of this report.

Within the framework of the Overall project operation and monitoring of the project

progress (Actions F) 11 deliverables of LIFE-RIZOELIA project were foreseen to be

prepared:

- Project Management Manual (see I.R., Annex 7.2.7)

- Project Monitoring Protocol (see MR, Annex 7.2.4). The updated table of Project

Monitoring Protocol, presenting the final assessment of the indicators can be found in

Annex 7.2.13 of this report.

- Minutes of the 1st meeting of the SC (see I.R., Annex 7.2.8)

- Minutes of the 2nd meeting of the SC (see Annex 7.2.2 of this report)

- Minutes of the 1st meeting of the ShC (see I.R., Annex 7.2.9)

- Minutes of the 2nd meeting of the ShC (see MR, Annex 7.2.14)

12

- Minutes of the 3rd meeting of the ShC (see PR, Annex 7.1.1)

- Minutes of the 4th meeting of the ShC (see Annex 7.2.3 of this report)

- Proceedings of the expert’s workshop (see MR, Annex 7.2.3)

- Report from the visits of team members to similar projects areas (see MR, Annex

7.2.2)

- After-LIFE Conservation Plan (see Annex 7.3.2 of this report).

The Partnership Agreement was signed by the CB and the AB on 14.10.2013 and was

submitted to the EC with the IR. No changes have been made to the Grant Agreement.

4.2 Evaluation of the management system

The PMT has been characterized by excellent collaboration during the implementation of

the project. The PMTL along with the PM organized and monitored the timely

implementation of project activities and evaluate the project progress in collaboration

with the SCo of the project. The project progress is shown in the Gantt chart (Annex 7.1.2

of this report). Moreover, the PFM monitored the financial documents of the project and

interfered whenever and wherever was necessary (please see #6). As a result, no

substantial problems have occurred. Furthermore, the close collaboration of the PMT

with the SC and ShC ensured the scientific quality of the project activities and the success

of the information campaign and the communication with the local people, respectively.

Two problems were raised during project implementation:

• No records on website visits for certain months. The issue was successfully met (see

#5.2.2.2).

• The low percentage of Ziziphus lotus seedlings production from seeds and the high

mortality of these seedlings in the nursery. The issue was also successfully met (see

#5.1.10 and Annex 7.1.1).

The PMT was engaged in an ongoing communication with the EMT, including the

transition of monthly reports for the project’s progress and also asking for guidance

regarding administrative and financial issues. All project reports have been sent to the

EMT, too.

5. Technical part (maximum 50 pages)

5.1. Technical progress, per task

5.1.1. Action A.1: Detailed mapping of the distribution of the targeted habitat

types and the locations where conservation activities will take place

Status: COMPLETED

Foreseen start date:

01/09/2013

Actual start date:

01/09/2013

Foreseen end date:

30/06/2014

Actual end date:

30/06/2014

The first preparatory Action focused on:

- the detailed mapping of the exact boundaries of the targeted habitat types *1520 and

*5220 within Rizoelia area,

- the identification and mapping of IAPS and the proposal of locations where control

of invasive species have taken place (Action C.2).

13

- the identification of suitable locations regarding restoration activities (Action C.3

and C.6) of the targeted habitat types.

Action A.1 started from the beginning of the project and was completed as foreseen in

the project proposal. Please note that all habitat types were mapped within RNFP,

which did not affect either the deliverables, timetable or the overall EC contribution to

the project. Within the framework of this action, a GIS software package was

purchased by the DF in December 2013.

It should be mentioned that within the framework of this action, mapping of Oxalis

pes – caprae took place in March 2014. This invasive species, a persisting perennial

herb, occurs at several locations of RNFP, especially in disturbed areas. Mapping of

Oxalis pes –caprae was not foreseen in the project proposal (outside LIFE activity). It

was proposed by the external experts of the SC, after their first visit to the RNFP. Pilot

control of this IAPS (see Action C.2, #5.1.7) was also proposed by the SC.

The production of one 1:500 colour map was the main deliverable of Action A.1.

However, due to large amount of data, four large scale maps were produced (see

Annex 7.2.5 of MR). Specifically:

- Habitat types distribution map,

- Proposed locations for the implementations of "C" Actions map,

- Acacia saligna distribution map and

- Oxalis pes caprae distribution map.

The maps produced provided the necessary information for:

- Preparing (Action A.5) and implementing (Action C.3) the Action Plans,

- Preparing the Monitoring Plans (Action A.3),

- Preparing the Management Plans (Action A.4),

- Controlling/ minimizing competitive vegetation (Action C.2) and

- Indicating new locations for establishing Ziziphus lotus (Action C.6)

Furthermore, data acquired through Action A.1 was utilised for updating the SDF of

the Natura 2000 site ‘Ethniko Dasiko Parko Rizoelias’, including new areas

(expansion of the site). The new SDF (see Annex 7.2.4) was updated and preliminary

approved in October 2016 by the Scientific Committee, which was set according to the

Law for the Protection and Management of Nature and Wildlife [153(I)2003] of

Cyprus. The new SDF has preliminary been forwarded to the EC by DE. A certain

period for consultation was given to interested parties to express their complaints or

objections. The consultation was completed and no changes to the SDF emerged. The

finalized SDF will be sent to EC (probably by the end of 2017), after the declaration of

Alona area (the expansion area) as State Forest land.

DF was the responsible beneficiary of this action. OUC, DE and DF involved in the

inventory of the targeted habitat types and mapping of their boundaries. DF produced

the maps. DE, with collaboration of DF, updated the SDF of the targeted Natura 2000

site.

14

5.1.2. Action A.2: Composition and structure of the priority habitat type *1520

Status: COMPLETED


01/03/2014

Actual start date:

02/04/2014

Foreseen end date:

30/06/2014

Actual end date:

02/09/2014

Action A.2 started in early April 2014, instead of March 2014, simultaneously with

the mapping of habitat type *1520 (Action A.1). The appearance of the habitat’s

keystone species Gypsophila linearifolia and Campanula fastigiata, which are both

annual herbs, depends on the weather conditions which were favourable during April

2014. Within the framework of this action, 25 variable size plots have been established

in the field, based on environmental features (topography and elevation). All reference

plots were georeferenced using GIS. Basic environmental parameters (slope, aspect,

gradient, elevation, etc.) and vegetation cover (using the modified Braun-Blanquet 9-

grade cover-abundance scale) have been recorded.

This action’s deliverable was a ‘Report on population structure of the priority habitat

type *1520’ (Annex 7.2.6 of MR). The report provides information on the composition

and structure of the priority habitat type *1520 within the targeted Natura 2000 site

‘Ethniko Dasiko Parko Rizoelias’ (CY6000006) in Cyprus. Specifically, it provides

information on the composition and structure of *1520, the floristic list of the habitat

type 1520 at RNFP, the population size of the two keystone species of *1520

(Campanula fastigiata and Gypsophila linearifolia) and the threats which were

recorded. Raw data (field sheets in Greek language) is available in digital format, upon

request. The main findings of the report are:

- Keystone species for habitat type 1520* in Cyprus are the gypsophilous species

Campanula fastigiata and Gypsophila linearifolia.

- Other species participating in the composition of the habitat are Herniaria hemistemon

(Vulnerable), Thymbra capitata, Teucrium micropodiodes (Εndemic), Phagnalon

rupestre and Fumana thymifolia.

- Regarding its structure, the habitat is characterized by the presence of herbaceous

species and low shrubs with large bare soil exposures. Such scientific knowledge was

essential for taking the appropriate conservation measures for the targeted habitat

type.

FU was the responsible beneficiary of this action. FU was involved in the procedures

of delineation of the plots and acquiring of data on the targeted habitat composition

and structure. DF was involved in the collection of data. The analysis of vegetation

releves was carried out by the member of SC Prof. Panayiotis Dimopoulos.

The action was completed with a two months delay with no impact whatsoever on the

scientific quality of the deliverable or the project implementation. The completion of

the action depended on the availability of Prof. Dimopoulos to perform the vegetation

analysis, an activity that was not foreseen in the project proposal, which resulted in a

small delay.

15

5.1.3. Action A.3: Preparation of Monitoring Plans

Status: COMPLETED


01/09/2013

Actual start date:

02/10/2013

Foreseen end date:

31/10/2014

Actual end date:

31/10/2014

The Action A.3 started in October 2013 and concluded in October 2014. It is

important to note that there were no standardised monitoring protocols/methods for the

habitat type *1520, neither appropriate baseline data available for the targeted site. A

monitoring plan already existed for the habitat *5220 but only for the Kavo Gkreko

site. The existing monitoring plan was adapted accordingly for the targeted Natura

2000 site.

The action started with data collection and literature review on the habitat types *1520

and *5220. The table of contents has been reviewed by the external experts of the SC.

The elaboration of the monitoring plans utilized the results of Actions A.1, A.2 and

A.4.

Two Monitoring Plans were the deliverables of this action (see Annex 7.2.7 of MR).

The Monitoring Plans aimed at (i) assessing the conservation status of the targeted

habitat types, (ii) setting specific monitoring objectives and (iii) selecting the

appropriate qualitative and quantitative parameters of monitoring. The plans included

updated information on the targeted habitat types (general description, geographical

distribution, threats, conservation status, protection status etc); specific parameters to

be monitored (mapping, population density, habitat monitoring, threats); and

bibliography. The implementation of the Monitoring Plans at the end of the project is

expected to contribute towards adopting sound management measures for the

conservation of the targeted habitat types.

The preparation of monitoring plans concluded in September 2014 and they were

approved by the DF, the DE and the SC in October 2014. The letters of the official

approval of the Plans by DE and DF can be found in Annex 7.2.5.

FU was the responsible beneficiary of this action. DF and DE have critically reviewed

and approved the Monitoring Plans.

16

5.1.4. Action A.4: Preparation of Management Plans

Status: COMPLETED


01/09/2013

Actual start date:

02/10/2013

Foreseen end date:

31/10/2014

Actual end date:

30/12/2014

The aim of this action was to develop complete and integrated Management Plans for

the priority habitat types located within the targeted site. Action A.4 started in October

2013 with data collection and concluded in December 2014 with the elaboration of

two Management Plans (see Annex 7.2.8 of MR). The elaboration of the management

plans utilized the results of Actions A.1, A.2 and A.3.

Both Management Plans aimed at (i) assessing the current status of the targeted habitat

type, (ii) setting specific management objectives for the targeted habitat type and (iii)

proposing sound management measures to promote the long-term conservation of the

habitat type *1520. Each plan also included updated information on the RNFP and the

targeted habitat type, threats and pressures for the habitat and bibliography.

The management measures included in the Plans are:

- Gradual removal of competing vegetation

- Protection against fires

- Management of visitors and recreation activities

- Expansion of habitat types *1520 and *5220

- Decrease *5220 habitat fragmentation.

Stakeholders Committee members critically reviewed and validated the two

management plans. Furthermore, the DF and the DE, taking into consideration the

views of the ShC and the SC, have approved the management plans. The letters of the

official approval of the Plans by DE and DF can be found in Annex 7.2.6. The

Management Plans became legally operational in October 2016 after their approval by

the Scientific Committee, which was set according to the Law for the Protection and

Management of Nature and Wildlife [Law 153(I)2003]. The minutes of this

Committee meeting can be found in Annex 7.2.7.

DF was the responsible beneficiary of this action. FU contributed to the collection of

bibliographical data and to the writing of the management plans. DF and DE have

critically reviewed and approved the Management Plans.

17

5.1.5. Action A.5: Preparation of Action Plans for the enhancement of the

targeted habitat types

Status: COMPLETED


01/02/2014

Actual start date:

01/02/2014

Foreseen end date:

31/10/2014

Actual end date:

10/11/2014

Action A.5 implemented according to the project timeframe. The elaboration of two

Action Plans (Annex 7.2.9 of MR), one for each targeted habitat type, was the main

deliverable of this action. The two Plans were officially approved by the DF in June

2016 (see Annex 7.2.8). The two action plans constituted a guiding tool for the

enhancement of the targeted habitat types in RNFP through habitat restoration and re-

creation at selected locations of the project area. They provide general information on

the targeted habitat types, the methodology and time frame, as well as the foreseen

results of each activity. The implementation of the action plans through Actions ‘C’ of

the current project ensured the proper implementation of restoration and re-creation

activities mentioned in the project proposal and the successful conservation of the


Furthermore, a feasibility study (Annex 7.2.10 of MR) has been prepared, identifying

all the obstacles to re-creation activities, knowledge gaps regarding the site,

information on status of the area including past and current management, species

composition and soils for the needs of Action C.6. The feasibility study provided

authorities, residents and stakeholders with information about the re-creation of the

habitat type *5220 in RNFP, at selected locations of the project area. It analysed the

methods which were implemented and discussed their necessity and limitations. The

key actions are described herein including important components of the selected

methods and the criteria for their selection.

During this action, the expert on IAPS, Dr Jean-Marc Dufour-Dror, visited RNFP and

trained 19 persons of the DF’s staff and 4 persons of the Nature Conservation Unit,

Frederick University on the appropriate methods of Acacia saligna control on 4-5

February 2014.

FU was the responsible beneficiary of this action. FU prepared the two action plans.

DF critically reviewed the action plans and organised the expert's visit in Cyprus.

OUC prepared the Feasibility Study.

18

5.1.6. Action C.1: On site habitat demarcation and fencing of gypsum steppes

*1520

Status: COMPLETED


01/11/2014

Actual start date:

15/07/2014

Foreseen end date:

29/05/2015

Actual end date:

06/06/2016

The aim of this action was the demarcation of the habitat type *1520 at selected areas

through ‘Soft-fencing’. Action C.1 started earlier and completed one year after the

foreseen deadline (May 2016). The low rainfall of the years 2013 and 2014 resulted in

limited emergence of the two characteristic gypsophilous species. The DF taking into

account the occurrence of the two species during 2015, which was a rainy year, asked

for one year extension of the action. This request was approved by the EC, through the

official letter of EC, during the 2nd visit of the EMT on 27 April 2015 (Annex 7.1.2 of

MR).

In total, 1300 m of soft fencing were considered necessary and installed in specific

locations (Fig. 1) of the RNFP (2000 m of soft fencing was foreseen in the project

proposal). However, the area of habitat type *1520, which is now protected through

soft-fencing, is much more because soft-fencing exploited the relief of the area,

avoiding any unnecessary fencing within the Park. The selection of the areas took into

account the outcomes of Action A.1 and Action A.2. Moreover, the limit of vehicle

access on 3,4 km (more than the length foreseen in the proposal) of forest roads (see #

5.1.9) contributed also to the protection of *1520 habitat type. The exact locations and

the methodology for soft-fencing are analytically discussed in the ‘Action Plan for the

habitat type *1520: Gypsum steppes, at Rizoelia National Forest Park’ (see Annex

7.2.9 of MR).

Demarcation of selected areas successfully directed visitors towards specific trails and

discouraged visitor access in the targeted habitat type area using off-road vehicles,

thus limiting threats and impacts like littering, trampling and fires.

DF was the responsible beneficiary of this action.

Figure 1. Soft-fencing of *1520 habitat type at selected locations at Rizoelia National

Forest Park.

19

5.1.7. Action C.2: Minimizing the impact of competitive vegetation on priority

habitat types *5220 & *1520

Status: COMPLETED


02/06/2014

Actual start date:

03/02/2014

Foreseen end date:

30/12/2016

Actual end date:

30/12/2016

Action C.2 started earlier than the timeframe set in the project proposal (mid-February

2014 instead of June 2014), taking into consideration the view of the expert on IAPS

and the SC. During the 1st SC meeting in February 2014, there was a site visit where

the vegetative condition of Acacia saligna was examined, revealing that it was already

forming flowering heads due to the warm weather, thus it was suggested by the SC

that that period (i.e. February 2014) was the most suitable for the effective control of

Acacia saligna.

The exact locations for controlling competitive vegetation were identified during the

visit of Dr Jean-Marc Dufour-Dror on 4-5 February 2014 and were confirmed during

the first meeting of the SC on 6-7 February 2014, taking into consideration the

outcomes of Action A.1 and experts’ opinion during field visit. Details regarding the

distribution of Acacia saligna, the control area and the methodology are being

presented in the maps prepared in Action A.1 (see Annex 7.2.5 of MR), in the two

management plans (Annex 7.2.8 of MR) and in the two action plans (Annex 7.2.9 of

MR), respectively. According to the project proposal, 500 Acacia saligna individuals,

covering a total area of 0.4 ha were expected to be treated. During the first year (2014)

approximately 1000 individuals (twice than planned) of Acacia saligna were treated

(Fig. 3) in an area larger than the expected area of treatment. During 2015, a follow-up

program (returning control actions) started to secure that in all treated individuals,

which they have been controlled, no re-sprouting or regeneration by seeds will take

place. Furthermore, the control of Acacia saligna was expanded to 6,8 ha in total (42%

of the total distribution area of Acacia in RNFP). More than 10000 stems of Acacia

saligna were treated up to June 2015. Returning control actions continued until

December 2016 for all the above area, securing that 100% of the stems have

successfully treated.

Conifers and Eucalyptus species do not act as IAPS. As expert on IAPS said

‘Eucalyptus individuals do not show any invasive pattern as only mature, planted trees

were observed. The habitat is probably too dry in order to enable spreading of new

individuals of eucalyptus. Only a dozen of Dodonaea viscosa individuals were spotted

in the field, so this species at this stage can only be considered as 'casual' in RNFP. All

Pinus trees found in the field were planted and Pinus species do not display any

invasive behaviour in the region studied.’ As the expert advised, the available

resources for invasive species control should allocated mainly to the control of Acacia

salilgna. However, the DF removed all Dodonaea viscosa and selected Yucca spp.

individuals during summer 2015 within RNFP and Alona area (near *5220 habitat re-

creation), respectively.

Prescribed burning was applied over an area of 1400 m2 in autumn 2015 at a position

with Acacia seeds in the soil (seed bank) to promote regeneration of Acacia (activation

of soil seed bank), aiming to control the young seedlings that emerge. The area was

treated (Acacia removal) in May 2015 (402 individuals were treated) before the

prescribed burning was applied. Seedling emergence was quite high, as approximately

3000 seedlings coming from seeds found in June 2016 and 2000 saplings from

regeneration. Both types of plantlets have been removed successfully by hand.

20

Moreover, during the first visit of the SC in February 2014, Oxalis pes –caprae was

also considered as IAPS. Oxalis pes-caprae populations were localized onto the most

fertile and disturbed soil and locally formed dense stands, crowding out native

herbaceous species. However, the main foci were observed in habitats were Ziziphus

lotus is found (*5220) rather than in the gypsum steppes (*1520) which is the habitat

with rare annual species. It was suggested by the SC that Oxalis pes –caprae should be

mapped within the Natura 2000 site ‘Ethniko Dasiko Parko Rizoelias’ (see Action

A.1, #5.1.1) and also to try to control this species at a pilot level. It was stressed that

the main problem in controlling the Bermuda buttercup is that only glyphosate

spraying can affect the plant, yet only temporarily as the stands may recover within a

two-year period. Mapping took place in March 2014 (see Action A.1, #5.1.1). Oxalis

pes – caprae pilot control (Fig. 3) started in February 2015. Part of the area of habitat

*5220 re-creation was selected to be controlled (3300 m2). This area was free from

natural vegetation as it was an abandoned field. Chemical treatment (glyphosate)

repeated three more times at different development stages of the species. The final

conclusion is that the control of Bermuda buttercup is quite difficult, needs repeated

spraying with glyphosate, a chemical medium that cannot applied in natural areas with

important habitat types and species. The above activities were not foreseen in the

project proposal (outside LIFE activities).

Another outside LIFE activity, carried out in June 2015, was the estimation of Acacia

saligna seed bank in RNFP. Several samples (25 x 25 cm) were taken from soil in

three layers: at the soil surface (0 cm), at 0-10 cm depth and at 10-20 cm depth, at

different canopy covers of Acacia saligna, according to the literature (Strydom et al.

2011.). The results are indicated in the Table 1. The average number of seeds per

square meter at the soil surface is estimated to be 1648 seeds, at 0-10 cm depth is 2160

seeds and at 10-20 cm is 400 seeds.


Table 1. Number of Acacia saligna seeds at different samples and layers.

Sample

(0,25x0,25 m)

% canopy cover of Acacia

saligna Layer

0 cm 0-10 cm 10-20 cm

1

<50%

0 39 46

2 3 64 110

3 0 7 0

4 2 9 2

AVERAGE 1,3 29,8 39,5

Standard error 0,8 13,6 25,8

1

50%

3 3 0

2 0 1 0

3 23 19 0

4 252 311 0

AVERAGE 69,5 83,5 0,0


1

75%

2 17 0

2 29 67 7

3 49 73 5

4 25 96 3

AVERAGE 26,3 63,3 3,8

21


1

100%

82 472 87

2 399 413 44

3 456 210 43

4 320 360 55

AVERAGE 314,3 363,8 57,3


Figure 2. Oxalis pes –caprae pilot control at Rizoelia National Forest Park.

Figure 3. Control of Acacia saligna.

22

5.1.8. Action C.3: Restoration of the targeted habitat types

Status: COMPLETED


02/10/2014

Actual start date:

15/07/2014

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

28/02/2017

This action focused on the restoration of the habitat types *1520 and *5220 by

applying in situ and inter situ conservation measures. Action C.3 started earlier than

the timeframe set in the project proposal (mid July 2014 instead of October 2014).

Preliminary activities such as ground preparation (i.e. garbage removal and mild

pruning of shrubs as needed) for habitat restoration started in July 2014 at the

proposed locations for restoration, indicated in the ‘Action Plan for the habitat type

*5220: Arborescent matorral with Ziziphus, at Rizoelia National Forest Park’.

Within the framework of this action:

- Three restoration sites of *5220 habitat type have been created, 1,97 ha in total (1 ha

was foreseen in the project proposal). 815 pits were opened and 815 plantlets1 were

planted (541 Ziziphus lotus, 115 Asparagus horridus, 45 Noaea mucronata, 39

Thymbra capitata and 75 Phagnalon rupestre). Watering of the plants took place

according to the respective Action Plan but also according to weather conditions.

- Seed dispersal (Fig. 4) of the species Gypsophila linearifolia, Campanula fastigiata

and Herniaria hemistemon took place for the enhancement and restoration of habitat

type *1520. Specifically:

o Enhancement took place in three localities covering 0,46 ha in total (0,1 ha was

foreseen in the project proposal).

o Restoration took place in two localities, covering an area of 0,56 ha (0,1 ha

was foreseen in the project proposal).

For both sub-activities, 13000 seeds of Gypsophila linearifolia, 1100 seeds of

Campanula fastigiata and 9000 seeds of Herniaria hemistemon have been dispersed.

No seedlings coming from seeds dispersal identified in the field mainly due to low

precipitation the past two years. However, the seeds have enriched the soil seed bank

and when the weather conditions become favourable, at least some seedlings are

expected to emerge. This is a common strategy of annual species like Gypsophila

linearifolia and Campanula fastigiata.

- 20 m of stonewalls (50 m of stonewalls were foreseen) have been created to prevent

soil erosion nearby the three restoration sites of habitat type *5220 (Fig. 5). There was

no need for more stonewalls in the framework of this action.

Some minor problems appeared during the implementation of this action. Specifically,

some plants planted in November 2014 have been destroyed due to extreme weather

conditions in January 2015 (heavy rainfall). Moreover, the success rate of plantations

was not the expected one, especially for Ziziphus lotus plantlets. However, the DF

overcame these problems, achieving the project objectives. According to Dr Reyes

Tyrado, member of the SC, taking into consideration the low success rate of Ziziphus

lotus, as well as the difficulties anticipated in the propagation process in her country,

indicated that this success rate can be considered as satisfactory. The final success rate

(percentage of established plants in the field) was 29,4% for Ziziphus lotus, 28,7% for

Asparagus horridus, 60% for Noaea mucronata, 79,5% for Thymbra capitata and

1 The actual number of plants planted was much more. Replanting activities for replacement of failures were

carried out until the end of the project. In general, for the needs of Actions C.3 and C.6 the following number of

individuals were planted: 2520 Ziziphus lotus, 490 Asparagus horridus, 270 Thymbra capitata, 395 Phagnalon

rupestre and 320 Noaea mucronata.

23

92% for Phagnalon rupestre. The DF, which is the competent authority and has a

leading role in implementing the After-LIFE Conservation Plan, will monitor and

maintain the plantations and carry out additional planting as necessary in order to

replace possible failures. In addition, it will try to increase the number of Ziziphus

lotus to the desired level and in any case to ensure that at each planting patch, in all

plantation sites, there will be at least one successfully established individual of

Ziziphus lotus. In this way, the desired distribution of Ziziphus lotus will be achieved

in the re-creation sites. The follow-up procedure and methodology concerning the high

mortality rate of Ziziphus lotus seedlings in the nurseries can be found in Annex 7.1.1.

DF was the responsible beneficiary of this action. Moreover, FU contributed to the

implementation of seeds dispersal at appropriate locations (restoration and

enhancement of habitat type *1520).

Figure 4. Seed dispersal of *1520 habitat type keystone species.

Figure 5. Stonewalls construction.

24

5.1.9. Action C.4: Fire Prevention

Status: COMPLETED


02/01/2015

Actual start date:

02/01/2015

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

28/02/2017

The aim of this action was to apply a series of specific measures to prevent or

minimize the risk of fire, which is a threat to the targeted priority habitat types. The

Action started in January 2015, as planned, by limiting car access (Fig. 6) to roads

indicated in the two management plans elaborated in Action A.4. Vegetation clearings

took place at selected areas in late spring, taking into account the outcomes of Actions

A.1., A.2 and A.4.


- Limit vehicle access on forest roads was enforced in a length of 3,4 km (1 km was

foreseen in the project proposal). This measure successfully limit vehicle access to

specific areas.

- 16.900 m2 of dry herbaceous vegetation were cleared (manually) each year (2015 and

2016). Total area of clearings: 33800 m2.

- An agricultural tractor cultivated/removed stubble over a belt of 10 m wide (18000

m2) on parts of the perimeter of the site in cereal fields just after harvesting, as

indicated in the Management Plans (see Annex 7.2.8 of MR), for two consecutive

years (2015 and 2016). Total area of clearings: 36000 m2.

The above clearings, either manually or mechanically, took place using external

services. 10000 m2 more ha were cleared by the personnel of the DF (no invoices).


Figure 6. Limiting car access at Rizoelia National Forest Park.

25

5.1.10. Action C.5: In situ and inter situ conservation of the targeted habitat types

keystone species

Status: COMPLETED


01/11/2013

Actual start date:

15/10/2013

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

28/02/2017

The aim of this action was the conservation of the targeted habitat types through

activities that focus mainly on their keystone species. Within the framework of this

action, seed collection of the keystone species for both habitat types and production of

saplings of the keystone and accompanying species of *5220 took place. It has to be

mentioned that seed collection of the targeted species took place during the whole

timeframe of the project, according to the fruit-maturity phase of each species. These

seeds were used to study seed germination and to produce saplings (Fig. 7) for the

needs of Actions C.3 and C.6. Specifically,

- Seed germination

Seed germination tests have identified the optimum germination conditions for the

species Ziziphus lotus, Gypsophila linearifolia, Campanula fastigiata and Herniaria

hemistemon.

Zizizphus lotus

Final germination percentages are higher at 20°C in darkness. Only half of the seeds

germinated in any germination treatment tested.

Campanula fastigiata

Germination is promoted by light. The final germination percentages are higher at

15°C (77%), with alternating light conditions (12h light/12h dark).

Gypsophila linearifolia

Most Gypsophila linearifolia’s seeds are dormant. Germination is promoted by light.

The final germination percentages are higher at 10°C (91%) and 15°C (94%), with

alternating light conditions (12h light/12h dark).

Herniaria hemistemon

Most Herniaria hemistemon’s seeds are dormant. Germination is promoted by light

(alternating light conditions - 12h light/12h dark) at temperatures from 10°C to 30°C

(the highest percentage recorded at 30°C – 98%).

Production of saplings

The high mortality of Ziziphus lotus seedlings and samplings (detailed discussed in

Annex 7.1.1) led to the need for an increased effort in the nurseries of the DF. This

issue dealt with by planting (sowing) considerably larger numbers of Ziziphus lotus

seeds, in the nursery. More seedlings have been produced in order to have enough

number of Ziziphus lotus individuals for out-planting. To this end, 20000 Ziziphus

26

lotus seeds were planted; finally producing 2900 saplings. Moreover, 1008 Asparagus

horridus saplings, 598 Thymbra capitate saplings, 660 Noaea mucronata saplings and

1010 Phagnalon rupestre saplings were produced. Most of the above saplings

forwarded for planting in the field for restoration and re-creation of habitat type

*5220.

More information on seed germination and on production of saplings can be found in

the ‘Report on protocols of seed storage, germination, growth and outplanting of the

keystone species’ (Annex 7.2.9).

Furthermore, a 4x4 vehicle was purchased in December 2013 within the framework of

this action. However, the vehicle was used for other actions, too.

The main problem encountered in this action (this was also the main issue during of

the project implementation) was the low percentage of Ziziphus lotus seedlings

production from seeds and, moreover, the high mortality of these seedlings in the

nursery. DF planted much more Ziziphus lotus seeds to overcome the low seed

germination rate and the high saplings mortality of this species. Moreover, DF tested

the production of saplings through cuttings (asexual reproduction) with no success.

Detailed discussion on this issue can be found in Annex 7.1.1.

FU was the responsible beneficiary of this action and responsible for seed collections,

germination tests and development of protocols on germination, growth and

outplanting. DF was responsible for the production of plants (saplings).

Figure 7. Saplings production in the nursery of Department of Forests.

27

5.1.11. Action C.6: Habitat re-creation of arborescent matorral with Ziziphus

(*5220) adjacent to Rizoelia area

Status: COMPLETED


03/11/2014

Actual start date:

15/07/2014

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

28/02/2017

This action aimed at the establishment of the priority habitat *5220 in an area where

the habitat was known to have existed previously but is currently lost (habitat re-

creation). Action C.6 started earlier than the timeframe set in the project proposal (mid

July 2014 instead of October 2014). Preliminary activities such as ground preparation

(i.e garbage removal and mild pruning of shrubs as needed) started in July 2014 at the

proposed locations for re-creation (Fig. 9), indicated in the ‘Action Plan for the habitat

type *5220: Arborescent matorral with Ziziphus, at Rizoelia National Forest Park’

(Action A.5).


- Three re-creation sites of *5220 habitat type have been created, 1,95 ha in total (2 ha

was foreseen in the project proposal). Three degraded locations (an abandoned field,

an area filled with rubble and an old firebreak, which causes fragmentation of

vegetation) have been selected where the habitat was known to have existed

previously but is currently lost, without affecting the natural vegetation of the area.

2085 hundred pits were opened and 2085 plantlets2 were planted (1194 Ziziphus lotus,

366 Asparagus horridus, 141 Noaea mucronata, 156 Thymbra capitata and 228

Phagnalon rupestre saplings). Watering of the plants (Fig. 8) took place according to

the respective Action Plan but also according to weather conditions.

- 100 m of stonewalls (100 m of stonewalls were foreseen in the project proposal)

have been created to prevent soil erosion nearby or within the re-creation sites of

habitat type *5220 (Fig. 5).

Some minor problems appeared during the implementation of this action. Specifically,

some plants planted in November 2014 have been destroyed due to extreme weather

conditions in January 2015 (heavy rainfall). Moreover, the success rate of plantations

was not the expected one, especially for Ziziphus lotus plantlets. However, the DF

overcame these problems, achieving the project objectives. According to Dr Reyes

Tyrado, member of the SC, taking into consideration the low success rate of Ziziphus

lotus, as well as the difficulties anticipated in the propagation process in her country,

indicated that this success rate can be considered as satisfactory. The final success rate

(percentage of established plants in the field) was 30,7% for Ziziphus lotus, 56,3% for

Asparagus horridus, 87,9% for Noaea mucronata, 98,1% for Thymbra capitata and

92,1% for Phagnalon rupestre. The DF, which is the competent authority and has a

leading role in implementing the After-LIFE Conservation Plan, will monitor and

maintain the plantations and carry out additional planting as necessary in order to

replace possible failures. In addition, it will try to increase the number of Ziziphus

lotus to the desired level and in any case to ensure that at each planting patch, in all

plantation sites, there will be at least one successfully established individual of

Ziziphus lotus. In this way, the desired distribution of Ziziphus lotus will be achieved

2The actual number of plants planted was much more. Replanting activities for replacement of failures were

carried out until the end of the project. In general, for the needs of Actions C.3 and C.6 the following number of

individuals were planted: 2520 Ziziphus lotus, 490 Asparagus horridus, 270 Thymbra capitata, 395 Phagnalon

rupestre and 320 Noaea mucronata.

28

in the re-creation sites. The follow-up procedure and methodology concerning the high

mortality rate of Ziziphus lotus seedlings in the nurseries can be found in Annex 7.1.1.

More details on the outcomes of this action can be found in the ‘Report on the results

of the habitat re-creation (*5220)’ (Annex 7.2.10).

DF was the responsible beneficiary of this action. OUC contributed to the field work

and to the preparation of the report on the results of the habitat re-creation.

Figure 8. Watering of plantlets.

Figure 9. Ground preparation of the re-creation site of *5220 habitat type.

29

5.1.12. Action D.1: Monitoring of Concrete Conservation Actions

Status: COMPLETED


02/11/2013

Actual start date:

02/11/2013

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

28/02/2017

This action was designed to measure the effectiveness of the concrete conservation

actions as compared to the initial situation prior to the start of the project. The Action

D.1 started in November 2013 and concluded by the end of the project, in line with the

project timeframe.

The Conservation Monitoring Protocol was the deliverable of this action (see IR,

Annex 7.2.1) and it was finalized in February 2014 after the 1st SC meeting and the

approval of SC members. The PM and the SCo monitored the progress of the Concrete

Conservation Actions through the evaluation of the Conservation Monitoring Protocol

regularly (at least once a month). The monitoring indicators included in the

Conservation Monitoring Protocol also allowed the project beneficiaries and the SC

either to confirm the adequacy of the developed means to address the specific

problems and threats, or to question these means and alternatively develop new ones.

The SC reviewed the progress achieved towards fulfilling each of the monitoring

indicators during the 2nd official meeting of the SC.

The updated table of Conservation Monitoring Protocol, presenting the final

assessment of the indicators can be found in Annex 7.2.11. In general, the target

numbers were fulfilled more than expected, except in a few cases, where the reason

was clearly explained.

DF was responsible for the elaboration of the Conservation Monitoring Protocol. PM

and SCo were responsible for the evaluation of the Actions ‘C’ according to the

monitoring indicators of the Protocol.

30

Action D.2: Socio-economic study

Status: COMPLETED

Foreseen start date: 02/09/2013

Actual start date: 01/11/2013

Foreseen end date: 28/02/2017

Actual end date: 28/02/2017

The aim of the action was to identify and assess the ecosystem services in the area and

the socio-economic impacts of the project to the local communities. The action started

in November 2013 by reviewing the existing frameworks for ecosystem services

assessment (including Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) and concluded at the end

of the project, in line with the project timeframe.

A different approach to the one initially suggested for evaluating ecosystem services

(ES) in the study area was adopted. The Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based

Assessment (TESSA), developed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and

the University of Cambridge, was selected as the most suitable kit for the ecosystem

services assessment at a site-based level. TESSA toolkit (Peh et al., 2013) is designed

to identify and assess the most important ecosystem services of a specific site by

providing templates of assessment, which can be adapted to local conditions. It is a

more rigorous, objective tool which has been tested in other geographical context and

provided scientific validity to the project’s results. Access to the TESSA kit was

requested and granted.

The Rapid Appraisal analysis of TESSA toolkit revealed that the most important

ecosystem services supported by the study area are:

i. Nature-based recreation and

ii. Carbon related services involved in the Global Climate Regulation.

The SC confirmed results from TESSA toolkit considering the ecosystem services in

the study area during the meeting held in February 2014.

Assessing nature-based recreation

Census method (Recreation Method 1) was used for measuring the volume and the

economic value of nature-based tourism and recreation at RNFP. The key information

was the total number of annual visits (Table 2). Visitors counting took place in a large

and representative sample of days through a year, from April 2014 until February

2015. Census time was divided into 3 periods (March-May, June-October, November-

February) and within each period 7 census surveys (21 in a total) were conducted

including weekends, weekdays and national holidays. The counting and questioning

points were located at the site entrances (North and South) of RNFP and the census

surveys took place from 7:00 to 19:00.

Table 2. Number of visits recorded on three census periods. Period A

(March-May) Period Β

(June-October) Period C

(November-February) TOTAL

No of annual visits 3834 4734 5903 14471

The socio-economic Indicator assessed by this action considering the nature-based

recreation is the annual number of visits (14471).

31

Global climate regulation

Based on TESSA, the following were estimated: Above-ground biomass (AGB),

Below-ground biomass (BGB), Litter and dead organic matter, Soil carbon stock in

soils, Total Carbon stock and greenhouse gas emissions of each habitat type within the

Park. The results showed that the total carbon stock in the study area is 14247.33 tC

(Table 3).

Table 3. Carbon stock estimations for each habitat type and total carbon stock in the

study area; [Above Ground Biomass (C_ABG), Below Ground Biomass (C_BGB),

Soil organic carbon stock for mineral soils (C_Soil), Dead organic matter (C_dead)].

In addition, an ES 'matrix' approach (Burkhard et al. 2009) was employed to map the

potential/capacity of habitat types within the RNFP to support a range of ES. The

scores awarded to each habitat and function were derived through brainstorming

sessions and literature searches. Scores retained represent the consensus of these

sessions between St.C and local experts from the DF, DE, OUC and FU. When the

sum for all groups of services was calculated, the results demonstrated that plantations

with an understory of habitat types 1520*, 6220* and 5420 attain the highest capacity

value in ES provision in the study area.

Local population perceptions and attitudes: A short questionnaire of 12 questions

with c.20 min duration about perception and attitudes of the local population towards

the conservation activities and Natura 2000 sites was created as a basis for information

collection from the urban areas around the park. The questionnaire included generic

personal questions, general questions about Natura 2000 and about the RNFP. The

questionnaire was tested over the phone in a small sample (20 respondents) of local

inhabitants in the areas of Aradippou and Larnaca in October 2015 and modifications

were made where seen necessary. This was followed by a large-scale phone survey in

the areas surrounding RNFP in order to ‘map’ the perception of the local population

regarding nature conservation and Natura 2000 sites. The phone survey run from

November 2015 until December 2016, coupled with some selected randomly

distributed questionnaires (snowballing technique) resulting in 298 responses in total.

Habitat Type TESSA

Habitat

Classificatio

n

Area

(ha)

C_AGB

(tC)

C_BGB

(tC)

C_Soil

(tC)

C_dead

(tC)

Total

Carbon

stocks

(tC)

Tree-

dominated

habitat

Needle-leaf

Plantation

Temperate

scrub/woodl

and

14.57 349.59 139.84 295.69

Broadleaf

Plantation

14.09 338.06 148.75 no data

Shrub-

dominated

habitat

Sarcopoterium

spinosum

phryganas (5420)

14.48 347.47 972.92 no data

Arborescent

matorrals with

Ziziphus (5220)

0.38 9.19 25.74 no data

Grass

Dominated

Pseudo-steppe

with grasses and

annuals (6220)

Temperate

grassland

0.19 0.20 0.57 0.00

1045 1288 11619 296 14247

32

The questionnaire responses revealed that although many of the respondents had heard

of the Natura 2000 network (49%), they were uncertain about its aims and role in

nature conservation (70% of the respondents). Respondents (79%) thought that there is

a degree of conflict between Natura 2000 and other forms of land development. The

majority of the respondents (95%) believed that there are multiple benefits in nature

conservation, and the majority (73%) do not think that nature conservation imposes

too many restrictions on land development. In addition, 77% of the respondents

thought that the areal extent of protected areas in Cyprus is currently small and should

be increased. Most respondents were familiar with protected areas in their district

(63% of the respondents), and in particular with RNFP (83%) which they seem to have

visited often. Seventy nine percent (79%) of the respondents welcomed the proposed

changes carried out by the LIFE-RIZOELIA project, regarding visitor related

infrastructure and public awareness.

In addition, the visits of local schools in the park were monitored annually until the

end of the project recording a total of 38 visits (c.9 per year), i.e. 950 students in total.

The ‘Study on the impacts of the project on the local economy and the ecosystems

functions’ can be found in Annex 7.2.12.

To the best of our knowledge this is the first study at the national level which in a

protected area context provided quantification and mapping of ES with the use of

widely employed tools, recorded in a systematic extensive manner the number of

visitors and carried out a large-scale survey on attitudes and perceptions on Natura

2000 sites.

OUC was the responsible beneficiary of this action.

33

5.2 Dissemination actions

5.2.1 Objectives

Despite the fact that no dissemination plan was foreseen in the project proposal, the four

actions included in ‘Public awareness and dissemination of results’ ensure the

information and awareness on the project implementation and outputs to the target groups

set by the project proposal. Specifically,

- Local workshops, notice boards and habitat information boards, leaflets and

newsletters aimed to raise awareness of local people, local authorities and students of

the nearby schools, universities, government authorities, tourists, farmers and relevant

NGOs on the project activities.

- Media coverage (press releases and articles), website development, final info day and

layman’s report aimed to promote the project implementation and results to the

general public.

- Account on social community website aimed to promote the project and

environmental awareness on young people, students, local people and the general

public.

- The promotion material (pens, hats), available at the premises of each beneficiary, at

RNFP and at Athalassa Environmental Information Centre, contributed to the project

dissemination to students, NGOs, tourists, local people and the general public.

- Scientific publications in conferences aimed to the promotion of the project and the

restoration efforts on the targeted habitat types to the scientific community, students

and universities.

Figure 10. First Local Workshop in Aradippou Municipality Hall.

34

5.2.2 Dissemination: overview per activity

5.2.2.1. Action E.1: Information campaign

Status: COMPLETED


02/10/2013

Actual start date:

02/10/2013

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

10/02/2017

Action E.1 focused on the promotion of public awareness about the actions, targets and

expected results of the project. The action started in October 2013 with the development

of the project logo and concluded with the organization of Final Info Day.


- Two local workshops were organised at Aradippou.

- Four notice boards and four habitat information were established at RNFP.

- Five press releases (three press releases were foreseen in the project proposal) were

published in national and local newspapers and online news websites,

- Five articles (three articles were foreseen in the project proposal) were published in

newspapers and magazines,

- Three newsletters and a leaflet were published.

- A Final Info-day took place at the end of the project.

- A flyer (outside LIFE activity) was prepared and distributed to all inhabitants of

Aradippou Municipality (6000 copies) in March 2015, as it was proposed in the first

local workshop held on the 9th of May 2014, at Aradippou Municipality Hall. The

project flyer can be found in Annex 7.3.3.7 of MR.

Dissemination related products can be found on the DVD provided with this report.

Specifically:

Local Workshops

- The first Local Workshop (Fig. 10) was held in Aradippou Municipality Hall on 9th May

2014. Local workshop focused on the presentation of the main aim of the project, its

actions and the targeted habitat types. The target groups of people invited included local

authorities and local people (Aradippou and Larnaca Municipalities), government

authorities, environmental organizations (NGOs), universities and research institutes,

the union of agro-tourism enterprises and farmers. The discussion that followed the

presentation showed the participants’ interest on the project and their will to collaborate

for the proper implementation of the project activities. The Report on the first Local

Workshop was prepared in May 2014 (Annex 7.2.11 of the MR).

- The second Local Workshop (Fig. 11) was implemented on the 11th of March 2016, at

Aradippou Municipality Hall. It focused on the progress of the project and the goals

achieved by that date. The workshop was successfully implemented and the

participation was satisfactory. The discussion that followed the presentation showed the

participants’ interest on the project. Their comments focused on the necessity of more

control by the competent authorities on the illegal activities in the Park, i.e. use of

motorcycles and dog walks. Moreover, as they pointed out, leisure activities that take

place in the Park sometimes affect directly or indirectly the targeted habitats. They

highlighted the efforts to reduce the impact of the invasive species Acacia saligna and

their will to contribute to the project’s activities or in cleaning campaigns. Finally, they

agreed to the implementation of a stronger awareness campaign on the importance of

35

the targeted habitat types and their conservation, targeting specifically the residents of

Aradippou and Larnaca municipalities who visit RNFP for leisure and training. The

Report on thesecond Local Workshop can be found in Annex 7.2.14 of this report.

Figure 11. Second Local Workshop in Aradippou Municipality Hall.

Notice boards and habitat information boards

- Two Habitat Information Boards and two Notice Boards were installed at RNFP in

November 2014. These boards were established at the two entrances of the RNFP in

Greek and English language and contain information on the RNFP along with hiking

code of conduct (notice boards) and on the project, the targeted habitat types and the

threats that the habitat types face (habitat information boards).

- Two more Habitat Information Boards and two more Notice Boards were installed at

RNFP in April 2015. These boards were established at two locations in Greek and

English language: near habitat type *5220 and near habitat type *1520 and included

information on the project and its activities (notice boards) and on the targeted habitat

types and the threats that the habitat types face (habitat information boards). Photos of

all installed boards can be found Annex 7.3.1 of PR.

Press releases

- The first press release (Annex 7.3.3.1 of MR) was published in newspapers in

November 2013. The first press release announced the start of the LIFE project, the

project aims and targeted habitat types and the contribution of EC, through the LIFE+

program.

- The second press release (Annex 7.3.3.4 of MR) was published to the media in

November 2014 and it was about the implementation of the second meeting of the

Stakeholder Committee on 11th November 2014.

- The third press release (Annex 7.2.2 of PR) was forwarded through Cyprus News

Agency and published to Sigmalive.com, ikypros.com, Paideia-news.com and

36

Palo.com.cy on November 2015. The third press release stated the implementation of

concrete conservation actions on the targeted habitat types.

- Two more press releases were published in the official newspaper of Aradippou

Municipality promoting the implementation of the project. The first was published in

July 2014 and the second in April 2016. The two press releases (outside LIFE activity)

can be found in Annex 7.3.3.1).

Articles

- The first article (Annex 7.3.3.2 of this MR) was published in newspapers/ magazine in

March 2014. Apart of the project aims and targeted habitat types, it has included clear

information on the project actions.

- The second article (Annex 7.3.3.6 of MR) was published in June 2015 in ‘Agrotis’

magazine, the official magazine of the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and

Environment. The article aimed to inform the employees of the Ministry as well as the

farmers on the project implementation.

- The third article was published in April 2016 in selected online news websites. The

article aimed to inform the general public on the concrete conservation actions

undertaken in RNFP. The third article can be found in Annex 7.3.3.2.

- Two more articles were published (outside activities). One article was published in

December 2014 in ‘Dasiki Thisavri’ (Annex 7.3.3.8 of MR), the official magazine of

the Cyprus Forestry Association and one extended article in August 2016 in the official

newspaper of Aradippou Municipality (Annex 7.3.3.3 of this report).

Newsletters

- The first newsletter (Annex 7.3.3.3 of MR) was prepared in September 2014 and

included information on the RNFP, the targeted habitat types and the activities of the

project by September 2014. Several photographs were also included.

- The second newsletter (Annex 7.2.1 of PR) was printed in October 2015. It stated the

progress of the conservation actions of the project.

- The third newsletter (Annex 7.3.3.4 of this report) was published in September 2016,

including information on the outcomes of the project and the results that were expected

to be achieved by the end of the project.

Leaflet

- The project leaflet (Annex 7.3.3.5 of MR) was prepared in January 2015. The project

leaflet was prepared in Greek an English language and contained information on project

activities along with photographs of concrete conservation actions.

Final Info-day

- The Final Info-Day (Fig. 12) of the project took place on 08/02/2017 at Aradippou

Municipality Hall. The event welcomed and honored by the presence of the Minister of

Education and Culture Dr. Costas Kadis. Dr. Kadis mentioned the importance of

undertaking such initiatives for the promotion and protection of the biodiversity of the

island. The Mayor of Aradippou, Mr. Evangelos Evaggelidis, emphasized the

importance of maintaining biodiversity and thanked the project partners for their

contribution. Mr. Andreas Karittevlis praised the efforts undertaken at RNFP in

Aradippou Municipality for environmental protection, noting the full support of the

Municipality undertaking such initiatives in the future. The PC, the SCo and the PM

presented the objectives of the project, the two habitats, the threats affecting the habitats

and the achievements of the project, as well as the ecosystem services provided by the

RNFP. Eighty-five people attended the event. The invitation, the program and some

photos of the event are presented in Annex 7.3.3.5.

- The event was promoted through several ways:

o The website and the Facebook group of the project.

37

o The creation and dissemination of an invitation and program (outside life activity) to

local people.

o The creation of a banner for the event (outside life activity).

o The promotion of the event through radio. It was on the radio show ‘proino

dromologio’ on 07/02/2017 (outside life activity). The playback can be found on the

project DVD.

o After the event, the project and the Final Info-Day were presented on TV shows on

09/02/2017: ‘proti enimerosi’ at 07:00 and ‘RIK NEWS’ at 20:30. (outside life

activity). The videos can also be found on the project DVD.

Table 4 presents the allocation of the newsletters, flyers and project leaflet.

FU was the responsible beneficiary of this action. FU has produced the newsletters,

leaflets, press releases, articles and designed the notice and habitat information boards.

DF has organised the two workshops and the Final Info-day. Moreover, DF has

installed the notice and habitat information boards at the RNFP.

Figure 12. Final Info-Day.

38

Table 4. Allocation of the newsletters, flyer and the project leaflet.

S/N Deliverable Partner

disseminating Target Group Aim (Action) No. Date

1 1st

Newsletter

DF NGOs,

General public Dissemination (E.2) 100 10/2014

RFS Local people Dissemination (E.2) 500 10/2014

OUC Students,

Scientists Dissemination (E.2) 100 10/2014

DE NGOs,


AEIC Students,


FU

Students (Green

Week Satellite

Event)

Dissemination (E.2) 100 6/2015

2 Leaflet

(GR, EN)

DF Scientists,

Experts

Experts Workshop

(F.5)

35 GR

15 EN 1/2015

DF NGOs,

General public Dissemination (E.2)

50 GR

150 EN 2/2015

FU Students Dissemination (E.2) 150 GR

150 EN 2/2015

RFS Local people Dissemination (E.2) 75 GR

75 EN 2/2015

OUC Students,

Scientists Dissemination (E.2)

50 GR

150 EN 2/2015

DE NGOs,


50 GR

150 EN 2/2015

FU Public Secondary

Schools (2) Dissemination (E.2)

1090

GR 2/2015

FU Private Secondary

School Dissemination (E.2) 400 EN 2/2015

FU Aradippou

Municipality Dissemination (E.2)

75 GR

75EN 2/2015

AEIC Students,


150 GR

150 EN 3/2015

FU

Students (Green

Week Satellite

Event)

Dissemination (E.2) 100 GR 6/2015

DE NGOs,

General public Dissemination (E.2) 200 EN 3/2016

FU Participants

6th WORLD

CONGRESS ON

MOUNTAIN

UNGULATES»

and the «5th

INTERNATIONAL

SYMPOSIUM ON

MOUFLON

Conference

50 GR

60 EN 8/2016

DF

Ayia Napa

International

Festival

Dissemination (E.2) 300 EN 9/2016

OUC Participants European 40 EN 9/2016

39

Ecosystem Services

2016 conference

RFS Students Dissemination (E.2) 25 GR 10/2016

FU Participants 1st Forestry

workshop (Cyprus) 85 EN 1/2017

FU Local people Final Info Day 100 GR 2/2017

3 Flyer FU Aradippou local

people

Outside LIFE

activity 6000 3/2015

4 2nd

Newsletter

DF NGOs,

General public



OUC Students,

Scientists

Dissemination

(E.2)

100 10/2015

DE NGOs,

General public

Dissemination

(E.2)

150 10/2015

FU Students,

General public

Dissemination

(E.2)

150 10/2015

FU Aradippou

Municipality

Dissemination

(E.2)

200 10/2015

5 3rd

Newsletter

DF NGOs,

General public



OUC Students,

Scientists

Dissemination

(E.2)

200 10/2016

DE NGOs,

General public

Dissemination

(E.2)

200 10/2016

AEIC Students,

General public Dissemination (E.2) 100

10/2016

FU Aradippou

Municipality

Dissemination

(E.2)

200 10/2016

40

5.2.2.2. Action E.2: Website development – Production of promotion material

Status: COMPLETED


02/09/2013

Actual start date:

15/09/2013

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

28/02/2017

This Action focused on the presentation and promotion of the project, the scientific

data and the outcomes of the project through the development of a website, the

creation of account on social community website and the production and

dissemination of information material. Action E.2 started in September 2013 and

concluded by the project.

An account in social community website (Facebook) was created from the early stages

of the project (September 2013). The link for the project’s group is

https://www.facebook.com/groups/rizoelia/. The group was periodically updated

following the project’s progress. The group has now 266 members.

The development of the project website started in October 2013. The website (Greek

language) was published online in February 2014. The website url is http://www.life-

rizoelia.eu/. The English website was published online in March 2014. The project’s

website was periodically updated following the project’s progress. The comments on

project website indicated in the Ref. Ares(2014)3014571 - 15/09/2014 answer of the

DG Environment to the Inception Report (the answer was received in February 2015)

were adopted in March 2015. The traffic report (website hits) of the website can be

found in Annex 7.3.3.6 of this report. Unfortunately, there is period without data (June

2014-Jan 2015). At that time, the provider of statistic data (Sitemeter) stopped keeping

monthly records. Total unique visits were properly recorded. Despite the repeatedly

contact by email to the service provider, there was no response. In February 2015, the

website administrator move to a new free website statistics provider (StatCounter),

which from that time data records on website visits were kept in monthly basis.

Promotion material (Fig. 13) were produced in July 2014 (provided with the MR). The

allocation of promotional material is presented in Table 5.

FU was the responsible beneficiary of this action. FU provided information for the

website development, produced the promotion material and created the account on

social community website. DF was responsible for the development of the project's

website and its updating.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/rizoelia/

http://www.life-rizoelia.eu/

http://www.life-rizoelia.eu/

41

Table 5. Allocation of promotional material.

S/N Deliverable Partner

disseminating Target Group Aim (Action) No. Date

1 Hats

DF NGOs,



OUC Students,


DE NGOs,


FU Students Dissemination (E.2) 200 10/2014

DF Scientists,

NGOs

Biogeographical

Workshop (Outside

LIFE activity)

75 8/2014

RFS Local people,

NGOs

2nd Stakeholders’

Committee Meeting

(F.4)

23 11/2014

RFS Local people Local people 25 11/2014

DF Scientists,

Experts

Experts Workshop

(F.5) 45 1/2015


AEIC Students,


FU

Students (Green

Week Satellite

Event)


FU Participants

6th WORLD

CONGRESS ON

MOUNTAIN

UNGULATES»

and the «5th

INTERNATIONAL

SYMPOSIUM ON

MOUFLON

Cnference

40 8/2016

FU Teachers Valgreen Erasmus+

KA2 Project 12 1/2017

2 Pens

DF NGOs,



OUC Students,



DE NGOs,


DF

Biogeographical

Workshop

(Outside LIFE)

Biogeographical

Workshop (Outside

LIFE)

75 8/2014

RFS Local people,

NGOs

2nd Stakeholders’

Committee Meeting

(F.4)

23 11/2014


DF Scientists, Experts Workshop 45 1/2015

42

Experts (F.5)


AEIC Students,


FU

Students (Green

Week Satellite

Event)



OUC Students,


DE NGOs,



Aradippou

Municipality Local people Dissemination (E.2) 275 4/2016

FU Participants

6th WORLD

CONGRESS ON

MOUNTAIN

UNGULATES»

and the «5th

INTERNATIONAL

SYMPOSIUM ON

MOUFLON

Cnference

110 8/2016

DF

Ayia Napa

International

Festival


FU Teachers Valgreen Erasmus+

KA2 Project 12 1/2017

FU Local People Final Info Day 100 2/2017

Figure 13. Promotional material.

43

5.2.2.3. Action E.3: Conferences

Status: COMPLETED


02/10/2013

Actual start date:

15/09/2013

Foreseen end date:

30/12/2016

Actual end date:

28/10/2016

This Action focused on the presentation and publication of the scientific data and the

outcomes of the project through participation in scientific conferences. It was foreseen

that the project will be presented in four scientific conferences (by December 2016),

through oral/poster presentations and scientific articles about the project will be published

in the respective volumes of the proceedings of these conferences.

The project was presented in eight conferences, out of which four are considered outside

LIFE activities Specifically, at:

- The 13th Panhellenic Scientific Conference of the Hellenic Botanical Society at

Thessaloniki (Greece) in October 2013 (outside LIFE activity) – see Annex 7.3.3.9 of

MR),

- The ialeUK Annual Conference in London (UK) in August 2014 – see Annex 7.3.3.10

of MR,

- The 7th Panhellenic Ecology Conference of the Hellenic Ecological Society at

Mytilene (Greece) in October 2014 – see Annex 7.3.3.11 of MR,

- The Joint 2014 Annual Meeting of the British Ecological Society and the French

Ecology Society at Lille (France) in December 2014 (outside LIFE activity) – see

Annex 7.3.3.12 of MR,

- The 27th International Congress for Conservation Biology and the 4th European

Congress for Conservation Biology at Montpellier (France) in August 2015 (outside

LIFE activity) – see Annex 7.2.3 of PR,

- The European Ecosystem Services Conference: Helping nature to help us at Antwerp

(Belgium) in September 2016 (outside LIFE activity) – see Annex 7.3.3.7 of this

report,

- The World Congress Silvo-Pastoral Systems 2016: Silvo-Pastoral Systems in a

changing world. Functions, management and people at Evora (Portugal) in

September 2016 – see Annex 7.3.3.8 of this report,

- The 8th Panhellenic Ecology Conference '150+ years of Ecology: structures, dynamics

and survival strategies' at Thessaloniki (Greece) in October 2016 – see Annex 7.3.3.9

of this report.

Abstracts and Posters of all conferences can be found on the DVD provided with the FR.

OUC was the responsible beneficiary of this action. The presentations at scientific

conferences were implemented by both OUC and FU.

44

5.2.2.4. Action E.4: Layman’s report

Status: COMPLETED


01/09/2016

Actual start date:

05/01/2016

Foreseen end date:

28/02/2017

Actual end date:

28/02/2017

This Action focused on the presentation and publication of the project results through the

production of a Layman’s report. This action started earlier (January 2016) and continued

until the end of the project. Preliminary work took place in order to liaise with partners

and set up the specifications and the content of the Layman’s Report.

The Greek version (130 copies) of the Layman’s report printed on 07/02/2016 and

distributed to the participants of the Final Info-day. The English version (130 copies) was

ready by the end of the project and given to the project partners in order to be distributed

accordingly. The Layman’s report can be found in Annex 7.3.1. It is also provided in hard

copy.

OUC was the responsible beneficiary of this action. However, all partners have

contributed to the production of the Layman’s report.

5.3 Evaluation of Project Implementation

In general, the project was efficiently and timely implemented, according to the project’s

approved work plan, without substantial divergences from the initial proposal. The

project encountered no serious problems during the implementation of the project actions.

All problems that occurred during the project’s implementation were resolved from their

beginning, mainly owing to the efficient cooperation between the project’s partners, the

PMT, as well as the consultation of SC and ShC. The preparatory actions, necessary for

the collection of the required information and knowledge base, were successfully

concluded and gave appropriate, technical details for the implementation of concrete

conservation actions. Conservation actions were successfully implemented and in most

cases, they have achieved more than the expected results.

A minor problem that was raised was the low percentage of Ziziphus lotus seedlings

production from seeds (Action C.5) and, moreover, the high mortality of these seedlings

in the nursery. DF has successfully overcame this issue (see Annex 7.1.1). Finally, the

cost of actions’ implementation was according to the proposed project budget, thus

securing the cost-efficiency of actions.

Table 6 presents the results achieved against the project objectives. It clearly assesses

whether the objectives were met by implementing specific project activities. Please note

that a specific activity may fulfil more than one project objective.

Table 6. Results achieved against project objectives.

Objective Task Foreseen in the

revised proposal Achieved Evaluation

To contribute

to the

consolidation

and

dissemination

Detailed mapping of

the distribution of the

targeted habitat types

Production of one

colour map

Production of four

colour maps (due to

large amount of

data)

Completed

Establishment of Elaboration of a ‘Report on Completed

45

of a

knowledge

base for the

protection,

restoration,

monitoring

and evaluation

of targeted

priority habitat

types

reference plots -

vegetation sampling

report regarding

population structure

of *1520 habitat

type

population structure

of the priority

habitat type *1520’

delivered

Preparation of two

Monitoring Plans

Elaboration of two

Monitoring Plans

Two Monitoring

Plans delivered Completed

Preparation of two

Management Plans

Elaboration of two

Management Plans

Two Management

Plans delivered Completed

Preparation of two

Action Plans

Elaboration of two

Action Plans

Two Action Plans

delivered Completed

Networking with other

projects

Visit to the projects

LIFE00

NAT/E/007304 and

LIFE03

NAT/E/000059

One report from the

visit to LIFE00

NAT/E/007304

Completed

Organization of an

Experts workshop

Experts workshop -

Proceedings of the

expert’s workshop

Experts workshop

organised -

Proceedings of the

expert’s workshop

delivered

Completed

Establishment of a

Scientific Committee

Two official

meetings of the

Scientific

Committee

Two official

meetings and an

unofficial meeting

during experts’

workshop took

place

Completed

To increase

habitat

connectivity

for arborescent

matorral with

Ziziphus

(*5220)

Preparation of two

Action Plans

Elaboration of two

Action Plans

Two Action Plans

delivered Completed

Preparation of

Feasibility Study

Elaboration of a

Feasibility Study

A Feasibility Study

delivered Completed

Minimizing the impact

of competitive

vegetation

Control of 0,4 ha of

Acacia saligna (500

individuals)

6,8 ha of Acacia

saligna controlled

(> 10000 stems)

Completed

Restoration of *5220 Restoration of 1 ha

of *5220

1,97 ha of *5220

restored Completed


2500 Zyziphus lotus,

350 Asparagus

horridus,

350 Phagnalon

rupestre,

350 Thymbra

capitata,

350 Noaea

mucronata


1008 Asparagus

horridus,

1010 Phagnalon

rupestre,

598 Thymbra

capitata,

660 Noaea

mucronata produced

Completed

Re-creation of *5220 Re-creation of 2 ha

of *5220

1,95 ha of *5220 re-

created Completed

To reduce the

risk of fire

affecting both

targeted

priority habitat

types

Demarcation of *1520

habitat type

2 Km of soft –

fencing

1,3 Km of soft –

fencing created Completed

Clearing of vegetation

on parts of the

perimeter of RNFP

(with agricultural

tractor)

Belt of 10 m wide

on parts of the

perimeter to reduce

fuel continuity

36000 m2 of

clearings created

(10 m wide)

Completed

46

Vegetation clearings

(manually)

20000 m2 of

clearing/year (2

years)

33.800 m2 of dry

herbaceous

vegetation cleared

Completed

Limited road access Limited road access

by 1 km

3,4 Km of road

network has been

closed.

Completed

To eradicate

competitive

vegetation for

both priority

habitats

Preparation of two

Action Plans

Elaboration of two

Action Plans

Two Action Plans

delivered Completed

Minimizing the impact

of competitive

vegetation

Control of 0.4 ha of

Acacia saligna (500

individuals)

6,8 ha of Acacia

saligna controlled

(> 10000 stems)

Completed

To manage

leisure

activities and

accessibility in

the park in a

favourable

manner to the

conservation

of the priority

habitats.


habitat type

2 Km of soft –

fencing

1,3 Km of soft –

fencing Completed

Limited road access Limited road access

by 1 km

3,4 Km of road

network has been

closed.

Completed

Information campaign

(workshops,

information material

etc)

2 Local Workshops

4 Notice Boards

4 Habitat

Information Boards

3 Press Releases

3 Articles

3 Newsletters

1 Leaflet

Final Info Day

Website

Facebook group

Hats-Pens

4 Conferences

Layman’s report

4 Stakeholders

meetings

2 Local Workshops

4 Notice Boards

4 Habitat

Information Boards

5 Press Releases

5 Articles

3 Newsletters

1 Leaflet

Final Info Day

Website

Facebook group

Hats-Pens

8 Conferences

Layman’s report

4 Stakeholders

meetings

Completed

To promote

and enable the

long-term

conservation

of the habitat

types *5220

and *1520

Expansion of the

targeted Natura 2000

site

Update of the SDF SDF updated Completed


habitat type

2 Km of soft –

fencing

1,3 Km of soft –

fencing Completed

Restoration of *5220 Restoration of 1 ha

of *5220

1,97 ha of *5220

restored Completed

Restoration of *1520 Restoration of 0,1

ha of *1520

0,56 ha of *1520

restored (850 seeds

of Campanula

fastigiata, 3400

seeds of Gypsophila

linearifolia and

4100 seeds of

Herniaria

hemistemon have

been dispersed)

Completed

Enhancement of

*1520

Enhancement of 0,1

ha of *1520

0,46 ha of *1520

enhanced (250 seeds

of Campanula

fastigiata, 9600

seeds of Gypsophila

Completed

47

linearifolia and

4900 seeds of

Herniaria

hemistemon have

been dispersed)



350 Asparagus

horridus,

350 Phagnalon

rupestre,

350 Thymbra

capitata,

350 Noaea

mucronata


1008 Asparagus

horridus,

1010 Phagnalon

rupestre,

598 Thymbra

capitata,

660 Noaea

mucronata produced

Completed

Re-creation of *5220 Re-creation of 2 ha

of *5220

1,95 ha of *5220 re-

created Completed

Elaboration of an

After-LIFE

Conservation Plan

After-LIFE

Conservation Plan

After-LIFE

Conservation Plan

delivered with this

report

Completed

Most of the concrete conservation actions applied are immediately visible. However,

activities regarding restoration or re-creation of the targeted habitats, especially for *5220

(woody vegetation), require several years in order to become natural habitats (long-term

procedure).

The dissemination activities were of great importance for the project’s smooth

implementation since they presented the project’s main aim and actions, the targeted

priority habitat types, as well as the project outputs to the general public, to the local

people, to interested stakeholders and to the general scientific community. All foreseen

dissemination activities have successfully implemented. Interaction with Aradippou

municipality continued throughout the project through the presentation of the project’s

implementation in the ShC meetings, the local workshops, the participation of

stakeholders in re-creation activities of the habitat type *5220 in Alona area and the Final

Info-day. The project activities and outputs have been promoted constantly through the

media (by press releases and articles in the newspapers/magazines), through the

distribution of information material, through the project’s website and social community

website (Facebook) and through the presentation in Scientific conferences. The

establishment of total 8 boards at strategic places in RNFP secured the park visitors’

awareness. Specific activities enhanced public awareness, promoted the project’s

implementation, or presented project’s results to several outside – LIFE activities, i.e.

• production of a project flyer,

• publication in ‘Dasiki Thisavri’ (the official magazine of the Cyprus Forestry

Association),

• participation at four more scientific conferences,

• presentation of the project in the Mediterranean Kick off Seminar through the Natura

2000 Seminars of the Mediterranean Biogeographical Region on 26th-28th May 2014

– Action F.5,

48

• participation of the LIFE-RIZOELIA project at the Green Week Satellite Event and at

the European Natura 2000 Day organized in Cyprus in 2015 and at the Final Info Day

of the LIFE+ project JUNIPERCY,

• co-organization, with other LIFE projects implementing in Cyprus, of the ‘LIFE

Nature Platform Meeting on the management of Mediterranean habitat’ on 9-10

October 2014 at Polis Chrysochous,

• publication of two more articles and press releases and

• promotion of the Final Info-Day through the media.

5.4 Analysis of long-term benefits

The project had a significant positive impact on the conservation status of the targeted

habitat types. Specific activities have taken place during the project implementation and

in conjunction with the actions that are included in the ‘After-LIFE conservation plan’,

aim to the long-term conservation of the habitat types *1520 and *5220.

Specifically:

- Within the framework of the project, the priority habitat types *1520 and *5220 have

been precisely mapped. More areas than those originally known have been identified;

an important fact, especially for habitat type *1520, since this habitat type occurs

only in one Natura 2000 site in Cyprus: ‘Ethniko Dasiko Parko Rizoelias’.

- Important knowledge was achieved regarding the composition and structure of

habitat type *1520 in Cyprus. Two keystone species were identified: Gypsophila

linearifolia and Campanula fastigiata.

- The implementation of the two Monitoring Plans after the end of the project ensures

the long-term sustainability of the targeted habitat types. Monitoring will provide the

necessary information in order to maintain favourable conservation status of the


- Management Plans on the two habitat types, elaborated during the first phase of the

project implementation, provided the necessary information to the local forest station

of the DF for the sound management of the habitat types *1520 and *5220 within

RNFP.

- The two Action Plans provided right, and scientifically accepted, technical details to

the employees of the DF in order to apply the conservation measures to the habitat

types *1520 and *5220.

- The expansion of the Natura 2000 site CY6000006 (and the update of the relevant

SDF) secures the implementation of the Directive 92/43/EEC and the Law for the

Protection and Management of Nature and Wildlife (N.153 (I)-2003) beyond of the

current boundaries of the Natura 2000 site, where the two habitat types occur.

- The optimum germination conditions of the seeds of Ziziphus lotus, Gypsophila

linearifolia, Herniaria hemistemon and Campanula fastigiata were determined and

provide the necessary knowledge for any future effort undertaken regarding in situ or

ex situ conservation.

The above points provide to the DF (the competent authority for Natura 2000 sites within

State Forest Land) the necessary information to continue to apply specific management

measures after the end of the project, ensuring the long-term conservation of the two


The long-term sustainability of the project and consequently the long-term benefits for

the targeted habitat types will be continued through the implementation of the ‘After-

49

LIFE conservation plan’. The ‘After-LIFE conservation plan’ describes how the partners

plan to continue and develop the actions that have been initiated through this project,

after the end of the project. Moreover, it describes how the long-term management of the

targeted habitat types will be secured. The ‘After-LIFE Conservation Plan’ gives details

on the actions that will be carried out in the future and it forms a separate chapter of this

report. A detailed budget table was included in the Plan for the activities to be

implemented after the end of the project. The budget for each activity to be continued

will derive from the responsible beneficiary’s resources, which is already been agreed

between the partners with the acceptance of the Plan. The ‘After-LIFE Conservation

Plan’ created in English and Greek. The English version of the Plan can be found in

Annex 7.3.2.

The project was also characterized by the long-term social and economic benefits (direct

and indirect) to the local communities through public awareness campaign and

participation of local communities in the conservation activities. The project developed a

series of measures promoting awareness among the local people about the value of

conservation and sustainable management of targeted habitat types within Natura 2000

sites and especially within RNFP. The local people started changing perception regarding

the value and the conservation of the two habitat types in their area. People living near

the targeted site started appreciating species that are not emblematic (e.g. Ziziphus lotus)

and understanding their contribution to the conservation of other flora and fauna species.

The project successfully applied the knowledge gained from previously implemented

LIFE projects in Cyprus (LIFE04 NAT/CY/00013) and Spain (LIFE00 NAT/E/007304),

on restoring/conserving or re-creating the priority habitat types *1520 and *5220.

This project provided EU added value as it contributes to the implementation of

Community policy and legislation on nature and biodiversity, in particular Directive

92/43/EEC, by supporting the effective management and protection of the Natura 2000

network, and two priority habitat types: Arborescent matorral with Zyziphus (*5220) and

Gypsum steppes (Gypsophiletalia) (*1520). Both habitats pose a conservation challenge

phytogeographically for the EU since they are restricted to the southwest and southeast

margins of the Euro-Mediterranean area. In Cyprus, both targeted priority habitats have a

patchy distribution, which is under serious threat and for which Cyprus holds a great

responsibility since it's the easternmost margin of their distribution in Europe. As this

project is a demonstrational one aims at the consolidation of a knowledge base for the

conservation of these habitats, which could be utilized by other EU countries, promoting

the wider conservation of these habitats types. The outcomes of the project (including

protocols created) could be utilized and replicated in other areas of Cyprus, Spain or

Italy. These are the only European countries that have included *5220 habitat type in

Natura 2000 sites. Best practices on germination and planting of Ziziphus lotus and the

accompany species of the habitat type *5220 can be utilized in similar areas for

restoration or re-creation purposes. Moreover, habitat type *1520 is limited to Cyprus and

Spain only. It is noted that, there is an ongoing communication between OUC and DF

with the Instituto Pirenaico de Ecología of Spain and an expression of interest of

submitting a HORIZON 2020 project proposal (MSCA-RISE) to promote the study of

gypsum ecosystems worldwide. The Report on protocols of seed storage, germination,

growth and outplanting of the keystone species already sent to Dr. Francisco Javier

Cabello Piñar (University of Almeria).

The project also contributed towards achieving the goals set by the Convention on

Biological Diversity and the European Commission Strategy to halt the loss of

biodiversity by 2020. In addition, it supported policies related to the protection of

Mediterranean regions such as MedSPA. The project can serve as a planning tool to the

50

Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and Environment of Cyprus who is

responsible for the conservation and management of Natura 2000 sites. The project

addressed issues of national sustainable development as highlighted by the Goteborg

meeting (2001) and therefore contributes to the EU Strategy on Sustainable

Development. The project’s embedded participatory approach and multi-stakeholders’

communication strategy illustrate the commitment to the Aarhus Convention.

6. Comments on the financial report

The costs incurred during the whole project period (Sept 2013 – Feb 2017) of the LIFE-

RIZOELIA project correspond to 98.8% of the total initial project budget, as presented in

the table below, a percentage that in general corresponds to the technical completion of

the project. Overall some noted deviations from budget have to with reasons that have

been flagged from the beginning of the project (i.e. higher personnel rates, lower

requirements for travel expenses and savings in external services) and justified again here

below. These deviations however did not have an impact on the technical completion of

the project and furthermore lie within the €30,000 and 10% limits (as per LIFE 2012 CP)

on changes to the provisional project budget foreseen in one or more categories of

expenditure.

Moreover, during the final detailed review of all expenses, some corrections were made,

mainly on more accurate calculations of the personnel cost, especially with respect to the

employer contributions, which had a relatively small downward effect on amounts

previously reported. These corrections however, were deemed necessary for a more

accurate reflection of the actual project expenses.

The flagged issue of compliance with the 2% rule for public bodies, which occurred due

to the savings in direct expense categories like Travel and External Assistance, was

finally addressed by lowering the total funding rate requested for the whole project (from

75% to 74.1%) to the extent that all public beneficiaries contribute by 2% more than the

staff cost of public employees (permanent or with contracts before the start of the

project). The total personnel cost of the public beneficiaries that falls under this category

was €190,426 and the total own contribution of these beneficiaries is set at €194,235.

All required financial statements, as per the LIFE model financial statement for LIFE 12

projects, can be found as annexes (# 8) and on the DVD provided with the current report.

life project number life12 nat/cy/000758 final report ... · the protocol can be found in annex...

Documents