Estonia-Latvia Programme 2007-2013 project „Tuned nature management in transboundary area of Estonia and Latvia”

(“Green Corridor”) (LURSDV 5HƧLRQƗODLV )RQGV 3ƗUUREHåX VDGDUEƯEDV SURJUDPPD (LURSDV 6WUXNWnjUIRQGX  PƝUƷD Ä(LURSDV WHULWRULƗOƗ VDGDUEƯED´ JDGDPLHWYDURV ,JDXQLMDV/DWYLMDVSURJUDPPD

„Ä6DVNDƼRWDGDEDVWHULWRULMXDSVDLPQLHNRãDQD ,JDXQLMDVXQ/DWYLMDVSLHUREHåƗ´  =DƺDLVNRULGRUV

$SVDLPQLHNRãDQDVUHNRPHQGƗFLMXSOƗQV

9}UX6LJXOGD

MANAGEMENT PLAN

Võru-Sigulda 2013

Content

Introduction ...... 5 1. Description of the project area ...... 6 1.1. Landscape ...... 6 1.2. Climate ...... 6 1.3. Protected territories ...... 7 1.4. General Economical Backround ...... 9 2. Tourism in the region ...... 10 2.1. Development opportunities ...... 10 3. Hunting impact for the nature values ...... 11 4. Alien Species ...... 13 5. Protected species ...... 15 5.1. Inverterbrates ...... 15 5.2. Birds ...... 19 5.3. Flying Squirrel (Pteromys volans) ...... 21 6. Habitats ...... 22 6.1. Forests ...... 22 6.2. Meadows ...... 23 6.3. Rivers ...... 25 7. Joint monitoring ...... 29 7.1. Forests ...... 30 7.2. Grasslands ...... 30 7.3. Wooded meadows and wooded pastures ...... 30 7.4. Rivers ...... 31 7.5. Great snipe ...... 31 7.6. Flying squirrel ...... 32 7.7. Osprey ...... 32 7.8. Capercaillie ...... 32 8. Monitoring programmes and process ...... 34 8.1. Other monitorings ...... 35

3 8.2. Necessary monitorings in Project territory ...... 35 8.3. Management monitoring ...... 35 8.4. Voluntary monitoring ...... 37 9. Management activities ...... 38 10. Strategic crossborder coopertion ...... 39 11. Management plans practices in the region ...... 41 References ...... 45

4 Introduction

The Nature Conservation Agency and the WR WKH FDSHUFDLOOLH JUHDW VQLSH À\LQJ VTXLUUHO Estonian Environmental Board Põlva-Valga- Osmoderma eremita , river pearl oyster, a variety Võru region administration on November RIEXWWHUÀLHVDQGGUDJRQÀLHV6XPPDUL]HGWKH 1, 2011, launched the project “Tuned nature available information on the protected habitats management in the transboundary area of and species in project area - Latvian project Estonia and Latvia” (abbreviated as “Green EMERALD inventory questionnaire, the current Corridor”). Funding was allocated according to Natura 2000 mapping, researchers persons infor- the Estonian-Latvian bordercooperation program. mation (for Osmoderma eremita À\LQJVTXLUUHO The project is carried out in Southern Estonia Great snipe), the conservation plans and habitat and Northern Vidzeme border region NATURA data mapping, forest inventory data and natural 2000 sites. Project area embraces Ape district, forest habitat information. Haanja, Misso, Mõniste, Rõuge, Taheva, Varstu Although initially it was planned to establish a rural districts (including 17 N2000) in Estonia. common methodology for conducting the inven - Nature is our common value, also the species tory, the project implementation has shown that knows no boundaries, especially in terms of it is problematic, as in both countries in cases of migration. In border regions have remained inventory of protected habitats are already being little affected ecosystem complexes, which play XVHGVSHFL¿FPHWKRGVDQGIRUPVZKLFKDUHWKHQ an important role in the Baltic biological and used in a national level, gathering information on landscape diversity conservation and develop - habitats. While preparing project application, this ment as well as strengthening ecological integrity. forms were not yet implemented in practice, so Therefore the need for a common understanding it was included in the application as a common of the environment and current trends, joint methodology development. When inventories research and concerted action becomes more started, it was clear that it would be unneces - pressing. Without the common understanding sary resource consumption - the data collection in the nearest future nature values in the border through yet another method or form. It was DUHDV PD\ GLVDSSHDU RU EH VLJQL¿FDQWO\ WKUHDW - therefore decided to use national methodologies, ened. Therefore the main objectives are to create however, during seminars there was gained an a common database for environmental values understanding of the partners methodology and that will help in responsible decision- making, data collection forms, as far as possible using the as well as to develop a mutually agreed manage- ¿QGLQJVWRREWDLQWKHGHWDLOVRISUDFWLFDOZRUN ment and habitat management, monitoring and The following summarize the species and habitat development activities in the cross-border area. inventory methods applied in the project area, in 2QH RI WKH PDLQ WDVNV ZDV WKH LGHQWL¿ - some places showing differences of interpreta- cation of protected habitats and species, tion between countries (habitats). compilation of existing information and produc- tion of the new data. Particular attention was paid

5 1. Description of the project area

1.1. Landscape depression, which has a more varied relief and LV VLJQL¿FDQWO\ ODUJHU LQ WKH HDVW ,Q WKH ODWWHU In Estonia, the project area includes two VWRQ\VDQG\ORDPDQGORDPÀDWODQGVYDU\ZLWK landscape regions – Võru - Hargla Depression VZDPSDQGPHVRWURSKLFPLUHÀDWODQGV5HOLHILV and Haanja Upland. In Latvia the project area more restless towards Haanja-Ruusmäe hillocks, includes Talava Depression and Aluksne Upland. ÀDWODQGVDUHUHSODFHGE\KLJKHUDQGKLJKHUKLOOV The most characteristic elements of Võru-Hargla and ridges both in east and west. Depression are Koiva and Mustjõe valleys. The absolute heights of Haanja Upland are in 0RVWO\ ZDWHU VHGLPHQWDU\ VDQG ÀDWODQGV DQG majority part of the upland area 200 m above sandy hillocks and mounds of different origin sea level. The highest absolute heights of the are common on their banks. There are progla- project area are up to 250 m. The highest peak of FLDOÀDWODQGVZLWKPRUHGLI¿FXOWWH[WXUHIRUPHG Haanja-Ruusmäe Upland, which remains in the as a result of recession of continental glacier, in project area, is Paabumägi with its 254 m. Karisöödi and Mõniste. The altitude varies in Võru-Hargla Depression between 60-90 m above 7KH HDVWHUQ SDUW LV LQ$OnjNVQH SODWHDX ZKLFK sea level (Arold 2005). as a the large-scale relief occurred at the end of the last icing in terms of different intensities of The western part of the territory - a protected active glacier ice conditions, in the formation landscape area “Veclaicene” area of geograph- of basic moraine and deformation morain in ical zoning perspective is in the North Vidzeme WZRJODFLHUVÀRZFRQWDFW]RQH$OXNVQHSODWHDX 7ƗODYD  FRQVWLWXHQW 9LGXVJDXMD ORZODQG ,WCV terrain is divided into four areas: Veclaicene ZHVWHUQSDUWFRQVLVWVRIVDQG\6WUHQþLLFHODNH hillock, Vaidava abasement, Maliena hillock plain, which is sharply demarcated from the and Gulbene hill rampart. Jaunlaicene and eastern part by hilly terrain zone - Aumeistari Veclaicenes parishes differs with particularly wall. rich diversity of relief forms. The major hills - The middle of territory is located in the 'ƝOLƼNDOQV  P DERYH VHD OHYHO  ZKLFK Vidusgauja lowland Trapene plain. Characterized is recognized by the relatively large height (71 by hilly areas, gentle wavy terrain, surface height m), as well as with gorgeous landscape - steep, of 115.8 meters above sea level. The surface wooded slopes, and it is a popular destination LVZDY\LWFRQVLVWVPDLQO\RIÀXYLRJODFLDODQG for tourists and a popular place to ski (there are limnoglacial sediments. In some places can be ski slopes), Apukalns or Opekalns (235 m above found moraine hills and ridges. sea level, height 35 m), Garais kalns (Long Hill) - 233m above sea level, Saltupju Hill - 230 m The relief of the eastern part of the area is deter- DERYHVHDOHYHOHWF7KHZKROHDUHDKLOOCVKHLJKW mined by its belonging to the highest landscape reaches over 150 meters above sea level. area of the Baltic States, it is part of Haanja Upland. Haanja Upland continues in Latvia as Aluksne Upland. The distinctive feature 1.2. Climate of this area is hilly mesorelief with ridges and depressions. In larger scale, Haanja-Ruusmäe Project area climate as a whole is determined by hillocks stand out, the landforms with absolute its geographical location near the Baltic Sea, a heights of which reach Estonian-Latvian border. region where the dominant air masses are from Haanja Upland continues there with Paganamaa the Atlantic Ocean. Overall, in the territory hillocks. The complicated relief pattern of prevailing are southwest and west winds that Haanja-Ruusmäe hillocks is balanced by more bring moist air mass. H[WHQVLYH ÀDWODQGV ERWK LQ WKH ZHVW DQG HDVW Climate is formed depending on the hilly plateau There is Vanamõisa or Luhasoo on a swamp and terrain, causing excessive moisture conditions. PHVRWURSKLFPLUHÀDWODQGLQWKHZHVWDQG0LVVR In Haanja/Aluksne Upland rainfall reaches 700

6 - 800 mm per year, but the moisture evapora- swamps, etc., as well as a number of specially tion is only 400 mm, while in Vidzeme Central protected plant and bird species. plateau - 600-750 mm per year. In adjacent The most attractive objects are hills - Delinkalns, lowlands rainfall is less - 550 - 650 mm. In the Pilskalns (Castle hill), Drusku hill, with a plateau slopes there are less repetitive thunder PDJQL¿FHQW YLHZ RI WKH 6RXWKHUQ (VWRQLD DQG DQGUDLQEXWIRJLVVHHQPRUHRIWHQ$VLJQL¿FDQW the highest point of Baltics - Munamägi, God’s number of cloudy days. Most rainfall is from KLOO 6XQ KLOO ƶDXƷX KLOO DQG RWKHUV DV ZHOO June to September (76-89 mm), less - February - .RUQHWL3HƺƺL WUHQFK ZLWK WKH FXUUHQW VHULHV RI March (33 - 34 mm). The average annual relative  ODNHV  5DLSDOV 0HOOƯWLV ']ƝUYHV &UDQH  KXPLGLW\ LV  7KH VLJQL¿FDQW DPRXQW RI lake, Pilskalna (Castle) lake, etc. Landscape rainfall, mild temperatures throughout the year diversity is also provided by Vaidava River leads to a higher humidity and cloud cover. Valley with dolomite outcrops and sandstone Project area is one of the coldest regions. Snow ³5DQGDWX5RFN´']HQƯãLJUHDWZLOORZ WKLFNHVW cover usually develops in mid-November and in Latvia) and other trees, interesting habitats lasts until the end of March. Snow depth the and biodiversity. central part of the district reaches 50 cm and in 1RUWKHUQ *DXMD 3URWHFWHG ODQGVFDSH area the lowlands - 25 - 30 cm. Lakes are also longer founded in 2004., the total area of 21,749 under the ice cover. Non-frost period is 125-130 KD ,QFOXGHV QDWXUH UHVHUYHV 3LUWVOƯþD/ƯNƗ days a year. DWWHND GLVWULEXWDU\   =HPƗ VDOD /RZ LVODQG  3XNãL VZDPS 3/$ KDV VR IDU LGHQWL¿HG  Latvian protected species. Two insect species - 1.3. Protected territories Osmoderma eremita and Xylomoia strix, as well 9HFODLFHQH SURWHFWHG ODQGVFDSH DUHD estab- as two bird species - corncrake and lesser spotted lished in 1977., the total area of 20,892 ha. eagle protection in the EU is a priority. Protected QDWXUDODUHDKDVVRIDULGHQWL¿HG(8+DELWDWV Includes 3 nature reserves - Avoti forest, Directive habitats (11 priority protected) and 14 'ƝOLƼNDOQV.RUQHWL3HƺƺL7KLVDUHDVWUHWFKHVLQWR Latvian specially protected habitats. the Jaunlaicene, Markalne, Veclaicenes parishes, as well as in rural territory of Ape. In protected Six of these nature reserves (excluding Melnupe landscape areas are found protected habitats forests - in 2004 and Melnsalas marsh - 1999) is such as forests of slopes and ravines, intact founded in 1977. In reserves can be found plants, raised bogs, transition swamps and quaking insects and bird species and habitats that in the bogs, species-rich dry to mesic grasslands, alder

3URMHFWWHUULWRU\FRQWDLQVIROORZLQJ 3URMHFWWHUULWRU\FRQWDLQVIROORZLQJ SURWHFWHGDUHDVLQ/DWYLDQVLGH SURWHFWHGDUHDVLQ(VWRQLDQVLGH

QDWXUHUHVHUYHV 9DGDLƼLPDUVK%HGQHVZDPS QDWXUHSURWHFWHGDUHDV Parmu, White Marsh, Lepuri marsh, Melnsala swamp, Mõisamõtsa and Pähni Melnupe forests, Sloka marsh, Tetersala marsh

SURWHFWHGODQGVFDSHDUHDV Luhasoo, SURWHFWHGODQGVFDSHDUHDV Koiva-Mustjõe, Paganamaa, Peetri jõe, Hino Veclaicene, Northern Gauja ja Väike-Palkna maastikukaitseala

VSHFLDOFRQVHUYDWLRQDUHDV Koiva- QDWXUHPRQXPHQW ±.DODPHFX0DUNnj]XUDYLQH Mustjõe luha, Peetri jõe, Vaidva jõe, Pärlijõe luha ja Majori järve hoiuala

PLFURUHVHUYHV 0HOGUXSƯWHVIRUHVW0HOQXSH SHUPDQHQWKDELWDWV : 8 caper- forests, Vidaga forests, swamp forests of Gaujiena caillie ja 1 lesser spotted eagle

7 Valka Valga

6 1

3 1 4 7

8 5 2 Ape

Valmiera

Aluksne Smiltene 1

)LJ3URWHFWHGWHUULWRULHVLQSURMHFWDUHD9HFODLFHQH=LHPHƺJDXMD3DJDQDPDD Koiva-Mustjõe; 5 - Peetri jõe; 6 - Luhasoo; 7 - Hino; 8 - Parmu.

EU Birds and Habitats Directives are listed as (including the grayling and river trout) and a protected. spawning site for salmon and sea trout. In the area is also found in a large number of .RLYD0XVWM}H /DQGVFDSH SURWHFWHG DUHD giant (specular, big) trees and geologically signif- (3179 ha) - At the heart of this protected area icant objects - rocks, etc. on the southern border of Estonia is the Koiva River - the natural boundary between Estonia 3DJDQDPDD /DQGVFDSH 3URWHFWLRQ $UHD (1024,4 ha) is located in Võru county. The main DQG/DWYLDDQGWKH0XVWM}JL5LYHUWKDWÀRZV into it. The symbol of the Koiva River is the sights are the deep valley Piiriorg, that separates meadows that surround it with their old oak, Haanja upland from the Aluksne upland in lime and aspen trees. This is also the only place Latvia, the chain of lakes and Piirioja Brook, the varied kame relief and kettle holes, ravines and LQWKHFRXQWU\ZKHUH\RXZLOO¿QGWKH(XURSHDQ spindle growing naturally. The meadows are the ancient cultural landscape. The highest peaks in grazing land of Hereford cattle. Tellingumäe is the landscape protection area are hills Raadimägi home to a 24-metre viewing tower, campsite and (176,7 m), Kikkamägi (166,4 m) and Trumbipalo barbecue area. (161,4 m). +LQR/DQGVFDSH3URWHFWLRQ$UHD (697,7 ha) - Is 3HHWULULYHU/DQGVFDSHDUHD (497 ha) The Peetri part of the Natura 2000 network of nature protec- River Landscape Protection Area is renowned tion areas as an important bird and nature area. for its geological diversity. Devonian limestone The protection area encompasses Lake Hino, is only seen in Estonia as an outcrop on the Lake Idinä and Lake Mustjärv along with two banks of the Peetri River at Kalkahju. Beneath rivers, the Kuura and Pedetsi Rivers. The most the rolling white stone is a cave with a spring, while the limestone and sandstone walls, river QRWHZRUWK\LV/DNH+LQRZLWKLWVSOHQWLIXO¿VK and many islands and its diverse shoreline and banks, meadows and forests provide a habitat for interesting water chemistry (207.1 ha). Over 40 many protected plant species. Karisöödi Park is species of birds have been spotted here, of which home to an oak tree which is around 300 years the most rare is black-throated loon. old. It soars to a height of 23 metres, while its trunk measures 4.4 metres in circumference. The medieval Siksäla kalmõtõmägi burial mound 3HHWUL5LYHULVWKHKDELWDWRIVSHFLHVRI¿VK that has been thoroughly studied and has yielded

8 many artefacts is located in the area between 1140, Ape town – 1083, Varstu- 431, Hargla -223. Lake Hino and Lake Mustjärve. Spatial population outside the villages are small - 1.4 to 1.9 residents per km2, and now its signif- /XKDVRR/DQGVFDSH3URWHFWLRQ$UHD (798,3 ha) icant increase is not predictable. On the contrary, - Largest complete bog area in Southern Estonia. over the last 10 years has been seen a gradual It covers about 800 ha and is almost untouched population decrease in the region. by human activity. Luhasoo is very valuable in terms of environmental and landscape protection Currently, the greatest impact on the area’s both as a uniform ecosystem and the habitat of natural values and landscape are related to protected species. The bog is unique for its 15 logging. Agricultural land occupies about 30% mineral islands that are on average 1 metre high of the territory. The area has quite a lot of small and have sandy soil. farms, most of them are small, with 1-2 animals. Natural conditions in the area are not suitable for intensive agriculture, although in some places during the middle of 20th century was done of other protected protected area agricultural land drainage and have been culti- areas in Latvia in Estonia YDWHGFURSVPDLQO\LQ*DXMLHQD9LUHãLSDULVKHV Veclaicene DQG=YƗUWDYDSDULVKVRXWKHUQSDUW,QWKHSURMHFW 5% Ziemeļgauja 14 % other areas area there are also abandoned agricultural land in Estonia that is overgrown and, together with abandoned

14 % 27 % Soviet-era farm buildings, evaluated as a landscape degrading factor, but here it is not so striking, and overall landscape quality rated as high quality and has good potential of develop- 39 % ment. The area has a number of common mineral other areas in Latvia resources - sand and gravel mines. In largest villages that are not yet towns, are Fig. 2. Distribution of protected areas GHYHORSHGVPDOO¿UPVPRVWO\UHODWHGWRORJJLQJ in project area services, agriculture, tourism, beekeeping,

trade. The region is popular for sheep and cattle farming, organic and non-traditional farming. Main site visitor groups that use spatial resources, are water tourists who use the Gauja river for boat trips, other tourists who come to look at a 1.4. General economical variety of cultural, historical and natural values, background mushroom and berry pickers, people who visit the area on weekends and holidays. According The project area is generally sparsely populated, WR  6& ³/DWYLD 6WDWH )RUHVWV´ GDWD D VLJQL¿ - except bigger communities. On average, each cant proportion of visitors are hunters (each of municipality is home to about 500 residents, in the territories hunting organizations has about the major towns the population is larger and 10 members, who each is visiting the site of an WKH SRSXODWLRQ GHQVLW\ LV JUHDWHU LQ$OnjNVQH  average of 2 times per month). UHVLGHQWV6WUHQþXa*DXMLHQDa

9 2. Tourism in the region

In recent years, tourism in the region is gaining organized recreation spots for water tourists, popularity due to the relatively intensive available accommodation. advertising, and the overall rise of interest of Tourist attraction of the area is also contributed eco-tourism, as well as through recreational by the cultural and entertainment events. In infrastructure development. The region as a Gaujiena since 1988 is being organized J.Vitols tourist spot is also promoted by local authorities, Music Festival, in which annually participate because the development of tourism is facili- about 60 choirs from all Latvia. In Strenci tating the development of the region as a whole, annually in the third week of May takes place increasing economic activity and reducing 5DIWVPHQ IHVWLYDO LQ LWCV IUDPHZRUNV LV RUJDQ - unemployment. ized a raft trip down the Gauja, commemorating The most popular tourist destination area is WKHWLPEHUUDIWLQJWUDGLWLRQLQ*DXMD,QWKH¿UVW Gaujiena. In future there are expected that 6DWXUGD\ LQ $XJXVW LV 6WUHQþL WRZQ IHVWLYDO protected areas increase the number of visitors, During the summer season, between the rafter due to the advertising and the growing popularity DQGWKHWRZQCVIHVWLYDOFHOHEUDWLRQHYHU\RWKHU of recreational tourism in society and recrea- Saturday night there takes place action “Evening tional infrastructure development in the region 0XVLF´ZKHQPXVLFLDQVLQDÀRDWLQJERDWLQWKH and in whole Latvia. Thoughtfully planning site middle of Gauja are playing popular Latvian surveys, cognitive and leisure infrastructure, tunes. LWLVSRVVLEOHWRRUJDQL]HDQGGLUHFWWKHÀRZRI visitors, including the shifting it off the highly sensitive nature values. 2.1. Development opportunities The area is attractive by its varied landscapes, Project area is located Estonia, Latvia and natural resources and cultural monuments. In Russia borderzone. It has great potential in most areas are developed tourism infrastructure, nature tourism.

3UREOHPV Developing joint tourism infrastructure lack of infrastructure for tourism (walking paths, routes, bridges etc.) development; Between the Veclaicene LPA and Haanja NP; developing joint Enviroment educa- uneven quality of walking paths; tional and Tourism centres. lack of information near the tourism Developing water tourism on Vaidava objects, information is mostly in native river (from Ape to Metsavenna bunker). language; Compilating informational maretials - no joint marketing in the region. homepage of the project area, booklets, mobile applications, detailed maps (in 3RVVLELOLWLHV Estonian, Latvian, Russian and English); joint marketing between the countries Tourism information in Latvian, (Russia and Latvia joint route devel- Estonian, Russian and in English; opment Pihkva – Misso – Veclaicene – Haanja, Ape – Mõniste, Koiva river); Cooperation between different partners (nature protection specialists, foresters, cooperation between the countries to businessmen, local municipalities, create tourism products: Regional Tourism Centres); Developing seasonal tourism products: Carefully plan the infrastructure, to guide GUDJRQÀ\VXUYH\PXVKURRPLQJKXQWLQJ mass tourism away from the sensitive tourism etc. areas.

10 3. Hunting impact for the nature values

The high abundance of beavers and their growing up takes long time, then the loss of their dams’ effects on the ecosystem every oak is of big impact. of water bodies and on plant commu- nity of the river banks The main measures are regulating the abun- dance of beavers, demolishing dams and The impact of beaver’s activity can be positive covering important and especially endan- or negative depending on nature value. Beaver gered trees with net. In Estonia hunting causes damage by damming up water on forest of beavers is managed by landowners. and agricultural lands. The biggest effect is Landowner hunts beavers from damage indisputably on drained forests, followed by IRFDOKLPVHOIRU¿QGVKXQWHUVZLWKDSSUR - effects on water bodies and on banks habitations. priate skills. Landowner can demolish the %HDYHUV¶DFWLYLW\FDQEULQJVLJQL¿FDQWHFRQRPLF dams without permission if these cause damage on communities of water bodies and ÀRRGLQJ river banks, including salmons, the most impor- tant is hindering effect on spawning migration. As a positive effect, beavers’ dams establish new habitats and hold large quantities of sediments Increasing abundance of wild boars carried by water, but cause excessive moisture of and small games due to additional the banks. feeding and the resultant negative pressure on nature values of the One negative effect in the area results from surroundings beavers damaging or even felling old oaks on IRUHVW PHDGRZV 7KH ULYHUVLGH ÀRRGHG IRUHVW Additional feeding is widely spread hunting meadows are characteristic to the region, where measure, which objective is to preserve high old oaks provide conditions for large population abundance of games and to decrease damages diversity. As the number of oaks is small and caused by games. The main object of feeding is wild boar, for which the number of established

Roedeer. Photo A. Ader

11 feeding spots has doubled since 1991. In DUHWKHPDLQVRXUFHRIFRQÀLFWEHWZHHQPHQDQG addition to wild boar also other mammals large predators. attend the feeding spots, for example raccoon $VDUHVXOWRIVFLHQWL¿FUHVHDUFKODUJHSUHGDWRUV dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides ) and fox ( Vulpes are being increasingly appreciated in last decades vulpes ). The aggregation of the named species as an important component of ecosystem, but around feeding spots increases devastation of also as nature and hunting tourism object. nests of ground-nesting birds (especially endan- According to estimations the sustainable size gered are game fowls), damaging of Orchidaceae of Estonian wolf population is 200 specimens. and aggravation of maintenance of meadow Concurrently, wolf abundance is high in Latvia communities (wooded meadows). and Russia and as there are no migration barriers such species of extensive movement can effec- Based on Nature Conservation Act the addi- tively migrate. tional feeding of games on protected areas and on species’ protection sites is generally The main measures are regulation of abundance, prohibited in Estonia. compensation of wolf damages and support of protection measures. The hunting limit of wolves is determined on county level by Ministry of the Environment. Inside the county the hunting The negative pressure on nature limit is shared by the Environmental Board values deriving from high abundance according to propositions by Hunting Council. of small games Hunting of problematic specimens is organ- After utilization of antirabic vaccine in 2005 ized exceptionally outside the hunting season the abundance of foxes and raccoon dogs has by the Environmental Board together with increased considerably. There can be different game monitoring department of Environmental reasons for changes in abundance of small Agency. Problematic specimens are wolves who games – hunting, diseases, large predators as have started to persistently damage people’s abundance regulators, abundance of hunting assets (farm animals). objects. According to experts the spread of rabies The compensation of large predators’ damages has been stopped by vaccination in Estonia, but is considered an important protection measure rabies is the disease that keeps the abundance of of big predators in Estonia, which improve these species balanced. the locals’ attitude towards large predators and Such dominance by certain species imperils the nature conservation in general. The damages games that they hunt, including several endan- are directly related to the herding traditions gered species (game fowls, Anatidae, but also and applied protection measures. The effec - tive protection of large predators’ population JURXQGQHVWLQJELUGVRQWKH¿HOGVOLNHFRUQFUDNH  on actively managed areas is not considered $WWKHVDPHWLPHWKHGHQVL¿FDWLRQRIFRPSHWLWLRQ on everyday hunting objects (rodents) affects possible without measures to protect the cattle. endangered species like owls or spotted eagles. In Estonia the important measures are chainlink fences the predators cannot come through or electric fence and watchdogs. The Environmental The main measure is regulating the abun- Board supports construction of new wolf safe dance of small games. fences for sheep and purchase of watchdogs up to 50% of the expenses.

Damages on farm animals and domestic animals done by wolves From way back people have regarded wolves and other large predators with scare and tried to exterminate them, as they are competitors on food, kill farm animals and have attacked people. At present, the damages done by large predators

12 4. Alien species

Alien species are species that appear outside their 6LJQDO FUD\¿VK KDV EURXJKW WR (XURSH IURP natural distribution area, where these could not America and people have spread it to most spread without intentional or unintended help of European countries except Estonia and Norway. humans. Invasive alien species are alien species Latvia has encouraged the breeding of signal that can endanger ecosystems, habitats or species FUD\¿VK DQG WKHUHIRUH WKHUH LV ELJ ULVN RQ WKH and causing economic or ecological damage. The project area that some specimens have escaped to harmfulness of invasive species consists of the WKHQDWXUH7KHVLJQDOFUD\¿VKGLVSODFHFUD\¿VK following: as they are more fertile, aggressive and resistant ‡ enter into local food chain; to diseases and tough environmental condi- WLRQV$PHULFDQFUD\¿VKDUHLPPXQHWRFUD\¿VK ‡ FRPSHWH ZLWK RWKHU RUJDQLVPV ¿OOLQJ WKH plague and pass it on. More aggressive American same niches; PDOHFUD\¿VKPDWHZLWKQDWLYHIHPDOHRQHEXW ‡ can be toxic to local species, including no offspring results from that and hence the humans; DEXQGDQFHRIFUD\¿VKGHFUHDVHV$OLHQVSHFLHV ‡ carry pathogens and parasites; are introduced into Estonian water bodies by intentional or unintended human activity. ‡ hybridisation with close species; 0HDVXUHV 0RQLWRULQJ RI WKH 6LJQDO FUD\¿VK weaken genetically the adaptation of local ‡ Informing the public, involvement, populations. As of May 2011, 947 alien species are regis- tered in Estonia, of which 739 are plants. The best-known alien species of the project area are Sosnovski hogweed, American mink and raccoon dog, but at present only Sosnovski hogweed is being intensively fought with. Large attention KDVEHHQSDLGWRPRQLWRULQJRIVLJQDOFUD\¿VKLQ boundary water bodies. On the Latvian side of project area the 6RVQRYVNL KRJZHHG is widely spread and landowners have to deal with its control. Therefore it is not effec- tively repelled in Latvia and the exact spread is unknown. On Estonian part there are 12 colonies of Sosnovski and giant hogweed with the area of 4 ha, of these colonies 11 are in Võrumaa and 1 in Valgamaa. The most spread is the hogweed in Misso parish in Võrumaa. In all the colonies hogweed weed killer is being manually used, organized by the Environmental Board with the help of state funds. Since 2007, 6 colonies have been exterminated; in 2010 one new colony was added, in 2011 two colonies, in 2013 one colony and in 2014 one new colony. The vitality of colonies where weed killer has been used for longer time has started to weaken. Measures (Holm 2010): Detail mapping the spread of distribution, monitoring, constant repelling. Informing the public, involvement, raising owners liability.

13 Tab. 1. Alien species distribution in project region and measures.

6SHFLHV 'LVWULEXWLRQ 0HDVXUHV

Very rare in Latvia. :DUW\FDEEDJH Common in North-Estonia. Rare in the project area. Mapping spread (Bunias orientalis ) Distribution is related with roadsides and of distribution farmlands.(Kukk &Kull 2005).

&DQDGLDQ Rare in latvia.Common in Eastern part of :DWHUZHHG Etonia(also in the project area). Mapping spread (Elodea of distribution canadensis ) Spreads vegetatively.(Kukk &Kull 2005) Spreads rapidly in Latvia. In Estonia colonys under control. ,Q/DWYLD$OnjNVQH0DOLHQD$SH0ƗUNDOQH 9RONRYD.ROEHUƧLV.RUQHWL/ƗUEHUƧLV5DLSDODODNH Mapping spread of 6RVQRYVNL %ƝUWLƼXODNH$OVYLƷL7UDSHQHVXUURXQGLQJV distribution in Latvia. KRJZHHGDQG *LDQWKRJZHHG /DUJHVWDUHDV%ƗUGDVNURJVDQG.RUQHWLVXUURXQGLQJV3RSML Consistent monitoring (Heracleum VXUURXQGLQJ*DURåXDQG7DOHãXODNHVVXUURXQGLQJV in Estonia. sosnowskyi, 12 colonys (total area ca 4 ha) are found on the Estonian Informing the public, Heracleum part of the project territory. 11 colonys are located involvement, raising mantegazzianum ) in Võru county and 1 of them in Valga county. owners liability.

Abandoned agricultural lands, roadsides(Kukk &Kull 2005)

(DVWHUQ*DOHJD 9HU\UDUHLQ/DWYLD 'ƝOLƼNDOQVLVXUURXQGLQJV  Mapping spread (Galega orientalis ) Common in Estonia. of distribution. ,Q/DWYLD=LHPHUL0ƗULƼNDOQV=HOWLƼL Mapping spread +DLU\*DOLQVRJD $OnjNVQH0ƗULƼNDOQV$OVYLƷLUHJLRQV of distribution, (Galinsoga ciliata ) Common in South-Estonia. Informing the public. *DUGHQV¿HOGV .XNN .XOO Registrated in Ape. *DOODQW6ROGLHU Mapping spread (Galinsoga Rare in Estonia.Not registrated in the project area. of distribution, ) Informing the public. SDUYLÀRUD *DUGHQV¿HOGV .XNN .XOO Mapping spread 5DUHLQ/DWYLD$OnjNVQH$SH0DOLHQD of distribution. $OVYLƷL0ƗULƼNDOQVUHJLRQV Invasive alien species. +LPDOD\DQ In Estonia70 localities (2011), in Valga county Consistent control %DOVDP (Impatiens 3 and in Võru county2 localities. and monitoring. glandulifera ) Forests, parks, banks of the reservoirs, roadsides. Informing the public, Spreading with horticulture(Kukk &Kull 2005) involvement, raising owners liability. 6SUHDGLQJLQ$SH$OVYLƷL.UƗJDVNDOQV 6PDOO%DOVDP *XGXSML$OnjNVQH-DXQODLFHQH*UnjEH Mapping spread (Impatiens Spread diffusely in Estonia. of distribution SDUYLÀRUD ) Gardens, parks, cemeteries, roadsides.(Kukk &Kull 2005)

14 /DUJHOHDYHG 9HU\UDUHLQ/DWYLD $OnjNVQH  Mapping spread /XSLQH ( Lupinus Common in South-Estonia of distribution. polyphyllus ) Meadows (Kukk &Kull 2005) Informing the public.

2[H\HGDLV\ 6SUHDGLQ$OnjNVQH=LHPHULUHJLRQV Mapping spread (Telekia speciosa ) Parks, river banks, gardens. (Kukk &Kull 2005) of distribution /DWYLMƗUHWLVDVWRSDPD5HƧLVWUƝWD-DXQDQQDV =DPDƼX $OnjNVQH0ƗULƼNDOQV DSNDLPƝ 7KLFNHWVKDGEXVK Rare in Latvia. Registrated in Jaunanna, Mapping spread (Amelanchier =ƗPDQL $OnjNVQH0ƗULƼNDOQV UHJLRQ of distribution spicata ) Spread diffusely in Estonia. Registrated in the project area - Varstu, Rõuge regions. Naturalized species.

Very rare in Latvia, also in the project area. Mapping spread &DQDGDJROGHQURG of distribution (Solidago Spread diffusely in Estonia. canadensis ) 6DELHGUƯEDV Meadows, abondoned areas, roadsides. (Kukk &Kull 2005) LQIRUPƝãDQD /DWYLMƗUHƧLRQƗUHWLVDVWRSDPDVXJD )DOVH6SLUDHD Rare in Latvia Mapping spread (Sorbaria Spread diffusely in Estonia. of distribution sorbifolia ) Old parks surroundings, abondoned gardens.(Kukk &Kull 2005)

15 5. Protected species

5.1. Inverterbrates evenly chunky back part of the body, which is black at the bottom and has several red and one There is not so much information about protected \HOORZ WULDQJXODU VSRW )HPDOH GUDJRQÀLHV DUH EXWWHUÀ\ C. hero, E. aurinia, L. dispar, P. slimmer than male creatures and there are large mnemosyne DQGGUDJRQÀ\VSHFLHV A. viridis, L. orange-yellow spots on the back part of the body. albifrons, L. caudalis, L. pectoralis, O. cecilia ) RQ WKH SURMHFW WHUULWRU\ ,Q RUGHU WR ¿QG RXW /DUJHPDUVKGUDJRQÀ\SUHIHUVVPDOOODNHVULFKLQ species distribution, size of the population and ÀRUDULYHUFURRNVDQGFDQDOVZLWKVORZÀRZDV threats. Inventors that were carried out during KDELWDWV/DUYDHDUHIRQGRIÀRUDDQGWKH\OLYH the project, gave us new information about there mostly in stagnant waters. The species is mostly situation in the border areas. Inventorys were endangered by eutrophication of water bodies carried out on the Natura 2000 areas and on areas and changes in landscape, as a result of which located next to Natura 2000 protected areas. suitable habitats will disappear. In addition to key species some interesting It is a rare species in Europe. In Estonia, the species has been scattered but more habitats can ¿QGLQJVZHUHUHJLVWHUHG be found in South-Estonia. During the inventory Dytiscus latissimus ±LGHQWL¿HGLQIHZODNHVQHDU of the project area, several habitats of the species 9HFODLFHQH DQG LQ RQH ODNH QHDU &LUJDƺL 7KH ZHUHLGHQWL¿HGEXWWKHUHZHUHQRULVNIDFWRUV HJ habitat is found at the species most northern eutrophication of water bodies and changes in distribution limits. landscape. Cucujus cinnaberinus ±LGHQWL¿HGLQRQHKDELWDW near Melnupe. The habitat is found at the species 5.1.2. Lilypad Whiteface most northern distribution limits (also it is one of (Leucorrhinia caudalis) the 5-7 up to now know habitats). It indicates a It is a species belonging to Appendix IV to the presence of a highly biologically valuable forest EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, the species has in the area. been entered in II category of the species under Hirudo medicinalis – found in lakes near protection and in the Red Book. 9HFODLFHQH DQG $OnjNVQH 7KH ¿QGLQJV VXJJHVW that it is more widespread as have been consid- /LO\SDG:KLWHIDFHLVDGUDJRQÀ\RIDYHUDJHVL]H ered before. ZKRLVVPDOOHUWKDQRWKHUPDUVKGUDJRQÀLHV WKH wings spread up to 50 mm). Lilypad Whiteface Nehalennia speciosa – few new habitats has a white face and there are dark brown spots ZHUH LGHQWL¿HG LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW LQ WKH ODNHV RI on the rare wings. It can be distinguished from $SH9HFODLFHQH DUHD D VLJQL¿FDQW SDUW RI LWV RWKHUPDUVKGUDJRQÀLHVE\DEGRPHQZKLFKLV population could be found. of club shape and very much wider from the top. Abdomen of male is black with a greyish blue 5.1.1. Large White-faced Darter ¿OPQHDUWKHWKRUD[7KHUHDUH\HOORZVSRWVRQ (Leucorrhinia pectoralis) DEGRPHQDQGZLQJVRIIHPDOHGUDJRQÀLHV Large White-faced Darter belongs to Appendixes Suitable habitats are mesotrophic and eutrophic II and IV of the EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, ponds and lakes (the species may be found in the species has been entered in III category of the VZDPSV DV ZHOO  ,W SUHIHUV ODNHV ULFK LQ ÀRUD species under protection and in the Red Book. and water bodies with larger open water area. The species is primarily endangered by pollu- ,W LV D GUDJRQÀ\ RI DYHUDJH VL]H ZKRVH ZLQJV tion of water bodies and changes in water bodies spread approximately 55 mm. There are dark (deepening and changing the water level). An spots on the rare wings. Compared with other action plan has been prepared for the protection PDUVKGUDJRQÀLHVLWLVFKXQNLHU0DOHGUDJRQ - of Lilypad Whiteface, which foresees different ÀLHV KDYH ZLGHU KHDG DQG WKRUD[ ZLGH DQG

16 studies in order to work out necessary measures black abdomen and feet with yellowish-green for the protection of the species. stripes. It can be distinguished from other snake- tails by the thorax, which looks completely green The natural habitat of the species is not constant from the distance. in the Central Europe. In Estonia the species has mostly spread in east and several of them are Larvae of Green Snaketail live on a sandy bottom located in South-Estonia. A couple of habitats of of small streams with clean water and smaller the species were discovered during the inventory TXLFNÀRZLQJULYHUVRURQDERWWRPFRYHUHGZLWK of the project area. It is not numerous in protected a thin layer of mud. In order to stay alive they areas (only in some oxbow lakes of Koiva- need water rich in oxygen. Imagines live near Mustjõe), and in nature park of Paganamaa such water bodies. (Veskijärve), in oxbow lake of the Koiva River, According to protection action plan of Green the habitat is endangered by beavers. Snaketail, the species is endangered by pollution, straightening, deepening of the water body, and 5.1.3. Dark Whiteface changes in the water level (incl. construction of (Leucorrhinia albifrons) weirs). In order to preserve the habitats of the Dark Whiteface has been entered in Appendix species, the above-mentioned activities should IV to the EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, the be avoided. species has been entered in III category of the In Europe, Green Snaketail has spread until species under protection and in the Red Book. Germany and Denmark. The species has been The wings of Dark Whiteface spread up to 60 discovered in places all over Estonia but mostly mm. The species differs from other similar in South-West of Estonia. species due to its lower lip, which is black in the During the inventory, the species was found in middle and light on sides. The lower lip of other River Mustjõe, Peetri River, Laanemetsa stream, PDUVKGUDJRQÀLHVLVFRPSOHWHO\EODFN where the risk factor is household contamination Swamp is a suitable habitat, which has small from the farms close to the river, but no required HQGRUKHLFODNHVDQGERJSRROVULFKLQÀRUD7KH activities have been foreseen for eliminating species is endangered by the falling number of the risk. The species was also found in Parmu suitable habitats and loss of swamp and bog nature reserve (at the most east and south-eastern landscape. border). Dark Whiteface has almost disappeared in 5.1.5. Green Hawker (Aeshna viridis) Western Europe. This species has spread all over Estonia and some habitats are located on the The Green Hawker is the invertebrate of project area. During the inventory, the appear- Appendix IV to the EU Nature Directive. In ance of the species was marked in Lagesoo lakes Estonia, the species has been entered in III and bog-pools and in oxbow lakes of Koiva- category of the species under protection and in Mustjõe. The species is endangered in oxbow the Red Book. lakes of the Koiva River by beavers but no action ,WLVDODUJHGUDJRQÀ\ZKLFKLVVLPLODUWRRWKHU has been required for eliminating the risk. hawkers but it can be distinguished by green sides of thorax and slight brown shade at the tip 5.1.4. Green Snaketail of the wings. (Ophiogomphus cecilia) Several water bodies with stagnant water are Green Snaketail belongs to Appendixes II and suitable to the species (ponds, lakes, peat pits). IV to the EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, the The species is mostly endangered by eutrophica- species has been entered in III category of the tion of water bodies, draining of bogs and loss of species under protection and in the Red Book. ZDWHUERGLHVULFKLQÀRUDVXLWDEOHIRUOD\LQJHJJV Green Snaketail is larger than average species and life of larvae. RIGUDJRQÀLHV,WKDVJUHHQH\HVDSDUWIURPHDFK The coverage area of Green Hawker is from other, a thorax with wide green stripes and a Siberia to North-Europe. It is a rare species. The

17 biggest risk factors are eutrophication of water has been entered in III category of the species bodies, draining of bogs. In Estonia, the species under protection and in the Red Book. has mostly been seen on the western coast ,W LV D EXWWHUÀ\ ZKLFK EHORQJV DPRQJ FRSSHU but also in the area between Peipsi Lake and EXWWHUÀLHVZLWKWKHVSUHDGRIWKHZLQJVXSWR Võrtsjärve. The species was not found during the mm. The upper part of the wings is glossy red inventory of the project area. with a dark pattern. The main colour of the lower part of the rare wing is light greyish-blue. 5.1.6. Clouded Apollo (Parnassius mnemosyne) According to the protection action plan of Large &RSSHUPHDGRZVÀRRGODQGVRIULYHUVVZDPSV The species belongs to Appendix IV to the EU damp high-grasslands and banks of water bodies Nature Directive. In Estonia, the species has are the most suitable habitats for the species. The been entered in II category of the species under species is endangered by draining of swamps, protection and in the Red Book. growing over of open landscape (no maintenance &ORXGHG$SROORLVDODUJHEXWWHUÀ\ ZLQJVVSUHDG ZRUN DVZHOODVORQJWHUPÀRRGVLQKDELWDWVVRLO until 55 mm). The upper part of the wings is contamination, usage of fertilisers and too inten - whitish, translucent. There are two black spots on sive agriculture. the front edge of the front wings, and the outer The species is wide-spread in Europe but it is edge of the wing is glassy. The inner edge of the a retreating species. In Estonia, it is spread all rare wings is dark. The species is very similar to RYHUWKHFRXQWU\EXWPRVWO\RQPHDGRZVÀRRG the Black Veined White but the latter does not lands of rivers, swampy meadows and banks of have black spots. the water body in South-Eastern part of Estonia. ,WLVSRVVLEOHWR¿QGWKHVSHFLHVLQVWUHDPYDOOH\V During the inventory, the species was marked in ULYHUÀRRGODQGVPHDGRZVDQGDWWKHHGJHRIWKH Peeli River’s beaver dam and on the meadows of forest. The species chooses edges of the forest Luhasoo landscape protection area. open to the noon sun as habitat, as there is more Taking into account the currently good situa- food for caterpillar – Corydalis. The existence tion of the species in Estonia, it is foreseen in of the species is endangered by brushwood of the action plan of the species that no mowing meadows, agricultural activities, mining. The practices oriented to Large Copper need to be species also endangered by grass burning in implemented in habitats. However, extensive spring as then the main nutritious plants of cater- grass cutting is needed in the habitat of the pillar sprout. species – otherwise the habitat would be full of In Estonia, the species has been found in north- brushwood and nutritive plants would disappear. eastern, eastern and south-eastern parts of If possible, the grass should not be cut every year Estonia. During the inventory, a population of in the habitat but every 2-3 years. Further advice average number was marked in Parmu nature for maintenance and management can be found reserve as well as Koiva population was marked from the action plan of the species. where single individuals were noticed. Parmu population is endangered by growing over 5.1.8. Marsh Fritillary and trash around the farm and meadow of the (Euphydryas aurinia) Pedetsi River. It is necessary to cut brushwood in The Marsh Fritillary belongs to Appendix II to suitable habitats and cut the grass on the meadow. the EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, the species After cutting, the grass needs to be taken away. has been entered in III category of the species Koiva population is endangered by crushing of under protection and in the Red Book. the grass, which should be replaced by cutting and taking away of the grass. The wings of the Marsh Fritillary spread up to 41 mm. The main colour of the upper part of 5.1.7. Large Copper (Lycaena dispar) the wings is yellowish-brown with a blackish drawing and yellowish spots. The upper part The species belongs to Appendixes II and IV to of the rear wings has a number of black spots, the EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, the species

18 which distinguish this species from others. The In Europe, the species are spread from North edge of the lower part is greyish-yellow. Spain, northern part of the Balkan Peninsula to South Scandinavia. In the scope of Europe, it is Suitable habitats for Marsh Fritillary are damp a retreating species. In Estonia, the species has grasslands with low herbs, which can be found at spread all over the territory in coniferous and the edges of swamps, on river banks and glades. broadleaf forests rich in species and with lush According to the protection action plan of Marsh undergrowth and on meadows. The risk factors Fritillary, it is important to keep the nutritive affecting the species are clear-cuttings, affores- plants (e.g. Succisa pratensis ) surrounded by tation and growth of brushwood. During the lower plants than they are in order to preserve inventory, the species was found from Parmu the species. The eggs and caterpillars feeding in nature reserve and Luhasoo landscape protection a cobweb should be exposed to sunlight, the soil area but no above-mentioned risk factors were should be moderately damp and this should be found. relatively stable (developed moss layer contrib- XWHVWRWKLV DQGWKHUHVKRXOGEHQRULVNRIÀRRG during vegetation period. In European scale, it 5.1.10. Scarce Heath is a retreating species. The species has spread (Coenonympha hero) all over Estonia but locally. As a result of the It is a species, which belongs to Appendix IV to inventory, a small population was discovered EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, the species has in the south-eastern part of Luhasoo landscape been entered in III category of the species under protection area, where the risk factor is growing protection and in the Red Book. over of the area and waste. These are lands of a former farm, where grass should be cut and taken ,WLVDVPDOOEXWWHUÀ\ WKHZLQJVVSUHDGRQO\XS away from the point of view of preserving the to 25 mm). It can be distinguished from other species. In case of herding the habitats (in order species belonging to the family only by catching to keep the meadows with low herbs), too inten- it or when the creature is feeding. At the back sive herding should be avoided not to destroy of the specie’s front wings can be seen three WKH ÀRUD DQG FREZHE QHVWV RI FDWHUSLOODUV GXH swollen tracheas, the upper part of the wing is to treading. It is recommended to herd animals dark brown, lower part of the rear wings has a there after several years or to keep 0.4 – 0.7 narrow white stripe towards tarsus from the line animals per 1 ha. of eye spots. It is a species that likes to be in damp broadleaf 5.1.9. Woodland Brown and mixed forests, brushwood, swamps and (Lopinga achine) excessively damp areas. It is endangered by draining of habitats, agricultural activity, changes It is a species, which belongs to Appendix IV to in grasslands and usage of forest areas. EU Nature Directive. In Estonia, the species has been entered in III category of the species under The species is primarily spread in North-Western protection and in the Red Book. Europe but it can be found also elsewhere. In Estonia, it is spread all over the country but only The wings of Woodland Brown spread up to 48 in few known habitats. During the inventory, the mm. The upper part of the wings is brownish, species was found in Luhasoo landscape protec- outer part of upper part of front and rear wings tion area and according to the expert, there were have a row of black spots surrounded by a yellow no risk factors. circle. Brown Woodland prefers coniferous and 5.1.11. Hermit beetle broadleaf forest, oak forests and meadows with (Osmoderma eremita) lush undergrowth as a habitat. The species is endangered by forestry (clear-cuttings as well as Hermit Beetle is one of the largest beetle in afforestation and growing of brushwood) as well Europe and also endangered. as by agricultural activities. The entire life cycle of the beetle can take place within the hollow of just one tree, this elusive species spends three to four years as a larva,

19 feeding on the rotten wood in the centre of the Western Capercaillie is a sessile bird in Estonia hollow. It pupates in autumn, constructing a and its circulation coincides mainly with that cocoon out of its excrement and wood mould, of the pines and ordinary blueberry. These two and then emerges as a beetle the following species are the most important source of food summer. Dispersal is limited, as although the for Western Capercaillie respectively in winter EHHWOHV FDQ À\ YHU\ IHZ GR DQG HYHQ WKHQ and in summer. The playing areas of the Western rarely further than 100 metres. For this reason Capercaillie are mostly in the pine forest around the beetles require a stable environment with bigger or smaller bogs, where the forest is most suitable habitat very nearby. Usually, adult often 81-126 years old. Mostly they visit tradi- hermit beetles are found from July to September. tional playing areas, which may be used for ,Q¿HOGVWXGLHVWKHOLIHVSDQRIDGXOWVKDVEHHQ decades by cocks. Older cocks come to the same up to one month, while in the lab, hermit beetles, playing area during sequential years. The average especially females, may survive much longer. scattering distance of Western Capercaillie is considered to be 10 km. There is only one known population in Estonia in Koiva-Mustjõe landscape area. It was discovered The Western Capercaillie game lasts from March on the oak tree in 1995 (Süda, 1998, 2003, 2004, to the middle of May, and the game is the most 2006). active during the period when female Western Capercaillie visit the playing areas, which lasts During the inventories (2012) in Koikküla, usually for a couple of weeks. The nest is mostly Laanemetsa, Mõniste, Rõuge, Viitina, Karisöödi in the forest close to the playing area and the and Ruusmäe parks and in Vastse-Roosa, new hatch may move later to the suitable feeding area, populations were not found. which is located hundreds of meters further. The Measures: Removing undergrowth around mortality of chicken is the highest during three habitat trees. ¿UVWZHHNVDIWHUKDWFKLQJZKHQFKLFNHQHDWRQO\ insects, depending at the same time a lot on their mother in order to keep their body heat. Western Capercaillie eats mostly vegetarian food. 5.2. Birds Pine needles constitute the main food basis in very snowy winters. In spring, after the snow 5.2.1. Western Capercaillie has melted, Western Capercaillie eats mostly (Tetrao urogallus) pine needles and buds, blossoms of hare’s-tail cottongrass, leaves of Andromeda and sprouts Western Capercaillie is the largest member of blueberries in Estonia. Summer is the most of galliformes in Europe. The feathering of energy-consuming period of time for Western male Western Capercaillie (the cock) is mostly Capercaillie as body energy reserves need to dark grey and black, and of female Western be restored after the game period in spring Capercaillie (female) brownish. A female bird is and moulting begins. During this period, male bigger than a heath hen, who is distinguishable Western Capercaillie chooses fur forest growing by a large rust-red spot on the chest, and a longer on nutritious earth for their living place, and at and more round top of rusty tale (Cramp et al., the same time the usage of old natural forest 2004; Jonsson 2000). Western Capercaillie has a increases during the whole summer. In this strongly represented sexual dimorphism: male is habitat, the cocks feed on plants, which are clearly distinguishable from female. rich in proteins and they contain easily assimi- Western Capercaille belongs to Category II of lated energy such as the species belonging to the types of birds under protection in Estonia blueberry family, herbs and Pteridophyta. The (RT I 2004, 44, 313). In the last report of the cocks are not territorial in summer and they often Estonian Red Book (2008), Western Capercaille appear in groups during the whole summer, and belongs to the class vulnerable, the hazard factor cocks of the neighbouring games may share one of which is noted to be forest draining, changes and the same habitat in summer. Female Western in the age of the forest, clear-cutting and distur- Capercaillies without a family are more often bance (Report of Estonian Red Book 2008). to be found in younger and thicker coniferous

20 Valka Valga

Ape

Valmiera

Aluksne SmiSmiltenelte

Western Capercaillie

Great Snipe

0 5 10 km

Fig. 3. Lekking sites of Western Capercaillie and Great Snippe in project area

forests. In winter, Western Capercaillies prefer are considered to be a risk factor of average old pine forests close to their playing areas. importance. According to the analysis of coherency of KDELWDWV HI¿FLHQF\ RI GHIHQFH DQG FRQGLWLRQ 5.2.2. European Roller of habitats of Estonian population of Western (Coracius garrulus) Capercaillie ( Tetrao urogallus ) (Leivits 2012), the forest population of Estonian Western Bird prefers to nest in sparse pine or oak Capercaillie is divided into core areas, which are forests. The main cause for the rapid decline in three-dimensionally distinguishable, consisting the roller population in Europe is due to major of coherent games. According to this analysis, changes in agricultural practices and forestry there are three core areas of Western Capercaillie (lack offnesting and feeding sites, use of pesti- in the project area – Hargla, Misso and Rõuge. cides). Information on mortality in wintering These core areas form together 54,588 ha (5.6% areas and during the migration is rather poor. of the habitat predicted in Estonia), they include In the 1950s, thousands of pairs were breeding 15 games and 30 cocks (2.9% of Estonian in Estonia, yet a rapid decline occurring in the population). Almost all playing areas are under European population also affected the Estonian protection but abundance has decreased in most population. In order to improve the breeding of the games. conditions and to enhance the population growth of rollers, which is cut off from the southern The average scope of the Western Capercaillies’ population, a nestbox program was launched in JDPHVKDVVLJQL¿FDQWO\GHFUHDVHGLQDOO(VWRQLD 2000 (Lüütsepp, 2011). in the perspective of 25 years. The most impor- tant negative risk factor to the scope of the game In project site the European Roller´s inventory is considered to be the effect of ditches. Clear- was performed in Northern Gauja landscape cutting in habitats of Western Capercaillies is protected area, which is known as a historic considered to be a risk factor of great impor- Roller´s nesting territory. tance as well as long-term changes in landscape, whereby the games are in danger of staying European Roller tracking is performed by in isolation and fragmentation of preferred checking certain known cages, as well as habitats. Predatory and disturbance by people gathering information about local landowners

21 observations. Latest news from the landowners 5.3. Flying Squirrel says that in 2011 spring the European Roller (Pteromys volans) have been observed, but not anymore in 2012. During 2004-2005 in area were located 46 cages. Flying Squirrel has received its name from hairy Cages were yearly tested up to 2006. folds of skin between its fore and hind legs which help it to make jumps up to 50 metres from one In 2012 tested cages were not found any signs tree to another.(Timm 2012). Flying squirrel is that the European Rollers are nesting there. There nocturnal and require mature trees with classic were found other species - The common starling understory with fallen rotting logs for nesting (Sturnus vulgaris ), The European Pied Flycatcher and a food source. The rotting logs have a fungus (Ficedula hypoleuca ) and the Common Redstart that is an important food source. In recent (Phoenicurus phoenicurus ). decades intensive woodcutting has decreased the number of old forests and particularly old hollow Measures: Placed cages should be aspen trees that are suitable for Flying Squirrels. monitored further, as well as should It is considered vulnerable within the European continue displaying new cages, repairing Union. and routine testing .

5.2.3. Great Snipe (Gallinago media) During the late 19th and early 20th century, populations of great snipe started to decline. According to experts opinions 25-30 years ago was great snipe widespread species. In 2002 there were 500-700 nesting male birds in Estonia. Nowadays there are 400-600. Great snipe populations inside the protected areas are quite stable (Alam-Pedja, Matsalu, Soomaa, Koiva-Mustjõe). Populations outside of the protected areas are declining. Interesting is that some lekking sites are growing quite large (there are 3 known lekking sites where number of male birds is 30-40). In the project area, there are 4 known great snipe lekking sites in Estonian side and 2 in Latvian side. Together they are forming one vital popula- tion in a small area close to Koiva river and Mustjõgi. During the inventorys in 2012 there were counted 9 birds in Estonian side and 6 birds on Latvian side of the project territory. Major threats for the species are overgrowth LQWKHJUHDWVQLSHOHNNLQJVLWHVDQGLQVXI¿FLHQW quality of maintenance.

Measures: habitat maintenance .

22 6. Habitats

Based on the analysis of the collected informa- Densely forested areas are: tion, forest and meadow habitat mapping was ‡ Areas covered with coniferous forests near done in Veclaicene landscape protected area and the Koiva River (Koiva-Mustjõe landscape in Koiva-Mustjõe, Hino, Peetri river landscape protection area). This is a homologous mass areas. O for the areas Natura 2000 habitat infor- of forest where the habitat types are not mation was available. Northern Gauja updated particularly diverse and are differentiated information on the habitat “ Wooded meadows” mainly due to the age of forests. (code 6530) spread using remote sensing data. Pähni – Mõisamõtsa – Villike area River habitats inventory done in Latvia, in ‡ stretching from south to north within the Estonia river habitat mapping has been done in middle part of the area. This is a semi-nat- previous years. ural landscape where the forests make up +DELWDWLGHQWL¿FDWLRQLVEDVHGRQWKH(XURSHDQ an important part of the diversity of the Commission 2007´s “Interpretation Manuel of landscapes. This area has a long history of European Union Habitats”. Each EU member human impact. The forest within this area state can develop its own interpretation of the can be divided into coniferous forests and method by adjusting the country´s situation, bog woods. vegetation and habitat types. For Latvian habitat ‡ Eastern set of forests (Parmu, Hino). The inventory used in 2010 published “ The European main assets of this area are the ancient Union habitats in Latvia. Determination Guide”. farmlands. The high amount of natural In Estonia Habitat Directive Handbook was used. forests in this area is caused by the compli- During inventory for each habitat polygon cations of maintaining a forest due to the ZDV ¿OOHG D FHUWDLQ IRUP RI TXHVWLRQQDLUH high number of swamps. Most common Standardised questionnaires since 2012, are used types of forests include coniferous and fen in all Latvian habitat inventory and mapping of woods. N2000 sites, also in N2000 habitat monitoring, as well as other various projects inventories and surveys (such as JSC “Latvian State Forests” *9080 Citi 91F0 performed eco-forests inventories) for the 9050 country to collect data in a joint form, so it would *91D0 3% 3% 3% be comparable and includable in a joint database 8% (Database OZOLS in Latvia and database EELIS in Estonia) *9010

6.1. Forests 79% Forests cover up to 64 percent of the area of this project. According to a basic map of Estonia there are 31160 ha of forests in the Estonian part Fig. 4. Distribution of forests according of the project. The average percentage of forests to forest habitats inventory is thus higher than the average in Estonia, but the landscape includes few large ancient forests. A large part of the forests started to grow on former farmlands after the last war and most of those are Half of the forests in this area are middle-growth birch or grey alder forests and diverse coniferous stands, the second highest proportion are forests that have developed out of the two previ- old-growth stands and the smallest proportion ously mentioned. belongs to young-growth stands (according to the Forestry Management). The amount of

23 middle-growth birch and alder forests shows 6WDQGDUGL]HG¿HOGZRUNIRUPVIRUIRUHVWKDELWDWV massive desertion of farmlands and over-growing. inventory were used. 1518 ha of forest habitats, of which more than 1/3 were in Koiva-Mustjõe 52% out of all the forests within this area belong Landscape Protection Area, were mapped as a to the state. The most common type within the result of this project. project area is the coniferous forest growing on eskers, kames and outwash plains on oligo- to 38% out of the inventoried area (3959 ha) turned mesotrophic sand and gravel soils. Second most out to be some sort of forest habitat, of which common are coniferous forests growing mostly 23% has a good quality (A or B presentability). on a sand and clay mixed soil on moraine hills. More potential habitats could have been mapped 30% of forests in this project lie within protected as generally only important connecting buffer areas, of which 9% lie in conservation zones zones with other habitats or zones with a clear and 21% in restricted areas. Protected areas with and high value were mapped as protected areas. the largest amount of forests are Koiva-Mustjõe This presupposes sustainable use of resources in Landscape Protection Area, Parmu Nature the protected areas and that most forests should Reserve and Paganamaa Landscape Protection conserve at least some sort of a reservational Area. Considering the protection of forests, value even while being continuously maintained. Mõisamõtsa Nature Reserve, Pähni Nature The largest homogenous areas were bog wood Reserve and Hino Landscape Protection Area are (*91D0) and western taiga (*9010) habitats important as well. according to the size of the areas. The smallest Forest communities were taken in stock only in and less common were representable broad- protected areas. 2194 ha (28%) of valuable forest leaved forests (*9020), scree forests (*9180) and communities have been surveyed. 1744 ha of deciduous swamp woods (*9080). those are western taigas (9010) in good protect- able condition, followed by 182 ha of fen forests. Factors affecting forest habitats: 6.2. Meadows ‡ Trampling of tender plant communi- Semi-natural communities, also known as natural ties (unregulated visiting, off-road motor heritage, are communities with a natural set of vehicles) species that has evolved over time due to contin- ‡ Uncoordinated forestry, ignorance of uous moderate herding and mowing. Maintaining forestry restrictions, fragmentation of semi-natural communities is one of the most habitats due to the building of infrastructure, important areas of responsibility. Semi-natural arefying of forests, establishing of new strip communities include alvars, dry meadows, mines in ancient forests ÀRRG PHDGRZV PDUVK OLNH PHDGRZV ZRRGHG meadows, coastal meadows and wooded pastures. Exploitive deforestation, stealing ‡ Semi-natural communities are described through ‡ 'DQJHURI¿UH DODUJHGLYHUVLW\RISODQWVZKLFKIXO¿OVWKHQHFHV - sary requirements for other communities of 6.1.1. Inventory of forest species to develop. habitats in Estonia :LWKLQ WKH DUHD RI WKH SURMHFW RQH FDQ ¿QG The inventory of forest habitats was organized ÀRRG PHDGRZV PDUVK OLNH PHDGRZV ZRRGHG in Estonia in 2012 where altogether 3959 ha meadows, coastal meadows and wooded pastures of forests were surveyed. Inventory included with the most important places being the valuable 7 protection sites for Western Capercaillie, 1 ÀRRGPHDGRZVZRRGHGPHDGRZVZLWKDQFLHQW site for Osprey and conservation zones of Hino, broad-leafed trees, dry meadows with junipers Peetri and Koiva-Mustjõe Landscape Protection and sandy, dry herdable pastures around Koiva Areas. Based on the methods, a database for river and Mustjõgi. Meadows around Koiva are forest habitats was compiled where in addition unique in Estonia – plant communities can be WR WKH ERUGHUV RI SURWHFWLRQ VLWHV ¿OOHG IRUPV found there that are more common in western DQG SLFWXUHV IURP WKH ¿HOGZRUN ZHUH DGGHG Estonia and are attracted to limestone.

24 Main factors endangering semi-natural commu- Culturing can be understood as a change of nities are as follows: species in habitation (seeding hay), as fertiliza- tion and is a problem especially outside areas 2YHUJURZWK under conservation. Culturing endangers (and Overgrowth endangers all meadow communi- has endangered) dry meadows in special. ties with high diversity of species, where a lot of Biomes such as wooded meadows can be divided species depend on traditional maintenance. Lack into meadows and pastures according to their use. of maintenance has many important reasons Due to the natural similarities they are usually including lack of economic interest against thought of as two similar subspecies of one maintaining a semi-natural community, missing semi-natural community. The main difference knowledge considering nature preservation lies in the handling: wooded meadows are taken and demands upon maintenance of semi-nat- care of through mowing and wooded pastures ural communities, small settling in rural areas, through farming. Wooded meadows are natural sophistication of maintenance and the cost meadows with sparse growth of trees and bushes. (meadows are often found in places hard to reach Yearly mowing and shaping of trees and bushes RUZKLFKDUHHDVLO\ÀRRGHG ODFNRIPDLQWHQDQFH is a necessity for the wooded meadows to endure. equipment, lack of use for mowed hay and the cost of transport. Landscapes similar to wooded meadows could have been developed by our ancestors a long $OWKRXJKGLIIHUHQWVFKHPHVIRU¿QDQFLDOVXSSRUW time ago by continuous disbudding, herding have been established for reconstructing, and later, hay making. The pasture is histori- maintaining and investing, people tend to think of them as to complicated and thus forsake the FDOO\SUREDEO\WKH¿UVWVHPLQDWXUDOODQGVFDSH The development of wooded meadows strongly maintenance. The reconstruction takes place evolved with the use of scythe in the second with yearly agreements or contracts, which does not offer continuity and creates uncertainty in KDOI RI WKH ¿UVW PLOOHQQLXP $' 7KH KH\GD\ of wooded meadows, as of other half-natural participants. landscapes, was the end of 19th century and the 0LVPDWFKLQJ PDLQWHQDQFH DQG LQVXI¿FLHQW beginning of the 20th, when the demand upon TXDOLW\ farmlands was the highest and such meadows could have embraced one third of the total area :URQJ PHDVXUHV RI PDLQWHQDQFH DQG LQVXI¿ - of Estonia. cient quality are the reasons why the situation of semi-natural communities has not improved in The 6000 ha of wooded meadows in Estonia all areas under maintenance. Improper mainte- have retained a high or average geobotanical nance is referred by the decreasing amount of and preservational value. In addition there are plant species related to semi-natural communi- around 4000 ha pastures. Around 2700 ha of ties (natterjack toad and eurasian woodcocks), wooded meadows (32% of total area) are located even if the area under maintenance is growing. in different nature preserves. 45% of wooded meadows with a high preservational value are Common problems are mismatching mainte- under protection as are 35% of meadows with nance patterns and the impact of herding, an average value and 24% of meadows with low wrong technical methods (hacking, crushing) value, but which can still be restored. and failure to clean up the hay. Most common is the low frequency of mowing and low load Wooded meadows and pastures are mostly due to herding, excessive mowing or herding is common to the western part of Estonia but are not dominating, but can happen. Mismatching sparse in southern Estonia. One of the most PDLQWHQDQFHLVDELJJHUSUREOHPUHJDUGLQJÀRRG representable locations is found in the landscape meadows (also dry meadows). Maintenance protection reserve of Koiva-Mustjõe where needs consideration due to the different needs of 133 ha of wooded meadows are registered. The different species of plants. wooded meadows of Koiva are unique in the whole of Estonia. The micro relief of meadows &XOWXULQJRIVHPLQDWXUDOFRPPXQLWLHV and thus the vegetation varies a lot due to a large

25 SDUWRIWKHZRRGHGPHDGRZVO\LQJZLWKLQÀRRG eaten enough and they will start to dominate the plains. Trees, of which broad-leafed are most community. If the load is too high, unnecessary common, and bushes differ from each other in roads, trampled gathering places and piles of groups. Such wooded meadows in southern excrements will occur, the animals will be short Estonia are of high value due to the content of of food, will begin eating the bark of the trees carbonates in soil. Accordingly, species that are and attempt to escape the pasture. The pasture keen on limestone and can usually be found should be divided into smaller paddocks for a in western Estonian semi-natural habitats are balanced load. located there.

Main factors affecting wooded meadows/ 6.3. Rivers pastures are: ‡ Overgrowth/reforestation 6.3.1. Gauja / Koiva ‡ Lack of mowers/herders (even potential), .Koiva River is part of the Livonian bay water- lack of interest in restoring and maintaining. shed. To protect the river and the species ‡ Wrong methods (no mowing and contin- within, the river has been added to the Koiva- uous herding) 0XVWM}H ÀRRGHG PHDGRZ QDWXUDO DUHD 7KH During the inventory within the project, only Koiva-Mustjõe landscape preservation area is wooded meadows currently being taken care considered an important site based on the nature of and the bordering restorable areas were protection directive of habitat types (rivers and described. Areas charted elsewhere where lakes, 3260) and the species mentioned in the marked as pastures due to lacking evidence appendix II and III. of mowing. The composition of plant species Koiva river is dark watered, rich in humic almost uniformly referred to herding. Existing or matter and according to the results of surface overgrown sparse tree fronts were considered as water monitoring the water in Koiva river is of wooded pastures, not areas with single groups of a high quality (Program of preservation for the trees or areas and groves with a developed tree Koiva-Mustjõe landscape protection area and front. Koiva-Mustjõe preservation area from 2010 to Generally typical wooded meadows can not be   7KH ZDWHU TXDOLW\ DQG V\VWHP LV LQÀX - enced by tributaries of which the biggest is IRXQGLQWKLVDUHDDVPRVWO\RQHFDQ¿QGVLQJOH groups of trees or single trees on levees and the Mustjõgi. surroundings of oxbow lakes. Thus the trees Koiva river, Mustjõgi, Peetri river and Vaidava and bushes are in a large way spatially separate river are either fully or in parts included in the from the meadow and have historically been list of rivers for salmon, brown trout and grayling very sparse, meaning that the amount of trees for spawning and living. on the meadow has always been very low. Oaks The length of the Koiva river is 452 km long (24 and other broad-leafed trees are still vital for the km along the border between Estonia and Latvia) habitat. Maintenance of a pasture is based on with a gradient of 234 m and a basin of 14 380 herding (with a load of 0,3-1 animal units per km 2. hectare) and occasional disbudding and pruning of bushes and trees. It is not necessary to remove all the bushes as the animals will keep their 6.3.2. Mustjõgi growth under control. The distribution of trees Mustjõgi is the largest and most voluminous and bushes should not be too regular. In terms tributary of the Koiva River. The source is a of forestry the pastures have a certain value, lake called Suur-Sarjärv. The water system and the trees should be selectively fallen according quality of water depends heavily on the tribu- to necessity. Herding load should be kept at taries feeding Mustjõgi. Mustjõgi belongs to the optimum and under, or excessive herding WKH .RLYD0XVWM}H ÀRRG PHDGRZ DUHD DQG should be avoided. In case of low load from Koiva-Mustjõe landscape protection area and is herding, some of the plant species will not be considered an important site based on the nature

26 protection directive of habitat types (rivers and growth of Phragmites australis through 5 km lakes, 3260) and the species mentioned in the DIWHUÀRZLQJRXWIURPWKHODNH0XUDVWH)ORZ appendix II and III (Environmental registry, rate is less than 0.2 m/s and the river complies 2013). with the habitat type 3260. Following species protected by the nature direc- Up to 2 km from a forest road before Ziemer, tive have been found in Mustjõgi: spined loach, WKH ÀRZ UDWH LQFUHDVHV7KH EDQNV DUH XVXDOO\ European bullhead, salmon, European river ÀRRGPHDGRZVWKDWKDYHQRWEHHQWDNHQFDUHRI lamprey and large white-faced darter. and are overgrown. The bottom is usually sandy with muddy places and organic debris. The plant The river has been altered at some places habitat is poor, major species are Phragmites through dredging or straightening (Koemetsa australis and Phalaroides arundinaceae and the and Kurgjärve marshes for example) so it has more uncommon ones are Sparganium emersum , not remained fully natural. The upper course Nuphar lutea , Elodea canadensis . is sparsely inhabited and mainly consists of marshlands. Mid-course runs mainly between The width of the river downstream from the farmlands and within couple of hundred meters Grübe mill is 15 to 20 meters. The bottom varies RQHFDQ¿QGVHWWOHPHQWV7KHULYHUEDQNVFRQVLVW - dolomite, sand, pebbles and some rocks. High mostly of forests (Järvekülg, 2001). sandstone outcrops can be spotted, with the most famous ones in Ape being 8-10 meters high and No information of pollution sources at the banks up to 100 m long. The left bank, burrowed by the of Mustjõgi exist. According to the national Vaidava River, is called ‘The Witch cliff’. The hydrobiological complex monitoring, the situa- tion of the river within the Koiva-Mustjõe ÀRZUDWHRIWKHULYHULVPRUHWKDQPVDQGWKH habitat is in compliance with the Natura habitat landscape protection area and Koiva-Mustjõe type 3620. water meadow reservation area is considered very good or good. Benthic habitat is considered Vaidava River in Estonia is considered a natura to be in a very good condition. Trophic diatom habitat type 3620 from Vastse-Roosta to the indexes valuate the situation of the river as being mouth of the river, a total of 11 km, The river is mediocre, but there is no reason for it. According DOPRVWIXOO\LQLWVQDWXUDOEDVLQ7KHRXWÀRZLV WR WKH ¿VK VWRFN WKH VLWXDWLRQ RI WKH ULYHU LV near to its natural conditions. in-between good and mediocre. Species protected by Natura include: European The river, its habitat and its situation needs river lamprey, salmon, grayling, asp, spined additional investments, less pollution from loach, European bullhead, thick shelled river settlements, and farming can also be a hazard mussel, Ophiogomphus Cecilia . (although the situation of Mustjõgi is good). As it One of the main threats in the Estonian part is - LVDJRRG¿VKLQJULYHULOOHJDO¿VKLQJLVDSRWHQ the dam in Vastse-Roosa. The main threat of tial threat but can be prevented through regular this dam, lying outside the Natura areas, is its monitoring. WKZDUWLQJ RI ¿VK PLJUDWLRQ UDLVLQJ WKH ZDWHU Mustjõgi is 84 km long with a gradient of 30 m temperature during the summer, raising the threat and a basin of 1820 km 2. of pollution through sediments and its impact on the hydrological water regime. Beaver made 6.3.3. Vaidava GDPV KDYH D VLPLODU EXW VLJQL¿FDQWO\ VPDOOHU impact. Main threats are temporary and in case Vaidava river, the largest tributary where the of very low water levels only. In Estonia, beaver rivers join, is the fastest, clearest and coldest, dams have not been reported yet, but in Latvia especially in the summertime, thus having an the chopped trees in addition to the dams can important impact on Mustjõgi. be a cause for erosion on the banks, changes 7KHZDWHULQXSSHUFRXUVHLVGDUNWKHÀRZLV LQWKHTXDOLW\RIWKHKDELWDWDQGFDQWKZDUW¿VK slow and the river is relatively deep and warm migration. Pollution from farming is minimal throughout the summer. The bottom is muddy due to a large buffer zone between the banks and and full of organic debris. The banks are swampy farmlands. and unevenly wide (pond-like widening) with

27 The best solution to preserve the communities 17,8 km from the source of Peetri river are and the river would be to destroy the dam or to considered as Natura habitat (3260). The river is lower the water level of the dam and the building almost fully in its original channel and the river of a natural rapid. In addition beaver dams mouth is similar to its natural situation. Species should be demolished, trees fallen to the river protected by Natura include: European river VKRXOGEHUHPRYHGDQGLOOHJDO¿VKLQJVKRXOGEH lamprey, spined loach, European bullhead, thick stopped, especially during the migration in the shelled river mussel, Ophiogomphus Cecilia . spring (second half of April until the beginning One of the biggest threats are beaver dams inhib- of May) and autumn (the end of September until LWLQJ¿VKPLJUDWLRQDQGFKDQJLQJWKHLPSRXQGHG October). SDUWV RI ULYHUV XQVXLWDEOH IRU ¿VK DQG LQYHUWH - Vaidava River is 72 km long (61 in Latvia) with a brates. Beaver dams can also change the water gradient of 107 km and a basin of 557 km 2. quality, for example raising the water tempera- ture and exacerbating the gas systems in water. 6.3.4. Peetri river Manmade impediments can also be dangerous- VWRQHGDPVFDQEHHDVLO\SDVVHGE\¿VKWKDWDUH Peetri River is the second largest tributary river good swimmers (such as salmon, grayling, trout) of Mustjõe, after Vaidava River. The springs EXW FDQ LQKLELW ¿VK PLJUDWLRQ RI RWKHU VSHFLHV constitute a small proportion in feeding the 3ROOXWLRQSRLQWVLQÀXHQFLQJWKHTXDOLW\RIZDWHU ULYHUWKXVWKHDPRXQWRIZDWHUÀRZLQJLVVLJQL¿ - have not been found and the distributed pollution cantly smaller during the low water level periods from farming can be considered as minute due (compared to the Vaidava river) and the propor- WR WKH VXI¿FLHQW EXIIHU ]RQH EHWZHHQ WKH ULYHU tion of water from rain or forested areas is large, and farmlands. Peetri River (as Vaidava River) is causing the water to be brown (high amount of HQGDQJHUHGE\LOOHJDO¿VKLQJDOWKRXJK¿VKLQJLV humic substances). forbidden throughout the whole year. To preserve the river and the species within, beaver dams and stone dams should be demol- LVKHG 7KH ¿VKLQJ SURKLELWLRQ VKRXOG DOVR EH eased, but only on some parts of the river (form the mouth of the river to the bridge in Karisöödi). Peetri river is 73 km long (58 km in Latvia), with a gradient of 132 m and a basin of 424 km 2.

6.3.5. Pärlijõgi Pärlijõgi (Pearl River) is the biggest tributary in the mid-course for Mustjõgi. The river source can be found in the Raipala Lake in Latvia and ends on the left bank of Mustjõgi. Pärlijõgi does QRWÀRZIXOO\LQLWVQDWXUDOFKDQQHOEHFDXVHLW has been dredged and straightened (Järvekülg, 2001). The upper course of the river lies within marshes DQGSDUWLDOO\ÀRRGHGPHDGRZV$IWHUZDUGVWKH ULYHU ¿QGV LWV ZD\ WR KLOO\ PRUDLQHV DQG WKH FKDUDFWHU RI WKH ULYHU FKDQJHV VLJQL¿FDQWO\ DV WKH ÀRZ UDWH LQFUHDVHV 7KH ERWWRP LV PDLQO\ sandy with few stones, but at some points the bottom can be rockier. At the rocky bottom in FRQFHDOHGSODFHVZLWKDKLJKÀRZUDWHWKDOORLG algae Hildebrandia rivularis can grow. During a Peetri river. Photo A. Ader project a part of this river up to a former mill was 28 cleaned of fallen trees. This part of the river is Pärlijõgi is 39 km long (6km in Latvia) with a in compliance with the Natura habitat type 3620. gradient of 96 m and a basin of 203 km 2. The river passes through 600m of abandoned grasslands downstream from the mill. There are sparse plant communities with dominant species such as Phalaroides arundinaceae , Phragmites australis , Sparagnium emersum , Elodea canadiensis . The river bottom heading north for ca 1 km has been dredged and straightened. An area near the Estonian border, where the bottom is sandy with few stones, has once again been marked as Natura habitat type 3620. Colonies of Hildebrandia rivularis have also been found here. Pärlijõgi is partially included in the Pärlijõe preservation area with the aim to protect the habitat type rivers and creeks (3260) according to the nature directive and to protect the species European bullhead, ophiogomphus cecilia and thick shelled river mussel (Environmental registry, 2013). Pärlijõgi is endangered by beaver and manmade dams (Järvekülg, 2001). In Estonia, three of WKHVHGDPVKDYHD¿VKSDVVEXWWZR 6DUODVHDQG 3lUOLM}HGDPV ODFND¿VKSDVVWKXVLQKLELWLQJ¿VK migration. A good solution for creating a path for ¿VKHVLVODFNLQJDWWKHPRPHQW'DPVDUHDOVR dangerous as they can change the rate of water ÀRZUDLVHWKHZDWHUWHPSHUDWXUHDQGH[DFHUEDWH WKH JDV V\VWHPV LQ ZDWHU WKXV LQÀXHQFLQJ WKH whole hydrological equation. Manmade dams are under discussion, but beaver dams are consid- ered being demolished. In the mid- and lower course farmlands and forests can be found. Several small villages can be found next to the river, of which Sänna village is the largest (Järvekülg, 2001). Large pollution points do not exist, but the general sparse pollu- tion is endangering the river. At some places the tributary creeks are also outfalls for waste outlets (Environmental registry, 2013). The river is endangered by land ameliora- tion, development and breaches of law (illegal ¿VKLQJGDPDJLQJRIEDQNVDQGUHGHVLJQLQJRI the water body). To preserve the natural situation RIWKLVULYHULQÀXHQFHVRQWKHULYHUVKRXOGEH minimised (the effect of arefying) and dangerous activities to be forbidden or supervised.

29 7. Joint monitoring

The monitoring of nature value in Estonia The need for joint monitoring derives from the can provisionally be divided in two: national fact that on boundary areas exist separate popula- monitoring and performance monitoring. The tions of capercaillie, great snipe, protected main objective of national environmental GUDJRQÀLHV DQG EXWWHUÀLHV ,Q RUGHU WR JHW DQ monitoring is the consistent monitoring of objective overview of the population of these environmental state. The objects are capercaillie, species, it is necessary to assemble inventory JUHDWVQLSHRVSUH\EXWWHUÀLHV7KHPRQLWRULQJ results from Estonia and Latvia. The named WDNHVSODFHDFFRUGLQJWR¿[HGPHWKRGRORJ\LQ species together with habitats important to them pre-agreed habitats or transects and the single ULYHUVÀRRGPHDGRZVDQGIRUHVWVZLWKQDWXUH transects of the named monitorings are on the values) are the main monitoring programs. project area. The organizer of environmental The more detailed methodology of monitoring monitoring in Estonia is Environmental Agency programs is provided below. In addition to that was established in 2013. uniform monitoring methodology a constant The objective of performance monitoring is to exchange of data and experiences is neces- estimate the state of species and habitats being sary. The joint monitoring data collected on the the values of protected areas, and the effective- project area will be assembled into joint database ness of protection measures. The organizer of and every end of the year a collective seminar performance monitoring is the Environmental between the employees of the Environmental Board. As performance monitoring is more Board and Latvian Nature Conservation Agency ÀH[LEOH DQG WDUJHWHG WRZDUGV GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI will be held. It is reasonable that the seminars the state of local values, the partner for joint take place in Estonia and Latvia by turns. The monitoring is the Environmental Board. LQVHSDUDEOHSDUWVRIWKHVHPLQDUVDUH¿HOGWULSV to protected area to become acquainted with their values and protection regime.

Photo S. Ikauniece 30 7.1. Forests is also a well-established turf, which consists mainly of dense grass plants roots mesh. By 6HOHFWLQJWKHVLWHVRIVXUYH\ contrast, in cultivated grasslands usually In Latvia and in Estonia the sites were chosen dominate 1-3 species (sown cereal plants), other based on the National Forest Registry data, species would be negligible, and the turf is selecting for research the grownup and overaged sparse and non-connected. - starting from the stands, where the dominant specie has reached the cutting age and younger stands in moist forest growing condition types, 7.3. Wooded meadows and as well as on the basis of groves selection criteria wooded pastures in natural forest habitat inventory methodology. 6HOHFWLQJWKHVLWHVRIVXUYH\ 7LPHRIVXUYH\ : April - November In Latvian interpretation habitats “Fennoscandian wooded meadows” (code 6530) and 7.2. Grasslands Fennoscandian wooded Pastures” (code 9070) have been joint into one - “Fennoscandian Selecting the sites of survey: In Latvia for wooded meadows” (code 6530). Very rare site selection used information biologically throughout the whole Latvia. Mostly found valuable grasslands (BVG) in parishes, as well in the river valleys, possible on different soils, as visual aerial photo and topographyc map with the exception of deep peat soil, mostly in review. BVG are natural grasslands, which are ancient river bank slopes and valleys, including not sown, andhave not been tilledfor an average ÀRRGSODLQV ÀRRGSODLQVGXULQJLQYHQWRU\WLPHLV of 20 years. They are natural meadows, rich in GH¿QHGDVKLJKOLJKWLQJWKHLPSRUWDQFHRI ÀRZHULQJSODQWVZKLFKDUHH[WHQVLYHO\PDQDJHG management, less the alluvial processes) with traditional methods - mowing and grazing. Since 2010, habitat interpretation has changed Long-term management of thesegrasslands have a little, so it was necessary to revise the habitat developed into complex ecosystems with high mapping in PLA “Northern Gauja”, where have biodiversity. concentrated the best Latvian areas of habitat. Potentially the most valuable areas are steeper hill slopes. After surveying topographic maps, 3URFHVVRIPDSSLQJ there are selected slopes with potential grassland  'H¿QLQJWKHUHIHUHQFHSRLQWVDQGSRO\JRQV habitats. Then there are selected rivers, in which - on the orthophoto base notes the ancient ÀRRGSODLQVFRXOGEHÀRRGSODLQJUDVVODQGVDQG woodland situation elements (woodland lakes with potential grasslands on their banks. trees and sparse forests) to be found in nature; 7LPHRIVXUYH\ May – October. 2) Determination of the ancient woodland 3URFHVVRIVXUYH\ situations - according to the above- checked An assesment is made of grassland structure elements, draw polygons around them in (characteristic species of habitats, unimproved radius of three lenghts, and then specify the grasslands indicating species, herb and moss polygon boundaries in relation to demar- cover, layers, expansive species presence), cation lines given by terrain, water, forest, functions and processes ( humidity, current ancient maps - the result isa map of ancient management) and restoration capabilities. woodland situation polygons; BVG can be recognized by a large number of   :RRGODQG PHDGRZ DQG SDVWXUH ¿QDO plant species, occurring plant and bird species. mapping - from the ancient woodland situa- Natural grasslands often differ from cultivated tions distinuished those that do not have any grasslands in species composition and diversity, factor that could contribute to the restara- also in vegetation structure. Natural grasslands tion of management functions or they have are generally not expressed in dominant species. no prospect because of natural conditions, There is great diversity of species, including the other situations are the ultimate wooded many different species of grass plants. Typical meadows anspastures maping, without

31 distincting sites of the importance of quality micro-habitats are collected samples of aquatic and protection. invertebrates, as well as aquatic plant species WKDWDUHGLI¿FXOWWRUHFRJQL]HRQVLWH Habitat determining structure indicators in nature: )RUULYHUVWKHUHDUHGH¿QHGVHYHUDOIDFWRUVVXFK as: ‡ 7KHSURSRUWLRQRIVRLOFRYHUVSHFL¿FWRWKH grassland vs. the whole habitat area; 1) Upstream/downstream ‡ Non-wooded trees that are higher or similar 2) Width, depth along the wooded tree stand; 3) Soil composition ‡ Undesirable undergrowth; 4) Color of the water ‡ Viable park trees 5) Shading % ‡ Grassland quality indicators; 6) Speed of the stream ‡ The number of protected species 7) Beaver dams, debris, piles ‡ The woodland tree stand-related natural 8) The river is /is not straightened forest habitat indicator species and it´s 9) Protected habitatis /is not found VSHFL¿FVSHFLH 10) Characteristic species 11) Characterizing benthic inverebrate species 7.4. Rivers  1XPEHURIUHR¿OLQYHUWHEUDWH 6HOHFWLQJWKHVLWHVRIVXUYH\ Surveying the rivers, the following EU habitats were mapped: “Water courses of plain to 7.5. Great snipe PRQWDQH OHYHOV ZLWK WKH 5DQXQFXOXV ÀXLWDQV 6HOHFWLQJWKHVLWHVRIVXUYH\ and Callitricho-Batracion vegetation” (code 3260) and “Rivers with muddy banks with 7KHDSSURSULDWHDUHDVIRU*UHDWVQLSHDUHGH¿QHG Chenopodion rubri pp and Bidention p.p. vegeta- by the specie feeding options - Great snipe feeds tion” (code 3270). almost exclusively on earthworms obtained by stabbing the beak into loose soil. Therefore, the The most importants habitats are rapids (3260), Great snipe populated areas have moist, crumbly which is characterized by high degree of soil, rich in earthworms. In Latvian conditions overgrowth, in the species composition one of WKH PRVW WKH PRVW IDYRUDEOH DUH ÀRRGSODLQ the dominant species at all stages in Potamogeton meadows, but it can also be found in other big pectinatus that grows in nutrient-rich, eutrophic and wet meadows with a suitable mineral soils. waters. Habitat also includes natural unchanged For the Great snipe, important are continuous river stages, regardless of the speed of the stream. grasslands, shrubs, however, are permissible and Impounded, dug a new anddeepened sections of even in some degree, in terms of the meadows river where the current speed of the stream is less heterogeneity, even desirable. While shrubs does than 0,2 m/s, are not considered as this habitat. QRWVLJQL¿FDQWO\GHFUHDVHWKHPHDGRZDUHDWKH\ +DELWDWLVGH¿QHGLQWZRYHUVLRQVVW7KH do not jeopardize the existence of the specie UDSLGVDQGQG1DWXUDOXQPRGL¿HGULYHU overgrowth, so this process there is consider- stages. mapped also habitat 3270 spread in slow ably slower then in other grasslands, where the and sandy river sections with a lot of sand banks overgrowth begins already a few years after where sparse stands of annual plants can grow.. abandoment. 3URFHVVRIVXUYH\ $OOWKHVLWHVVKRXOGEHVXUYH\HGWZLFHWKH¿UVW Riverhabitat assessment is carried out using a WLPHLQODWH$SULODQGLQWKH¿UVWGHFDGHRIWKH questionnaire developed for the habitat survey. May, visiting them during the day to assess Small and medium-sized rivers are surveyed habitats, and at night to search for the Great by walking along the shore or wading in the Snipe leking sites. The areas where during the river, the largest river - by boat. i different river ¿UVWYLVLWWKH*UHDW6QLSHOHNVZHUHQRWIRXQG

32 but their habitat assessment leads to consider in one place. Survey habitats can be selected them suitable for the specie, can be surveyed using the forest database, selecting from them the again - in the second decade of June. stands older then 50 years, which include aspen. )RUHVWVWDQGVXLWDELOLW\IRUÀ\LQJVTXLUUHOPXVW 3URFHVVRIVXUYH\ be assessed in nature both in specially protected To select the areas, which are important for areas and outside them - in commercial forests. surveying from the view of Great Snipe inven- tory, the available remote research (Landsat satellite images and aerial photos), and other 7.7. Osprey cartographic materials detailed studies should be done. 7LPHRIVXUYH\ Meadow area has to be assessed in conjunction Best search results are in July, when the osprey with the appropriate Great snipe feeding habitat are big and the male regularly (ate least four availability in a wider area, as a part of both WLPHVDGD\ KDVWRFDUU\WKH¿VKWRWKHQHVW sexes, attending leks, can eat outside mating 3URFHVVRIVXUYH\ meadow. As the criteria for the selection of potentially suitable sites can be used informa- If the osprey is regularly and within short inter- tion on the watercourses and the adjacent areas vals seen at the feeding sites, that indicates of open space, terrain and spectrac information that the nest is fairly close. Fairly good search of satellite images to assess moisture and vegeta- results are given by the testing suitable habitats tion. There are selected survey areas, calculated (marshes, glades, beaver activity areas) or the the size of the total area, and they are grouped surrounding watching from the good of visibility. into 3 categories according to their potential Safe way is to check the known previous years´ suitability for Great snipe. habitats and nests, but should focus on searching for new nests in places where ospreys are observed but where are no known nesting sites. 7.6. Flying squirrel %XWLWPXVWEHQRWHGWKDWRVSUH\FDQÀ\XSWR 20 miles from their nest to the feeding sites, but )RUÀ\LQJVTXLUUHOVWKHRUHWLFDOO\VXLWDEOHIRUHVW more often it is not more then 10 km. VWDQGV DUH FODVVL¿HG LQWR IRXU FDWHJRULHV LQ 'XGLQJZHUHFKHFNHG¿YHDUHDVSRSXODWHG Latvia): LQSUHYLRXV\HDUVLQZHUHLGHQWL¿HGDQXPEHU ‡ potential habitats - usually they are young of babies. Nest monitoring should continue every aspen stands, no hollow trees no second year. More attention should be paid to searching level spruce; for a new areas. ‡ poor habitats - primarily those stands with very few mature aspen or are very sparse; 7.8. Capercaillie ‡ suitable habitats - mature and mixed aspen - spruce or spruce - aspen groves; 6XUYH\VLWHV ‡ very good habitat - old, mixed aspen - Capercaillie counting should be performed in the spruce or spruce - orspruce-aspen groves. SUHYLRXVO\GH¿QHGOHNLQJVLWHV,QRUGHUWRHQVXUH 3URFHVVRIVXUYH\ an even distribution of surveys and numericaly representative presentation of the country, it 0DLQO\WKHVXUYH\LVSHUIRUPHGE\¿QGLQJDQG is neccessary to choose a leking sites who are VXUYH\LQJWKHVXLWDEOHKDELWDWVIRUÀ\LQJVTXLUUHO located in all parts of Capercaillie population, 7REHDEOHWRH[DPLQHWKHÀ\LQJVTXLUUHOSUHVHQFH regardless of administrative tenure and and in these habitats, it is important to choose proper farming practices. survey time, when can be found the excreta - spring or winter. In particular, a lot of excrement 7LPHRIVXUYH\ can be found by the root of the trees, and on the Capercaillie leking site visits during the spring fat horizontal branches, at the trunk below the time is a mating disturbance, so the stay in the hollows, usually - in large heaps, tens of pieces leking site should take the shortest possible time.

33 In latvia it is recommended to survey three have been no changes - no longer can see or hear WLPHVDVHDVRQWKH¿UVWUHFRUGIURPWKHWK any capercaillie, but no sooner then 2 hours after march to 5th April, the second from 10th April sunrise, survey ends. In the plan shall be noted to 20th April, a third from the 1st May to 10th the found capercaillie exceta piles, regardless of May. Given the seasonal differences between the which survey it is. Latvian eastern and western regions, in the west  'URSLQJVPDSSLQJ this surveys should be performed in beginning of these periods, but in the eastern regions - in the At the latest by the 10th May, when the lek has end of the periods. lost its intensity and the mating cocks are no longer attending, can be performed a dropings It is very important to pay attention to the (excrement) mapping. At this time, the number meteorological situation, and perform surveys of droppings ina mating season is at its peak, only in appropriate weather conditions. In case of as they have accumulated during the whole unfavorable weather conditions, surveys should spring period, as capercaillies are staying in be postponed until a suitable time, even if the trees, singing and walking on the ground, that records have to be made after the dates indicated is, staying just in the lek. Noting of the dropping in surveys. piles is very important, because along with infor- Capercaillie droppings (excrement) mapping in mation about the heard and visually listed birds, leks is best to be done around 10th May, when there can be relatively accurately (up to 1-2 the leking site has lost its intensity and the cocks males) determined the size and location of the are no longer attending to it lek in the current year. If there is a snow , then the mapping is very easy, because the excreta on 6XUYH\V : the snow can be seen in several tens of meters. It   9LVXDODFRXVWLF UHFRUGLQJ DW QLJKW RU LVHDVLHUWR¿QGGURSSLQJLQGU\OHNVLWHV SLQH ³VHDWLQJ´ forests, Callunosa), where the vegetation is short, Must enter the lek site when it´s still light, to get LW LV PRUH GLI¿FXOW LQ ZHW OHNV SDUWLFXODU\ LQ to the observation / listeningspot in no later then areas withs stands of evergreen undershrubs like 2 hours before sunset. When the sun is setting, Ledum palustre. and the dusk is thickening, capercaillies are Compact excreta piles indicates the capercaillie À\LQJLQWRWKHOHNLQJDUHDDQGVLWLQJLQVFDWWHUHG accommodation, as well as singing places, while trees where they settle for the night in the three the dispersed (scattered beneath the pine canopy, FURZQV RIWHQ À\LQJ RYHU WR WKH QHDUE\ WUHHV dominated by the “broken”, half the size) (IIRUWV VKRXOG EH PDGH PDGH WR ¿[ DUULYLQJ indicates that this is a feeding tree (capercaillie birds landing sites and to distinguish them from moved from branch to branch), which´s canopy WKH RYHUÀLJKW WLPHV :KHQ GDUNQHVV LV WKLFN - from the bird eating off the needles, has become ened, and for at least 30 min have not been heard more scarse than the side trees. It sis therefore anynoise, it is time to end the survey. essential to note the number of excrete and if the  9LVXDODFRXVWLFUHFRUGLQJLQWKHPRUQLQJ pile is compact or dispersed. Must enter the lek site with an aim to get to the observation / listening spot in no later then 2 hours before sunrise. It means to move in the dark (until the songbirds have not started to sing) to the chosen ocation at which must sit down and wait for the light. Keep in mind that during a full moon the dark is conditional and birds start to sing earlier. In anticipation of the lights, all observations (singing cocks and chickens) from the moment you walk into a lek site, should be noted the plan. At the moment, when for at least 30 min there

34 8. Monitoring programmes and process

/DQG 3) Quality of sea water data on sea water VHGLPHQW VKHOO¿VK ¿VK DOJDH  TXDOLW\ /DQGFRYHUPRQLWRULQJZLWKLQZKLFK/9Ʀ0& and the quality of transitional and coastal participates in an international CORINE waters; data on radioactive contamination program, obtaining information on land cover, and changes in the Baltic Sea and the Gulf including land use change and mapping. Within of Riga. &RULQH ± GDWD DUH REWDLQHG RQFH LQ HYHU\ ¿YH years. Monitoring data are gathered by analyzing 4) Agricultural run-off water monitoring the satellite images (decoding) together with program (3 permanent monitoring stations other relevant consumable materials. Changes and 3 point pollution monitoring spots near are recorded only for those areas larger than 5 ha. large livestock farms with high livestock density). Monitoring of radioactivity in the soil within ZKLFKDQDO\]HVWKHDUWL¿FLDOUDGLRQXFOLGHV&V %LRORJLFDOGLYHUVLW\PRQLWRULQJV and 90Sr concentration in the soil (10 sample Purpose - to provide information on the size of gathering spots). populations of species and habitat trends in the Today’s geological processes monitoring, area. Unlike the Natura 2000 monitoring, which marine and river coastal risk areas of geological is made only for special areas of conservation, processes (erosion) observations in determining background monitoring provides monitoring of the rinsed area. Monitoring station range species and habitats, which shows the situation covers all coastline of Latvia (coast of Baltic of the territory as a whole. In Latvia currently sea and coast of Riga gulf) including different are carried out three programs: the birds nesting, coast types that are subject of constant erosion. 1LJKWELUGV¿VK+DVVWRSSHGVXFKSURJUDPVDV Monitoring has to be carried out in 100 stations EDWV DQG VPDOO PDPPDOV DOVR EXWWHUÀLHV DUH DQGSUR¿OHV waiting for the implementation of the program, also overground fauna. $LU $LUTXDOLW\±DLUSROOXWLRQLQÀXHQFHRQQDWXUDO 6SHFLDOPRQLWRULQJ vegetation. The net covers whole territory of Purpose - to provide information on ecological Latvia, altogether 101 moss sampling spot in processes happening in ecosystems and the inter- pine forest ecosystems where Hylocomnium dependencies of organisms. Monitoring Objects splendens and Pleurozium schreberi are found. - protected species, that in the Latvia context have 0RVVVDPSOLQJKDSSHQVRQFHLQHDFK¿YH\HDUV VLJQL¿FDQWSRSXODWLRQVRURUJDQLVPVIURPZKLFK there are detected heavy metals and nitrogen. they are dependent. They also provides with information about other group or habitat condi- :DWHU tions such as changes in bird populations may be In programme there are set several sub-sections: indicative of forests or agricultural lands area or 1) The surface water monitoring program state changes. provides information on the surface vater 1DWXUDPRQLWRULQJ bodies quality and hydrologic regime, as well as radioactivity of the largest Latvian ‡ Provides the latest data for Natura 2000 rivers, lakes and some drinking water Databases standard data forms; abstraction spots. ‡ According to the Habitats Directive, 11th, 2) The quality of groundwater - Quantitative 17th chapter and the Birds Directive 12th situation monitoring and groundwater chapter. chemical status monitoring. Quantity ‡ $UHFROOHFWHGVLWHVSHFL¿FGDWDRQVSHFLHV monitoring net (59 stations) historically / habitat (HD Annex I and II, BD Annex I developed to assess the possibility of and migratory bird concentration areas) risks in all groundwater objects. Quality ‡ Every place (327 land + 7 sea) have a monitoring stations – 51 station. unique monitoring plan

35 ‡ 1798 reporting units from 327 places system it is not possible to get information about ‡ Full monitoring cycle – 6 years VSHFLHVVSHFL¿FVLWXDWLRQLQWKHSURMHFWDUHD 1) Great snipe ( Gallinago media ) – regarding to the little studied species status in the project area 8.1. Other monitorings in Latvia and the lack of information, there is a need to pay special attention to monitoring of the At the same time with national monitoring specie. programs, that are concentrating on the environ- Two territories, where have been detected mental quality changes, in country are being ‡ leking sites, have to be surveyed every implemented a variety of smaller monitorings, year (territories AA002, AA003, AA004, carried out by a variety of educational institu- AA005). Survey should be done each year, tions, organizations or enthusiasts, obtaining during the leking time, 2x in a season (see answers to their questions. For example, JSC the inventory methods). “Latvian State Forests” has launched several monitoring to assess their management’s ‡ AA001, AA008, AA009 desirable to survey LQÀXHQFH 2QH RI WKRVH LV WKH HFRORJLFDO WUHH 1x in 3 years. (retention tree) monitoring carried out in the ‡ Other areas in should be surveyed, if there clearcuts that started in 2002. Maintained ecolog- is undertaken any habitat restoration. ical trees are surveyed in each several years. The results help to make better decisions on selec- 2) European roller cages monitoring in Latvia - it tion of tree species to set aside and placement is desirable to survey the placed cages at least of these trees. For several years, monitoring is [HYHU\WZR\HDUV$OWKRXJK¿QGLQJ(XURSHDQ made in Beaver activity areas, for each Beaver UROOHULVXQFHUWDLQLWLVSRVVLEOHWR¿QGRWKHUUDUH activity area providing their necessary manage- bird species, which tend to use the same cages PHQWDFWLYLWLHV'HSHQGLQJRQWKHÀRRGHGDUHD (Upupa epops, Columba oenas), and to obtain ecological value, condition and the surrounding additional information on the area’s biological stands, the decision is made either to keep values. Beaver activity area by controlling water levels and by monitoring or to eradicate it. 8.3. Management monitoring /DL VDJODEƗWX ELRORƧLVNR GDXG]YHLGƯEX XQ 8.2. Necessary monitorings X]ODERWX HVRãR ELRWRSX VWƗYRNOL YDL VDJODEƗWX in Project territory DL]VDUJƗMDPX VXJX G]ƯYRWQHV YDOVWƯ GDåƗGX projektu ietvaros tiek veikti biotopu apsaimnie- The project site is monitored, relating to biodi- versity assessment and in accordance with the NRãDQDVXQDWMDXQRãDQDVSDVƗNXPL7LHSDUDVWL national monitoring programs. This monitoring VDLVWƯWLJDQDUNRNXFLUãDQXJDQ]ƗOƗMXSƺDXãDQX process, depending on the state budget options YDL KLGURORƧLVNƗ UHåƯPD L]PDLQƯãDQX 3ODãƗNL will also take place during the upcoming years. DSVDLPQLHNRãDQDV SDVƗNXPL SDUDVWL QRWLHN /,)( SURMHNWX LHWYDURV $WVHYLãƷDV DNWLYL - One of the largest and most important is the WƗWHV LU YHLNXãDV SDãYDOGƯEDV YDL QHYDOVWLVNDV Natura 2000 species and habitat monitoring, RUJDQL]ƗFLMDV 9DOVWV PHåX WHULWRULMƗV SODãƗNXV which in 2014 will begin a new cycle. This DSVDLPQLHNRãDQDV GDUEXV DWVHYLãƷƗV DL]VDUJƗ - monitoring provides answers on habitat quality MDPƗV GDEDV WHULWRULMƗV YDL GDELVNDMRV PHåD and changes in species status, so a special biotopos veic AS LVM. additional monitoring of protected habitats and of a large proportion of protected species is not /DLJDQELRWRSXVWƗYRNƺDX]ODERãDQDVSDVƗNXPL necessary. DWELOVWRãL HVRãDMƗP ]LQƗãDQƗP WLHN YHLNWL SƝF GDUEX SDEHLJãDQDV WXUSPƗNR QRYƝURMXPX During the inventories of project area experts YHLNãDQD LU ƺRWL LHUREHåRWD /,)( SURMHNWRV KDYHLGHQWL¿HGDQXPEHURIVSHFL¿FPRQLWRULQJ SDUDVWL LU LHWYHUWD SUDVƯED YHLNW DSVDLPQLHNRWR needs, because in frameworks of the existing ELRWRSXPRQLWRULQJXEHWGLHPåƝOSDUDVWLSHULRGV NXUƗWDVWLHNGDUƯWVLUWLNDLSURMHNWDQRULVHVODLNV

36 3ƝF SURMHNWD EHLJƗP PRQLWRULQJD LHVWUƗGQHV specialists, so the results so far for the larger QHWLHN WXUSLQƗWDV WƗSƝF ND WUnjNVW SLHWLHNRãD public are not available. ¿QDQVƝMXPDYDLVSHFLƗOLVWXL]ƼHPRWDWVHYLãƷXV  5HVWRUDWLRQRIZRRGHGPHDGRZV JDGƯMXPXV NDG SƝWƯMXPXV SHUVRQLVNL WXUSLQD NRQNUƝWLLHLQWHUHVƝWL]LQƗWQLHNL*DGƯMXPRVNDG Restoration of wooded meadows in the project ELRWRSX DSVDLPQLHNRãDQDV SDVƗNXPL LU YHLNWL area in Latvia was carried out in 2006 within $6/90UHJXOƗURSOƗQRWRDNWLYLWƗãXLHWYDURVYDL a LIFE project in PLA “Northern Gauja” terri- NƗGDVDELHGULVNDSDVƗNXPDUH]XOWƗWƗ SLHPƝUDP WRU\ZKLFKDUHFRQFHQWUDWHG/DWYLDCVODUJHVWDQG WDONƗV DSVDLPQLHNRãDQDVUH]XOWƗWXPRQLWRULQJV highest quality habitat areas. YLVSƗUQHWLHNSOƗQRWVXQQHWLHNYHLNWV During wooded meadows restoration projects 3URMHNWD Ä=DƺDLV NRULGRUV´ LHWYDURV SOƗQRWL are usually carried out cutting of bushes in DSVDLPQLHNRãDQDVSDVƗNXPLELRWRSXYHLGRV± overgrown meadows, ie., the site preparation for PHåRV X]ODERMRW G]ƯYRWQHV DSVWƗNƺXV PHGQLP future management. Further habitat maintenance SDUNYHLGD SƺDYƗV SDOLHƼX SƺDYƗV X]ODERMRW are dependent on the site operator’s needs and G]ƯYHV DSVWƗNƺXV ƷLNXWDP XQ XSMX VWUDXMWHFƝV abilities. 'LHPåƝOSURMHNWDLHWYDURVQDYSDUHG]ƝWV¿QDQVƝ - In some areas, due to the personal initiative of MXPV ELRWRSX DSVDLPQLHNRãDQDV PRQLWRULQJD scientists, is performed a restored grassland SDVƗNXPLHP NƗ DUƯ SURMHNWD QRULVHV ODLNV LU monitoring. Butin most cases, observations are SƗUƗNƯVVODLVDƼHPWXDWELOGHVSDULOJODLFƯJƗNƗP not being made. Also in the “Green Corridor” L]PDLƼƗPELRWRSƗXQYHLNWRGDUEƯEXLHWHNPLX] restored wooded meadows in Latvia, monitoring VXJXVWƗYRNOL is not planned and opportunities to integrate it in 7ƗOƗN DSVNDWƯWDV LHVSƝMDV YHLNW SURMHNWD ODLNƗ other activities are not found. It is mainly due to DSVDLPQLHNRWR ELRWRSX PRQLWRULQJX HVRãR the lack of funding and staff in NCA. PRQLWRULQJDVLVWƝPXLHWYDURVYDLLHYLHVWMDXQLQƗ -  6ZLIWULYHUUHVWRUDWLRQ MXPXVDWELOGƯJRLQVWLWnjFLMXGDUEƗ The swift river habitat degradation usually  &DSHUFDLOOLHOHNLQJVLWHVPDLQWHQDQFH occurs in several cases - result of eutrophication Management is resulting in reduced forest under- by overgrowing with aquatic plants, the forma- JURZWKDQGWUHHGHQVLW\RQWKHQGÀRRURIIRUHVW tion of tree trunks and branches congestion in the improving spatial transparency and mobility watercourse, also important are beaver activities conditions, that are very important factors for LQEXLOGLQJGDPVDQGÀRRGLQJWKHUDSLGV capercaillie. There is peformed cutting of trees Over the past 4-5 years, in Latvia great and bushes, by scattering them in the compart- popularity and attention have gained the activi- ment or withdrawing them from the stands. In ties that are aimed at improving the quality of the some places have started tree cutting in combi- swifts, often linking it with habitat improvement nation with hydrological regime restoration in for salmonids species. Activities are conducted drained forests. Potential monitoring can be both in various small projects, and as voluntary divided into two parts, performing observations public events (clean-ups). Effectiveness evalua - of certain changes in vegetation and recording tion of the measure is usually performed visually the change in the number of capercaillie popula- or based on anglers experience. tion in territory. While such measures in Latvia territory have been carried out in a number of The monitoring system is not designed for protected areas, vegetation monitoring of these management assessment and evaluation is not places has not be made and there are no plans performed. To some extent, this also due to the to open one. Management impacts are assessed mentioned lack of funding and staff, also tradi- by monitoring changes in capercaillie numbers, tional aquatic habitat quality are evaluated using XVXDOO\  ¿[LQJ WKH QXPEHU RI OHNLQJ FRFNV VSHFL¿F VFLHQWL¿F PHWKRGV WKDW UHTXLUH VSHFLDO Measures in accordance with the company’s knowledge. For water quality evaluation it would designed methodology in Latvia is organized be possible to make a good use of forms devel- and provided by the JSC “Latvian State Forests” oped under the voluntary monitoring program, also should be performed a regular observation

37 RIWKHPDQDJHGVLWHE\GH¿QLQJWKHUHVSRQVLEOH used, for several purposes such as determining institution. the quality of water for the growing plants. Other observations needs just a measuring tape and )RU VLPSOL¿HG REVHUYDWLRQV WR FRPSDUH WKH familiarity of their neighborhood, for example, situation before the habitat management and while noting the observations on the alleys or after works, the project produced the observa- trees. tion protocol, which was tested during habitat management. NCA staff, in whose controlled During observation, everyone with look more territory are situated the managed rivers, will carefully to the nature, gaining knowledge continue observations for several years after the about the processes in nature, and understanding works. Developed protocol will be presented to why this is happening. Public monitoring other NCA colleagues and leadership, consid- program engages students, local researchers and ering the idea to include observations of the stakeholders. managed swift river habitats in the regular work Since 2010, the program is publicized throughout tasks. the country, bringing more new potential In Estonia swift river restoration is not been observers. Teachers and children in the program carried out in very large territories. ¿QGVWKHRSSRUWXQLW\WRGHYHORSDSURMHFWZHHN VFLHQWL¿FZRUNVORFDOUHJLRQDOUHVHDUFKHUVFDQ  5HVWRUDWLRQRIKDELWDWVIRU*UHDWVQLSH make use of their knowledge of the surrounding As the great snipe normally inhabits and leks objects, while scientists use the data collected. LQULYHUÀRRGSODLQVZKLFKDUHFKDUDFWHUL]HGE\ Data can also be practically used, for example, SHULRGLFÀRRGVDQGORZRYHUJURZLQJZLWKVKUXEV in spatial planning, destroying hogweed stands or the main activity for habitat restoration in the for nature-based tourism development. project is associated with cutting the bushes In Estonia a similar program has not yet been and grazing.In Latvia this activity has not been implemented, but there are a variety of research carried out but it would be necessary. nature education centers. In frameworks of the project “Green Corridor” in some programs 8.4. Voluntary monitoring observation recording forms have been translated into English and EEB experts are now familiar 9ROXQWDU\PRQLWRULQJSURJUDPCVPDLQSXUSRVHLV with the system. Consideration is being given to to obtain objective data on condition of different ¿UVWXVHWKLVLGHDLQQDWXUHHGXFDWLRQFHQWHUV nature objects, involving the local society in Voluntary monitoring is also taking place in the process. It was started in North Vidzeme Estonia, but it is not very well organized. People Biosphere reserve in 2005. interested in nature can enter the observations In wildlife watching there are invited to partic- into nature observation database. In addition ipate anyone who has an interest in what is Estonian Ornithological Society collects data happening in nature. In order to be more agile to about migrant birds and white stork from the make observations and the data would be reliable interested people. Schoolchildren can participate and easily comparable, it is proposed to use a in a project “Hallo spring”, where data about simple study materials prepared by scientists. arrival of migrant birds are collected and most Observations can be made on secular trees and active nature observers are invited to nature scenic trees, alleys and rows of trees, hogweed camp in the summer. and orchids, air and water quality, white storks, migratory birds and sand martins, beavers, bats, KHUPLWEHHWOHPROOXVFVDQGVKHOO¿VKGUDJRQÀLHV Guidance materials can be easily used by all interested parties without any special prior knowledge, although in some programs relevant knowledge is good for registering, for example, birds living in a farmstead. Other programs have specially prepared guides of species that can be

38 9. Management activities

The following chapter gives an overview about management actions, according to inventories results.

7RSLF 'HVFULSWLRQRIDFWLYLWLHV 3HULRG

Management of Large Copper ( Lycaena dispar) 2015-2016 habitats (mowing interval 2-3 years) Maintenance of March Fritillary ( Euphydyas aurinia ) habitats (mowing, Constant grazing). Grazing after every few years or0,4-0,7 animal units per ha. Establish permanent habitat of Scarce Heath ( Coenonympha hero ) 2015 Protected Removing undergrowth around Hermit Beetle species 2014 (Osmoderma eremita ) habitat trees. Removing undergrowth in Capercaillie lek sites. 2014-2016 Monitoringknown cages of European Roller. Repairing 2014-2015 old cages. Supprtig grazing in important habitats. Management of Great Snipe ( Gallinago media ) habitats. Constant Restauration and maintenance of the semi-natural habitats. Constant Eliminating dams on Vaidava river. Eliminating beaver dams, Habitats Constant fallen trees from the river and improving supervision. Eliminating beaver dams on the Peetri river and Pärlijõgi. Constant Habitats monitoring(grasslands wooded meadows and pastuses, rivers, forests) Constant Joint Monitoring of the protected species (Great snipe, moonitoring Constant Flying squirrel, Osprey, Capercaillie) Regulating the abundance of beavers, demolishing dams and Constant Hunting covering important and especially endangered trees with net.. Regulating the abundance of small game. Constant Sosnovski hogweedand Giant hogweed- mapping spread of distribution, monitoring, constant repelling. Informing Constant the public, involvement, raising owners liability. 6LJQDOFUD\¿VK±0RQLWRULQJ,QIRUPLQJWKHSXEOLFLQYROYHPHQW Constant Alien species Himalayan Balsam– repelling, monitoring, mapping spread Constant of distribution.Informing the public, involvement Other Alien species– Mapping spread of distribu- Constant tion, Informing the publicand involvement.

39 10. Strategic crossborder coopertion

Nature never recognizes borders between the ‡ 6XVWDLQDEOH ¿QDQFLQJ   7KH ¿QDQFLQJ FRXQWULHV%XWERUGHUVFUHDWHDUWL¿FLDOEDUULHUV of joint trans-frontier projects should be to the management of these valuable natural secured. Project proposals for international resources. The places where protected areas funding are to be jointly prepared and share a common political boundary bring submitted. The use of funding from inter- these issues into sharp focus and need special national programs e.g. European Union, consideration. Global Environmental Facility is to be mutually agreed. As global threats, including climate change and other global change factors, impact species and ‡ -RLQW ¿HOGV RI ZRUN IRU FRRSHUDWLRQ habitats worldwide, connectivity conservation $OO¿HOGVRIZRUNVKRXOGEHVHWZLWKWKH areas on larger scale will need to be considered. frame of a mid-term work plan and include ZRUNLQWKHSULPDU\DQGVHFRQGDU\¿HOGV Transboundary protected areas are one tool that indicated below, administrative capaci- can help support global and continental connec- ty-building and the training of staff from the tivity conservation. partner protected areas. International organizations recommend cross- ‡ ([FKDQJHRIGDWD - The mutual exchange border cooperation in nature conservation. But of data between all partners on the natural, collaborating with neighboring countries brings historical and cultural aspects of the area its own particular challenges, adding another should be in progress. OD\HURIFRPSOH[LW\WRWKHDOUHDG\GLI¿FXOWWDVN of managing a protected area. There are several ‡ -RLQWHFRORJLFDOPRQLWRULQJ - The partners basic standards and actions that should be taken should have commenced the systematic into consideration and implemented between linking of their resources for the ecological countries, while planning a transboundary monitoring of the shared ecosystem. protected area: ‡ -RLQW UHVHDUFK DFWLYLWLHV - The partners ‡ &RPPRQYLVLRQ - In addition to the vision should develop and implement common for their respective areas, the managing mutually agreed research and monitoring bodies of the trans-boundary protected area programmes. should have a common vision, a future ‡ -RLQW FRQVHUYDWLRQ DFWLYLWLHV - Cooperation orientation which can only be implemented LQWKH¿HOGRIQDWXUHDQGODQGVFDSHFRQVHU - together with the respective partner. vation should be developed through ‡ 2I¿FLDODJUHHPHQW $QRI¿FLDODJUHHPHQW concrete activities and projects, e.g. the is signed at the appropriate management establishment and management of cross- and political decision-making levels for border systems of inter-connected habitats facilitating the creation and progress of the and biotopes, the practical implementation trans-frontier protected area within a given of agreed management aims and plans, joint time frame. projects on biodiversity / species conserva- tion, etc. ‡ *XLGLQJ UXOHV IRU FRRSHUDWLRQ - The partners establish and put into practice ‡ &RRSHUDWLRQ LQ HGXFDWLRQ DQG FRPPX compatible rules which guide cooperation QLFDWLR n - Trans-frontier cooperation in and ensure permanent exchanges of infor- WKH¿HOGRIHGXFDWLRQDQGFRPPXQLFDWLRQ mation, the running and documentation of should cover a range of joint activities joint meetings, joint decision-making and providing information, raising awareness dispute settlement. The rules are based upon and communicating the message of the the mutual consideration of each partner’s trans-frontier protected area as a whole. working methods, time management, native This work will include, for example, the language, administrative structure and development of a common identity, the decision-making procedures publication of joint bi- or multilingual

40 publications, maps, and video or web on-site activities in all partner areas. A joint presentations, the organisation of guided steering committee is recommended. visits for different target groups on both ‡ )RUHLJQ ODQJXDJH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ sides of the border, events for pupils and - Foreign language communication, trans- schools etc. lation arrangements and facilitation should ‡ 6WDII H[FKDQJH - Permanent communi- be ensured in the main areas of transfrontier cations at all level of staff in a process of cooperation. familiarisation should have been estab- ‡ &RRSHUDWLRQ LQ UHFUHDWLRQ DQG WRXULVP lished and (a) facilitator/s for collaboration - Trans-frontier opportunities for people to LGHQWL¿HG 6WDII ZLWK UHVSRQVLELOLW\ IRU experience nature and enjoy the landscape cooperative activities should meet regularly should be developed. This includes, for to discuss project management, evaluate example, coordinated visitor management progress and exchange of knowledge systems, visitor facilities and trails, and and experience. In addition, staff should trans-frontier public transport systems. This SHULRGLFDOO\FDUU\RXWMRLQW¿HOGWULSVDQG ¿HOG RI ZRUN DOVR LQFOXGHV WKH GHYHORS - ment of sustainable trans-frontier tourism initiatives covering, for example, the contribution of tourism to regional develop- ment, or the support of protected areas for marketing of local ecological products.

Visitor tower in Paganamaa LPA. Photo A. Ader

41 11. Management plans practices in the region

0DQDJHPHQWSODQIRU3DJDQDPDDODQGVFDSH with an area of 13 ha). The most noticeable of SURWHFWLRQDUHDDQG9lLNH3DONQDODQGVFDSH rare and protected species is the black stork SURWHFWLRQDUHDGXULQJ which nests in the protected area. In addition, several protected plant species from the III the main asset of the Paganamaa Landscape category have been found. Protection Area is the diverse natural and semi-natural landscape on the western border Diverse landscape and habitats in Paganamaa are RI +DDQMD XSODQGV ZLWK LWV NDPH ¿HOGV 0DLQ ¿WIRUQDWXUHVWXGLHVRUIRUVFLHQWL¿FDQGUHFUHD - elements of the landscape include Piiriorg (a tional purposes. The area has been accordingly 600 m wide and 55 m deep U-shaped valley used for a long time. which narrows towards the middle of the prote- 0DQDJHPHQW SODQ IRU 0}LVDP}WVD QDWXUH cted area into a 200 m wide and a sharper, more UHVHUYHGXULQJ V-shaped, valley with a slope gradient up to 35-45 degrees. In the western part of the prote- The main assets of the nature reserve are forest cted area, the valley changes back to a smoother habitats, as 93% of the reserve is covered with valley. Piiroja River runs in the bottom of the forest. Especially interesting are boreal forests, valley), kettles which have developed into which make up more than half of all the forests swamps and are known as the ‘footprints of the and areas covered with broad-leaved, conif- devil’; there are also gullies, of which the biggest erous, fen and bog woods. Grassy forests and is Luukraav, but the most famous are Väike and ZRRGODQGV RQ DUH¿HG ODQGV DUH OHVV FRPPRQ Suur Liivakraav (Small and Large Sand ditch). In The value of this area is increased by the high addition, historic buildings, traditional farmlands amount of forests that could be put under protec- and ancient places or heritage objects (locations tion (21,5 %) and because of the high diversity of that have been related to the devil, stone tumuli Natura 2000 forest habitats. Dominating habitats in Pedaku (also known as Kalmu) and Vorotka). include naturally conserved forests like western taiga, herb rich spruce forests and deciduous fen Considering the nature directives, many forest and swamp woods. Natural rivers (3210, part of habitats can be found here as more than 80% the Vaidava River from Mustjõgi to the mill in of the protected area is covered with forests Vastse-Roosta) with steep riverbanks, a continu- (western taiga (9010*) 40 ha, herb rich spruce RXVO\FKDQJLQJUHOLHIDQGÀRRGHGPHDGRZVDGG forests (9050) 27 ha, corneous forests on glacio- value to the area and are one of the most impor- ÀXYLDOHVNHUVDQGNDPH¿HOGV  KDDQG tant habitats within the protected area. bog woodlands (91D0) 17 ha). Lakes (Kikkajärv – area of 21,4 ha, deepest point 22,3 m, Sarapuu  0DQDJHPHQW SODQ IRU .RLYD0XVWM}H Lake – area of 2,4 ha, deepest point 8,8 m, ODQGVFDSHSURWHFWLRQDUHDDQG.RLYD0XVWM}H Liivajärv – area of 4,2 ha, deepest point 19,8 m, OLPLWHGFRQVHUYDWLRQDUHD Mudajärv – area of 0,8 ha), springs and creeks The main elements of this protective area are (Piirioja – with a high gradient (6 m/km), runs the biggest rivers Koiva River, Mustjõgi, Peetri in its natural riverbed) are considered impor- River and Vaidava River, which all comply tant habitats. Out of all the lakes in Paganamaa, with the Natura habitat type rivers and springs Kikkajärv and Liivajärv have been named as (3210). All previous rivers have been recognized oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing water as spawning places for salmon. Boreal alluvial habitats (3130). Väike-Palkna has been named PHDGRZV KDELWDWW\SHDUHD RQÀRRG as an oligotrophic water habitat containing sandy plains of rivers and lowlands (habitat type *6270, plains (3110). Several semi-natural meadows area 120,3 ha). Prominent wooded meadows of can be found within cultured landscapes which Southern Estonia are here found only on a small increase diversity (habitat type *6270, species- scale (*6530, 133 ha). The wooded meadows of rich dry to mesic grasslands on soils lacking Koiva are unique in the whole of Estonia. The calcium with an area of 16,2 ha habitat type 6430, plant communities and micro reliefs are diverse hydrophilous tall herb communities with an area because a lot of the meadows can be found on of 7,3 ha and boreal alluvial meadows (6450)

42 ÀRRG SODLQV 'U\ PHDGRZV   KD  DV taiga covers 240 ha, sedge mire and bog woods types of semi-natural communities can be found cover 28 ha and deciduous fen and swamp in three separate areas. woods 55,4 ha of Parmu Nature Reserve. Natural landscapes and little interference are prerequi- There are approximately 1550 ha of forests on sites for the nesting of the Black Stork, Western the landscape protection area. The biggest assets Capercaillie and the Lesser Spotted Eagle. Other in the Koiva Landscape Protection Area are the notable species within this territory are Early EURDGOHDYHGIRUHVWVRQÀRRGSODLQVRI0XVWM}JL Purple Orchid and Clouded Apollo. and Koiva River (91F0). The forests are habitats for humulus, being endangered and rare in &RQVHUYDWLRQ SODQ IRU /XKDVRR ODQGVFDSH (VWRQLD%URDGOHDIHGÀRRGSODLQIRUHVWVWDNHXS SURWHFWLRQDUHD 73 ha. Western taiga (*9010) takes up 1065 ha Luhasoo is the biggest and almost untouched in the Koiva Landscape Protection Area. Most swamp in Southern Estonia. The local landscape of these forests are coniferous forests and pine protection area was created to protect the forests on heaths. Understory of oaks is distinc- hallmark swamps that have evolved from lakes tive for pine forests in Koiva. and where several habitats can be found. This Diversely used farmlands of Taheva parish in swamp front (*7110, area 261,57 ha) covers most Koiva-Mustjõe protected meadows are notable of the swamps in Luhasoo. In addition one can because it is the only place in Estonia where ¿QG WUDQVLWLRQ PLUHV DQG TXDNLQJ ERJV   the European Roller nests. The meadows near on 9,03 ha, deciduous swamp woods (9080) on Mustjõgi are also important for the nesting of 20,9 ha and bog woodlands (91D0) on 32,1 ha. Great Snipe (Gallinago media) and living areas Three swamp lakes in Luhasoo (dystrophic lakes for the Western Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) and ponds, 3160, area 8,4 ha) are leftovers of have been built in the protection area. one former lake. On the edges of the protected area is western taiga (*9010), 10,32 ha. Luhasoo Conservation plans in Valga County with the Landscape Protection Area has a high protective headline ‘Factors guiding settlements and use of and landcape value in addition to being a habitat ODQG¶GH¿QHGWKHPHDGRZVDQGIRUHVWVLQ.RLYD for protected species. Mustjõe Landscape Protection Area to be of a national importance, constituting the core for a The main value of the protected area is the 5 km green belt (which continues in Latvia). Koikküla, long nature learning trail which in its farthest end Laanemetsa and the surroundings of Taheva on a swamp island called Meiesaar has a heated manor are the most important of all the historical cabin. semi-natural landscapes, where the main value is the village milieu with its architectural heritage. This is the reason for conservation of historic use of land as well as mental and material heritage, including preserving and appreciating the activi- ties and behaviour related to the river. Koiva-Mustjõe landscape protection area lies within the resting area of the Centre for State Forest Management. Camping places in Kõrgeperve and Tellingumägi, the latter has a tower for sightseeing, are within this area. It is possible to see the meadows of Mustjõgi and Latvia with its characteristic old rivers. The area is popular amongst people hiking on water trails. &RQVHUYDWLRQSODQIRUWKHQDWXUHUHVHUYHRI 3DUPX Natural landscapes along the border are valuable assets of the Parmu Nature Reserve. Western

43 &216(59$7,213/$1)253$*$1$0$$/$1'6&$3(3527(&7,21$5($ $1'9b,.(3$/.1$/$1'6&$3(3527(&7,21$5($'85,1*

$VVLJQPHQW 'HVFULSWLRQRIWKHDVVLJQPHQW

Maintenance of Known semi-natural landscapes will be maintained (ca 29,10 existing semi-natural eek/ha), there is roughly 25 ha of maintainable land. landscapes (37,6 ha)

7LNVDWMDXQRWLELMXãLH]ƗOƗMLNXULHPEnjVLHVSƝMDQRGURãLQƗWDUƯ $WNOƗWRDLQDYXDWMDXQRãDQD WXUSPƗNXDSVDLPQLHNRãDQX1RYƝUWƝWƗSODWƯEDKD

(VRãDMƗVDWNOƗWDMƗVDLQDYƗVYLVPD]SDãUHL]ƝMR (VRãR]ƗOƗMXDSVDLPQLHNRãDQD /DXNVDLPQLHFƯEDVUHƧLVWUXXQLQIRUPƗFLMDVGLHQHVWDGDWX DSMRPƗ DSPKD XQSHUVSHNWƯYƗDSPKD 9HFDLVWRUQLVWLNVQRMDXNWVWƗYLHWƗYLHWƗSDUHG]ƝWV -DXQDVNDWXWRUƼDL]EnjYH L]EnjYƝWMDXQXQHGDXG]DXJVWƗNXWRUQL 3ƗUJƗMLHQXWDNXL]SƺDXãDQD 3ƗUJƗMLHQXWDNX DSPNP L]SƺDXãDQD[JDGƗ UHL]H 'ƝƺXFHOLƼXNRSãDQD 'ƝƺXFHOLƼXVDNƗUWRãDQDXQDWMDXQRãDQD LNSƝFJDGLHP

&216(59$7,213/$1)25.2,9$0867-®(/$1'6&$3(3527(&7,21$5($$1' .2,9$0867-®(/,0,7('&216(59$7,21$5($

$VVLJQPHQW 'HVFULSWLRQRIWKHDVVLJQPHQW Natural obstructions, such as trees fallen into the water, which heavily LQÀXHQFHWKHZDWHUV\VWHPDQGLQWHUIHUHZLWKWKHPLJUDWLRQRI¿VKZLOOEH Removal of obstruc- UHPRYHG,WLVLPSRUWDQWWRUHHVWDEOLVKWKHÀRZRIZDWHUQRWWKHUHPRYDO WLRQVLQÀXHQFLQJWKH of the whole obstruction. The removal of beaver dams is also impor- natural water balance WDQW2EVWUXFWLRQVFDQEHUHPRYHGRQDODUJHUVFDOHRQO\QHDURI¿FLDO resting sites for aesthetic reasons (can be done as communal work). Communal work to maintain At least twice a year. semi-natural communities Improving the approaches Building of the necessary infrastructure to gain access to meadows to problematic meadows (on state lands). Determining the necessity Determining the needs for infrastructure to gain access to for culverts and accordingly, meadows that are hard to reach (6 culverts - 15 000). installation (on state lands) Purchase of machinery that is necessary to Purchase of machinery maintain the complicated meadows.

Purchase of animals 20 specimen of cattle and 3 horses that have been bought and are in use.

Complex monitoring of river 2 consecutive years, inventory of LD river habitats and species. habitats and Natura species %RUGHUVRI1DWXUDKDELWDWVZLOOEHVSHFL¿HGDQGH[DFWHFRQRPLFJXLGH - Addition inventory of lines will be presented especially for wooded meadows and pastures. habitats on meadows The data in the inventory has to correspond with the demands of PRIA. Ornithological monitoring The impact on birds due to maintaining, or due on the meadows to the lack of it, will be monitored.

44 Specifying inventory %RUGHUVRI1DWXUDKDELWDWVZLOOEHVSHFL¿HGDVZHOODVWKH of forest habitats conformance of forest habitats with the criteria. Full plan for forestry in Forest maintenance will be planned according to the aims the protected area of the protection and general principles of forestry. Gathering of information Gathering of information and compilation of a plan for monitoring of insects and monitoring (monitoring of populations: Clouded Apollo, Conifer Dark Beetles, of selected populations Hermit Beetle), consideration of the demands for habitats.

Building and maintenance of infrastructure for hikers using water- Directing visitors ways (access to boats, stairs to Kõrgeperve and other resting places).

&216(59$7,213/$1)25/8+$622/$1'6&$3(3527(&7,21$5($

Maintenance of paths, visiting Maintenance of the nature study trail in Luhasoo. centres and resting places

&216(59$7,213/$1)257+(1$785(5(6(59(2)3$508

Renovation of communities Regular maintenance of meadows. Gathering of information Gathering of information and compilation of a plan for monitoring of insects and monitoring (monitoring of populations: Clouded Apollo, Conifer Dark Beetles, of selected populations Hermit Beetle), consideration of the demands for habitats. Building and maintenance of infrastructure for hikers using water- Directing visitors ways (access to boats, stairs to Kõrgeperve and other resting places).

45 References

$OnjNVQHV SLOVƝWDV WHULWRULMDV SOƗQRMXPV XQ loomastiku kaitse kohta, 1992. URL (kasutatud -DXQDOnjNVQHV SDJDVWD WHULWRULMDV SOƗQRMXPV oktoobris 2013) http://www.natura2000. ±  DSVWLSULQƗWL DU$OnjNVQHV QRYDGD HQYLUHH¿OHVGRFORRGXVGLUHNWLLYSGI GRPHVOƝPXPX1UKWWSZZZ *UƯQEHUJD / 3ULHGH $  ,QYDVLYH VSHFLHV LQ aluksniesiem.lv Latvia and in the area of the “Green Corridor” $QGHUVRQHä/XFFKLQL95DQGL(2]ROLƼã- SURMHFW3URMHNWD]LƼRMXPV6LJXOGD Hybridisation between wolves and dogs in Hindrikson M., Männil P., Ozolins J., Krzywinski Latvia as documented using mitochondrial and A., Saarma U. 2012. Bucking the Trend in microsatellite DNA markers. – Mammalian Wolf-Dog Hybridization: First Evidence from Biology, 67: 79–90. Europe of Hybridization between Female Dogs Anonymous. 2008. LIFE project Protection and and Male Wolves. – PloS ONE 7(10): e46465. Management of the Northern Gauja Valley. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0046465 Technical Final Report (LIFE03 NAT/ Holm B. 2010. Karuputke ( Heracleum ) võõrliikide LV/00082). http://www.zgauja.lv/images/stories/ ohjamiskava perioodiks 2011-2015. SDU]JIDLOL¿QDOBUHSRUWBWHFKQLFDOBSGI Pärandkoosluste Kaitse Ühing, Tartu. URL Arold, I. 2005. Eesti maastikud. Tartu Ülikooli (kasutatud 25.10.2013) http://www.envir.ee/ Kirjastus. RUEDZFODVV ¿OHDFWLRQ SUHYLHZLG  putke+v%C3%B5%C3%B5rliikide+ohjami- $$XQLƼã UHG   ´(LURSDV 6DYLHQƯEDV skava.pdf DL]VDUJƗMDPLH ELRWRSL /DWYLMƗ 1RWHLNãDQDV URNDVJUƗPDWD´/') Hunting regulations in Latvia 2011. Allforhunt world- Beaver hunting in Latvia 2011. Allforhunt worldwide wide hunting community, URL (kasutatud hunting community, URL (kasutatud märtsis märtsis 2013) http://www.allforhunt.com/en/ 2013) http://www.allforhunt.com/en/article/ laws/view/hunting-regulations beaver-hunting-in-latvia Jahieeskiri (RT I, 29.05.2013, 51). URL (kasutatud Dombrovska, L. 2011. Läti jahinduse funktsioneer- oktoobris 2013) https://www.riigiteataja.ee/ imine. Eesti Jahimeeste Seltsi koduleht. URL akt/129052013051 (kasutatud märtsis 2013) http://www.ejs.ee/ Jahiseadus (RT I, 16.05.2013, 2). URL (kasutatud et/uudised-ja-teated/558-rahvusvaheline-ja- oktoobris 2013) https://www.riigiteataja.ee/ hinduskonverents-qjahinduse-korraldus -eu- akt/116052013002?leiaKehtiv roopa-liidu-maadesq.html Järvekülg, A (koost). 2001. Eesti jõed.Tartu Ülikooli Drenkhan, R. & Kalk, K. 2003. Mõisamõtsa Kirjastus, Tartu. looduskaitseala kaitsekorralduskava aastateks Kalakotka ( Pandion haliaetus ) kaitse tegevuskava 2006-2015. Tartu. URL (kasutatud oktoobris 2013. Keskkonnaministeerium . URL (kasutatud 2013) http://www.keskkonnaamet.ee/kkk/ oktoobris 2013) http://www.envir.ee/orb. 0RLVDPRWVDB/.$B...BBSGI aw/class=file/action=preview/id=1203305/ Druva-Druvaskalne I. 2013. Characteristics of ..BBOLVDBSGI tourism supply and infrastructure in project area. Keskkonnaregister. URL (kasutatud oktoobris 3URMHNWD]LƼRMXPV6LJXOGD 2013) http://register.keskkonnainfo.ee/envreg/ Eek, L. & Kukk, T. 2008. Maismaa võõrliikide käsir- main#HTTPn8z7i9mskRS79Fz6tEV19Ju- aamat. Keskkonnaministeerium. 3DA4Tf5 Eesti eElurikkus. URL (kasutatud oktoobris 2013) Koiva-Mustjõe maastikukaitseala ja Koiva-Mustjõe http://elurikkus.ut.ee/ luha hoiuala kaitsekorralduskava 2010-2018. URL (kasutatud oktoobris 2013) http://www. (N 7 6XãNR 8 $X]LƼã 5 0HåDXGåX DWVOƝJDV ELRWRSXLQYHQWDUL]ƗFLMD0HWRGLND90' NHVNNRQQDDPHWHHNNN.RLYDB0XVWMRHB0.$B MDB.RLYDB0XVWMRHBOXKDB+$B...BB European Federation of Associations for Hunting pdf and Conservation, 2013. URL (kasutatud märtsis 2013) http://www.face.eu/member/full/ Kont, R. 2013. Jahindus projektialal „Green Corridor“. latvia-latvijas-mednieku-asociacija Projekti Green Corridor aruanne. MTÜ Therio. Tartu. Euroopa Nõukogu direktiiv 92/43/EMÜ, looduslike elupaikade ning loodusliku taimestiku ja

46 Kukk, T. & Kull, T. (toim.) 2005. Eesti taimede and Forest Management in the Transborder Area OHYLNXDWODV$WODV RI WKH (VWRQLDQ ÀRUD (0h of North Livonia“ 2005. põllumajandus- ja keskkonnainstituut, Tartu. Paal, J. 2007. “Loodusdirektiivi” elupaigatüüpide /ƗUPDQLV 9  3DUNYHLGD SƺDYDV XQ JDQƯEDV käsiraamat. Auratrükk, Tallinn. DL]VDUJƗMDPR DLQDYX DSYLGnj =LHPHƺJDXMD Paganamaa MKA ja Väike-Palkna MKA kaitse- DNWXDOL]ƝWV NDUWƝMXPV XQ LHWHLNXPL WƗOƗNƗP korralduskava 2010-2019. URL (kasutatud GDUEƯEƗP ELRWRSD ODEYƝOƯJD DL]VDUG]ƯEDV oktoobris 2013) http://www.keskkonnaamet.ee/ VWƗYRNƺD QRGURãLQƗãDQDL 3URMHNWD DWVNDLWH NNN3DJDQDPDDBMDB9DLNH3DONQDB...B Sigulda. 2019.pdf Lepp, R. 2012. Metsise mängupaikade inventeerimine. Parmu looduskaitseala (Parmu loodusala ja Misso Projekti Green Corridor aruanne. Mõniste. URL linnuala osa) kaitsekorralduskava 2013-2022. (kasutatud oktoobris 2013) http://www.keskkon- URL (kasutatud oktoobris 2013) http://www. QDDPHWHHSXEOLFUDKYXVYDKHOLVHGBSURMHNWLG NHVNNRQQDDPHWHHSXEOLF3DUPXB...SGI JUHHQBFRUULGRU0HWVLVHBPDQJXSDLNDGHBLQYHQ - WXXULBDUXDQQHSGI 3LOƗWV92]ROLƼã-6WDWXVRIEURZQEHDULQ Latvia. - Acta Zoologica Lituanica, Vol. 13, No. Leivits, M. 2012 Metsise ( Tetrao urogallus L.) Eesti 1: 65-71. asurkonna elupaikade sidususe, kaitse tõhususe ja elupaikade seisundi analüüs. Keskkonnaamet, Ploom, K. 2013. Turism projektialal. Käsikiri Vana-Järve. Käsikiri Keskkonnameti Otepää kontoris. Lindman, L., Tammaru, T., Meister, H., Õunap, E. 3ULHGH $  ,QYD]ƯYLH QHRIƯWL /DWYLMDV ÀRUƗ 2011. Teelehe-mosaiikliblika ( Euphydryas L]SODWƯED XQ GLQDPLND 3URPRFLMDV GDUEV aurinia Rott.) kaitse tegevuskava. Eelnõu. /DWYLMDV8QLYHUVLWƗWH5ƯJDOSS Loodusvaatluste andmebaas. URL (kasutatud oktoo- Riigimetsa Majandamise Keskus. URL (kasutatud bris 2013) http://loodus.keskkonnainfo.ee/lva/ märtsis 2013) http://www.rmk.ee/organi- satsioon/pressiruum/uudised/uudised-2009/ Luhasoo maastikukaitseala kaitsekorralduskava riigi-jahipiirkonnad-lbisid-phjaliku-haldusmuu- 2013-2022 eelnõu. URL (kasutatud oktoobris datuse 2013) http://www.keskkonnaamet.ee/public/ LPDJHVOXKDVRRBPNDBNNNBYHUBGRF Süda, I. 1998. Ohustatud mardikalised ( Coleoptera ) Eesti metsades. – Metsanduslikud Uurimused Läti Riigimetsa AS. URL (kasutatud märtsis 2013) 29: 109–123. http://www.vmd.gov.lv/?sadala=327 Süda, I. 2003. Euroopa Liidu loodusdirektiiviga Martin, M. 2011. Hännak-rabakiili ( Leucorrhinia kaitstavad mardikalised ( Coleoptera ) Eesti caudalis ) kaitse tegevuskava 2012-1026 metsades. – Metsanduslikud Uurimused 38: koostamine. Lepingulise töö lõpparuanne. Elva 103–114. Martin, M. 2011. Rohe-vesihobu ( Ophiogomphus Süda, I. 2012. Eremiitpõrnika ( Osmoderma eremita cecilia ) kaitse tegevuskava 2012-1026 (Scop.)) inventuur Lõuna-Eestis. Tartu. URL koostamine. Lepingulise töö lõpparuanne. Elva (kasutatud oktoobris 2013) http://www.keskkon- Martin, M. 2012. Natura 2000 liikide ja elupaikade QDDPHWHHSXEOLFUDKYXVYDKHOLVHGBSURMHNWLG inventuuride läbiviimine Võrumaa ja Valgamaa JUHHQBFRUULGRU(UHPLLWSRUQLNDBLQYHQWXXUB piiriäärsetel aladel. Lõpparuanne. OÜ Oniscus, Louna-Eestis.pdf Elva. URL (kasutatud oktoobris 2013) http:// Timm, U & Ojaste I. 2013. Lendorava ( Pteromys ZZZNHVNNRQQDDPHWHHSXEOLF/RSSDUXDQQHB volans ) kaitse tegevuskava. Eelnõu .LLOLGBOLEOLNDGSGI Vilbas, M., Lindman, L., Õunap, E., Tammaru., T. Metsise (Tetrao urogallus Linnaeus, 1758) kaitse 2011. Suur-kuldtiiva ( Lycaena dispar Haw.) tegevuskava. Eelnõu. kaitse tegevuskava. Eelnõu. Männil, P. & Kont, R. 2012. Suurkiskjate (hunt Canis Voolaid, P. 2013. Lendorava inventuur Karisöödi- lupus , ilves Lynx lynx , pruunkaru Ursus arctos ) Villike ja Hintsiko-Lüütsepa piirkondades. kaitse- ja ohjamise tegevuskava aastateks Projekt „Eesti-Läti piiriülese kaitse korral- 2012–2021. Keskkonnaministeerium, 103 lk. damise ühtlustamine“ aruanne. Otepää. URL 2]ROLƼã-/DDQHWX1 9LOEDVWH( XQSXEOLVKHG  (kasutatud oktoobris 2013) http://www.keskkon- Prospects of integrated game management in the QDDPHWHHSXEOLFUDKYXVYDKHOLVHGBSURMHNWLG WUDQVERUGHUDUHDRI1RUWK/LYRQLD±¿QDOUHSRUW JUHHQBFRUULGRU/HQGRUDYDBLQYHQWXXULBDUXDQQH of the PINMATRA project „Integrated Wetland pdf

47