Workshop on Natura 2000 Management Threats, Challenges and Solutions With a specific focus on management of forest and grassland habitats in the Alpine biogeographic region The state of play of Natura 2000 management and financing in Romania prepared by Laura Done, Speleological Foundation "Club Speo Bucovina"
Please answer the following questions regarding recent developments of Natura 2000 in your country.
1. Last development of the establishment of Natura 2000: • are there any changes in the Natura 2000 coverage in the last years: Yes, geographical diversification and competence domains. • do you expect any changes in the next few years: Yes, we expect that more areas to be added to Natura2000 network. • do you consider that the network is complete: No. There are still many studies to be made and approved for areas that need to be included in the network. • Any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Facilitating the exchange of good practices between the NGOs in the network. Involving the young people in Natura 2000 projects.
2. SAC designation process: • how many SCI till now:
SCIs on Suceava County territory approved through the order of the Ministry of Environment and Forests No.2387/2011 to modify the order of the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development No.1964/2007 regarding naming natural protected areas of comuniotary importance as integrated part of the ecological European network Natura 2000:
1. ROSCI0010 – Bistrița Aurie (Golden Bistrita) – situated on the administrative territories of Cârlibaba, Ciocăneşti and Iacobeni, administred by Romanian Waters; ‐ plans started to be developed 2. ROSCI0019 – Călimani – Gurghiu ‐ situated on the administrative territories of Poiana Stampei, Dorna Candrenilor, Panaci and Şaru Dornei, administred by Călimani National Park; ‐ plans are ready 4. ROSCI0075 – Pătrăuți Forest 6. ROSCI0081 – Fânețele seculare Frumoasa (Secular forests of Frumoasa) – situated on the territory of Moara Nica, administred by The Environmental Protection Agency of Suceava; ‐ plans started to be developed 7. ROSCI0082 – Fânețele seculare Ponoare (Secular forests of Ponoare) ‐ situated on the territory of commune Bosanci, administred by The Environmental Protection Agency of Suceava; ‐ plans started to be developed 8. ROSCI0086 – Găina‐Lucina ‐ situated on the administrative territories of Cârlibaba and Moldova Sulița, administred by The Forestry Direction Suceava; ‐ plans started to be developed 12. ROSCI0184 – Pădurea Zamostea‐Lunca – belongs to Zamostea town, administred by The Forestry Direction Suceava; 13. ROSCI0196 – Pietrosul Broştenilor‐Cheile Zugrenilor ‐ situated on the administrative territories of Crucea and Dorna Arini, administred by The Forestry Direction Suceava; ‐ plans started to be developed 14. ROSCI0212 ‐ Rarău‐Giumalău ‐ situated on the administrative territories of Câmpulung, Crucea, Dorna Arini and Pojorâta, administred by The Forestry Direction Suceava; ‐ plans started to be developed 15. ROSCI0245 – Tinovul de la Româneşti 16. ROSCI0247 – Tinovul Mare Poiana Stampei 17. ROSCI0249 – Tinovul Şaru‐Dornei 19. ROSCI0310 – Lacurile Fălticeni 20. ROSCI0321 – Moldova Superioară 21. ROSCI0328 – Obcinele Bucovinei 22. ROSCI0363 – Râul Moldova between Oniceni and Miteşti 23. ROSCI0365 – Râul Moldova between Păltinoasa and Ruşi 24. ROSCI0379 – Suceava river 25. ROSCI0380 – Suceava Liteni river 26. ROSCI0391 – Siretul Mijlociu Bucecea 27. ROSCI0392 – Slatina
• how many SAC declared:
SACs on the territory of Suceava County – aproved through H.G. No.971/2011 to complete and modify the H.G. No.1284/2007 regarding the declaration of avifaunistic special protected areas as integrated part of the European ecological network Natura 2000:
1. ROSPA0064 – Lacurile Fălticeni – include the areas under the administrative territories of Buneşti, Horodniceni, Rădăşeni, Moara Nica and Fălticeni. 2. ROSPA0083 – Munții Rarău‐Giumalău ‐ situated on the administrative territories of Câmpulung Moldovenesc, Crucea, Dorna Arini and Stulpicani, administred by The Forestry Direction Suceava; ‐ plans started to be developed 3. ROSPA0089 – Obcina Feredeului ‐ include the areas under the administrative territories of Izvoarele Sucevei, Moldova Sulița, Moldovița, Sadova, Ulma, Vama, Vatra Moldoviței, Breaza, Brodina, Câmpulung Moldovenesc, Frumosu, Fundu Moldovei and Pojorâta, administred by The Forestry Direction Suceava;
• any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Facilitating the exchange of good practices between the NGOs in the network. Involving the young people in projects in the network. Workshops and trainings.
3. Management plan development:
• how many management plans started to be developed: 6 plans • how many plans are ready: According to HG nr.1035/12 October 2011 the management plan of the Calimani National park has been approved. • any templates for management plans: No. • any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Facilitating the exchange of good practices between the NGOs in the network. Involving the young people in projects in the network. Workshops and trainings.
4. Habitat action plans:
• are there any Habitat action plans developed: In Suceava County, there’s only one action plan, which is for Calimani National Park. • any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Workshops and experience exchange with NGOs from different countries.
5. Biogeographic process:
• how many biogeographic regions are there in your country: There are 5 out of the 11 European biogeographical regions in Romania. These are: continental (53% of the countries’ surface), alpine (23%), steppe (17%), pannonic (6%), and pontic (1%) • how active is the national participation in the Alpine region: Medium ‐ weak • do you plan to participate in process for the Continental region: Yes • any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Workshops and experience exchange with NGOs from different countries.
6. Priority Action Frameworks:
• level of development: Weak • main achievements: The punctual projects in the POS Environment program. • key problems: o politics involvement in the funding programs; o the lack of consistent funding for biodiversity conservation projects; o the local communities’ lack of information regarding biodiversity; o weak level of involvement of local authorities that have natural protected areas on their territories. • any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Workshops, trainings, seminaries and experience exchange with NGOs from different countries.
7. Reporting on article 12 and 17:
• how is the reporting process organized: The reporting process is organized operational and functional. The rapport stage is very bureaucratic. There are weekly, monthly and trimestrial rapports. • any comments on the quality of the reports: No information. • any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Promoting the legislative initiatives of the civil society in the parliament.
8. Wilderness and non‐intervention management:
• are there any Natura 2000 sites which can fall into the wilderness concept: Secuar forest of Slatioara, which is included in the Rarau‐Giumalau Natura 2000 site. Giumalau Masiff, which is included in the Rarau‐Giumalau Natura 2000 site. • is the concept present in national forestry guidance / regulations: Yes, in the Forestry Code. • any ideas for CEEweb support and activities in this field? Promoting the sites and their importance to raise the awareness of the danger that will occur if humans interfere.
The event is financially supported by the European Commission.