Four Highlights from Natura 2000 Forests NGO Recommendations on Management Four Highlights from Natura 2000 Forests: NGO Recommendations on Management
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Four Highlights from Natura 2000 Forests NGO recommendations on management Four Highlights from Natura 2000 Forests: NGO recommendations on management Authors and contributors: Wilderness and non-intervention management | Stefan Avramov, Bulgarian Biodiversity Foundation, and Pawel Pawlaczyk, Naturalists Club Poland Management for deadwood retention | Pawel Pawlaczyk and Monika Kotulak, Naturalists Club Poland Light forests | Matthias Dolek, Butterfly Conservation Europe, and Zoltán Ilonczai, Bükki National Park Directorate Ecological coherence | Tamás Papp and Csaba Domokos, Milvus Group, and Andriy-Taras Bashta, Animal Research and Protection Association “Fauna” Four Highlights from Natura 2000 Forests Editor | Ildikó Arany NGO recommendations on management Proofreading | Judit Herman Layout | Kristina Vilimaite Editor responsible | Ágnes Zólyomi Photo on the cover page | Piotr Lewandowski Copyright © CEEweb for Biodiversity, 2013. CEEweb for Biodiversity is an international network ofnon-governmental organizations in Central and Eastern Europe. The mission of the network is the conservation of biodiversity through the promotion of sustainable development. CEEweb for Biodiversity This publication is supported Széher út 40. by the European Commission. H-1021 Budapest, Hungary The donor is not responsible Tel.: (+36 1) 398-0135 for the expressed views Fax: (+36 1) 398-0136 and the use ofthe information www.ceeweb.org made available. 2013 Table of contents Introduction ......................................................................4 Wilderness and non-intervention management ....6 Management for deadwood retention..................22 Light forests .........................................................34 Ecological coherence ...........................................42 Recommendations and conclusions.................................50 References ......................................................................54 2 3 3 support the implementation ofthis target and action along with the Strategy’s other provisions, such as the Biogeographic Process where forestry management is a highlighted issue or the preparation of the Guidance on the management offorests in Natura 2000. Introduction However, it is often unclear for planners and managers alike how the above provisions should be integrated into actual management practice. Therefore, it is crucial to share experience and knowledge In 2010 forests and other wooded land covered 177.8 million on different forest management options and their role in achieving hectares which is more than 40% ofthe EU’s land area. This number favourable conservation status of forests. It is also crucial to enhance has been growing throughout the last twenty years. The majority cooperation between countries and stakeholders. These are some ofwooded land is covered by semi-natural forests or woody ofthe goals expected from the ongoing EU processes. plantations, whereas around 20.4 million hectares (equivalent to 13% ofthe total area) offorests were in protected areas in the EU in With this brochure NGOs wish to contribute to this knowledge by 2010.1 European forests are among the most important ecosystems sharing their field-based experiences. We have decided to highlight providing necessary services for Europe’s citizens, including a four selected issues offorest management and to provide a list number or provisioning, cultural, supporting and regulating services. ofgood examples. These issues are relevant across most biogeographical regions and forest habitat types and are important Despite their growing area European forests are exposed to for achieving favourable conservation status of Natura 2000 forest a number ofpressures such as climate change, habitat fragmentation, habitats and the target species they host. Non-intervention invasive alien species or the intensification offorest management. management is one ofthe management options for all zonal climax At the same time resilience and adaptation capacity offorests to forests with large coverage across Europe, especially those in the these pressures depends on their biodiversity and ecological Boreal and Alpine regions. Ecological coherence is key to ensuring coherence. This was already recognized by the EU’s 2006 Forest forest resilience against climate change and other environmental Action Plan which states maintaining and enhancing forest pressures, and important for emblematic species such as large biodiversity as one ofits aims.2 Maintaining biodiversity, sustaining carnivores. Management for deadwood retention is a rather technical 4 ecological health and functioning in forests depends largely on their modification of current practices with significant benefits for 5 5 management. This was acknowledged by the EU Biodiversity Strategy structural and biological diversity ofthe forest. In the context of this to 2020 by adoptingits Target 3: Increase the contribution of brochure light forests are created and sustained by management agriculture and forestry to maintaining and enhancing biodiversity and practice which opens the canopy and allows light to penetrate to the its Action 12: Integrate biodiversity measures in forest management understorey thus enabling a diverse mosaic offorest and grassland plans.3 These plans should include important measures such as patches and favouring traditional land use practices at the same time. maintaining optimal levels of deadwood, preserving wilderness areas, applying ecosystem-based measures to increase the resilience We especially invite forest planners and managers, land use offorests against fires and adopting specific measures developed for planners, conservation professionals and other interested readers Natura 2000 forest sites. There are several ongoing EU processes to to explore, learn and disseminate our findings. Wilderness and non-intervention management According to the definition given in the EU Guidelines on Wilderness in Natura 2000,4 a wilderness is an area governed by natural processes. It is composed ofnative habitats and species, and large enough for the effective ecological functioning ofnatural processes. It is unmodified or only slightly modified and without intrusive or extractive human activity, settlements, infrastructure or visual disturbance. Wilderness areas are typically national parks or reserves Above: The Three-toed Woodpecker ofIUCN category I covering thousands ofhectares and with a history occurs only in old-growth forests of strict protection. The term ‘wild area’ is used for sites (…) where Right: The highest spruce tree only some ofthe wilderness qualities are found, where the ofBulgaria is in the non-intervention conservation objectives aim at achieving only part ofthe wilderness forest of Parangalitsa reserve, qualities, or where the objective is to fully restore natural processes Rila Mountains and features with the aim to extend the wilderness core zone. Wild areas can have various statuses, for example core zones ofnationally protected or Natura 2000 sites or entire smaller nature reserves under strict protection. Wild areas do not necessarily have a long between minimum intervention and non-intervention along which history ofbeing undisturbed but they need to have the potential the level ofintervention decreases even in case ofnaturally of restoring and sustaining natural processes. occurring disturbances (e.g. bark beetles or forest fires). 6 7 7 Wilderness and wild areas are generally subject to non-intervention Natural dynamics enabled by non-intervention management: all kinds ofhuman intervention are avoided that could Natural structural and functional diversity is a precondition have negative effects. (Exceptions are scientific investigation and in for maintenance ofhigh biodiversity in forests. There are different some cases guided tourism.) In other cases a minimum intervention5 levels and scales ofnatural ecosystem dynamics. In case offorests approach is applied which limits active management to non- it varies from small-scale gap dynamics (as in lowland beech forests) extractive and preventive measures such as eradication ofinvasive through “stand development phases” dynamics (as typical for alien species, maintaining touristic paths, etc. While in each case the montane mixed forests) to the large-scale disturbance dynamics guiding principle is to enable natural processes, there is a continuum (as in typical montane spruce forests). All manifestations of these dynamics should be accepted in wilderness and wild areas as Applicability manifestations of the natural processes maintaining the ecosystem. Even if natural processes are seemingly destructive for the forest Non-intervention management areas significantly contribute stands (as massive wind throws or bark beetle outbreaks), non- to the favourable conservation status ofa large set ofhabitat types, intervention is often a good strategy and may bring along especially primary habitats and dynamic complexes of habitats as conservation benefits. Non-intervention is often less destructive well as the species they host. Examples ofhabitats that benefit from for forest-related biodiversity than active intervention against non-intervention management can be found in all habitat groups the outbreaks; and forest recovery by natural succession is usually under Annex I to the Habitats Directive from aquatic to terrestrial and faster and cheaper than by artificial planting. A network of large non- from closed canopy forests to open grasslands, dunes, peatlands intervention areas contributes