University of Montenegro Faculty of Sciences and Mathematics

UNIVERSITY OF MONTENEGRO FACULTY OF SCIENCES AND MATHEMATICS

PROTECTED AREA GAP ASSESSMENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR A REPRESENTATIVE PAS (PROTECTED AREA SYSTEM)

November, 2012th

PROJETC TEAM:

DR DANILO MRDAK – Project leader, expert for fish, for conservation issues and for sustainable development

DR DANKA CAKOVIĆ – Expert for botany and conservation issues

MR SNEŽANA VUKSANOVIĆ – Expert for botany

DR MARKO KARAMAN – Expert for invertebrate fauna

DR RUŽA ĆIROVIĆ – Expert for herpetofauna

MR NELA VEŠOVIĆ – DUBAK – Expert for bird fauna

DR VESNA MAČIĆ – Expert on marine flora and fauna

MR MARINA ĐUROVIĆ - Expert on mammal fauna

DR SNEŽANA DRAGIĆEVIĆ – Expert on moss

DR GORDANA KASOM – Expert on fungi

DR DRAGANA MILOŠEVIĆ – Expert for conservation issues

MR ANA KATNIĆ – Expert for sustainable development

DR SEONA ANDERSON – International expert for conservation issues

DR PREDRAG STANIŠIĆ - Expert for data basis

MR MARJAN ERCEG – Expert for GIS

1. IDENTIFICATION, ASSESSING AND MAPPING OF HABITATS AND SPECIES DISTRIBUTION

1.1. Identification and assessing

Experts for botany reviewed list of habitats related to Montenegro (lend and marine). They paid attention on habitats that were specified as important for Emerald network designation as well as to ones that were of interest for Yearly Monitoring of Biodiversity status 2011th. The Botany team identifies habitats that are either endangered or threatened as well as the ones that are rare or specific for Balkan nature. They produce check list of habitats that serve as a referent check list for their work.

Table 1. List of important habitats for mapping (Codes are given according to NATURA 2000 classification.)

CODE Name of habitat type 1210 Annual vegetation of drift lines 1240 Vegetated sea cliffs of the Mediterranean coasts with endemic Limonium spp 1310 Salicornia and other annuals colonising mud and sand 1410 Mediterranean salt meadows (Juncetalia maritimi) Mediterranean and thermo-Atlantic halophilous scrubs (Salicornetea 1420 fruticosi) 2110 Embryonic shifting dune 2120 Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (white dunes) 2190 Humide dune slack 2220 Dunes with Euphorbia terracina 2240 Brachypodietalia dune grasslands with annuals Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the 3130 Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea 3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp. Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion and Hydrocharition type 3150 vegetation 3230 Alpine rivers and their ligneous vegetation with Myricaria germanica 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths 5310 Laurus nobilis thickets 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates 6210 (Festuco-Brometalia) ( * important orchid sites) 6220 Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea *Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas 6230 and submountain areas in continental Europe 62A0 East sub-Mediterranean dry grasslands (Scorzoneretalia villosae) 7220 *Petrifying springs with tufa formation (Cratoneurion) Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea 8120 rotundifolii) 8130 Western mediterranean and thermophilous screes 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation 91E0 * Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion,

Alnion incanae, Salicion albae) Riparian mixed forests of Quercus robur, Ulmus laevis and Ulmus minor, 91F Fraxinus excelsior or Fraxinus angustifolia, along the great rivers (Ulmenion minoris) 9110 Luzulo-Fagetum beech forests 9130 Asperulo-Fagetum beech forests 91K0 Illyrian Fagus sylvatica forests (Aremonio-Fagion) 91L0 Illyrian oak-hornbeam forests (Erythronio-carpinion) 91W0 Moesian beech forest 9250 Quercus trojana woods 9260 Chestnut woods 9320 Olea and Ceratonia forests 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio-Piceetea) 9530 (Sub-) Mediterranean pine forests with endemic black pines 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests

This list was produced on basis of extrapolation of existing data, published and data collected during filed research while their categorization of habitats was based on two main parameters, their rarity and vulnerability. Those were main characteristics for selection of listed types of habitats. This list (Table 1.) was referent for further mapping.

For choosing of referent specie among several taxonomic groups (plants, moss, invertebrates, fish, amphibians and reptiles, birds, mammals and marine species and habitats) each expert study and assess the list of protected fungi, plant and animal species of Montenegro1. They also assess the lists that are noted in national reports for the Convention on Biological Diversity, in EMERALD network data basis in program of Biodiversity Monitoring. They additionally analyzed data basis for IPA (Important Plan Areas) and for IBA (Important Bird Areas) (bird and plant experts). Experts check each species IUCN Red List status (endangered or threatened) as well as analyze the ecological value of endemic species trough European scale. For the species with unreliable data of occurrence in Montenegro extra filed research were organized.

Their work was based on following approach: a) Experts categorized species that are present in Montenegro and that are listed in Habitats and Bird Directive and those that are on Barcelona and Bon conventions. They overlap such list with those related to protected plant and animal species in MNE and with lists in Emerald, IBA an IPA data basis b) They made crosscut analysis among international and national data sets (lists) in order to produce draft list of species for each group. Final list of each species group is based on several criteria such are level of endemism, level of vulnerability, level of importance (on EU scale), IUCN Red List category, etc.

1 RJEŠENJE O STAVLJANJU POD ZAŠTITU POJEDINIH BILJNIH I ŽIVOTINJSKIH VRSTA, 2006. Službeni glasnik Crne Gore br. 76/06

c) Species that are protected under National Legislative and which population number is high and stabile are not included in following lists. The same situation is with those that are numerous in Balkan countries no matter if they are low in number in EU countries.

d) Occurrence of some species in Montenegro is highly disputable and some field researches were done

in MN in related to verification of their existence. The species which are not reported for more than 40 years are

not taken in consideration.

e) For selecting of target species list related to mapping, 80 % of decision making process was based on published papers, documents, monographs, master and doctoral thesis, 10% was based on personal field experience while 10% was based on filed investigation during this project implementation.

IN following tables they are lists of each group that served as a basis for further taxa mapping work.

Table 2. List of important plant species for mapping

Species IUCN Red IUCN Red IUCN EU Status Status Endemic

Protected

Directive

Habitat List List Red List Wildlife Bern Cites in

Category Category Category Trade Annex Annex MN (World, (Europe) (EU 27) Regulati

1998) on

1 Adenophora lilifolia (L.) LC Annex + _ Ledeb. II, IV 2 Allium phthioticum Boiss. DD DD + RE & Heldr 3 Androsace komovensis + Schönswetter & Schneew Komovi 4 Aquilegia dinarica G. Beck R + Balkan 5 Arenaria halacsyi Bald. R + Mne Komovi 6 Arnica montana L. LC LC D Annex + - V 7 Artemisia eriantha Ten LC LC Annex + - Artemisia petrosa V (Baumg.) Jan subsp. eriantha Ten.

8 Asperula baldaccii R + Mne (Halacsy) Ehrend. Rumija 9 Asperula doerfleri Wettst. + RE 10 Bellevalia dalmatica R + RE (Backer) A.K. Jackson & Turill= Hyacinthella dalmatica (Baker) Chouard 11 Berteroa gintlii Rohlena R + Mne Lovćen 12 Buxus sempervirens L. + 13 Caldesia parnassifolia (L.) NT Annex I _ - Parl. II, IV

14 Calistegia soladanella (L.) + - R. Br. 15 Campanula abietina DD I + - Griseb. et Schenk. 16 Campanula secundiflora Ex/E + RE Vis 17 Centaurea glaberima R + RE Tausch 18 Centaurea incompta Vis. R + RE 19 Cephalaria pastricensis + RE Dörfler et Hayek 20 Crepis bertiscea Jáv. R + RE 21 Cymbalaria ebelii (Cufod.) + RE Speta 22 Cypripedium calceolus NT A Annex I II + - II, IV 23 Cerastium dinaricum VU Annex + RE G.Beck & Szysz. II, IV

24 Daphne malyana Blečić R? + RE 25 Dianthus knappii (Pant.) R + RE Ascher. & Kanitz ex Borbas 26 Dianthus nitidus ssp. RE lakusicii Wraber 27 Dioscorea balcanica + RE Košanin 28 Draba bertiscea D. Lakušić + RE & V. Stevanović 29 Edraianthus wettsteinii R + Hal. & Bald. subsp. RE wettsteinii 30 Edraianthus wettsteinii + Hal. & Bald. subsp. RE lovcenicus Mayer & Blečić 31 Euphorbia montenegrina + RE (Bald.) K. Malỳ 32 Euphorbia pancicii G. + RE Beck. 33 Eryngium alpinum L. I NT Annex I + _ II, IV 34 Fritillaria montana Hoppe. DD I + _

35 Gentiana lutea L. LC LC D Annex + - V 36 Gladiolus palustris Gaud. I DD Annex + _ II, IV 37 Geum bulgaricum Panc. LC Annex I + Balkan II 38 Gymnospermium + RE scipetarum (Paparisto & Qosja) Mayer & Pulević 39 Himantoglossum caprinum DD Anex I II + _ (Bieb.) C. Koch II, IV

40 Ilex aquifolium L. + 41 Knautia sarajevensis Szabó R + RE 42 Leucanthemum R + RE chloroticum A. Kerner & Murb.

43 Lunaria telekiana Jáv. R + RE

44 Lycopodium alpinum Annex + - Diphasiastrum alpinum V (L.) J. Holub 45 Marsilea quadrifolia NT Annex I + - II, IV 46 Minuartia velenovskyi R + RE (Rohlena) Hayek

47 Melampyrum doerfleri R + RE Ronninger 48 Najas flexilis (Willd.) VU Anex I + _ Rostk. & W.L.Schmidt II, IV

49 Narcissus angustifolius DD I _ _ Curt. 50 Narthecium scardicum R + Balkan Košanin 51 Ophrys bertolonii Moretti LC B + subende mic 52 Orchis provincialis Balb. LC B I II + _

53 Orchis albanica Goelz et B - - Reinhard

54 Petasites doerfleri Hayek R + Balkan 55 Plantago reniformis G. R + RE Beck 56 Polygonum albanicum Jáv. + Balkan

57 Protoedraianthus tarae + MNE Lakušić 58 Pulsatilla grandis Wend. LC Annex I + _ II, IV 59 Rhamnus intermedius R + RE Steudel & Hochst 60 Ramonda serbica Pancic LC Anex I + + IV 61 Salvia brachyodon Vandas R + RE 62 Saxifraga federici-augusti + Balkan Biasol. 63 Scilla litardierei Breist. R DD CR Annex + + II, IV 64 Scrophularia bosniaca G. R + RE Beck 65 Sempervivum kosaninii R + Balkan Praeger 66 Silene macrantha (Pančić) R + RE Neumayer 67 Taxus baccata L. + - 68 Trapa natans L. NT I + _

69 Tulipa grisebachiana Pant + Balkan 70 Utricularia minor L. + - 71 Utricularia vulgaris L + - 72 Valeriana bertiscea Pančić R + RE 73 Valeriana pancicii Hal. & + RE Bald.

74 Vicia montenegrina R + RE Rohlena 75 Verbascum durmitoreum R + RE Rohlena 76 Verbascum nicolai R + RE Rohlena 77 Viola elegantula Schott R + RE 78 Viola speciosa Pantocsek R + RE

Table 3. List of important invertebrate species for mapping

Ordo: COLEOPTERA 1 Scarodytes savinensis 2 Lucanus cervus (Linnaeus, 1758) 3 Oryctes nasicornis Linnaeus, 1746 4 Rosalia alpina (Linnaeus, 1758) 5 Cerambyx cerdo Linnaeus, 1758 6 Osmoderma eremita Scopoli, 1763 7 Buprestis splendens (Fabricius, 1775) 8 Luciola novaki Muller, 1946 Ordo: LEPIDOPTERA 9 Papilio machaon Linnaeus, 1758, ssp. giganteus Verity, 1911 10 Parnessius apollo Linnaeus, 1758, ssp. bosniensis Stichel, 1899 11 Iphiclides (Papilio) podalirius (Linnaeus, 1758) Ordo: HYMENOPTERA 12 Formica rufa Linnaeus, 1758 13 Formica polyctena Förster, 1850 14 Crematogaster auberti savinae Zimmermann, 1934 15 Plagiolepis xene Starcke, 1936. 16 Crematogaster gordani Karaman, 2008 17 Crematogaster montenigrinus Karaman, 2008 Ordo: ORTHOPTERA 18 Saga natoliae Serville, 1838 19 Ephippiger discoidalis Fieber, 1853 Ordo: DIPTERA 20 Riponnensia morini Vujić, 1999. 21 Chrysogaster mediteraneus Vujić, 1999 Ordo: ARANEAE 22 Cryphoecina deelemanae Deltshev, 1997 23 Fageiella ensigera Deeleman-Reinhold, 1974 24 Sintula roeweri Kratochvil, 1935 Ordo: OPILIONES 25 Cyphophthalmus martensi Karaman, I. 2009 26 Cyphophthalmus zetae Karaman, I. 2009 27 Cyphophthalmus rumijae Karaman, I. 2009 Classis: GASTROPODA 28 Vinodolia (anagastina) scutarica Radoman, 1973 29 Orientalina lacustris Radoman, 1983

30 Tandonia reuleaxi (Clessin, 1887) 31 Limax wohlberedti Simroth, 1900 32 Microcondylaea bonellii (Ferussac, 1827)

Table 4. List of important marine species for mapping

Barcelona Bern National convention convention legislative

FLORA Posidonia oceanica + + + Cymodocea nodosa + + + Zostera noltii + + Zostera marina + + + Cystoseira amentacea (including var. stricta + + + and var. spicata) Cystoseira spinosa (including C. adriatica) + + FAUNA Axinella polypoides + + + Geodia cydonium + + + Tethya sp. plur. + + Centrostephanus longispinus + + + Ophidiaster ophidianus + + + Lithophaga lithophaga + + + Luria lurida (= Cypraea lurida) + + + Mitra zonata + + + Pinna nobilis + + Tonna galea + + + Hippocampus ramulosus + + Hippocampus hippocampus + + Caretta caretta + + + Holothuria forskali + Holothuria impatiens + Holothuria polii + Holothuria tubulosa +

Table 5. List of important marine habitats for mapping

1110 Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time Natura 2000: 1110 Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time Emerald: 11.22 Sublittoral soft seabed Corine: 11.22 Sublittoral soft seabed Pal. Class: 11.125, 11.22, Shoals, Sublittoral soft seabed EUNIS: A2.2 Littoral sands and muddy sands

A5.1 Sublittoral coarse sediment A5.2 sublittoral send A5.4 sublittoral mixed sediment A5.5 sublittoral macrophyte-dominated sediment 1120 Posidonia beds Natura 2000: 1120 Posidonia beds Emerald: 11.3 Sea-grass meadow Corine: 11.34 Posidonia beds Pal. Class: 11.34 Posidonia beds EUNIS: A5.535 Posidonia beds 1130 Estuaries Natura 2000: 1130 Estuaries Emerald: 13.2 Estuaries Corine: 13.2 Estuaries Pal. Class: 13.2 Estuaries EUNIS: A2.12 Estuarine coarse sediment shores A2.31 Polychaete/bivalve-dominated mid estuarine mud shores A2.32 Polychaete/oligochaete-dominated upper estuarine mud shores 1140 Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide Natura 2000: 1140 Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide Emerald: 14 Mud flats and sand flats Corine: 14 Mud flats and sand flats Pal. Class: 14 Mud flats and sand flats EUNIS: related A2.2 Littoral sands and muddy sands A2.3 Littoral muds A2.4 Littoral mixed sediments 1150 Coastal lagoons Natura 2000: 1150 Coastal lagoons Emerald: 21 Coastal lagoons Corine: 21 Lagoons Pal. Class: 21 Coastal lagoons EUNIS: A7.1 Enclosed coastal saline or brackish water

1160 Large shallow inlets and bays Natura 2000: 1160 Large shallow inlets and bays Emerald: 12 Sea inlets and coastal features Corine: 12 Sea inlets Pal. Class: 12 Large shallow inlets and bays EUNIS: Realted to A2.2. Littoral sands and muddy sands; A2.3. Muddy sand ; A2.4 Littoral mixed sediments 1170 Reefs Natura 2000: 1170 Reefs Emerald: 11.24, 11.25 Sublittoral rocky seabeds and kelp forests, Sublittoral organogenic concentration Corine: 11.24, 11.25 Sublittoral rocky seabeds and kelp forests, Sublittoral organogenic concentration Pal. Class: 11.24, 11.25 Sublittoral rocky seabeds and kelp forests, Sublittoral organogenic concentration

EUNIS: A1 Littoral rock and other hard substrata

Table 6. List of important fish species for mapping

SPECIES

tion of certain species of species tion certain

Endemism (species endemic (species Endemism forMontenegro for or Balkan region) by national protection Under legislation under is threat Species List Red IUCN to according of species certain Population representspopulation border Popula is individuals) their (and by genetic characterized morphological and/or fastersuggest that differences processes evolution 1. Acipenser naccarii x x x 2. Acipenser sturio x x x 3. Salmo obtusyrostris x x x x x 4. Salmo marmoratus x x x 5. Salmo farioides x x 6. Salmo labrax x x 7. Hucho hucho x x x x 8. Telestes montenigrinus x 9. Pelasgus minutus x x 10. Telestes montenigrinus x 11. Scardinius knezevici x 12. Alburnoides ohridanus x x 13. Alburnus alborella x 14. Barbus rebeli x 15. Pachychilon pictum x 16. Barbatula zetensis x 17. Rutilus albus x 18. Anguilla Anguilla x

Table 7. List of important amphibian and reptile species for mapping

SPECIES IUCN END EMERALD NATURA 2000 MNE CITES 1. Salamndra atra VU x x

2. Triturus carnifex VU x HD Ann. II, IV x

3. Bufo bufo Lmt x

4. Bufo viridis VU x x

5. Hyla arborea VU x HD Ann. II x

6. Bombina scabra DD BEND x HD Ann. II, IV

7. Rana graeca VU BEND x

8. Rana arvalis EN PANEND x HD Ann. IV

9. Rana shqiperica DD YUSEND HD Ann. IV x

10. Podarcis muralis LR BEND x x

11. Lacerta trilineata EN YULEND x HD Ann. IV x

12. Zootica vivipara EN x

13. Dinarolacerta mosorensis VU YUSEND x

14. Podarcis melisellensis VU YUSEND x HD Ann. IV x

15. Algiroides nigropunctatus VU BEND x HD Ann. IV x

16. Adriolacerta oxycephala VU YUSEND x

17. Pseudopodus apodus EN BEND x HD Ann. IV x

18. Natrix tessellate DD x HD Ann. IV x

19. Elaphe situla VU BSEND x HD Ann. II, IV x

20. Elaphe quatuorelineata VU BSEND x HD Ann. II, IV x

21. Platyceps najadum VU BEND x HD Ann. IV X 22. Testudo hermanii VU x HD Ann. II, IV x 23. Mauremys caspica EN x HD Ann. II, IV x Ap. II 24. Emys orbicularis VU x HD Ann. II, IV x 25. Vipera ammodytes VU BEND x HD Ann. IV Ap. I 26. Vipera ursinii EN BEND x HD Ann. II, IV

Table 8. List of important bird species for mapping

Species Off. Bonn EU CITES AEWA IUCN Global EU Status SPEC Gazette Convention Directives App. Annex status category RCG No. (79/409/EEC) I, II, III 2, 76/06 2008 Phalacrocorax RCG BONN EUBD AEWA NT Safe (S) SPEC 1 pygmeus Pelecanus RCG BONN EUBD AEWA VU Rare (R) SPEC 1 crispus Bubulcus ibis RCG AEWA Safe (S) Non-SPEC Plegadis RCG BONN EUBD AEWA Decreasing SPEC 3 falcinellus (D) Platalea RCG BONN EUBD CITES AEWA Rare (R) SPEC 2 leucorodia Cygnus olor RCG BONN AEWA Safe (S) Non- SPEC(e) Anas BONN AEWA Safe (S) Non- penelope SPEC(e)W Anas BONN AEWA Decreasing SPEC 3 querquedula (D) Aythya nyroca RCG BONN AEWA NT Vulnerable SPEC 1 (VU) Aythya BONN AEWA Decreasing SPEC 3 fuligula (D)

Haliaeetus RCG BONN EUBD CITES Rare (R) SPEC 1 albicilla Circus RCG BONN EUBD Decreasing SPEC 3 cyaneus (D) Accipiter RCG BONN EUBD Safe (S) Non-SPEC gentilis Buteo buteo RCG BONN Safe (S) Non-SPEC Aquila clanga RCG BONN EUBD VU Endangered SPEC 1 (EN) Aquila RCG BONN EUBD Rare (R) SPEC 3 chrysaetos Falco RCG BONN EUBD Vulnerable SPEC 3 biarmicus (VU) Falco cherrug RCG BONN EUBD Endangered Endangered SPEC 1 (EN) Tetrao RCG EUBD Safe (S) Non-SPEC urogallus Alectoris EUBD Decreasing SPEC 2 graeca (D) Coturnix BONN Decreasing SPEC 3 coturnix (D) Tetrax tetrax CITES NT Vulnerable SPEC 1 (VU) Rallus RCG AEWA Safe (S) Non-SPEC aquaticus Crex crex Decreasing SPEC 1 (D) Recurvirostra Safe (S) Non-SPEC avosetta Eudromias RCG EUBD AEWA Safe (S) Non-SPEC morinellus Numenius RCG AEWA Decreasing SPEC 2 arquata (D) Limosa RCG AEWA Vulnerable SPEC 2 limosa (VU) Tringa RCG AEWA Decreasing SPEC 2 totanus (D) Scolopax AEWA Decreasing SPEC 3 rusticola (D) Philomachus RCG EUBD AEWA Decreasing SPEC 2 pugnax (D) Larus minutus RCG EUBD AEWA Prorijedjena SPEC 3 (H) Larus RCG AEWA Safe (S) Non- ridibundus SPEC(e) Larus RCG AEWA Safe (S) Non- michahellis SPEC(e) Sterna RCG BONN EUBD AEWA Safe (S) Non-SPEC hirundo Chlidonias RCG EUBD AEWA Prorijedjena SPEC 3

14 hybrida (H) Chlidonias RCG BONN EUBD AEWA Prorijedjena SPEC 3 niger (H) Tyto alba RCG CITES Decreasing SPEC 3 (D) Athene RCG CITES Decreasing SPEC 3 noctua (D) Asio otus RCG CITES Safe (S) Non-SPEC Alcedo atthis RCG EUBD Prorijedjena SPEC 3 (H) Merops RCG BONN Prorijedjena SPEC 3 apiaster (H) Upupa epops RCG Decreasing SPEC 3 (D) Jynx torquilla RCG Decreasing SPEC 3 (D) Dendrocopus RCG EUBD Safe (S) Non-SPEC major Dedrocopus RCG EUBD Safe (S) Non- syriacus SPEC(e) Dendrocopus RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC minor Dryocopus RCG EUBD Safe (S) Non-SPEC martius Alauda RCG Prorijedjena SPEC 3 arvensis (H) Eremophila RCG Non-SPEC alpestris Hirundo RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC daurica Motacilla flava RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC Anthus RCG EUBD Decreasing SPEC 3 campestris (D) Anthus RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC spinoletta Lanius RCG Prorijedjena SPEC 3 collurio (H) Lanius RCG Decreasing SPEC 2 senator (D) Oriolus Safe (S) Non-SPEC oriolus Corvus corax RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC Sylvia RCG Safe (S) Non- cantillans SPEC(e) Turdus RCG Safe (S) Non- philomelos SPEC(e) Parus RCG Safe (S) Non- lugubris SPEC(e) Parus RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC montanus

Sitta europaea RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC Tichodroma RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC muraria Carduelis RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC carduelis Loxia RCG Safe (S) Non-SPEC curvirostra

Table 9. List of important mammal species for mapping

SPECIES 1 Rhinolohus blasii 2 Rhinolophus euryale 3 Miniopterus schreibersii 4 Myotis capaccinii 5 Nictalus leisleri 6 Myotis blythii 7 Plecotus macrobularis 8 Tadarida teniotis 9 Canis aureus 10 Canis lupus 11 Ursus arctos 12 Lutra lutra 13 Felis sivestris 14 Lynx lynx 15 Capreolus capreolus 16 Rupicapra rupicapra balcanica 17 Tursiops truncatus 18 Stenella coeruleoalba 19 Delphinus delphis 20 Sorex alpinus 21 Mus spisilegus adriaticus

Table 10. List of important moss species for mapping

HEPATICAE 1. Athalamia hyalina (Sommerf.) S. Hatt. 2. Leiocolea collaris (Nees) Schljakov 3. Leiocolea turbinata (Raddi) H. Buch 4. Lophozia ascendens (Warnst.) Schust. 5. Mannia triandra (Scop.) Grolle

6. Marsupella sphacelata (Gieseke ex Lindenb.) Dumort. 7. Riccia cavernosa Hoffm. 8. Riccia macrocarpa Levier 9. Riccia trabutiana Steph. 10. Scapania aequiloba (Schwägr.) Dumort.

MUSCI 11. Brachythecium geheebii Milde 12. Bryum neodamense Itzigs. 13. Buxbaumia viridis (Moug. ex Lam. et DC.) Brid. ex Moug. & Nestl. 14. Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus (Brid.) R.S.Chopra 15. Campyliadelphus elodes (Lindb.) Kanda 16. Dicranum viride (Sull. & Lesq.) Lindb. 17. Diplophyllum taxifolium (Wahlenb.) Dumort. 18. Encalypta microstoma Bals.-Criv. et De Not. 19. Ephemerum recurvifolium (Dicks.) Boulay 20. Ephemerum sessile (Bruch) Müll. Hal. 21. Grimmia anomala Hampe ex Schimp. 22. Grimmia caespiticia (Brid.) Jur. 23. Grimmia dissimulata E. Maier 24. Grimmia fuscolutea Hook. 25. Hamatocaulis vernicosus (Mitt.) Hedenäs 26. Homalia webbiana (Mont.) Schimp. 27. Hypnum fertile Sendtn. 28. Neckera pennata Hedw. 29. Orthotrichum patens Bruch ex Brid. 30. Paraleucobryum sauteri (Bruch & Schimp.) Loeske 31. Philonotis arnellii Husn. 32. Pseudoleskea radicosa (Mitt.) Macoun & Kindb. 33. Pseudoleskea saviana (De Not.) Latzel 34. Rhodobryum roseum (Hedw.) Limpr. 35. Schistidium helveticum (Schkuhr) Deguchi 36. Schistidium umbrosum (J.E.Zetterst.) H.H.Blom 37. Syntrichia handelii (Schiffn.) S. Agnew et Vondr. 38. Syntrichia princeps (De Not.) Mitt. 39. Timmia austriaca Hedw. 40. Trematodon ambiguus (Hedw.) Hornsch. 41. Trichostomum triumphans De Not. 42. Ulota crispa (Hedw.) Brid.

Table 11. List of important fungi species for mapping

SPECIES 1 Albatrellus pes-caprae (Pers. : Fr.) Pouzar (maglen) 2 Amanita caesarea (Scop. : Fr.) Pers. (blagva, knjeginja, jajača) 3 Amanita franchetii (Boud.) Fayod 4 Amanita solitaria (Bull. : Fr.) Mérat (ježasta muhara) 5 Amanita vittadinii (Moretti) Vittad. (kuštrava muhara) 6 Boletus aereus Bull. : Fr. (crni vrganj) 7 Boletus fechtneri Velen. (fechtnerov vrganj) 8 Boletus impolitus Fr. (pustenasti vrganj) 9 Boletus regius Krombh. (kraljevka) 10 Boletus rhodoxanthus (Krombh.) Kallenb. (žuta ruževača) 11 Boletus torosus Fr. 12 Cantharellus friesii Quél. (sitna lisičarka, frijesova lisičarka) 13 Geastrum coronatum Pers. : Pers. 14 Gomphidius maculatus Fr. 15 Gomphus clavatus (Pers. : Fr.) Gray (ljubičasta lisičica, grimizna lisičica) 16 Gyrodon lividus (Bull. : Fr.) Sacc. (žuti johovac) 17 Hygrocybe citrinovirens (J.E. Lange) Jul. Schäff. (zelenkastožuta vlažnica) 18 Hygrocybe intermedia (Pass.) Fayod (suva vlažnica) 19 Hygrocybe obrussea (Fr. : Fr.) Wünsche 20 Hygrocybe ovina (Bull. : Fr.) Kühner (crnosmeđa vlažnica) 21 Hygrocybe punicea (Fr. : Fr.) P. Kumm. (velika vlažnica) 22 Hygrocybe spadicea (Scop. : Fr.) P. Karst. (žuto smeđa vlažnica, klipasta vlažnica) 23 Hygrocybe subglobispora (P.D. Orton) M.M. Moser 24 Hymenochaete cruenta (Pers. : Fr.) Donk 25 Lactarius controversus Pers. : Fr. (topolova mliječnica) 26 Lactarius mairei Malençon 27 Lactarius musteus Fr. 28 Morchella rotunda (Pers.) Boud. 29 Onygena equina (Willd.) Pers. (rožna stapkoglavka) 30 Sarcodon joeides (Pass.) Bataille 31 Sarcosphaera coronaria (Jacq.) J. Schröt. (ljubičasta krunašica) 32 Sarcosphaera coronaria var. nivea (M.M. Moser) Péric. & Courtec. 33 Suillus sibiricus (Singer) Singer 34 Trametes suaveolens (L. : Fr.) Fr. 35 Tulostoma brumale Pers. : Pers. 36 Tulostoma fimbriatum Fr. 37 Volvariella bombycina (Schaeff. : Fr.) Singer (svilenkasta tobličarka) 38 Hygrocybe calyptriformis (Berk. & Broome) Fayod 39 Chalciporus amarellus (Quél.) Bataille

40 Chroogomphus helveticus (Singer) M.M.Moser 41 Suillus mediterraneensis (Jacquet. et J. Blum) Redeuilh 42 Lactarius lilacinus (Lasch : Fr.) Fr. 43 Suillus variegatus (Sw.) Kuntze 44 Tylopilus felleus (Bull.) P. Karst.

Our mapping and further analysis are based on 39 habitats type, 78 vascular plant species, 32 invertebrate species, 23 marine flora and fauna species, 7 type of marine habitats, 18 fish species, 26 amphibian and reptile species, 67 bird species, 21 mammal species, 42 moss species and 41 fungi species. In total our work is based on spatial distribution of 394 species and habitats types important for Montenegro.

1.2. Mapping of selected species and selected habitat types

Maps are produced in QUANTUM GIS (version 1.5.0.) software package. Each expert was responsible for mapping of selected species/habitats within Montenegro borders. Experts made separate layers for occurrence of each individual species or habitat types which were lately overlapped among specific groups (all 78 layers for 78 vascular plant species). By overlapping of individual layers we defined spatial centers of diversity for specific group in Montenegro. Specialists each specific group defined those areas, scaled it by marking (marks 1 – 5, mark 5 means most important) and specified species / habitats which are present in each specific diversity center.

In following part of this document they are all basic maps with all layers (all species or habitat types) related to each specific group.

Map 1. Spatial distribution of selected habitats types

Map 2. Spatial distribution of selected vascular plant species

Map 3. Spatial distribution of selected invertebrate species

Map 4. Spatial distribution of selected marine habitats and marine species

Map 5. Spatial distribution of selected fish species

Map 6. Spatial distribution of selected amphibian and reptile species

Map 7. Spatial distribution of selected bird species

Map 8. Spatial distribution of selected mammal species

Map 9. Spatial distribution of selected moss species

Map 10. Spatial distribution of selected fungi species

1.3. Maps of specific centers of diversity for each group

In this chapter we will give maps with specific centers of diversity for each group. Each expert within his group of organisms or habitats, made a suggestion for diversity centers which are accepted and mapped in QUANTUM GIS (version 1.5.0.) software package. Specialist additionally gave marks for each of suggested centers of diversity in scale 1-5, where 5 means highest importance while 1 means lowest importance. Those are relative marks and our specialists take in consideration suggested areas while giving marks. Other word speaking, mark 5 for some area means highest importance among suggested areas while mark 1 means lowest importance. For each of suggested diversity centers (areas) all important species or habitats are also listed in terms of explanation for given mark.

Map 11. Centers of diversity for habitats

Table 12. Marks and important habitat types for each center of habitat diversity

Number of diversity Important habitats Mark for specific diversity center center 1210 Annual vegetation of drift lines; 1310 Salicornia and other annuals colonising mud and sand 1410 Mediterranean salt meadows (Juncetalia maritimi); 1420 Mediterranean and thermo-Atlantic halophilous scrubs (Salicornetea fruticosi); 2110 Embryonic shifting dune; 2120 1. Velika Ulcinjska Shifting dunes along the shoreline with plaža with hinterland Ammophila arenaria (white dunes); 2190 5 and saltern Humide dune slack; 2220 Dunes with Euphorbia terracina; 2240 Brachypodietalia dune grasslands with annuals; 2270 Wooded dunes with Pinus pinea and/or Pinus pinaster; 3170 Mediterranean temporary ponds; 92A0 Salix alba and Populus alba galleries 3130 Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto- Nanojuncetea; 3140 Hard oligo- mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.; 3150 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion and Hydrocharition type vegetation; 5310 Laurus nobilis thickets; 6220 Pseudo-steppe 2. Skadar Lake 5 with grasses and annuals of the Thero- Brachypodietea; 62A0 East sub- Mediterranean dry grasslands- Scorzoneretalia villosae; 91E0 Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior- Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae; 92A0 Salix alba and Populus alba galleries ; 9250 Quercus trojana woods; 9260 Chestnut woods

6220 *Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea; 62A0 East sub-Mediterranean dry grasslands- Scorzoneretalia villosae; 8130 Western 3. Cijevna canyon Mediterranean and thermophilous scree; and part of 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with 4 Ćemovskog polje chasmophytic vegetation;91E0 * Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior- Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae; 9250 Quercus trojana woods; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6220 *Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero- Brachypodietea;62A0 East sub- Mediterranean dry grasslands- Scorzoneretalia villosae; 8120 Calcareous 4. Lovćen and calcshist screes of the montane to 5 alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8130 Western Mediterranean and thermophilous scree; 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous 5 Plavsko-Gusinjske grassland; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist Prokletije (Bjelič, screes of the montane to alpine levels 4 Trojan, Majakolata, (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous Karanfili) rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6150 Siliceous alpine and subalpine grassland; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6230 Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas and submountain areas in 6 South-east continental Europe; 8120 Calcareous and Prokletije calcshist screes of the montane to alpine 5 (Bogićevica, Starac) levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio-Piceetea)

3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.;6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes 7 Visitor and Zeletin with chasmophytic vegetation; 91E0 * 5 Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior- Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae; 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio-Piceetea); 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea 8 Komovi rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes 4 with chasmophytic vegetation;9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio-Piceetea); 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6230 Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas and submountain areas in continental Europe; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea 9 Hajla rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes 5 with chasmophytic vegetation; 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 91W0 Moesian beech forest; 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio- Piceetea); 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests

4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6150 Siliceous alpine and subalpine grassland; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6230 Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in 10 Bjelasica mountain areas and submountain areas in 5 continental Europe; 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 9110 Luzulo-Fagetum beech forests; 91W0 Moesian beech forest; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 7220 *Petrifying springs with tufa formation (Cratoneurion); 8120 11 Sinjajevina and Calcareous and calcshist screes of the part of Moračke montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea 4 planine rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation;91W0 Moesian beech forest; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests 3130 Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto- Nanojuncetea; 3140 Hard oligo- mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.; 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) ( * important orchid sites); 7220 *Petrifying 12 Durmitor springs with tufa formation 5 (Cratoneurion);8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation;91W0 Moesian beech forest; 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio- Piceetea); 9530 * (Sub-) Mediterranean pine forests with endemic black pines -* (Sub-)

3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.;4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and 13 Maglić, Bioč, subalpine calcareous grassland; 8120 4 Volujak Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the 14 Ljubišnja montane to alpine level (Vaccinio-Piceetea) 5

Map 12. Centers of diversity for vascular plants

Table 13. Marks and important vascular plant species for each center of diversity

Number of Important plant species Mark for specific diversity center diversity center Asperula baldacci; Centaurea incompta; Edraianthus wettsteinii ssp. wettsteinii; Narcissus angustifolius; Orchis provincialis; 1 Rumija Ramonda serbica; Tulipa grisebachiana; 5 Ophrys bertolonii; Rhamnus intermedius; Saxifraga federici-augustii Crepis bertiscea; Gymnospermium scipetarum; Ophrys bertolonii; Rhamnus 2 Sutorman intermedius; Himantoglossum caprinum; Ilex 5 aquifolium; Narcissus angustifolius; Orchis albanica; Tulipa grisebachiana Caldesia parnassifolia; Himantoglossum caprinum; Marsilea quadrifolia; Najas flexilis; Narcissus angustifolius; Orchis albanica; 3 Skadarsko jezero Orchis provincialis; Ramonda serbica; Trapa 5 natans; Utricularia vulgaris; Cymbalaria ebelii; Minuartia mesogitana ssp. Velenovsky Centaurea incompta; Centaurea glaberrima; Edraianthus wettsteinii ssp. lovcenicus; Narcissus angustifolius; Scilla litardierei; Tulipa grisebachiana; Berteroa gintlii; 4 Lovćen Gladiolus palustris;Leucanthemum 5 chloroticum; Ophrys bertolonii; Pulsatilla grandis; Rhamnus intermedius; Saxifraga federici-augustii; Scrophularia bosniaca; Taxus baccata Aquilegia dinarica; Centaurea incompta; Dianthus knapii; Gentiana lutea; Salvia 5 Orjen brachyodon; Scilla litardierei;Leucanthemum 5 chloroticum; Rhamnus intermedius Cypripedium calceolus; Gentiana lutea; Viola speciosa; Androsace komovensis; Arenaria halacsyii; Asperula doerfleri; Cerastium 6 Komovi dinaricum; Plantago reniformis; Saxifraga 5 federici-augusti; Silene macrantha; Taxus baccata; Valeriana bertiscea; Valeriana pancicii; Verbascum nicolai, Viola elegantula Gentiana lutea; Viola speciosa; Dianthus 7 Bjelasica nitidus ssp. lakusicii; Pulsatilla grandis; 5 Saxifraga federici-augustii; Viola elegantula

Himantoglossum caprinum; Ilex aquifolium; Sempervivum kosaninii; Viola speciosa; Asperula doerfleri; Campanula patula ssp. abietina; Cerastium dinaricum; Euphorbia montenegrina; Geum bulgaricum; 8 Prokletije Leucanthemum chloroticum; Lunaria 5 telekiana; Melampyrum doerfleri; Narthecium scardicum; Plantago reniformis; Saxifraga federici-augustii; Scrophularia bosniaca; Silene macrantha; Taxus baccata, Valeriana pancicii; Verbascum nicolai Allium phthioticum; Centaurea incompta; Eryngium alpinum; Gentiana lutea; Narcissus angustifolius; Viola speciosa; Cephalaria pastricensis; Daphne malyana; Euphorbia 9 Sinjajevina with montenegrina; Vicia montenegrina; Fritillaria Moračke planine montana; Geum bulgaricum; Leucanthemum 5 chloroticum; Plantago reniformis; Scrophularia bosniaca; Taxus baccata; Valeriana pancicii; Verbascum nicolai; Viola elegantula Cypripedium calceolus; Gentiana lutea, 10 Part of Tara Narcissus angustifolius; Verbascum canyon durmitoreum, Adenophora lilifolia; Daphne 5 malyana; Euphorbia pancicii

Eryngium alpinum; Gentiana lutea; Utricularia minor; Verbascum durmitoreum; Viola speciosa; Artemisia eriantha; Cerastium dinaricum; Euphorbia montenegrina; 11 Durmitor Euphorbia pancicii; Fritillaria montana; 5 Leucanthemum chloroticum; Plantago reniformis; Scrophularia bosniaca; Taxus baccata; Verbascum nicolai; Viola elegantula Arnica montana; Gentiana lutea; Verbascum durmitoreum; Daphne malyana; Euphorbia 12 Maglić, Bioč, pancicii; Knautia sarajavensis; Plantago Volujak reniformis; Scrophularia bosniaca; Valeriana 5 bertiscea; Verbascum nicolai; Viola elegantula

Map 13. Centers of diversity for marine species and marine habitats

Table 14. Marks and important marine habitat and species for each center of diversity

Number of Important marine species Mark for specific diversity center diversity center

Posidonia oceanica; Cymodocea nodosa; Zostera noltii; Zostera marina; Cystoseira spinosa (including C. adriatica); Axinella cannabina; Geodia cydonium; Tethya sp. plur.; Lithophaga lithophaga; Luria lurida (= 1 Cypraea lurida); Pinna nobilis; Hippocampus 5 ramulosus; Caretta caretta; Holothuria impatiens; Holothuria polii; Holothuria tubulosa; Savalia savalia (žuta); Leptogorgia sarmentosa

Posidonia oceanica; Cystoseira amentacea (including var. stricta and var. spicata); Cystoseira spinosa (including C. adriatica); Axinella damicornis; Centrostephanus 2 longispinus; Ophidiaster ophidianus; 4 Lithophaga lithophaga; Luria lurida (= Cypraea lurida); Mitra zonata; Pinna nobilis; Caretta caretta; Holothuria forskali; Holothuria polii; Holothuria tubulosa Posidonia oceanica; Cymodocea nodosa; Cystoseira amentacea (including var. stricta and var. spicata); Cystoseira spinosa (including C. adriatica); Axinella damicornis; 3 Ophidiaster ophidianus; Lithophaga 4 lithophaga; Pinna nobilis; Tonna galea; Hippocampus ramulosus; Caretta caretta; Holothuria polii; Holothuria tubulosa

Map 14. Centers of diversity for invertebrate species

Table 15. Marks and important invertebrate species for each center of diversity

Number of Mark for specific diversity Important invertebrate species diversity center center

1 Crematogaster montenigrinus 3 Papilio machaon; Iphiclides podalirius; Saga natolie; Vinodolia scutarica; Orientalina lacustris; 2 Tandonia reuleaxi; Limax wohlberedti; 4 Microcondylaea bonellii; Lindenia tetraphylla; Oryctes nasicornis; Luciola novaki; Iphiclides podalirius; Crematogaster auberti savinae; Plagiolepis xene; Crematogaster gordani; 3 Crematogaster montenigrinus; Riponnensia morini; 5 Chrysogaster mediteraneus; Cyphophthalmus martensi; Tandonia reuleaxi; Limax wohlberedti . Formica polyctena; Sintula roeweri; 4 Cyphophthalmus martensi. 3

Scarodytes savinensis; Papilio machaon ssp. giganteus; Parnessius apollo ssp. bosniensis; 5 Iphiclides podalirius; Formica rufa; Formica 4 polyctena; Cheilosia balkana

Map 15. Centers of diversity for fish species

Table 16. Marks and important fish species for each center of diversity

Number of Mark for specific diversity Important fish species diversity center center

Pachychilon pictum, Barbatula zetensis, Rutilus albus, Anguilla anguilla, Pelasgus minutus, Telestes montenigrinus, Scardinius knezevici, Alburnoides 1 ohridanus, Telestes montenigrinus, Acipenser 5 naccarii, Acipenser sturio, Salmo obtusyrostris, Salmo marmoratus, Salmo farioides, Alburnus alborella,Barbus rebeli

Salmo marmoratus, Salmo farioides, Alburnus 2 alborella,Barbus rebeli, Anguilla anguilla, Telestes 4 montenigrinus, Alburnoides ohridanus; Salmo labrax, Hucho hucho 3 4 Salmo labrax, Hucho hucho 4 3 Salmo labrax, Hucho hucho 5 3

Map 16. Centers of diversity for amphibian and reptile species

Table17. Marks and important amphibian and reptile species for each center of diversity

Number of diversity Mark for specific Important amphibian and reptile species center diversity center

Rana shqiperica; Podarcis melisellensis; Natrix 1 tessellata; Mauremys caspica; Emys orbicularis; 5 Platyceps najadum; Elaphe situla Bufo Bufo; Hyla arborea; Triturus carnifex; Lissotriton vulgaris; Adriolacerta oxycephala; Podarcis melisellensis; Lacerta trilineata; 2 Algiroides nigropunctatus , Natrix tessellate, Emys 5 orbicularis; Platyceps najadum; Elaphe situla, Elaphe quatuorlineata Lissotriton vulgaris; Triturus carnifex; Hyla arborea; Podarcis melisellensis; Algiroides 3 nigropunctatus; Adriolacerta oxycephala; 5 Mauremys caspica; Emys orbicularis; Platyceps najadum; Elaphe situla, Elaphe quatuorlineata Lissotriton vulgaris; Triturus macedonicus; Hyla arborea; Rana shqiperica Podarcis melisellensis; 4 Algiroides nigropunctatus; Adriolacerta 5 oxycephala; Mauremys caspica; Emys orbicularis

Salamandra atra; Mesotriton alpestris; Rana 5 graeca 3

Mesotriton alpestris; Rana graeca; Adriolacerta 6 oxycephala; Lacerta trilineata; Bombina scabra 4 Rana graeca; Lisotriton vulgaris; Bufo bufo;; 7 Podarcis melisellensis; Adriolacerta oxycephala, 4 Natrix tessellate Rana graeca; Mesotriton alpestris; Natrix 8 tessellata; Mauremys caspica 4

Rana graeca; Mesotriton alpestris; Lacerta 9 trilineata; Vipera ursinii; Dinarolacerta 5 mosorensis; Bufo bufo Mesotriton alpestris; Mauremys caspica; Natrix 10 tessellata 3

Map 17. Centers of diversity for bird species

Table18. Marks and important bird species for each center of diversity

Mark for Number of diversity Important bird species specific center diversity center Sterna hirundo; Ralus aquaticus; Plegadis fallcinelus;Larus ridibundus; Larus michahelis; Larus minutes; Haliaetus albicilla; Chlidonias hybrida; 2 – Skadar lake Chlidonias hibrida; Buteo buteo; Aythya fuligula; Ans 5 penelope; Aythya nyroca; Anas querquedila; Alcedo athis; Phalacrocorax p pygmeus; Phalacrocorax carbo; Pelecanus crispus; Bubulcus ibis. Phalacrocorax pygmeus; Pelecanus crispus; Platalea leucorodia;Anas penelope; Crex crex; Recurvirostra 1 - Ulcinj salts avosetta,; Numenius arquata; Limosa limosa ; 5 Philomachus pugnax; Larus minutus; Larus ridibundus; Larus michahellis; Aythya fuligula Tetrao urogallus; Coturnix coturnix;Tetrax tetrax; Eudromias morinellus; Accipiter gentilis; Buteo buteo; Falco biarmicus; Athene noctua; Asio otus;Jynx 4 - Durmitor torquilla; Dendrocopus major; Dedrocopus syriacus; 4 Dendrocopus minor; Dryocopus martius; Alauda arvensis; Hirundo daurica; Anthus campestris

Accipiter gentilis; Buteo buteo; Aquila clanga; Aquila chrysaetos; Falco biarmicus; Falco cherrug; Tetrao urogallus; Coturnix coturnix; Athene noctua; Asio otus; Upupa epops; Jynx torquilla; Dendrocopus major; 3 - Bjelasica Dedrocopus syriacus; Dendrocopus minor; 4 Dryocopus martius; Alauda arvensis; Eremophila alpestris; Hirundo daurica; Anthus campestris; Anthus spinoletta; Lanius collurio; Upupa epops; Jynx torquilla; Scolopax rusticola; Lanius collurio;

Map 18. Centers of diversity for mammal species

Table19. Marks and important mammal species for each center of diversity

Number of Mark for specific diversity Important mammal species diversity center center

Canis aureus; Miniopterus schreibersii; Myotis 1 blythii; Myotis capaccinii; Rhinolophus blasii; 5 Rhinolophus euryale; Delphinus delphis; Lutra lutra;Miniopterus schreibersii; Mus spicilegus adriaticus; Myotis 2 blythii; Rhinolophus blasii; Tadarida teniotis; 5 Tursiops turcatus; Miniopterus schreibersii; Myotis capaccinii; 3 Nictalus lasiopterus; Rhinolophus blasii; 5 Rhinolophus euryale;Lutra lutra Delphinus delphis; Stenella coeruleoalba; 4 Tadarida teniotis; Tursiops turcatus; 5 Canis lupus; Felis silvestris; Lutra lutra; Lynx lynx; 5 Rupicapra rupicapra; Sorex alpinus; Tadarida 5 teniotis; Ursus arctos; Canis lupus; Capreolus capreolus; Lynx lynx; 6 Rupicapra rupicapra; Ursus arctos; 5 Capreolus capreolus; Felis silvestris; Sorex 7 alpinus; Ursus arctos; 4 Rupicapra rupicapra; Tadarida teniotis; Ursus 8 arctos; 4 Canis lupus; Capreolus capreolus;Felis silvestris; Lutra lutra; Lynx lynx; Myotis blythii; Myotis 9 capaccinii;Nictalus lasiopterus; Plecotus 5 macrobularis; Rhinolophus euryale; Rupicapra rupicapra; Sorex alpinus; Ursus arctos; 10 Lutra lutra; Ursus arctos; 4

Map 19. Centers of diversity for moss species

Table20. Marks and important moss species for each center of diversity

Number of Mark for specific diversity Important moss species diversity center center

Athalamia hyalina; Leiocolea collaris; Leiocolea turbinata; Lophozia ascendens; Scapania aequiloba; Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; 1 Ephemerum recurvifolium; Ephemerum sessile; 5 Orthotrichum patens; Philonotis arnellii; Pseudoleskea saviana; Trematodon ambiguus; Trichostomum triumphans. Brachythecium geheebii; Buxbaumia viridis; Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; Campyliadelphus 2 elodes; Grimmia caespiticia; Paraleucobryum 4 sauteri; Pseudoleskea radicosa; Pseudoleskea saviana; Rhodobryum roseum; Timmia austriaca Marsupella sphacelata; Buxbaumia viridis; Diplophyllum taxifolium; Encalypta microstoma; 3 Grimmia anomala; Grimmia caespiticia; 3 Schistidium umbrosum; Timmia austriaca Leiocolea turbinata; Riccia cavernosa; 4 Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; Grimmia 3 fuscolutea; Neckera pennata; Ulota crispa Lophozia ascendens; Scapania aequiloba; Bryum neodamense; Buxbaumia viridis; Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; Campyliadelphus elodes; Dicranum viride; Hamatocaulis vernicosus; 5 Hypnum fertile; Orthotrichum patens; 5 Pseudoleskea saviana; Timmia austriaca; Ulota crispa

Map 20. Centers of diversity for fungi species

Table21. Marks and important fungi species for each center of diversity

Number of diversity Mark for specific Important fungi species center diversity center Albatrellus pes-caprae; Amanita solitaria; Boletus aereus; Boletus fechtneri; Boletus rhodoxanthus; Boletus torosus; Geastrum coronatum; Gomphidius maculatus; Gomphus 5 clavatus; Gyrodon lividus; Hygrocybe obrussea; Hygrocybe 5 ovina; Hygrocybe punicea; Hygrocybe subglobispora; Lactarius controversus; Lactarius musteus; Sarcosphaera coronaria; Trametes suaveolens; Chroogomphus helveticus; Lactarius lilacinus; Suillus variegatus Albatrellus pes-caprae; Amanita caesarea; Boletus impolitus; Boletus regius; Boletus rhodoxanthus; Gomphus 7 clavatus; Hygrocybe citrinovirens; Hygrocybe punicea; 5 Hymenochaete cruenta; Lactarius controversus; Volvariella bombycina; Sarcosphaera coronaria; Sarcosphaera coronaria var. nivea; Sarcodon joeides; Tylopilus felleus Amanita franchetii; Amanita solitaria; Boletus aereus; 3 Boletus fechtneri; Hygrocybe intermedia; Hygrocybe ovina; 5 Hygrocybe punicea; Sarcosphaera coronaria var. nivea; Chalciporus amarellus 4 Boletus aereus; Boletus regius; Cantharellus friesii; 3 Chalciporus amarellus; Lactarius lilacinus Amanita caesarea; Hygrocybe spadicea; Onygena equina; 2 Sarcosphaera coronaria; Suillus mediterraneensis; 4 Tulostoma brumale; Tulostoma fimbriatum 1 Amanita franchetii; Boletus impolitus; Lactarius mairei; 3 Amanita solitaria 8 Suillus sibiricus; Chroogomphus helveticus 4

9 Hygrocybe calyptriformis 4

10 Albatrellus pes-caprae; Amanita caesarea; Amanita 3 vittadinii

Gyrodon lividus; Hygrocybe citrinovirens; Hygrocybe 6 4 intermedia; Lactarius lilacinus

2. IDENTIFICATION OF BIDIVERSTY CENTERES IN MONTENGRO (KEY BIDIVERSTY AREAS, KBAs)

2.1. Overlapping of individual maps of diversity centers for each group of organisms/habitats

All individual specific maps related to most important diversity areas for each group of analyzed organisms are used for identification of biodiversity centers of richness or for Key Biodiversity Ares in Montenegro. We overlapped those maps (Maps 11-20) in order to find most important areas within Montenegro state borders. Regarding the fact that overlapping of those maps produces numerous areas of importance, we did additional analysis based on marks for each individual diversity center of particular group.

We also choose that each KBAs have to have at least three or more centers of group diversity in order to be candidate for KBAs. Additionally we take in consideration marks for those diversity areas given by each expert as well as the fact that plant species and habitats are the most important part of ecosystems and that without those two components speaking about biodiversity centers is pointless. Additionally, presence of big mammal species (bear, wolf, otter, lynx etc.) indicates god state of ecosystems in those areas and indicates presence of many other animal and fungi species that are perhaps not mapped yet. In following maps there are overlapping of individual diversity centers and defined KBAs presented. For marine ecosystem we decide to adopt areas that are produced during mapping and overlapping of marine species and habitats and to mark theme as KBAs. We decide for such solution regarding the fact that no terrestrial diversity centers will not overlap with marine areas of importance.

Map 21. Overlapping of each diversity group centers (without marine species and habitats)

Map 22. Overlapping of each diversity group centers (without marine species and habitats) in one color

Map 23. Overlapping of each diversity group centers (without marine species and habitats) and suggested KBAs

Map 24. KBAs (Key Biodiversity Areas) in Montengero

Based on all previous we defined 13 continental Key Biodiversity Areas and 3 marine Key Biodiversity Areas (one continental and one marine KBA are pulled in one area – Kotor / Tivat / Lovcen (Map 24.). All KBAs are consisting of four or more overlapped individual group diversity areas. Only KBA Maglić is consisting of three individual group diversity areas, habitats, vascular plant and mammals but our standing point is that regarding those group importance, this area should be marked as KBA. Absence of other species is most probably consequence of information lack regarding low level of field researching in this area.

In following tables they are shown all data related each KBA, type of group and important species that are present as well as marks for area (marks given by experts based on importance of specific individual area that is overlapped within KBA). In last row we give aggregate mark for KBA that indicate it importance in scale of Montenegro.

Table 22. KBA Orijen

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Vascular plant Aquilegia dinarica; Centaurea species incompta; Dianthus knapii; Gentiana lutea; Salvia brachyodon; Scilla 5 litardierei;Leucanthemum chloroticum; Rhamnus intermedius Moss species Athalamia hyalina; Leiocolea collaris; Leiocolea turbinata; Lophozia ascendens; Scapania aequiloba; Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; Orjen Ephemerum recurvifolium; 5 Ephemerum sessile; Orthotrichum patens; Philonotis arnellii; Pseudoleskea saviana; Trematodon ambiguus; Trichostomum triumphans. Fungi species Albatrellus pes-caprae; Amanita caesarea; Amanita vittadinii 3

Invertebrate Formica polyctena; Sintula roeweri; 3 species Cyphophthalmus martensi. AGGREGATE MARK 16

Table 23. KBA Kotor / Tivat / Lovćen

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Vascular plant Centaurea incompta; Centaurea species glaberrima; Edraianthus wettsteinii ssp. lovcenicus; Narcissus angustifolius; Scilla litardierei; Tulipa grisebachiana; Berteroa gintlii; Gladiolus palustris;Leucanthemum 5 chloroticum; Ophrys bertolonii; Pulsatilla grandis; Rhamnus intermedius; Saxifraga federici- augustii; Scrophularia bosniaca; Taxus baccata Habitats 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6220 *Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero- Brachypodietea; 62A0 East sub- Mediterranean dry grasslands- Scorzoneretalia villosae; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the 5 montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8130 Western Mediterranean and thermophilous Kotor / Tivat / scree; 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes Lovćen with chasmophytic vegetation; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests Amphibians and Lissotriton vulgaris; Triturus Reptile species macedonicus; Hyla arborea; Rana shqiperica Podarcis melisellensis; 5 Algiroides nigropunctatus; Adriolacerta oxycephala; Mauremys caspica; Emys orbicularis Invertebrate Oryctes nasicornis; Luciola novaki; species Iphiclides podalirius; Crematogaster auberti savinae; Plagiolepis xene; Crematogaster gordani; Crematogaster montenigrinus; 5 Riponnensia morini; Chrysogaster mediteraneus; Cyphophthalmus martensi; Tandonia reuleaxi; Limax wohlberedti Mammal species Delphinus delphis; Stenella coeruleoalba; Tadarida teniotis; 5 Tursiops turcatus Marine species Posidonia oceanica; Cymodocea 5 and marine nodosa; Zostera noltii; Zostera

habitats marina; Cystoseira spinosa (including C. adriatica); Axinella cannabina; Geodia cydonium; Tethya sp. plur.; Lithophaga lithophaga; Luria lurida (= Cypraea lurida); Pinna nobilis; Hippocampus ramulosus; Caretta caretta; Holothuria impatiens; Holothuria polii; Holothuria tubulosa; Savalia savalia (žuta); Leptogorgia sarmentosa AGGREGATE MARK 30

Table 24. KBA Ada Bojana / Šasko lake / Velika plaža

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 1210 Annual vegetation of drift lines; 1310 Salicornia and other annuals colonising mud and sand 1410 Mediterranean salt meadows (Juncetalia maritimi); 1420 Mediterranean and thermo-Atlantic halophilous scrubs (Salicornetea fruticosi); 2110 Embryonic shifting dune; 2120 Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria 5 (white dunes); 2190 Humide dune slack; 2220 Dunes with Euphorbia terracina; 2240 Brachypodietalia dune grasslands with annuals; 2270 Ada Bojana / Wooded dunes with Pinus pinea Šasko lake / and/or Pinus pinaster; 3170 Velika plaža Mediterranean temporary ponds; 92A0 Salix alba and Populus alba galleries Invertebrates Crematogaster montenigrinus 3 species Amphibian and Rana shqiperica; Podarcis Reptile species melisellensis; Natrix tessellata; Mauremys caspica; Emys orbicularis; 5 Platyceps najadum; Elaphe situla

Bird species Phalacrocorax pygmeus; Pelecanus crispus; Platalea leucorodia;Anas 5 penelope; Crex crex; Recurvirostra avosetta,; Numenius arquata; Limosa

limosa ; Philomachus pugnax; Larus minutus; Larus ridibundus; Larus michahellis; Aythya fuligula Mammal species Delphinus delphis; Lutra lutra;Miniopterus schreibersii; Mus spicilegus adriaticus; Myotis blythii; 5 Rhinolophus blasii; Tadarida teniotis; Tursiops turcatus; AGGREGATE MARK 23

Table 25. KBA Skadar Lake

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 3130 Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea; 3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.; 3150 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion and Hydrocharition type vegetation; 5310 Laurus nobilis thickets; 6220 Pseudo-steppe with 5 grasses and annuals of the Thero- Brachypodietea; 62A0 East sub- Mediterranean dry grasslands- Scorzoneretalia villosae; 91E0 Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior- Alno-Padion, Skadar Lake Alnion incanae, Salicion albae; 92A0 Salix alba and Populus alba galleries ; 9250 Quercus trojana woods; 9260 Chestnut woods Vascular plant Caldesia parnassifolia; species Himantoglossum caprinum; Marsilea quadrifolia; Najas flexilis; Narcissus angustifolius; Orchis albanica; Orchis 5 provincialis; Ramonda serbica; Trapa natans; Utricularia vulgaris; Cymbalaria ebelii; Minuartia mesogitana ssp. Velenovsky Invertebrates Papilio machaon; Iphiclides podalirius; species Saga natolie; Vinodolia scutarica; Orientalina lacustris; Tandonia 5 reuleaxi; Limax wohlberedti; Microcondylaea bonellii; Lindenia

tetraphylla; Fish species Pachychilon pictum, Barbatula zetensis, Rutilus albus, Anguilla anguilla, Pelasgus minutus, Telestes montenigrinus, Scardinius knezevici, Alburnoides ohridanus, Telestes 5 montenigrinus, Acipenser naccarii, Acipenser sturio, Salmo marmoratus, Salmo farioides, Alburnus alborella, Barbus rebeli Amphibian and Bufo Bufo; Hyla arborea; Triturus Reptile species carnifex; Lissotriton vulgaris; Adriolacerta oxycephala; Podarcis melisellensis; Lacerta trilineata; Hyla arborea ; Algiroides nigropunctatus , 5 Natrix tessellate, Emys orbicularis; Platyceps najadum; Elaphe situla, Elaphe quatuorlineata

Bird species Sterna hirundo; Ralus aquaticus; Plegadis fallcinelus;Larus ridibundus; Larus michahelis; Larus minutes; Haliaetus albicilla; Chlidonias hybrida; Chlidonias hibrida; Buteo 5 buteo; Aythya fuligula; Ans penelope; Aythya nyroca; Anas querquedila; Alcedo athis; Phalacrocorax p pygmeus; Phalacrocorax carbo; Pelecanus crispus; Bubulcus ibis. Mammal species Miniopterus schreibersii; Myotis capaccinii; Nictalus lasiopterus; 5 Rhinolophus blasii; Rhinolophus euryale; Lutra lutra AGGREGATE MARK 35

Table 26. KBA Ćemovsko polje / Cijevna

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 6220 *Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero- Brachypodietea; 62A0 East sub- Mediterranean dry grasslands- Scorzoneretalia villosae; 8130 Western Mediterranean and thermophilous scree; 8210 Calcareous 4 rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation;91E0 * Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior- Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae; 9250 Quercus trojana woods; Fish species Pachychilon pictum, Barbatula zetensis, Anguilla anguilla, Telestes montenigrinus, Alburnoides Ćemovsko polje / ohridanus, Telestes montenigrinus, 5 Cijevna Salmo marmoratus, Salmo farioides, Salmo obtusirostris, Alburnus alborella, Barbus rebeli Amphibian and Bufo bufo; Hyla arborea; Triturus Reptile species carnifex; Lissotriton vulgaris; Adriolacerta oxycephala; Podarcis melisellensis; Lacerta trilineata; 5 Algiroides nigropunctatus , Natrix tessellate,; Platyceps najadum; Elaphe situla, Elaphe quatuorlineata

Fungy species Amanita caesarea; Hygrocybe spadicea; Onygena equina; Sarcosphaera coronaria; Suillus 4 mediterraneensis; Tulostoma brumale; Tulostoma fimbriatum AGGREGATE MARK 18

Table 27. KBA Moračke planine

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 7220 *Petrifying springs with tufa formation (Cratoneurion); 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels 4 (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation;91W0 Moesian beech forest; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests Vascular plant Allium phthioticum; Centaurea species incompta; Eryngium alpinum; Gentiana lutea; Narcissus angustifolius; Viola speciosa; Cephalaria pastricensis; Daphne malyana; Euphorbia montenegrina; 5 Vicia montenegrina; Fritillaria montana; Geum bulgaricum; Moračke planine Leucanthemum chloroticum; Plantago reniformis; Scrophularia bosniaca; Taxus baccata; Valeriana pancicii; Verbascum nicolai; Viola elegantula Fish species Anguilla anguilla, Telestes montenigrinus, Telestes 5 montenigrinus, Salmo marmoratus, Salmo farioides, Barbus rebeli Amphibian and Rana graeca; Lisotriton vulgaris; Bufo Reptile species bufo;; Podarcis melisellensis; Adriolacerta oxycephala, Natrix 4 tessellate

Mammal species Rupicapra rupicapra; Tadarida 4 teniotis; Ursus arctos; Moss species Leiocolea turbinata; Riccia cavernosa; Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; 3 Grimmia fuscolutea; Neckera pennata; Ulota crispa AGGREGATE MARK 25

Table 28. KBA Komovi

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with 4 chasmophytic vegetation;9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio- Piceetea); 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests Vascular plant Cypripedium calceolus; Gentiana species lutea; Viola speciosa; Androsace Komovi komovensis; Arenaria halacsyii; Asperula doerfleri; Cerastium dinaricum; Plantago reniformis; 5 Saxifraga federici-augusti; Silene macrantha; Taxus baccata; Valeriana bertiscea; Valeriana pancicii; Verbascum nicolai, Viola elegantula Amphibian and Mesotriton alpestris; Rana graeca; Reptile species Adriolacerta oxycephala; Lacerta 4 trilineata; Bombina scabra Fungi species Boletus aereus; Boletus regius; Cantharellus friesii; Chalciporus 5 amarellus; Lactarius lilacinus

AGGREGATE MARK 18

Table 29. KBA Prokletije

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests; 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6150 Siliceous alpine and subalpine grassland; 6230 Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas and submountain 5 areas in continental Europe; 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio- Piceetea); 3140 Hard oligo- mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp; 91E0 * Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa Prokletije and Fraxinus excelsior- Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae;

Vascular plant Himantoglossum caprinum; Ilex species aquifolium; Sempervivum kosaninii; Viola speciosa; Asperula doerfleri; Campanula patula ssp. abietina; Cerastium dinaricum; Euphorbia montenegrina; Geum bulgaricum; Leucanthemum chloroticum; Lunaria 5 telekiana; Melampyrum doerfleri; Narthecium scardicum; Plantago reniformis; Saxifraga federici-augustii; Scrophularia bosniaca; Silene macrantha; Taxus baccata, Valeriana pancicii; Verbascum nicolai Fish species Salmo labrax, Hucho hucho 4

Amphibian and Salamandra atra; Mesotriton Reptile species alpestris; Rana graeca 3 Mammal species Canis lupus; Felis silvestris; Lutra 5 lutra; Lynx lynx; Rupicapra rupicapra;

Sorex alpinus; Tadarida teniotis; Ursus arctos; Moss species Brachythecium geheebii; Buxbaumia viridis;Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; Campyliadelphus elodes; Grimmia caespiticia; Paraleucobryum sauteri; 4 Pseudoleskea radicosa; Pseudoleskea saviana; Rhodobryum roseum; Timmia austriaca AGGREGATE MARK 26

Table 30. KBA Hajla

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6230 Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas and submountain areas in continental Europe; 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky 5 slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 91W0 Moesian beech forest; 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio- Hajla Piceetea); 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests

Mammal species Canis lupus; Capreolus capreolus; Lynx lynx; Rupicapra rupicapra; Ursus 5 arctos; Fungi species Albatrellus pes-caprae; Amanita solitaria; Boletus aereus; Boletus fechtneri; Boletus rhodoxanthus; Boletus torosus; Geastrum coronatum; Gomphidius maculatus; Gomphus clavatus; Gyrodon lividus; Hygrocybe obrussea; Hygrocybe 5 ovina; Hygrocybe punicea; Hygrocybe subglobispora; Lactarius controversus; Lactarius musteus; Sarcosphaera coronaria; Trametes suaveolens; Chroogomphus helveticus; Lactarius lilacinus; Suillus variegatus AGGREGATE MARK 20

Table 31. KBA Bjelasica

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6150 Siliceous alpine and subalpine grassland; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6230 Species- rich Nardus grasslands, on siliceous substrates in mountain areas and 5 submountain areas in continental Europe; 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; 9110 Luzulo-Fagetum beech forests; 91W0 Moesian beech forest; 95A0 High Oromediterranean pine forests Bjelasica Vascular plant Gentiana lutea; Viola speciosa; species Dianthus nitidus ssp. lakusicii; 5 Pulsatilla grandis; Saxifraga federici- augustii; Viola elegantula Fish species Salmo labrax, Hucho hucho 3

Amphibian and Rana graeca; Mesotriton alpestris; Reptile species Natrix tessellata; Mauremys caspica 4 Birds species Accipiter gentilis; Buteo buteo; Aquila clanga; Aquila chrysaetos; Falco 4 biarmicus; Falco cherrug; Tetrao urogallus; Coturnix coturnix; Athene

noctua; Asio otus; Upupa epops; Jynx torquilla; Dendrocopus major; Dedrocopus syriacus; Dendrocopus minor;Dryocopus martius; Alauda arvensis; Eremophila alpestris; Hirundo daurica; Anthus campestris; Anthus spinoletta; Lanius collurio; Upupa epops; Jynx torquilla; Scolopax rusticola; Lanius collurio;

Mammal species Capreolus capreolus; Felis silvestris; 4 Sorex alpinus; Ursus arctos; Moss species Marsupella sphacelata; Buxbaumia viridis; Diplophyllum taxifolium; Encalypta microstoma; Grimmia 3 anomala; Grimmia caespiticia; Schistidium umbrosum; Timmia austriaca AGGREGATE MARK 28

Table 32. KBA Durmitor

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 3130 Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea; 3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.; 4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco- Durmitor Brometalia) ( * important orchid 5 sites); 7220 *Petrifying springs with tufa formation (Cratoneurion);8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation;91W0 Moesian beech forest; 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio-Piceetea); 9530 * (Sub-) Mediterranean pine forests with

endemic black pines -* (Sub-) Vascular plant Eryngium alpinum; Gentiana lutea; species Utricularia minor; Verbascum durmitoreum; Viola speciosa; Artemisia eriantha; Cerastium dinaricum; Euphorbia montenegrina; 5 Euphorbia pancicii; Fritillaria montana;Leucanthemum chloroticum; Plantago reniformis; Scrophularia bosniaca; Taxus baccata; Verbascum nicolai; Viola elegantula Invertebrates Scarodytes savinensis; Papilio species machaon ssp. giganteus; Parnessius apollo ssp. bosniensis; 4 Iphiclides podalirius; Formica rufa; Formica polyctena; Cheilosia balkana Fish species Salmo labrax, Hucho hucho 3

Amphibian and Rana graeca; Mesotriton alpestris; Reptile species Lacerta trilineata; Vipera ursinii; Dinarolacerta mosorensis; Bufo bufo; 4 Mauremys caspica; Natrix tessellata

Bird species Tetrao urogallus; Coturnix coturnix;Tetrax tetrax; Eudromias morinellus; Accipiter gentilis; Buteo buteo; Falco biarmicus; Athene noctua; Asio otus;Jynx torquilla; 4 Dendrocopus major; Dedrocopus syriacus; Dendrocopus minor; Dryocopus martius; Alauda arvensis; Hirundo daurica; Anthus campestris

Moss species Lophozia ascendens; Scapania aequiloba; Bryum neodamense; Buxbaumia viridis; Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus; Campyliadelphus elodes; Dicranum viride; Hamatocaulis 5 vernicosus; Hypnum fertile; Orthotrichum patens; Pseudoleskea saviana; Timmia austriaca; Ulota crispa Fungi species Albatrellus pes-caprae; Amanita caesarea; Boletus impolitus; Boletus regius; Boletus rhodoxanthus; 5 Gomphus clavatus; Hygrocybe citrinovirens; Hygrocybe punicea;

Hymenochaete cruenta; Lactarius controversus; Volvariella bombycina; Sarcosphaera coronaria; Sarcosphaera coronaria var. nivea; Sarcodon joeides; Tylopilus felleus

Mammal species Canis lupus; Capreolus capreolus;Felis silvestris; Lutra lutra; Lynx lynx; Myotis blythii; Myotis capaccinii;Nictalus lasiopterus; 5 Plecotus macrobularis; Rhinolophus euryale; Rupicapra rupicapra; Sorex alpinus; Ursus arctos; AGGREGATE MARK 40

Table 33. Maglić

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.;4060 Alpine and boreal heaths; 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grassland; 8120 Calcareous and 5 calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii); 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation Vascular plant Arnica montana; Gentiana lutea; species Verbascum durmitoreum; Daphne Maglić malyana; Euphorbia pancicii; Knautia sarajavensis; Plantago reniformis; 5 Scrophularia bosniaca; Valeriana bertiscea; Verbascum nicolai; Viola elegantula Mammals species Canis lupus; Capreolus capreolus;Felis silvestris; Lutra lutra; Lynx lynx; Myotis blythii; Myotis capaccinii; Nictalus lasiopterus; Plecotus 5 macrobularis; Rhinolophus euryale; Rupicapra rupicapra; Sorex alpinus; Ursus arctos; AGGREGATE MARK 15

Table 34. KBA Ljubišnja

Key Biodiversity Individual Species/habitats present Mark for area Area diversity center Habitats 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine level (Vaccinio- 5 Piceetea) Invertebrates Scarodytes savinensis; Papilio species machaon ssp. giganteus; Parnessius apollo ssp. bosniensis; 5 Iphiclides podalirius; Formica rufa; Formica polyctena; Cheilosia balkana Fish species Salmo labrax, Hucho hucho 3 Ljubišnja Amphibian and Mesotriton alpestris; Mauremys 3 reptile species caspica; Natrix tessellata Mammal species Canis lupus; Capreolus capreolus;Felis silvestris; Lutra lutra; Lynx lynx; Myotis blythii; Myotis capaccinii;Nictalus lasiopterus; 5 Plecotus macrobularis; Rhinolophus euryale; Rupicapra rupicapra; Sorex alpinus; Ursus arctos; AGGREGATE MARK 21

Based on selected species and habitat types for mapping we can estimate relative importance of each KBA among those we defined as important. Most important parameter is number of groups of organisms which are present in KBA while aggregate mark number we used for fine leveling among KBAs with same number of group present within it.

Table 35. Relative ranking of KBA by biodiversity importance (KBAs are listed from most important to less important)

Number of group of Relative Aggregate mark KBA Name organisms / habitats Rank for KBA present in KBA 1. Durmitor 9 40 2. Skadar Lake 7 35 3. Bjelasica 7 28 4. Kotor / Tivat / Lovćen 6 30 5. Prokletije 6 26 6. Moračke planine 6 25 7. Ada Bojana / Šasko lake / Velika plaža 5 23 8. Ljubišnja 5 21

9. Hajla 4 20 10. Komovi 4 18 11. Ćemovsko polje / Cijevna 4 18 12. Orijen 4 16 13. Maglić 3 15

On the end of this chapter we wish to stress that ranking and marks are not absolute, this are relative marking which are based on our experts selection criteria and in such way selected species for mapping. Furthermore, results are dependent on level of knowledge in specific group, historical data related to field research of specific group in Montenegro territory, personal field experience, master and PhD thesis of experts and other colleagues biologist and some field research conveyed during project implementation. Knowing all previous it is for expectation that some KBAs which are on list relatively low, could be positioned much higher due to systematical biodiversty research in those areas that will be implemented in future.

2.2. Coridors among detected KBAs

In order to define corridors among detected KBAs first we had to analyze needs and type of movement of each biodiversity group we use for this identification methodology. First we divide all groups in mobile organisms and sedentary organisms.

In group of sedentary organisms we have vascular plants and habitats which they forms, moss and fungi. Those organisms haven’t possibility to move in one generation, they can move in few generation by dispersal of seed (vectored with wind, with animals that feed on fruits which contains seed in it, with flow of watercourses), by dispersal of parts of their body – adventive dispersal or by dispersal of spore (vectored with wind, with watercourses, and with animals). However they move from one place to another trough generations, they are limited by ecological factors and they can spread their areas of dispersal only trough vary same or similar territories in ecological sense. Other word speaking, majority of plants, moos and fungi species can move through areas that have similar ecological condition in terms of climate, humidity, temperature and soil composition. Of course that they are so-called cosmopolite species which can grows in various ecological conditions but such species haven’t be in focus of this analyze. Therefore in construction of corridors we paid attention on similar climate region, river valleys and canyons that connects individual KBAs.

In group of mobile organisms they are all animal species. But among theme there are some which are highly mobile and other which are less mobile. In highly mobile organisms we have birds, mammals, fish and reptiles while in group of less mobile organisms we have amphibians and most of invertebrates. Nevertheless, among those two groups there are some specificities of each group in terms of their movement capability.

For instance, among highly mobile organisms fish are strictly restricted to watercourses and their movement is restricted trough fresh-water ecosystems. Birds as highly mobile organisms often chose

73 river vales and canyons for their migrations regarding to ascendant hot air that goes up in such regions and which birds use for fly (in such way they spare energy by using of energy of hotter air for fly and keeping theme in air on higher altitude). Of course that they are capable to fly over high mountain peaks saddles but they chose easer way in every possible situation. This doesn’t refer to migratory birds that fly over Montenegro territory on their migration routes and that fly on high altitude (5 000 m or more) but many of them also use Montenegro territory as a resting and feeding areas on their route (Skadar and Šasko lake). After feeding and resting they are forced to use ascent air movement above river valleys and canyons for reaching of altitudes on their migrations routes. Mammals, especially big ones, are capable for overcome high altitudes and long distances if they are forced to. But they, as all other organism, choose the easiest route for migration and if it is possible along same or similar ecosystems. Such corridors are most often placed along river valleys and canyons on slopes of surrounding mountains and hills. Reptiles are also highly mobile and can change their living environment but they are less effective than mammals.

Invertebrates due to their small size are placed in group of low mobile organisms but due to their huge variance and number of species there are many of them which can shift their living are easy. No matter on movement capability they migrate along similar ecosystems and climate conditions. This specially refer to water invertebrates that are, similar to fish, strictly bound to water ecosystems (either they had water larval stage or their adult stage lives in fresh water environment). Amphibians are bound to water or humid ecosystems. All of them have larval stage that demand fresh water while some have adult stages that lives in surrounding ecosystems. Other word speaking they are bounded to water or humid ecosystems due to their intolerance to drought condition. Regarding those facts their migrations occurs or along watercourses (mainly larval stage dispersal) or along surrounding ecosystems (adult stage dispersal).

In following map we show corridors that we defined based on KBAs and previous analysis of dispersal models of various groups of organisms. In concrete situation of identified KBAs we decide to mark two corridors among theme. One is Corridor 1 with northwest-southeast direction that connect majority of KBAs on north which are more-less in similar ecological conditions/climate and along Tara and Lim rivers valleys. Second corridor have north-south direction and it is placed in Mediterranean, sub-Mediterranean and changed Mediterranean climate along river Morača valey/canyon, Skadar Lake basin and Bojana river valley. This corridor connect central and southern KBAs in Montenegro.

Map 25. Map of KBAs and corridors

3. CLIMATE CHANGING AND REFLECTION ON DETECTED KBAs

For prediction of possible impact of climate changes on KBAs first we have to define those changes in Montenegro. As this project is not dedicated to development of models for future climate change we will use current studies that refers to this area (Mediterranean) which predict possible scenario of climate change. For this purpose we will use Impact of climate change on marine and coastal biodiversity in the Mediterranean Sea (UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA, 2010). Predicted changing in temperature and humidity we will apply on our KBAs system in order to define impacts on it (impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity components)

3.1. Climate changing (temperature and precipitation)

Climate change and its effects on the marine and littoral environments are already perceptible. The Mediterranean shores have been classified as hot spots in the last IPCC report. The models associated with the scenario A1B predict an average increase in annual temperatures of 2.2 to 5.1 °C by the end of the century, which is higher than the average figure expected for the planet. There is an estimated 50 % probability of warming between 3 and 4 °C taking place (GIEC, 2007).

The increase would have been greater in the hinterland rather than along the coast, sea or in the islands. It would have been greater in the summer (2.7 to 6.5 °C) than in the winter (1.7 to 4.6 °C). There would have been more numerous, longer and more intense heat waves, with frequent extremely hot days with all the ensuing repercussions on human health and risks of fire (UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA, 2010).

The projected figures forecast less annual rainfall with a decrease of 4 to 27 %. This decrease would be more noticeable in the summer than in the winter. North Africa would be particularly affected by this drought which has also been noted in other parts of the Mediterranean basin. Periods of drought would be more frequent, longer and more intense. The distribution of precipitation would be modified with intense rainfall in the winter whereas the other seasons would be much drier. Torrential rains would also be more frequent (UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA, 2010).

Table 36. Expected variations of temperatures, precipitations and extreme events. Differences are calculated between 1980-1999 and 2080-2099 (scenario A1B on the basis of results of 21 global climatic models), Source: 4th IPCC report

Temperatures Precipitations Frequency of extreme events (%) Season variations (C°) variations (%) Min. Max. Min. Max. Hot Humid Dry Winter 1.7 4.6 -16 6 93 3 12 Spring 2.0 4.5 -24 -2 98 1 31 Summer 2.7 6.5 -53 -3 100 1 42 Autumn 2.3 5.2 -29 -2 100 1 21 Annual 2.2 5.1 -27 -4 100 0 46

Rainfall models converge towards forecasting more periods of drought with a lesser number of days with precipitation and there would be more and longer periods without rain. Extreme events will become more frequent with more frequent and intense flooding. As for storm waves and flooding, the results of the models are still preliminary but there should be a lesser number of depressions and weaker winds so that these risks should be mitigated even if a nuance should be introduced into this assessment on a local level. There is little probability of real tropical cyclones developing in the Mediterranean in the 21st century. Wind shear at altitude and the low maritime extension should inhibit their development (UNEP/MAP-Plan Bleu, 2009).

3.2. Sea level changing

It is still difficult to forecast the increase in sea level on a regional level especially in the Mediterranean basin. It could be 23 to 47 cm by the end of the 21st century according to IPCC on the basis of the 2007 projections which today are considered as being rather optimistic. Numerous Mediterranean regions would thus run a huge risk of submersion and erosion, and the extreme cases of Venice, Kerkennah archipelago in Tunisia, Alexandria and the Nile delta in Egypt would be cited as examples (UNEP-MAP- RAC/SPA, 2010).

The consequences to be apprehended are as follows (UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA, 2010):

• Worse submersions on low-lying coastlines especially delta areas, littorals with lagoons, marsh lands and some islands:

• Accelerated erosion of the cliffs and beaches;

• Greater salinity in the estuaries;

• Reduction in volume of fresh water aquifers.

This increase however is not at all homogeneous and satellite monitoring through the Topex/Poseidon program on the variations of the Mediterranean sea level between January 1993 and June 2006 has shown a raised Mediterranean sea level especially in the eastern basin (UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA, 2010).

3.3. Extrapolation of foreseen climate changing data on KBAs in Montenegro

In order to define possible impacts and to identify those KBAs which are most vulnerable regarding foreseen climate change scenario we will show KBAs overlapped with map of climatic zones and with map of isohyets (precipitation). Doing so we will be in position to perceive identified KBAs within climate changing perspective.

Map 26. KBAs and climatic zones in Montenegro

Map 26. KBAs and precipitation zones in Montenegro (isohyets)

On previous two maps two marine KBAs are not shown regarding fact that changing of temperature and precipitation on continental part of Montenegro will not affect theme. They will be discussed in part of this chapter related to prediction of sea level raising.

Temperature changing impacts – as we noticed in previous part of this chapter it for expectation that by the end of this century temperature will rise in range of 2.2 – 5.1 C0 on annual level. From ecological conditions point of view, more dramatic is spring and especially summer average temperature raising (Table 36.). Such scenario dominantly will affect KBAs that are in hot Mediterranean, Sub-Mediterranean and changed-Mediterranean climatic zones (Map 25.). Of course that such impact will be negative and new ecological condition will favor plants that have high resistance on high temperatures during spring and summer part of the year. Such changing of ecological factor (temperature) will be driving force for changing of ecosystems types which will dramatically affect all detected species in such KBAs (changing of plants species associations will change ecosystem considering that plants are main builders of all land ecosystems). Less negative impact will affect terrestrial insects and reptiles which during their evolutions developed high temperature defending mechanism. But, although they will not be impacted directly, those groups will be negatively affected indirectly through ecosystem changing, regarding ecosystem food-web disorder. Less dramatic impact of temperature raising will hit KBAs which are in continental, modified continental and mountain climate regions. It is for expectation that in those mostly mountainous regions raising of temperature will be less expressed. Plants species that are essential constituents of ecosystems in mountain regions are adapted to rough temperature conditions which underestimate extremely low winter temperature and relatively high summer temperature (high but significantly lower than in central and southern part of MNE during summer). In such conditions those plants are adapted to significantly shorter period of vegetation and raising of temperature for 1-2 C0 averagely on yearly level could even have positive impact on theme because prolonging of that period (if humidity during period of vegetation is on relatively same level like it is now). Consequently, if such scenario does not negatively impact on plants, the ecosystems will resists together with all other constituents in it. Considering dominantly aquatic organisms, submerged plants, fish and aquatic invertebrates, raising of temperature will not have dramatic negative impact on theme regarding physical characteristics of water. Namely, water is much more stable environment in sense of temperature than surrounding air and soil (due to high temperature capacity). Raising of average air temperature will not significantly change average temperature of water bodies (watercourses and lakes) and organisms that inhabit those ecosystems will not be significantly affected by such scenario.

Precipitation changing impacts – as it is already stressed it is for expectation that by the end of this century amount of precipitation will drop for interval of 4-27 % on yearly level (Table 36.). Furthermore, decreasing of precipitation will be particularly expressed during humid part of the year (spring and autumn) and during dray part of the year (summer) (Table 36.). In circumstances of climates that are present in Montenegro this could have dramatically negative impact on identified KBAs. This particularly reference on KBAs that are in Mediterranean, Sub-Mediterranean and changed- Mediterranean climatic zones. Namely, those climatic zones are characterized by high level of precipitation during early spring and late autumn, with relatively low level of precipitation during winter

80 and with extremely low level of precipitation during summer. Such scenario, decreasing level of precipitation in particular parts of the year, will have extremely negative effect on KBAs in this zone (Map 26.). In combination with scenario of temperature raising all ecosystems in those KBAs will be faced with dramatically changed ecological factors. Such changing will favorite xerophyte plant species that are resistant on extreme drought and high temperature what will change those ecosystems in their sense. By changing of essential characteristic of ecosystems all original constituents will also be negatively impacted. In terms of dominantly aquatic organisms, submerged plants, fish, aquatic invertebrates and aquatic ecosystems, decreasing of precipitation will have extremely negative impact on it. This especially refers to wormer period of year cycle, second part of spring, whole summer and first half of autumn. In this period of year water level is low and it is for expectation that it will be even lower, which is most dramatic negative impact for such ecosystems and their constituents. Regarding to KBAs which are in continental, modified continental and mountain climate regions of Montenegro, the ecosystems in it will also undergo negative impact, but in smaller range. Plants as main constituents of ecosystems in those KBAs are more or less adapted to lover level of precipitation on yearly level comparing to ones in central and southern parts (Map 26.). But this doesn’t mean that decreasing of precipitation will not have negative effect on it. It is for expectation that in mountain regions this will be less expressed and that we can expect moving of present ecosystems on higher altitudes. This is especially for expectation if we consider additional temperature rising. Such movement, as a consequence, will have shrinking of those ecosystems and reducing distributions areal of other ecosystems constituents they lives in them. Dramatically negative effect we can expect on glacial lakes ecosystems and on all organisms which depend on it.

Sea level rising effect – by prediction of climate changing it is for expectation that sea level will rise 23 to 47 cm in vertical level. Such event will have some effect on marine KBAs, but it will not have any catastrophic consequences. Raising of sea level will mostly affect upper steps of littoral system while other part of marine ecosystem will not be affected. This particularly refers on medio-littoral and supra- littoral steps which are in contact zones of marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Those two zones will become constantly covered with water and organisms that are adopted to live in this contact zones will be forced to move up following the sea level. Furthermore, estuary zones will also undergo negative effects by rising of salinity of this zone water. This situation will cause upstream retreat of species that are less tolerant on salts concentration while majority of estuary organisms are adapted to salt content in water and will not have extreme problems.

Sea level rising will dramatically affect lowland parts in sea hinterland and rising of sea level will have completely catastrophic consequences on Ada Bojana / Šasko lake / Velika plaza KBA regarding sea flooding. We can expect that, if this scenario becomes real, majority of this are will be under sea level and that Šasko lake will become salty lake and loose present ecosystem in it.

3.4. KBAs that will be negatively affected by Climate Change Scenario

Following KBA will be extremely negatively affected if scenarios of climate change suggested by UNEP- MAP-RAC/SPA (2010) become real:

- Ada Bojana / Šasko lake / Velika plaza

- Kotor / Tivat / Lovćen

- Orijen

- Skadar Lake

- Ćemovsko polje / Cijevna

- Moračke planine

4. CONFLICTS AMONG DETECTED KBAs, HUMAN ACTIVITIES AND DEVELOPMENTAL NEEDS

The function of this chapter is to identify the characterization of main pressures on landscape and on biodiversity in Montenegro, which in theory are: urbanization, agriculture intensification and encroachment, forestry, infrastructure development, energy investment. This will further serve to give directions for recommendations on a comprehensive long-term implementation strategy for the PAS in Montenegro and revalidation of short and long term spatial targets of the protected area system.

Main part of the work will be based on analyzing Spatial Plan of the Republic of Montenegro till 2020, in relation to this study’s identified biodiversity centers.

The result of this work will provide an overview to: conflicts between different sectorial requirements which will have to be balanced and solved in accordance with the defined general principles and objectives of the spatial development; and negligence of particular sector proposals for uses of locations and areas to the principles and objectives of sustainable development, all in light of newly identified biodiversity centers and corridors, recognized within this study.

Further work on the actualization of red lists and the inventory of the bio-diversity, as well as the land use, have to be completed and institutionalized for the better integral planning and management processes.

4.1.Introduction

Nature protection and biodiversity conservation in Montenegro in the last couple of years are under frequent changes, because country was, and still is, in an emerging economic and social transition. These have been setting up different socio-economic scenarios in the south, central and northern region of Montenegro. Yet, development has brought significant pressures on biodiversity in general, including: increased urbanization – mainly in the narrow strip along the coast, on the central plain and around the systems of natural lakes; increase in illegal construction and development in and around protected areas and along much of the coastal area and around mountain resorts; outflow and swamp pollution as a result of intense agricultural activities; illegal deforestation, illegal removal of river pebbles, illegal fishing and other illegal use of natural resources. The most significant pressures include the direct use of natural resources, intense and unbalanced development of tourism and urbanization, conversion of some habitats into semi-natural and artificial land, and wastewater and solid waste pollution. The cumulative effect of the above threats to biological diversity is the loss of rare or endangered habitats and their associated (often endemic) species, particularly on the coast, and a reduction in the functionality and stability of natural ecosystems, particularly of forest and water ecosystems. Results from the National State on Environment Reports that are annually adopted by the Government indicate that water ecosystems and forests, then urban and agricultural areas are under the greatest negative impacts.

Nevertheless, there are still many challenges in front of Montenegro for the usage of resources for development purposes such as, water supply and disposal infrastructure, transport, road infrastructure, energy, etc. This mainly within the main strategic orientations for development, which are tourism and energy.

Despite being exposed to numerous pressures, biodiversity and other natural and landscape values in Montenegro are immense. As the country is declaring sustainable development as the norm, certain improvements have been made in the areas of plans and legislations. However, institutional framework, implementation and enforcement of regulations, are still lagging behind. Obvious lack of data and real time information on species, habitats, changes of ecosystems and their causes are stumbling blocks of planning and decision making processes. Knowledge on biodiversity is not systematic, and is scattered throughout the expert and scientific literature; thus, there are insufficient scientific inventories of numerous taxonomic groups. Monitoring of the state of biodiversity is not sufficient and does not provide the necessary level of information for more reasonable use of natural resources and safeguard of environment. Land use maps are not developed and red lists are still in the future on the process of prioritizing in this area. Additionally, no reliable and robust bases for the development of protected or planned protected areas have existed, which would provide clear guidelines for the particular areas. Having said this, the old plans and data for system of protection areas, and policies on the biodiversity safeguard should be revalidated, as to relay on the actual status and trends of biodiversity and development what would further include information on ecosystem services, provisions for the ecological and social carrying capacity, particularly bearing in mind the requests of sector development. Thus, as the basics, aiming integration of biodiversity findings into sectorial policies, the synchronized overview and evaluation of the important protection statuses and tendencies needs to be done both by experts and policy makers. For the measures to be concluded on, and priorities set up, this and further synchronized researches, need to be assessed in the systematic and organized manner, taking into account national and international policies and programme, such as Emerald and NATURA network, IPA, IBA, IFA, different national and international corridors agreements, (such as Dinaric ark), international conventions, etc. This will set up strong targets for conservation and directions for development. It will contribute to exact location of the threats to the most vulnerable and threatened examples of biodiversity and enforcement of the measures for the improvements in this field. On the opposite, the result of insufficient research and lack of a more complex system of monitoring of biodiversity will bring more inadequate planning and prolong the process of biodiversity loss.

This study in total, therefore, is trying to give the contribution to the estimate of the biodiversity and consequently contributes in identifying further necessary and immediate requirements for research, measures and plans to be set forward as part of the biodiversity strategy and action plans and protected area system documents and processes.

The outcomes of the study recognized 15 biodiversity hotspot areas (KBAs), some of which overlaps with the current and planned protection areas, and some of which are opening possibilities for new discussions on expanding and prioritizing areas of environmental importance.

4.2. Forest

Apart from water resources, which are already in the focus of many international and national protection statuses and measures, existing or to be established, one of the priority areas for interventions, already notified in several documents, needing immediate intervention, is in the sector of forestry. This emphasize herewith in is given also because of the enormous pressure this sector is suffering from. Reliable and up-to-date data on forest habitats are the precondition for the safeguard of the vast number of species vulnerable to forest degradations, fragmentations, and disturbances.

Forest habitats/forest ecosystems: Forest biodiversity suffered heavily in Montenegro. After World War II there was a period of ‘industrialization’ of forestry, when the highest-quality timber was logged and almost all of the most valuable forest complexes were destroyed. Unfortunately, there are no reliable data on changes in the distribution or coverage of different forest types in Montenegro over the last 50 years, but some data do exist on timber volumes extracted.

Problems having negative impacts on the forests in Montenegro are the following:

- Forest ecosystems are not managed in an integrated manner (hunting, fishing, tourism; forest products not made of wood – medicinal herbs and similar; development of agroforestry);

- Means for the exploitation of forests are old and inappropriate for working conditions and needs, while the majority of works are performed by persons without necessary qualifications;

- Weak or inadequate openness of the forests;

- High quality species are not being used for regeneration of forests;

- Inadequate management of protecting zones;

- Inadequate fire protection system and man-maid fires escalations.

Special problem for management is lack of reliable and up-to-date data on forest resources i.e. non- existence of national inventory of forests. Monitoring system of the health status of the forests has not been established either.

In the aim of improvement of management and obtaining of the certificate on sustainable forestry, priority measures are enacting National forestry policy of Montenegro and relevant legislation, national inventory of forests, introduction of the geographical information system, improvement of planning, establishing reliable monitoring system and control of implementation of plans and managing in forestry and hunting.

4.3. Protected areas system

Program for protection, with the revision of existing and proposed territories, and preparedness of future protected areas to be set forward in the process and documents, should be prepared and included in the spatial planning documents. Although the existing network of protected areas in nature comprises protected areas that are recognizable biodiversity’s centers, their strengthening as well as proclaiming other new protected areas in nature are necessary.

Expanding of the existing protected natural areas with new areas will need to take into account socioeconomic consequences and related to that, the protection of acquired rights of local population in those areas. Establishing new protected areas in nature will not jeopardize development opportunities of the area, but it will cause relevant limitations with the aim to achieve sustainable development in those zones. During the phase of search for best options for the management for new protected areas, the advantage should be given to those management models that will gather and connect all stakeholders (a cooperative model - with clearly shared responsibilities and rights). Such management models will provide a participative and transparent approach in preparation, development and implementation of management plans for protected areas.

Existing legal and institutional framework for protected areas does not provide sufficient level of the efficiency regarding the protected areas; neither has it given good framework for establishment of the new ones. Some recent interventions have been making certain improvements in the fields of legislation. Besides the weak efficiency and insufficient enforcement of domestic legal provisions in this area, there are numerous obligations from international contracts (conventions and protocols) which also wait for appropriate solutions in national regulations as well as in better institutional organization.

The indicators of problems existing in protected areas are:

- Proclamation of only one additional protected area (NP Prokletije) since 1983.

- Decrease of the size of protected area (due to unplanned/illegal urbanizations).

- Increase in conflicts with local population, and strong opposition to proclamation of new protected areas or expanding borders of existing ones.

- Negative migrations from protected areas.

- Increase in illegal activities and unsustainable use of the resources.

Some of the management problems may be systematized as follows:

- The environmental administration system in Montenegro is extremely under resourced considering the extent of new environmental legislation and present legislative and institutional framework and cannot guarantee that all nature conservation obligations are properly met.

- Substantial weaknesses in management of the national parks, and of establishment of other protection categories exist. All internationally established protected areas lack management bodies and management plans.

- Systematized data and monitoring system of environmental parameters, biodiversity, and land use, which does not exist.

Conservation issues needs to be looked into trough components of socio economic factors. Example of the negative impact of these on the ecosystem services is given below.

High unemployment is structural and long-term. Around, 30% of the population is classed as economically vulnerable. A significantly ageing population structure and the number of vulnerable people have also increased considerably. Also Montenegro is one of the most unequal countries in the Balkans, and the income gap is widening. Migration of population from the northern to the southern region, especially to central and coastal regions, is evident, as well as form the rural to urban centres. Increasing real estate prices prompts further unplanned building, and reduces the capacity of many to afford to buy their own homes. A large persistent grey economy and institutional corruption is evident.

These negative demographic changes affect traditional forms of the utilization of natural resources as well as traditional life style, especially in the rural, protected and planned to be protected areas. Unfavorable economic conditions caused increase of the volume of direct exploitation of biological resources. Volume of direct exploitation of biological resources is depending on their accessibility while unequal distribution of the benefits arisen from their exploitation is causing local population feel dissatisfied.

As to set up the corresponding management, rural areas, future and existing protected areas, needs to be assessed trough several activity levels and overlapped with socioeconomic assessment: vicinity of densely urbanized places or in the vicinity of larger towns, tourism areas; mixed activities, areas (which still depend on agriculture but with noticeable development of other activities, for instance tourism, industry and services); primarily agricultural rural areas; hardly accessible rural areas in the hilly and mountainous areas, where forestry and extensive cattle breeding are typical activities.

This could provide planers and decision makers with scenarios out of which concrete measures and policies can be identified, carrying capacities and intensity of activities, as to reduce possibilities of negative/ad hock development and management problems.

4.4. Biodiversity hotspot centers (KBAs)

Direct relations between changes in biodiversity and human pressures are poorly investigated in Montenegro, so far. Most of these efforts were given to consequences of pollution from industry to fish and other water organism and then to human health, as it was case of Aluminum industry Podgorica (KAP) pollution consequences directly to humans in vicinity of KAP and indirectly through fish population in Skadar Lake and Morača River as recipients of pollution from KAP.

In this respect, following would need to be assessed in deep and on the each site:

- Uncontrolled urbanization and tourism development of natural habitats with associated infrastructure development;

- Changes in land use practices, particularly in relation to agriculture and forestry;

- Unsustainable and illegal use of natural resources (including illegal hunting, overharvesting etc);

- Water, soil and air pollution from industrial and agricultural pollutants and municipal wastes;

- Introduction of alien, invasive species is poorly investigated threat, so far, but its higher importance among threats to biodiversity could be expected soon.

- Impact of climate change, especially the effects of hot and dry periods on forest habitats which need to be the focus of more attention.

Also, different ecosystems are endangered to different extents depending not just on the on the intensity of anthropogenic factors, but on the vulnerability of the habitats and species, too, thus the correlation is necessary to be made.

Map 27. Overlapping KBAs map with map of plan of sustainable spatial development until 2020

Map 28. Overlapping KBAs map with map of mineral resources

Ljubisnja

At the top of ecological issues in Montenegro are high pollutions of environment along Ćehotina valley. Sharp conflicts exist between industrial development , forestry and mining on one side, opposing to the agriculture and requests for environmental protection on the other. There is also conflict between industrial development, mining and energy sector and potentials for development of tourism and recreational functions.

Municipality Pljevlja main development area is industry. As the limitation of resources is evident and extractive industries are diminishing the strategic directions are moving toward more sustainable areas of tourism and agriculture as alternative livelihoods. However, municipality is facing permanent and constant migrations from the area.

High value biodiversity hot spot is identified in the upper north part of the proposed Regional Park Ljubisnja, which set up the basis for its zonation. As it is stretching beyond the Montenegrin border the cross-border cooperation on the conservation issues is necessary. Ljubisnja is also part of the Corridor 1 identified within study here in hand, what strongly imposes safeguarded connection between this area and NP Durmitor. Spatial Plan of Montenegro envisages proclamation of Regional Park on the territory of around 7800ha of Ljubisnja Mountain. And municipality department of European integration and international cooperation is working intensively on preparation and models for its establishment, zoning and management, too, sourcing funding and expertise from international foundations and programs.

As this area has good potential for further, more sustainable development and natural resources valorization and protection, certain measures have to be insured prior to development of complementary sectors of tourism and agriculture; these over:

- rehabilitation of mine industry areas which still have not been covered by local spatial and other development documents, although they may be of great relevance for future development. This needs to be done as soon as possible; especially bearing in mind that in foreseeable future their primary purpose will not be renewed.

- establishing of sustainable forestry

- sustainable agricultural practices which needs to be in respect with the traditional usage of the land, preserving values of the agro biodiversity;

- control over hunting activities;

- control over tourism development and activities;

- constant negative migrations from the area need to be addressed on the adequate way.

- measures toward possible de-agrarization as a consequence of negative migration;

Direct pressures on this area are set by:

- Landfill Gradac on Cehotina;

- Danger for river Cehotina from unsolved issues of flotation in Gradac, as well as from the possible reactivation of the mine and processing of lead-zinc mine, which would not be spatially- ecologically controlled;

- Intensive and not controlled forestry

Vicinity of Municipality Pljevlja, characterized by low environmental quality area, specially poor air quality and land contamination, also sets up certain pressures on this biodiversity hotspot and on the corridor 1 identified by this study, which needs to be addressed efficiently, as to reduce the current and foreseen negative effects.

This brings to the attention several necessary revitalization measures for healing of environment and taking long term sustainable development directions. These could be directed toward construction and realization of complex program of rehabilitation and cultivation of space degraded by surface diggings of coal, with particular accent on reconstruction and cultivation of landfills of ashes and wastes; control of all factors causing pollution of water, air and land and establishment of Regional Park “Ljubišnja” with the zone of the strict protection where biodiversity center is identified.

If the appropriate spatial planning, urban and ecological measures for environmental protection are not undertaken, extended unfavorable state of environment in Pljevalja basin and surrounding (from exploitation of coal, thermo energy capacities and potential reactivating of cement production) should be expected.

Focusing on the corridor 1 function, several conflicts could be identified. In the area between rivers Tara and Ćehotina the development of the following segments of tourism could be promoted in future: potential for creating the ski tourism and summer mountain tourism what could bring new issues. Hence, the development of tourism infrastructure and accommodations has to be handled with extraordinary care due to the limited carrying capacity ofthis eco-sensitive area. The usage of existing facilities and setting up standard for accommodation development has to be enforced, on the expense of the uncontrolled and unsustainable short term development, which usually happens in this area.

Conflicts with the safeguard of environment and landscape and development plans for technical lines, and road infrastructure will impose big pressure on the corridor, considering sensitivity of the valley of the river Tara. Plans for high electricity lines implementation on the way, calls for the less impact solution, for this and similar.

Maglić

KBA Maglić is set north-west from the Regional Park proposed territory of the mountain range Bioč- Maglić-Volujak. Spatial Plan of Montenegro put this proposal forward together with an extension of borders of the National Park Durmitor and its connection with the National Park Sutjeska in Bosnia and

Herzegovina. This is also of the high importance for the connectivity of the biodiversity hotspots and the safeguarding and upkeep of the corridor 1.

Priority sectors for development of the Piva area, administrated by Pluzine municipality are tourism and organic production agriculture, where both have huge potential, but there is little successful valorization of resources.

The direct threats to this biodiversity center area are not notified so far.

Durmitor

NP Durmitor (1952), World Heritage site NP Durmitor (1980), with a bit wider area of protection and than the actual NP, and Man and Biosphere Tara River Reserve (1977), one of the first MAB BR in the region, encompassing Durmitor NP and Tara River basin to the Komovi mountain, is the area of an exceptional natural values recognized nationally and internationally.

So far, the only management body is NP authority, and this is the only protection area where the actual downsize of the protection zone has been applied, clear sign of the poor management performance.

The vast number of illegally constructed, non-planned buildings (causing development, social and environmental unrecoverable damage), illegal extraction of wood, vast number manmade forest fires, as well as more conflict in-between national and local authority and local actors, combined with the inadequate capacities for natural resource management and reduction of National park protected area surface, are setting the threatening scenario to the natural heritage of the Durmitor NP and World Heritage site.

Pressure on the landscape and ecosystems in Durmitor National Park and surroundings, from unplanned and insensitive development, and consequently the conversion of natural habitats, is evident.

Some of the conflicts between strict protection requirements imposed by the National Park status and development programs promoting unsustainable usage of the resources and irreversible damage to the natural values, are listed here:

- Degradation of mountain forest habitat as a result of illegal logging and unsustainable forestry practices;

- Tourism and infrastructure development followed by expansion of the urban zone and increase in illegal construction and development;

- Also, the conflicts between the plans for usage of hydro energy potential of the river Tara or other rivers in its water system that have a potential impact on Tara, still remains.

- The need for providing continuity of technical infrastructure, high electric lines, roads, etc.

- Unsolved issue of polluting River Tara from existing flotation (Mojkovac ).

- Intensive tourism activities on the Tara River and surrounding infrastructure damages to its venerable zone;

- The development corridor part Šavnik – Žabljak – Pljevlja coming from Risan – Grahovo – Nikšic – Šavnik – Žabljak – Pljevlja corridor passes the National Park Durmitor and its sensitive ecosystem.

- The region of Durmitor also suffers from permanent negative migrations (Šavnik, Žabljak, Plužine, Pljevlja) and local population unsutisfaction with the management of the Park.

If the trends of unplanned, ad-hock development projects and activities continue, local actors remain in clashes, the conflict in this region risk to put in danger ecological balance, stir intensive soil erosion especially in the watercourse of upper Tara and on the ski slopes, further deteriorate landscape values, and stir fragmentation of the ecosystem under protection, endangering important connectivity and corridor functions in the area and wider.

Bjelasica

The area identified within this study encompasses much wider surface than the actual NP Biogradska Gora, set in the core of this biodiversity hotspot. It also spreads on the Mojkovac town industrial and development areas, imposing some of the conservation measures herewith in. It is characterized by high value habitats of forests and grasslands.

Mojkovac is strategically greening its agenda for development. Still many challenges are ahead. Certain and important revitalizations of the heavy industry polluted area, tailing pond, progressed well. Among specific polluting substances the highest level of air pollution is connected with the industrial production of Steel Plant in Mojkovac. Also, uncontrolled combustion of the waste at the town landfills and traffic, which significantly pollutes the atmosphere of the urban settlements with exhaust gases, are in conflict with safeguard of biodiversity in this area, having tendency of increase, specifically with improvements of technical and road lines. Mojkovac area also suffers from the land contamination.

This biodiversity area comprises region of valley of upper Tara, very sensitive and vulnerable to anthropogenic pressure. Therefore, development of tourism facilities and activities here, have to be in line with the biodiversity conservation preconditions, jet to be set up and validated.

On the other hand, NP Biogradska gora is suffering from not very intense pressures: scattered pressure of tourism, possible treat of forest ecosystem disturbance, and natural processes of Biogradsko lake reduction.

Having in mind priorities of development for this area which are in a sphere of agriculture, orientated to development of cattle breeding and specific farmer production (seed potatoes, etc.); mountain tourism; mining and primary processing; smaller scale processing industry, underlining conflicts of development and protection might be:

- Further industry development, especially of those that can influence the requested quality of waters, in the first place of Tara, as well as the air quality which has to be controlled.

- Exploitation of minerals of poly-metal, and future plants for primary processing; technical construction stone, clay, gravel and sand;

- Conflict between landfills of waste materials from mine “Brskovo“ and demands of protection of river Tara.

- Pollution of the environment due to the impregnation of the sleepers and asphalt base in Podbisce which is in the zone of the biodiversity hotspot

- Formed and improvement on traffic connections;

- Agricultural development, depending on the intensity and form, on the complexes of qualitative mountain pastures, and the preserved arable land in valley of Tara and of its confluences, could become a problem for conservation of biodiversity;

- Constructed capacities for processing industry and already established social function and services;

Some of the measures to be introduces for the better integration of conservation and development plans would be:

- Setting up attention trough local spatial plans and the procedures for certain abandoned industrial, mining, military and other similar areas to be put in purpose of future development. This needs to be done as soon as possible; especially bearing in mind that in foreseeable future their primary purpose will not be renewed, in order to prevent dislocation of vital town functions from smaller urban centers.

- It is also necessary to protect suburban parts of town center from the uncontrolled suburbanization. Processes of the so called “urban recycling” and “land recycling” should be accelerated and regulations on this issues should be incorporated in relevant plans and other local documents.

- Control over tourism and agricultural sectors of development, as to fit with the biodiversity and landscape conservation preconditions.

Moračke Planine

The area of Moraca Mountains covers the large and typical surfaces and high-mountainous chains in the sources of the rivers Moraca, Gracanica, Bijela and Mrtvica. This area has potential to eventually become an important tourist place. Moraca’s Mountains are evaluated as a very good habitat and species biodiversity area. Two emerald areas are identified on its territory. They are on the connectivity point of the corridors 1 and 2. Also it is set in between Tara River valley and Sinajajevina Mountain. However, this biodiversity hotspot is not recognized to be protected in any special planning documents.

Tourist valorization of this attractive space should be expected in a further future, according to planning assumptions in the sense of traffic opening, infrastructural equipping and hydro-energy potential of the River Moraca. Summer cattle birding is characteristic of this place, and apart for occasional jeep tours there are no human pressures notified in this area, at the moment.

Exploitation of sand and gravel at several places in rivers and karst fields (lower watercourse of Moraca – Platije), as well as other development plans on the Moraca river, set up many conflicts in the functioning of the corridor 2.

Hajla

Turjak and Hajla are the areas planned to be proclaimed for Regional Park within Spatial Plan of Montenegro. Biodiversity hotspot identified here extends from Hajla Mountain down to Rozaje town.

At the moment this area has good potential for development. Complexes of high quality forests; significant areas covered with pastures; constructed industrial capacities; established services; constructed tourist capacities and equipment; availability of labor; hydro energy potential of the river Ibar. Priorities of development of this area are forestry; industry, with orientation to finalization; mountain tourism and agriculture, orientated towards cattle breeding. Development of some of these sectorial areas in the unsustainable way could endanger quality of environment.

At the moment the area suffers from following and potential pressures:

- Degradation of mountain forest habitat as a result of illegal logging and unsustainable forestry practices. Conflict between scope of woodcutting and protection of environment is clear, as well as between other functions of economic development.

- Tourism and infrastructure development in this context is the very prominent problem of the area. Here also, ski tourism possible new plans could be an issues.

- Pollution of air soil and water from the industry.

- Urbanization.

- Road infrastructure development and increase of traffic intensity.

Some of the immediate measures for safeguard of biodiversity would need to be directed toward avoiding risk of deforestation and its consequences, and control over and especially of, areas attractive for development of tourism; accordingly, establishment of the Regional Park “Turjak and Hajla” needs to be accelerated. Generally, control of all factors causing pollution of water, air and land needs to be established.

Komovi

Together with Piva, Komovi are in the process of being established as Regional Park.

Priorities for development of this area could be agriculture directed to production of fruit and cattle breeding and mountain tourism. The development conflict exists in the area of forestry between commercial exploitation of forests and requests for protection of environment and landscape.

Degradation of mountain forest habitat, as a result of illegal logging and unsustainable forestry practices, tourism and infrastructure development are one of the treats to the biodiversity and landscape of this area, too.

Conflicts exists between need for efficient use of potentials, especially nature tourism ones and present tendency of migration of population capable to work, emphasized by evident disparity in the current level of social-economic development of this sub-zone and the Republic’s average.

With the passing of the highway plans a conflict may be created between the highway functions and environment.

Prokletije

The area identified as a high value biodiversity zone within this study encompasses NP Prokletije (the newest established NP) on the south of the territory, Visitor and Zeletin (areas planned to be proclaimed as Regional Park, under Spatial Plan of Montenegro) on the north-west, and down to the east from town Plav area as far as to the border and beyond, on Kosovo territory. In the terms of habitats and biodiversity this area can be defined in 3: Visitor and Zeletin open habitats and water habitat area, scoring 5 (on the biodiversity importance scale 1-5); Plav-Gusinje Prokletije (NP), scoring 4; and southeast Prokletije, scoring 5. This large area sets up a demand for complex solutions in terms of conservation and development conflicts and measures. Additionally it asks for the cross border cooperation both with Kosovo and Albenia.

Plav is the only municipality in the northern region where slighter positive migrations are noted.

Conflicts between urban expansion and individual usurpation of location exposed in the space and requests for preservation of natural beauty and agricultural land is evident. Similarly, conflict between natural character and attractiveness of the ground water system and measures for improvement of use of arable land potential – melioration scopes of wetlands south from the Plav Lake are significant, as well as the conflict between commercial exploitation of forests and requests for protection of environment and landscape.

Inadequately solved and/or lacking systems of communal infrastructure is a problem of the urban area of this region.

Protection of landscape, water, air, land, as well as chosen compositions of traditional architecture and agro-biodiversity are of the great importance for sustainable development of this area.

Increase in illegal construction and development, illegal deforestation and therefore degradation of mountain forest habitat are evident. Also forestry practices, tourism infrastructure development are threatening ecosystem balance. Uncontrolled and unsustainable usage of the resources by local

97 population and resistance to the establishment of protection management bodies and protection territories, are calling for more sophisticated ways of community engagement in conservation issues with local community, then what have been at the present. This is the precondition for the new protection areas to be established and successfully managed here.

Ćemovsko polje / Cijevna River

Dry grasslands in Montenegro are now very rare and considered the most threatened habitat in Montenegro, most having been overgrazed or converted for arable and fruit farming or viniculture. Concretely, a large part of the grasslands at Cemovsko field has been converted into vineyards and orchards.

Dry grasslands are found on alluvial land but are now very sporadic. The remnant areas that exist at Cemovsko polje, include Karabuško, TuSko and DinoSko polje and the lower part of the canyon of the River Cijevna.

However, this area is not identified in the planning document as to be protected, although Cijevna River is identified as important area for conservation within the Emerald network.

This region has big and numerous development and spatial-ecological problems. Leading conflict appears between trends of further growth of the town, trends of concentration of political and economically important functions. Sharp conflict exists between urbanization and agricultural land with extra quality. The conflict between industrial activities and agriculture (air, water and land pollution) has also been noticed, as well as a conflict between highway roads and urban functions.

Among specific polluting substances the highest level of air pollution is connected with the industrial production (Factory of Aluminum), uncontrolled combustion of the waste at the town landfills and traffic, which significantly pollutes the atmosphere of the urban settlements in this area with exhaust gases. The increased quantity of polluters (organic and non-organic) has been recorded in Podgorica.

Migrations of population to more urban area and de-agrarization in service to urbanization are characteristics of this region. There is on-going strong process of the migration of population towards Podgorica, as well as the expansion of the suburbs. This aggravates changes in the landscape pressure on the agricultural land with urbanization and to the natural grasslands. It is already possible to forecast future creation and growth of urban agglomerations along the roadways Podgorica – Danilovgrad – Tuzi – Golubovci, right in this biodiversity hotspot area.

Measures for conservation and development integration:

- Strict control of disposal of waste materials from KAP/Factory of aluminum and all factors which cause active and potential pollution, regarding great hazard of pollution of air, land and water, due to microclimate conditions; suspension of further degradation of landscape by uncontrolled construction; equipping with adequate filter devices of plant for production of construction materials (Cijevna), which cause pollution with dust, or dislocation of the same.

- Elaboration of a unique policy program for spatial development of the whole sub-zone needs to be done. Reaffirmation of importance of this area trough NATURA 2000 in important habitats, and consequently management and responsibilities, needs to be set up. Prohibition of spreading of constructions on the dry grasslands as the compensation for the urbanization and agriculture conflicts.

- Cooperation with Albania on regulation and protection of River Cijevna.

Skadar Lake

Trans-boundary protected, biggest lake in Balkan (National Park on Montenegrin side and Regional Park on Albanian side, and Ramseur site), immense natural resource, suffers from uncontrolled and incomprehensible development and tendencies for usage of its potentials from the two countries. Development and transition periods in the last 50years brought changes in the usage of this regionally important natural resource adjusting its potentials to the demands of present, and neglecting significant physical changes and gradual cumulative impact on the ecological balance and stability of this important ecosystem. The development and projects are running ahead of our understanding of the ecosystem resilience and potential to recover. Nevertheless, there has been significant previous investment in the lake trough the programs and projects, targeting integrated water management, with little or no success. At the moment, Lake Skadar still suffers from following human pressure aggregating: 500,000 people living in the greater watershed, migrations to toward urban centers , large quantities of solid waste and wastewater, aluminum and other plants pollution, expansion of the arable land, an increased usage of pesticides, all followed by flooding too, illegal or legal fishing, increased number of tourist, all this additionally accompanied by new regional water supply system for coast and planned highway and hydro-electrical facilities on its tributes. Consequently severe and widespread pollution accelerate eutrophication of the Skadar Lake. Further to this: eutrophication, domestic sewage pollution, industrial waste pollution, unspecified agricultural runoff, lead poisoning, and impacts associated with tourism development, are carrying loss of species.

Very important conflict appears between traffic network (road and railroad), which passes through the area of NP Skadar Lake dividing it in two parts. A conflict is possible between potential urban widening caused by vicinity of a future agglomeration of Podgorica on one side, and requests for protection of agricultural land and the ecological entirety, on the other.

The following environmental impacts have been identified at Skadar Lake:

- Polluting of this lake from industrial-communal plants of Podgorica, Cetinje, Danilovgrad and Niksic and agriculture in Zeta plain;

- Increase in illegal construction and development; outflow and swamp pollution as a result of intense agricultural activities; illegal removal of river pebbles;

- Loss of protected species by poaching, with implications for tourism and recreation, and illegal development.

- Succession of habitats on the southern side (small fishermen settlements) of this biodiversity area, due to the negative migrations.

There is a need for better integral management of this area based on the ecosystem functions and a comprehensive and cumulative impacts assessment, as to shift the ad-hock, and need or crisis based approaches for development, decisions and program/project making, toward more sustainable and long term one.

Some of the immediate and mid-term measures that needs to be undertaken for conservation purposes:

- Direct emission of wastewaters into the Lake should be strictly prohibited.

- Control over industrial waste and waters.

- Complex protection of environment, especially of ecosystem of the Lake (birds habitats and fish nursery) and slopes of the surrounding mountains; protection of chestnut woods on slopes along the south shore of the Lake, as well as the laurel habitats on the south islands.

- Reconstruction of the polluted and devastated shore zone of the Lake caused by illegal construction.

- Prohibition of construction of dirty service zones.

- Control over illegal construction and devastation of the area.

- Control over the agricultural practices in Zeta plain.

- Signing of agreement with Albania, which implies establishing of integrated regime of protection and use of the Skadar Lake and river Bojana.

- Control over rehabilitation of the certain cultural monuments, as they become important habitats for endangered species.

- Proposition of the expansion of the protection and management on the southern part of the Skadar Lake area, or enlargement of the proposed Rumija Regional Park territory on the northern slopes of the mountain as to incorporate the high biodiversity zone identified here within the protection area.

Orjen

The only territory still not established as NP, thought planned as such for some time. The territory identified as the biodiversity hot spot here, is narrower but set in center of the planed territory of NP and the same applies for the area of Emerald network identified.

Due to lack of potable water, the high mountain was never densely populated. Consequently there are not many pressures identified in Orjen.The threat to the forest habitats may happen due to the forest fires that possible on the south mountains during the hot summer days. Being part of the south

100

Mediterranean mountain range, together with Lovćen and Rumija, Orjen is important for the connectivity, as well as for the cross-border cooperation on conservation with BiH.

Kotor / Tivat / Lovcen

This area encompasses south west part of the Lovcen NP down to Kotor Bay and its very narrow hinterland, identified as emerald site, and Tivat bay with its hinterland, where small but important emerald site is identified too.

The flora and fauna of the coastal zone is in general considered the most threatened in Montenegro. This region is threatened by uncontrolled tourism and urban development

A great seasonal anthropogenic pressure of the space, supported with the narrow character of the coastal strip is one of the core problems. Its weak link to the hinterland supported preservation of some of the habitats.

The Coastal region is also well known for illegal construction. Intensity of construction in some parts of the coast is already such, that it has all characteristics of so called “wall up of the coast”-what would lead, with this intensity, to the final loss of the landscape attractiveness of the area.

Besides the quoted ecological and development problems, following should be emphasized:

- Difficulties in preservation of Mediterranean habitats in the current tourism development set up, as well as difficulty in preservation of bio and agro-diversity, in first line due to the uncontrolled construction of facilities.

- Danger and risk from forest fires, which demands maintenance, i.e. establishment of the system for protection which would be significantly more efficient than the current one, and especially at the most endangered areas (here surroundings of Kotor and its surroundings).

- Insufficient revitalization of the old urban settlements could be of an issue here.

- While natural coastal habitats have been occupied by tourism facilities and urban development, coastal water ecosystems are also endangered. Further degradation of the aquarium and parts of the coast in Boka Kotorska, insufficiently controlled port infrastructure and other infrastructure development that are under way are further stressing complexity of the conflicts in this area.

- Intensification of air traffic and lines could be in conflict with important bird habitats in Tivat.

- Plans for intensified agriculture in the Tivat field.

101

Having this in mind, the area needs immediate actions for regulations and integration of conservation measures in development. This should be directed toward some special problems this area has: illegal construction in the most important areas , along the sea coast and in natural areas, especially when it is massive and when builders gain large profits, mainly at the expense of public interest and environment. It happens frequently that major part of technical, traffic, environmental and other requirements are not respected. Public and environmental interest is often neglected or ignored. Also, unplanned construction makes additional pressure on the natural resources and the environment, particularly regarding water pollution. The new road lines (especially bypass around Kotor), or improvement of current infrastructure needs to be assessed in the light of biodiversity potential and vulnerability of this area. Although the reactivation of the villages in the coastal hills (and coastal hinterland) is still slow and not so expanded, in the majority of those villages sudden construction already starts, mostly without any direction and control. Since those settlements and space are of the highest importance for preservation and safeguard of landscape, also for the increase of the attractiveness of Montenegrin coast in near future and for a longer time, primarily through selective development of alternative and complementary types of very payable tourism of best quality, this demands urge undertaking of appropriate measures, and in the first line elaboration of the planning programs and projects of development, physical planning and ecological protection of those settlements (spaces). If that is not done, it is possible that numerous conflicts appear in activation, i.e. the use of this space would advance the process where the wider area of the coast could be rapidly decreased.

This area needs to be preserved as well as for the importance of the Mediterranean coast species endangered and for the protection of “green corridors“, which connect mountain hinterland with the shore against.

Velika plaža /Ada Bjana / Šasko lake

Big Ulcinj beach area has some of the characteristic vegetation types best preserved throughout the eastern Adriatic coast. The beach and the hinterland recorded 10 types of Natura 2000 habitats, of which number of sites found to be very representative. Of these habitats, 5 types only occur at this site in Montenegro. Ulcinj Salina is a significant area in the context of protection of halophyte vegetation. Natura 2000 habitats recorded at this site occur only in Tivat Salina.

Next to the great natural landscape and biodiversity values of this area, it also holds huge development potentials and possibilities. Some of the best quality agricultural land is within Ulcinj municipality. Plans for construction of tourist facilities in area of Big Beach with its deep hinterland, construction of marina; intensive agriculture; sea fishing and salt production and refining, airport, are some of the possible development scenarios of this area.

Generally speaking, this is a zone with relatively limited number of development conflicts at the moment. In some areas, conflicts can appear between processes of urbanization and agricultural land. Big attractiveness of the seashore, northeast from the town, can cause uncontrolled housing and tourist construction and activities in that area, creating conflict with the priority request of the environment.

102

Nevertheless, already in the 2005, it was noted that the ecosystems of salt pans (hinterland of Big beach in Ulcinj) are threatened. Moreover, the most threatened habitats on the coast are the dunes at Velika Plaža at Ulcinj (which has unique halophyte vegetation) and the remaining fragments of Skadar Oak (Quercus robur scutariensis) forest at Štoj at the rear of the Velika Plaža and Ulcinj. Bird fauna at these localities is endangered by hunting, too.

The increased quantity of polluters (organic and non-organic), increase in illegal construction and development has been recorded in Ulcinj. Severe and widespread pollution of coastal waters and of rivers, from the industry, with eutrophication on Bojana River is the problems the area is facing already, urging for cross-border cooperation on these issues especially for the regulation of River Bojana waters, important further for the corridor 2 connectivity. Erosion of some of the beaches is noted, too. Additionally occasional flooding is damaging sensitive ecosystems.

Some of the tendencies and conflicts need to be considered in the light of the venerability, as well as the importance of the natural assets that this area poses, which should be declared as protected areas:

- If the positive tourism and demographic growth happens as foreseen, possible trends of further shifting of agricultural land to the construction land will be consequently continued and intensify.

- Misbalance between new construction on one side and demands of the protection of cultural and natural heritage on the other side (e.g. endangered dunes of Ulcinj area and Southern part of Big Beach,) needs to be resolved, and priorities and regulation set up.

- Limited capacity of the existing systems of communal infrastructure, especially of systems for water supplying and system for drainage and refining of wastewaters needs to be taken into account when planning development of this area

Possible measures for protection: protection of coastal line and landscape zone; protection form sea pollution; complete urban structure planned. The attention should be paid to flooding of arable agricultural land and melioration works, including desalinization of agricultural land complex alongside Saline. Limitations should be set for location of any type of hard and/or harmful industry; opening of quarry and landfills on exposed slopes of the surrounding hills; housing construction in agricultural complexes, except for the needs of agricultural producers and excessive construction of housing and tourism complexes on the coast.

Marine KBAs - Very important source of pressures on resources and the quality of environment of the marine and coastal area are unsolved issues of waste and wastewaters treatment, in addition issues of ports and other infrastructure of maritime economy and a little bit less important issues of fishery, marine-culture, agriculture and industry.

In the Coastal area, waste waters are discharged directly into the sea (outlets in Herceg Novi L-

103

1000m, bay Trašte L-3200m, Budva – Cape Zavala L-2500m, Bar Volujica and other smaller ones), also without prior treatment.

The huge and increasing pressure is set up by tourism development: infrastructure facilities, traffic, activities, etc., usually not properly controlled and directed to safeguard environment.

Illegal fishing activities at the sea, especially of the species of best quality, gets proportions which threaten the ecosystems, with projected large damages (the loss of the part of biological diversity of aquatorium).

Urgent sanctions determined by law are necessary as well as other measures on one hand, and incentives measures directed to the change of the structure of the catch on the other hand.

Also, harmonization of maritime legislation and legislation on the protection of sea from pollution from ships with the demands and rules of IMO (International Maritime Organization) and other relevant UN Conventions and regulations of the European Union deem necessary.

There is an urge for defining waterways for international sea traffic (cargo, ferries) in a way not to cause negative impacts on marine ecosystem, particularly nature protected areas and protected areas in terms of preserving values, as well as areas assigned for nautical tourism.

Restriction of marine-cultural activities to areas which are not protected, or planned as areas of nautical tourism, and which in general don’t disturb natural resources as well as living conditions of the population is needed.

Waste water purification facilities shall be constructed in the basins Boka Kotorska Bay, as well as in the areas of protected natural heritage. It is necessary to establish the zones of sanitary protection at all used and potential sources.

These further impose the need for the exact locations of possible protection areas have to be defined and introduced in respective planning documents.

Considering all factors of risk and orientation of Montenegro as ecological state it is necessary to strictly define conditions of protection of environment for each development program proposed, in order to fit the economy field into the general development strategy of the coastal region. If not, consequences would be devastating for the overall development of the area.

Kotor bay

Conflicts in the area of this region development, to be expected, will go in direction of further degradation of the aquatorium in Boka Bay, as the consequence of the inflow of untreated communal wastewaters, industrial wastewaters and wastewaters from hotel complexes, ecologically damaging processes (for example in Bijela and Tivat), disaster of the oil tanks and other traffic means, uncontrolled discharge of the solid waste, insufficiently constructed port infrastructure (international ports, marinas and shipyards) for acceptance of the ballast and other wastewaters and solid waste and goods in

104 transport from the ships. Increased in quantity of polluters (organic and non-organic) is already significant.

Uncontrolled tourism and urban development, endangers the marine ecosystem, particularly in tourist areas such as the Boka Bay, due to increased discharge of polluted and untreated waste waters into the sea. Significant lagging behind of the maritime traffic comparing to the demands will increase pressure in the Boka bay once potential is fully realized.Danger from spilling of oil derivates into aquatorium and danger from explosions and fires (warehouse of oil derivate Lipci in Boka Kotorska), are huge ecological threat.

Trsteno (Rt Žukovica – Trsteno)

Not very accessible for tourism development, this area of see ecosystem is one of the rare well preserved one in Montenegro. It is also identified as emerald site. Some of the scattered influence from development is present on its shore as well as in the municipal surrounding centers that can be influential.

Petrovac / Buljarica / Canj / Sutomore (Rt Skočidjevojka - Rt Kršcevac)

Development of the construction facilities (collective or individual, tourist and others) in this part of the coast, consequent continuation of the too high anthropogenic pressure on the space in summer months and lack of its regulating pollution of water, air and land, as well as noise, are the characteristic pressures of the beach holiday tourism in this area.

105

5. CONSERVATION NEEDS, CONSERVATION MEASURES AND PRJECTED BUDGET

Within their field of expertise, each experts select most important species / habitats from conservation need standpoint, proscribe conservation measures and give overall estimation of budget on yearly level related to implementation of suggested conservation measures.

Table 37. Habitats, conservation measures, estimated budget

Habitat Conservation measure Estimated budget - Researching of detail floristic composition - Detail and precise mapping of 2110 Embryonic shifting dune habitat 3 700,00 EUR (per two years) - Protection from negative anthropogenic impacts of most representative localities - Researching of detail floristic composition 2120 Shifting dunes along the - Detail and precise mapping of shoreline with Ammophila habitat 3 700,00 EUR (per two years) arenaria (white dunes) - Protection from negative anthropogenic impacts of most representative localities - Researching of detail floristic composition - Detail and precise mapping of 2240 Brachypodietalia dune habitat 3 700,00 EUR (per two years) grasslands with annuals - Protection from negative anthropogenic impacts of most representative localities - Researching of detail floristic composition on Ljubišnja mountain - Detail and precise mapping of 9410 Acidophilous Picea forests habitat on Ljubišnja mountain 7 400,00 (per three years) of the montane to alpine level - Protection from negative anthropogenic impact of most representative associations on Ljubišnja mountain

106

Table 38. Vascular plant species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Vascular plant species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Determination of numbers of individuals in every subpopulation in MNE Cypripedium calceolus 4 500,00 EUR (per two years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in only population in MNE Asperula baldaccii 720,00 EUR (per one year) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category - Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in every subpopulation in MNE Utricularia vulgaris 4 500,00 EUR (per two years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in population Caldesia parnassifolia - Precise defining of IUCN Red 2 000,00 EUR (per two years) List category (national level) - Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in population Salvia brachyodon - Precise defining of IUCN Red 2 000,00 EUR (per two years) List category (national level) - Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in population Androsace komovensis - Precise defining of IUCN Red 1 200,00 EUR (per one year) List category (national level) - Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in population Lunaria telekiana - Precise defining of IUCN Red 1 200,00 EUR (per one year) List category (national level) - Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in every Arnica montana subpopulation in MNE 4 200,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level)

107

- Mapping - Determination of numbers of individuals in every subpopulation in MNE Orchis albanica 1 200,00 EUR (per one year) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Mapping

Table 39. Marine species and habitats, conservation measures, estimated budget

Marine species and habitats Conservation measure Estimated budget - Mapping with Side Scan Sonar (SSS) - Placement of buoy for boats in touristic part of coast 80 000,00 EUR (per more than Posidonia oceanica - monitoring five years) - Education on marine biodiversity conservation importance Budget for mapping of Posidonia - Mapping with Side Scan Sonar is the same like for Cymodocea Cymodocea nodosa (SSS) mapping regarding that job will be done in the same time

Budget for mapping of Posidonia - Mapping with Side Scan Sonar is the same like for Zostera (SSS) mapping regarding that job will Zostera noltii - Placement of buoy for boats in be done in the same time touristic part of coast 10 000,00 EUR (for placement of buoy for boats) Budget for mapping of Posidonia - Mapping with Side Scan Sonar is the same like for Zostera (SSS) Zostera marina mapping regarding that job will - Comparison of new data with be done in the same time literature data

Cystoseira amentacea (including - Detail mapping from boat by 10 000,00 EUR (per three years) var. stricta and var. spicata) CARLIT method Cystoseira spinosa (including C. - Detail estimation of number of 10 000,00 EUR (per three years) adriatica) individuals - Cleaning sea bottom of solid waste - Detail estimation of number of 60 000,00 EUR (per three years Axinella cannabina individuals work in Boka bay) - Protection of habitat - Education of SCUBA divers about this species importance Axinella damicornis - Cleaning sea bottom of solid 6 000,00 EUR (per three years

108

waste additionally on sum related to - Detail estimation of number of Axinella species) individuals - Protection of habitat - Education of SCUBA divers about this species importance - Cleaning sea bottom of solid waste - Detail estimation of number of 6 000,00 EUR (per three years Geodia cydonium individuals additionally on sum related to - Protection of habitat Axinella species) - Education of SCUBA divers about this species importance - Cleaning sea bottom of solid waste - Detail estimation of number of 6 000,00 EUR (per three years Tethya sp. plur. individuals additionally on sum related to - Protection of habitat Axinella species) - Education of SCUBA divers about this species importance - Detail estimation of number of Centrostephanus longispinus 10 000,00 EUR (per three years) individuals - Detail estimation of number of Ophidiaster ophidianus 10 000,00 EUR (per three years) individuals - enforcement of the present Law on protected species - Inspection of market places, Lithophaga lithophaga fish stores, restaurants 15 000,00 EUR (per one year) - Capacity building of relevant Inspection - Work with NGO sector - Detail estimation of number of Luria lurida (= Cypraea lurida) 5 000,00 EUR (per two years) individuals - Detail estimation of number of Mitra zonata 5 000,00 EUR (per two years) individuals - Detail estimation of number of Tonna galea 5 000,00 EUR (per two years) individuals - Detail estimation of number of Hippocampus ramulosus 5 000,00 EUR (per two years) individuals - Detail estimation of number of Hippocampus hippocampus 5 000,00 EUR (per two years) individuals - Detail estimation of number of Holothuria forskali individuals Holothuria impatiens - Reconsideration of this four 15 000,00 EUR (per three years) Holothuria polii species status on the list of Holothuria tubulosa protected species in MNE - Detail estimation of number of Pinna nobilis 20 000,00 EUR (per three years) individuals on most locations

109

with most dens populations - Comparison of new data with literature data - Cleaning sea bottom of solid waste 1170 Grebeni (submarine - Detail mapping of this habitat 70 000,00 EUR (per five years) springs of fresh water) type - Protection of habitat

Table 40. Invertebrate species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Invertebrate species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Estimation of population number in MNE Formica rufa - Precise defining of IUCN Red 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) List category (national level) - Mapping - Estimation of population number in MNE Formica polyctena - Precise defining of IUCN Red 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) List category (national level) - Mapping - Estimation of species presence and population number in MNE Saga natoliae - Precise defining of IUCN Red 5 000,00 EUR (per three years) List category (national level) - Mapping - Estimation of population number in MNE Luciola novaki - Precise defining of IUCN Red 4 000,00 EUR (per two years) List category (national level) - Mapping - Estimation of species presence and population number in MNE Sintula roeweri - Precise defining of IUCN Red 3 300,00 EUR (per three years) List category (national level) - Mapping - Estimation of population number in MNE Cyphophthalmus martensi - Precise defining of IUCN Red 5 000,00 EUR (per three years) List category (national level) - Mapping

110

Table 41. Fish species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Fish species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Estimation of species presence and eventual population number Acipenser naccarii - Estimation of main threats 9 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan - Estimation of species presence and eventual population number Measures will be applied in the - Estimation of main threats same time like for naccarii Acipenser sturio - Precise defining of IUCN Red species therefore for same List category (national level) amount of money - Crating of conservation plan - Estimation of population number - Estimation of main threats - Precise defining of IUCN Red Salmo obtusyrostris List category (national level) 20 000,00 EUR (per five years) - Determination of main spawning grounds - Crating of conservation plan - Repopulation - Estimation of population number - Estimation of main threats - Precise defining of IUCN Red Salmo marmoratus 12 000,00 EUR (per three years) List category (national level) - Determination of main spawning grounds - Crating of conservation plan - Estimation of population number - Estimation of main threats - Precise defining of IUCN Red Hucho hucho 12 000,00 EUR (per three years) List category (national level) - Determination of main spawning grounds - Crating of conservation plan

111

Table 42. Amphibian and reptile species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Amphibian and reptile species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Protection of habitats - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population Mesotriton alpestris number in each sub-population 15 000.00 EUR (per three years) - Repatriation in certain ponds and lakes - Crating of conservation plan - Protection of habitats - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population Triturus carnifex number in each sub-population 15 000.00 EUR (per three years) - Repatriation in certain ponds and lakes - Crating of conservation plan - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population number and populations trend Rana shqiperica 12 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population number and populations trend Rana graeca 12 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population number and populations trend Podarcis melisellensis 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population number and populations trend Algiroides nigropunctatus 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population number and populations trend Emys orbicularis 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan Mauremys caspica - Mapping of habitats 6 000,00 EUR (per three years)

112

- Estimation of population number and populations trend - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population number and populations trend Natrix tessellata 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Crating of conservation plan - Mapping of habitats - Estimation of population number and populations trend - Precise defining of IUCN Red Vipera ursinii List category (national level) 15 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Crating of conservation plan - Creating of management plan of most important areas of dispersal

Table 43. Bird species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Bird species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Census on monthly level - Continual monitoring Pelecanus crispus 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Ringing of juvenile birds - Reparation of natural - Estimation of number of nesting pairs Aithya nyroca 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution - Spring census monitoring - Continual monitoring of Haliaetus albicilla 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) population number - Estimation of number of nesting pairs Plegadis falcinellus 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution - Spring census monitoring - Continual monitoring of Anas querquedula 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) population number - Estimation of number of nesting pairs Chlidonias hybrida 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution - Spring census monitoring - Estimation of number of Platalea leucorodia nesting pairs 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution

113

- Spring census monitoring Aythya fuligula - Winter census monitoring 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Estimation of number of nesting pairs Numenius arquata 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution - Census monitoring - Estimation of number of nesting pairs Limosa limosa 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution - Census monitoring - Estimation of number of nesting pairs Tetrao urogallus 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution - Census monitoring - Estimation of number of nesting pairs Tetrax tetrax 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Mapping of distribution - Census monitoring - Spring and autumn census Anthus campestris 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) monitoring - Spring and autumn census Aquila clanga 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) monitoring - Mapping of distribution Jynx torquilla 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Census monitoring - Mapping of distribution Scolopax rusticola 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Census monitoring - Mapping of distribution Lanius collurio 3 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Census monitoring

Table 44. Mammal species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Mammal species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Analysis of populations size - Determination of zero level regarding population number Canis lupus - Monitoring of activity of 15 000.00 EUR (per three years) Registered pacts - Initiation of crossborder cooperation (Al, BiH) - Analysis of populations size - Determination of most Capreolus capreolus important herds 50 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Detection of migratory patterns and corridors by radio tagging - Analysis of population size and Delphinus delphis; Stenella populations trends 9 000,00 EUR (per three years) coeruleoalba,Tursiops turcatus - Continual monitoring

114

- Analysis of populations size - Determination of zero level regarding population number Felis silvestris 12 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Photo traps positioning on detected moving transect - Mapping of activities - Analysis of species presence - Analysis and mapping of most Lutra lutra favorable habitats 9 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Identification of moving patterns and mapping of traces - Analysis of populations size - Determination of zero level regarding population number - Photo traps positioning on Lynx lynx 54 000,00 EUR (per three years) detected moving transect - Detection of migratory patterns and corridors by radio tagging - Mapping of activities - Analysis of populations size - Determination of most Rupicapra rupicapra important herds 50 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Detection of migratory patterns and corridors by radio tagging - Identification of nursery and hibernation colonies All bats species - Identification of migratory 21 000,00 EUR (per three years) routs and feeding areas - Mapping of all collected data - Analysis of populations size - Determination of zero level regarding population number - Photo traps positioning on Ursus arctos 45 000,00 EUR (per three years) detected moving transect - Detection of migratory patterns and corridors by radio tagging - Mapping of activities

115

Table 45. Moss species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Moss species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Determination of population number Buxbaumia viridis - Precise mapping 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Dicranum viride - Precise mapping 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Marsupella sphacelata - Precise mapping 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Encalypta microstoma - Precise mapping 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Pseudoleskea saviana - Precise mapping 4 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Campyliadelphus elodes - Precise mapping 2 100,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Neckera pennata - Precise mapping 2 100,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Riccia cavernosa - Precise mapping 2 100,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Trematodon ambiguus - Precise mapping 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level)

116

- Determination of population number Ephemerum recurvifolium - Precise mapping 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Determination of population number Ephemerum sessile - Precise mapping 1 500,00 EUR (per three years) - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level)

Table 46. Fungi species, conservation measures, estimated budget

Fungi species Conservation measure Estimated budget - Determination of species population number - Precise mapping of distribution - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) Hygrocybe calyptriformis 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Assessment of species need to become legally protected - Identification of most important habitats - Crating of conservation plan - Determination of species population number - Precise mapping of distribution - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) Hygrocybe calyptriformis 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Assessment of species need to become legally protected - Identification of most important habitats - Crating of conservation plan - Determination of species population number - Precise mapping of distribution - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) Chalciporus amarellus 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Assessment of species need to become legally protected - Identification of most important habitats - Crating of conservation plan Suillus sibiricus - Determination of species 6 000,00 EUR (per three years)

117

population number - Precise mapping of distribution - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) - Assessment of species need to become legally protected - Identification of most important habitats - Crating of conservation plan - Determination of species population number - Precise mapping of distribution - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) Suillus variegatus 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Assessment of species need to become legally protected - Identification of most important habitats - Crating of conservation plan - Determination of species population number - Precise mapping of distribution - Precise defining of IUCN Red List category (national level) Amanita caesarea 6 000,00 EUR (per three years) - Assessment of species need to become legally protected - Identification of most important habitats - Crating of conservation plan

118

6. GAP ANALYSIS WITHIN IDENTIFIED KBAs AND PRESENT/PLANNED SYSTEM OF PROTECTED AREAS IN MONTENEGRO

In order to determine eventual gaps among identified KBAs and current system of protected areas we decide to overlap map of KBAs with several maps such are map of protected areas, map of Emerald network and with map of planned protected areas that will be established.

6.1. GAP analysis of KBAs with existing protected areas

Map 29. Overlapping KBAs with National parks borders

119

Map 30. Overlapping KBAs with Emerald areas network

By analyzing of map 26 (overlapping of KBAs with existing National Parks) we can conclude that present NPs borders are fitting with identified KBAs which means that all detected important species are within NP borders. Only noticeable difference shows fitting of NP Lovećen borders and KBA Kotor / Tivat /

120

Lovćen. This difference is consequence of pulling marine KBA with terrestrial centers of diversity in surrounding coastal area. Other word speaking, areas that are out of NP Lovćen borders and which are part of KBA are marine habitat and salts near coast close to city of Tivat. NP Durmitor has even wider borders then KBA with the same name. NP Bjelasica is completely covered with KBA Bjelasica and similar situation is with youngest NP in Montenegro, NP Prokletije. Borders of NP Skadar Lake and KBA Skadar Lake are more or less the same. In this stage of analysis we can conclude that there are no significantly important gaps among NPs and KBAs we identified. This is most probably reflection of the situation that National Parks are most studied and researched areas in Montenegro in biological sense of research.

If we analyze overlapping of Emerald Network and KBAs we can find even better matching. All identified KBAs are totally or partly covered with KBAs and we can’t detect any gap among theme.

6.2. GAP analysis of KBAs with future protected areas

Map 31. Overlapping KBAs with other protected category areas and with future protected areas

121

By analyzing of Map 30, GAP analysis becomes more detailed. Hire we can dedtect gaps among KBAs and every area which is already protected or among KBAs and areas which are planned for protection (base maps taken National strategy for biodiversity with action plan for period 2010-2015, Government of Montenegro; 2010).

Area of Orijen Mountain is planned for the sixth NP in Montenegro and our KBA Orijen fit with suggested borders. By our analysis Orijen is ranked on 12th position (of 13), in this area we had overlapping of only 4 groups and this KBA had relatively low marks for each group which aggregate are mark 16 (Table 35.).

Area of Boka bay (Kotor bay) that is within KBA Kotor / Tivat / Lovećen is under UNESCO protection (World Heritage Site) and we are sure that protection of marine biodiversity in this area is feasible under UNESCO framework. Second part of this KBA is under NP Lovećen while only detected gap is related to Tivat salts area.

We detect gaps among protection of marine biodiversity and identified marine KBAs (Trsteno and Petrovac / Buljarica / Čanj / Sutomore KBA). No marine areas of any level of protection are planned for proclaiming according to National strategy for biodiversity (2010).

Another significant gap we detected for KBA Ada Bojana / Šasko lake / Velika plaza. This area or some of their parts are not planned for any kind of protection by National strategy for biodiversity (2010). In this KBA we detected overlapping of 5 individual diversity centers (5 groups) with relatively high aggregate mark 23 (highest ranking of all KBAs with 5 groups diversity centers within).

Area of KBA Ćemovsko polje / Cijevna River also represent spatial gap in our analysis. In area of this KBA there are no planes for any kind of biodiversity protection according to relevant government document (National strategy for biodiversity with action plan for period 2010-2015, Government of Montenegro; 2010). Within this area we detected overlapping of 4 individual diversity centers with aggregate mark 18 which is higher mark the ones for Orijen (planned for 6th NP) and for Maglić (planned for Regional park) (Table 35.)

The biggest gap we detected is the one in area of KBA Moračke planine. Although this KBA is ranked on 6th place immediately above KBAs that match with present NPs, containing 6 individual diversity centers within (aggregate mark 25, Table 35), it is not planned any protection of biodiversity in this area. Presence of 6 individual centers of diversity of possible 10 strongly suggests high biodiversity importance of this part of Montenegro.

Other KBAs are more or less already recognized as important as centers for biodiversity and there are planned regional parks that match with theme. Our standpoint is that for those areas (Komovi, Hajla- Turjak, Ljubišnja and Maglić, Map 30) some fine tunings regarding their borders are needed. Those tunings have to be based on additional field research and mapping, not on drawing of borders in office, in order to cover all important components and to avoid possible conflicts with developmental demands.

122

Our KBA Prokletije covers NP Prokeltije and Visitor-Zelatin Regional Park that is planned for proclamation. We think that those to protected areas are to close and that more feasible is if spatial planners expand borders of NP Prokeltije in this area. This opinion is based on biodiversity richness data and with purpose of functionality (managing) in those two protected areas.

Similar situation is with Regional Park Sinjajevina which leans on NP Durmitor borders. We think that is not feasible to have such situation and that better is, from functionality and sustainability point of view, if NP Durmitor expand borders to this areas but not on whole planed surface of Regional Park Sinjajevina. Detailed field research and mapping in Sinjajevina area will give best possible bases for decision making process. Other possibility is to expand NP Durmitor border in south-eastern direction as they are in our KBA Durmitor.

7. COMPREHENSIVE LONG-TERM STRATEGY FOR THE PAS IN MONTENEGRO

7.1. Recommendation for acquiring needed biological data

Based on all data we state and analyses we conduced, hire we will recommend several subject in order to improve level of knowledge related to biodiversity that will, as a consequence, produce easier decision making process and push whole developmental process in more sustainable zone:

o We recommend more field biological research in areas that are out of NPs o Regarding obvious lack of biological data for central – western part of Montengro we suggest intensive field research of this area in next 5 years o Regarding obvious lack of biological data related to marine ecosystems we suggest intensive field research of this component of Montenegrin biodiversity in next 5 years o Serious investment in education of existing biological experts, especially in young ones (Investment in their Specialist work, Master Thesis, PhD) o Serious investment in technical equipment for field research o Using of available EU funds for biological field research o Detail field biological research in each Regional Park or National Park which is planned for proclaiming o Continuing with yearly program of monitoring of biodiversity in Montenegro o Reducing of competition among institutions and specialists which deal with biodiversity o Forming of National Data Base on biological diversity that will be followed by GIS data sets

7.2. Recommendation for building capacity level of managers and other staff that work within PAS

All manager positions within parts of PAS (in this moment those are Directors of NPs regarding no Regional Parks haven’t officially formed yet) are more or less politically filled with managers. In such situation it is hard to foresee the educational background of directors and it is impossible to recommend any capacity building actions. Hire we will focused on so called “other staff” such are sectorial managers

123 and ranger service that usually doesn’t have any background in biology/ecology and sustainable development. We are witness of ten or more years of investment in capacity building but amount of past investment in this field doesn’t match with noticeable progress. Our standpoint is that employees are not stimulated to accomplish their job on appropriate way. This stimulation doesn’t underestimate only money, stimulation also means better equipment, better organization, better human resource management, better working conditions, etc. In terms of capacity building we think that in future period, in focus of this process should be members of ranger services. They have to be trained in terms of importance of their job, in basic biological/ecological knowledge, in basic of communication skills and in basic of selected specialty (regarding the fact that they spent most of the time on field it will be practical if that they can recognize some biological/ecological features in order to motorize areas within PA).

7.3. Recommendation for improving the biodiversity management and planning policies

o Based management of biodiversity on fresh and reliable data sets from the field research o Quitting with copy-paste document production when planning policy is about o Always engage more specialists on production of documents related to biodiversity o Reduce conflicts among economy and biodiversity conservation needs (especially among biodiversity conservation and energy, forestry, construction sectors) o Education of decision makers and biodiversity managers in ecological thematic o Consistent enforcement of related legislative o Fighting against corruption when natural and bio resources usage are about (usage of forests, water, fish, gravel, “forest fruits”, etc.)

7.4. Schedule and organization of an annual reporting procedure

At least ones in two years every management of each Protected Area (no matter on protection level) should submit to relevant government authorities report on natural resource usage and natural resource status within their administrative areas of responsibilities. Those reports should be based on two year work of PA employees and collaborators, not on coy-paste production. Reports should consist of following:

o Description of resources they are managing with (natural resource, bio resources, cultural resources, etc.) o Description and exact data of those resources usage in past two years (concessions, local community, economy, sport - amount and way of usage in each category). o Description of status of resources they are managing with (monitoring of resources status) o Detected problems in past two years and demands from local community o Action plane for usage of each resource for next two-years period

124

8. PROPOSAL FOR BETTER SOLUTIONS AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF PRESENT AND FUTURE SYSTEM OF PROTECTED AREAS IN MONTENEGRO (PAS)

Regarding spatial distribution of PAS their borders and types within Montenegro, hire we have several proposals in order to accomplish following goals:

o To ensure nature protection in most important areas in Montenegro o To have long-term sustainable PAS o To reach EU goals when percentage of territory under protection is about o To fill gaps in field research o To ensure connectivity and functionality of PAS

National parks – Our analysis haven’t show that area of Orijen Mountain has biological values required for higher protection level (National Park). Such situation partly could be caused by lack of biodiversity data from field research but on the other hand we are sure that we operate with basic knowledge related to this area. Furthermore, we are not sure that sixth NP in Montenegro is sustainable solution (system with 5 NP already showed problems in functionality). We all were witnesses of problems we had with functionality of latest proclaimed one, NP Prokletije, regarding restricted budget funds due to Economic Crisis which will last few more years (NP Procletije haven’t start to function yet). We are on standpoint that area of Orijen Mountain is more suitable for Regional Park than for National Park protection level. Furthermore, we think that Orijen Mountain area is most suitable for the crossborder Regional Park among Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia and that this are have all potentials to become first cross-border Regional Park among three Balkan countries.

Regarding spatial borders of already proclaimed NPs, we detected some gaps in functionality when NP Durmitor and NP Prokeltije are about. Namely, suggested area of Visitor-Zelatin Regional Park is too close to NP Prokletije borders and our standpoint is that it would more sustainable if Borders od NP Porkeltije are expanded on this territory than to have two areas with different level of protection which borders leans so close (some solution is if portion of Visitor-Zelatin area become part of NP Prokletije as a buffer zone). Completely the same situation is with NP Durmitor and Sinjajevina Regional Park. In this situation we have the same suggestion like for previous one. We think that sustainable solution is if portion of suggested Regional Papk Sinjajevina becomes part of NP Durmitor.

Regional parks – our analysis shows that other suggested Regional Parks, Maglić, Ljubišjna, Hajla-Turjak and Komovi are reasonable planned. Suggested borders of those four parks need some revision and fine tuning in order to cover all biologically important areas and to, as much at it is possible, avoid detected conflicts with economy and developmental needs. Toward accomplishing of previously stressed, we strongly suggested serious field biological research and detail mapping in those four areas.

Marine parks - Montenegro as Mediterranean country which is among all other things ecological state (Constitution of Montenegro) dedicated to sustainable development still haven’t any protected marine areas. Such situation doesn’t reflect real situation and main proclaimed developmental goals. We

125 strongly suggest to our spatial planners and to our decision makers future work on proclaiming of first marine reserve of nature in Montenegro. Of three suggested marine KBAs one is already under UNESCO protection (Kotor Bay) and solution and location for future marine park have to be find among other two KBAs (Petrovac / Buljarica / Canj / Sutomore or Trsteno KBAs)

Gaps in protection - our analysis detected three areas in Montenegro with high biodiversity values which are not under any kind of protection (present or planned). This are areas of Moračke planine, Ćemovsko polje/Cijevna River and Velika plaža /Ada Bjana / Šasko lake KBAs. KBA Moračke planine shows exceptional biodiversity richness and we think that this area have to become part of PAS in Montengro. We suggest this area for proclaiming in Regional Park which borders have to be fine-tuned on field research followed by precise mapping. Similar situation is with Velika plaža /Ada Bjana / Šasko lake KBA which areas also shows great biodiversity value. Our standpoint is that at least part of this area have to become cross-border Regional Park with Republic of Albania regarding fact that on the other side of border Republic of Albania already recognized biological values of area and proclaimed part of territory as a Park of Nature. Regarding Ćemovsko polje/Cijevna River best solution will be if at least part of Cijenva river canyon with surrounding slopes become kind of nature landscape protected area. Regarding Tivat soils area this space already is proclaimed as special nature reserve.

On the end of this study once again we wish to highlight the following: For detection and sustainable organization of protection areas within Montenegro PAS it is of essential importance that decision making process is fundamentally based and driven by reliable biological data, not on somebody “good will” or “political trade”. Regarding huge biodiversity value of almost all part of Montenegrin territory there is almost no part of Montenegro which hasn’t more than enough arguments to be proclaimed for some kind of protected areas. Other word speaking, till now first always came initiative for proclaiming of some territory for protection and every time and every biological study find more than enough biological facts for supporting such initiative. Our standpoint is that in order to have sustainable PAS within Montenegro things have to happen in right opposite way. First detailed biological research with comparative analysis that will highlight most important areas and then, based on those facts, initiative for proclaiming of some part of territory as PA should come. In this process special attention has to be paid on economical and developmental needs in order to find most sustainable solution.

126