Joint Action Plan for the Conservation of Alkaline Fens and Caladium Fens

Natura 2000 Action Plans for Habitat Groups 7210* and 7230

Workgroups for the habitat group of:

- 7210* Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae - 7230 Alkaline fens

Participating Project Partners: Lake Balaton Development Coordination Agency (LBDCA) / Balatoni Integrációs Közhasznú Nonprofit Kft. Vienna University of Technology (VIETU) / Center of Public Finance and Infrastructure Policy Federal Agricultural Research and Education Centre Raumberg-Gumpenstein (AREC) E.C.O. Institut für Ökologie

External Experts: DI Dr. Karin Hochegger, Gebietsbetreuung Natura 2000 Ennstal Mag. Daniel Kreiner, Nationalpark Gesäuse Gerhard Schmiedhofer, Naturschutzbund Steiermark Mag. Johannes Reitsamer, Gebietsbetreuung Natura 2000 Ennstal Univ. Doz. Dr. Johannes Gepp, Institut f. Naturschutz, Präsident Naturschutzbund Steiermark Mag. Klaus Krainer, arge NATURSCHUTZ Csaba Megyer, Balaton Uplands National Park Directorate Máté Magyari, Balaton Uplands National Park Directorate Miklós Óvári, Balaton Uplands National Park Directorate

GENERAL INFORMATION ...... 3

INTRODUCTION ON ACTION PLANS ...... 4

CONTEXT OF ACTION PLAN & MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 4

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF HABITATS 7210 AND 7230 ...... 5 Biogeographical distribution ...... 5 Bioinventory ...... 7 Dominating vegetative associations ...... 7 Biotope Types according to the CORINE land cover types ...... 8 Habitat characterization ...... 8 Habitat size and trend ...... 10 Human influence ...... 10

THREATS AND PRESSURES ...... 11

LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND AND POLICIES ...... 17

ACTIONS ...... 18 Overall goals ...... 18 Objectives for conservation sorted by priority – Management Concepts ...... 18 Actions necessary to reach the objectives ...... 20 Identification of knowledge Gaps ...... 11 Future Research and Monitoring ...... 21 Species Management and Protection ...... 20

LONG TERM MONITORING AND FUTURE RESEARCH ACTIVITIES ...... 21 Communication, Public Awareness...... 22 Subsidies and Funding ...... 23 Common transnational strategy for financial management of Natura 2000 ...... 23

LITERATURE: ...... 26

ANNEX: ...... 30

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Species and habitats listed and sorted by responsible BE-NATUR project partners and coordinators. .... 5 Table 2: Vegetative units covered by the habitat type 7210 ...... 7 Table 3: Vegetative units covered by the habitat type 7230 ...... 8 Table 4: Indicator species indicating certain development stages of the habitat type 7230 ...... 9 Table 5: Pressures, codes and priorities of the habitat type 7230 ...... 11 Table 6: Pressures, codes and priorities of the habitat type 7230 ...... 14 Table 7: Objectives, possible actions defined by time horizon and priority for the habitat type 7210 ...... 20 Table 8: Objectives, possible actions defined by time horizon and priority for the habitat type 7230 ...... 20

General Information

Natura 2000 is an ecological network of protected areas in the European Union, set up to conserve biodiversity in the territory of the EU Member States, by protecting natural habitats and wild flora and fauna. The aim of the network is to ensure the long-term survival of Europe's most valuable and threatened species and habitats across their entire natural range within the EU, defining a common framework for biodiversity conservation. The European Community established Natura 2000 network by the adoption of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC). The Habitats Directive establishes Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), designated by Member States with a complex procedure, following the criteria set out in the annexes of the Directive. These annexes define types of habitats and species whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation and lists of animal and plant species in need of particularly strict protection. Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for threatened and migratory species of birds are defined by the Birds Directive in order to create favourable conditions for survival or reproduction of species. SPAs should be situated in birds’ natural areas of distribution and include wintering and nesting grounds or staging posts along migratory routes, with particular attention to wetlands. Special Protected Areas (SPAs) or Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) form the Natura 2000 European network of protected sites. This network is not a system of strictly protected nature reserves that exclude all human activities, but within these sites, actions that could significantly damage protected species or habitats are to be avoided. Member States are obligated to guarantee the respect of appropriate conservation measures to maintain and restore habitats to a favourable conservation status. The Natura 2000 network now represents around 18 % of the EU’s terrestrial territory.

Hungary The designation of Natura 2000 sites was helped by an initial data collection of a PHARE project. In the CORINE Biotopes project a database was developed by 171 botanist and zoologist experts, which contained information about 156 conservation areas. On this basis, the experts proposed to be assigned to the Natura 2000 network areas. In Hungary the Natura 2000 network represents totally 525 areas. The designated Natura 2000 sites SPA and SAC are covering about 1.95 million hectares, which is about 21% of the country's territory. The two types of areas overlap on nearly 42%. 46 habitat types of community importance, 36 plant species, 91 bird species, and 105 other animal species occur in Hungary in considerable stock. The 39 % of Natura 2000 sites are protected. (More information: www.termeszetvedelem.hu)

Austria In Austria, the Natura 2000 Network represents 218 areas, this is about 15% of the land surface, from which only 159 sites are legally enacted [status of 2010]. The process of the designation of Natura 2000 sites led landowners often to uncertainty. The current management of the designated Natura 2000 sites has contributed to maintain high value natural features. At present, numerous initiatives and studies with the thematic are in progress. After 20 years of Natura 2000, many areas should be nominated additionally to the already existing Natura 2000 sites in Austria.

Introduction on Action Plans

Context of Action Plan & Management Plan

Management Plans Management Plans are defined in the statuary framework of the FFH directive and illustrated by guidelines and concepts (FANALP 2010, Sperle 2007, Ellmauer 2009). They are no binding recommendations and no consistent method is behind them. Exemplary plans are serving as best practice guides. Management plans are working as links between expert requirements and the practical implementation on site (Ellmauer 2012). Critical information such as exact location and size of locations/patches of the individual conservation features are given. Additionally, conservation measures, defined through conservation objectives, should be listed. A very detailed description for the production of management plans for Natura 2000 areas is given in a handbook prepared by Cassol et al. (2010).

Action Plans At the moment there is no comprehensive recommendation written in the FFH guideline for the development of Action Plans. A standardized and consistent manual for Action Plans is yet missing. Action plans as defined in the INTERREG SEE project BE-NATUR should serve as common tool for management of highly endangered species and habitats. Unlike management plans, only general management recommendations without any relation to a certain site are to be given in an action plan. Instead, general strategies for long term actions should form a common basement for management plans, which should follow the same target. Therefore, comprehensive knowledge about the state of the overall population and general threats and pressures is inevitable in order to create a sound management strategy for protective goods. Actually, there are some action plans, which also served as an orientation for the framework of this action plan concept. Especially, two documents are to be mentioned: “Biodiversity - The UK action plan” and the set of bird-species action plans commissioned by the European Commission and

prepared by BirdLife International. These two documents served as best practice examples for structure and content. The publication of the UK Action Plan is in response to Article 6 of the Biodiversity Convention, to develop national strategies for the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of biological resources (Sharp 1994).

BE-NATUR Project – Designation of Habitat and Species groups for transnational Action Plans

Seven “Transnational Action Plans” will be developed (four on species and three on habitats).

Habitat groups Coordinator

1-2 (2110, 2120,2130,2230) PRA, STRANDJA, VRE, TORRE GUACETO, DDNI Gianluca Salogni (VRE)

3-9 (3130, 92A0) ETANAM, TIMIS, CACAK Eleni Kostoula (ETANAM)

7 (7210, 7230) LBDCA, AREC, VIETU Hanns Kirchmeir (VIETU), Köstl

Species groups Coordinator

Ciconia ciconia NIMFEA, TIMIS, STRANDJA Fábián Zsófia (NIMFEA)

Phalacrocorax pygmeus PRA, LBDCA, VRE, CACAK, ETANAM Massimiliano Costa (PRA)

Emys orbicularis STRANDJA, TORRE GUACETO Ivan Kamburov (STRANDJA)

Liparis loselii AREC, LBDCA AREC, LBDCA Table 1: Species and habitats listed and sorted by responsible BE-NATUR project partners and coordinators.

Biological assessment of Habitats 7210 and 7230

Biogeographical distribution Both habitat types: 7210* Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae and - 7230 Alkaline fens are encountered mostly in the middle-european subatlantic- mediterranean region, which is characterized by mild winters and warm summers.

Alkaline fens

Figure 1: Distribution of Alkaline fens (7230) in Austria and in Hungary

Actually, there is no mapping of the actual distribution of the habitat type of 7230 - Alkaline fens on European level.

Cladium fens

Figure 2: Distribution of Cladium fens (7210) in Austria and Hungary

Figure 3: Distribution map of 7210 in Europe

According to Ellmauer (2005) Cladium fens can be found in almost every country of the European Union: Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Germany, Hungary, Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland, Albania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Greece, Italy, Romania, France, Portugal, Spain.

Bioinventory

Dominating vegetative associations The botanical share of a biotope is defined as a phytocoenosis, plant community or vegetative association. Each phytocoenosis is characterized by a certain species composition and a demand for more or less specific site conditions. Following a hierarchical system phytocoenosis can be classified following main types of vegetation and according to certain structural types (Dierschke 1994). According to Braun-Blanquet the standard classification for central Europe can be defined as following:

Cohort Order Suborder Class

A habitat type defined by the Habitats directive is a rather general vegetation unit based on the CORINE biotope types (COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (Ed.) (1991)), because they are the only available reference on a European level (Ellmauer 2005). In the following table vegetative units that are overlapping with the habitat types are listed and also classified. It is also indicated whether units are identical with the habitat type (=) or whether they have a broader (>) or narrower (<) range.

7210 Phragmiti-Magnocaricetea Klika in Klika et Novák 1941 > Magnocaricion elatae Koch 1926 > Caricenion rostratae (Bal.-Tul. 1963) Oberd. et al. 1967 ...... > Mariscetum serrati Zobrist 1935 = Cladietum marisci Allorge 1922 = Table 2: Vegetative units covered by the habitat type 7210

7230 Scheuchzerio-Caricetea fuscae R. Tx 1937 > Caricetalia davallianae Br.-Bl. 1949 > Caricion davallianae Klika 1934 > Amblystegio stellati-Caricetum dioicae Osvald 1925 em. Steiner 1992 < Schoenetum ferruginei Du Rietz 1925 < Junco obtusiflori-Schoenetum nigricantis Allorge 1921 < Juncetum subnodulosi Koch 1926 < Caricetum davallianae Dutoit 1924 < Amblystegio intermedii-Scirpetum austriaci Nordhagen 1928 em. Dierßen 1982 <

Eleocharitetum pauciflorae Lüdi 1921 < Caricetum frigidae Rübel 1912 < Astero bellidiastri-Saxifragetum mutatae Usinger et Wiggers 1961 < Carici flavae-Eriophoretum latifolii < Caricetum lasiocarpae < Cladio-Schoenetum < Eleocharidi uniglumi-Eriophoretum angustifolii < Menyanthetum trifoliatae < Orchio-Schoenetum nigricantis < Seslerietum uliginosae < Table 3: Vegetative units covered by the habitat type 7230

Biotope Types according to the CORINE land cover types

Embedded into the group of 4.1.1 Inland marshes

Habitat characterization

7230 – Alkaline fens Alkaline fens are peat forming wetlands that receive nutrients from sources other than precipitation and are characterized as wetlands which are mostly occupied by peat- or tufa-producing small sedge and brown moss communities. Usually, they develop on permanently waterlogged soils with a nutrient- poor, base-rich, calcareous water supply which results in rather neutral to alkaline milieu (OPW, 2009). In central Europe, alkaline fens have to be categorized as a succession stage of up-sitting water bodies towards marshland forest, depending on the abiotic environment. Above the timber line there are biotopes that keep stable on the long term, below the timber line they have to be utilized in some way to prevent reforestation (Ellmauer, 2005). This fact implies that the conservation objective has to be defined from site to site individually. In lowlands, or more general in secondary stands, alkaline fens have to be considered as “man made” and, therefore, are succession stages at different levels of development. The decision, at which level the biotope should be preserved, has to be made carefully and with respect to the ecological cross-linking. This should also implicate the role of the biotope as a stepping stone or its abundance in the regional and national context.

Bohner (2012) listed a number of species suitable to act as indicator species for different habitat conditions. This list is only valid for the central-European territory.

Indicator species typical for… Good condition Acidification Drainage Eutrophication Bare soil [ Abandonment

Carex davalliana Willemetia stipitata Trifolium montanum Alchemilla spec. Mentha arvensis Molinia caerulea

Schoenus ferrugineus Comarum palustre Orobanche gracilis Ranunculus acris ssp. acris Blysmus compressus Phragmites australis

Liparis loeselii Danthonia decumbens Briza media Filipendula ulmaria ssp. Cirsium palustre Frangula alnus

decumbens ulmaria

Epipactis palustris Agrostis capillaris Carex flacca Angelica sylvestris Trifolium repens Salix myrsinifolia

Polygala amarella Juncus effusus Prunella grandiflora Prunella vulgaris Agrostis stolonifera Betula pubescens

Primula farinosa Viola palustris Homalotrichon pubescens Caltha palustris Triglochin palustre

ssp. pubescens

Carex hostiana Mentha longifolia Table 4: Indicator species indicating certain development stages of the habitat type 7230

7210 - Cladium fens Cladium fens are usually basophilic, calcium-rich fens dominated by the great fen sedge, Cladium mariscus, but they can be also found on acid stands (e.g. peat extraction sites). The term “dominance” should be understood just for primary stands, where according to Ellmauer (2004) it is defined by a minimum coverage of 70 %. For secondary stands Stöhr (2012) gives a minimum coverage of 25 % (value 2 according to Braun-Blanquet). The great fen sedge is a tall (up to 2.5m) and robust species with long, leathery saw tooth-edged leaves producing clusters of red-brown flower spikes. The assimilation rate and, therefore the photosynthesis rate, of the saw sedge are considered to be optimal in waterlogged conditions (Saltmarsh et al., 2005). Generative reproduction is rather ancillary due to a high mortality of seedlings and high requirements on germination environment. Therefore, vegetative dispersion by creeping rhizomes is of greater importance for the great fen sedge. As a relict species from the last interglacial, C. mariscus requires a constant temperature regime and an oligotrophic to mesotrophic, oxygen-rich environment. The ecological amplitude is narrower compared to reed (Phragmites australis) in terms of nutrient regime and water table fluctuations.

Communities with C. mariscus form two principal types regarding their aspect, origin and structure: “acquatic” and “terrestrial” communities (Theocharopoulos et al., 2006). Cladium fens are characteristic on flat grounds. The broader view is that this habitat is wetter than alkaline fens (7230) with the water table at or above the surface, though fluctuations in the water table are less (NPWS, 2008). Cladium fens are often associated with alkaline fens (OPW, 2009). Basically, one can distinguish between primary and secondary types of Cladium fens. Primary stands usually appear as an element in the accretion zone of water bodies or in shallow ponds. These stands

are usually dominated by Cladium mariscus and can be considered as stable ecosystems, where no management or tending strategies are necessary (Ellmauer 2004).

Any other biotopes that show a considerable dominance of Cladium mariscus (> 70 % coverage), but still represent another habitat type can be defined as secondary stands. Abandoned or disturbed alkaline fens tend to be colonized by Cladium mariscus, but due to the environmental circumstances this habitats are just a succession stage and disappear when mown.

Habitat size and trend There are estimations for the overall area of alkaline fens in Greece (~6.000 ha), Germany (~8.400 - 9.500 ha), Belgium (~100 ha), United Kingdom (~500 ha) and Sweden (~85.000 ha). In Austria, there are estimations of an overall area of ~3.000 ha, from which 2.200 ha are situated in Natura 2000 sites (Ellmauer 2005). In Hungary, there are estimated 1.300 hectares of alkaline fens inside the Natura 2000 sites, but there are no numbers for the overall distribution area outside of protected areas.

In Hungary, there are about 1.000 ha of Cladium fens. According to Stöhr (2012), they are covering about 326 ha on 184 single stands in Austria. Estimations indicate an area distribution for Greece (~ 900 ha), Germany (1.300-1.600 ha), United Kingdom (500 ha) and Sweden (~ 6.500 ha). Wetlands in general and in particular both alkaline and Cladium fens have been selectively drained in the past and have therefore become very rare in most of the EU countries. This negative trend has to be considered as ongoing.

Human influence Human influence is considered to be the driving force for all pressures to both habitat types. The way people manage the habitats and the surrounding landscape has a big influence on biotic and abiotic factors. Change of management practices, direct or indirect interference with the water level (both groundwater and surface water bodies) or direct mechanical damages through construction and leisure activities may have an impact on the species composition and, therefore, on the conservation status of the habitats. On the other hand, human interference is usually essential for the survival of some habitat varieties, such as alkaline fens below the timber line and secondary Cladium fens.

Even though alkaline fens are different to typical litter meadows, in reality there are may shades between similar associations. Hay from alkaline fens is similar to hay from wet meadows (usually a high share of fen-sedges), and therefore not suited for feeding cattle. Due to inclusion of silicon- crystals fen-sedges are not easily digested by ruminants, whereas horses even prefer fen-sedges to sweet grass in order to the abrasive effects on their teeth of the silicon crystals. The fact that the

absorptive capacity of the hay is not best suited for litter in stables additionally lowers the value of the hay. Therefore it is becoming increasingly important for farmers to find alternative solutions instead of dumping the material. At the moment, farmers are depending on funding if they want to continue manage fens and wet meadows, which cannot be considered as a sustainable approach for nature conservation. Instead, further use for hay and biomass has to be sought in order to increase attractiveness of the management of wet meadows for farmers.

Identification of knowledge Gaps At the moment there is no European-wide mapping of the geographical extension of both habitat types. Every country should update their maps of the extension area for each habitat type to get a clear view of the actual extension. Furthermore, the actual level of knowledge regarding the Cladium fens has to be described as moderate. Especially the discrimination between secondary stands and primary stands has to be discussed, because any further conservation activities are depending on a precise definition of the certain site/stand.

Threats and pressures

For both habitat types a separate list of threats and pressures is given. For every threat the synonym and its corresponding code given by the European Union is added. (http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Natura_2000/reference_portal, 10.7.2012) All pressures are listed according to their priority (critical, high, medium, low, unknown).

Alkaline fens:

Priority Pressure Code Austria Hungary Change of management patterns A03.01, B01 Critical/High Critical Nutrient accumulation F01.01; H01.05; H02; K02.03 Critical Critical J02.01; J 02.05; K01.03; M01.02; Change of hydrology High/medium Critical M01.04; M01.05; M01.06 Mechanical damage C01.03.01; C01.03.02; E04;E06; J02.01 High High Invasive native and non-native species I01; I02 High High Biocoenotic development, succession K02.01 Unknown Unknown Table 5: Pressures, codes and priorities of the habitat type 7230

Change of hydrology During the past few centuries as an European-wide trend, almost all fens have been at least slightly drained and changed into more productive meadows and pastures. This type of artificial grassland cannot be maintained without management, because increased nutrient availability changes the species composition and enables the growth of trees and shrubs. Compaction of soils caused by bad management practices such as the use of heavy machinery, especially when soils are wet and soft, can heavily affect the ventilation and water holding capacity of soils. Another important driving force for changes in species composition is climate change. Especially in the Pannonian region a significant decrease in precipitation and rise of temperature is going to become one of the most important threats for wetlands. However, this threat is not tangible and therefore hard to combat.

J02.07 water abstractions from groundwater K01.03 drying out M01.02 droughts and less precipitation M01.04 pH-changes M01.05 water flow changes (limnic, tidal and oceanic) M01.06 wave exposure changes

Mechanical damage Due to an increase in human population and a change of settlement structures the pressure on grassland is steadily increasing over the last centuries. Redesignation of arable land into construction land is significantly reducing the number of low-productive sites, especially outside of protected areas. But also within Natura 2000 sites which are in direct vicinity to human settlements, such problems may become apparent. Another threat to open land with a low productivity is the deposition of excavated materials. The use as a landfill may also introduce the problem of contamination with pollutive materials. In case of agricultural activity, damages to the top soil caused by trampling or tractor traffic may occur. This bare soil is prone erosion and may serve as a stepping stone for invasive species or enhance reforestation.

E04 structures, buildings in the landscape E06 other urbanisation, industrial and similar activities J02.01 landfill, land reclamation and drying out, general

Nutrient accumulation Due to fertilizer application on and in the surrounding of wetlands nutrients accumulate and may have a fertilizing effect. The application of fertilizers enables the growth of some competitive plant species, leading to a change of the typical plant community.

Another source of nutrients is accumulating litter. Dead plant material not being removed by regular mowing will increase the nutrient content of soils and change species composition. Excrements of livestock as a source of nutrients may become problematic if external fodder is offered to the animals.

H01.05 diffuse pollution to surface waters due to agricultural and forestry activities A08 fertilisation H02 pollution to groundwater (point sources and diffuse sources) K02.03 eutrophication (natural) K02.04 accidification (natural)

Invasive species Vital primary stands are not very likely to be affected by alien species, only with the exception of changing the hydrological regime. Secondary stands or sites that are out of their natural equilibrium are predisposed to invasive species. Plants such as Impatiens glandulifera, Fallopia japonica and Solidago gigantea have the ability to become dominant and replace sensitive and low competitive species very quickly. Especially in Hungary a “new” neophyte is becoming increasingly problematic, Echinocystis lobata. A common way that alien species are introduced is construction work. On the one hand, vegetation cover may get disturbed and soils exposed to germination. On the other hand, seeds of invasive species may be introduced by transport and construction activity.

I01 invasive non-native species I02 problematic native species

Change of management patterns Fens are highly sensitive ecosystems and are responding to a change in disturbance patterns with a change in species composition. Extensification as well as intensification of agricultural practices such as grazing, mowing and fertilizing but also changes towards tilling practices can strongly damage these habitats. This pressure becomes increasingly exigent due to changing agricultural systems. At the moment there is a small scaled mosaic-like structure of farmers who manage their patches of land in an extensive way, mainly for self-supply. Trends indicate that favourable site will be increasingly intensified whereas decentralised farmers will stop their practices and tend to move to urban areas to earn their living. This development will result in abandonment of large, formerly mown grasslands which will be prone to succession processes. Especially for Hungary, the political changes in the 1990ies had a great influence on land management patterns. Agricultural communities have been divided into smaller, privately owned properties. Quite often, the land owners are not the land users any more, so the number of active farmers is significantly decreasing for centuries causing a high pressure on the biocultural diversity (Bernhardt et al. 2010).

Another direct threat to open grasslands with a low productivity is either natural reforestation or planting of trees by men.

A02.01 agricultural intensification A02.03 grassland removal for arable land A03.03 abandonment / lack of mowing A04.01 intensive grazing A07 use of biocides, hormones and chemicals A08 fertilization B01 forest planting on open ground Destruction of habitats Rededication of wetlands and wet grasslands into construction land is a major threat to these habitats, because agricultural land use does often bring no economic benefits any more. Deposition and filling with excavated materials also contribute to the ongoing loss of intact sites. Peat extraction, either manually or mechanically, can lead to severe deterioration of the habitat on different levels. Besides the bare destruction, changes in hydrology through drainage and aeration the peat pits can have negative effects on the conservation status of the habitat.

C01.03.01 hand cutting of peat C01.03.02 mechanical removal of peat E04 structures, buildings in the landscape E06 other urbanisation, industrial and similar activities J02.01 landfill, land reclamation and drying out, general

Cladium fens:

Pressure Code Priority J02.01; K01.03; M01.02; M01.04 Change of hydrology M01.05; M01.06 Critical Mechanical damage E04; G01; J02.05.06; J02.01 Critical I01; I02 For secondary stands high Invasive native and non-native species For primary stands low Nutrient accumulation F01.01; H01.05; H02; K02.03 Unknown For secondary stands medium Change of management patterns A03.01 For primary stands low Biocoenotic development, succession K02.01 Unknown Table 6: Pressures, codes and priorities of the habitat type 7230

Change of hydrology Due to a lowering of the water table succession processes may be started. Reed is very likely to colonize Cladium stands due to its high tolerance for fluctuating water tables. On secondary

stands, a change in soil moisture may result more likely in the growth of trees and shrubs, especially Salix- and Alnus species. Intact fens are characterized by relatively high dissolved mineral levels but few other plant nutrients (Solstice Alaska Consulting Inc. 2012). Dead parts of Cladium mariscus such as rhizomes and roots are forming a special kind peat. As a result of a decreasing water table more oxygen will be available and mineralization of organic matter will be accelerated. Independent from direct human interventions, changes in water surface level and temperature will be likely to increase due to climate change. This pressure is hard to predict and therefore difficult to tackle.

J02.01 landfill, land reclamation and drying out, general K01.03 drying out M01.02 droughts and less precipitation M01.04 pH-changes M01.05 water flow changes (limnic, tidal and oceanic) M01.06 wave exposure changes

Nutrient accumulation Fertilizer application on or in the vicinity of fens have negative effects on species composition. Another source of nutrients can be fish breeding in adjacent open waters, where inappropriate amounts of fodder are applied an excrements of animals can spread to the environment.

F01.01 intensive fish farming, intensification H01.05 diffuse pollution to surface waters due to agricultural and forestry activities H02 pollution to groundwater (point sources and diffuse sources) K02.03 eutrophication (natural)

Mechanical damage A big problem for primary stands is heavy water movement, caused by boating and other water sport activities. If boats move close to the shore waves will hit the accretion zone which can cause erosion to the shoreline and wash out the rhizomes of Cladium. The impact of waves is growing with increasing velocity of the boats. Especially at the shores of lakes the danger of mechanical damage caused by persons seeking for access to the lake is not be underestimated. Construction of infrastructures such as docks and shipping piers can also significantly harm primary Cladium stands.

E04 structures, buildings in the landscape G01 outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities J02.05.06 wave exposure changes J02.01 landfill, land reclamation and drying out, general

Invasive species

Primary stands are not very likely to be affected by alien species because dead leafs can form thick layers directly on the water surface. Secondary stands or sites that are out of their natural equilibrium are predisposed to invasive species. Plants such as Impatiens glandulifera, Fallopia japonica and, especially for some Hungarian sites, Solidago gigantea and Echinocystis lobata have the ability to become dominant and displace sensitive and low competitive species very quickly.

I01 invasive non-native species I02 problematic native species

Change of management patterns Primary Cladium fens are relatively stable ecosystems which need no active management. On secondary stands, they are sensitive to disturbances such as mowing or burning. Intensification of agricultural practices such as mowing and fertilizing but also conversion to arable land can strongly damage these habitats.

A03.01 intensive mowing or intensification

Biocoenotic development, succession Cladium mariscus is thought to be a relict species from the last interglacial. Its ecological amplitude is rather narrow concerning temperature and water table fluctuations. Increasing temperatures, however, will not pose a threat to primary Cladium stands. Natural succession, amplified by increasing temperatures, though, will pose a threat to secondary stands.

K02.01 Biocoenotic development, succession

Legislative Background and Policies

International Level

RAMSAR convention: Protection of wetlands, based on the designation as a Ramsar-site.

Hungary

In Hungary according to the Nature Conservation - Act No. LIII. of 1996 there is a national protection of all wetlands (which contain marshland and fens as well), including “ex lege” protection of Cladium mariscus.

Commission Decision

2012/10/EU of 18 November 2011 adopting, pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC, a third updated list of sites of Community importance for the Pannonian biogeographical region (notified under document number C(2011) 8187)

Reference List of habitat types and species of Pannonian Region (50KB

Austria

Exposure according to Red List Austria FFH Reeds with grassy large sedges 2 Critically endangered 7210* Subtypus Boggs with Saw sedge reeds 2 Critically endangered 7210* Reeds with small sedges 2 Critically endangered 7230

All national legislation regarding the protection of wetlands, fens and bogs can be found in the annex.

Actions

Overall goals

Because of the endangered status of these habitat types all known locations are protected by the FFH-Guideline and other legal instruments. These protected habitats have to be managed in a way that a favourable conservation status is to be kept or enhanced.

The main goal is to at least sustain the overall area of both habitat types (Austria: 7210 = 326ha (Stöhr 2012), 7230 = 3.000 ha (Ellmauer et al. 2005)) and an improvement of at least 80% towards a favourable conservation status (A) until 2020.

This goal should be reached by: To continue to maintain and enhance the biodiversity of these habitats and their characteristic species through appropriate habitat and species management. To raise awareness of the significance of these habitats and their conservation requirements. To carry out all necessary monitoring.

In the Annex there is a check list attached which can be used as supplement for protected area manager or site manager in order to implement the recommendations from the Action Plans/respectively management plans. Following the recommended points, this tool can help to avoid missing out important steps-

Objectives for conservation sorted by priority – Management Concepts Depending on the environmental requirements of each habitat type, management concepts have to be evaluated. These management concepts will be based on a clearly defined objective. Every location is different by natural means and may need slightly different approaches to reach the goal. This implies that every country is, up to a certain degree, free to choose from different approaches to reach the goals, as long as they follow the direction given in the action plan. Looking at the individual site, it is very important to discriminate between primary and secondary stands. Primary stands, both alkaline fens and Cladium fens, do not need any preservative management such as mowing or other active interventions, whereas passive measures can be necessary. On secondary stands, the situation has to be evaluated from case to case.

The main objective is to keep the hydrologic regime at a favourable level. Water level should be stable and a stable, low trophic level has to be kept.

Alkaline fens and secondary Cladium fens have to be managed in a proper and ecologically sound way (extensive land use in form of grazing, mowing, manual removal of trees and shrubs…) Keeping the habitats open an close to their natural species composition and dominance Both types of fens have to be protected against directly adjacent agricultural land to puffer the influence of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides.

Actions necessary to reach the objectives

7210 * Objective Possible actions Time Priority -Closing of all existing drainage ditches*, Essential Keeping the water body stable Mid term reinforcing any feeding water bodies -Rehabilitation and preservation of the natural Keeping trophic level of the catchment areas Medium Long term stands stable and low -Creating buffer zones such as shaws or hedge rows Keeping secondary habitats -Manual removal of emerging shrubs and trees High Short term free of trees and shrubs -Alien species control (active and preventive) Insulation against directly -Creating buffer zones such as hedge rows or Medium Short term adjacent agricultural land fallow strips Table 7: Objectives, possible actions defined by time horizon and priority for the habitat type 7210 * May also affect adjacent land, which could lead to problems with land owners. Conservation objectives of adjacent habitats may be affected negatively

7230 Objective Possible actions Time Priority -Manual removal of emerging shrubs and trees Sustaining the natural species Short term/ -Annual mowing in autumn (Sept - Oct) Essential composition long term -Alien species control -Insulation against directly adjacent agricultural land by creating buffer zones such as green belts managed without using fertilizer -Removal of top soil layer ** Maintaining the natural nutrient Mid term/ -Insulation against directly adjacent agricultural Essential/ High equilibrium Long term land by creating buffer zones such as hedge rows or fallow strips -Extensive agricultural use in form of mowing or grazing Restoring of qualitative and -restoration of drained sites by blocking or filling quantitative hydrologic in the ditches*** Mid term Essential conditions Table 8: Objectives, possible actions defined by time horizon and priority for the habitat type 7230 * Conflicts of objectives between different target species may arise due to certain management practices ** A very severe intervention that may introduce neophytes to the site and therefore has to be properly considered *** May also affect adjacent land, which could lead to problems with land owners. Conservation objectives of adjacent habitats may be affected negatively.

Identification and location of all existing wetland habitat types is the fundamental information for any further protective efforts. According to the FFH-guideline, representative locations have to be announced and integrated into the existing Natura 2000 network.

Species Management and Protection Hungary In Hungary, the evaluation of Cladium mariscus stand is somewhat problematic. According to the Hungarian Red Book it is highly protected. Treatment of Cladium mariscus causes problems, because of its monodominant stands. In appropriate circumstances it extends in other fens and displaces them. If Cladium mariscus stands occur in valuable fens its spreading should be limited or reduced, especially in the secondary stands. The already existing stands which have long been known are

under protection. It is important to maintain the water level to ensure its habitat. Sparsely occurrences of Cladium mariscus stands ensure habitat for rare species such as Carex buxbaumi, Juncus maritimus, Vertigo moulinsiana and Microtus oeconomus.

Austria Management of Cladium mariscus on secondary stands bears certain difficulties. Usually, the secondary habitat can be seen as a succession state of alkaline fens with a disturbed hydrological regime or peat excavation pits on former raised bogs. If Cladium mariscus starts to invade fens and become dominant, it could be necessary to remove it with the objective to maintain the fen habitat, which would be threatened in its conservation status. There are many other possible conflicts that may arise in the management objectives of highly endangered and sensitive species such as Liparis loeselii, Crex crex or Desmoulin whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana (Šteffek & Vavrová 2005). Thus, a conscientious assessment appreciation of values of the different conservation objectives at each site has to be carried out before planning any management measures.

Future Research and Monitoring

Long term monitoring and future research activities

Hungary Currently there are no research projects, however the National Park plans to implement long-term monitoring of the designated stands. According to our observation of Vindornya-grove within a few decades Cladium mariscus became dominant in the whole area, now overgrowing all of the open water surface. In Tapolca area it should be limited because of the protection of Primula farinosa. Economic utilization of it cannot be proven, so that only the damage of habitats means a risk.

Austria At the moment there is a monitoring programme aimed to assess the conservation status of certain habitats and species which will be finalized by the end of 2012. This monitoring, commissioned by the Umweltbundesamt Austria is based on the findings of Ellmauer & Moser (2009), who developed a concept for a monitoring according to article 11 of the Habitats directive in Austria. In autumn 2012 a series of management measures have been planned for both habitat types in the Natura 2000 site Lendspitz-Maiernigg in Klagenfurt, Austria. The main focus is put on the success of different management approaches in order to maintain alkaline fens. Following some initial measures s such as clearing and milling, a continuous mowing regime should be started. Accompanying to this, a monitoring concept has been developed in order to survey the impact of the measures and, in the

long term, the success rate of different approaches. The main indicators that are surveyed are: Abundance of neophytes, dominance of trees and shrubs, thickness of the litter layer, regenerative potential of Cladium mariscus (vegetative and generative) and surface structure.

Communication, Public Awareness

Hungary The specific communication about this species is not known, but the Red Book of protected plants and other conservation publications, brochures mention it everywhere. It is a site characteristic species so all stands are protected by law (ex lege).

Austria In many cases secondary Cladium fens and Alkaline fens are situated on potential arable land. The group of stakeholders mostly affected are farmers. Especially on secondary stands, they might use the area for pastures or hay production. It is inevitable to raise awareness over the importance and special needs of these highly adapted and rare habitats.

Common Transnational Strategy

The key to proper management of endangered habitats or species is sufficient resources in terms of money and personnel. It is difficult to give precise numbers when it comes to cost estimations. In order to have a scientifically sound basement for any management activities comprehensive and actual data about species and habitats of interest are necessary. This requires frequently carried out monitorings and investigation of the status of the favourable conservation status.

In the long term it will be inevitable to create common, national standards for the implementation of Natura 2000. An optimisation of the use of resources should be coordinated in a sustainable and long-term perspective in competence centres. Action plans should be elaborated for every habitat and every species including a priorization of the objectives, which, according to the BE-NATUR-proposal, should be put into a transnational context. On the one hand management plans have to be implemented according to uniform quality standards, on the other hand there is a need for competent supervision on-site through professional, independent protected area manager. Each country should make an effort to organize training sessions and workshops with local stakeholder, site manager and experts to enforce cooperation and to ensure sustainable coordination of functions (protection, use, recreation, welfare) on the sites.

The results of such a training session, carried out in Klagenfurt, Austria, in summer 2012 are show in the Annex. The outcome of the common discussion and working process is displayed with the Programme “Miradi” which is based on the principles of the “CMP Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation” (https://miradi.org/openstandards). This tool is highly recommended in order to create and display a logical framework of a project, problem etc.

Common transnational strategy for financial management of Natura 2000

The conservation of the multifunctional agriculture should be implemented at its best on Natura 2000 sites by national funding programmes (e.g. ÖPUL neu) for the sake of a sustainable management approach. Furthermore, it will be necessary for the public authority (state, province, community) to take responsibility for designated sites, especially where the continuation of management by the farmers is threatened due to financial or other restrictions. In the long term, a basic financing for the implementation of Natura 2000 management and monitoring has to be ensured for all EU-member states. Initiative financing, which is common for temporary limited projects in Life+ or INTERREG projects can only be used as initial subsidy for the restoration of more or less intact habitats or species conservation programmes. Further investments into management, monitoring and communication are urgently necessary and in the responsibility of national politics.

Subsidies and Funding

Status quo Hungary The distribution area of Cladium mariscus decreased in the last hundred years. The main problem is the human activities (drainage, plowing…), and improper water management. According to the Hungarian Red Book it is highly protected. Treatment of Cladium mariscus causes problems, because of its monodominant stands. In appropriate circumstances it extends in other fens and displaces them. It is a site characteristic species so all stands are protected by law (ex lege).

Status quo Austria Continuous management is the only sustainable way to preserve open grass land in the long term. Therefore, it is crucial to increase the value of the grass in order to enhance the farmer’s interest in the preservation of the land. Additionally, a certain degree of knowledge and appreciation of is necessary to keep the focus off economical interests. Extensive farming is by nature less profitable, therefore it is necessary to support the farmers who are willing to manage their land in a sustainable and ecologically sound way. Actually, there are many different kinds of subsidies and funding mechanisms.

According to the Umweltdachverband, in Austria the actually spent money for the management of Natura 2000 covers only about one third of the necessary financial resources. The yearly demand, though, is estimated to be about 2 billion €. Every EU-member state is requested to develop a “Prioritized Action Framework” (PAF) in order to plan the upcoming financial period until the end of 2012. By that all existing financial instruments should be linked (ELER, EFRE, ESF, EFF, etc). Furthermore, conservation priorities as well as management activities should be identified. There are estimations, that almost 3 % of the GDP are covered by the value creation by the ecosystem services generated by Natura 200 sites (especially CO2 trapping function of bogs and fens, water retention, prevention of natural hazards, recreation- and tourism activities…)

In Austria, there are about 3.000 ha of alkaline fens and 326 ha of Cladium fens. Whereas primary Cladium fens do not need any active maintenance, it is inevitable for alkaline fens (at least below the timber line and on stands with slightly disturbed hydrology) to be managed in terms of annual mowing. In Austria, this applies to about 80 % of all sites covering 7230 (about 2.400 ha), from which about 10 % demand intensive reactivation measures (clearing, mulching) and 20 % less intensive reactivation measures (manual removal of trees and shrubs). Mulching of reforested sites or sites with very uneven terrain formed by hummocks takes about 8 hours per hectare, which is necessary to create a surface which can be mown without larger difficulties. After this first reactivation of a alkaline fen a annual mowing regime has to be kept in order to prevent reforestation and support light- demanding species. A total of 8 h is roughly necessary to mow and clear one hectare of fen. Using a standard, light-weight tractor with standard devices such as mower, mulcher… a very rough estimation of the costs necessary for a proper management of all alkaline fens in Austria can be made:

Primary measures

Clearing Costs / h Working hour 15 4wd tractor (55kw) 23 Extra charge for twin tyres 1,65 Mulcher 200cm 11,73 Total 51,38

€/ha € for all sites manual removal of trees and shrubs 1.200 360.000 miling 411,04 123.312 Total 1.611,04 483.312

Continuous measures: Removal of hay Costs / h Mowing Costs / h Working hour 15 Working hour 15 4wd tractor (55kw) 23 4wd tractor (55kw) 23 Extra charge for twin tyres 1,65 Extra charge for twin tyres 1,65 Self loading wagon 19,9 Front mower 210cm 21,6 Tedder (400cm) 10,62 Total 61,25 Total 70,17

Hours / ha Manual removal of trees and shrubs up to 80 Miling 6 to 8 Mowing (tractor on even terrain) 3 Drying and removal of hay 5

300 ha intensive clearing à 80 manual removal and milling…………………………………..….483.312 € 600 ha low intensive clearing à 8h/ha and milling à 51,38€/h………………..…………………....30.828 € ------Overall costs for initial measures for Alkaline fens in Austria…………...………………….514.140 €

3.000 ha mowing à 3h à 61,25€/h…………………………………………...... …….183.750 € 3.000 ha drying and removal of hay à 5h à 70,17€/h…………………….………………….….…210.510 € ------Annual costs for continuous management of Alkaline fens in Austria...……………...…..394.260 €

All calculations are only very rough estimations and based on the experience of farmers and agricultural consulters. All numbers linked to monetary values are based on the calculation tool ÖKL 2012 (http://richtwerte.oekl.at/).

Literature: Bernhardt, K. G., Lapin, K., Werschonig, E. 2010: The future of plant diversity in grassland farming vegetation – a review of diversity in a strongly transformed agricultural landscape. In: Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry 26 (spec.issue), p 205-217, 2010. Publisher: Institute for Animal Husbandry, Belgrade-Zemun

Cassol, M., Fulvio, G., Favalli, M., Oriolo, G., Sgobino, F., De Colle, A. 2010. Handbuch für die Erstellung der Managementpläne. 33p.

Birdlife 2008. Financing Natura 2000: assessment of funding needs and availability of fundings from EU funds

Borhidi A. 2003: Magyarország növénytársulásai. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 610 pp.

Buzek A. 2005: Habitat conditions, ecology, resources and protection of saw sedge Cladium mariscus (L.) Pohl. in Lublin macroregion. Acta Agrophysica year: 2005, vol: 9, number: 129, pages: 1-127

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (Ed.) (1991): CORINE biotopes manual. Habitats of the European Community – A method to identify and describe consistently sites of major importance for nature conservation. Luxembourg, 300pp

Conway V.M. 1936: Studies in the autecology of Clafium mariscus R.BR. I Structure and development. VOL. XXXV, No. 3 6 JULY, 1936

Conway V.M. 1936: Studies in the autecology of Clafium mariscus R.BR. II. Environmental conditions at wicken fen, with special reference to soil temperatures and the soil atmosphere VOL. XXXV, No. 3 6 JULY, 1936

Conway V.M. 1936: Studies in the autecology of Clafium mariscus R.BR. III The aeration of the subterranean parts of the plant. VOL. XXXV, No. 3 6 JULY, 1936

Conway V.M. 1936: Studies in the autecology of Clafium mariscus R.BR. V The distribution of the species VOL. XXXV, No. 3 6 JULY, 1936

Egger, G. & Kreiner, D. 2009: Managementplan Almen. LIFE Gesäuse. Bericht der Nationalpark Gesäuse GmbH. Wenig im Gesäuse

Ellmauer, T. (Hrsg.) 2005: Entwicklung von Kriterien, Indikatoren und Schwellenwerten zur Beurteilung des Erhaltungszustandes der Natura 2000-Schutzgüter. Band 3: Lebensraumtypen des Anhangs I der Fauna-Flora-Habitat-Richtlinie. Im Auftrag der neun österreichischen Bundesländer, des Bundesministerium f. Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft und der Umweltbundesamt GmbH, 616 pp.

Ellmauer, T. & Moser, D. 2009: Konzept zu einem Monitoring nach Artikel 11 der Fauna- Flora-Habitat-Richtlinie in Österreich. Endbericht. Umweltbundesamt Wien, 126 S.

FANALP Manual for the drafting of Management plans of Natura 2000 cross-border sites http://www.fanalp.com

EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy adopted in May 2011.

Haseke, H. & Kreiner, D. 2011: Final Report. LIFE Gesäuse. Naturschutzstrategien für Wald und Wildfluss im Gesäuse. Bericht der Nationalpark Gesäuse GmbH. Wenig im Gesäuse

Holzinger, W. In prep.: Tierökologische Evaluierung von ökologischen Maßnahmen auf Almen im Nationalpark Gesäuse. Ökoteam Graz.

Illyés Z. (2011): Hazai lápi kosborfajok aktív védelmét megalapozó élőhelyi és laboratóriumi vizsgálatok, különös tekintettel a hagymaburok (Liparis loeselii) és a tőzegorchidea (Hammarbya paludosa) fajokra (Habitat studies and laboratory analyses aimed at promoting the active protection of Hungarian marsh orchids, with special regard to the species fen orchid (Liparis loeselii) and bog orchid (Hammarbya paludosa). Ph.D. Thesis, Eötvös Loránd University, 87 pp.

Illyés Z., Takács A. A., Takács G., Kiss P. (2007): Szempontok a Liparis loeselii magyarországi élőhelyeinek természetvédelmi szempontú kezeléséhez (Aspects to the conservation management of the Hungarian habitats of Liparis loeselii. In Hungarian). Természetvédelmi Közlemények 13: 403- 410.

Illyés Z., Halász K., Rudnóy Sz., Ouanphanivanh N., Garay T., Bratek Z. (2009): Diversity change of mycorrhizal fungi of orchids relationship along environmental gradient in wetlands. Appl. Bot. Food Qual. 83: 28-36.

Kovács M. (1962): Die Moorwiesen Ungarns. Verlag der Ungarischen Akademie de Wissentschaft Budapest, 214 pp.

National Parks and Wildlife Service website; www.npws.ie

Naturschutzvorschriften: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/index_en.htm

Office of Public Works 2009: Series of ecological assessments on arterial drainage maintenance No 11, Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) of the Effects of Statutory Arterial Drainage Maintenance Activities on Fens, Mires & Whorl Snails. Headford, Galway Version 0309, 77p.

Saltmarsh A., Mauchamp, A., Rambal, S. 2005: Contrasted effects of water limitation on leaf functions and growth of two emergent co-occurring plant species, Cladium mariscus and Phragmites australis

Šefferová Stanová, V., Šeffer, J., Janák, M. 2008. Management of Natura 2000 habitats. 7230 Alkaline fens

Species action plans commissioned by the European Commission and prepared by BirdLife International. (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/wildbirds/action_plans/per_species_e n.htm)

Sharp, R. 1994. Biodiversity - The UK action plan, Managed by the Inter- Departmental/Agency Steering Group (http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=5155)

Solstice Alaska Consulting Inc. 2012. Matanuska-Susitna Wetland Functions and Values Landscape-Level Assessment - Methodology and Mapping. P83

Sperle, T. 2007: Leitfaden des Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland e.V. (BUND) und des Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V. (NABU) zum Monitoring gemäß Art. 11 FFH- Richtlinie. 63 S.

Šteffek J. & Vavrová Ľ. 20 05. Pimprlík bruškatý (Vertigo moulinsiana). In: Polák P., Saxa A. (eds.): Priaznivý stav biotopov a druhov európskeho významu. ŠOP SR, Banská Bystrica: 410-411.

Stöhr, O. 2012: Transnationales Management von Natura 2000 Gebieten, Präsentation in Klagenfurt 10./11.09.2012

Theocharopoulos, M., Georgiadis, T., Dimitrellos, G., Chochliouros, S. & Tiniakou, A. 2006: Vegetation types with Cladium mariscus (Cyperaceae) in Greece. – Willdenowia 36 (Special Issue): 247-256. –ISSN 0511-9618; © 2006 BGBM Berlin-Dahlem.

Annex:

Legislative background:

Federal laws in Austria concerning the protection of fens and wetlands

Carinthia: § 8 of the Kärntner Naturschutzgesetz 2002, as amended on 31.10.2012

Salzburg: § 24 of the Salzburger Naturschutzgesetz 1999, as amended on 31.10.2012

Vorarlberg: §24 and §25 of the Vorarlberger Natuschutzgesetz 2008, as amended on31.10.2012

Burgenland: §7 of the Burgenländisches Naturschutz- und Landschaftspflegegesetz 1990, as amended on 31.10.2012

Styria: No specific protection of fens and wetlands in the Styrian Nature Protection Law.

Upper Austria: § 9 des Oberösterreichisches Natur- und Landschaftsschutzgesetzes 2001, as amended on 31.10.2012

Lower Austria: §6 of the Niederösterreichischen Naturschutzgesetz 2000, as amended on 31.10.2012

Tyrol: § 9 of the Tiroler Naturschutzgesetz 2005, as amended on31.10.2012

Vienna: §18 of the Wiener Naturschutzgesetz 2005, as amended on 31.10.2012

Check list for the Natura 2000 Action Plans for Habitat Groups 7210 and 7230

Task Yes Irrelevant Identify restraints on management Identify any restraints imposed by or associated with: Designations (site, O O local, regional) Archaeological evidence which may be buried in the fen O O Services (power, telecommunications) O O Public access/rights of way O O Land ownership or tenancy agreement Decide what you are trying to achieve Establish objectives (maintain or encourage key species? maintain status O O quo? more open water? control scrub invasion? raise water table?) Identify target habitat(s) and species O O Identify target hydrological regime O O Compare existing and target regimes and identify issues/ problems Establish how target species/habitat(s) differ from the current O O species/habitats present Establish how target hydrological/management regimes differ from current O O regimes Loss of or change in species/habitat O O Changes in hydrology or nutrient status O O Causes of changes in species/habitat/hydrology/nutrient status O O Identify necessary changes Establish what you need to do to achieve target regime/habitat or address O O problems Identify suitable techniques to achieve changes Consider appropriate vegetation, water and nutrient management O O techniques – see Section 6: Fen Vegetation Management, Section 7: Fen Water Management and O O Section 8: Managing Fen Nutrient Enrichment, Appendix VI Management for Bryophytes and O O Appendix VII Management for Vertebrates and Invertebrates Research/draw on experience elsewhere (see case studies included within O O this handbook) Evaluate suitability of techniques O O Consider how restraints identified above may limit choice of management O O options Assess what control you have over factors influencing changes, problems O O or issues Assess the costs of proposed management O O Assess whether the required management is realistically achievable O O Assess whether fen restoration is practical and sustainable O O Develop and implement action strategy to achieve objective O O Identify funding sources (see Section 12: Fens from an Economic O O Perspective) Monitor outcomes See Section 10: Monitoring to Inform Fen Management O O Review and revise strategy O O Source: The Fen Management Handbook (http://www.snh.gov.uk/about-scotlands-nature/habitats-and-ecosystems/lochs-rivers-and-wetlands/fen/ 31

Management of alpine pastures including habitat type 7230 Alkaline Fens in Gesäuse National Park (Austria/Styria/Ennstaler Alpen)

The Gesäuse National Park, also Natura 2000 site, in the Northern Limestone Alps in Austria, has gathered 10 years of experience in nature conservation since its foundation in the year 2002. Five years of nature protection management were mainly covered by a LIFE Nature project called „Conservation strategies for woodland and river in the Gesäuse“. Besides renaturations of rivers and forest stands there was a third focus on management of montainous pastures (HASEKE & KREINER 2011).

Most of these mountain pastures originate from former forested areas, by clearcutting and giving the „pristine grassland“ above the timber line and his flowers and wild herbs more space to grow. These manmade habitats are also a hot spot of „biodiversity“ in the National Park and have therefore been a main focus of management since the beginning.

During the LIFE project we elaborated the management tools for 718 hectares of mountainous pastures. Over 7% of these grasslands are considered exceedingly sensitive, most of which are wetlands and rough pasture. About 6 ha are belonging to habitat type 7230 Alkaline fens. The Managementplan Mountainous Pastures (Managementplan Almen, EGGER & KREINER 2009) includes economical and ecological parameters to optimize the grazing of the different habitat types. So different mangement strategies are evoked for different kinds of habitats. For example the following actions are listed: Mowing of areas with monotonous weeds like Rumex alpinus ••Cutting of areas overgrown with bushes (Mainly Pinus mugo) ••Restoration of watering places and water troughs ••Fencing of sensitive habitats like springs and pools, or alkaline fens ••Creation of enclosures and roundup of the cattle

Without any action by the farmers, or even better the cows, the pasture grounds will be reconquered by the forest. So even the alkaline fens need the grazing of cattle from time to time. That means that the fencing we carried out has to be opened for some time to allow extensive grazing. Otherwise the area would be reconquered by shrubs and these would mean to have quite big efforts because the alkaline fens would need to be relieved from bushes and shrubs.

We do have some permanent plots in these areas to investigate the success of these management strategies. The first documentation took place before the actions were started so that we can see the direct influence of the change in the management. For each habitat type relevees were done by the LFZ Raumberg Gumpenstein (BOHNER in prep.). The monitoring plots cover also areas with different intensity of grazing and these plots were also investigated concerning the biodiversity of some indicator species like grasshoppers, bugs and spiders. The first iteration of the investigation was done and will be published in this year (HOLZINGER in prep.).

Fig.1: Fencing of Alkaline fens on the Sulzkaralm (Gesäuse National Park)

Literatur: Bohner A. In prep.: Egger G. & Kreiner D. 2009: Managementplan Almen. LIFE Gesäuse. Bericht der Nationalpark Gesäuse GmbH. Weng im Gesäuse. Haseke H. & Kreiner D. 2011: Final Report. LIFE Gesäuse. Naturschutzstrategien für Wald und Wildfluss im Gesäuse. Bericht der Nationalpark Gesäuse GmbH. Weng im Gesäuse. Holzinger W. In prep.: Tierökologische Evaluierung von ökologischen Maßnahmen auf Almen im Nationalpark Gesäuse. Ökoteam. – Graz.