DOCSLIB.ORG

Reviewing the Coherence and Effectiveness of Implementation of Multilateral Biodiversity Agreements in Estonia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reviewing the Coherence and Effectiveness of Implementation of Multilateral Biodiversity Agreements in Estonia Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre, Publication No 25, Project Report – 2014 Reviewing the coherence and effectiveness of implementation of multilateral biodiversity agreements in Estonia Kaja Peterson, Piret Kuldna, Plamen Peev, Meelis Uustal Reviewing the coherence and effectiveness of implementation of multilateral biodiversity agreements in Estonia Kaja Peterson, Piret Kuldna, Plamen Peev, Meelis Uustal Reference: Peterson, K., Kuldna, P., Peev, P. and Uustal, M. 2014. Reviewing the coherence and effectiveness of implementation of multilateral biodiversity agreements in Estonia. Project Report, SEI Tallinn, Tallinn: 70 p. Project no 41064 Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre Lai Str 34 Tallinn 10133 Estonia www.seit.ee January–December 2013 Language editor: Stacey Noel, SEI Africa Lay-out: Tiina Salumäe, SEI Tallinn Photos: Kaja Peterson, SEI Tallinn ISBN: 978-9949-9501-4-0 ISSN: 1406-6637 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of acronyms and abbreviations ..................................................................................................................................................7 List of figures .............................................................................................................................................................................................8 List of tables ..............................................................................................................................................................................................8 Executive summary ................................................................................................................................................................................9 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 1 General framework ........................................................................................................................................................................... 12 1.1 Country profile: Estonia ........................................................................................................................................................ 12 1.2 Overview of nature protection framework .................................................................................................................... 14 2 Methodology of the evaluation ................................................................................................................................................... 17 3 The Conventions: objectives and main concept ................................................................................................................... 20 3.1 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ...................................................................................................................... 20 3.2 Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 21 3.3 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES/Washington Convention) ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 3.4 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS/Bonn Convention) .......... 23 4 Review results and observations ................................................................................................................................................. 24 4.1 Category 1. Adequate legal and policy framework .................................................................................................... 24 4.2 Category 2. Coordinated institutional and administrative framework ................................................................ 28 4.3 Category 3. Development of an integrated national implementation/action plan(s) ................................... 32 4.4 Category 4. Effective implementation and review of the plan(s) .......................................................................... 34 4.5 Category 5. Effective monitoring of the MEAs in question ...................................................................................... 35 4.6 Category 6. Consideration of objectives of the MEAs in decision making ......................................................... 37 4.7 Category 7. Adequate financing of the implementation ......................................................................................... 38 4.8 Category 8. Strong competencies and capacity .......................................................................................................... 40 4.9 Category 9. Stakeholder engagement ............................................................................................................................ 41 4.10 Category 10. Effective enforcement system ............................................................................................................... 43 4.11 Category 11. Cross-border cooperation ....................................................................................................................... 45 4.12 Category 12. Achieving the objectives ......................................................................................................................... 47 4.13 Category 13. Coordination across the cluster of MEAs ........................................................................................... 49 4.14 Category 14. Benefits for the environment ................................................................................................................. 50 4.15 Category 15. Socio-economic benefits ......................................................................................................................... 53 5 Overall assessment of implementation of four biodiversity conventions and ways for improvement ............ 56 5.1Observations and suggestions to the methodology .................................................................................................. 59 References ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 60 Annex. Checklist for reviewing the national implementation of a cluster of MEAs ..................................................... 64 STOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE TALLINN CENTRE LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Administration of nature conservation in Estonia ................................................................................................. 15 Figure 2. Examples of protection regimes applied to protected areas of various designations ............................. 15 Figure 3. The relationships between the score of implementation and the overall assessment of implementation effectiveness of the MEAs ................................................................................................................................ 18 Figure 4. Governance of the biodiversity-related conventions in Estonia ....................................................................... 31 Figure 5. CITES permits issued in Estonia, 2003–2010 ............................................................................................................ 36 Figure 6. Total number of environmental violations registered by all supervisory authorities and number of persons fined, 2005–2011 ................................................................................................................................................................. 44 Figure 7. Number of violations and persons fined in the field of protected objects of nature, 2005-2011 ........ 44 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Review categories and the type of effectiveness they address .......................................................................... 17 Table 2. Ratification (or accession) of the biodiversity conventions, protocols and agreements in Estonia ....... 24 Table 3. Biodiversity-related objectives and references to biodiversity-related conventions in relevant national policy documents, in effect as of October 2013 ....................................................................................................................... 26 Table 4. Relevant sectoral legal acts for biodiversity protection ........................................................................................ 27 Table 5. National focal points for scientific advisory bodies and initiatives under the four conventions ............ 29 Table 6. Specific action plans for biodiversity protection relevant for the four conventions ................................... 33 Table 7. Sub-programmes of the state environmental monitoring relevant for the biodiversity conventions . 35 Table 8. Membership fees of the biodiversity conventions for Estonia in 2013 ............................................................ 39 Table 9. Total number of seizures/confiscations of CITES specimens in Estonia, 2003–2010 ................................... 45 Table 10. Bilateral, regional or multilateral agreements or arrangements relevant for the biodiversity
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EUROPARC NBS Newsletter 1/2014
    EUROPARC NBS Newsletter 1/2014 http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=5108bdfadcd892894bfe63be6&... Subscribe Share Past Issues Translate Use this area to offer a short preview of your email's content. View this email in your browser Final countdown Ongoing year is the last presidency year for Estonia and Environmental Board. We are making our best to negotiate with possible next host of Nordic-Baltic Section secretariat. Many activities lie still ahead, such as interesting seminars about wooded grasslands and health issues. We rely on your good collaborations for the upcoming newsletters and other activities! Section secretariat 1 of 10 10.04.2014 9:34 EUROPARC NBS Newsletter 1/2014 http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=5108bdfadcd892894bfe63be6&... Subscribe Share Past Issues Translate President´s corner Winter in Matsalu National Park was cold, Following species are getting special but very short. Spring migration has begun attention in Estonia this year having been with first grey-lag geese, lapwings and elected so called species of the year: sky-larks here; first hundreds of whooper Ringed Seal (Pusa hispida), Common and bewick's swans have started their Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) and Alder song festival on Matsalu bay. Some of the Buckthorn (Rhamnus frangula). spring can be seen from home via internet - the "seal camera" of Vilsandi National In spite of good weather the mood is not Park is located in the grey-seals' kinder- very much so, the thoughts being held by garden: www.looduskalender.ee/node the tense situation in Ukraine. Who knows /19354 and "owl camera" of Matsalu how far the conflict can go, and there National Park is inside a tawny owl's nest: would be then losses both among people www.looduskalender.ee/node/19372 .
    [Show full text]
  • Wetland Tourism: Estonia - Soomaa National Park
    A Ramsar Case Study on Tourism and Wetlands Wetland Tourism: Estonia - Soomaa National Park Estonia, Soomaa. Fifth Season in a Soomaa Boat. © Mati Kose Estonia’s Soomaa National Park is a Soomaa National Park is the most popular land of peat bogs, naturally meandering rivers, wilderness tourism destination of the Baltic swamp forests and meadows on the rivers’ countries. Its tourism products are based on floodplains. Its bogs and rivers began to develop wilderness experiences, the uniqueness of around 10,000 years ago when the last of the Soomaa and its cultural heritage, and the quality European ice sheets retreated northwards. Today services that are offered by the local tourism the area contains some of the best preserved and entrepreneurs and stakeholders. most extensive raised bogs in Europe. Each spring, it is subject to spectacular floods over a vast area – The Park was established under Estonian a time of the year that is known locally as the ‘fifth legislation in 1993, and joined the PAN Parks season’. Soomaa also has rich wildlife which Network of European wilderness areas in 2009. It includes golden eagles, black storks, woodpeckers, also received an EDEN (European Destinations of owls, various kinds of bog waders such as golden Excellence) award from the European Commission plovers, wood sandpipers, whimbrel, curlew, great in 2009 for promoting sustainable tourism in and snipe, and corn crake, as well as elk, wild boar, around a protected area. The site has been listed beaver, wolf, lynx, and brown bear. as a Ramsar Wetland of International Importance since 1997. The Ramsar Secretariat selected 14 case studies for a publication on wetlands and sustainable tourism, to be launched at the 11th Conference of Parties, July 2012.
    [Show full text]
  • Active Raised Bogs* (7110) – Estonia
    Active raised bogs* (7110) – Estonia Conservation EU28: Endangered (EUNIS D1.11) status EE: U2 (+) Protection HD: Annex I (priority habitat) status Area (2007-12) EU: 10,200 km2 EE: 1,580 km2 MS with EE (sub-reporting level), DK, BE (CON) genuine improvement Other MS AT, BE (ATL), CZ, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, HU, IE, IT, LT, LV, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, SK, UK Photo © Herdis Fridolin Summary: Active raised bogs are a highly endangered habitat in the EU, with an estimated 90% of the original habitat lost, and the current area in unfavourable condition due to drainage, peat extraction, and afforestation. Estonia, reported an unfavourable-inadequate conservation status for the habitat in both the 2001-06 and 2007-12 periods, but a sub-reporting level improvement in the last period. This improvement resulted from strategic planning and government target setting, protection in Natura 2000 areas, and restoration projects both inside and outside conservation areas. Estonia carried out a comprehensive national inventory of mires, which was used to define the list of disturbed sites where peat extraction and drainage may still be permitted. Since 2012, the national nature conservation plan and the mire action plan set targets for peat bog restoration. Most of the active raised bog habitat is on state land, and the responsible government agency has undertaken an increasing number of large scale restoration projects. ERDF funding was used for 1,916 ha of habitat between 2007-13, and Cohesion funding has restored 369 ha since 2014, with restoration of another 4,990 ha ongoing.
    [Show full text]
  • Wolves Recolonizing Islands: Genetic Consequences and Implications for Conservation and Management
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Wolves Recolonizing Islands: Genetic Consequences and Implications for Conservation and Management Liivi Plumer1☯, Marju Keis1☯, Jaanus Remm1, Maris Hindrikson1, Inga Jõgisalu2, Peep Männil2, Marko Kübarsepp2, Urmas Saarma1* 1 Department of Zoology, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia, 2 Estonian Environment Agency, Tartu, Estonia a11111 ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work. * [email protected] Abstract After a long and deliberate persecution, the grey wolf (Canis lupus) is slowly recolonizing its OPEN ACCESS former areas in Europe, and the genetic consequences of this process are of particular Citation: Plumer L, Keis M, Remm J, Hindrikson M, interest. Wolves, though present in mainland Estonia for a long time, have only recently Jõgisalu I, Männil P, et al. (2016) Wolves started to recolonize the country’s two largest islands, Saaremaa and Hiiumaa. The main Recolonizing Islands: Genetic Consequences and Implications for Conservation and Management. objective of this study was to analyse wolf population structure and processes in Estonia, PLoS ONE 11(7): e0158911. doi:10.1371/journal. with particular attention to the recolonization of islands. Fifteen microsatellite loci were gen- pone.0158911 otyped for 185 individuals across Estonia. As a methodological novelty, all putative wolf- Editor: Sergios-Orestis Kolokotronis, Fordham dog hybrids were identified and removed (n = 17) from the dataset beforehand to avoid University, UNITED STATES interference of dog alleles in wolf population analysis. After the preliminary filtering, our final Received: December 16, 2015 dataset comprised of 168 “pure” wolves. We recommend using hybrid-removal step as a Accepted: June 23, 2016 standard precautionary procedure not only for wolf population studies, but also for other taxa prone to hybridization.
    [Show full text]
  • Last of the Wild
    as nature intended – best practice examples of wilderness management in the Natura 2000 network last of the wild OVERVIEW OF STATUS AND MONITORING OF SOME WILDERNESS RELATED SPECIES IN THE NATURA 2000 NETWORK last of the wild OVERVIEW OF STATUS AND MONITORING OF SOME WILDERNESS RELATED SPECIES IN THE NATURA 2000 NETWORK Published by PAN Parks Foundation 2009 supported by The sole responsibility lies with the author and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained here. contents contents 2 2 foreword 4 introduction 6 background 6 wilderness and wildlife 6 large spaces – large species 7 wilderness conservation in the EU 7 impetus behind further re-wilding 8 species depending on wilderness 9 large herbivores chamois 10 CENTRAL BALKAN AND RILA NATIONAL PARKS, BULGARIA MAJELLA NATIONAL PARK, ITALY ibex 14 TRIGLAV NATIONAL PARK, SLOVENIA large carnivores brown bear 17 FULUFJÄLLET NATIONAL PARK, SWEDEN RILA NATIONAL PARK, BULGARIA MAJELLA NATIONAL PARK, ITALY wolf 22 MAJELLA NATIONAL PARK, ITALY FULUFJÄLLET NATIONAL PARK, SWEDEN SOOMAA NATIONAL PARK, ESTONIA eurasian lynx 26 FULUFJÄLLET NATIONAL PARK, SWEDEN SOOMAA NATIONAL PARK, ESTONIA TRIGLAV NATIONAL PARK, SLOVENIA birds of prey white-tailed eagle 31 ARCHIPELAGO NATIONAL PARK, FINLAND conclusion 34 last of the wild – overview of status and monitoring of some wilderness related species in the natura 2000 network There are many reasons why Europe should pay more attention to its wilderness areas. Most importantly, these territories are an invaluable refuge for many species such as large mammals like the brown bear, wolf or lynx - Photo: Tamas Gereczi/gt-photo.hu foreword 4 by Hans Kampf Executive Director Large Herbivore Foundation It is more than 40 years since I realised that I wanted Secondly, at a time when they wandered and migrated to work in the field of nature conservation, preservation in enormous numbers across our regions, they influenced and development.
    [Show full text]
  • Estonia - Birds and Bears
    Estonia - Birds and Bears Dates: 20th – 27th May 2017 Estonia is situated on the Eastern coast of the Baltic Sea and is bordered by Russia to the East and Latvia to the South. The country is generally sparsely populated and once away from the major cities like Tallinn the roads are almost empty. The landscape is very flat with extensive wild bogs and rich forests, home to an abundance of wildlife. This relatively unspoilt corner of Europe contains a superb network of national parks with many tower hides scattered throughout the country making wildlife viewing easier and a real joy. Large concentrations of migratory waterfowl pass through during April and May with many species still in abundance late into spring. A trip at this time of year provides us with a very good chance of picking up a diverse variety of wildfowl including Barnacle and Brent Geese as well as Common Scoter, Velvet Scoter and Long-tailed Ducks. Other species such as White-fronted Geese, Goldeneye, Scaup, Wigeon, Pintail and Garganey are all, also likely to be encountered. It's also a great time for good numbers of passage waders, resplendent in their summer plumage including Ruff, Wood and Green Sandpipers, Temminck's Stints, Spotted Redshanks and maybe something a little more unusual such as a Broad-billed Sandpiper, Terek Sandpiper or Red-necked Phalarope. Raptors feature well with White- tailed Eagles being a daily sight along the coast whilst Montagu's, Marsh and Hen Harriers; Hobby, Honey Buzzard and Lesser-spotted Eagle are almost guaranteed. Add to this the expansive stretches of forest found throughout the country supporting a rich array of birds, animals and flowering plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Status and Conservation of Wild Land in Europe
    REVIEW OF STATUS AND CONSERVATION OF WILD LAND IN EUROPE FINAL REPORT TENDER REF: CR/2009/31 PROJECT NO: WRI/001/09 Mark Fisher1 Steve Carver1 Zoltan Kun2 Rob McMorran3 Katherine Arrell4 Gordon Mitchell4 1 Wildland Research Institute, School of Geography, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK 2 PAN Parks Foundation, PF 264, 9002 Györ, Hungary 3 Centre for Mountain Studies, Perth College UHI, Perth PH1 2BR, UK 4 School of Geography, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK 3.11.2010 Suggested citation Fisher, M., Carver, S. Kun, Z., McMorran, R., Arrell, K. and Mitchell, G. (2010). Review of Status and Conservation of Wild Land in Europe. Project commissioned by the Scottish Government. Report details This report is for the project TENDER REF: CR/2009/31 - REVIEW OF STATUS AND CONSERVATION OF WILD LAND IN EUROPE. Project commissioned by the Scottish Government Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Steering Group for their support and comments. In addition, the authors greatly appreciate the information freely given by the following people: Toby Aykroyd, Wild Europe Initiative Dr Mike Daniels, Chief Scientific Officer, JMT Dr Torbjørn Ergon, Associate Professor Department of Biology, University of Oslo and Director of Finse Alpine Research Center. Dr Norman Henderson, Executive Director of Prairie Adaptation Research Collaborative, University of Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada Dr Keith Kirby, Natural England Chris Mahon, Chair IUCN-UK National Committee Murel Merivee, Conservation planner, Environmental Protection Agency Pärnu-Viljandi, Estonia Eleanor Newson, Grazing Advice Partnership Diana Reynolds, Head of Nature Conservation & Biodiversity Policy, Nature Conservation and Biodiversity Branch, Welsh Assembly Government Vlado Vancura PAN Parks Conservation Manager, Slovakia About the Wildland Research Institute The Wildland Research Institute is a unique UK-based research group specializing in research and policy development relating to wilderness and wildland.
    [Show full text]
  • Estonian Nature Conservation in 2007
    Diversity of Nature in Estonia Estonian Nature Conservation in 2007 Diversity of Nature in Estonia ESTONIAN NATURE CONSERVATION IN 2007 Estonian Environment Information Centre Tallinn 2008 Published as 3rd book within series “Diversity of Nature in Estonia” Editor: Lauri Klein Compiled by: Taimo Aasma, Marika Arro, Lauri Klein, Reigo Roasto, Kaire Sirel, Margit Tennokene, Rene Volt, Hanno Zingel Photographs: Arne Ader, Mati Kose, Toomas Tuul, Lauri Klein, Heiko Kruusi, Reigo Roasto, Uudo Timm, Tiina Napp, Ingmar Muusikus Cover photo: Floodplain meadow at Suitsu. Matsalu National Park. Author: Mati Kose. Design by: Tõnis Kipper Printed by: Tallinna Raamatutrükikoja OÜ, Publisher: Laki 26, 12915 Tallinn, Estonia, www.trt.ee Printed on 100% recycled paper Cyclus Off set with environmentally friendly colours Copyright: Estonian Environment Estonian Environment Information Centre Information Centre, 2008 Mustmäe tee 33, 10616 Tallinn, Estonia Phone: +372 673 7577 Fax: +372 673 7599 ISSN 1406-2399 [email protected] ISBN 978-9985-881-54-5 (hard copy) www.keskkonnainfo.ee ISBN 978-9985-881-56-9 (online) 2 Foreword Dear reader, Th e book you are holding is an overview of Es- Th e purpose of this book is to provide a com- tonian nature conservation management in 2007 pact overview of Estonian nature conserva- – 16 years after the restoration of independence tion in its current state. Following accession to and three years after accession to the European international conventions, membership of the Union. It is in these most recent years of rapid European Union and updates to legal acts on economic development that nature conservation nature conservation, many innovations have been has become one of the top topics of discussion introduced in Estonian nature conservation, and a in Estonian society.
    [Show full text]
  • Latvia and Estonia February 2013 Frans De Schamphelaere and Jasmina Malevé
    Latvia and Estonia February 2013 Frans De Schamphelaere and Jasmina Malevé Introduction After hearing about stable populations of Wolf as well as Lynx in the Baltic region, we decided to spend our week off in some of the wilder areas of Latvia and Estonia. A week is short to find (one of) both species but we gave it a try anyway, with a possible prospective of a future visit and a better background on the possibilities here. We visited Kemeru National Park near Riga in Latvia and then drove further to Estonia where we spent most of our time in and around Soomaa NP, Matsalu NP and Viimsi near Tallinn. No Lynx or Wolf was seen but we got quite close and the experience of visiting this region in a quiet moment of the year (most birdwatchers go in spring) with only short days and desolate, snowy landscapes was certainly rewarding. We learned a lot about Wolf and Lynx populations in this region (both not doing too well this winter) and about how local people look upon them. Both Lynx and Wolf are still managed as game species in Estonia, leading to some sad stories during our visit. Locals told us about Wolves being shot illegally on quite a big scale, rather high hunting quota on Lynx (when a map was shown of a not so big forest area near Matsalu where 7 Lynxes were shot during winter until now, we were quite shocked...). Wolf populations are descending fastly. On the other hand, the incredibly high forested area and low densities of inhabitants provide an ecosystem which is probably unseen in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness Set out to Discover the European Wild Nature HOHE TAUERN AUSTRIA 04-05
    WILDeRNEsS Set out to discover the european wild nature HOHE TAUERN AUSTRIA 04-05 GESÄUSE AUSTRIA 06-07 WOODSMOKE ENGLAND 08-09 MAJELLA ITALIA 10-11 VERCORS FRANCE 12-13 WOLF SLOVAKIA 14-15 BERESINSKY BELARUS 16-17 KALKAPEN AUSTRIA 18-19 SAREK SWEDEN 20-21 SOOMAA ESTONIA 22-23 ADULA SWITZERLAND 24-25 ŠUMAVA CZECH REPUBLIC 26-27 LES ÉCRINS FRANCE 28-29 LIVE THE WILDERNESS IN YOUR DAILY LIFE 30-31 Whether it is the power be individually smaller and more Mountain Wilderness / france of high mountains, the fragmented than wilderness areas, For over 20 years, MW France has been promoting a global gigantic desert or the old although they often cover extensive approach of mountain in which “preservation of natural forests, the nature allows tracts. The condition of their natural environment”, “social equity” and “local economy” us to be amazed and offers us the habitat, processes and relevant species constitute the same aim. feeling of loneliness, freedom and is however often partially or substan- www.mountainwilderness.fr adventure. But if Nature gives us a tially modified by human activities lot, the artificialization of natural such as livestock herding, hunting, spaces and urbanization threaten fishing, forestry, sport activities or it. Indeed, the human impact general imprint of human artifacts.” EWS / Austria increases, jeopardizing the natural The European Wilderness Society is the only Pan-European, balance. The wilderness concept has wilderness and environmental advocacy non-profit organi- gained considerable momentum zation with a dedicated multi-cultural and very experienced To cope with this situation, a large in Europe during the last 15 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices for Developing Ecotourism in Support of National Parks in Slovakia
    BEST PRACTICES FOR DEVELOPING ECOTOURISM IN SUPPORT OF NATIONAL PARKS IN SLOVAKIA On behalf of Aevis n.o., Rybnická 3951, 06901 Snina, Slovakia LT&C is a Non-Profit Organisation registered in Norway Kystveien 2 N-4841 Arendal (Reg.No 813 329 972) 0 BEST PRACTICES FOR DEVELOPING ECOTOURISM IN SUPPORT OF NATIONAL PARKS IN SLOVAKIA Contents BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THIS HANDBOOK 3 CURRENT TOURISM TRENDS OF RELEVANCE FOR PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT 4 METHODOLOGY 9 ECOTOURISM BEST PRACTICES SUPPORTING NATIONAL PARKS 10 CHAPTER 1: STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT FOR PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT 11 CHAPTER 2: FINANCIAL MECHANISMS TO SUPPORT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 18 CHAPTER 3: TOOLS FOR ECOTOURISM PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT 24 CHAPTER 4: CERTIFICATION IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDISATION ON REGIONAL AND DESTINATION LEVEL 30 CHAPTER 5: VISITOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY NATIONAL PARK AND NGOS AND COOPERATION SCHEMES WITH TOURIST GUIDES 36 BIBLIOGRAPHY 43 ANNEX 48 Stakeholder Map 48 Interview Participants 49 This Handbook is realized within the project Fewer barriers for more benefits in utilising nature and is supported by a program ACF – Slovakia, which is financed from the EEA Financial Mechanism 2014-2021. An administrator of the program is Ekopolis Foundation in partnership with Open Society Foundation Bratislava and Carpathian Foundation. 1 BEST PRACTICES FOR DEVELOPING ECOTOURISM IN SUPPORT OF NATIONAL PARKS IN SLOVAKIA Executive Summary This practical handbook was put together target area in a national park. It was by Linking Tourism & Conservation (LT&C) highlighted that a people centered outlook, on behalf of Aevis n.o. as part of the project where ecotourism is seen as an integral “fewer barriers for more benefits in utilizing part of rural development is crucial.
    [Show full text]
  • LEGEND Tourist Information National Park More Details Overleaf
    LEGEND Tourist information National park More details overleaf KM Võru Virtsu Viljandi Valga Tartu Tallinn Rapla Rakvere Pärnu Põlva Petseri Paide Otepää Narva Luhamaa Kärdla Kuressaare Jõhvi Jõgeva Ikla Harbor Beach E 67 2 Road number Haapsalu 310 77 199 254 258 101 91 203 111 314 378 155 300 314 344 34 155 266 226 176 Ikla 208 147 110 137 197 194 149 248 65 216 268 164 174 340 233 210 217 302 189 KEHRA Town Village (over 2500 inhabitants) Hamlet (400 – 2500 inhabitants) Jõgeva 119 242 79 138 51 159 136 78 171 102 150 72 93 161 153 262 320 113 Jõhvi 206 300 197 223 136 165 216 68 251 184 234 152 178 48 240 300 381 1 Sagadi manor 12 Kuremäe monastery 22 Panga cliff 2 Kuressaare castle 13 Setu museum 23 Saka cliff Kuressaare 351 76 249 295 330 216 184 315 152 355 409 248 313 429 385 189 3 Narva castle 14 Põlva peasant museum 24 Ehalkivi boulder 344 111 233 288 292 135 125 234 145 340 402 189 306 348 378 Kärdla 4 Rakvere castle 15 Mõniste open air museum 25 Jägala waterfall Luhamaa 34 307 162 104 102 291 266 227 233 59 29 205 78 286 5 Haapsalu castle 16 Mihkli farm museum 26 Keila-Joa waterfall Narva 252 351 265 271 184 213 264 116 299 192 282 200 226 6 Koguva village 17 A. H. Tammsaare museum 27 Devil’s Grave crater 7 Vormsi church in Vargamae 28 The Pit crater Otepää 44 235 84 47 42 231 192 167 161 42 109 145 8 Ruhnu church 18 Kaali crater 29 Sipa basswood Paide 171 170 72 163 103 93 64 84 99 151 201 9 Muhu church 19 Kõpu lighthouse 30 Suur-Munamägi Petseri 65 331 179 136 98 287 262 223 257 54 10 Pöide church 20 Valaste waterfall observation
    [Show full text]