DOCSLIB.ORG

Habitats Directive and the UK Conservation Framework and SSSI System Research Paper 94/90

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Habitats Directive and the UK Conservation Framework and SSSI System Research Paper 94/90 The habitats directive and the UK conservation framework and SSSI system Research Paper 94/90 15 July 1994 The habitats directive is one of the most significant wildlife and habitats protection measures to be produced in the last ten years or even twenty years. It will be transposed into UK law by the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994. This paper considers the Regulations and reviews the existing UK conservation framework, including the SSSI system. Patsy Hughes Science and Environment Section House of Commons Library CONTENTS Page I. Introduction 1 II. The international habitat conservation framework 5 A. Bern convention 5 B. Bonn convention 5 C. Ramsar convention 6 D. Biodiversity convention 7 E. Birds Directive 7 F. Habitats Directive 12 1. Main Provisions 12 2. Effects on Bird Directive 14 III. The UK habitat conservation framework 17 A. National Parks 17 B. Areas of outstanding natural beauty 17 C. Scotland: National Scenic Areas and Natural Heritage Areas18 D. Environmentally sensitive areas 18 E. Heritage coasts 18 F. National nature reserves 19 G. Local nature reserves 19 H. Marine Nature Reserves and the problem of subtidal protection 20 IV. The UK SSSI system 24 A. Selection and designation 24 B. Management and protection 25 C. Criticisms of the SSSI system 26 1. Low penalties 27 2. Voluntary basis 27 3. Damage by third parties 28 4. Nature and cost of management agreements 29 5. Land use- the example of the Cairngorms 30 6. Off-site damaging activities 31 7. Developments on SSSIs 31 D. Damage to SSSIs 34 V. The Conservation (Natural Habitats &tc.) Regulations 38 A. Procedures for UK implementation of Directives1 38 B. Part II Conservation of natural habitats 39 1. Site selection and registration 39 2. Management agreements 41 3. Control of potentially damaging operations: SNC0s 42 4. Byelaws and compulsory purchase powers 44 5. European marine sites 44 C. Part HI Protection of species 46 D. Part IV Adaptation of planning controls 47 1. Requirement to consider effect on a European site 47 2. Planning 48 Appendix 1 51 Special Protection Areas already designated under the Birds Directive Appendix 2 54 Potential Special Areas of Conservation Appendix 3 55 Acronyms 1 Research Paper 94/90 I. Introduction The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994, which have been laid under the European Communities Act 1972, transpose into UK law the EU Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora). The Habitats Directive was adopted on 21 May 1992 and is one of the most important pieces of wildlife legislation to be agreed in the last ten or even twenty years; it is the "main vehicle through which the EC is endeavouring to safeguard its precious natural heritage"1. The Directive further implements and gives force at an EU level to the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, which was drawn up by the Council of Europe in September 19792. Loss of natural habitats has been partly a historical process in Europe, with, for instance, 90% of the woodland cover in the UK being lost over the past 5000 years3. However, it is a continuing process which has accelerated over the past 50 years. Between 1984 and 1990 there was a net decrease of 23% in the length of hedgerows in the UK, and built up land increased by 4%4. Most of the reforestation in the UK in recent years has been through an increase in conifer (5%), rather than broadleaf woodland (less than 1%). In Europe, perhaps 22% of higher plants, 52% of fish and 42% of mammal species are threatened5. In the UK, 94 endemic animal species and 168 plant species are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, which reflects "the Government's concern for those species at risk"6. The plant species richness of grasslands, woodland and arable fields in the UK has fallen significantly since 1978, and although species richness in moorlands has risen, this may be associated with disturbance4. The Directive aims to contribute towards ensuring biodiversity through the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora7. A Natura 2000 network of conservation sites will be established. They will contain specific habitat types and the habitats of vulnerable species. Habitat Directive sites will be known as special areas of conservation (SACs), but the network will also include the special protection areas (SPAs) already designated under 1"The EU Habitats Directive" John Faulks, European Environment, Spring 1994 pp12-26 2Manual of Environmental Policy: the EC and Britain Nigel Haigh, Institute for European Environmental Policy, 1992 and updated 3Biodiversity The UK Action Plan Cm 2428 HMSO 1994 4Countryside Survey 1990 Main Report Department of the Environment 1993 5Special issue on Bern Convention, Naturopa newsletter No 4 (1993) Council of Europe 6HC Deb 11 July 1994 c474w 7Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora OJ L 206, 22.7.92, p.7 Research Paper 94/90 the Wild Birds Directive 79/409/EEC. However, during negotiations on the Habitats Directive it was decided to remove some of the protection afforded to SPAs as established by case law; please see section II.F.2. All Natura 2000 sites are termed European sites in the UK Regulations. The legislative and administrative provisions needed to meet the Directive's requirements had to be put in place by Member States by June 1994. In October 1993 the DoE/Welsh Office and the Scottish Office issued consultation papers concerning the Directive's implementation8. The key existing terrestrial designation in the UK is the SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) or the ASSI (Area of Special Scientific Interest) in Northern Ireland. Around 6000 SSSIs have been notified. A 1991 report for Wildlife Link9 (the umbrella organisation for most of the UK's major conservation groups) concluded that SSSIs were failing to safeguard adequately Britain's finest wildlife sites. The National Audit Office recently reported English Nature/Nature Conservancy Council figures showing that since 1987, 869 cases of loss and damage to SSSIs have been recorded in England alone10. In 1993, 40 SSSIs suffered long term damage, a higher number than in any previous year, and 107 suffered short term damage (expected to recover within 15 years). SSSIs cannot exist below low water mark, so the key marine designation is the marine nature reserve (MNR). Yet only two MNRs have ever been established in the UK, largely because of the procedures that conservation agencies have to observe before designation, especially consultation with local fishing communities11. In a 1992 report which cited case studies to illustrate some of the problems associated with the SSSI and MNR systems, the World Wide Fund for Nature concluded12: "It is suggested that new legislation should be drafted which is sufficiently flexible to encompass protection for both marine and terrestrial sites in one designation. ...The UK Government could choose to implement the Directive in the most minimal way, avoiding the opportunity to review the mechanism for site safeguard in this country by tinkering with existing legislative and 8Implementation in Great Britain of the Council Directive on the conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Flora and Fauna (92/43/EEC), The Habitats Directive. Consultation Papers, DoE/Welsh Office and Scottish Office, both 4 October 1993 9SSSIs: A Health Check. A Report for Wildlife Link. T A Rowell, Wildlife Link, December 1991. 10Protecting and Managing Sites of Special Scientific Interest in England. National Audit Office, 11 May 1994 HMSO HC 379 11D Laffoley, J M Baxter, R J Bleakley and M Richards [in press] Marine Protected Areas in the United Kingdom: Past Experience and Future Opportunities. In: Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on the Science and Management of Protected Areas, Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia, 16-20 May 1993. 12The Habitats Directive: Time for Action WWF UK (World Wide Fund for Nature) November 1992 Research Paper 94/90 administrative structures. This is not good enough if we are to be sure of securing a future for the myriad of species and habitats which constitute our biodiversity". The former head of the Nature Conservancy Council, Sir William Wilkinson, has said13: "I think the Government should jump at the opportunity to legislate as part of its post-Rio programme on biodiversity. Otherwise I see great pressure on nature conservation sites as the recession ends. We could see a flood of developments on SSSIs, unless they are turned from a system of notification, to one of protection." However, the Directive is being implemented by statutory instrument, not through new primary legislation, and the SSSI system will be used as the bedrock for the European site network. (The use of the European Communities Act 1972 to implement Directives is discussed in section V.A.) The RSPB has commented14: "The Government has clearly done as little as possible to meet the requirements of this Directive. The chance for the UK to take the lead in wildlife conservation in Europe has been sacrificed to expediency and Government in-fighting. By allowing the annual damage to hundreds of our best wildlife sites to continue, the Government shows that it is afraid to take its responsibilities to protect habitats seriously. Relying on a voluntary system to protect important marine areas is a disaster". However, just before the present Regulations were published, English Nature commented15: "Essentially, because Britain is in the vanguard amongst European nations in the way it protects its wildlife and natural features, the Directive is likely to bring few changes for England's land managers.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conservation of the Wildcat (Felis Silvestris) in Scotland: Review of the Conservation Status and Assessment of Conservation Activities
    Conservation of the wildcat (Felis silvestris) in Scotland: Review of the conservation status and assessment of conservation activities Urs Breitenmoser, Tabea Lanz and Christine Breitenmoser-Würsten February 2019 Wildcat in Scotland – Review of Conservation Status and Activities 2 Cover photo: Wildcat (Felis silvestris) male meets domestic cat female, © L. Geslin. In spring 2018, the Scottish Wildcat Conservation Action Plan Steering Group commissioned the IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group to review the conservation status of the wildcat in Scotland and the implementation of conservation activities so far. The review was done based on the scientific literature and available reports. The designation of the geographical entities in this report, and the representation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The SWCAP Steering Group contact point is Martin Gaywood ([email protected]). Wildcat in Scotland – Review of Conservation Status and Activities 3 List of Content Abbreviations and Acronyms 4 Summary 5 1. Introduction 7 2. History and present status of the wildcat in Scotland – an overview 2.1. History of the wildcat in Great Britain 8 2.2. Present status of the wildcat in Scotland 10 2.3. Threats 13 2.4. Legal status and listing 16 2.5. Characteristics of the Scottish Wildcat 17 2.6. Phylogenetic and taxonomic characteristics 20 3. Recent conservation initiatives and projects 3.1. Conservation planning and initial projects 24 3.2. Scottish Wildcat Action 28 3.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Project FFH-Impact: Implementing the Habitats Directive in German Forests
    WORK REPORT Project FFH-Impact: Implementing the Habitats Directive in German forests Executive summary of a case study on the economic and natural impacts on forest enterprises Bernd Wippel, Gero Becker, Björn Seintsch, Lydia Rosenkranz, Hermann Englert, Matthias Dieter, Bernhard Möhring, Josef Stratmann, Johannes Gerst, Marian Paschke and Daniela Riedinger Institute of Forest Based Sector Economics in cooperation with Becker, Borchers and Wippel consultancy, the De- partment for Forest Economics and Forest Inventory of the University of Göttingen and the Faculty of Law of the Uni- versity of Hamburg. Zentrum Holzwirtschaft No. 01/2013 Universität Hamburg Johann Heinrich von Thuenen-Institute Institute of Forest Based Sector Economics Visiting address: Leuschnerstr. 91, 21031 Hamburg, Germany Postal address: Postfach 80 02 09, 21002 Hamburg, Germany Tel: 040 / 73962-301 Fax: 040 / 73962-399 Email: [email protected] Internet:http://www.vti.bund.de Institute of Forest Based Sector Economics in cooperation with Becker, Borchers and Wippel consultancy, Department of Forest Economics and Forest Management, University of Göttingen and the Faculty of Law, University of Hamburg Project FFH-Impact: Executive Summary by Bernd Wippel, Gero Becker, Björn Seintsch, Lydia Rosenkranz, Hermann Englert, Matthias Dieter, Bernhard Möhring, Josef Stratmann, Johannes Gerst, Marian Paschke and Daniela Riedinger Work report by the Institute of Forest Based Sector Economics 2013/1 Hamburg, January 2013 Final report of the project Topic: Joint research project:
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Support for Successful Implementation of the Natura 2000 Network
    Scientific support for successful implementation of the Natura 2000 network Focus Area B Guidance on the application of existing scientific approaches, methods, tools and knowledge for a better implementation of the Birds and Habitat Directives Environment FOCUS AREA B SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT FOR SUCCESSFUL i IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATURA 2000 NETWORK Imprint Disclaimer This document has been prepared for the European Commis- sion. The information and views set out in the handbook are Citation those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the Van der Sluis, T. & Schmidt, A.M. (2021). E-BIND Handbook (Part B): Scientific support for successful official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not implementation of the Natura 2000 network. Wageningen Environmental Research/ Ecologic Institute /Milieu guarantee the accuracy of the data included. The Commission Ltd. Wageningen, The Netherlands. or any person acting on the Commission’s behalf cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information Authors contained therein. Lead authors: This handbook has been prepared under a contract with the Anne Schmidt, Chris van Swaay (Monitoring of species and habitats within and beyond Natura 2000 sites) European Commission, in cooperation with relevant stakehold- Sander Mücher, Gerard Hazeu (Remote sensing techniques for the monitoring of Natura 2000 sites) ers. (EU Service contract Nr. 07.027740/2018/783031/ENV.D.3 Anne Schmidt, Chris van Swaay, Rene Henkens, Peter Verweij (Access to data and information) for evidence-based improvements in the Birds and Habitat Kris Decleer, Rienk-Jan Bijlsma (Guidance and tools for effective restoration measures for species and habitats) directives (BHD) implementation: systematic review and meta- Theo van der Sluis, Rob Jongman (Green Infrastructure and network coherence) analysis).
    [Show full text]
  • The EU Birds and Habitats Directives for Nature and People in Europe
    The EU Birds and Habitats Directives For nature and people in Europe Environment European Commission Environment Directorate General Author: Kerstin Sundseth, Ecosystems LTD, Brussels Commission coordinator: Sylvia Barova, European Commission, Natura 2000 unit B.3, – B-1049 Brussels Graphic design: NatureBureau, United Kingdom. www.naturebureau.co.uk Additional information on Natura 2000 is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers and these may be billed Additional information on the European Union is available at: http://europa.eu © European Union, 2014 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged The photos are copyrighted and cannot be used without prior approval from the photographers Printed in Belgium Printed on recycled paper that has been awarded the EU eco-label for graphic paper (http://ec.europa; eu/ecolabel) Cover photo: Puffins, Fratercula arctica, on Farne Islands, Scotland, UK © Hans Christoph Kappel/naturepl.com Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Union, 2014 3 Contents 4–5 Europe’s biodiversity – a rich natural heritage 6–7 An invaluable resource for society 8–9 Europe’s biodiversity – under threat 10–11 EU nature legislation – a unique partnership 12–13 Scope and objective 14–15 Key requirements 16–17 Species protection 18–19 The Natura 2000 Network – a coordinated ecological network 20–21 Site designation 22–23 Managing Natura 2000 sites 24–25 Natura 2000 – part of a living landscape 26–27 Promoting sustainable development 28–29 Natura 2000 permits for new plans and projects 30–31 Investing in the future for the benefit of nature and people 32–33 The challenges ahead 35 Further information and photographers’ credits 4 5 Europe’s biodiversity – a rich natural heritage Europe covers less than 5% of the planet’s land mass.
    [Show full text]
  • Sweden's Biodiversity at Risk: a Call to Action
    Sweden’s biodiversity at risk A call for action Sweden hosts a large proportion of the species that are threatened at the European level, and has the important responsibility for protecting these species within its territory. Species in Sweden require greater action to improve their status. While many species already receive some conservation attention, others do not. Species can be saved from extinction but this requires a combination of sound research and carefully coordinated efforts. Sweden as an EU Member State has committed to halting biodiversity loss by 2020 but urgent action is needed to meet this target and better monitoring capacity is required to measure if the target is met. Considerable conservation investment is needed from Sweden to ensure that the status of European species improves in the long term. This document provides an overview of the conservation status of species in Sweden based on the results of all European Red Lists completed to date. It does not provide the status of the species in the country, therefore we invite the reader to cross check national and sub- national Red Lists. Together, they can be used to help guide policies and local conservation strategies. THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES ™ The European Red List The European Red List of Species is a review of the conservation status of more than 6,000 species in Europe according to the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria and the regional Red Listing guidelines. It identifies species that are threatened with extinction at the European level so that appropriate conservation actions can be taken to improve their status.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproduction and Behaviour of European Wildcats in Species Specific Enclosures
    Symposium Biology and Conservation of the European Wildcat (Felis silvestris silvestris) Germany January 21st –23rd 2005 Abstracts Mathias Herrmann, Hof 30, 16247 Parlow, [email protected], Mobil: ++49 +171 9962910 Introduction More than four years after the last meeting of wildcat experts in Nienover, Germany, the NABU (Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V.) invited for a three day symposium on the conservation of the European wildcat. Since the last meeting the knowledge on wildcat ecology increased a lot due to the field work of several research teams. The aim of the symposium was to bring these teams together to discuss especially questions which could not be solved by one single team due to limited number of observed individuals or special landscape features. The focus was set on the following questions: 1) Hybridization and risk of infection by domestic cat - a threat to wild living populations? 2) Reproductive success, mating behaviour, and life span - what strategy do wildcats have? 3) ffh - reports/ monitoring - which methods should be used? 4) Habitat utilization in different landscapes - species of forest or semi-open landscape? 5) Conservation of the wildcat - which measures are practicable? 6) Migrations - do wildcats have juvenile dispersal? 75 Experts from 9 European countries came to Fischbach within the transboundary Biosphere Reserve "Vosges du Nord - Pfälzerwald" to discuss distribution, ecology and behaviour of this rare species. The symposium was organized by one single person - Dr. Mathias Herrmann - and consisted of oral presentations, posters and different workshops. 2 Scientific program Friday Jan 21st 8:00 – 10:30 registration /optional: Morning excursion to the core area of the biosphere reserve 10:30 Genot, J-C., Stein, R., Simon, L.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance Document on the Strict Protection of Animal Species of Community Interest Under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC
    Guidance document on the strict protection of animal species of Community interest under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC Final version, February 2007 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD 4 I. CONTEXT 6 I.1 Species conservation within a wider legal and political context 6 I.1.1 Political context 6 I.1.2 Legal context 7 I.2 Species conservation within the overall scheme of Directive 92/43/EEC 8 I.2.1 Primary aim of the Directive: the role of Article 2 8 I.2.2 Favourable conservation status 9 I.2.3 Species conservation instruments 11 I.2.3.a) The Annexes 13 I.2.3.b) The protection of animal species listed under both Annexes II and IV in Natura 2000 sites 15 I.2.4 Basic principles of species conservation 17 I.2.4.a) Good knowledge and surveillance of conservation status 17 I.2.4.b) Appropriate and effective character of measures taken 19 II. ARTICLE 12 23 II.1 General legal considerations 23 II.2 Requisite measures for a system of strict protection 26 II.2.1 Measures to establish and effectively implement a system of strict protection 26 II.2.2 Measures to ensure favourable conservation status 27 II.2.3 Measures regarding the situations described in Article 12 28 II.2.4 Provisions of Article 12(1)(a)-(d) in relation to ongoing activities 30 II.3 The specific protection provisions under Article 12 35 II.3.1 Deliberate capture or killing of specimens of Annex IV(a) species 35 II.3.2 Deliberate disturbance of Annex IV(a) species, particularly during periods of breeding, rearing, hibernation and migration 37 II.3.2.a) Disturbance 37 II.3.2.b) Periods
    [Show full text]
  • A Race to Protect Europe's Natural Heritage WWF European
    A Race to Protect Europe’s Natural Heritage WWF European Snapshot Report on the Status of Implementation of the Habitats Directive GERMANY Score: 13/30 I. Legal Aspects of Implementation Score: 3/9 Transposition: To what extent has the Habitats Directive been transposed into national or regional law? Good/complete Some gaps remaining Key/major gaps Failure to transpose transposition remaining 3 2 1 0 Whereas the Habitats Directive has been transposed into national law fairly well, it almost completely lacks transposition into regional law. This is a significant gap, since the German constitution places nature conservation within the responsibility of the 16 states (Länder). It is thus almost solely a regional matter. Only a small number of issues may be fully regulated on a nation-wide basis by national law, and major portions of the Habitats Directive are not among them. This means that, to put the Habitats Directive into full effect, transposition into state law is crucial. Major gaps remain especially in the transposition of Articles 6, 10 16 into regional law. Several states have not even attempted to improve their laws for nature protection (Naturschutzgesetz). According to the Habitats Directive’s requirements, not a single state has done so in an adequate way. In some cases, the states tried to take legal measures short of altering their regional laws (legal instruments of Richtlinie or Erlass), which is an appropriate way to cope with some details, but definitely not the whole Directive. Thus, for the majority of states transposition remains to be completed. Complaints in Progress at the European level: How significant are current Commission complaints in progress against your Member State? No outstanding Some complaints not Significant Decisions of the ECJ complaints yet dealt with complaints not yet not yet dealt with dealt with 3 2 1 0 In April 1998 the legal procedure initiated by the Commission against Germany was sent to the ECJ following Germany’s failure to provide a complete (or even nearly complete) list of sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation of the European Wildcat Wildcat European the of Conservation
    Conservation of the European Wildcat (Felis silvestris) and Addressing the Issue of Hybridization within Europe NAME: REMI OOSTENDORP SNR: 2015256 INSTITUTION: TILBURG UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT: EUROPEAN AND INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC LAW SUBMISSION DATE: MAY 2019 Table of Contents Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 2 Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5 1.1 The European wildcat .................................................................................................................... 5 1.1.1 Taxonomy ............................................................................................................................... 6 1.1.2 Habitat .................................................................................................................................... 6 1.1.3 Ecology.................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Conservation status and legal framework ..................................................................................... 7 1.3 Conservation threats ..................................................................................................................... 9 1.3.1 European wildcat population in Scotland ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WMA: the Habitats Directive
    The Habitats Directive Implications for the Water Management Alliance About this Information The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c) Regulations became law in 1994. Sheet The regulations transpose the European Habitats Directive into UK law, and Internal Drainage Boards (IDB’s) are bound by this legislation with This sheet is produced for respect to work which may affect European wildlife sites. members of Drainage Boards, particularly those With two new sites under consideration for Norfolk, it is a good time to within the Water remind all board members of our duties under this legislation, the Management Alliance. significance of which is only now being fully appreciated. It aims to remind members of the requirements of the What are European Sites? What Type of Work is Covered? Habitats Directive European sites are defined in the All work affecting a European Site is Regulations with regard to Regulations as Special Protection covered by the Habitats Directive. the activities of IDB’s. Areas (SPAs) classified under the However, only work which is likely to EC Birds Directive, and Special ‘significantly affect the special interest The responsibility rests with Areas of Conservation (SAC’s) of the site ` will require an appropriate members to ensure these including those candidates sites assessment. As the European Sites requirements are met. submitted by Government to the within the drainage districts tend to be European Commission. of interest for their wetland features, As a Board Member What this will include any work which may Should I Do? Confusingly, these may often be lower water levels and lead to a drying referred to variously as European out of the site.
    [Show full text]
  • The Habitats and Birds Directives Versus the Common Fisheries Policy: a Paradox
    article The Habitats and Birds Directives versus the Common Fisheries Policy: A Paradox Jaap Leijen Keywords Conservation of habitats, conservation of birds, fisheries conservation, exclusive competence, Habitats Directive, Birds Di- rective, CFP Basic Regulation, EU environmental policy, EU common fisheries policy. Abstract The interaction between environmental conservation and fisheries has never been easy. This is no less true for European Union (EU) policy in these areas. Numerous EU Member States, and the European Commission, are struggling with the paradox in EU law that emerges when EU environmental policy and EU fisheries policy overlap. On the one hand, EU Member States are required to take conservation or protection measures, if necessary, in specific areas to fulfil their duties stemming from the Habitats and Birds Directives. On the other hand, Member States are, to a great extent, deprived of their competence to fulfil these duties as soon as these measures possibly touch upon fisheries. There is an exclusive competence for the EU attached to the common fisheries policy of the EU. This article addresses this paradoxical situation by analysing the Habitats and Birds Directives on the one side, and the exclusive competence of the EU in the area of fisheries on the other. The article concludes by examining possible solutions to the paradox, hopefully constituting worthwhile contributions to an ungoing discussion. The article is a revised version of a report written on behalf of the Amsterdam International Law Clinic. Author Affiliations Jaap Leijen is a law student at the University of Amsterdam, where he is currently finishing the LLM Programme in European Union Law.
    [Show full text]
  • NATURA 2000 - the European Union Mechanism for Nature Conservation
    Journal of Comparative Urban Law and Policy Volume 2 Issue 1 Study Space X Marseille, France Article 10 2017 NATURA 2000 - The European Union Mechanism for Nature Conservation. Some Legal Issues. Maria Kenig-Witkowska University of Warsaw, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/jculp Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Land Use Law Commons, and the Urban Studies Commons Recommended Citation Kenig-Witkowska, Maria (2017) "NATURA 2000 - The European Union Mechanism for Nature Conservation. Some Legal Issues.," Journal of Comparative Urban Law and Policy: Vol. 2 : Iss. 1 , Article 10, 198-214. Available at: https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/jculp/vol2/iss1/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Reading Room. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Comparative Urban Law and Policy by an authorized editor of Reading Room. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Kenig-Witkowska: NATURA 2000 - The European Union Mechanism for Nature Conservatio NATURA 2000 – THE EUROPEAN UNION MECHANISM FOR NATURE CONSERVATION. SOME LEGAL ISSUES. Maria Magdalena Kenig-Witkowska* KEY WORDS: Natura 2000, Nature Conservation, Environmental Protection, Habitats Directive, Birds Directive, European Union I. NATURA 2000 – AN OVERVIEW Natura 2000 is the European Union (EU) initiative aimed at conserving the natural heritage of Europe, considered the cornerstone of the European Union nature conservation policy and law. The EU Member
    [Show full text]