Project number: 639
Project acronym: trAILs
Project title: Alpine Industrial Landscapes Transformation
DELIVERABLE D.T2.2.6
Environmental context assessment report: pilot site in Borgo San Dalmazzo, Italy
Work package: T2 – Assess AILs: assessment procedure (pilot-based)
Activity: A.T.2.2 – Co-assessment of AILs actual conditions and socio- economic context
Authors: Katharina Strobl, Kerstin Bär, Umberto Fava, Sonia Abluton, Valentina Curato
Organization: Technical University of Munich (Chair of Restoration Ecology); LAMORO Development Agency
Deliverable date: December 2019
Version: FINAL
Dissemination level: Project partners and public
Dissemination target: Project partners and public
This project is co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through the Interreg Alpine Space programme
CONTENT
1 FOREWORD ...... 3
2 ABBREVIATIONS AND TERMINOLOGY ...... 5
3 PART 1: RESULTS OF THE AIL ASSESSMENT ...... 6
3.1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ...... 6
3.2 RESULTS OF THE ASSESSMENT – POTENTIALS AND PROBLEMS ...... 8
4 PART 2: PERFORMANCE OF THE AIL ASSESSMENT ...... 13
4.1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ...... 13
4.2 ANALYSIS ELEMENTS REVIEW ...... 17
4.3 PERFORMANCE CONCLUSION ...... 22
5 PART 3: FEEDBACK OF THE REGIONAL PARTNER ...... 23
6 APPENDIX...... 25
7 LITERATURVERZEICHNIS ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
Page | 2
1 FOREWORD
The assessment report has two parts. First part is a document providing essential knowledge of a specific AIL pilot area and second part is a record of reflection on the assessment method performance in the AIL pilot site. With the ‘learn-by-doing’ approach on four different pilot area, research project partners identify and gradually specify key elements of individual assessments that work for the AILs.
Assessment reports are part of the activity WP T2: Co-assessment of AILs actual conditions and in a set of five thematic assessment reports, five different deliverables for each pilot area:
D.T2.2.2 – Existing policies on local/regional level assessment reports D.T2.2.3 – Spatial and landscape assessment reports D.T2.2.4 – Socio-demographic assessment reports D.T2.2.5 – Economic context assessment reports D.T2.2.6 – Environmental context assessment reports
Together with mini reports - D.T2.2.1, the assessment reports form an input for the workshops in the WP T3 (figure 1).
The template of the assessment report is structured to facilitate two main parts of the Co- assessment of AILs:
Part 1 – Assessment of AILs which constitutes main findings of the AILs actual conditions, results of the assessments, conclusions and recommendations. Its purpose is to be used for the activities in the WP T3 (the dossier) - workshops with relevant stakeholders.
Part 2 – Performance of the Assessment that investigates how the Assessment and its parts performed on the given AIL site. It is conducted through a reflection questionnaire for the research partner and regional partner of that AIL. Its purpose is to evaluate the analyses used in the assessment process and to monitor variability of the assessments throughout the AIL pilot sites.
Page | 3
Figure 1: Scheme of the WPT2 Assessment Framework with the general structure of the assessment reports, their input source (WP T1 and site visits) and output purpose (workshops).
Page | 4
2 ABBREVIATIONS AND TERMINOLOGY
Alien plant = Plant taxa that occurs in a given area outside its region of origin due to intentional or accidental introduction as a result of human activity (RICHARDSON et al. 2000).
Habitat type = A unit in an ecosystem that is defined by a unique vegetation structure and comprises an environment for specific species and species assemblages.
Ecosystem function = Energy, matter and information fluxes linking ecosystem compartments (MEYER et al. 2015).
Ecosystem service = Functions and products of an ecosystem that directly or indirectly benefit humans; often ecosystem functions are considered a service when they can be attributed an economical value (MEYER et al. 2015).
Indicator species = One or more taxa selected based on high sensitivity to a particular environment attribute, and then assessed to make inference about that attribute (SIDDIG et al. 2016).
Invasive plant = Naturalized plants that sustain viable populations over many generations without human intervention and produce reproductive offspring often in very large numbers providing the species with the potential to spread over large areas (RICHARDSON et al. 2000).
Succession = Process of change observed in an ecological community in relation to species structure and assemblage with time after disturbance (CONNELL & SLATYER 1977).
Page | 5
3 PART 1: RESULTS OF THE AIL ASSESSMENT
3.1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
Brownfields can be ecologically valuable. Since they often host a mosaic of numerous habitats within a small area, they are also susceptible to host a high diversity of plant and animal species. But they might also be polluted due to former use and are often colonized by invasive alien species that are potentially affecting human health, economy or biodiversity. Brownfields in the Alpine region could be an enrichment of the local biodiversity, but also threaten the largely undegraded and often rare Alpine ecosystems. Therefore, an ecological assessment of former brownfield sites is a prerequisite when aiming at their transformation. For the industrial site “Italcementi” in Borgo San Dalmazzo we analysed data and literature on its geographical situation, connectivity, potentially occurring animal species and pollution. We assessed habitat units on aerial photographs and sampled plant species in the field within the accessible perimeter.
The site is located within the valley of river Gesso, which is a largely undisturbed, dynamic Alpine river with a high wilderness potential as habitat and migratory corridor for many species. While at present the site is (partly) structurally disconnected from the river area by constructions, it could largely benefit from a better integration within the landscape. Also, there is a flooding risk within a large part of the site, which should be taken into account by not planning any use that is vulnerable to flooding. We found that more than half of the site is vegetated and another sixth is not sealed by roads or buildings. These areas have considerable potential as habitats for plants and animals. We assessed eleven different habitats. Their high diversity is correlated with a high number of species. Thus, we could identify 83 plant species outside the fence and over 100 potentially occurring animal species, that should be considered during the planning process. However, we also found seven invasive alien species, two of them with potential negative impacts on native biodiversity (black locust – Robinia pseudoacacia) and health of livestock (narrow-leaved ragwort - Senecio inaequidens). Their development and potential negative impacts should be further observed, so that eventually a suitable management can be applied. The future use of the site should also take into consideration, that cement plants are a source of soil and air contamination and cause high CO2 emissions.
Diverse and unique plants and animals in eleven habitats Consider conserving habitat and species diversity of the site while planning transformation Natural river dynamics as well as grazing increase species diversity
70% of non-sealed surfaces with high ecological potential Conserve a large proportion of vegetated areas of different successional stages by keeping some of them unmanaged and imitate industrial disturbance on others
Page | 6
Location of the site within the valley of the river Gesso, but lateral connectivity of the river is disconnected by a wall and constructed embankment High ecological potential when connecting the (currently partly disconnected) site to the river landscape
30% of asphalted and built-up surfaces concentrated in the Western part of the site Vegetation, particularly trees, would improve the microclimate, especially cooling, and at the same time generate habitats for wildlife
Seven occurring invasive alien plants, among them two might be problematic Observe their development and impacts If necessary, decide on adequate management measures in order to reduce/ eradicate them
Location of the site within the flooding zone of the river Gesso No use that is potentially vulnerable to flooding should be situated within this area
Emission of particulate matter and heavy metals from cement production Make sure public health and nearby ecosystems are not affected, if the activity of the cement factory is continued
Soil contamination with heavy metals possible at the site and in direct surrounding Further investigate the level of heavy metals in and around the site and consider industrial depollution, if necessary
Page | 7
3.2 RESULTS OF THE ASSESSMENT – POTENTIALS AND PROBLEMS
Habitats within Alpine post-industrial sites structurally differ from those of other land-use types like agricultural landscapes or nature conservation areas. More specifically, we found, that habitat units in brownfields are generally smaller and more diverse, which is similar to urban landscapes. However, in contrast to cities they host more early-successional habitats, since green spaces of brownfields usually experience more frequent and intense disturbance. This means, that they have a high potential for supporting wildlife, since diverse habitats can attract a high diversity of plants and animals. However, we would expect that only small animals would find sufficient space to complete their life cycle, while larger ones depend on sufficient landscape connectivity. Since habitats of the post-industrial sites differ from those in the surrounding Alpine landscapes, they potentially host different species, therefore enriching the regional species pool.
Habitats
The “Italcementi” site in Borgo San Dalmazzo has 56% vegetated, 17% non-sealed and 29% constructed or asphalted areas (Fig. A1, Fig. A2). Vegetated, and particularly unmanaged (early, intermediate and late succession) areas are ecologically most interesting. Sealed or constructed surfaces are of limited ecological importance. However, especially old buildings or high towers could offer nesting, resting or breeding habitats for birds, bats or small mammals. Built-up areas of the “Italcementi” site are concentrated in the western part, while eastern and southern parts are the most natural areas.
In total we identified eleven different habitats on the aerial photographs (Fig. A1, Fig. A2). Parts of them were verified in the field. The production site as well as a forested area in the eastern part are surrounded by a concrete wall. These parts were not accessible for field sampling. On the aerial photographs, it seemed that the eastern part within the walls is largely covered by woody vegetation (trees and shrubs). Either it has not been used for a long time, so that trees regained the area, or it has never been used and the trees correspond to the originally present vegetation. Since we observed a high number of the invasive alien species Robinia pseudoacacia, the first hypothesis seems more likely. Generally, late-successional shrubby and woody habitats offer habitats for different species, e.g. nesting habitats for birds, bats or beetles, and should remain largely unmanaged. Built-up areas of the “Italcementi” site are concentrated in the western part of the site and some buildings are still being used. Only few open habitats (mostly bare soil and mown green space) are found close to buildings (Fig. A3, B). This area could benefit from an increased vegetation cover. This could be reached by unsealing and leaving the area to natural succession, by seeding or planting. The plantation of trees links the advantages of being beneficial to wildlife (birds, bats, beetles…) and to humans by offering shade and cooling on hot summer days.
The southern part was accessible for field sampling. It is connected to the landscape (fully) and dynamics (partly) of the river Gesso (Fig. A3, A). As an alpine chalk river, the river Gesso shows a
Page | 8
high variability in water source contributions, temperature and sediment dynamics. Alpine rivers offer a habitat to many specialised plants and animals (BROWN et al. 2007). They also represent a corridor for migration of plant species, fish and terrestrial invertebrates (TOCKNER et al. 2003). The site would benefit from a better connectivity to the river dynamics, since this would enable free movements of plants and animals within this wildlife corridor. This could be reached by dismantling the constructed river embankments and the wall (Fig. A3, C and D). Parts of the upper floodplain, i.e. the area directly south of the wall, are grazed (most likely by cattle).
Site conditions
The five habitat units, that were assessed in the field (Fig. A1), are relatively similar in terms of temperature, continentality and soil reaction, but differ in terms of light, moisture and nitrogen availability (Fig. A4). This means, that the site in general is moderately warm to warm, which is typical for the altitude of Borgo San Dalmazzo (645 m. a.sl), but comparatively high for the Alpine range, since similar values usually occur in colline altitudes (300-800 m.a.sl.). It is also suboceanic and relatively base rich. While the early successional stages and grazed areas host plants indicating (half to) full light as well as dry and nitrogen-poor soils, plants in the later successional stages also grow in half shade, on intermediately wet and moderately nitrogen-rich soils. As expected, the intermediate successional stage has an intermediate position between early and late successional stages in terms of all site conditions.
Plant diversity
Within the habitats of the accessible area (Fig. A1), we identified 83 plants (Tab. A3, list non- exhaustive) in five different habitats, i.e. early succession, intermediate succession, late succession with shrubs, late succession with trees and managed green space by grazing. Among them, there were ten grass species, 50 herbs, eleven shrubs and twelve tree species. The most species (33) were found in the grazed area, since it represented a relatively large area and grazing is known to increase species richness in floodplain areas (SCHAICH et al. 2010). The site is also comparatively rich in woody species, since we found 24 species in the late successional stage with trees. This is explained by the heterogeneity of different habitats within the small assessed areas, since some of the recorded woody species are typical riparian species (e.g. common ash - Fraxinus excelsior, aspen and poplar - Populus spp., willows - Salix spp.), some of them are typical for hedges (e.g. hawthorn - Crataegus monogyna, dewberry and raspberry - Rubus spp., black elder - Sambucus nigra) and some are ornamental and might have been planted (e.g. white pine - Pinus strobus, common lilac - Syringa vulgaris). However, we identified only five species in the late successional stage with shrubs, since this stage only occurred on the stabilised river banks and only hosts species characteristic for this habitat. Nevertheless, it must be noted, that the herb layer in the two late successional stages was not assessed and therefore, their species richness was underestimated.
Page | 9
Invasive alien plants
We also identified seven invasive alien plants (Tab. A3, Fig. A5). Three of them (snapdragon - Antirrhinum majus, white pine - Pinus strobus and lilac - Syringa vulgaris) have probably been planted or spread from nearby gardens, since they are ornamental and occur only in low abundances. Their occurrence is not particularly threatening. A fourth one, the daisy fleabane (Erigeron annuus), occurs in higher abundances, but it is not known to have negative impact on biodiversity, human health or economy. However, it might threaten rare species in nutrient-poor grasslands (INFO FLORA 2014). The development of the four species should be further observed in order to be able to intervene in case of any threats. On the contrary, the black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) and the narrow-leaved ragwort (Senecio inaequidens) might be more problematic. Robinia pseudoacacia is threatening biodiversity by outcompeting rare species in (semi)dry habitats like for example gravel-sand pits (ŘEHOUNKOVÁ & PRACH 2008). It can become the dominating tree species in urban wastelands and brownfields. It is changing light conditions and the microclimate and alters soil conditions by fixing nitrogen, which in turn can endanger specialised plants and invertebrates (RICE et al. 2004). Where necessary, it can be eradicated by repeated cutting or competition by other trees (e.g. through succession), while it can be tolerated in less vulnerable sites (VÍTKOVÁ et al. 2017). Senecio inaequidens is not known to have any negative impacts on biodiversity or ecosystem processes (NEHRING et al. 2013), but contains pyrrolizidine alkaloids, that are toxic to invertebrates including livestock and humans (SCHERBER 2002). To date, there are no efficient mechanical (e.g. mowing, BÖHMER et al. 2001) or chemical (e.g. herbicides, CONRADI & ZEHM 2011) measures for reducing the species. However, it is a relatively poor competitor and can be reduced through competition of other plants (SCHERBER 2002).
Potentially occurring animals and habitats
While we did not sample animal species yet, we could identify over 100 potentially occurring species of birds, amphibians, reptiles, butterflies and dragonflies based on assessments of the “parco fluviale Gesso e Stura”, that is including the “Italcementi” site. Especially interesting are the common toad Bufo bufo and the dragonfly, Coenagrion mercuriale, which are listed in the Italian list of endangered species as vulnerable and near threatened. However, it appears from the aerial photograph that no standing water bodies are present at the site. Therefore, most amphibian species which occurre in parco fluviale will most likely not appear on the Italcementi site. Most dragonfly species need standing water bodies or slow-running rivers as reproduction habitats. Therefore, the site can serve as hunting habitat at the most. However, the river and temporary waterbodies are potentially habitats for certain amphibians and dragonflies.
As it appears from the aerial photograph that most of the eastern part of the site is covered by wood and shrubs, we assume that particularly butterfly species specialised on forests or forest’s edges will find suitable habitats at the Italcementi site. Grasland species might find suitable habitats at the riverside. The shrubs and walls are potential habitat elements for several species of reptiles.
Page | 10
Other interesting habitat structures might be the buildings, which could serve as breeding habitats e. g. for Barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) and Common kestrels (Falco tinnuculus). Table A4 shows a list of species from Parco fluviale Gesso e Stura and potential habitat structures for these species at the Italcementi site.
Further environmental threats: erosion, flooding, air and soil contamination
Since the site is relatively flat and mostly vegetated or sealed, the erosion risk in the “Italcementi” plant is comparatively small. Inside the walls, it seems minimal due to high vegetation cover and/ or asphalted surfaces. Only within the current river bed, frequent flooding is causing erosion. However, this is part of the natural dynamics of Alpine rivers (TOCKNER et al. 2003) and should be considered as an ecological potential for the site. Disturbances with varying frequency in different areas create heterogeneous conditions and a large variety of successional stages. Therefore, these dynamics are expected to increase the overall diversity of the site by creating habitats for numerous plants and animals.
However, they also imply a flooding risk to the site (Fig. A6). While the zone of “very high risk” is only covering areas directly adjacent to the river and do not exceed the “wall” surrounding the site, there is a “medium high” risk almost everywhere on the site. This means, that a future use should not be vulnerable to flooding.
Cement plants are a source for soil and air contamination. Previous studies near other cement plants showed that topsoil in direct neighbourhood to the plants can contain high levels of lead, copper, cadmium, chrome and zinc (OGUNKUNLE & FATOBA 2014). Therefore, soil contamination around the “Italcementi” plant is also likely. Furthermore, cement dusts contain heavy metals such as fluoride, magnesium, lead, cadmium, nickel, zinc, copper and beryllium. These elements cause stress for terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, reduce diversity and fitness of aquatic and terrestrial plant species (MUTLU et al. 2009, ERDAL & DEMIRTAS 2010). The dust also contains particulate matter smaller than 10 µm, which can cause respiratory problems (ANDERSON et al. 2012, LEONE et al.
2016). Apart from heavy metals, CO2 and NOx are emitted from cement plants. Cement is the largest source for CO2-emissions from decomposition of carbonates (ANDREW 2018).
Stakeholder Perception
In total, only 14 participated in the survey so far. Most of them were researches or worked for NGOs. Overall, late successional stages were perceived as the most aesthetic. Concerning ecosystem services, natural habitats and a healthy environment were most important to the stakeholders. The survey will be continued till March 2020 and the results will be included in an updated assessment report afterwards.
Summary and Planning recommendations
First of all, it is recommended to conduct a field survey as soon as the site is accessible. It is crucial for further planning to know about rare and protected species, as well as invasive species and soil conditions on the site. Biodiversity and soil conditions on the Italcementi site and outside the
Page | 11
fence are not comparable, as the vegetation on the site is dominated by trees and shrubs, while there’s a lot of grassland and bare soil outside the fence. Furthermore, the fence inhibits animal movement and seed dispersal.
General management recommendations are:
1. Consider connecting the site to the river landscape, as this would support natural river dynamics and increase species diversity. 2. Preserve spatial heterogeneity, as diverse vegetation types result in a high diversity of animals. This could be reached by allowing natural processes on some areas and implement grazing on other areas 3. Consider potential threats: The development of invasive plants should be observed and if necessary, measures for eradication should be taken. Also, the potential soil contamination and flood risk should be kept in mind.
Page | 12
4 PART 2: PERFORMANCE OF THE AIL ASSESSMENT
4.1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
The ecological importance of brownfields
Brownfields can be highly diverse, including rare and endangered plant and animal species (KATTWINKEL et al. 2011), since they offer a wide range of spatio-temporarily heterogeneous habitat conditions (GODEFROID et al. 2007). For example, within one site, soils can be variable, e.g. sandy next to compacted soil, and contain diverse anthropogenic admixtures like rubble, metal or charcoal. During active industrial use sites are disturbed through for example traffic, construction, demolition, soil extraction and deposition. When an area is no longer used and disturbance stops, different plant communities follow each other with time (succession). First short-lived, specialized pioneer plants colonize, that can cope with unstable substrate and extreme temperature fluctuations; later structurally more diverse communities with tall ruderal herbs. Finally, woody vegetation takes over, when areas remain undisturbed and unmanaged (MATHEY et al. 2015). Most brownfields simultaneously support several of these successional stages on various substrates, which largely determine the species present, their diversity, ecosystem functions and services (MATHEY et al. 2015).
Environmental conditions and organism assemblages in brownfields can be similar (“analogous”) to natural habitats or largely differ from pristine ecosystems (“novel”; LUNDHOLM & RICHARDSON 2010). Thus, anthropogenic ecosystems may host indigenous species, because they structurally and functionally resemble to their natural ecosystems. They may also act as a substitute habitat for species, whose natural environments have been degraded or destroyed. This is the case for example for the endangered amphibian species Bufo viridis, which has its largest populations in railway areas, or Alytes obstetricans, which regionally only occurs in brownfields (REBELE 1996). Climatic, hydrological and pedological conditions of brownfields as well as species interactions might also be largely influenced by humans rendering direct comparisons with natural areas impossible (LUNDHOLM & RICHARDSON 2010). Such “novel ecosystems” often host invasive alien species that start spreading into the Alps (DAINESE et al. 2014). Novel ecosystems have a considerable level of self-regulation in terms of ecosystem processes (e.g. decomposition, nutrient cycling, biomass production) and can be ecologically as interesting as ancient natural landscapes (KOWARIK 2018).
Brownfields offer many important ecosystem services to people. The above-described provision of habitats to plant and animal species and near-natural ecosystem processes is an indirect benefit to humans. By preserving biodiversity, we preserve natural resources as the basis for economy and well-being (EUROPEAN COMISSION 2015). Besides that, brownfields also offer more direct services to humans. Within a matrix of sealed surfaces, green areas can regulate the microclimate and therefore locally mitigate climate change (MATHEY et al. 2015). Vegetated areas prevent from
Page | 13
erosion, that is especially relevant on mining sites; post-industrial wilderness can also provide a nature experience to humans (KOWARIK 2018).
When brownfields need to be transformed due to social, economic or ecological reasons, impacts of future use on the above-described wilderness and their associated species, ecosystem processes and services need to be considered. In most European countries, it is necessary to estimate impacts of development projects (e.g. construction of factories, roads etc.) on species (and habitats) that are legally protected; and if the impact cannot be avoided, it usually needs to be compensated by establishment of new protected areas or restoration (MOILANEN & KOTIAHO 2018). Besides these legal requirements, a sustainable transformation needs to assume its ecological responsibility, e.g. by promoting endangered species or avoiding the spread of invasive alien species to intact natural ecosystems in the surroundings. Furthermore, in some cases an economic or social transformation might not be possible and the only sustainable future for the site might be an ecological transformation. In this case, the environmental setting will be particularly important.
Motivation for the environmental assessment
While there is extensive literature on the diversity, ecosystem processes and services of brownfields or wastelands, most of them focus on urban areas, and no studies exist specifically on post-industrial landscapes in mountains. Thus, it is not known, how their species dynamics, ecosystem processes and services differ from lowland brownfields. Especially, the importance of some ecosystem services like habitat provision, hazard prevention, microclimate regulation or recreational services might strongly be affected by the surrounding environmental context. Alpine ecosystems, for example, are have more adverse habitat conditions and are less affected by intensive land use than those in the lowlands. This might be make them less challenging for restoration, e.g. because plant invasions are less prominent (ALEXANDER et al. 2016), but the need for a local cooling effect or leisure areas might also be less urgent than in urban areas.
The ecological assessment within trAILs aims at identifying the ecological value of Alpine post- industrial sites as basis for transformation, restoration or conservation. Specifically, we want to (i) provide an overview of the ecological status quo in terms of habitat and species diversity as well as ecosystem processes and services, (ii) develop recommendations for managing areas of high ecological value in order to ensure their conservation, and (iii) identify degraded or damaged areas as well as potential measures for their restoration.
Methods of the environmental assessment
The environmental assessment consists of three main steps (Figure 2).
1) We will sample data on biodiversity, ecosystem processes and services (Table 1). We will start by delimitating habitat units, mostly corresponding to successional stages on aerial photographs, that we later verify in the field (Table A1). Within each habitat unit, we will assess representative indicators for habitat and species diversity, ecosystem processes and
Page | 14
services (Table 1), including the aesthetic preferences of stakeholders at the workshop by showing them representative pictures of habitat units. Thus, we can include the recreational service function of brownfields into our analysis. Each indicator or indicator group can be visualised in a map and brought to the workshop. There, we will also ask stakeholders to rank indicators according to their importance. 2) Results of individual indicators and stakeholder perception will then be combined using multifunctionality approaches (BYRNES et al. 2014, MANNING et al. 2018). This will result in an integrative map showing conservation hotspots and their threats. Data of all four pilot sites will be compared using statistical modelling, that will inform about underlying drivers of species assemblages, ecosystem functions and services. 3) Finally, we will interpret results in order to derive general and site-specific management recommendations for Alpine post-industrial sites.
Figure 2: The environmental assessment includes three main steps. Data will be sampled in the field as well as during the workshop. Maps of individual indicators can be brought to the workshop. Final planning recommendations are given after the workshop and explorative data analysis. For more details, see Table 1. ES = ecosystem.
Current challenges of the environmental assessment
The main challenge of the ecological assessment is caused by the schedule of the trAILs project contrasting seasonal periods of ecological sampling.
1) Since the workshop in Borgo San Dalmazzo will take place in September, we will not have any field results by then, as the site will most likely not be accessible till September due to the change of owner. Therefore, we can only present preliminary data based on aerial photographs and literature-based evidence. In this assessment report, we included the
Page | 15
mapping of habitat units on aerial photographs and first statistical results based on these data (see Appendix). 2) While time and travel costs are restricted within the project, there are many potential taxonomic groups and indicators for ecosystem processes and services; many of them require frequent sampling over longer time periods (e.g. butterflies at least three times) or the installation of measuring devices (e.g. temperature loggers). Since we can only assess selected indicators, we will give theoretical recommendations on a complete environmental assessment. We will also carefully select those indicators, that are most relevant to the project team and goals, and actually assess them during field season 2019.
Page | 16
4.2 ANALYSIS ELEMENTS REVIEW
Table 1: Environmental context assessment. The step numbers correspond to Figure 2. Analysis element Output description Output usage Usefulness for this AIL Step
1. Landscape Assessment of habitat units Brownfields can be ecologically The structural comparison of structure based on aerial photographs. valuable. Habitat diversity and brownfields with other land-use types structures differ from other land-use reveal their degree of uniqueness Comparison of brownfield types. that is worth being conserved. structural diversity with agricultural, natural and urban Plant and animal diversities not only As it was not possible to access the
land use. depend on environmental (habitat) site, it is unknown which habitat conditions, but also on connectivity structures are already present at the Estimate of connectivity and to other habitats in the site and how they could be dispersal potentials for target surroundings. It needs to be taken connected to other habitats in the organisms. into account, when selecting target surroundings. species for conservation or Format: maps, graphs restoration strategies.
1.1 Remote mapping 1.1 Remote 2. Habitat Definition of habitat units based The definition of habitat units sets The definition of habitat units could diversity on aerial photographs and site the scale for further on-site differ depending on the person verification. analyses. They are representative for mapping habitats on aerial certain plant and animal species, photographs and/ or on site.
ecosystem functions and services.
Page | 17
Assessment of structural diversity An increased diversity of habitats In order to increase the based on (i) diversity of habitats increases the diversity of plants and representativeness of delimited and (ii) plant communities (plant animals. habitat units, an unambiguous and openness, height, food reproducible protocol was Certain plant and animal species resources) established. This protocol evolves depend on a specific communities. throughout the project.
Only the habitat units outside the
fence could be verified in the field.. Formats: maps, graphs
3. Species Frequency and abundance of Brownfields can be highly divers, While plants can be sampled in one diversity (non-)native species, including including rare and endangered site visit at any time between May degree of rarity. The analysis will plant and animal species. Some of and September, a representative include plants and two or three them might be protected by law. assessment of many animal selected animal taxonomic We also expect a high abundance of taxonomic groups requires repeated groups (e.g. reptiles, amphibians, invasive alien species. surveys (e.g. three visits); this means 1.2 On site mapping 1.2 site On butterflies, dragonflies, carabids) it can be resource and time Biodiversity status quo is the basis consuming. Therefore, three groups for identifying environmental that are ecologically meaningful at targets (e.g. conservation of the pilot site scale and useful in the protected species or diverse future planning process were communities), environmental threats selected. (e.g. invasive alien species) and environmental management options However, the on-site mapping was (e.g. managing green spaces). not possible. Plants have been Formats: maps, tables, graphs sampled only around the site.
Page | 18
4. Habitat Assessment of (i) habitat Specific habitat conditions and A representative and quantitative conditions and conditions including disturbance processes (or functions) determine analysis of some ecosystem ecosystem regime, soil moisture and successional dynamics of processes and services needs to be processes contamination as well as of (ii) (semi)natural ecosystems, including repeated at several points of time ecosystem processes including the establishment of plant and throughout the year (e.g. soil soil biological activity and soil animal species. They (i) can be a biological activity differs according to nutrients. conservation target on their own, season). This would require repeated and (ii) need to be taken into site visits, that are costly. Because of
account for future conservation and that, we do fewer measurements Formats: maps, tables, graphs restoration strategies. (that allow for comparisons within sites, but not with literature). 5. Ecosystem Assessment of ecosystem Vegetated areas of brownfields services processes, that are relevant for provide important ecosystem humans. It includes an estimate services, i.e. can be useful for The on-site assessment can only be of erosion protection (plant cover human purposes. They can protect started next year, since the and slope), microclimate from erosion, have a cooling effect vegetation period is almost over in (temperature) and aesthetic or serve as recreation areas. september and most animal species landscape appeal (ranking of are not as active anymore as they are pictures by stakeholders at in spring / summer. Accessing the workshops). site before september has not been possible Formats: maps, tables, graphs, pictures
Page | 19
6. Stakeholder Ranking of most of the above Ecosystem services are perceived The stakeholder perception was perception mentioned analyses elements: (i) differently by different stakeholders. surveyed at the workshop. However, species diversity, (ii) ecosystem The perceived importance needs to as only few stakeholders participated processes and (iii) ecosystem be taken into account for identifying in the survey, an online-survey is services by stakeholders at environmental targets and for conducted right now. workshops. developing conservation or restoration strategies.
1.3 Workshop survey 1.3 Workshop Format: table 7. Environmental Integration of status quo A spatial visualisation of targets and Evaluation not yet possible. potentials and analyses (species diversity, threats will help identify threats ecosystem functions and conservation and restoration zones. ecosystem services) and stakeholder ranking in order to identify environmental potentials (targets) or threats, e.g. invasive alien species, erosion, contamination
2..1 Descriptive analysis 2..1 Descriptive Format: 2 maps
Page | 20
(8. Underlying Statistical analyses for Statistical analyses help understand Evaluation not yet possible, as drivers) understanding underlying drivers relationships between targets (plant species diversity and ecosystem of species diversity, ecosystem and animal diversity, ecosystem functions could not be investigated functions and services using data processes and services) and on the site. of all four pilots. explanatory variables (connectivity,
analysis habitat conditions) and serve as a
basis for deriving management Formats: statistical models, 2.2. Explorative data 2.2.Explorative options. graphs 9. Environmental Management measures for At the site scale: Spatially explicit Evaluation not yet possible. management conserving or restoring strategy for valorising the AIL from
recommendations biodiversity, ecosystem processes an environmental perspective and services
At the Alpine scale: General
3.Planning guideline for practitioners how to include environmental aspects into Formats: map, text their transformation strategy
Page | 21
4.3 PERFORMANCE CONCLUSION
Which elements of the method were found crucial based on the results of the assessment and table X?
The mapping of habitat units is crucial, since it can be done on aerial photographs and even if it is not guaranteed, that it is without mistakes, it can serve as a basis for many further analyses. The mapping of vegetation is a good means for evaluating site conditions, since plants indicate abiotic conditions like light, water or nutrient availability. If carried out in a stratified randomised sampling, its sampling is comparatively fast and therefore efficient. Soil analyses are rapid in the field, but more laborious in the lab, but is crucial for identifying the present conditions, that need to be taken into account for future transformation strategies. Butterfly and reptile sampling should ideally be repeated three to four times in different seasons. However, two repetitions – as done within the trAILs project – can give a first insight in the diversity of those species groups.
What modifications of the method will be considered for future assessments of AIL?
The mapping protocol for habitat units on aerial photographs will be gradually be adapted during the assessment of other pilots. The here presented methods correspond to the optimum sampling, that should be carried out before thinking about transformation strategies. However, since some methods would need continued and repeated site visits, we could not test all of them. Therefore, we concentrated on measurements, that can be done with one site visit (habitats, vegetation, soil) and tested more laborious methods with a reduced sampling (butterflies, reptiles). After assessment of all 4 pilot sites, we will evaluate our methods in terms of resource efficiency and feasibility.
Page | 22
5 PART 3: FEEDBACK OF THE REGIONAL PARTNER
Do you find the results useful and which ones?
From our point of view, the data most interesting is the ones concerning the ecologically and environmental value of Italcementi site. From the assessment emerged that the area is already hosting a mosaic of numerous habitats within a small area and it results also susceptible to host a high diversity of plant and animal species. On the other hand the research also consider the fact that the site is also high polluted due to its former use and it is colonized by invasive alien species that are potentially affecting the possible natural context.
During the investigation activities the researchers identified eleven different habitats, a big potential for the biodiversity of the site. Italcementi site and the surroundings can host 83 plant species and over 100 potentially occurring animal species that should be considered during the planning process.
In our opinion, knowing the site's environmental situation represents an additional and unexpected potential, that the major player in the policy-decision making process have to take in to account. It’s really useful to know that the site area and the surroundings have considerable potential as habitats for plants and animals.
Have you learned something about the site that you did not know before? What was it?
We didn’t know that the site is also comparatively rich in woody species, the researchers found 24 species in the late successional stage with trees. Either it has not been used for a long time, so that trees regained the area, or it has never been used and the trees correspond to the originally present vegetation. From our point of view, this is a really relevant element to take in account also for the future economic development of the area, that would be strictly connected with the emerging craft sector and for the next development of the touristic sector.
Will you be able to use any of the results and how?
When brownfields need to be transformed due to social, economic or ecological reasons, impacts of future use on the above-described wilderness and their associated species, ecosystem processes and services need to be considered. So, LAMORO could use all the results about the ecologically value of the site to implement awareness raising actions among the population and the decision-policy makers to create a new vision on the site (not more an industrial and polluted area, but a potential good natural system for plants and animals) that it could be useful for its further regeneration.
Will you be able to take any additional actions based on the assessment results, what are they?
Yes, we could work on the result about the flooding risk: the “very high risk” zone is the one covering areas directly adjacent to the river and do not exceed the “wall” surrounding the site,
Page | 23
but there is a “medium high” risk almost everywhere on the site. Stimulate the public debate on this risk could be useful to assure that the future use should not be vulnerable to flooding.
Which analysis elements are more useful (look at the spreadsheet 4.2 and appendix results)?
From our point of view, it could be really important to deepen the elements concerning the environmental management recommendations that they will be able to bring concrete solutions to “the table” of decision and policy makers.
Any suggestions to make this assessment method better?
No, in our opinion it’s ok like this.
Page | 24
6 APPENDIX
Table A1: Criteria for the delimitation of habitat units in AILs. Habitat units smaller than 10 m2 area or 2 m width are integrated into larger habitat units (exceptions: vegetated walls, single trees and bare as well as vegetated rocks).
Habitat unit Mapping protocol for aerial photographs
Successional stages
Bare rocks Vegetation cover <10%, consolidated substrate, min. area 4 m2 Vegetated rocks Vegetation cover >10%, consolidated substrate, min. area 4 m2 Vegetation cover <10%, Bare soil loose substrate Early succession with pioneer Vegetation cover <50% vegetation
Intermediate succession with ruderal or Vegetation cover >50%, herbaceous vegetation dominated by ruderal or herbaceous plants
Late succession with spontaneous Vegetation cover >50%, shrubs dominated by shrub species Late succession with spontaneous Vegetation cover >50%, wood dominated by tree species Other habitat units
Sealed/ asphalted (e.g. traffic) Sealed or asphalted surface
Linear feature, frequently or permanently disturbed Open trails by traffic
Built-up (e.g. buildings) Temporary and permanent buildings
Artificial vegetated walls, min. length 20 m, min. Vegetated walls height 2 m Vegetated area, that is regularly managed (mown, Managed green space (e.g. gardens) grazed, ...) or includes ornamental plants Trees or tree groups dominated by trees with Single trees or tree groups >50 cm DBH Ponds, ditches, rivers or streams, that are Open water permanently filled with water
Page | 25
Fig. A1: Habitat units of the “Italcementi” site in Borgo San Dalmazzo as defined in Table A1. Results in the shaded area are based on aerial photographs and have not been verified in the field.
Page | 26
Open water 7,7% Trail open
2% Bare soil 7% Managed green space Early succession 9% 9%
Intermediate succession 2% Built-up 13% Late succession shrub 13%
Sealed/ asphalted 15% Late succession wood 22% Individual tree-…
Fig. A2: Composition of habitat units in Borgo San Dalmazzo as delimited in Fig. A1. Results are mostly based on aerial photographs and not verified in the field.
Page | 27
A) River Gesso within the perimeter of the B) Managed green spaces between buildings site
C) Constructed riverbank that is laterally D) Wall around the site that is inhibiting disconnecting the site from the river movement of many plants and animals
Fig. A3: Habitats and landscapes of the “Italcementi” site and its direct surroundings within the delimited perimeter (Fig. A1)
Page | 28
Site indicator values after ELLENBERG
9,0 sun warm continental moist basic rich 8,1 8,0 7,6 7,5 7,3 6,9 7,37,2 6,6 6,3 7,1 6,06,6 7,0 6,26,2 6,0 5,8 6,0 5,7 5,45,6 5,0 4,4 5,0 4,0 4,34,0 3,8 4,2 4,1 3,8 4,0 3,1 3,2 3,0
2,0
1,0 shade cold oceanic dry acidic poor
0,0
light
nitrogen
moisture
soil reaction soil
temperature continentality early succession intermediate succession late succession shrub late succession wood managed green space
Fig. A4: Site conditions (mean values and standard error) of the five present habitat units as indicated by the recorded plant species (indicator values after ELLENBERG et al. 2001). Low values indicate shaded, cold, oceanic, dry, acidic or nitrogen poor conditions, while high values point at sunny, warm, continental, moist, base or nitrogen rich conditions respectively.
Page | 29
Table A3: Occuring plant species in the assessed area of pilot site for each successional stage. None of the species is listed as rare or endangered in the IUCN Red List of endangered species for Italy (https://www.iucnredlist.org/search/list). Some species are classified as invasive. (DAISIE (2008): www.europe-aliens.org, Global Invasive Species Database (2019): www.iucngisd.org/gisd/search.php) early intermediate managed late succ. late succ. Invasive Scientific name Italian name succession succession green space shrub wood species Grass Arabis ciliata Arabetta cigliata x Arrhenaterum elatius Avena altissima x Bromus hordeaceus Forsacco peloso x x Chenopodium album Farinello comune x Festuca dei Festuca ovina montoni x x x Hordeum murinum Orzo murino x Lolium perenne Lioetto perenne x Melica ciliata Melica barbata x x
Panicum capillare Panico capillare x x Fienarola Poa compressa compressa x Herbs Achillea millefolium Achillea millefoglie x Achnatherum calamagrostis Cannella argentea x Bocca di leone Antirrhinum majus comune x x
Page | 30
early intermediate managed late succ. late succ. Invasive Scientific name Italian name succession succession green space shrub wood species Artemisia absinthinum Assenzio vero x Artemisia campestris Assenzio di campo x Artemisia vulgaris Assenzio selvatico x Calamintha nepeta Mentuccia comune x x Carduus nutans Cardo rosso x Centaurea stoebe Fiordaliso stebe x x x Centaurium erythraea Centauro maggiore x Convoluvulus arvensis Convolvolo x Crepis tectorum Radicchielle dei tetti x Daucus carota Carota x Dipsacus fullonum Cardo x Echium vulgare Viperina azzurra x x x Gramigna Elymus hispidus intermedia x x x Erigeron annuus Cespica annua x x x Erophila verna Draba primaverile x Euphorbia stricta Euforbia stretta x Galium mollugo Caglio bianco x Hedera helix Edera comune x
Page | 31
early intermediate managed late succ. late succ. Invasive Scientific name Italian name succession succession green space shrub wood species Helianthemum nummularium Eliantemo maggiore x Sferracavallo Hippocrepis comosa comune x Humulus lupulus Luppolo x Knautia arvensis Ambretta x Lactuca perennis Lattuga rupestre x Linaria vulgaris Lionjola comune x Lotus corniculatus Ginestrino x Erba medica Medicago lupulina lupulina x Melilutous albus Meliloto bianco x x Origanum vulgare Origano comune x Garofanina Petrorhagia saxifraga spaccasassi x x Piantaggine Plantago lanceolata lanciuola x x Plantago media Piantaggine pelosa x Cinquefoglie piè Pontentilla anserina d'oca x
Page | 32
early intermediate managed late succ. late succ. Invasive Scientific name Italian name succession succession green space shrub wood species Cinquefolgie Potentilla neumanniana primaticcia x x Reseda lutea Reseda comune x Salvastrella Sanguisorba officinalis maggiore x x Securigera varia Cornetta ginestrina x Sedum album Borracina bianca x Sedum rupestre Borracina rupestre x Sedum sexangulare Borracina insipida x x Senecione Senecio inaequidens sudafricano x x x Taraxacum officinale Taràssaco comune x Trifolium pratense Trifoglio die prati x Trifolium repens Trifoglio bianco x Urtica dioica Ortica x Verbasco falso Verbascum densiflorum barasso x x Verbasco tasso Verbascum thapsus barbasso x Vicia parviflora Veccia gracile x
Page | 33
early intermediate managed late succ. late succ. Invasive Scientific name Italian name succession succession green space shrub wood species Shrubs Clematis vitalba Clematide vitalba x x x Cornus sanguinea Sanguienella x Crataegus monogyna Biancospino x Rosa spec. Rosa x x Rubus caesius Rovo bluastro x Rubus idaeus Lampone x Salix caprea Salicone x Salix elaeagnos Salice ripaiolo x x Salix purpurea Salice rosso x x Sambucus nigra Sambuco comune x Syringa vulgaris Lillà comune x x Trees Acer pseudoplatanus Acero di monte x Betula pendula Betulla bianca x Fraxinus excelsior Frassino maggiore x Juglans regia Noce bianco x Pinus strobus Pino strobo x x
Page | 34
early intermediate managed late succ. late succ. Invasive Scientific name Italian name succession succession green space shrub wood species Pinus sylvestris Pino silvestre x Populus alba Pioppo bianco x Populus nigra Pioppo nero x x Populus tremula Pioppo tremulo x x Prunus avium Ciliegio x Prunus cerasus Ciliegio aspro x Robinia pseudoacacia Robinia x x x
Page | 35
A) Erigeron annuus B) Robinia pseudoacacia
C) Senecio inaequidens
D) Antirrhinum majus E) Panicum capillare F) Pinus strobus G) Syringa vulgaris
Fig. A5: Invasive alien species found during the site mapping. Sources: Pictures A-C: K. Strobl (June 2019). Picture E: www.floraweb.de. Pictures D, F, G: www.infoflora.ch
Page | 36
Table A2: Potentially occurring target animals based on occurrences within the “parco fluviale Gesso e Stura” including the “Italcementi” site. Sources: Birds: TOFFOLI (2008), Amphibians: OLIVERO (2007), Butterflies: GERBAUDO (2006), Dragonflies: PETTAVINO & OLIVERO (2004) Taxonomic group Scientific name Italian name Potential habitats on site Birds Casmerodius albus Airone bianco maggiore - * species with special Pernis apivorus Falco pecchiaiolo - conservation interest in Parco fluviale Milvus migrans Nibbio Bruno - Accipiter gentilis Astore - Accipiter nisus Sparviere - Falco tinnunculus Gheppio buildings Falco peregrinus Falco pellegrion buildings Charadrius dubius Corriere piccolo floodplain Actitis hypoleucos Piro piro piccolo floodplain Streptopelia turtur Tortora selvatica woods Athene noctua Civetta trees Alcedo atthis Martin pescatore floodplain Merops apiaster Gruccione - Upupa epops Upupa woods Picus viridis Picchio verde woods Hirundo rustica Rondine buildings Phoenicurus phoenicurus Cordirosso woods Muscicapa striata Pigliamosche sparse forests Lanius collurio Averla piccolo shrubs Passer montanus Passera mattugia trees Carduelis cannabina Fanella shrubs Amphibians Bufo bufo (vulnerable) Rospo comune - temporary Bufotes viridis Rospo smeraldino waterbodies Hyala arborea Raganella - Lissotriton vulgaris Tritone punteggiato - Rana esculenta Rana ibrida dei fossi -
Page | 37
Taxonomic group Scientific name Italian name Potential habitats on site Rana dalmatina Rana agile - Rana lessonae Rana di Lessona -
Rana temporaria Rana montana riverbank Reptiles Anguis fragilis Orbettino shrubs Hierophis viridiflavus Biacco shrubs, walls Lacerta bilineata Ramarro occidentale shrubs, walls Natrix natrix Biscia dal collare floodplain Podarcis muralis Lucertola muraiola walls Butterflies Aglais io Vanessa io various Aglais urticae Vanessa dell’ortica various Anthocharis cardamines Aurora various Aporia crataegi Pieride del biancospino various Argynnis aglaja NA various Argynnis adippe NA woods Argynnis paphia Pafia woods Boloria dia NA - Brenthis daphne Dafne woods Carcharodus alceae NA - Callophyrus rubi NA various Celastrina argiolus NA - Coenonympha pamphilus Ninfa minore - Colias croceus Limoncella - Cupido alcetas NA floodplains Cupido argiades NA - Cupido minimus NA - Erynnis tages NA - Glaucopsyche alexis NA - Gonepteryx rhamni Cedronella wood, shrubs Hesperia comma NA -
Page | 38
Taxonomic group Scientific name Italian name Potential habitats on site Iphiclides podalirius Podalirio sparse forests Issoria lathonia NA - Kanetisa circe NA woods Lampides boeticus NA - Lasiommata megera Megera various Leptidea sinapis NA shrubs Limenitis camilla NA woods Lycaeides idas NA - Lycaena tityrus NA - Lysandra bellargus NA - Maculinea arion Licena azzura del timo - Maniola jurtina NA various Melanargia galathea NA - Melitaea didyma NA - Melitaea phoebe NA - Minois dryas NA - Ochlodes venatus Ochlodes venatus forest edges Papilio machaon Papilio machaon - Pararge aegeria Pararge aegeria woods Pieris brassicae Cavolaia maggiore various Pontia daplidice NA - Pieris napi Pieride del navone forest edges Pieris rapae Cavolaia minore various Polygonia c-album NA wood, shrubs Polyommatus dorylas NA - Polyommatus icarus Icaro various Pyrgus malvoides NA shrubs Pyronia tithonus NA forest edges Satyrium ilicis NA forest edges
Page | 39
Taxonomic group Scientific name Italian name Potential habitats on site Vanessa atalanta Atalanta various Vanessa cardui Vanessa del cardo various Dragonflies Calopteryx splendens NA - Calopteryx virgo NA river Chalcolestes viridis NA - Lestes sponsa NA - Lestes dryas NA - Lestes virens NA - Sympecma fusca NA - Platycnemis pennipes NA - Erythromma viridulum NA - Erythromma lindenii NA - Ceriagrion tenellum NA - Coenagrion puella NA - Coenagrion caerulescens NA river Coenagrion mercuriale NA - castellani (Near threatened) Enallagma cyathigerum NA - Ischnura elegans NA - Ischnura pumilio NA Aeshna cyanea NA Aeshna mixta NA Anax imperator NA Hemianax ephippiger NA temporary waterbodies Onychogomphus forcipatus NA river unguiculatus Cordulegaster bidentata NA - Cordulegaster boltonii NA -
Page | 40
Taxonomic group Scientific name Italian name Potential habitats on site Crocothemis erythraea NA Libellula depressa NA Libellula fulva NA Orthetrum albistylum NA Orthetrum brunneum NA Orthetrum cancellatum NA - Orthetrum coerulescens NA - Sympetrum depressiusculum NA - (Endangered) Sympetrum fonscolombii NA - Sympetrum meridionale NA - Sympetrum pedemontanum NA floodplain Sympetrum sanguineum NA temporary waterbodies
Page | 41
Fig. A6: Map of flood risk. Data from Geoportale Nazionale - Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare (2010).
Page | 42
Fig. A7: Stakeholders perception on aesthetic value of different habitat units and importance of ecosystem services. So far, only 14 stakeholders participated in the survey.
Page | 43
7 LITERATURVERZEICHNIS
ALEXANDER, J. M., LEMBRECHTS, J. J., CAVIERES, L. A., DAEHLER, C., HAIDER, S., KUEFFER, C., LIU, G., MCDOUGALL, K., MILBAU, A., PAUCHARD, A., REW, L. J. & SEIPEL, T. (2016): Plant invasions into mountains and alpine ecosystems. Current status and future challenges. – Alpine Botany 126 (2): 89–103.
ANDERSON, J. O., THUNDIYIL, J. G. & STOLBACH, A. (2012): Clearing the air: a review of the effects of particulate matter air pollution on human health. – Journal of Medical Toxicology 8 (2): 166–175.
ANDREW, R. M. (2018): Global CO2 emissions from cement production. – Earth System Science Data 10 (1): 195–217.
BÖHMER, H. J., HEGER, T. & TREPL, L. (2001): Fallstudien zu gebietsfremden Arten in DEutschland gemäß Beschluss-/Abschnittsnr. V/8 und V/19 der 5. Vertragsstaatenkonferenz des Übereinkommens über die biologische Vielfalt. Forschungsbericht 363 01 026. 2 pp.
BROWN, L. E., MILNER, A. M. & HANNAH, D. M. (2007): Hydroecology of Alpine Rivers. – In: HANNAH, D. M., SADLER, J. P. & WOOD, P. J. (Edit.): Hydroecology and ecohydrology. Past, present and future: 339–360. Wiley, Chichester, England, Hoboken, NJ.
BYRNES, J. E. K., GAMFELDT, L., ISBELL, F., LEFCHECK, J. S., GRIFFIN, J. N., HECTOR, A., CARDINALE, B. J., HOOPER, D. U., DEE, L. E., EMMETT DUFFY, J. & FRECKLETON, R. (2014): Investigating the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality. Challenges and solutions. – Methods in Ecology and Evolution 5 (2): 111–124.
CONNELL, J. H. & SLATYER, R. O. (1977): Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role in community stability and organization. – The American Naturalist 111 (982): 1119–1144.
CONRADI, T. & ZEHM, A. (2011): Zusammenstellung zur Kreuzkraut-Situation (Gattung Senecio). aktueller Kenntnisstand zum Management. Augsburg. 16 pp.
DAINESE, M., KÜHN, I. & BRAGAZZA, L. (2014): Alien plant species distribution in the European Alps. Influence of species’ climatic requirements. – Biol Invasions 16 (4): 815–831.
ELLENBERG, H., WEBER, H. E., DÜLL, R., WIRTH, V., WERNER, W. & PAULIßEN, D. (2001): Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica, Band 18. 3. Aufl. – Goltze, Göttingen. 262 pp.
ERDAL, S. & DEMIRTAS, A. (2010): Effects of cement flue dust from a cement factory on stress parameters and diversity of aquatic plants. – Toxicology and Industrial Health 26 (6): 339–343.
EUROPEAN COMISSION (2015): Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. The mid-term review of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Brussels. 19 pp.
GERBAUDO, C. (2006): I Lepidotteri diurni del Parco fluviale Gesso e Stura. 7 pp.
Page | 44
GODEFROID, S., MONBALIU, D. & KOEDAM, N. (2007): The role of soil and microclimatic variables in the distribution patterns of urban wasteland flora in Brussels, Belgium. – Landscape and Urban Planning 80 (1-2): 45–55.
INFO FLORA (2014): Einjähriges Berufkraut - Erigeron annuus (L.) Desf. s.l. Art der Schwarzen Liste. www.infoflora.ch (23.7.2019).
KATTWINKEL, M., BIEDERMANN, R. & KLEYER, M. (2011): Temporary conservation for urban biodiversity. – Biological Conservation 144 (9): 2335–2343.
KOWARIK, I. (2018): Urban wilderness. Supply, demand, and access. – Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 29: 336–347.
LEONE, V., CERVONE, G. & IOVINO, P. (2016): Impact assessment of PM10 cement plants emissions on urban air quality using the SCIPUFF dispersion model. – Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 188 (9): 499.
LUNDHOLM, J. T. & RICHARDSON, P. J. (2010): Habitat analogues for reconciliation ecology in urban and industrial environments. – Journal of Applied Ecology 47 (5): 966–975.
MANNING, P., VAN DER PLAS, F., SOLIVERES, S., ALLAN, E., MAESTRE, F. T., MACE, G., WHITTINGHAM, M. J. & FISCHER, M. (2018): Redefining ecosystem multifunctionality. – Nature ecology & evolution 2 (3): 427–436.
MATHEY, J., RÖßLER, S., BANSE, J., LEHMANN, I. & BRÄUER, A. (2015): Brownfields As an Element of Green Infrastructure for Implementing Ecosystem Services into Urban Areas. – Journal of Urban Planning and Development 141 (3): A4015001.
MEYER, S. T., KOCH, C. & WEISSER, W. W. (2015): Towards a standardized Rapid Ecosystem Function Assessment (REFA). – Trends in Ecology & Evolution 30 (7): 390–397.
MOILANEN, A. & KOTIAHO, J. S. (2018): Fifteen operationally important decisions in the planning of biodiversity offsets. – Biological Conservation 227: 112–120.
MUTLU, s., ATICI, Ö. & KAYA, Y. (2009): Effect of cement dust on diversity and antioxidant enzyme activities of plants growing around a cement factory. – Fresenius Environmental Bulletin 18 (10): 1823–1827.
NEHRING, S., KOWARIK, I., RABITSCH, W. & ESSL, F. (2013): Naturschutzfachliche Invasivitätsbewertungen für in Deutschland wild lebende gebietsfremde Gefäßpflanzen. Unter Verwendung von Ergebnissen aus den F+E-Vorhaben FKZ 806 82 330, FKZ 3510 86 0500 und FKZ 3511 86 0300. – BfN Bundesamt für Naturschutz, Bonn. 202 pp.
OGUNKUNLE, C. O. & FATOBA, P. O. (2014): Contamination and spatial distribution of heavy metals in topsoil surrounding a mega cement factory. – Atmospheric Pollution Research 5 (2): 270–282.
OLIVERO, D. (2007): Gli anfibi del parco fluviale Gesso e Stura. presentazione del lavoro. 4 pp.
Page | 45
PETTAVINO, M. & OLIVERO, D. (2004): Gli Odonati del Parco fluviale Gesso e Stura. – Unpublished. 2 pp.
REBELE, F. (1996): Typen von Industriebrachen und deren Bedeutung für Arten- und Biotopschutz. – Gleditschia 24 (1/2): 287–302.
ŘEHOUNKOVÁ, K. & PRACH, K. (2008): Spontaneous vegetation succession in gravel–sand pits: A potential for restoration. – Restoration Ecology 16 (2): 305–312.
RICE, S. K., WESTERMAN, B. & FEDERICI, R. (2004): Impacts of the exotic, nitrogen-fixing black locust Robinia pseudoacacia on nitrogen-cycling in a pine oak ecosystem. – Plant Ecology (174): 97–107.
RICHARDSON, D. M., PYSEK, P., REJMANEK, M., BARBOUR, M. G., PANETTA, F. D. & WEST, C. J. (2000): Naturalization and invasion of alien plants. Concepts and definitions. – Diversity and Distributions 6 (2): 93–107.
SCHAICH, H., RUDNER, M. & KONOLD, W. (2010): Short-term impact of river restoration and grazing on floodplain vegetation in Luxembourg. – Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 139 (1-2): 142– 149.
SCHERBER, C. (2002): The effects of herbivory and competition on Senecio inaequidens DC. (Asteraceae), an invasive alien plant. Diplomarbeit. Rostock. 104 pp.
SIDDIG, A. A.H., ELLISON, A. M., OCHS, A., VILLAR-LEEMAN, C. & LAU, M. K. (2016): How do ecologists select and use indicator species to monitor ecological change? Insights from 14 years of publication in Ecological Indicators. – Ecological Indicators 60: 223–230.
TOCKNER, K., WARD, J. V., ARSCOTT, D. B., EDWARDS, P. J., KOLLMANN, J., GURNELL, A. M., PETTS, G. E. & MAIOLINI, B. (2003): The Tagliamento River: A model ecosystem of European importance. – Aquatic Sciences - Research Across Boundaries 65 (3): 239–253.
TOFFOLI, R. (2008): L'avifauna del Parco Fluviale Gesso e Stura. check-list e distribuzione delle specie ornitiche di maggiore interesse conservazionistico. 12 pp.
VÍTKOVÁ, M., MÜLLEROVÁ, J., SÁDLO, J., PERGL, J. & PYŠEK, P. (2017): Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) beloved and despised: a story of an invasive tree in Central Europe. – Forest Ecology and Management 384: 287–302.
Page | 46