DOCSLIB.ORG

Development of National Ecological Networks in the Baltic Countries in the Framework of the Pan-European Ecological Network

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development of National Ecological Networks in the Baltic Countries in the Framework of the Pan-European Ecological Network IUCN European Programme Development of National Ecological Networks in the Baltic Countries in the framework of the Pan-European Ecological Network Edited by: Kalev Sepp Environmental Protection Institute Are Kaasik Estonian Agricultural University The publication is the synthesis report based on the national reports on “Development of national ecological networks in Baltic countries in the framework of Pan-European Ecological Network – a concept and implementation in pilot areas”. Authors of national reports: Estonia: Kalev Sepp, Jüri Jagomägi and Are Kaasik; Latvia: Olgerts Nikodemus, Maris Kreilis, Baiba Strazdina and Vija Busa; Lithuania: Ruta Vaiciunaite, Pranas Mierauskas, Zenonas Gulbinas, Algimantas Ramonas, Petras Kurlavicius, Zigmantas Gudþinskas, Valerijus Raðomavicius, Povilas Ivinskis, Vytas Kesminas and Edvardas Mickevicius. Project coordination: Zenon Tederko IUCN Office for Central Europe Warsaw, August 2002 The views of the authors expressed in this volume do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN. Neither do the presentation of material and geographical designations employed imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Published by: IUCN Office for Central Europe IUCN The World Conservation Union Copyright: (2002) IUCN – The World Conservation Union and IUCN Office for Central Europe (Foundation IUCN Poland) Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without permission from the copyright holder. Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without the prior written permission of the copyright holder ISBN: 2-8317-0679-3 Consultants: Anna Liro, IUCN Irene Bouwma, ECNC English-language Edward Idle proofreading: Photos: Arne Ader; http://www.loodusemees.ee Cartographic Piret Palm and Eva-Lena Sepp preparation: Page layout by: W-TEAM, Marek J.WoŸniak & Jan Woreczko Printed by: Pracownia Poligraficzna ARWIL s.c., Warszawa, ul. Czereœniowa 16 Available from: IUCN Office for Central Europe ul. Narbutta 40/21, 02-541 Warszawa, Poland; E-mail: [email protected] This project was implemented by: Environmental Protection Institute of Estonia Latvian Fund for Nature Lithuanian Fund for Nature This project has been carried out with support from the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MATRA Fund/Programme International Nature Management) IUCN The World Conservation Union This project has been coordinated from the IUCN side by the IUCN Office for Central Europe The IUCN Office for Central Europe would like to express its gratitudes to the Ministry of Environment of Estonia, Ministry of Environment Protection and Regional Development of Latvia and Ministry of Environment of Lithuania for assistance, which the Ministries and their Departments have demonstrated and ensured in support of the project implementation. Table of Contents From the Publisher XIII Executive summary XVII 1. Introduction 1 2. Theoretical concepts and practical applications of ecological networks 5 2.1. Aims and objectives of developing the ecological networks in the Baltic countries 7 2.2. National approaches and experience in ecological networks 11 2.2.1. Development of the approach to ecological networks in Estonia 11 2.2.2. The history of ecological network planning in Latvia 15 2.2.3. The history of ecological network planning in Lithuania 16 3. Natural environment of the Baltic States 19 3.1. Habitats and species 20 3.2. Habitat trends and threats 29 3.3. Conclusion 32 4. Nature protection system 35 4.1. National legal and policy instruments 36 4.1.1. Estonia 38 4.1.2. Latvia 42 4.1.3. Lithuania 44 4.2. International agreements, initiatives and programmes 47 5. Methodology of designation of National Ecological Networks in the Baltic Countries 53 5.1. Terminology of ecological networks 53 5.2. Functional-spatial structure of Ecological network 54 5.2.1. Core areas 56 5.2.2. Ecological corridors 57 5.2.3. Buffer zones 59 VIII 5.2.4. Nature restoration areas 59 Table of Contents 5.3. Levels of Ecological network 60 5.4. Development principles and criteria of Ecological Network 62 5.5. Development principles and criteria of Ecological Network in the Baltics 63 5.5.1. Main principles of designating core areas 65 5.5.2. Main principles of designation of ecological corridors 70 5.5.3. Main principles of designation of buffer zones 74 5.5.4. Main principles of designation of restoration (re-naturalisation) areas 75 5.6. Data sources and technical issues 77 6. Ecological Networks in the baltic coutries 81 6.1. National Ecological networks 81 6.1.1. Estonian green (ecological) network 81 6.1.2. The Latvia Ecological network 82 6.1.3. The Lithuanian Ecological network 85 6.2. Designation of national ecological networks at regional level 86 6.2.1. Methodological aspects of ecological networks on regional level 86 6.2.2. Ecological network in Järva county – Estonia 88 6.2.3. Ecological network of Kuldiga District – Latvia 91 6.2.4. The local ecological network of Klaipëda district and Neringa city – Lithuania 94 7. Conclusions 97 Literature and WWW references 103 Additional literature 109 Table of Appendixes Appendix 1. General biodiversity information in the Baltic States 115 Appendix 2. Categories of protected areas in Estonia (Act on Protected Natural Objects 1994) 121 Appendix 3. Categories of protected areas in Latvia (LMEPRD and UNEP, 1998) 123 Appendix 4. Categories of protected areas in Lithuania (Law on Protected Areas 1993, currently being amended) 125 Appendix 5. Selecting core areas on the ground of size in Estonia 127 Appendix 6. Zoological points in identifying the structural IX elements and forming a green network in Estonia 131 Table of Contents Appendix 7. Additional criteria for designating ecological corridors in Lithuania 135 Appendix 8. Maps and digital databases used in planning of ecological networks in the Baltic countries 137 Appendix 9. Legend of the intermediate map for designing ecological network in Estonia 141 Appendix 10. The Estonian Green Network 143 Appendix 11. Example of description of biocentres in Latvia 145 Appendix 12. The Latvian Ecological Network 149 Appendix 13. The Lithuanian Ecological Network 153 Appendix 14. Examples of land use conditions and restrictions, which were used in green network planning in Estonia 157 Appendix 15. An example of the map of Ecological network in Järva county – Estonia 159 Appendix 16. Ecological network of Kuldiga district – Latvia 161 Appendix 17. Ecological network of Klaipëda district and Neringa city 163 Table of Figures Figure 1. Estonian network of ecologically compensating areas (Jagomägi, 1983)13 Figure 2. Network of compensating areas in practical planning: functional zoning scheme at a district level – Hiiumaa Island, designed in 1987 14 Figure 3. Protected areas and non-protected areas suitable for ecological network according to their present natural state (adopted from Remm et al., 2002)15 Figure 4. Lithuanian nature frame (Kavaliauskas, 1995)17 Figure 5. Protected areas according to national law, percentage of the national territory (BEF, 2000) 21 Figure 6. Land cover types in Baltic countries according to CORINE land cover 22 X Figure 7. Forest stands older than 100 years in the Table of Contents Baltic States (BEF, 1998) 23 Figure 8. Area drained per year in agricultural land (BEF, 2000) 24 Figure 9. Comparison of Estonian and Latvian mires (Data source: EME and UNEP, 1999; LMEPRD and UNEP, 1998) 24 Figure 10. Supply or sale of mineral fertilisers (BEF, 1998) 26 Figure 11. Sown area in 1960–1999 31 Figure 12. Theoretical structural elements of ecologically compensating infrastructure (Jagomägi and Sepp, 1999) 55 Figure 13. Core areas in Estonia based on massiveness 68 Figure 14. Defining ecological corridors in Estonia 72 Figure 15. The result of intermediate stage in green network designation forming the basis for composing the final map 78 Figure 16. Core areas defined by size (brown – international core areas; red – national core areas; green – county large core areas; yellow – county small core areas) 127 Table of Tables Table 1. Selected facts about the Baltic States (after BEF, 2000) 19 Table 2. The dominant tree species in Baltic forests, percentage of total volume of wood in forests (after Hallanaro and Pylvänäinen, 2002) 23 Table 3. Number of vertebrate species in the Baltic States 28 Table 4. Primary environmental problems according to the environmental policy documents of the Baltic States (Kratovitð, 2001) 36 Table 5. Ratification of/accession to some of the nature conservation conventions (after Kratovitð, 2001) 48 Table 6. The Pan-European Biological and Landscape Strategy (after Council of Europe et al., 1996) 49 Table 7. Overview of terms of “ecological networks” used XI in the Baltic counties 54 Table of Contents Table 8. Different categories distinguished in the national networks developed 55 Table 9. Comparative hierarchical levels of spatial planning and ecological network design (adopted from Külvik et al., 2002) 61 Table 10. Hierarchical levels and planning the ecological network in Estonia 62 Table 11. Recommended sizes of core areas for the main types of ecosystems in Lithuania 66 Table 12. The recommended size of core areas by Estonian report (Jagomägi and Sepp, 1999) 67 Table 13. Structure of GIS database of Lithuanian Ecological Network and coding of geo-objects 79 Table 14. Structure of GIS database of Latvia Ecological 79 Table 15. The total area of the Ecological network of Latvia 85 Table 16. Relations between hierarchical levels and stages of core areas and corridors 90 Table 17. The total area of ecological network in pilot area 93 Table 18. Number of natural species and distribution of categories under protection in Estonia (Külvik, 1996; Sepp and Mikk, 1998) 115 Table 19. Number of Wild Species and Their Status in Latvia (LMEPRD and UNEP, 1998) 116 Table 20.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Poland, May 2011
    Woodpeckers, Waders and Warblers: North-eastern Poland, 12-17th May Participants: Ian Reid and Tom Bedford North-eastern Poland had been on my list of places to go ever since Bill Oddie’s second series went there and he was guided around by Marek Borkowski to see goodies such as Aquatic Warbler and Great Snipe. Finally in ’11 I decided it was high time I went and I was delighted when Tom showed enthusiasm for joining me. In fact having set the ball rolling, choosing the dates, sorting out guides, and pricing flights, I then ended up in a very busy period at work and it was Tom took care of most of the remaining logistics. It is possible to do such a trip rather cheaper than we did, but we opted for the convenience of Heathrow and took BA to Warsaw at a cost of approx. £150 each. Car hire, booked through carhire3000.com was a Toyota Yaris with Thrifty, and once we had added a second driver came to about £200 for 6 days. We booked guides through Lukasz Masurek’s site wildpoland.com for the evening of 12th (for Pygmy Owl), 8 hours on 13th (Woodpeckers and the Strict Reserve), and the evening of 13th (Great Snipe). Arek Szmyura, mentioned in many trip reports was our guide for the first two, and his son Mateusz took us to the Great Snipe lek. Prices have gone up a lot since the reports I read from ’09. The Pygmy Owl trip cost 90euros, Arek’s services for 8 hours on 13th was 150euros, and the Great Snipe trip was also 90euros.
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • One of the Oldest Village in the Nemunas Delta, Founded in the XV Century
    RUSNE village Rusnė - one of the oldest village in the Nemunas Delta, founded in the XV century. This is the only city in Lithuania that is in the island. The modern bridge Atmata not always saves the local population from the spring floods. During the flood 40 thousand hectares of grassland is covered in water. People of Rusnė are kept safe from the floods by mound. Island has a Polders system equipped with 20 water lift stations. At the lake Dumblė the land surface is 1.3 m below sea level. During the summer Rusnė becomes particularly popular place. Tourists are coming not only from Lithuania but also from Germany, Denmark. In 2002, in Rusnė there was established an information center. The old tradition of fishermen revives – there was built and old sailing yawl according to the old drawing. In island Rusnė we can visit the restored church, the old post office, ethnographic K. Banys farmstead, Uostadvaris lighthouse (1876), the first water lifting station (1907). Rusnė - border town – on the other side of Skirvytė there is a region of Kaliningrad, Russian Federation. MINIJA (MINGE, MINE) village Minija is also called "Lithuanian Venice" because of its unique landscape. Village was fist mentioned in 16th century and originates for the river name, but earlier it was called only Minė. Germans called the village Minge. River Minija divides the village into 2 parts, but there are now bridges. Every house in Minija is facing the river and people say, that river is the street there. The town was flooded periodically. In 19th century there were 76 houses and more than 400 people lived in Minija.
    [Show full text]
  • Turizmo Verslo Skatinimo Sistemos Sukūrimas Šilutės Rajono Savivaldybėje
    TURIZMO VERSLO SKATINIMO SISTEMOS SUKŪRIMAS ŠILUTĖS RAJONO SAVIVALDYBĖJE galimybių studija Vykdytojas Užsakovas UAB „Eurointegracijos projektai“ Šilutės rajono savivaldybės administracija Šilutė, 2015 1 TURINYS 1. ŠILUTĖS RAJONO SAVIVALDYBĖS TURIZMO VERSLO IŠVYSTYMO ESAMOS SITUACIJOS ANALIZĖ ............................................................................................................................ 3 1.1. BENDRAS ŠILUTĖS RAJONO SAVIVALDYBĖS SOCIALINĖS-EKONOMINĖS SITUACIJOS ĮVERTINIMAS ................................................................................................................. 3 1.2. TURIZMO PLANAVIMO DOKUMENTŲ TRUMPAS VERTINIMAS ....................................... 10 1.3. TURIZMO PLĖTROS IŠTEKLIAI ................................................................................................. 22 1.4. TURIZMO PASLAUGŲ ANALIZĖ ............................................................................................... 24 1.5. TURIZMO INFRASTRUKTŪROS ĮVERTINIMAS ...................................................................... 30 1.6. TURIZMO INFORMACIJA IR RINKODARA .............................................................................. 31 1.7. TURISTŲ RINKOS IR SRAUTAI .................................................................................................. 36 1.8. INVESTICIJOS Į TURIZMO VERSLO IR REKREACIJOS PLĖTRĄ ......................................... 37 1.9. ŠILUTĖS RAJONO SAVIVALDYBĖS TURIZMO VERSLO PLĖTROS SSGG ANALIZĖ ...... 46 PRIEDAI ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • On the Problem of Assessment of Sustainability in the Sea Shore Region
    ISSN 2029-9370. REGIONAL FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, No. 2 (10) ON THE PROBLEM OF ASSESSMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY IN THE SEA SHORE REGION Kristina ramanausKaitė1, angelija Bučienė2 Klaipėda University (Lithuania) ABSTRACT Definitions and sets of indicators as well as approaches on sustainable development are compiled, discussed and evaluated in this paper. The researched region embraces for five urban and district municipalities in western Lithuania and Latvia in the total area of 1393.93 km2. The scheme of steps of assessment of sustainability with selected sets of indicators relevant for the sea shore region of Lithuania and Latvia is presented and discussed. KEY WORDS: sustainability, assessment, sea shore region. JEL CODES: Q01, Q56. Introduction The sea shore or coastal zone’s importance in the country’s economics is one of the greatest in most of world countries because of high natural and human resources located there (Berkes et al., 2003; Gadal and Lekavičiūtė, 2012; Walter, Stützel, 2009). In the sense of spatial planning, it involves a territory in the sea and on land, the boundaries of which are defined by mutual influences and interests (Pužulis, 2010; Spiriajevas, 2012; Burgis, Čiegis, 2012). According to the research in Finland, about 40 % of Baltic sea shore habitat types are threatened (SH7 Red-listed, 2008). The seashore meadows, seasonally flooded meadows and paludified wet meadows are among the most valuable rural landscapes in the coastal areas. This kind of areas has most certainly decreased lately, due to decreased grazing and hay harvesting, drainage activities, cultivation or increased damp construction with shrinking of agricultural activities. However the tourism, recreation, fishing, sports are increasing and their impact on the environment in these regions increases as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridgeshire and Peterborough County Wildlife Sites
    Cambridgeshire and Peterborough County Wildlife Sites Selection Guidelines VERSION 6.2 April 2014 CAMBRIDGESHIRE & PETERBOROUGH COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES PANEL CAMBRIDGESHIRE & PETERBOROUGH COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES PANEL operates under the umbrella of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Biodiversity Partnership. The panel includes suitably qualified and experienced representatives from The Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Northamptonshire; Natural England; The Environment Agency; Cambridgeshire County Council; Peterborough City Council; South Cambridgeshire District Council; Huntingdonshire District Council; East Cambridgeshire District Council; Fenland District Council; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Environmental Records Centre and many amateur recorders and recording groups. Its aim is to agree the basis for site selection, reviewing and amending them as necessary based on the best available biological information concerning the county. © THE WILDLIFE TRUST FOR BEDFORDSHIRE, CAMBRIDGESHIRE AND NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 2014 © Appendices remain the copyright of their respective originators. All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in any type of retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, photocopying, mechanical, recording or otherwise) without the permission of the copyright owner. INTRODUCTION The Selection Criteria are substantially based on Guidelines for selection of biological SSSIs published by the Nature Conservancy Council (succeeded by English Nature) in 1989. Appropriate modifications have been made to accommodate the aim of selecting a lower tier of sites, i.e. those sites of county and regional rather than national importance. The initial draft has been altered to reflect the views of the numerous authorities consulted during the preparation of the Criteria and to incorporate the increased knowledge of the County's habitat resource gained by the Phase 1 Habitat Survey (1992-97) and other survey work in the past decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Iucn Red Data List Information on Species Listed On, and Covered by Cms Appendices
    UNEP/CMS/ScC-SC4/Doc.8/Rev.1/Annex 1 ANNEX 1 IUCN RED DATA LIST INFORMATION ON SPECIES LISTED ON, AND COVERED BY CMS APPENDICES Content General Information ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Species in Appendix I ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Mammalia ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Aves ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Reptilia ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Pisces .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Baltikum 2021
    Baltikum 2021 Estland, Lettland, Litauen, Polen, Finnland, St. Petersburg, Kaliningrad, Schweden Vier Kataloge in einem: Individual Auto Motorrad Rad Natur Gruppen Hansetage Riga 2021 Seit über 26 Jahren Reisen mit Hund TeRe Tulemast! uNSeRe ReISeN 2021 ab Seite Seit 1995 bieten wir als Spezialveranstalter fast alle Möglichkeiten, in Estland, Lettland, Litauen sowie in St. Petersburg, Kaliningrad, Polen, Schweden und Finnland Urlaub zu machen. Ob Sie in INDIVIDuAlReISeN 03 der Gruppe oder individual reisen: Wir sind Ihr Ansprechpartner. länderinfos, Städtereisen, Hotels, Ferienhäuser: Besonderer Schwerpunkt: estland! Andres Vainumäe ist gebürtiger Este und mit Land und estland 04 lettland 06 Leuten bestens vertraut. Regelmäßig bereisen wir alle von uns angebotenen Länder. In Litauen litauen 08 haben wir unseren deutschen Vertreter vor Ort. Finnland 10 2021 haben wir eine neue Destination im Programm: Gotland haben wir im letzten und diesem St. petersburg 12 Jahr ausgiebig erkundet und getestet und wir sind begeistert. Die Natur im Landesinneren erin- Kaliningrad 14 polen 16 Individualreisen 2021 nert stark an die Baltischen Staaten, aber die Küste mit den natürlichen Kalksteinskulpturen ist Schweden 18 spektakulär, sozusagen Baltikum+. Sie finden Reisen nach Gotland auf den Seiten 18, 24, 31 und 48. Freuen Sie sich auf eine schöne Reise mit uns! AuTo uND MoToRRAD 19 Mit freundlichen Grüßen Mietwagenpreise 20 15 Tage Die schönsten Naturlandschaften Ihr Mare Baltikum Reisen – Team Estlands mit GPS Tablet erkunden 20 14 Tage Estland Entdecken 21 14 Tage Lettland Entdecken 21 Vier Kataloge in einem: Corona und die Folgen: 14 Tage Litauen Entdecken 22 16 Tage Finnland im Sommer 22 1. Individual-Bausteine und Städtereisen Die Pandemie hat uns alle vor ungeahnte Her- 18 Tage Polen im Sommer 23 Städtereisen, Ausflugsprogramme, Ferienhaus- ausforderungen gestellt.
    [Show full text]
  • Important Bird Areas of the Eu Importance in Latvia
    4. ES NOZĪMES PUTNIEM NOZĪMĪGĀS VIETAS LATVIJĀ | IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS OF THE EU IMPORTANCE IN LATVIA Skaits un platības | Numbers and size coverage In total, 71 Important Bird Areas have been identified in Latvia (Fig. 4-2, Table 4-1), 64 of those are inland territories with a total of 534,056 hectares comprising 8.3% of the country’s land surface. The other 7 areas are marine territories with a total coverage of ca. 339,470 hectares of the Baltic sea and Riga gulf waters. These marine sites are listed for information only, but they are not included in the site accounts. The individual area sizes of the inland IBAs range from 184 ha to 92,322 ha (on average 8345 ha), though most of them (56 sites, 88%) are below 15,000 ha. The number of IBAs in different area size groups is shown in Fig. 4-1. In comparison with the previous national IBA inventory (Raèinskis & Stîpniece 2000), the number of the inland IBAs has increased by 10 sites with their total extent increasing two-fold by 274,368 ha. All marine IBAs have remained unmodified, as the application of the BirdLife IBA criteria at sea are still under development. The long-term changes in number of IBAs in Latvia and their relative area size, compared to the country’s land surface, is illustrated in Fig. 4-3. Latvijâ ir noteikta 71 putniem starptautiski nozîmîgâ vieta (4.1. tabula, 4.2. attçls). 64 no tâm atrodas iekðzemç un aizòem 534 056 ha jeb 8,3% valsts teritorijas.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Plant List, Pdf Format
    Appendix A: City of Bellingham Native Plant List December 2020 The City of Bellingham Native Plant List (Figure 1) includes plant species that are native to Bellingham watersheds (Figure 2). The native plant list applies to all habitat types, including riparian, upland, and wetland areas. The list was developed using specimen records from the Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria and Bellingham plant checklists curated by Don Knoke, a volunteer at the University of Washington Herbarium. To improve plant establishment and protect the genetic resources of our local plant populations, the City recommends using native plants that were grown from seeds or cuttings collected from the Puget Trough Ecoregion (Figure 3). Obtaining native plants grown from material collected from the Puget Trough Ecoregion will help ensure the plants are adapted to the unique environmental conditions of Bellingham watersheds and are genetically similar to our local plant populations. A more thorough discussion of the rational and selection process is provided in the City of Bellingham Public Works Department Native Plant Materials Selection Guidelines, December 2020. Figure 1. City of Bellingham Native Plant List Ferns Common Name Scientific Name Family Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens Dennstaedtiaceae Bristle-like quillwort Isoetes tenella Isoetaceae Common horsetail Equisetum arvense Equisetaceae Deer fern Struthiopteris spicant (Blechnum spicant) Blechnaceae Dream fern Aspidotis densa Pteridaceae Giant horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii
    [Show full text]
  • WETLAND PLANTS – Full Species List (English) RECORDING FORM
    WETLAND PLANTS – full species list (English) RECORDING FORM Surveyor Name(s) Pond name Date e.g. John Smith (if known) Square: 4 fig grid reference Pond: 8 fig grid ref e.g. SP1243 (see your map) e.g. SP 1235 4325 (see your map) METHOD: wetland plants (full species list) survey Survey a single Focal Pond in each 1km square Aim: To assess pond quality and conservation value using plants, by recording all wetland plant species present within the pond’s outer boundary. How: Identify the outer boundary of the pond. This is the ‘line’ marking the pond’s highest yearly water levels (usually in early spring). It will probably not be the current water level of the pond, but should be evident from the extent of wetland vegetation (for example a ring of rushes growing at the pond’s outer edge), or other clues such as water-line marks on tree trunks or stones. Within the outer boundary, search all the dry and shallow areas of the pond that are accessible. Survey deeper areas with a net or grapnel hook. Record wetland plants found by crossing through the names on this sheet. You don’t need to record terrestrial species. For each species record its approximate abundance as a percentage of the pond’s surface area. Where few plants are present, record as ‘<1%’. If you are not completely confident in your species identification put’?’ by the species name. If you are really unsure put ‘??’. After your survey please enter the results online: www.freshwaterhabitats.org.uk/projects/waternet/ Aquatic plants (submerged-leaved species) Stonewort, Bristly (Chara hispida) Bistort, Amphibious (Persicaria amphibia) Arrowhead (Sagittaria sagittifolia) Stonewort, Clustered (Tolypella glomerata) Crystalwort, Channelled (Riccia canaliculata) Arrowhead, Canadian (Sagittaria rigida) Stonewort, Common (Chara vulgaris) Crystalwort, Lizard (Riccia bifurca) Arrowhead, Narrow-leaved (Sagittaria subulata) Stonewort, Convergent (Chara connivens) Duckweed , non-native sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Climate Change Impacts on Streamflow, Sediment And
    Article Assessing Climate Change Impacts on Streamflow, Sediment and Nutrient Loadings of the Minija River (Lithuania): A Hillslope Watershed Discretization Application with High-Resolution Spatial Inputs Natalja Čerkasova 1,*, Georg Umgiesser 1,2 and Ali Ertürk 3 1 Marine Research Institute, Klaipeda University, 92294 Klaipeda, Lithuania; [email protected] 2 ISMAR-CNR, Institute of Marine Sciences, 30122 Venezia, Italy 3 Department of Inland Water Resources and Management, Faculty of Aquatic Sciences, Istanbul University, 34134 Istanbul, Turkey; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +370-6-8301-627 Received: 5 February 2019; Accepted: 28 March 2019; Published: 1 April 2019 Abstract: In this paper we focus on the model setup scheme for medium-size watershed with high resolution, multi-site calibration, and present results on the possible changes of the Minija River in flow, sediment load, total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP) load in the near-term (up to 2050) and long-term (up to 2099) in the light of climate change (RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios) under business-as-usual conditions. The SWAT model for the Minija River basin was setup by using the developed Matlab (SWAT-LAB) scripts for a highly customized watershed configuration that addresses the specific needs of the project objective. We performed the watershed delineation by combining sub-basin and hillslope discretization schemes. We defined the HRUs by aggregating the topographic, land use, soil, and administrative unit features of the area. A multisite manual calibration approach was adopted to calibrate and validate the model, achieving good to satisfactory results across different sub-basins of the area for flow, sediments and nutrient loads (TP and TN).
    [Show full text]