Progress report on the establishment of the National Ecological Network in Hungary NATIONAL ECOLOGICAL NETWORK No.2 Foreword network varying country by country, although concurrently it has become professionally well- founded and methodologically mature. The legislative background has been formulated in In November 1993, the Congress Palace of Hungary as well as in the other European Maastricht, the Netherlands (the time and venue countries, compelling governments to of the event seem to be very purposefully implement the network. The necessary technical chosen) saw the birth of the European Ecological conditions have also been created in Hungary: Network (EECONET): prepared by the state edited by the Authority for Nature Conservation, nature conservation body of the Netherlands Ministry of Environment, a series of thematic (and, at an honouring invitation, Hungary). This maps has been produced and is still continued, new programme was discussed and endorsed by built on a vast database and several years of the leading officials of 43 European countries work. It is ready for being discussed with other and numerous technical, social and economic ministries, and deserves endorsement. It will be global organisations, as well as internationally decided in the near future for all of us whether renowned conservation experts. It was a long- nature conservation can contribute further matured but revolutionary idea to announce the support to Hungary's accession to the European plan of a transboundary ecological network that Union by establishing the Hungarian National knows no political frontiers in the spirit of the Ecological Network. Maastricht monetary union of a ‘New Europe’. The Pan-European Ecological Network is a The project later roused many debates but system of national ecological networks. The eventually fulfilled the hopes of its creators: after European Centre for Nature Conservation a number of modifications, practically all considers it a top priority to harmonise the European countries undertook to implement it. national networks of Central and Eastern The debates occurred between government bodies and supportive NGOs concerned about and ready to act for nature, and on the other side the great economic lobbies, primarily on the elements and total area of the network as well as the possibilities of further extension. Naturally, those who are – more and more rightly – concerned about the last refuge areas of Europe that still preserve near-natural conditions aim to warrant significantly more efficient protection to areas as large as possible. The scientific and professional objective is that protected and non- protected areas should not be distinguished within the network, i.e. habitats should be assessed for inclusion on the basis of their true conservation value (thus the network should consist of a combination of protected and non- protected elements), whereas advocates of unrestricted industrial and agricultural development aim to banish ecological restrictions entirely from their future prospects and can tolerate nature conservation exclusively in areas protected by law. At the same time, they try to obstruct designations in all possible ways, employing a whole arsenal of refined influence. This grave conceptual debate complicates and to Photo 1: Tumuli, such as this one, preserve a degree slows down the implementation of the remnants of the natural vegetation 1 hydrological and ecological unit. Moreover, it Hungary and the developing are compiled, special attention is primarily paid would be very unwise if the conservation European ecological network to endemic species (Carpathian and Carpathian management of the various parts of the Upper basin endemisms), relict species, and moreover, Tisza region varied depending on to which state those species whose world population or part of history has rendered them, since life along the it is hosted by Hungary. Tisza River depends much more on the The wealth of natural assets in Hungary is During the 1990s, not only political transition condition and proper functioning of natural expressed in a line of a poem: ‘Famous Pannonia took place in Hungary but also nature factors than on the political status. Obviously, the used to be a garden of flowers’. Though the state conservation was completely transformed, situation is similar around Lake Fertô as well as of nature has slightly changed, the Carpathian similar to the changes at the international along the two sides of Ipoly River. The only Basin is still an area with numerous habitat level.The most remarkable step in this process difference lies in the fact that in some places types, which are home to a surprisingly high was the drafting and approval of a modern act these inescapable, natural relations have been number of native species. Beside species (Act No. LIII. of 1996 on Nature Conservation) recognised and accepted, while in others there is diversity, a diversity of geological, geo- based on conservation of biological diversity. uncertainty about this type of co-operation. We morphological and other values is also typical for This act focuses not only on protected areas but are convinced that nature conservation has a this area. also provides a framework to conserve permanent obligation (and opportunity) to The richness of living organisms can be unprotected areas as well as the landscape. To support diplomatic efforts between countries explained by the biogeographical state of the implement this act, government and ministerial but must avoid the pitfall of getting entangled Carpathian Basin and that different floral and decrees have also been issued, and as many as with daily political issues. It has been recognised faunal regions converge here. According to our five new national parks have been established. In across Europe and the whole world that nature current knowledge, nearly 800 species of moss, total, there are nine national parks in Hungary conservation, being respected in every civilised 2800 species of vascular plants, and 42,000 and two more are planned to be designated. The country, can give active support to diplomacy in animal species can be found in Hungary. An extent of protected areas has reached nearly 10% relieving the tension between neighbouring estimated 20–25% of the species are considered of the country with the ex lege protected areas. Photo 2: Riparian zone of Danube countries in critical periods. This obvious to be threatened. Obviously, all species cannot The number of protected species has opportunity is worth exploiting, and especially be protected, hence when protected species lists increased considerably. The conservation of European countries and, as a first step, prepared in the biogeographically and geopolitically a ‘tentative network’ of the region at the complex Carpathian Basin there is an abundance 1 : 5,000,000 scale. Hungary has undertaken to of possibilities. Since 1990, our transboundary co-ordinate the national ecological networks of or near-boundary co-operations have been well- 4. the ‘Visegrád countries’ (Czech Republic, Poland, founded and promising, and include the Slovakia and Hungary), Croatia and the Ukraine. following countries: Austria (Fertô–Hanság The seemingly simple task of editing is in fact National Park – Neusiedler See-Seewinckel extraordinarily complex, with many questions National Park; Kôszegi Nature Park), Slovenia 3. 1. still awaiting solution, from the standardisation (Ôrség–Raab–Goriçko Nature Park; River Mura or at least harmonised interpretation of Landscape Protection Area), Croatia (protected 5. nomenclature, through the projection, scale as areas along the River Dráva; Béda-Karapancsa – 9. well as content of the maps, to the methodology Kopácski meadow), Serbia (Kôrös-éri Forest and descriptive techniques. Nevertheless, our LPA), Romania (protected areas along the river 8. most important task today is the establishment Maros; Biharugra fish ponds – Cséffa fish ponds), of our own ecological network. Slovakia (Zemplén LPA; Aggtelek Karst – Slovak The programme also prioritises the issue of Karst, Ipoly River, etc.) and quadrilaterally with 7. 6. transboundary protected areas. The Hungarian Romania, the Ukraine and Slovakia (Upper Tisza 1. Hortobágy NPD 2. state nature conservation has also given this region). It is with this transboundary spirit of 2. Kiskunság NPD concept top priority since the early 90s. It does nature conservation that I bring this brochure to 3. Bükk NPD not require too much explanation or any the Reader’s attention. 4. Aggtelek NPD National Park 5. Fertô-Hanság NPD particular geographical or ecological training to Proposed National Park recognise that both sides of the Dráva River Protected Landscape Area 6. Duna-Dráva NPD provide similar ecological conditions. The Nature Conservation Area 7. Körös-Maros NPD Dr. János Tardy 8. Balaton-Upland NPD Aggtelek Karst used to be called Gömör–Tornai Source: Authority for Nature Conservation Administration Area of Deputy Secretary of State Ministry of Environment National Park Directorate 9. Duna-Ipoly NPD Karst just like the Slovak Karst on the other side Head of the Authority for Nature Conservation, of the border, since it is a single geological, Ministry of Environment Protected areas of Hungary 2 3 Protected sites of Hungary Protected species in Hungary Categories of protection Number Total area (ha) Strictly protected (ha) Taxonomical groups Protected Strictly protected Total 1990 2001 1990 2001 1990 2001 Mosses 78 0 78 National Parks1 4 9 146,596 440,839 25,331 76,717