290 likes | 435 Views
Approaches to identifying Important Plant Areas in Europe Elizabeth Radford - Plantlife International European Crop Wild Relative Diversity Assessment and Conservation Forum Workshop, Korsør, Denmark April 2005. Overview. About the IPA programme How IPAs are selected. 3. IPAs in Europe
E N D
Approaches to identifying Important Plant Areas in EuropeElizabeth Radford - Plantlife InternationalEuropean Crop Wild Relative Diversity Assessment and ConservationForum Workshop, Korsør, Denmark April 2005
Overview • About the IPA programme • How IPAs are selected • 3. IPAs in Europe • 4. Possible links between work of CWR Forum and IPA programme
Important Plant Areas are …….. … the most important places in the world for wild plant diversity, that can be protected and managed as specific sites ‘Wild plant’ in this context includes: vascular plants, bryophytes, lichens, fungi, algae
Aim of the IPA programme: To identify & protect a network of the best sites for plants throughout the World using consistent criteria
The Three Phases of the IPA programme • Identification: • sound science • private, unprotected or already protected land • 2. Protection: • adequate protection • policy and legislative tools • working with authorities • 3. Management: • good, sustainable management of IPAs, • using transfer of best practise: funded schemes, sustainable harvesting etc • working with land managers
Identification principles • Use scientific criteria • Expert judgement • Plants and fungi • Recognise botanical richness aswell as threat • Identify specific sites • Not a designation
The Political framework: The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation • GSPC Target 5 aims: “Ensure the protection of 50% of the worlds most important areas for plants by 2010”
Three basic principles of IPA identification(global application) • A: The site holds significant populations of species of global or regional concern • B: The site has exceptionally rich flora in a regional context in relation to its biogeographic zone • C: The site is an outstanding example of a habitat or vegetation type of global or regional importance
Three basic criteria • Criterion A - Presence of threatened species • Criterion B – Botanical Richness • Criterion C – Presence of threatened habitats
Criterion A - Threatened Species • A(i) Globally threatened species • A(ii) Regional threatened species • A(iii) Threatened Endemics • A(iv) Threatened Near Endemics Helianthemum caput-felis (Aii)-
In Europe threatened species are defined as: Species that have a status of CR/EN/VU(new IUCN criteria) or Ex/E/E/V (old IUCN criteria) on the following official lists…
For Ai GLOBALLY THREATENED • IUCN Global Red Lists (inc. World List of trees 1998) • Global Red List for vascular plants 1997 Criterion A - Threatened Species For Aii REGIONALLY THREATENED • Habitats Directive Annexes IIb & Ivb • Bern Convention Appendix I • European Bryophytes 1995 • Fungi species proposed for the Bern Convention 2001 • European Macrolichens 1989 • For Aii and Aiv NATIONALLY THREATENED • Endemics/Near Endemics from National Red Lists
Criterion A -Threshold in Europe • All sites containing 5% or more of the national population of these threatened species • Or the 5 ‘best’ sites • Exceptionally 10 sites
Criterion B - Botanical Richness The sites which have the greatest number of species diversity (within one habitat or vegetation type)
Criterion B – Botanical Richness • Species diversity is compared using EUNIS level 2 habitat types. There are about 50. • A species list is created for each habitat type • Species characteristic to a habitat • Endemic species (for that habitat) • Nationally rare (for that habitat) It is possible to include data on lower plants and fungi
Criterion B – thresholds in Europe • Up to 10% of the national resource of a level 2 habitat • Or the 5 ‘best’ sites, whichever is most appropriate • Exceptionally 10 sites
IPA Criterion C - Threatened habitats/ vegetation C(i) Priority Threatened Habitats - Annex I of the Habitats Directive & corresponding on the Bern Convention C (ii) Other Threatened Habitats –Annex I Habitats Directive & on the Bern Convention Karstic calcareous grassland
IPA Criterion C - threshold in Europe • C(i) – all sites containing 5% or more of the of the habitat or • 20-60% of the national resource • C(ii) – all sites containing 5% of the national resource or the 5 ‘best’ sites, whichever is most appropriate • Exceptionally 10 sites
IPA methodologyfor Europe French Spanish English Russian See publications at www.plantlife.org.uk
The IPA Project in Central and East Europe 2001-2004: Belarus Czech Republic Estonia Poland Romania Slovakia Slovenia Pilot work in South East Europe & Russia
A few results • c. 800 IPAs identified in 7 countries • Species: presence, distribution and population data • Habitats: presence, distribution, extent • Land use • Threats • Site protection • Entered on to the IPA database • Will be published: Regional & national publications with recommendations
Estonia Kassari Bay RomaniaPietrosul Brostenilor • Only site for Andryala levitomentosa • Not a protected area • 98 IPAs contain globally threatened plants • Marine IPA: drifting red algae communities • Threatened by algae extraction • Lower plants feature in Estonian IPAs
IPAs & Grasslands • 56% of IPAs contain threatened grassland habitats • Deliblatska Sands in Serbia • Forest steppe – threatened by afforestation & invasive tree species
IPAs & Forests • 57% of IPAs contain threatened forest habitats • Danube flood plain forest • Inappropriate forestry management threatens 44 % of IPAs
Threats to IPAs • Forestry mismanagement 44% of IPAs • Tourism 38% of IPAs • Agricultural Intensification 29% of IPAs • Land abandonment 27% of IPAs • Development 25% of IPAs • Water mismanagement 21% of IPAs • Invasive species 17% of IPAs • Eutrophication 15% of IPAs
Protection & Management • 170 IPAs have no protection • 626 IPAs have some form of protection • Of the 510 IPAs in 5 new EU member states 399 IPAs are Natura 2000 SACs • Management planning varied or absent
The challenge now is to ensure IPAs are protected and managed successfully • adequate protection • policy and legislative tools • working with authorities • good, sustainable management of IPAs, • using transfer of best practise: funded schemes, sustainable harvesting etc • working with land managers • No small task !
Protecting wild crop relatives in IPAs • Red Listed wild crop relatives will fall within IPAs (criterion A) • Some CWRs will have been included through richness (Criterion B) • Threatened wild crop relatives can be used to locate IPAs - similar projects planned with medicinal plants • Opportunities for data sharing • Existing projects now at the stage of protection and management – PGR Forum lobbying possible !