1 / 6

Reporting – Article 17 Habitats Committee, 16 October 2007

Reporting – Article 17 Habitats Committee, 16 October 2007. Assessing Conservation Status for a Biogeographical Region Carlos Romão, Doug Evans & Iurie Maxim. Discussed by the Scientific Working Group (February 2007) Expert meeting held in Paris 14 June 2007

jnorthern
Download Presentation

Reporting – Article 17 Habitats Committee, 16 October 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Reporting – Article 17Habitats Committee, 16 October 2007 Assessing Conservation Status for a Biogeographical Region Carlos Romão, Doug Evans & Iurie Maxim

  2. Discussed by the Scientific Working Group (February 2007) • Expert meeting held in Paris 14 June 2007 • ‘Assessing the conservation status of habitats and species at the EU level’ (Doc.HAB 07-06-06b, June Habitats Committee) suggested 3 possible methods • Methods tested with data from Article 17 reports from 4 Member States by the ETC-BD in September 2007 • Expert meeting held in Paris 25 September 2007 • Paper for SWG produced to be discussed next month (SWG-07-11-02) – circulated to Habitats Committee

  3. 3 methods proposed • Use the evaluation matrices using primary data from Member States • Weighted aggregation of the four conservation status parameters – range, area/population, structure & functions/habitat spp, future prospects - using the rules for combining the four sub assessments given in the annexes (final line of the matrices) • Weighted aggregation of overall conservation status assessment

  4. All 3 methods rely, at least partially, on weighting the contribution of each MS • Weighting can be by area of distribution (habitats, species ), population (species) or range (habitats, species )

  5. Example: 601 cells occupied 249 cells in Poland 42% of ‘population’ in Poland Grid cells occupied by Arnica montana in the Continental region based on distribution maps from the MS and the ETRS LAEA89 10x10 km grid

  6. Tests show all 3 methods can work & give similar assessments (so far) The Scientific Working Group will be asked to discuss several issues including • Thresholds • Trends And to give an opinion on the ETC-BD’s proposal to use Method 1 – use of primary data - wherever possible

More Related