Europes ecological backbone.pdf

Protected areas
Figure 9.10 Changes in land covers inside and
outside Natura 2000 sites in the
Czech Republic from 1990 to 2000
Figure 9.11 Changes in land covers inside
and outside Natura 2000 sites in
Germany from 1990 to 2000
%
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
%
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
– 0.2
– 1.0
– 2.0
– 0.4
– 0.6
– 3.0
– 0.8
– 4.0
– 5.0
Class 1 Class 2A Class 2B Class 3A1 No pressure
Inside Natura 2000 Outside Natura 2000
– 1.0
Class 1 Class 2A Class 2B Class 3A1 No pressure
Inside Natura 2000 Outside Natura 2000
Note:
'No pressure' groups all land‐cover classes except for
the four shown, as these were judged to have little
influence on biodiversity.
Note:
'No pressure' groups all land‐cover classes except for
the four shown, as these were judged to have little
influence on biodiversity.
For the mountains of the EU‐27 as a whole, the
proportion of the area covered by HNV farmland
is greater than that covered by Natura 2000 sites.
However, at the level of massifs, the difference in
proportion varies considerably. In three massifs
(central European middle mountains 1, Carpathians,
Pyrenees), the area of Natura 2000 sites is greater than
the area of HNV farmland. In two others (Apennines,
central European middle mountains 2), it is similar.
In all others, HNV covers a greater area than Natura
2000 sites; the greatest difference is in the British Isles.
In terms of overlap between the two designations,
although Natura 2000 data were used to produce the
HNV dataset, so that the two datasets are correlated,
the proportions of HNV farmland in any massif that
is also with Natura 2000 sites are quite similar. The
proportions are highest in the southern massifs of
the Iberian mountains, the Pyrenees and the eastern
Mediterranean islands, and lowest in the French/
Swiss middle mountains (all in France).
The same data are presented at country level in
Figure 9.12. This shows that the countries with the
highest percentage of HNV farmland overlapped
by Natura 2000 sites are those with less than 10 % of
national areas within mountains, for instance Malta,
Luxembourg and Finland. In a number of other
countries, such as Slovakia, Portugal, Spain and
Bulgaria, the proportion is over a third. There are
only four countries where the proportion of HNV
overlapped by Natura 2000 sites is greater outside
mountains than inside them: Belgium, France,
United Kingdom and Germany, in decreasing order
of difference. If one considers that designation of
HNV farmlands within Natura 2000 sites provide a
greater level of habitat protection — which might be
expected, because habitats within Natura 2000 sites
should be maintained in a favourable conservation
status — a low percentage of overlap may imply
a potential risk of loss of HNV areas and thus a
threat for biodiversity. From this point of view,
HNV farmland in countries with a lower percentage
of HNV farmland overlapped by Natura 2000
sites could be at greater risk; such as Cyprus and
Belgium with a percentage below 10 %. All of these
findings certainly relate to national differences in the
designation of both HNV farmland and Natura 2000
sites, but may be used to inform future policy.
9.2 Nationally designated areas
As noted in the introduction to this chapter, all
European states have designated protected areas —
with a very wide range of objectives — under their
own legislation. In some countries, protected areas
174 Europe's ecological backbone: recognising the true value of our mountains