Europes ecological backbone.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mountain economies and accessibility Map 3.1 Classification of massifs according to the over- or under-representation of economic sectors Canary Is. Guadeloupe Martinique Réunion Guyane (F) Classification of massifs according to the overor under-representation of employment in agriculture, manufacturing and services Manufacturing over-represented Azores Is. Madeira Is. Agriculture overrepresented European average: - Agriculture 4 % - Manufacturing 26 % - Services 70 % Study area Missing data Services overrepresented © Eurogeographics, GISCO, NCRD, ESRI Romania for the administrative boundaries Software: Philcarto 3.1 - http://perso.club-internet.fr/philgeo 0 500 Km Note: This map is from European Commission (2004), which addressed a different study area and defined massifs differently, especially in Sweden and Norway (see Section 1.2.4). Values estimated from data at NUTS 3 level for Czech Republic, Poland and Spain. city sizes. As result of the inclusion of the larger cities within all the travel time maps, the weight of the larger agglomerations is larger than the small towns. Therefore the average travel time represents the relative importance of the different city sizes for the surrounding rural areas. Travel times are calculated based on a friction surface that includes different road types, railroads and frequently used ferry connections. Each road type was assigned an average travel speed derived from commonly observed speeds relative to road type. The network maps do not include minor roads and paths so an off-road speed is assumed that is slightly higher than would be realistic were no minor roads present. The off-road speed was decreased in regions with steep slopes. Again, these calculations were confined to the EU‐27. Table 3.1 shows the distribution of the economic density and accessibility for the various massifs and illustrates the high heterogeneity in economic density both within and between massifs. Economic density, in particular, probably derives mainly from differences in economic conditions between countries. The central European mountains in Belgium and Germany and the French/Swiss middle mountains have the highest average economic densities, whereas, the Carpathians and Balkans/South-east Europe have the lowest values. In certain cases, high economic density results from the location of important urban conglomerations close to the mountain massif borders, when in the economic density raster, some pixels located in or 46 Europe's ecological backbone: recognising the true value of our mountains
Mountain economies and accessibility Box 3.1 The changing economic importance of pastoralism in the Causses, France The Causses are high limestone plateaux at the western end of the French Massif Central. The steppe‐like habitat is mainly a consequence of deforestation by the first people living there in the early Neolithic, 6 000 years ago. These were chiefly pastoralists keeping sheep, at a time when most people were hunters and gatherers, but goats and sheep had already been domesticated (Brisebarre, 1996). With the onset of a warmer climate 4000 years ago, livestock breeding became more important. Transhumance — the seasonal migration of herds between lowland areas to the mountains — from the lowlands of Languedoc to the Causses and the upper Cévennes also became a necessity because of the lack of pasture in the plains during summer. Between the Middle Ages and the French revolution (16th to 18th centuries), much of the land and the buildings of the southerly Causse de Blandas belonged to two noble families. The rest of the land was owned by lesser noble families (Durand-Tullou, 1995). From the early 19th century, the land was bought by industrialists, bankers, lawyers and notaries. After 1850, farmers started to buy the land they had been farming, partly because the landowners had left the region and were no longer interested in these properties, partly because they had enough money to buy the land. The now famous Roquefort cheese, legally protected since 1666, was the first to be given the Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée, in 1925. The pastoral economy on the Causse de Blandas was mainly dependent on the Roquefort cheese factories. The farmers delivered the sheep milk to a few collecting points, whence it was collected by lorry and taken to Roquefort. Industrialisation of cheese production started in the 20th century. The shepherds were expected to produce more and more efficiently. This required more modern sheep sheds and expensive infrastructure; many small shepherds could not afford these and ceased operation. In 1950, there were 80 farms, with resident full-time farmer son the 10 000 hectares of the Causse de Blandas: 75 % were smaller than 10 ha, 15% between 10 and 50 ha, and only 8 % larger than 50 ha. The discrepancy between the hard life on the Causse and perceived opportunities in the cities led to a dramatic exodus, which was accelerated because older farmers were not able or willing to adapt to more modern ways of farming. By the 1990s, only 20 farms remained. Today, the few remaining farmers who live on their farms each utilise several hundreds of hectares of land, having bought abandoned properties or parts of them (partly with EU subsidies) or by renting land, mainly from retired farmers. They can also, again partly thanks to EU aid, buy larger machines that allow them to do the work of the former shepherds in keeping the pastures free from encroachment by scrub and fertilising the soil mechanically. Some farmers have started to diversify their businesses during the past two decades. New farmers arrived in the 'back to nature' movement and started to farm with partly new ideas and introduced cattle (of the Aubrac type, a tough animal from the Lozère), llamas, donkeys, and goats. Small producers now produce cattle meat, goat cheese and meat, and sheep cheese for sale in local markets, to shops in surrounding settlements and to restaurants. Others started bed and breakfasts, horse riding (on the estates or as tours of up to a week), donkey tours, or sell firewood. Thus, from being largely dependent on Roquefort, farmers have diversified considerably. This was probably the only way to maintain the local farming economy, and also helped to preserve pastoralism in a region that was originally shaped mainly by pastoralists. Before humans came to the Causses, much of the land was forested. The very extensive pastoralism that has been going on for thousands of years has very slowly built the steppe like landscape we find now. The diversity of plants and animals is impressive, including species listed on the birds and habitats directives of the EU. Thus it can be said that the pastoralism on the Causses is a High Nature Value (HNV) farming system: see Section 7.4.2. Source: Jean-Pierre Biber (European Forum on Nature Conservation and Pastoralism, France). around cities present extremely GDP high values. Because of the broad boundaries of the massifs, some cities or pixels at the edge of cities are included within certain massifs. Thus, they are taken into account in the analysis and can distort the average, for example in the Alps around Milano and Torino and some cities in Germany. In other cases, cities are within the massif, e.g. Genoa is completely included in the Apennines (Map 3.2). Maps 3.3 and 3.4 compare the economic density and accessibility of mountain and lowland areas. Europe's ecological backbone: recognising the true value of our mountains 47
Page 1: EEA Report No 6/2010 Europe's ecolo
Page 4 and 5: Cover design: EEA Cover photo © Ca
Page 6 and 7: Contents 7 Land cover and uses.....
Page 8 and 9: Acknowledgements Box 1.5: Maja Vasi
Page 10 and 11: Acknowledgements Chapter 8 Mountain
Page 12 and 13: Executive summary general, populati
Page 14 and 15: Executive summary Among all Europe'
Page 16 and 17: Introduction and background Interna
Page 18 and 19: Introduction and background same co
Page 20 and 21: Introduction and background instrum
Page 22 and 23: Introduction and background coopera
Page 24 and 25: Introduction and background instrum
Page 26 and 27: Introduction and background Box 1.4
Page 28 and 29: Introduction and background made. W
Page 30 and 31: Introduction and background Map 1.2
Page 32 and 33: Introduction and background require
Page 34 and 35: Introduction and background Map 1.3
Page 36 and 37: Mountain people: status and trends
Page 50 and 51: Mountain economies and accessibilit
Page 62 and 63: Ecosystem services from Europe's mo
Page 76 and 77: Climate change and Europe's mountai
Page 88 and 89: The water towers of Europe lowland
Page 90 and 91: The water towers of Europe Box 6.1
Page 92 and 93: The water towers of Europe Box 6.2
Page 94 and 95: The water towers of Europe Figure 6
Page 96 and 97: The water towers of Europe • Navi
Page 98 and 99:
The water towers of Europe in the a
Page 100 and 101:
The water towers of Europe Box 6.5
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
The water towers of Europe Figure 6
Page 106 and 107:
The water towers of Europe (Livings
Page 108 and 109:
The water towers of Europe Figure 6
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Land cover and uses 7 Land cover an
Page 114 and 115:
Land cover and uses Map 7.2 Dominan
Page 116 and 117:
Land cover and uses Table 7.1 Distr
Page 118 and 119:
Land cover and uses Figure 7.3 Land
Page 120 and 121:
Land cover and uses Table 7.2 Chang
Page 122 and 123:
Land cover and uses Box 7.1 Land us
Page 124 and 125:
Land cover and uses Box 7.1 Land us
Page 126 and 127:
Land cover and uses Figure 7.7 Aver
Page 128 and 129:
Land cover and uses Box 7.3 Land re
Page 130 and 131:
Land cover and uses Box 7.4 Land-us
Page 132 and 133:
Land cover and uses Figure 7.11 Con
Page 134 and 135:
Land cover and uses country before
Page 136 and 137:
Land cover and uses Table 7.8 Natio
Page 138 and 139:
Land cover and uses Map 7.6 Area cl
Page 140 and 141:
Land cover and uses Box 7.6 Identif
Page 142 and 143:
Land cover and uses Table 7.10 Tota
Page 144 and 145:
Biodiversity 8 Biodiversity At the
Page 146 and 147:
Biodiversity The geographic scope o
Page 148 and 149:
Biodiversity Recognising that not a
Page 150 and 151:
Biodiversity Figure 8.1 Number of m
Page 152 and 153:
Biodiversity Figure 8.3 Habitats in
Page 154 and 155:
Biodiversity For each habitat type,
Page 156 and 157:
Biodiversity Box 8.2 Alien plants i
Page 158 and 159:
Biodiversity Box 8.3 Climate change
Page 160 and 161:
Biodiversity The pattern of success
Page 162 and 163:
Biodiversity Box 8.4 Recent changes
Page 164 and 165:
Protected areas Box 9.1 Sharr Mount
Page 166 and 167:
Protected areas 9.1 Natura 2000 sit
Page 168 and 169:
Protected areas Table 9.1 Area of N
Page 170 and 171:
Protected areas the mountains of th
Page 172 and 173:
Protected areas Figure 9.3 Distribu
Page 174 and 175:
Protected areas Figure 9.7 Distribu
Page 176 and 177:
Protected areas Figure 9.10 Changes
Page 178 and 179:
Protected areas Box 9.3 Land use de
Page 180 and 181:
Protected areas Figure 9.12 Percent
Page 182 and 183:
Protected areas Box 9.4 Kaçkar Mou
Page 184 and 185:
Protected areas Table 9.7 Area of n
Page 186 and 187:
Protected areas scale. Overlaps are
Page 188 and 189:
Protected areas Box 9.5 Cantabrian
Page 190 and 191:
Integrated approaches to understand
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
References References Chapter 1 All
Page 206 and 207:
References European Union, 2010. Pr
Page 208 and 209:
References European Commission, 200
Page 210 and 211:
References Yoshino, M., 2005. Mount
Page 212 and 213:
References World Resources Institut
Page 214 and 215:
References Faggian, P. and Giorgi,
Page 216 and 217:
References Lopez-Moreno, J.I.; Goye
Page 218 and 219:
References Ambrosetti, W. and Barba
Page 220 and 221:
References characteristics of the l
Page 222 and 223:
References Rogora, M., 2007. 'Synch
Page 224 and 225:
References Chapter 7 Aitchison, J.
Page 226 and 227:
References Williamson, T., 2002. Th
Page 228 and 229:
References Lelek, A., 1987. The fre
Page 230 and 231:
References Berthold, P., 2000: Voge
Page 232 and 233:
References years of simulated clima
Page 234 and 235:
References Konstanz, erschienen 199
Page 236 and 237:
References EEA/UNEP, 2004. High nat
Page 238 and 239:
References Innovations in GIS 7. Ta
Page 240 and 241:
Appendix 1 Species Annex Endemic to
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Appendix 2 Appendix 2 Mountain habi
Page 248 and 249:
Appendix 2 Code ( a ) Name Category
Page 250 and 251:
Appendix 2 Code ( a ) Name Category
Page 252:
TH-AL-10-006-EN-C doi:10.2800/43450
show all

Europes ecological backbone.pdf

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?