B - Convention on Biological Diversity

animals in the summer thought to be left by their parents, actions to be taken to support hedgehog survival inthe autumn, etc.).AI.b) II. Current ConditionsThe very first attempt at species survival/recovery breeding in the country (although this was apparently motivatedby financial considerations) was the breeding of the European beaver (Castor fi ber) in captivity and its subsequentre-introduction into natural habitats at the turn of the 18 th and 19 th centuries in the Schwarzenberg estates inSouth Bohemia. Some measures have been implemented (and are continuing) in the Czech Republic to conserveendangered species since the 1980s. These include, e.g., the re-introduction of white-tailed eagles (Haliaeetusalbicilla) in the Třeboň Basin area, lynxes (Lynx lynx) in the Šumava/Bohemian Forest Mts., protection of thegiant lousewort (Pedicularis exaltata) in the Bílé Karpaty/White Carpathians Mts., measures to protect the springpasque flower (Pulsatilla vernalis) in the Třeboň area and in Krkonoše/Giant Mountains, and survival cultivationand strengthening the population of endemic Bohemian sand pinks (Dianthus arenarius subsp. bohemicus).The actual status of a species survival/recovery programme was officially introduced in the Czech Republic in1992 through Act No. 114/1992 Coll., on the Protection of Nature and the Landscape, as amended. Since theAct come into force, the Ministry of the Environment (ME) has so far approved 5 species survival/recoveryprogrammes (lynx , capercaille (Tetrao urogallus), river mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera), long-stalked pondweed (Potamogeton praelongus), and marsh angelica (Angelica palustre)).Further species survival/recovery programmes have been prepared for at least 5 plant species and a numberof animal species. Some of these projects are national-wide, while others are more regional or even localones. Species survival/recovery programmes for the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) and saker falcon (Falcocherrug) have been in operation for many years; they do not officially have the status of species survival/recoveryprogrammes, but are coordinated by Advisory Committee appointed by the Director of the Agency for NatureConservation and Landscape Protection of the CR (ANCLP CR).II.III.IV.V.VI.VII.VIII.IX.X.XI.XII.b) III. Problem Issues1. There is a lack of a comprehensive concept of species survival/recovery programmes for species protection inthe CR to allow establishing priorities in the subject and of rules for the preparation, approval and implementationof species survival/recovery programmes for selected species.2. Uncoordinated and highly dispersed active measures for specially protected species by various NatureConservancy authorities and non-governmental organizations, often not based on monitoring of the population intheir natural habitats and the impact of the particular measures.3. Inadequate financing of the species survival/recovery programmes, which must then be funded ina disorganized manner from various sources for various organizations (SEF -State Environmental Fund, LandscapeManagement Programmes, ME).4. General perception of species survival/recovery programmes in a narrower sense (sensu stricto), as partialmeasures, without emphasis of the necessity and utilization of contemporary scientifi c knowledge, viewingof the subject in its entirety, including the necessary monitoring (see the chapter on Biodiversity Monitoringand Indicators). The public is often informed on species survival/recovery measures as good intentions alone35