Rila Monastery Nature Park Management Plan - part - usaid

February 2004 Appendix 11
Station
No.
Habitat
code
Tree species %
presence
Ср.d
cm
Ср. h
m
Above
sea
level
(m)
Rila Monastery Nature Park
Management Plan (Draft) – Appendices
2004 - 2013
Health Status Degree of damage
0 1 2 3 4 Pathol.
causes
Enthom.
causes
Abiotic
damage
K Evaluation
22TR2 42.723 P.peuce 8 41.1 18-20 2,100 19.3 48.4 24.6 3.2 6.5 + + ++ 45.8 good
P.abies 2
38DB3 42.723 P.peuce 10 38.0 12-16 2,049 7.7 79.4 19.9 0.0 0.0 + + + 41.0 very good
Ab.a., P.ab. r
43BX4 42.723 P.peuce 6 34.0 16-17 2,024 19.1 80.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 + - + 34.0 very good
P.silvestris 4 50.8 0.0 36.5 63.5 0.0 0.0 - - -
49BAR 42.723 P.peuce 10 47.0 22.0 1,856 5.1 59.0 30.7 5.2 0.0 + + + 47.0 good
VII. Dwarf pine communities
45MER 31.58 P.mugo 10 - - 2,219 - - - - - + + - - very good
Key: I. Abbreviations: - in column 1: number and name of the REA station where the evaluation was carried out;
- in column 3: F.s. - Fagus silvatica; Ab.a. - Abies alba; Q.s. - Quercus sesiliflora; Ac.c. - Acer campestris; Ac.p. - Acer
pseudoplatanus; P.tr. - Populus tremula; Carp. - Carpinus sp.; Cr. - Crataegus sp.; B.a. - Betula alba; S.ar. - Sorbus aria
II. Health status (assessed by defoliation and leaf/needle colors): 0 – healthy (defoliation – 0-10%, color – 0-10%); 1 – light damage (defoliation – 11-25%,
color – 11-25%); 2 – average damage (defoliation – 26-60%, color – 26-60%); 3 – severe damage (defoliation – над 60%%, color – over 60%); 4 – dry
(defoliation – 100%, color – 100%).
III. Degree of damage: + - light; ++ - average; +++ - severe
ІV. K (column 16) – average weighted damage ratio
329