Poor effectiveness of Natura 2000 beech forests in protecting forest-dwelling bats

Hindrances to Effective Implementation of the Habitats Directive in Italy: Regional Differences in Designating Special Areas of Conservation

“Natura 2000” is a coordinated network of protected areas that stretches across the European Union in compliance with two directives (the so-called “Habitats Directive” and the “Birds Directive”) that underpin the Union’s policies on biodiversity conservation. This study is aimed at assessing the implementation of the network by qualitatively analyzing how Special Areas of Conservation are being designated. Such designation process, which is being implemented, although with great delay, in a number of member states, entails the establishment of site-specific conservation measures that may be included within appropriate management plans or other development plans. A systematic documental analysis of official acts establishing Special Areas of Conservation and approving conservation measures and management plans was performed by taking Italy as a case study. The analysis focuses on four key topics, as follows: use of conservation measures and appropriate management plans; multi-level governance of the Natura 2000 sites, in terms of involved institutions and tiers of government; stakeholders’ inclusion in the designation process; and the relationship between conservation measures and the wider spatial planning system. The results show significant differences regarding the implementation of the Natura 2000 network and highlight potential general hindrances to completing the designation process in the European Union.

Deficiencies in Natura 2000 for protecting recovering large carnivores: A spotlight on the wolf Canis lupus in Poland

If protected areas are to remain relevant in our dynamic world they must be adapted to changes in species ranges. In the EU one of the most notable such changes is the recent recovery of large carnivores, which are protected by Natura 2000 at the national and population levels. However, the Natura 2000 network was designed prior to their recent recovery, which raises the question whether the network is sufficient to protect the contemporary ranges of large carnivores. To investigate this question we evaluated Natura 2000 coverage of the three wolf Canis lupus populations in Poland. Wolf tracking data showed that wolves have recolonised almost all suitable habitat in Poland (as determined by a recent habitat suitability model), so we calculated the overlap between the Natura 2000 network and all wolf habitat in Poland. On the basis of published Natura 2000 criteria, we used 20% as the minimum required coverage. At the national level, wolves are sufficiently protected (22% coverage), but at the population level, the Baltic and Carpathian populations are far better protected (28 and 47%, respectively) than the endangered Central European Lowland population (12%). As Natura 2000 insufficiently protects the most endangered wolf population in Poland, we recommend expansion of Natura 2000 to protect at least an additional 8% of wolf habitat in western Poland, and discuss which specific forests are most in need of additional coverage. Implementation of these actions will have positive conservation implications and help Poland to fulfil its Habitats Directive obligations. As it is likely that similar gaps in Natura 2000 are arising in other EU member states experiencing large carnivore recoveries, particularly in Central Europe, we make the case for a flexible approach to Natura 2000 and suggest that such coverage evaluations may be beneficial elsewhere.