Natura 2000
requirements arising from the Habitats Directive
and how they are currently being met in the Czech
Republic
Petr ROTH
1.Introduction
Work required to
bring legislation on nature conservation closer to that of the European Community
can be divided into three basic groups:
a) implementaion
of the CITES agreement by widespread application of law nr. 16/l997 Sb.;
b) full acceptance of two essential
directives - known as the Bird Directive and the Habitats Directive - by
widespread application of law nr. 114/1992 Sb.;
c) the creation of a qualitatively new set of
specially protected areas of European importance, known as NATURA 2000, in
accordance with these directives
From every
point of view, these last two obligations are the most demanding, and this is
confirmed by the fact that they are officially assessed by the European
Commission as the two worst implemented pieces of environmental legislation in
its member states. The reason for this
is that these directives are very unclear, both in formulation and in
content. Worst of all, the scope of
individual requirements is boundless, and their full implementation would
involve some very complicated activities and procedures.
Although
dates were set by which both directives had to be met, the NATURA 2000 complex
has still not been established in the EU, so that the CR has no model,
experience or advice to follow in preparing for it on its own territory. It can only collect up what experience it can
from individual member states and try to learn from their mistakes - mistakes
which may have led them to face the European Court or provoked extensive
resistance from local populations and politicians. Another, very basic, problem facing the CR is
that problems of staff, organisation and finance have been
under-estimated. Partly because of lack
of appropriate experience and partly because of a lack of effective decision
making, this question has not been given the attention it deserves.
2. The Czech
national system of specially protected areas and its relation to the Natura
2000 complex
The Czech
Republic can be justly proud of its
specially protected areas (ZCHÚ), which were
begun in1838. Together, they now form a
system of 28 large ZCHÚ's and 2000 small ones, covering 15.6% of
Czech territory.
It is clear that the
Czech executive devotes too few staff to ZCHÚ's to ensure their survival by
legal or administrative means, even though they are entitled to this. Nor is there anything to guarantee funds for
them, and current law does not make it possible for economic social or
political authorities to give preference to nature conservation. Likewise, with no regulations to prevent it, there is nothing to stop ZCHÚ's suffering badly from economic influences. All in all, despite its high international
renown and relatively high diversity, this means that the national system of
specially protected areas is very vulnerable.
For this reason, incorporating the responsibilities that derive from EU
regulations into Czech law, and bringing a large part of the national system of
specially protected areas into the
European NATURA 2000 system, will be of unequivocal benefit.
3. NATURA 2000
NATURA 2000 is a plan
whereby EU states establish a system of areas to be given special
protection. These will be sites of European importance in accordance with
directive nr. 92/43/EHS on protecting natural habitats, wildlife and wild
flora, in short, the Habitats Directive.
The areas should represent types of natural habitat where certain
species can be found, and form a new 'level' for comparing the nature
protection systems used by each nation, although an important feature of the
NATURA 2000 system is its independence from them. The two systems can, however,
be operated so that each will complement the other. Any area designated
for the special protection of wild birds under directive 79/409/EHS, the 'Bird
Directive', will automatically become part of this system. In the Czech Republic, these areas will need
to be declared before the country enters the EU.
Under the Habitats Directive, sites
of community importance (SCI's) will be planned out, sent to the European
Commission and, once they have been approved by national assemblies, they will
be declared. They will fall into two
groups: high and low priority, as set out by the directive in its first
appendix, which describes a total of 181 habitat types. Member states will be required to declare all
areas which fall into the first, high priority group, and 60 to 80% of each
state will fall into the second. Under
exceptional circumstances, that percentage can be lower, as it will not apply
everywhere equally but areas will be assessed individually by specialist
institutions appointed by the EC for each type of habitat and species. The boundaries of each SCI will, of course,
need to be drawn up by specialists before they are declared. The different types of natural habitat were
classified in Brussels specifically for this directive and cannot be compared
with the classifications of habitat used by scientists, even though many of
them - phytocoenological systems, forest typology etc. - are made use of in the
Czech Republic. This means that the
Czech Republic - just like many member states of the EU - has only a partial
and limited basis for planning out various types of natural habitat, and will
have to start off by creating these bases by means of what is known as context
mapping.
Context mapping means showing the
location of certain natural features throughout the territory of the CR to indicate all specific sites for potential SCI's
according to type of habitat, and to evaluate them within the Czech Republic as
a whole. When sites are to be included in the NATURA 2000 system, especially those of low priority, it is
necessary to take into account not only their number and size but also what
species are found there and,
of course, what condition they are in.
Each member state is also required, when giving information about SCI
sites, to state what area is covered by sites for each type of habitat, and to
state what proportion of the entire area of the CR is covered by it. At present, no information of this sort is
available at all.
In practice, context mapping will
not be carried out throughout the whole territory of the CR but only in designated
areas where the type of habitat concerned might be found (excluding intensively cultivated areas, industrial
areas, housing areas etc.). Even with
this reservation it is estimated that the area to be mapped will be as much as
20% of the country, which means about 1.5 million hectares. Mapping can also only be carried out during
the growing season (April to October in low lying areas, less in mountainous
areas) and will have to be done by people with a certain level of education or
knowledge in botany (natural habitats are classified basically according to the
vegetation found there). This is why the
CR asked to be allowed a transition period (see below). Context mapping for types of natural habitat
is the only way that potential SCI's can be selected, and that mapping needs to
be detailed. The EC requires data to be
presented in a certain format, which entails plotting out detailed mapping
units for a potential SCI and specifying the appropriate features of each
unit. According to current estimates,
this mapping could cover 10 - 15% of Czech territory, and, considering the
detailed information and specialist skills required, it will be even more
demanding than context mapping itself.
It will, of course, need to be done in the growing season and require
skills and specializations from the map makers which are an order of magnitude
higher than those needed for context mapping.
Another consideration is that specialist work in planning out an SCI
will not come to an end once the extent of its natural habitats have been
decided on; SCI's for habitat will need to be combined with SCI's for species
(see below).
One of the basic requirements of the directive is that
SCI's be planned without regard to any political or economic interests. Sites proposed by member states (or candidate
states) will not be evaluated by the EC itself but their suggestions will be
sent to the European Thematic Centre for Nature Conservation in Paris, where
independent and qualified scientists and expert non-government organisations
are employed to carry out an assessment.
If the assessors find that a certain location has been omitted or held
back the EC will ask the appropriate state to include it. If the state once more fails to include an
appropriate site or refuses to include one after being told to do so it will be
taken to court. So far, with just one
exception (Finland) the European Court has always decided unequivocally against
those governments and ordered them to complete their incomplete lists. If a state fails to obey a court order it
will be taken before the European Court once more, resulting in sanctions of
between 15,000 and 100,000 euro per day.
It is only once an SCI has been planned out that the
whole process begins. The directive
stresses (para. 2.3) that NATURA 2000 must be created with due regard to
social, economic, regional and local requirements. In its most recent adjudication against Great
Britain, the European Court explained that it is simply unacceptable to limit
the number or size of SCI's for political or economic reasons, but that the
SCI's could be planned on site in consultaion with the most important
land-owners, users and local councils.
In this way they would decide exactly where conservation measures are to
apply and, most importantly, draw up a management plan, a document setting out
how the area is to be administered. This
management plan will normally be guaranteed by contract and the state will pay
land-owners for it. States which have
already gone through proceedings with the European Court recommend that proposed SCI's should be negotiated with all
land-owners and users whenever possible.
The example of some EU states (such as Italy and Austria) shows that
failure to negotiate sites with owners and users calls the whole NATURA 2000
complex into doubt. NGO's play an
irreplaceable role in these negotiations.
Eventually an SCI will be declared under the process set
out in law nr. 114/1992 Sb. The
directive stipulates that the declaration be made within six years, using national
legislation. The Czech legal code
prescribes precisely how this declaration is to be made and what documentation
is appropriate. Preparing the
documentation for declaring an SCI will be very time consuming, as the Czech
system of areas of protected landscape uses various categories and this will
take place at a level connecting different departments. Although SCI's won't
need to be declared before the CR enters the EU, the commission requires the
management regime set out in Paragraph 6 of the Habitats Directive to come into
force immediately afterwards. For the
conditions of the CR, that means that SCI's will need to have been planned out
in a way that basically means the same as their having been declared.
On the basis of what data are available, we estimate that
there could be more than 2,000 natural habitat SCI's in the CR because of the
country's high level of biodiversity and the state of conservation of its
natural habitats. There is no way of "limiting"
this number, since, as has already been stated, the number of sites has to be
determined by a specialist process, not the other way round - it cannot be
subjected to a previously set limit.
4. Transition period
In October 1998, the first
comparative studies of European and Czech law on nature conservation were
presented. Once they had been examined
(January 1999), and the first preparatory work for the Natura 2000 complex had
begun, the facts mentioned above soon became clear. By the middle of 1999 it was obvious that
there would not be time to carry out a complete mapping of SCI's or draw up
their boundaries before the assumed date of entry. For this reason, the Czech Republic submitted
a document to the European Commission showing their position and officially
asking for a transtition period lasting until the end of 2005. Without a detailed knowledge of the depth of
the entire problem, this transitional period was only a rough guess. It was only possible to quantify the original
estimates after pilot mapping of habitats, which took place in 2000. In the light of this quantification it seems
that Estonia took a far more realistic approach when they originally asked for
a transition period lasting until 2010.
Developments at the end of 2000, however, suggest that
for political reasons the Czech Republic will not be allowed any transition
period. Estonia also withdrew its
request for a transition period under similar political pressure.
5. Procedure if no
transition period is allowed
If the Czech request for
a transition period is turned down it will be necessary to work out new plans and negotiate a "crisis scenario" for those
taking part in preparing the Natura 2000
complex (especially with specialists from the academic world). This scenario should make it possible to meet
the requirements of the European Commission and member states of the EU in a
practical way and at the same time give room for preparing the NATURA 2000
complex.
The scenario becomes necessary because of the European
Commission's basic requirement that the Czech Republic put forward a list of
national SCI sites before its entry date.
For the reasons set out above, this list cannot be complete, but at the
same time the list must not be haphazard or a "pilot" list as this
could lead the European Commission to impose sanctions on the CR. The following procedure has therefore been
proposed. SCI's will be drawn up on the
basis of mapping begun throughout the entire territory of the CR in March
2001. They will be based on individual
types of habitat and will always be complete for each type. Once the mapping for each individual type of
habitat has been completed (from a total number of 55 on Czech territory) maps
will be made showing all sites of this type and everywhere that the species
concerned is found will be marked on them.
All relevant partners at those locations will be immediately consulted
and partial lists of SCI's will be prepared, and they, too, will be complete
for each type of habitat. As already
stated, it is expected that all SCI's will have been mapped out in 2001 and
show at least ten types of natural habitat.
More will be added during 2002.
The Czech Republic can realistically expect to have these partial,
national lists ready to send to the European Commission on the 1.1.2003, and
thus be really to enter the EU at that time.
If, on the other hand, the ratification process is more drawn out or
entry is deferred, then the partial list will become more complete with each
growing season with the addition of new files which always show complete types of natural habitat and the habitats of
species that go with them.
This proposed procedure has four
main advantages:
a) it already has the support of the scientific
community, without whose co-operation a properly qualified Natura 2000 complex
could not be prepared. Conversely, the
idea of any "haphazard" lists has already provoked clear opposition
from the specialist public and even weakens the national system of specially
protected landscapes (ZCHÚ);
b) progress made over any period can be
both easily quantified and used to show an integrated collection of sites. After its experience with some EU member
states the European Commission is justified in fearing that they might have to
wait in vain for lists for several years and that if they finally do succeed in
obtaining any they will give no indication of what work remains to be done (as would be the case with a haphazard
list). This plan will remove that
danger.
c) there will be a wide disparity in requirements for the protective
conditions and the management of individual types of habitat according to their
size, what qualified staff they will need, and their financial needs. When compiling the partial list of collective
habitat sites, it will be possible to formulate general principles of care for
each site in this area, as well as ways to make rough estimates of its
financial needs and hone these requirements according to local conditions. This will save both a great deal of time and
make the best use of limited specialist capacity.
d) the Common Position on applying Paragraph 6 of the directive on habitats and SCI's
was decided by the EU in
November 2000, and the crisis scenario will make it possible for the CR
to meet its commands immediately on entry.
Each site, as before, will have been considered individually for the
type of fully processed natural habitat it has to offer.
6. Finance and
organisation
In preparing the NATURA 2000 complex it will
unfortunately not be possible to use any foreign sources. The only source of finance offered by the EU
in this area, the LIFE III program (which the CR does not take part in, mainly
because of the 50 million korun annual entry fee it requires) specifically prohibits
the use of its funds for preparatory work by applicant states. All financial means will therefore have to be
found from sources within the Czech Republic, mainly from the state budget.
In the name of the Czech Republic, it is the Ministry of
the Environment (Ministerstvo
životního prostøedí) that is
responsible for the country's preparations for the Natura 2000 system. The Agency for Nature Protection and the
Landscape in the Czech Repubic (Agentura
ochrany pøírody a krajiny Èeské republiky)
was granted specialist verification in 1999.
Their website is kept up to date, and detailed information concerning
this entire matter can be found at www.nature.cz. Information
concerning 'political' matters can be obtained from the author of the article,
who is responsible for bringing Czech law, where it concerns nature
conservation, into line with that of the EU.