Report | Doc. 12459 | 05 January 2011
The need to assess progress in the implementation of the Bern Convention
Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs
Summary
On the occasion of the International Year of Biodiversity 2010 and the United Nations Decade for Biodiversity 2011-2020, the Parliamentary Assembly refers to the wider legal framework in the field of nature conservation and biodiversity and calls for the assessment of progress in the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention). This convention is the first comprehensive legal instrument for pan-European nature conservation and remains the keystone treaty for biodiversity within the Council of Europe framework.
Environmental degradation, depletion of biological diversity and alteration of ecosystems affect directly and indirectly a range of fundamental human rights defined by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and by the European Convention on Human Rights, namely the right to life, to access to food and water, to health, to adequate housing, and to property and land use.
The Committee of Ministers is invited to make the Bern Convention and the work of its expert bodies more visible internationally and ensure that it is regarded as one of the priorities of the Council of Europe.
A. Draft resolution
(open)B. Draft recommendation
(open)C. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Lotman, rapporteur
(open)1. Introduction
2. Institutional and legal background – the Bern Convention and other international activities for biodiversity protection
3. Key provisions of the Bern Convention
4. Implementation of the convention
4.1. Implementation of Article 4 – protection of habitats
4.1.1. Establishing protected area networks
- Resolution No. 3 (1996) concerning the setting up of a pan-European Ecological Network, establishes the Emerald Network of Areas of Special Conservation Interest. It thus clarifies a rather general reference to protected sites in the convention. It also establishes the relevant expert group and invites observer states to the convention to participate in the network.
- Resolution No. 4 (1996) lists in Annex I the habitat types to be protected (since the convention itself does not have an appendix listing such habitat types). This is complementary to the Habitats Directive that lists habitats to be protected within Natura 2000 in its Annex I. It is important to note, however, that the habitat lists in Annex I to Resolution No. 4 and Annex I of the Habitats Directive are not identical.
- Resolution No. 5 (1998) concerning the rules for the Network of Areas of Special Conservation Interest (Emerald Network) states, inter alia, that for European Union member states the Natura 2000 sites form the Emerald Network. It also establishes the procedure for depositing data regarding the sites with the convention secretariat and the standard data form for site information.
- Resolution No. 6 (1998) listing the species requiring specific habitat conservation measures provides clarification of the difference of species lists between the relevant appendices to the convention and annexes to the directives, as species listed in all of these documents are listed in the Appendix 1 to Resolution No. 6 (1998).
4.1.2. Management of the protected areas
- Recommendation No. 16 (1989), which provides – in addition to guidance on site selection – guidance on site management, including legislative measures, financing, management planning, boundary marking and monitoring;
- Recommendation No. 71 (1998), which provides guidance to habitat protection and management by private or voluntary schemes, including acquisition of land, conservation by private owners, legislative support for private habitat conservation, promoting tax policies favouring private conservation and involving the voluntary sector.
- Bulgaria: wind farms in Balchik and Kaliakra – Via Pontica. The case concerns the building of wind farms on the Black Sea coast on an important flyway. The Standing Committee has adopted a recommendation regarding the case. Other international bodies involved include the secretariat of the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA) and the European Commission. At present, a significant part of the area is included in Natura 2000 and the threat of new wind farms in the area has been significantly reduced.
- Cyprus: Akamas Peninsula. This case concerns plans for tourist development with detrimental effects on an ecologically valuable area with many rare plant and animal species. The site is especially important for two species of marine turtles included in Appendix I of the Bern Convention; both species are also included in Appendices II and IV of the Habitats Directive. The Standing Committee has adopted a recommendation regarding the case. The dispute has been going on since 1996. In July 2010, the European Union announced that the European Commission had recently received a complaint claiming insufficient designation and protection of the Akamas Peninsula. In that context, the Commission will assess the sufficiency of the designated site as well as the measures implemented to safeguard its conservation values, with a view to ensuring compliance with relevant provisions under European Union nature legislation. The area is at present partly included in Natura 2000, but whether this is sufficient for the long-term protection of the whole site and the relevant species is not clear.
- France: habitats for the survival of the common hamster (Cricetus cricetus) in Alsace. Insufficient measures aimed at ensuring the maintenance of the habitats needed for the survival of the common hamster. The European Commission brought the case before the European Court of Justice in June 2009.
- Ukraine: the project for a waterway in the Bystroe estuary (Danube delta). The proposed waterway would go through valuable nature area in the Danube delta that is also a biosphere reserve. The Standing Committee has adopted a recommendation regarding the case. Other international bodies involved in addition to the Standing Committee are the European Commission, UNESCO, UNECE, UNEP, the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River and the relevant bodies of the Aarhus, Espoo and Ramsar Conventions. The dispute has been going on since 2004 and the situation remains unclear regarding possible damage to the site by the project.
- Bosnia and Herzegovina: threats to the Vjetrenica cave. The cave site, which is rich in biodiversity, has been protected for a long time, but due to the recent turbulent history continuity of the protection had been lost. Other international actors include the IUCN. At present, there are developments that could secure appropriate protection in the future.
- Italy: wind turbines in Alta Maremma. In an area containing several protected sites and rich in species there is an illegal wind park and a proposal to erect another (legal) one is under discussion. There is no data regarding involvement of the European Commission even though some of the species that might be impacted are protected under the Birds and Habitats Directives. At present, it is hard to assess the magnitude of the problem.
- Morocco: tourism development project in Saïdia affecting the Moulouya wetland site. A major tourism development is proposed in the Moulouya site, a “zone of biological and ecological interest” and a Ramsar site. The authorities claim that the development would not harm the site.
- France: black grouse (Tetrao tetrix) in the Drôme and Isère
- Recommendation No. 144 (2009) of the Standing Committee, on the wind park in Smøla (Norway) and other wind farm developments in Norway.
- Recommendation No. 66 (1998) on the conservation status of some nesting beaches for marine turtles in Turkey.
- Recommendation No. 98 (2002) on the project to build a motorway through the Kresna Gorge (Bulgaria).
- Recommendation No.113 (2004) on military antenna in the British Sovereign Base Area of Akrotiri (Cyprus).
4.1.3. General issues of habitat diversity protection not related to particular sites
- Recommendation No. 122 (2006) on the conservation of biological diversity in the context of climate change, adopted on 30 November 2006, which proposes establishing a group of experts;
- Recommendation No. 135 (2008) on addressing the impacts of climate change on biodiversity, adopted on 27 November 2008, which, among other proposed measures, stresses the need to integrate protected area networks within a high-quality landscape conservation approach to provide permeability and connectivity to assist species adjust their spatial distributions, through the provision of habitat “stepping stones” and other tools;
- Recommendation No. 143 (2009) on further guidance for Parties on biodiversity and climate change, adopted on 26 November 2009, which stresses, inter alia, the importance of an ecosystem approach and the maintenance of large networks of heterogeneous habitats.
- Iceland: afforestation of lowland habitats, especially wetlands of importance for birds. In December 2002, the Standing Committee adopted Recommendation No. 96 (2002), concerning the conservation of natural habitats and wildlife, especially birds, in afforestation of lowland habitats in Iceland. The recommendation lists seven specific recommendations for implementation by the Government of Iceland.
- Ukraine: afforestation of steppe habitats. A complaint by an NGO has been received by the secretariat.
4.1.4. Selected issues related to protecting habitats of particular taxa
- General Recommendations Nos. 13 (1988), 26 and 27 (1991), 119 (2006) dealing with several species across several states and more specific ones like Recommendation No. 33 (1991) on protection of the natterjack toad in Ireland, Recommendation No. 70 (1998) on crested newt habitat in Orton Brick Pits (United Kingdom), and several recommendations on marine turtles from Nos. 7 (1987) to 95 (2002).
- Recommendation No. 120 (2006) of the Standing Committee refers to the measures proposed in the European Strategy for the Conservation of Invertebrates where habitat loss is recognised as the key threat and some guidance is provided on habitat management.
- Recommendation No. 132 (2007) of the Standing Committee referring to the guidelines included in the Guidance for the Conservation of Mushrooms in Europe considers habitat management as a priority for the conservation of fungi species in Europe.
4.1.5. Preliminary evaluation of Article 4 implementation.
4.2. Implementation of Article 5 – strict protection of plant species
4.3. Implementation of Article 6 – strict protection of animal species (Appendix II)
4.4. Implementation of Article 7 – protection of fauna species subject to exploitation
4.5. Implementation of Article 8 – capture and killing methods
4.6. Implementation of Article 9 – exceptions
4.7. Implementation of Article 11.2
5. Summing up the problems
5.1. Geographical coverage of the convention.
5.2. Creating protected area networks
5.3. Securing protection of the sites
5.4. Securing protection of the habitats on the wider landscape scale
5.5. Securing the protection of species
6. Conclusions
Appendix 1 – Comparison of the key provisions of the Bern Convention and the European Union nature conservation directives
(open)
Bern Convention |
Birds Directive |
Habitats Directive |
|
Protection of species’ habitats |
Article 4.1: protection of wild flora and fauna habitats, especially of species in Appendices I and II |
Article 3.1: general protection of the bird habitats Article 4.1: special conservation measures of Annex I species’ habitats Article 4.2: similar measures for other migratory species |
Article 3.1: protection in the framework of Natura 2000 of Annex II species’ habitats Article 12.1: protection of breeding and resting sites of Annex IV animal species |
Protection of habitat types |
Article 4.1: protection of endangered natural habitats (not specified) Resolution 4: lists in Annex I the habitats requiring special protection |
Not relevant |
Article 3.1: protection in the framework of Natura 2000 of Annex I habitat types |
Protected area networks (creation) |
Article 4: general reference to area protection Resolution 3: Emerald Network creation |
Article 4.1 and 4.2: listing special protection areas |
Article 3.1: Natura 2000 Network, including also special protection areas under the Birds Directive |
Co-ordination of protected area network creation |
Article 4.4: co-ordination between contracting parties in border areas Resolution 5: rules for Emerald to secure co-ordination on pan-European level |
Article 4.3: member states send the European Commission relevant information |
Article 4 : member states together with European Commission are responsible for developing coherent network according to Annex III |
Management of the sites in the network |
Article 4.2: deterioration of the sites has to be avoided or minimised in the planning and development policies. |
Article 4.4: pollution or deterioration of the habitats and significant disturbance to be avoided |
Article 6.1: conservation measures involving management plans and statutory, administrative or contractual measures Article 6.2: deterioration of the habitats and significant disturbance to be avoided Article 6.3: mandatory assessment of the impact on the site of all plans and projects that can have such an impact and permission of these only if no adverse impact Article 6.4: describes the procedure if in case of overriding public interest the plan must be carried out in spite of negative assessment Article 7: these rules apply also to the sites under Birds Directive |
Protection of plant species |
Article 5: picking, collecting, etc. prohibited, as well as possession or sale for species included in Appendix I |
Not relevant |
Article 13: picking, collecting, etc. prohibited, as well as possession, transport, sale etc for species included in Annex IV (b) |
Protection of animal species |
Article 6: for animals listed in Appendix II the following is forbidden: capture and killing, damaging breeding sites and resting sites, significant disturbance, destruction, taking and keeping of eggs, trade and possession |
Article 5: general protection of all birds from killing, capture, etc. (Article 7: allows hunting of birds listed in Annex II) Article 6: general ban on sale of birds not listed in Annex III |
Article 12: ban on killing, capture, significant disturbance and taking of eggs of species listed in Annex IV (a) |
Regulated exploitation |
Article 7: use of species listed in Appendix III has to be regulates so as to secure safe population levels |
Article 7: allows hunting of birds listed in Annex II |
Article 14: regulates exploitation of species listed in Annex V |
Hunting methods |
Article 8: when hunting or catching species listed in Appendix III (or in exceptional cases those of Appendix II) indiscriminate means or means capable to cause population extinction or serious disturbance, especially those methods listed in Appendix IV, are prohibited |
Article 8: in hunting or catching large scale or non-selective means or means capable of causing local extinction, in particular those listed in Annex IV (a); use of transport means listed in Annex IV (b) is also prohibited |
Article 15: in hunting or catching Annex V (or in exceptional cases Annex IV) species indiscriminate means capable of causing local extinction or serious disturbance, in particular those listed in Annex VI (a) are prohibited, and so is hunting or catching form transport means listed in Annex VI (b) |
Exceptions |
Article 9: exceptions allowed if there is no other satisfactory solution and it will not jeopardise the population in question |
Article 9: derogations allowed where there is no other satisfactory solution |
Article 16: derogations allowed when there is no satisfactory alternative and this does not jeopardise the conservation status |
Migratory species |
Article 10: special measures including co-ordination between member states |
No special reference |
No special reference |
Co-operation |
Article 11.1: co-operation between contracting parties in protection and research encouraged |
No special reference |
No special reference |
Research |
Article 11.1: research encouraged, member states encouraged to co-ordinate it |
Article 10: research encouraged, especially in the fields listed in Annex V; European Commission in charge of co-ordination |
Article 18: research to be encouraged by the member states and European Commission especially in relation to Natura 2000 Network and conservation of species |
Reintroduction |
Article 11.2: encouraged if research has shown this to be effective for conservation |
No special reference |
Article 22: encouraged for Annex IV species if research has shown this to be effective for conservation |
Alien species |
Article 11.2: introduction to be strictly controlled |
Article 11: member states to check that introduction of birds alien to Europe would not jeopardise local flora and fauna |
Article 22: ensure that introduction of a species alien to a member state would not jeopardise habitats and species |
Co-ordination |
Articles 13, 14, 15: Standing Committee |
Articles 16, 17: European Commission assisted by a committee |
Articles 20, 24: European Commission assisted by a committee |
Reporting |
Article 9.2: biannual report to the Standing Committee regarding exceptions Article 11.3: informing Standing Committee of protected species not included in Appendices I and II Article 14.1: Standing Committee to keep under review the implementation Article 15: Standing Committee reports to the Committee of Ministers |
Article 12.1: member states report to European Commission every three years Article 12.2: European Commission produces composite reports to the member states Article 17: member states communicate the implementing legislation to European Commission |
Article 17.1: member states report to European Commission every six years Article 17.2: Commission produces composite reports to the member states, European Parliament, Council, and Economic and Social Committee Article 23: member states inform Commission of the implementing legislation |
Appendix 2 – Coverage of the Emerald Network
(open)
Please note that the figures below are constantly evolving and represent the situation at the moment of compiling the report in November 2010. For Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and the Russian Federation, only the numbers of potential Emerald sites are up to date (30 November 2010), while the coverage of national territory is still being calculated. |
The current coverage of the proposed Emerald Network varies among the countries from just a few sites in some countries to over 1 000 sites (40% coverage) in Croatia. For example:
- Albania: 25 sites, covering 18.2% of the country’s territory, are proposed in the framework of a project finalised in 2008;
- Armenia: work on the constitution of the Emerald Network is ongoing, with eight potential Emerald sites identified covering 7.7% of the national territory; the aim of the ongoing project is to identify all the country’s potential Emerald sites by the end of 2011;
- Azerbaijan: work on the constitution of the Emerald Network is ongoing, with seven potential Emerald sites identified covering 8.2% of the national territory; the aim of the ongoing project is to identify all the country’ potential Emerald sites by the end of 2011;
- Bosnia and Herzegovina: 29 sites covering 4.9% of the country’s territory were proposed in the framework of a project finalised in 2008, but for some sites the geographical information systems boundaries were not available by the end of the project;
- Croatia: 1 132 sites covering 44% of its territory were proposed in the framework of a pilot project finalised in 2008. Ongoing work is performed in the framework of the accession process to the European Union (Natura 2000);
- “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”: 35 sites covering 29.3% of its territory were proposed in the framework of a project finalised in 2008;
- Georgia: work on the constitution of the Emerald Network is ongoing, with 17 potential Emerald sites identified covering 2.8% of the national territory; the aim of the ongoing project is to identify all the country potential Emerald sites by the end of 2011;
- Moldova: work on the constitution of the Emerald Network is ongoing, with 17 potential Emerald sites identified covering 1% of the national territory; the aim of the ongoing project is to identify all the country potential Emerald sites by the end of 2011;
- Montenegro: 32 sites covering 17.1% of its territory were proposed in the framework of a project finalised in 2008;
- Norway: 11 sites are officially proposed and several more were identified within the pilot project; subsequently, a list of about 1 200 potential sites was identified out of which 39 have been selected. Norway has made a reservation regarding the applicability of the convention to Svalbard thus in effect eliminating the region from Emerald but is currently considering a possible change in order to include the Svalbard sites in the network. An Emerald seminar is planned during 2011;
- Serbia: 61 sites covering 8.6% of the country were proposed in the framework of a project finalised in 2008;
- Switzerland: 37 sites identified; the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and BirdLife International have expressed their dissatisfaction with the process in a letter sent to the Standing Committee in 2008 and stating that these organisations had proposed many more sites but these have never been properly evaluated. An Emerald seminar is planned during 2011;
- Turkey: preliminary data on 10 sites provided in a report from a pilot project initiated in 2001;
- Ukraine: work on the constitution of the Emerald Network is ongoing, with 88 potential Emerald sites covering 2% of the national territory proposed; the aim is to identify 80% of the country potential Emerald sites by the end of 2011;
- Belarus and the Russian Federation: these countries are not contracting parties to the Bern Convention but are participating in an ongoing Emerald project and have identified respectively seven (1.2% of the national territory) and 103 (1.8% of the national territory) sites in 2009. The aim is to identify 50% of the countries potential Emerald sites by the end of 2011.
In January 2011, the evaluation of all candidate Emerald sites (Phase II) in the West Balkan area will start in collaboration with the European Topic Centre on Biodiversity of the European Environment Agency (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia and “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”).