Download Report on Favourable Conservation Status

Favourable conservation status – to the heart of EU
wildlife legislation
Rebecca Halahan & Rebecca May, WWF
31 January 2003
CONTENTS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Summary
Background and introduction
Defining and interpreting favourable conservation status
Delivering favourable conservation status
The Way Forward
Notes and acknowledgements
Glossary of Terms
References
1. SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to contribute to the debate and provide recommendations on the
interpretation and implementation of measures to achieve favourable conservation status by
Member States and the European Commission. It has been drafted with input from a range of
organisations and individuals, for use by non-governmental organisations, the European
Commission and Member States.
The concept and delivery of favourable conservation status is central to the implementation of
the EU Habitats Directive (Article 2(2)). As such, explicit references to, and provisions for, the
delivery of favourable conservation status are made throughout the Directive.
A broad definition of the term favourable conservation status is given in the Habitats Directive
(Article 1 of the Directive, see Annex I) but there remains a lack of clarity in the interpretation
of this term or the means by which to implement it. There is a risk that, at the moment, it can be
interpreted in many different ways, to suit different, and often conflicting, purposes. This
ambiguity makes it challenging to implement, but it is vital that this central objective of the
Directive can be translated into effective conservation action on the ground at the earliest
opportunity, using the range of measures that the Directive describes.
Key recommendations:

The European Commission and Member States must advance the definitions provided in the
Directive and develop these to provide conservation objectives at all appropriate levels
(local, national, biogeographical and European). These should be set within a conservation
programme that identifies how these will be taken forward, perhaps within a framework of
an action plan.

The European Commission must put pressure on Member States to adequately implement
the range of measures, set out in the Directive, for delivering favourable conservation status,
EP Image
04 February 2003
1
D:\582719599.doc
while addressing obstacles to delivery at an EU level. The Commission should undertake
legal proceedings against any Member State failing to comply with the Habitats Directive,
and hence the delivery of favourable conservation status, and withhold Structural and Rural
Development Funds for failure to do so.

Member States must assess the sum of influences acting on a species or natural habitat listed
in the Directive. This includes the immediate impacts, as well as the longer term impacts
affecting abiotic and biotic conditions of a habitat or species. The positive and negative
impacts of any decision, policy, incentive or activity also need to be assessed.

The European Commission and Member States must endeavour to integrate the
requirements of the Habitats Directive and, in particular the delivery of favourable
conservation status, into sectoral policies at the earliest opportunity, endorsing habitat
creation, restoration and management to encourage natural dispersal and re-colonisation.

The European Commission and Member States must put in place a comprehensive
programme of research, monitoring and reporting, in order to assess current status and then
to assess whether it is favourable. This is also necessary to assess, report on and understand
the contribution that various measures make to the achievement of favourable conservation
status. Common standards of monitoring across the EU are crucial to enable accurate
assessment of changes in species or habitat status. Assessment of conservation status needs
to take account of the European, national and local status and the persistence of all
populations throughout their natural range and should take account of genetic variation and
the conservation of geographic races. The results of such research must be disseminated as
widely as possible, amongst those who seek to rely on them. For example, conservationists,
civil servants, planners, planning inspectors and the judiciary.

Member States must implement the whole suite of measures set out in the Directive, as
appropriate, to achieve favourable conservation status for species and habitats listed in the
Directive – these will be needed at a site, regional, national and European level.

The European Commission and Member States must ensure appropriate funding is made
available to meet the objectives of the Directive. This should include diverting existing
funds away from unsustainable policies and practices, such as certain elements of the CAP
and CFP, to instead, support activities which contribute to the delivery of favourable
conservation status.

Member States must adopt the precautionary approach with respect to the cumulative
impacts of any decision-making process or activity that may affect a species or natural
habitat, including the range of activities undertaken to implement the Habitats Directive.
For example, the identification and designation of special areas of conservation (SACs), as
well as their subsequent protection, and for any derogation under Article 16 of the
Directive.
EP Image
04 February 2003
2
D:\582719599.doc
2. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
The EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) is one of the most important pieces of wildlife
legislation to be passed in the EU in the last 20 years. It is the main vehicle through which the
EU is endeavouring to safeguard it precious, but dwindling, natural heritage.
The Directive aims “to contribute towards ensuring bio-diversity through the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora in the European territory of the Member States to
which the Treaty applies” (Article 2(1)).
To achieve this, Article 2(2) requires that “measures taken pursuant to this Directive shall be
designed to maintain or to restore, at favourable conservation status, natural habitats and species
of wild fauna and flora of Community interest”. It is therefore clear that the concept and
delivery of favourable conservation status for species and natural habitats listed in the Annexes
to the Directive, is central to the implementation of the Directive. Within this context, the
Directive requires that economic, social and cultural requirements, and regional and local
characteristics are taken into account (Article 2(3)). As one of the key pillars of sustainable
development, the maintenance of a healthy environment and of the biodiversity that forms part
of it must also be recognised for its socio-economic significance.
A broad definition of the term favourable conservation status is given in the Habitats Directive
(Article 1 of the Directive, see Annex I) but there remains a lack of clarity in the interpretation
of this term or the means by which to implement it. There is a risk that, at the moment, it can be
interpreted in many different ways, to suit different, and often conflicting, purposes. This
ambiguity makes it challenging to implement, but it is vital that this central objective of the
Directive can be translated into effective conservation action on the ground at the earliest
opportunity, using the range of measures that the Directive describes.
The Directive sets out a framework for enabling Member States to secure species and habitats of
Community Interest at a favourable conservation status. Within this framework, the Directive
recognises that certain species and habitats are conservation dependent whereas they may
“require the maintenance, or indeed the encouragement, of human activities” to reach this goal
(preamble to the Directive). Such measures include:
 the designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) to ensure the restoration or
maintenance of natural habitats and species at a favourable conservation status in their
natural range (Article 3) and procedures for the management of economic development that
may have a significant impact on these sites (Article 6);

the provision of strict protection, outside SACs as appropriate, for species listed in Annex
IV of the Directive (Article 12-16); and

the management of features of the landscape outside designated sites (Article 10).
It is imperative that Member States implement the whole suite of measures set out in the
Directive to achieve favourable conservation status for species and natural habitats listed in the
Directive, while tackling the root causes of biodiversity loss, and embracing the opportunities
available to secure a future for the EU’s threatened species and habitats.
EP Image
04 February 2003
3
D:\582719599.doc
The purpose of this report is to contribute to the debate and provide recommendations on the
interpretation and implementation of measures to achieve favourable conservation status by
Member States and the European Commission. It has been drafted with input from a range of
organisations and individuals, for use by non-governmental organisations, the European
Commission and Member States.
EP Image
04 February 2003
4
D:\582719599.doc
3. DEFINING AND INTERPRETING FAVOURABLE CONSERVATION STATUS
A broad definition of the term favourable conservation status is given in the Habitats Directive
(Article 1 of the Directive, see Annex I) but there remains a lack of clarity in the interpretation
of this term or the means by which to implement it. There is a risk that, at the moment, it can be
interpreted in many different ways, to suit different, and often conflicting, purposes. This
section reviews and discusses the definition provided in Article 1(e)(i), and provides further
options and recommendations for the interpretation and implementation of favourable
conservation status.
3.1 The sum of influences
Article 1(e)(i) of the Directive (see Annex I) defines the “conservation status” of a species or
natural habitat as the “sum of the influences” acting on them. In assessing the sum of influences,
Member States should take account of biotic and abiotic factors that influence species and
habitats listed on the Directive, and the positive and negative effects of any decision, policy,
incentive or activity that may affect the conservation status of a species or habitat. Furthermore,
Member States must take account of the interaction between these influences now and in the
future. In particular, with regard to any effects on a habitat’s “long-term natural distribution,
structure and functions as well as the long-term survival of its typical species”; or on a species’
“long-term distribution and abundance”.
3.2 Favourable conservation status – Article 1(e)(i)
In order to determine whether a natural habitat can be taken as having favourable conservation
status, Member States should have:
 up to date scientific data on the natural range of a habitat and the areas it covers within that
range, gained through a comprehensive programme of research, monitoring and reporting,
as required in the Directive;

a thorough understanding of the species structure and functions which are necessary for the
habitat’s long-term maintenance. In this respect, Member States must consider the
interactions within and between plant and animal communities and their entire physicochemical environment (the concept of the ecosystem). Taking into account biotic and
abiotic factors, and considering the external influences acting on the structure and functions
of a habitat.

ensured the habitat’s typical species are at a favourable conservation status (see below). It is
important to emphasise that the conservation status of a natural habitat and its typical
species can only be taken as favourable if the species that typify that habitat are also at a
favourable conservation status. The term “typical” should be interpreted as those species
that are characteristic of a habitat and those that are typical of the habitat, which necessarily
means to include species other than those listed in the Annexes to the Directive.
In order to determine whether a species’ status can be taken as favourable, Member States
should have:
 up to date scientific data on the population dynamics of the species concerned, gained
through a comprehensive programme of research, monitoring and reporting, as required in
the Directive. Assessment of whether the species is maintaining itself as a viable component
of its natural habitat on a long-term basis relies on an understanding of a number of
variables. Taking account of the ecology (population structure, size and distribution) and
EP Image
04 February 2003
5
D:\582719599.doc
behaviour of a species (organisation, interaction within and between species), as well as
social and cultural indicators (level of protection and presence of conservation
programmes). Member States should also take account of the varying ecological
requirements from one species to another, but also the ecological requirements for the same
species depending on the stage of its biological cycle. For example, the great crested newt
Triturus cristatus (included in Annex II and IVa of the Directive) requires both aquatic and
terrestrial habitats during its life-cycle. It relies on a variety of different features on land for
food, shelter and hibernation, as well as certain features in its aquatic environment for
breeding and for the development of its tadpoles. In addition, some species have variable
life-cycles which must be considered in making any decisions affecting habitats and species.
For example, the Marsh fritillary Euphydryas aurinia (listed in Annex II of the Habitats
Directive) is renowned for undergoing large fluctuations in population size.

an understanding of the natural range of the species (past, present and potential), which
relies on a comprehensive programme of research, monitoring and reporting, as required in
the Directive. In order to ascertain whether the natural range of a species is being reduced,
or likely to be reduced, it is important to consider the risks from latent extinction, and the
need to model the long-term viability of populations, taking account of potential impacts of
climate change. For example, maintaining and restoring wildlife corridors and stepping
stones are essential for maintaining the potential for migration and colonisation in the
future, which will be key to ensuring favourable conservation status in the long-term (see
provisions of Article 10 of the Directive).

conservation measures in place to ensure the availability of a sufficiently large habitat to
maintain its populations. Member States should also consider the importance of isolation
and habitat quality to the conservation status of a species. Two related theories,
metapopulation dynamics and island biogeography predict the loss of species from smaller
and or isolated habitat patches. Furthermore, current research highlights the importance of
habitat quality in the maintenance of species on a long-term basis (1). Therefore, Member
States should consider the degree of isolation and quality of habitats, as well as the size of
habitats.
Species and natural habitats can only be taken as favourable when all the criteria set out in the
broad definitions provided in Articles 1(e)(i) have been met.
3.3 Favourable conservation status – further options and recommendations
The Oxford English Dictionary defines favourable as “that concedes what is required or
requested”. The conservation status of a species or habitat could, therefore, be taken as
favourable when the requisite conditions of that species or habitat favour its maintenance or
recovery. However, this still leaves open the interpretation of the level of occurrence or
recovery that the Directive requires for any species or natural habitat – what is the minimum
state and/or necessary conditions we wish to work towards?
Closer analysis of the definitions included in the Directive tells us that, in many cases, delivery
of favourable conservation status requires the enhancement of current status - for many species
and natural habitats listed on the Directive they were at an unfavourable conservation status to
merit their inclusion in the Annexes. The definition in Article 1 states that it is only when a
habitats "range, and the area it covers within that range is stable"; or when a species natural
range is not "being reduced" that they can be taken as favourable. Therefore, to reach this point
EP Image
04 February 2003
6
D:\582719599.doc
requires Member States to put in place conservation measures to enhance their status, which
may include protection, management and restoration measures. Once their status has reached a
favourable level, a "no net loss" management approach must be adopted, which will continue to
rely on ongoing monitoring and appropriate measures to maintain favourable conservation
status. As such, the European Commission must not allow the risk of species and habitats
becoming unfavourable through, for example, removing them from the Annexes. The definition
also includes a cautionary note that where species have reached a favourable status Member
States must also ensure that the natural range of a species is not "likely to be reduced for the
foreseeable future". In this regard, Member States should consider two key principles: the sum
of influences acting on the species and the precautionary principle.
It is also worth considering two theories which could be related to the concept of favourable
conservation status:
 carrying capacity which can be defined as the number of animals that a habitat can sustain
in a healthy, vigorous condition; and

minimum viable populations which can be defined as the estimated minimum number of
plants and animals in a population needed for long-term survival (e.g. 100 years) with high
probability (e.g. 95%)
Given the range of variables associated with the conservation status of a species or natural
habitat, it is clear that the level at which they can be taken as favourable, will vary from species
to species, and habitat to habitat.
Member States may consider developing Action Plans for listed species and habitats, providing
a clear conservation programme that identifies how the species or habitat may reach, and be
maintained at, a favourable conservation status. Action Plans should be formulated through
wide engagement from experts from around the EU and accession countries and may include:

numerical limits and a range of conditions, for what is widely agreed to be favourable at
EU, biogeographical, national and local levels.

an indication of the current status of the species or habitat, and a description of the work
required to reach or maintain favourable conservation status at EU, biogeographical,
national and local levels.

The DSPIR (Driving Force; Pressure; State; Impact; Response) Framework for presenting
causal links between environmental problems, to their impacts, and society’s responses to
them.

a list of key stakeholders who will be involved in the delivery or maintenance of favourable
conservation status at EU, biogeographical, national and local levels.

ongoing analysis of the sum of influences on the species or habitat at EU, biogeographical,
national and local levels.
3.4 The precautionary principle
The definition of conservation status also includes a precautionary note, whereas Member States
must take account of the sum of the influences that “may” affect a species or natural habitat on
the Directive. As such Member States should be advised to adopt a precautionary approach with
respect to the cumulative impacts of any decision-making process or activity that may affect a
EP Image
04 February 2003
7
D:\582719599.doc
species or natural habitat, including the range of activities undertaken to implement the Habitats
Directive. For example, the identification and designation of special areas of conservation
(SACs) (to which Article 3 refers), as well as their subsequent protection (note the
demonstration of the precautionary principle in Article 6). Accordingly, the absence of scientific
certainty must not be used as a reason for postponing measures to protect the species and
habitats listed on the Directive, or indeed the wider environment or human health, where there
are threats of serious or irreversible damage. Any potential threats must be assessed against the
criteria set out in the definitions included in Article 1 (e)(i).
The precautionary principle has gained prominence within a wide range of environmental issues
(pollution, food standards, toxic chemicals and conservation), and its compelling logic has led to
its progressive consolidation through international hard and soft law. For example, the
precautionary principle was correctly applied in R v Cornwall County Council, ex parte Hardy
(2001 Env LR 473) in which the judge found that the respondents (Cornwall County Council)
had erred in granting planning permission for an extension of a landfill site for the disposal of
waste, before information about the likely effects on bats (listed on Annex II of the Habitats
Directive) had been considered. In this instance, Harrison J was clear that information on the
likely adverse effects must be contained within the environmental information (i.e. the
“appropriate assessment”) and considered by the County Council before deciding whether to
grant planning permission. In the absence of such information, the respondent could not
rationally conclude that there were no significant nature conservation issues.
Even though the concept of the precautionary principle has been in use for many years, and was
adopted in the UK, as governmental policy as long ago as 1990 in the White Paper “This
Common Inheritance”, High Court judges have, to date, been largely dismissive of it. For
example, in R v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, ex parte Duddridge & ORS (1997
Env LR 235) the judge held that Article 130 EC Treaty did not of itself place any obligation on
any organ of a national government to adopt the precautionary principle. Similarly, in R v
Derbyshire County Council, ex parte David Murray (2001 Env LR 494) the applicant contended
that the respondent’s decision to grant planning permission for an extension in the use and
duration of a landfill site in its area was unlawful for a number of reasons, including the fact that
it failed to give effect to the precautionary principle contained within Article 174 (ex Article
130r) of the EC Treaty. In this instance, Justice Kay held that the precautionary principle did
not have direct effect and was not a free-standing principle of inexorable application. By
enshrining the precautionary principle in an EC Directive, it is hoped that the judiciary will not
only recognise its existence, but will start to place due reliance on it.
EP Image
04 February 2003
8
D:\582719599.doc
Precautionary principle: a case study - a toxic timebomb (2)
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are chlorinated organic compounds that are used, for
example, in electrical equipment and as ingredients in PVC plastics, paints, adhesives and
lubricants.
Commercial use of PCBs began in 1929. By the late 1930s Monsanto, the US producer of
PCBs, were already aware of the adverse health effects of exposure to PCBs after three workers
died in 1936. Autopsies of two of the workers revealed severe liver damage.
The first warning that PCBs were becoming widespread in the environment and
bioaccumulating along the food chain came in the 1960s, when Søren Jensen published his
findings which showed high PCB concentrations in a large proportion of Baltic sea fauna. It also
became apparent that the fertility of all three seal species (including the grey seal Halichoerus
grypus which is listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive) occurring in the Baltic Sea was in
decline. By the 1970s nearly 80 per cent of the females were infertile, with serious
consequences for future generations. High levels of DDT (dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane) and
PCBs were recorded in all three species. Evidence of PCB contamination of human breast milk
became apparent in the 1980s, along with the first published studies on possible developmental
effects in children.
Some 100 years after the first serious adverse effects had been documented, new legislation was
put in place in the EU which called for the elimination of PCBs and PCTs (polychlorinated
terphenols) and their phase out by 2010. The gravity of the situation had at last been recognised,
but the toxic legacy will remain for many decades. This is illustrative that had the precautionary
principle been applied early on, we might have prevented the costly legacy that now exists.
3.5 Defining and interpreting favourable conservation status: key principles and
recommendations:

In many cases delivery of favourable conservation status requires the enhancement of
current status. Many species and natural habitats listed on the Directive were at an
unfavourable conservation status, certainly in need of conservation action, to merit their
inclusion in the Annexes.

Once species and natural habitats have reached a favourable level, a no-net-loss
management approach must be adopted, which will continue to rely on monitoring and
appropriate measures to maintain favourable conservation status.

Species and natural habitats can only be taken as favourable when all the criteria set out in
the broad definitions provided in Article 1(e)(i) of the Directive have been met.

Favourable conservation status applies to all species and habitats on the Directive, but may
be different for each according to their ecological requirements.

The European Commission and Member States must advance the definitions provided in the
Directive and develop these to provide conservation objectives at all appropriate levels
(local, national, biogeographical and European). These should be set within a conservation
programme that identifies how these will be taken forward, perhaps within a framework of
an action plan. Such Action Plans may incorporate the DSPIR (Driving Force; Pressure;
State; Impact; Response) Framework which is a useful tool for organising environmental
EP Image
04 February 2003
9
D:\582719599.doc
information and for presenting causal links environmental problems to their impacts and
society’s responses to them.

Member States must assess the sum of influences acting on a species or natural habitat listed
in the Directive. This includes the immediate impacts, as well as the longer term impacts
affecting abiotic and biotic conditions of a habitat or species. Together with the positive and
negative impacts of any decision, policy, incentive or activity.

The European Commission and Member States must put in place a comprehensive
programme of research, monitoring and reporting, in order to assess current status and then
to assess whether it is favourable. Common standards of monitoring across the EU are
crucial to enable accurate assessment of changes in species or habitat status. Assessment of
conservation status needs to take account of the European, national and local status and the
persistence of all populations throughout their natural range and should take account of
genetic variation and the conservation of geographic races. The results of such research
must be disseminated as widely as possible, amongst those who seek to rely on them. For
example, conservationists, civil servants, planners, planning inspectors and the judiciary.

Member States must adopt the precautionary approach with respect to the cumulative
impacts of any decision-making process or activity that may affect a species or natural
habitat, including the range of activities undertaken to implement the Habitats Directive.
For example, the identification and designation of special areas of conservation (SACs), as
well as their subsequent protection, and for any derogation under Article 16 of the
Directive.
EP Image
04 February 2003
10
D:\582719599.doc
4. DELIVERING FAVOURABLE CONSERVATION STATUS
The Directive recognises that in order to achieve favourable conservation status, conservation
measures must respond to the ecological requirements of a natural habitat or species. It sets out
a suite of measures to do this. Efforts will be needed at the site, regional, national and European
level.
4.1 Site Designation
Article 3(1) requires Member States to designate a community wide network of SACs. These
sites should significantly contribute to the maintenance and restoration of species and habitats
listed in Annex I and II, at a favourable conservation status.
Article 6 plays a crucial role in the management of SACs. It sets out various measures and
procedures needed to safeguard the natural habitats types in Annex I and the habitats of species
in Annex II, contributing to the overall delivery of favourable conservation status. The Article
has three main sets of provisions. The preamble of the Directive recognises the need for “the
maintenance, or indeed the encouragement, of human activities”, while Article 6(1) focuses on
positive and proactive interventions through, for example, establishing management plans for
the sites. Article 6(2) emphasises the need for preventative action to avoid the deterioration of
habitats as well as disturbance of species for which the area has been designated. Article 6(3)
and (4) sets out a series of steps required to assess and minimise the impacts of any economic
activity likely to have a significant impact on the site. In particular through appropriate
assessment of its implications for the site and, where a plan or project must be carried out for
“imperative reasons of overriding public interest”, compensatory measures shall be introduced
to protect the overall coherence of the Natura 2000 network.
Inherent in the requirements of Article 6 is the need to ensure the potential impact(s) on the
conservation objectives of a Natura 200 site are fully assessed before a decision is made as to
whether the plan or proposal can proceed. This demonstration of the precautionary principle
allows for the use of caution when confronted with the threat of harm, despite an absence of
scientific certainty as to the likelihood or magnitude of the threat. This is recognised in guidance
issued by the European Commission Environment DG, wherein “Implicit in the Habitats
Directive is the application of the precautionary principle, which requires that the conservation
objectives of Natura 2000 should prevail where there is uncertainty” (3).
Article 6 applies to new activities which are foreseen outside a Natura 2000 site and its buffer
zone, but are likely to affect the site itself, as well as pre-existing activities that are likely to be
having an impact on the site.
Provisions in Article 8 provide co-financing for some of the measures necessary to meet the
objectives of the Directive, in particular for SACs hosting priority natural habitats and for
priority species. The European Commission and Member States must ensure the necessary
funds are available to meet the objectives of the Directive. This could be achieved, for example,
by diverting existing funds from unsustainable policies, such as the Common Agricultural
Policy and Common Fisheries Policy, to instead supporting activities which contribute to the
delivery of favourable conservation status. In addition, a range of fiscal mechanisms exist to
encourage positive management of species and habitats including voluntary payments provided
through agri-environment schemes under the Common Agricultural Policy and compensatory
EP Image
04 February 2003
11
D:\582719599.doc
payments, which recompense landowners for loss of profit arising from management activities
imposed in respect of designated sites.
However, the aims of the Directive extend beyond the scope of the Natura 2000 network, and
recognise that protected areas are one tool among many. Maintaining biodiversity outside
strictly protected areas is a critical test of sustainability and a considerable challenge for
Member States and the European Commission to reach the objective of halting biodiversity loss
by 2010 (Gothenberg European Council, June 2001).
4.2 Outside Designated Sites
In order to achieve favourable conservation status, site-based measures should be complemented
by conservation action across the wider environment.
For example, Member States are urged to improve the ecological coherence of the Natura 2000
network, to encourage the management of features of the landscape which are of major
importance for wild fauna and flora. Such features act as important wildlife corridors and
stepping stones for the dispersal of populations and to enable migration and colonisation in
future (see provisions of Article 10). In relation to Annex II species, measures outside of
designated sites may be especially important for those that are widespread or wide ranging, such
as the stag beetle Lucanus cervus and great crested newt Triturus cristatus in the UK.
Article 12-16 of the Directive seek to protect species in the wider countryside. They impose a
legal obligation on Member States to establish a “system of strict protection” for animal and
plant species listed in Annex IV(a) and (b). This system shall (see Article 12(1)(a)(b)(c)(d))
protect all important breeding sites and resting places and “prohibit the keeping, transport and
sale or exchange, and offering for sale or exchange” of animal species listed in Annex IV(a) and
prohibit the “picking, collecting, cutting, uprooting or destruction” or the “keeping, transport
and sale or exchange and offering for sale or exchange” of plant species listed in Annex IV(b)
(Article 13(1)(a)(b)).
Article 16 makes explicit reference to the maintenance of favourable conservation status.
Therefore a clear interpretation of favourable conservation status is needed to establish how
Articles 12-16 will be implemented in practice - Action Plans may contribute to this, while
providing a context for decision-making.
These provisions are crucial for those wide-ranging and migratory species listed in Annex IV(a)
and (b), such as the great crested newt Triturus cristatus, harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena
and loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta, whose breeding sites and resting places may fall outside
the Natura 2000 network. Where there is insufficient scientific data regarding the position of
breeding sites or resting places, Member States should adopt the precautionary approach for
protecting such species.
Derogation from the provisions of Article 12-15 is provided in Article 16. However any
derogations are subject to a series of conditions:
 that there is “no satisfactory alternative”

that derogation is “not detrimental to the maintenance of the populations of the species
concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range
EP Image
04 February 2003
12
D:\582719599.doc

subject to the list in Article 16(1)(a)-(e).
The precautionary principle must be applied to any derogation under Article 16. Furthermore,
Member States should take account of the sum of the influences including, for example trade,
affecting those species listed in Annex IV(a) and (b), and their habitats (including abiotic and
biotic factors (Article 1(f)) and must not prejudice their progress towards favourable
conservation status.
It should be emphasised that the “taking in the wild” or exploitation of species listed in Annex
V should not compromise their maintenance or delivery at favourable conservation status (see
provisions of Article 14).
A system of surveillance (see provisions of Article 11) is critical to 1) inform any decisionmaking process in respect of derogations under Article 16 and 2) measure the impact of these
measures in achieving favourable conservation status. The system of surveillance should operate
at all relevant levels – local, regional, national and international – to ensure that variations in the
number or range of species can be considered in the EU context.
In addition, it is critical that Member States and the Commission address widespread human
activities affecting species and habitats in the wider environment, such as those responsible for
causing diffuse pollution. For example, a recent WWF report “Out of sight, out of mind” (4)
highlights the detrimental impacts of eutrophication on coastal SACs. Integration of the
requirements of the Habitats Directive and, in particular the delivery of favourable conservation
status, into sectoral policies is critical to the success of the Directive.
These measures which are designed to protect the wider environment complement the principles
of the ecosystem approach which appears in many global and regional frameworks, particularly
for the marine environment. The ecosystem approach recognises the functional links between
species or groups of species such as trophic hierarchy or food webs, and between organisms and
their environment such as habitat requirements and climatic range, while managing human
demands on the environment. An ecosystem approach is about integrating environmental social
and economic objectives so that the needs of humans and those of wildlife can be met in both
the short and long term.
4.3 Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation
Article 11 requires Member States to “undertake surveillance of the conservation status of the
natural habitats and species referred to in Article 2”. This will allow Member States to make
objective assessments of trends and enable an evaluation of the efficacy of conservation and
protection measures that have been put in place in the Natura 2000 network, and in the wider
environment. It is vital that common monitoring standards, methods (5) and compatible systems
are used across Member States to feed into an EU wide picture. A European Union level
assessment of the conservation status of species and habitats listed in the Directive, “with
particular regard to priority natural habitat types and priority species”, is necessary to monitor
the implementation of the Directive.
Article 17 requires Member States to “report on the implementation of the measures taken under
the Directive”. Including, in particular, “information concerning the conservation measures
EP Image
04 February 2003
13
D:\582719599.doc
referred to in Article 6(1) (ie conservation measures involving appropriate management plans
for SACs or integrated into other development plans and appropriate statutory, administrative or
contractual measures which correspond to the ecological requirements of Annex I and II
habitats and species) as well as evaluation of the impact of those measures on the conservation
status of the natural habitat types of Annex I and the species in Annex II and the main results of
the surveillance referred to in Article 11”. The report shall include an “appropriate evaluation of
the progress achieved and… of the contribution of Natura 2000 to the achievement of the
objectives set out in Article 3”. The Directive therefore places an emphasis on reporting on the
progress towards delivering favourable conservation status through measures associated with
SACs. However, it is important to recognise that surveillance provisions included in Article 11
are broader than this, though it suggests “particular regard” to priority natural habitat types and
species. It would therefore be useful if the European Commission also collated this data during
the reporting round. Article 17 also includes provisions for making the report accessible to the
public – this will be an important step towards raising awareness of the Habitats Directive’s
aims, objectives and successes.
4.4 Re-introductions
Article 22(a) contains provisions for “re-introducing species in Annex IV, that are native to their
territory where this might contribute to their conservation”. IUCN/Species Survival
Commission (SSC) defines re-introduction as “an attempt to establish a species in an area which
was once part of its historical range, but from which it has been extirpated or become extinct”.
Article 22(a) requires Member States to study the desirability of using re-introductions, taking
into account “experience of other Member States or elsewhere” and that such re-introduction
will contribute “effectively to re-establishing these species at a favourable conservation status”,
and “that it takes place only after proper consultation”. Member States should also consider
IUCN/SSC guidelines on re-introductions.
Re-introductions: a case study (6)
WWF, in collaboration with the Council of Europe, has developed pan-European Species
Action Plans for large carnivores in the framework of the Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe
(LCIE). The Bear Action Plan recommends conservation actions based on regional and national
large carnivore populations, including re-introductions where appropriate. Re-introducing bears
to parts of their former range is still an experimental process, but experience shows that it can
only succeed with full co-operation of the public.
WWF-Austria was instrumental in reintroducing three brown bears into Austria's eastern Alps
between 1989 and 1993. By 1998, ten cubs had been born. This project has shown that, given
adequate protection and undisturbed habitat, bear populations will recover slowly from a small
founder group of re-introduced individuals, as well as through natural migration from core
refuge areas.
Lessons must be drawn and disseminated from past experience to ensure the success of reintroduction programmes in the long-term.
EP Image
04 February 2003
14
D:\582719599.doc
4.5 Obstacles and opportunities
It is important to identify those human activities which threaten the delivery of species and
habitats to a favourable conservation status including over-fishing, intensification or
abandonment of agriculture, pollution, transport infrastructure, aquaculture, urbanisation, land
drainage and introduction of non-native species. The following list identifies some of the
driving land and sea use policies that threaten species and habitats across the EU, thus
conflicting with the objectives of the Habitats Directive and Articles 2 and 6 of the EC Treaty,
as well as some opportunities for addressing them (this is not an exhaustive list).
4.5.1 Obstacles
A number of EU and national policies are adversely affecting the conservation status of species
and habitats.
 The Common Agricultural Policy provides a system of support for farmers which
encourages them to adopt intensive farming practices, and in some areas, the abandonment
of extensive farming practices, resulting in the loss and degradation of wildlife habitats.
About 80 per cent of the Common Agricultural Policy budget is currently spent on
production related subsidies, with just 20 per cent (approx.) supporting sustainable rural
development, of which a tiny proportion goes to agri-environment schemes.

The Common Fisheries Policy is the EU’s instrument for the management of fisheries and
aquaculture. However, there are insufficient measures in this policy to minimise effects of
these industries on the marine environment. With inappropriate subsidies and unsustainable
fisheries agreements, a growing number of fish stocks are declining, and facing collapse,
due to too many fishing fleets fishing the seas. Fishing also involves catching large numbers
of unwanted species, leading to the indiscriminate killing of other marine species such as
turtles, harbour porpoises and sea birds, which are protected under the EU Habitats and
Birds Directives.

Planning systems vary enormously in their ability to conserve and protect species and
habitats, and to contribute to their restoration, and hence the achievement of favourable
conservation status. Even where planning systems exist, they can lead to developments that
threaten protected species and habitats. Designated areas must receive strict protection,
adhering to the measures set out in Article 6. Planning systems, and consequently local
planning authorities, planning inspectors and the judiciary for example, must also recognise
the importance of protecting areas that support habitats and species listed on the Directive
outside the Natura 2000 network, and the contribution such areas make to achieving
favourable conservation status. In practice, however, there is little evidence that such an
approach is being adopted. In the marine environment, the situation is complex, and the
planning of activities in the sea are un-coordinated.

The EU Structural Funds aim to provide economic assistance designed to help Europe’s
poorer regions. These resources often support large-scale development projects, such as
irrigation and highway construction. However, many of the areas receiving funding, support
rich wildlife habitats that are vulnerable to development of this nature. Of utmost concern is
when Structural Funds are used for projects which have serious impacts on wildlife that are
already threatened and protected under the Habitats Directive or the Birds Directive. Such
projects include the construction of reservoirs, irrigation projects, river dredging,
canalisation, road networks, and afforestation. For example, Structural Fund money is used
for the development of some components of the Spanish National Hydrological Plan, such
as dams and hydro-infrastructure. In addition the Spanish Government intends to apply for
EP Image
04 February 2003
15
D:\582719599.doc
further funds for the transfer of huge quantities of water from the Ebro Delta in the north, to
the south of Spain. This project will have serious consequences for species and habitats
protected under both the Habitats and Birds Directives, including the world’s most
endangered wild cat - the Iberian lynx Lynx pardina.

Lack of reliable historical data, and inadequate monitoring and reporting systems In
order to achieve favourable conservation status, it is vital that these obstacles are overcome
to allow objective assessments of trends and allow the efficacy of conservation and
protection measures to be evaluated. Incompatible data sources across the EU is a further
impediment to the delivery of favourable conservation status. To achieve this, appropriate
funds must be made available at EU and national levels.

Lack of buffer zones and zones around Natura 2000 network designations Different
approaches to the designation of Natura 2000 sites have been adopted across Member
States. Recognising that activities outside protected sites can affect the species and habitats
within them, and therefore their conservation status, buffer zones and restoration zones are
important tools for the conservation and restoration of species and habitats. In addition, the
Habitats Directive does not intend for Natura 2000 sites to become isolated wildlife rich
pockets. Rather, it seeks to contribute to the overall objective of sustainable development
(preamble) and encourages the management of landscape features, such as rivers and small
woodlands, to act as wildlife corridors and stepping stones, to improve the overall
coherence of the network (Article 10).
It is important to re-emphasise that Member States should consider the sum of the influences
acting on a species or natural habitat, and to adopt the precautionary approach. It is therefore
critical that the threats outlined above are addressed as quickly as possible.
4.5.2 Opportunities
There are a number of frameworks, strategies and policies which provide potential opportunities
in terms of their contribution to the achievement of favourable conservation status, and which
need further consideration and application.
 The Common Agricultural Policy and Structural Funds are reviewed in 2003 (this is the
mid-term review) and 2006. The EC should use the earliest opportunity to introduce
significant reform of these instruments to ensure they contribute to the favourable
conservation status of species and habitats of community interest across the EU.

The Common Fisheries Policy is currently being reviewed for the first time in 10 years.
WWF has been campaigning for reform of this policy to secure a sustainable fishing sector.
To achieve the long-term viability of marine habitats and species and the delivery of
favourable conservation status, WWF is seeking significant reform through: the elimination
of over-capacity in the EU within the next 10 years; the reform and reduction of harmful
subsidies and transition to a long-term sustainable fishing sector; fair and sustainable access
agreements; and the protection of the marine environment through an ecosystem-based
management framework.

The OSPAR Convention provides a framework for the management of the marine
environment of the North-East Atlantic, through which members of the Convention meet
every 5 years (2003 being the next meeting). The protection of biodiversity and ecosystems
is one part of this framework, with strategies to address biodiversity protection, marine
pollution reduction and offshore developments. Parties are required to "protect the maritime
EP Image
04 February 2003
16
D:\582719599.doc
area against the adverse effects of human activities, so as to safeguard health and to
conserve marine ecosystems and, when practicable, restore marine areas which have been
adversely affected." This also recognises the need for an ecosystem approach, which will
contribute to the delivery of favourable conservation status. There should be clear links
between favourable conservation status, ecosystem management approaches and
Environment Quality Objectives (EQOs). Indicators of healthy ecosystems should include
those for favourable conservation status and EQOs. The OSPAR Convention requires the
application of the Precautionary Principle, the Polluter Pays Principle, Best Available
Techniques and Best Environmental Practice and establishes the right of access to
information.

The EU Strategy Towards a Strategy to protect and conserve the marine environment
(COM (2002) 539 final) incorporates the concepts of favourable conservation status
(Habitats Directive) and good ecological status (Water Framework Directive) to protect the
marine environment through an ecosystem approach. The implementation of the Natura
2000 network in the marine environment has been extremely slow, in which time,
continuing damage has occurred. The Marine Strategy could place extra impetus on
implementing the Habitats Directive for the marine environment. There may also be an
opportunity to adapt the Annexes to the Habitats Directive, to include additional marine and
coastal habitats and species (according to Article 1(g) of the Directive), so increasing
representivity in the marine environment. Furthermore, the strategy recognises the need to
manage activities with damaging impacts on Natura 2000 sites, and the need for integration
between policies to achieve this.

The Water Framework Directive promotes the integrated management of water resources
to support environmentally sound development and reduce problems associated with
excessive water abstraction, pollution, floods and droughts. It will require the integration of
industrial, agricultural, rural development, nature conservation and forestry programmes etc.
at the river basin scale, which in many cases, will need transboundary collaboration to
deliver good ecological status of aquatic species and the aquatic environment. In fact, one of
the purposes is the prevention of deterioration of the status of aquatic ecosystems and the
ecosystems directly dependent on them. When river basin management plans are drawn up,
there will be an opportunity to integrate Natura 2000 management plans and species
conservation objectives within these. This could result in a more holistic approach to water
and habitat management. There will also be links between indicators of favourable
conservation status and ecological quality of water. The actions under the Water Framework
Directive could help to achieve favourable conservation status for species and habitats, and
help to improve the ecological function of rivers.

The EU Chemicals Strategy There are around 30,000 different chemicals traded in
quantities above one tonne today in the European Union, the vast majority have never had
proper safety assessments. The European Union has taken a big step forward - by proposing
a new system to register, evaluate and authorise chemicals (REACH). The European
Commission published its plan for a future EU chemicals policy (White Paper) in February
2001. WWF are calling for EU Member States to develop this plan into workable
regulations, incorporating the precautionary principle to 1) phase out the use of very
persistent and very bioaccumulative chemicals; 2) phase out endocrine disrupting chemicals
and 3) require all hazardous chemicals to be substituted with safer alternatives wherever
they exist. This strategy will help to address the threat to species and habitats, such as those
EP Image
04 February 2003
17
D:\582719599.doc
listed on the Habitats Directive, from both diffuse and point sources of chemical
contamination.

The Kyoto Protocol aims to address the causes of climate change. The causes of climate
change cannot be addressed in isolation from the rest of the world. This global commitment,
if implemented, will help to reduce the long-term impacts of change on species and habitats.
Climate change will influence the distribution of species and habitats, and therefore how the
Habitats Directive is implemented, and any strategy for achieving favourable conservation
status must consider climate change impacts.

Large-scale habitat or landscape restoration initiatives are underway in many countries.
Following the principles of the marine ecosystem approach, it recognises the interactions
between human activities, habitats and species. These initiatives should be used to provide
models for managing landscapes to benefit species and habitats (and contributing to the
requirements of Article 10) and to benefit people within the landscape. Best practice should
be shared across Member States to secure sustainable management of landscapes.

Information technology should be used to enable improved information sharing and best
practice. It is critical that conservation status of species and habitats can be monitored, to
assess whether they are at a favourable level, and to identify appropriate conservation and
protection measures. This will be a challenging, and costly data management task, however.
Information technology, Geographical Information Systems, and a move to standardised
systems can help to take up the challenge more effectively.

Planning There are some developments which actually restore areas for wildlife, or which
consider wildlife within their design. However, in many cases, development activities are
having a detrimental impact. Land use planning can help to restore species and habitats and
ensure that they do not become further degraded and / or fragmented. For the marine
environment it is important to note the importance of Maurice Kay’s judgement in R v
Secretary of State for Trade & Industry & ORS, ex parte Greenpeace Ltd (2000 Env LR
221) in which it was held that the Habitats Directive applied to the UK Continental Shelf
and to the superjacent waters up to a limit of 200 nautical miles. This judgement has forced
the UK Government to prepare Regulations relating to the marine environment and will
result in the designation of the first marine SAC which will include important Lophelia
reefs, including the Darwin Mounds, in the Atlantic Frontier. The UK Government and the
European Commission are aware that the impact of ongoing activities, such as deep sea
trawling, will need to be addressed in order to prevent the continued erosion of these
important marine habitats. The judiciary’s confirmation that the Directive applies beyond 12
nautical miles presents an important opportunity for regulating and planning such activities.

Action plans Some Member States have introduced Species and Habitat Action Plans.
However, they are not explicitly linked to achieving favourable conservation status. This
science based process and partnership approach could be a good basis on which to develop
our interpretation of favourable conservation status for each species and habitat, identifying
actions that are needed to achieve this goal. Member States should consider using the
DSPIR framework (Drivers, State, Pressure, Impact, Response) when drawing up action
plans.

European Commission Working Groups are set up to help to clarify certain aspects of
European Directives. Favourable conservation status is a key element of the Habitats
Directive which needs further discussion in order to help interpret this in practical terms.
WWF recommends that the European Commission establish such a group to help clarify
EP Image
04 February 2003
18
D:\582719599.doc
this issue and to provide guidance on interpreting, implementing and monitoring favourable
conservation status.

Socio-economic benefits of functioning habitats It is important to emphasise the wider
socio-economic benefits associated with naturally functioning habitats. For example,
functioning wetland habitats act as both a sponge, soaking up excess water which might
otherwise flood more developed areas further downstream; and as a natural purifier,
absorbing pollution and nutrients from the water, generating savings for water companies in
the costs of water treatment. Furthermore, as one of the key pillars of sustainable
development, the maintenance of a healthy environment and of the biodiversity that forms
part of it must also be recognised for its socio-economic significance.
4.6 Delivering favourable conservation status: key principles and recommendations:

Sustainable management and use of natural resources are necessary, to restore and maintain
the biological and ecological functioning of ecosystems. Taking into account the
interactions within and between species populations and the entire ecosystem must be taken
into account, including biotic and abiotic factors.

Decisions affecting the conservation status of species and habitats should be made against
clear guidelines based around the precautionary principle.

NGOs, academic and research institutes, business and industry, planners, the judiciary,
Member States, the European Commission and the general public must work together to
succeed in delivering favourable conservation status.

The European Commission must put pressure on Member States to adequately implement
the range of measures, set out in the Directive, for delivering favourable conservation status,
while addressing obstacles to delivery at an EU level. The Commission should undertake
legal proceedings against any Member State failing to comply with the Habitats Directive,
and hence the delivery of favourable conservation status, and withhold Structural and Rural
Development Funds for failure to do so.

The European Commission and Member States must endeavour to integrate the
requirements of the Habitats Directive and, in particular the delivery of favourable
conservation status, into sectoral policies at the earliest opportunity, endorsing habitat
creation, restoration and management to encourage natural dispersal and re-colonisation.

Member States must implement the whole suite of measures set out in the Directive, as
appropriate, to achieve favourable conservation status for species and habitats listed in the
Directive – these will be needed at a site, regional, national and European level.

The European Commission and Member States must ensure appropriate funding is made
available to meet the objectives of the Directive. This should include diverting existing
funds away from unsustainable policies and practices, such as the CAP and CFP, to instead,
support activities which contribute to the delivery of favourable conservation status.
EP Image
04 February 2003
19
D:\582719599.doc
5. THE WAY FORWARD
It is likely that demands made by humans on the environment will grow. Favourable
conservation status lies at the heart of the EU Habitats Directive and is a critical objective for
ensuring sustainable development across the EU and achieving the objective of halting
biodiversity loss by 2010 (Gothenberg European Council, June 2001). As such, the concept and
delivery of favourable conservation status could be used as a powerful tool for managing human
activities.
Delivery of favourable conservation status will be achieved through a variety of conservation
and protection measures, and should incorporate a number of overarching principles:

In many cases delivery of favourable conservation status requires the enhancement of
current status. Many species and natural habitats listed on the Directive were at an
unfavourable conservation status to merit their inclusion in the Annexes, and need
conservation to achieve and maintain a favourable conservation status.

Once species and natural habitats have reached a favourable level, a no-net-loss
management approach must be adopted, which will continue to rely on monitoring and
appropriate measures to maintain favourable conservation status.

Species and natural habitats can only be taken as favourable when all the criteria set out in
the broad definitions provided in Article 1(e)(i) of the Directive have been met.

Sustainable management and use of natural resources are necessary, to restore and maintain
the biological and ecological functioning of ecosystems. Interactions within and between
species populations and the entire ecosystem must be taken into account, including biotic
and abiotic factors.

Decisions affecting the conservation status of species and habitats should be made against
clear guidelines based around the precautionary principle.

Favourable conservation status applies to all species and habitats on the Directive, but may
be different for each according to their ecological requirements.

NGOs, academic and research institutes, business and industry, planners, the judiciary,
Member States, the European Commission and the general public must work together to
succeed in delivering favourable conservation status.
5.1 Recommendations:

The European Commission and Member States must advance the definitions provided in the
Directive and develop these to provide conservation objectives at all appropriate levels
(local, national, biogeographical and European). These should be set within a conservation
programme that identifies how these will be taken forward, perhaps within a framework of
an action plan. Such Action Plans may incorporate the DSPIR (Driving Force; Pressure;
State; Impact; Response) Framework which is a useful tool for organising environmental
information and for presenting causal links environmental problems to their impacts and
society’s responses to them.

The European Commission must put pressure on Member States to adequately implement
the range of measures, set out in the Directive, for delivering favourable conservation status,
while addressing obstacles to delivery at an EU level. The Commission should undertake
legal proceedings against any Member State failing to comply with the Habitats Directive,
EP Image
04 February 2003
20
D:\582719599.doc
and hence the delivery of favourable conservation status, and withhold Structural and Rural
Development Funds for failure to do so.

Member States must assess the sum of influences acting on a species or natural habitat listed
in the Directive. This includes the immediate impacts, as well as the longer term impacts
affecting abiotic and biotic conditions of a habitat or species. The positive and negative
impacts of any decision, policy, incentive or activity also need to be assessed.

The European Commission and Member States must endeavour to integrate the
requirements of the Habitats Directive and, in particular the delivery of favourable
conservation status, into sectoral policies at the earliest opportunity, endorsing habitat
creation, restoration and management to encourage natural dispersal and re-colonisation.

The European Commission and Member States must put in place a comprehensive
programme of research, monitoring and reporting, in order to assess current status and then
to assess whether it is favourable. This is also necessary to assess, report on and understand
the contribution that various measures make to the achievement of favourable conservation
status. Common standards of monitoring across the EU are crucial to enable accurate
assessment of changes in species or habitat status. Assessment of conservation status needs
to take account of the European, national and local status and the persistence of all
populations throughout their natural range and should take account of genetic variation and
the conservation of geographic races. The results of such research must be disseminated as
widely as possible, amongst those who seek to rely on them. For example, conservationists,
civil servants, planners, planning inspectors and the judiciary.

Member States must implement the whole suite of measures set out in the Directive, as
appropriate, to achieve favourable conservation status for species and habitats listed in the
Directive – these will be needed at a site, regional, national and European level.

The European Commission and Member States must ensure appropriate funding is made
available to meet the objectives of the Directive. This should include diverting existing
funds away from unsustainable policies and practices, such as certain elements of the CAP
and CFP, to instead, support activities which contribute to the delivery of favourable
conservation status.

Member States must adopt the precautionary approach with respect to the cumulative
impacts of any decision-making process or activity that may affect a species or natural
habitat, including the range of activities undertaken to implement the Habitats Directive.
For example, the identification and designation of special areas of conservation (SACs), as
well as their subsequent protection, and for any derogation under Article 16 of the
Directive.
EP Image
04 February 2003
21
D:\582719599.doc
6. NOTES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The mission of WWF, the global environment network, is to stop the degradation of the planet's
natural environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature by:

conserving the world's biological diversity

ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable

promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.
WWF has been very active in the implementation of the Habitats Directive across the EU,
engaging, in particular, in the Natura 2000 designation process at national and European levels.
This paper has been drafted with input from a range of organisations and individuals. However,
WWF would like to give special thanks to Tony Gent (Herpetological Conservation Trust),
Sandra Jen (WWF-European Policy Office), Matt Shardlow (Buglife), Derek Ratcliffe, Carol
Hatton (WWF-UK), Emily Lewis-Brown (WWF-UK), Malachy Campbell (WWF-Northern
Ireland) for their valuable contributions to this report.
For future contact:
Sandra Jen, WWF European Policy Office
[email protected]
EP Image
04 February 2003
22
D:\582719599.doc
7. GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Agri-environment
Schemes
Support available to farmers who undertake agri-environmental
commitments for a minimum period of five years. Aid is granted
annually and calculated according to the income loss and additional
costs resulting from the undertakings, as well as the need to provide a
financial incentive.
Biodiversity
Assemblage of living organisms from all sources including terrestrial,
marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of
which they are part. (EEA)
Carrying Capacity
The number of animals that a habitat can sustain in a healthy, vigorous
condition.
Common
Agricultural Policy
The set of policy principles, regulations and subsidy mechanisms
adopted by the Member States of the European Community that
consolidates efforts in promoting or ensuring reasonable pricing of
food products, fair standards of living for farmers, stable agricultural
markets, increased farm productivity and methods for dealing with
food supply or surplus. (EEA)
Cumulative Impacts
The impacts (positive or negative, direct and indirect, long-term and
short-term impacts) arising from a range of activities throughout an
area or region, where each individual effect may not be significant if
taken in isolation. Such impacts can arise from the growing volume of
traffic, the combined effect of a number of agriculture measures
leading to more intensive production and use of chemicals, etc.
Cumulative impacts include a time dimension, since they should
calculate the impact on environmental resources resulting from
changes brought about by past, present and reasonably foreseeable
future actions (EEA).
Latent Extinction
This recognises that extinction of populations on surviving habitat
patches takes time, so current levels of diversity or current population
levels on habitat remnants may be unsustainable in the long run. Many
species, in Dan Janzen’s graphic phrase are the “living dead”.
Minimum
Population
Precautionary
Approach
EP Image
04 February 2003
Viable The estimated minimum number of plants and animals in a population
needed for long-term survival (e.g. 100 years) with high probability
(e.g. 95%).
A decision to take action, based on the possibility of significant
environmental damage, even before there is conclusive, scientific
evidence, that the damage will occur. (EEA)
23
D:\582719599.doc
8. REFERENCES
(1) Bourn, N. Thomas, J. Stewart, K. Clarke, R. 2002 Importance of habitat quality and
isolation Implications for the management of butterflies in fragmented landscapes. British
Wildlife, pp. 398-403
(2) European Environment Agency. 2001. Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary
principle 1896-2000. Environmental issue report No 22.
(3) European Commission. 2001. Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting
Natura 2000 sites Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3)and (4) of the
Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC
(4) MacGarvin, M. 2001. Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Marine Eutrophication in the United
Kingdom. Modus vivendi for WWF-UK, Glenlivet
(5) WWF. 2001. WWF Rapid Assessment and Prioritisation Methodology for protected area
systems.
(6) Kemf, E. Wilson, A. Servheen, C. 1999 Bears in the Wild. WWF Species Status Report
EP Image
04 February 2003
24
D:\582719599.doc
ANNEX I
Article 1
(e) Conservation status of a natural habitat means the sum of the influences acting on a natural
habitat and its typical species that may affect its long-term natural distribution, structure and
functions as well as the long-term survival of its typical species within the territory referred
to Article 2.
The conservation status of a natural habitat will be taken as ‘favourable’ when:

Its natural range and areas it covers within that range are stable or increasing, and

The species structure and functions which are necessary for its long-term maintenance exist
and are likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future, and

The conservation status of its typical species is favourable as defined in (i)
(i) Conservation status of a species means the sum of the influences acting on the species
concerned that may affect the long-term distribution and abundance of its populations
within the territory referred to in Article 2.
The conservation status of a species will be taken as ‘favourable’ when:

Population dynamics data on the species concerned indicate that it is maintaining itself on a
long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats, and

The natural range of the species is neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced for the
foreseeable future, and

There is, and will probably continue to be, a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its
population on a long-term basis.
EP Image
04 February 2003
25
D:\582719599.doc
ANNEX II
Implementing a system of strict protection through Article 12 and achieving favourable
conservation status for Annex IV(A) Species. Paper for Council Directive 92/43/EEC (Habitats
& Species Directive) Article 12 Working Group. Submitted by Tony Gent, Rebecca Halahan
and Rebecca May on behalf of the European Habitats Forum.
See attachment.
EP Image
04 February 2003
26
D:\582719599.doc