Strasbourg, 24 October 2011 T-PVS (2011) 23

[tpvs23e_2011.doc]

CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF EUROPEAN WILDLIFE

AND NATURAL HABITATS

Standing Committee

31^st meeting

Strasbourg, 29 November – 2 December 2011

__________

Document containing

all draft texts

presented to the Standing Committee

for possible adoption

Document prepared by

the Directorate of Democratic Governance, Culture and Diversity

This document has been prepared to facilitate examination of draft recommendations (DR) and of draft revision of a resolution by Standing Committee delegations. Only draft texts prepared by groups of experts, on-the-spot appraisals or Secretariat are grouped here. Draft recommendations presented by NGOs are not included as they require a proposal from a Party to be discussed by the Committee.

From Groups of Experts

DR on the European Code of Conduct on Hunting and Invasive Alien Species

[document T‑PVS (2011) 19]....................................................................................................... 3

DR on the European Code of Conduct on Pets and Invasive Alien Species

[document T‑PVS (2011) 20]....................................................................................................... 4

DR on the European 2020 targets on Invasive Alien Species

[document T‑PVS (2011) 21]....................................................................................................... 5

DR on the Charter on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity

on European Islands

[document T-PVS (2011) 7]......................................................................................................... 7

DR on the illegal killing, trapping and trade of wild birds

[document T-PVS (2011) 9]....................................................................................................... 15

DR on the European 2020 targets on Protected Areas

[document T‑PVS/PA (2011) 14]................................................................................................ 18

DR on the status of candidate Emerald sites and guidelines on the criteria for their adoption

[document T‑PVS/PA (2011) 12]................................................................................................ 20

From studies / reports

DR on the implementation of an Action Plan for the conservation of the

White-tailed Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) along the Danube

[document T‑PVS (2011) 11]..................................................................................................... 23

DR on Marine Biodiversity and Climate Change

[document T‑PVS (2011) 16]..................................................................................................... 24

Draft Revised Resolution No. 2 (1993) on the scope of Articles 8 and 9 of the Bern Convention

[document T‑PVS (2011)2 ]....................................................................................................... 27

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on the European Code of Conduct on Hunting and Invasive Alien Species

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Having regard to the aim of the Convention which is notably to ensure the conservation of wild flora and fauna, by giving particular attention to species, including migratory species, which are threatened with extinction and vulnerable;

Recalling that under Article 11, paragraph 2.b of the Convention, each Contracting Party undertakes to strictly control the introduction of non-native species;

Recalling Decision VI/23 of the 6^th Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity, on Alien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or species, and the definitions used in that text;

Recalling its Recommendation No. 99 (2003) on the European Strategy on Invasive Alien Species,

Recalling its Recommendation No. 128 (2007) on the European Charter on Hunting and Biodiversity;

Noting the need to co-operate with all the actors involved in hunting in the prevention of the entry, release and dispersal of invasive alien species into the territory of the Convention,

Referring to the European Code of Conduct on Hunting and Invasive Alien Species [document T‑PVS/Inf (2011) 5],

Recommends that Contracting Parties:

1. draw up national codes of conduct on hunting and invasive alien species taking into account the European Code of Conduct mentioned above;

2. collaborate as appropriate with the private sector involved in breeding, import and trade of species used in hunting, as well as with hunters and hunters associations in implementing and helping disseminate good practices and codes of conducts aimed at preventing entry, release and dispersal of invasive alien species;

3. keep the Standing Committee informed of measures taken to implement this recommendation;

Invites Observer States to take note of this recommendation and implement it as appropriate.

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on the European Code of Conduct on Pets and Invasive Alien Species

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Recalling that under Article 11, paragraph 2.b of the Convention, each Contracting Party undertakes to strictly control the introduction of non-native species;

Recalling its Recommendation No. 99 (2003) on the European Strategy on Invasive Alien Species,

Noting the need to co-operate with all the actors involved in breeding, import and trade of pets in the prevention of the entry, release and dispersal of invasive alien species into the territory of the Convention;

Taking note of the Conclusions of the AHTEG on Invasive Alien Species introduced as pets, aquarium and terrarium species, and as live bait and live food, organised in the framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity;

Referring to the European Code of Conduct on Pets and Invasive Alien Species [document T‑PVS/Inf (2011) 1rev],

Recommends that Contracting Parties:

1. draw up national codes of conduct on pets and invasive alien species taking into account the European Code of Conduct mentioned above;

2. collaborate as appropriate with the private sector involved in breeding, import and trade of pets in implementing and helping disseminate good practices and codes of conducts aimed at preventing entry, release and dispersal of invasive alien species;

3. keep the Standing Committee informed of measures taken to implement this recommended;

Invites Observer States to take note of this recommendation and implement it as appropriate.

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on the European 2020 targets on Invasive Alien Species

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Recalling that under Article 11, paragraph 2.b of the Convention, each Contracting Party undertakes to strictly control the introduction of non-native species;

Recalling its Recommendation No. 99 (2003) on the European Strategy on Invasive Alien Species,

Recalling that the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted 20 headline targets for 2020, organised under five strategic goals, taking into account that the goals and targets comprise both: (i) aspirations for achievement at the global level; and (ii) a flexible framework for the establishment of national or regional targets and that, within Strategic Goal B (Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use), one target is devoted to Invasive Alien Species: “Target 9: By 2020, invasive alien species and pathways are identified and prioritised, priority species are controlled or eradicated, and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent their introduction and establishment”,

Recommends that Contracting Parties adopt, at the national and European levels the following targets for Invasive Alien Species:

European targets:

1. By 2013, a EU European Strategy for Invasive Alien Species is adopted and its implementation started;

2. By 2015, a dedicated EU legislative instrument on IAS is concluded;

3. By 2015, priority IAS species in Europe are identified, controlled or eradicated;

4. By 2015, pathways for introduction of IAS are identified and prioritised; and measures are put in place to manage them;

5. By 2015, lists of invasive alien species to be excluded from trade are adopted and trade controls, implemented;

6. By 2015, an interpreted European Early warning and Response System on Invasive Alien Species is operative;

7. By 2018, a European Observatory on Invasive Alien Species is operative;

8. By 2014, invasive alien species used as bioenergy products are identified and phased out by 2016;

9. By 2016, European Codes of Conduct on Invasive Alien Species and a number of pathways and activities (horticulture, recreational fishing, hunting, zoological and botanic gardens, pet-trade) have been elaborated, translated as appropriate and their implementation started.

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on the Charter on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity on European Islands

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Noting the adoption by the Council of the European Union, in March 2010, of a long-term Vision 2050 and Headline Target 2020 for biodiversity; and noting the European Commission’s Communication in May 2011 of an EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020;

Equally noting the adoption by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), in March 2006, of a Programme of Work on Island Biodiversity; and that the in-depth review of the Programme of Work at the 11^th meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the CBD in October 2012;

Recalling that Article 3 of the Bern Convention requires Parties to have regard to the conservation of wild fauna and flora in their planning and development policies, as well as to promote national policies for the conservation of wild flora, wild fauna and natural habitats, with particular attention to endangered and vulnerable species, especially endemic ones, and endangered habitats;

Recalling that Article 4 of the Bern Convention requires Parties to take appropriate and necessary legislative and administrative measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of wild flora and fauna species, as well as of endangered natural habitats; and to give special attention to the protection of areas of importance for migratory species;

Recognising, in this context, the outstanding contribution of islands to global biodiversity largely resulting from their isolation and the high degree of endemism amongst their terrestrial, freshwater and marine animal and plant communities;

Recognising that the five principal proximate drivers of biodiversity loss – pollution, habitat change and disturbance, over-exploitation, climate change, invasive alien species – all have severe and cumulative impacts on the biological diversity of European islands.

Recognising moreover the extreme vulnerability of island biodiversity and that the majority of documented modern-time species extinctions have occurred on islands;

Equally recognising the high vulnerability of human cultures and communities on islands, as well as their economies that often hinge upon only a few sectors, most notably tourism, agriculture, fisheries and mining, and on external financial support; at the same time highlighting the particular resourcefulness of islanders;

Recognising that limitations in both scale and accessibility are fundamental characteristics of many islands and that any type of activity must commonly be conducted by fewer people than in mainland situations;

Noting that Europe has more than 50,000 islands, including around 500 islands larger than 20 km², ranging from polar to subtropical latitudes, and that several European countries are entirely situated on islands.

Recalling its Decision in 2008 to create a Group of Experts on European Island Biological Diversity having the following objectives: (i) improve Network conservation work on European islands; (ii) contribute positively to the island programme of work of the Convention on Biological Diversity by bringing the views, expertise and problems of European islands; (iii) assist Bern Convention governments on specific conservation issues of European islands; (iv) propose common guidelines and tools that may be used to improve conservation of European islands; (v) analyse threats to biodiversity that may present greater challenges on islands than on the continent; (vi) foster national conservation work on islands;

Acknowledging that the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in and around European islands is, further to the Bern Convention, subject to an array of sub-national and national policies, as well as of a range of international instruments, policies and initiatives, an non-exclusive list of which is provided in annex 1);

Refering to document T-PVS/Inf (2011) 8 rev “Draft Charter on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity on European Islands”, by Yves de Soye;

Taking note with interest of the document T-PVS/Inf (2011) 9 on “Priorities for conserving Biodiversity on European Islands”;

Recommends that Contracting Parties:

1. take note of the appended Charter on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity on European Islands as a source of inspiration for their policies and practice, promoting its use also with sub-national and regional authorities;

2. devote special attention to island biological diversity in the implementation of their international obligations and also in the achievements of the 2020 targets adopted in the framework of the Convention of Biological Diversity;

3. take note, in the elaboration of their workplans for island biological diversity of the priorities suggested in the document mentioned above;

4. inform the Standing Committee on the measures taken on the implementation of this recommendation;

Invites Observer States to implement as appropriate the recommendation.

Furthermore the Standing Committee decides to use the enclosed Charter and the priorities suggested in the document mentioned above as a useful framework for further Bern Convention work in the field.

Appendix to the recommendation

Charter on the Conservation and Sustainable Use

of Biological Diversity on European Islands

Whilst the principles and recommendations captured hereunder could apply to most, if not all, islands worldwide, this Charter focuses specifically on the marine islands of the European and Mediterranean states which are parties to the Bern Convention[1]. The Charter refers to all forms of biological diversity in the terrestrial, marine, coastal and freshwater realms, unless specified.

The Charter will be complemented by a separate plan of action detailing the corresponding recommendations and implementation means and measures.

1. The biological diversity of European islands is an important part of Europe’s natural heritage and warrants protection for both its intrinsic value and because the services it provides are a fundamental pillar of local socio-economic development

Islands cover around 5% of the global land area but contribute significantly to global biodiversity and are host to a significant proportion of threatened species: 29% (10/34) of the world’s terrestrial Biodiversity Hotspots are islands, and of 10 coral reef hotspots identified, 70% are on islands; 48% (104/218) of the world’s Endemic Bird Areas are on islands; 25% of WWF’s 200 priority Ecoregions wholly comprise islands; roughly 20% of all the world’s vascular plant diversity is found only on islands; around one-third of the world’s threatened mammals, birds and amphibians are found only on islands.

European islands harbour many of Europe's endemic species, host major breeding congregations of important species and may act as refuges for species threatened or extinct on the continent or 'mainland' islands. They also often represent vital wintering grounds, stopover points or bottlenecks for migrating birds, mammals, and possibly invertebrates.

The Mediterranean and Macaronesian Regions with their large numbers of islands stand out as a global Biodiversity Hotspot - despite significant historic losses of endemic species resulting from early human occupation. In the Canary Islands up to 70% of some taxa (e.g. beetles) are known to be endemic. On the Mediterranean islands of Corsica, Crete and Cyprus, endemic plants make up 12%, 10% and 7% of the respective floras. The islands in these regions are, in addition, highly vulnerable to climate change.

In contrast, the Northern European islands are characterised by a relatively impoverished biodiversity and a near complete absence of species-level endemism, due to their recent history of glaciation. However, a number of these islands are important feeding and breeding areas for birds and marine mammals, and are home to important marine living resources.

Finally, the economies and livelihoods of European islands often depend to a significant degree on the multi-faceted values of biodiversity and ecosystem services, with nature-based tourism including recreational diving, and the harvesting of marine living resources being the most obvious examples.

However, these values and services are often taken for granted, and their continuing deterioration is not noticed or heeded. The intrinsic, economic, social and cultural values of biodiversity and ecosystem services, should be increasingly recognised and reflected in public and private sector decision-making on islands.

2. Renewed targeted efforts are needed to conserve and manage sustainably both species and natural habitats on European islands, especially those with the greatest and most threatened endemic biodiversity, but also noting the significant conservation potential of small uninhabited islands

Past and current efforts have been insufficient to halt the loss of species and natural habitats on most European islands. Much to the contrary, pressures are mounting on various fronts including those resulting from continuing land use change, disturbance, over-exploitation, invasive species and climate change.

Renewed efforts are required to address the most urgent biodiversity conservation challenges, particularly on those islands which harbour an important share of European endemic and threatened biodiversity, particularly in the Mediterranean and Macaronesian regions. Additional efforts should equally be directed at protecting remote and/or uninhabited European islands, especially in the north-eastern Atlantic, where important wildlife populations and wilderness areas can be protected with relatively limited investment.

3. The conversion, modification and disturbance of natural habitats continues to be a significant threat to biodiversity on many European islands, wherefore spatial planning should give biodiversity full consideration

Historically the conversion of natural habitats by man has been the most widespread and significant cause for the reduction of animal and plant species populations. This trend continues on a number of European islands, especially the more densely populated ones where the demand for urbanisation and infrastructure development as well as for recreational and exploitative activities is highest.

Integrated spatial planning including Integrated Coastal Zone Management, and impact assessments should give biodiversity and ecosystem services full consideration and avoid, mitigate or compensate for any unavoidable impacts.

4. Invasive alien species represent one of the leading threats to island biodiversity; invasive species must be prevented from arriving on islands, detected, eradicated or controlled and measures be put in place to identify and manage pathways to prevent their introduction and establishment, particularly in priority sites and to safeguard highly threatened species

Besides habitat loss, invasive alien species (IAS) represent arguably the greatest immediate threat to European island biodiversity. This is largely due to the vulnerability of the large number of restricted-range endemic animal and plant taxa, but also to the scarcity or lack of natural factors, such as predators or pathogens, to control the expansion of harmful arrivals.

In addition, IAS cause significant damage to economic activities and human health: the costs related to IAS issues, in the EU alone, are estimated to be at least EUR 12.7 billion per year. Furthermore, both climate change and the expansion of international trade are prone to exacerbate IAS problems.

Tackling the IAS threat proactively is thus fundamental for safeguarding biological diversity on European islands. Important opportunities exist because both prevention and eradication are feasible on islands, where they are almost impossible to achieve in continental situations. Global and regional including EU policies pertaining to IAS should therefore give special consideration to islands.

5. Water resources on European islands should be managed so that negative impacts on freshwater biodiversity are minimised, especially in light of the growing impacts of climate change

Freshwater ecosystems are listed as the most threatened in Europe and globally, due to a number of key impacts including overexploitation, water pollution, flow modification including water abstraction, destruction or degradation of habitat, and invasion by invasive alien species.

Water is one of the most valuable resources on many European islands, particularly in the Mediterranean and Macaronesian Regions, home to the greatest share of European island biodiversity. However, the maintenance of water resources on these islands is at risk due to losses of forests and wetlands and, most importantly, inadequate water management resulting in the over-exploitation of local resources. In addition pollution and inadequate water sanitation endanger water quality.

The predicted impacts of climate change provide additional reason for concern as they are expected to affect the rainfall patterns and freshwater regimes on European islands, with those in northern Europe experiencing an increase in annual precipitation but those in southern Europe suffering significant decreases. The widespread damming of rivers and streams for domestic and agricultural use exacerbates the problem as it profoundly affects natural freshwater ecosystems, and this is also liable to increase under a drier climate.

Special attention should therefore be given to reducing the existing, and preventing additional negative impacts of inadequate water management on freshwater biodiversity, such as through appropriate incentive and regulation schemes.

6. The direct and indirect impacts of climate change on the especially vulnerable biodiversity and living natural resources on European islands require concerted preventive action, including measures enhancing their resilience and facilitating their adaptation.

Climate change is widely expected to become the greatest threat to global biodiversity in the course of the 21^st century and deserves special attention on islands. Island biotas are highly sensitive to climate change due to their isolation and ecological characteristics. While some changes may be mitigated by the buffering effect of the surrounding seas, others are likely to cause severe impacts.

In this context it is worth highlighting that biodiversity may be impacted by climate change both directly from the resulting changes in the physical and living natural environment, and indirectly through societal response measures, most notably those undertaken in the context of climate change adaptation and mitigation.

A four-part approach is therefore required for addressing climate change, by: (i) determining the vulnerabilities of island biotas and the anticipated direct impacts on species and habitats; (ii) minimising the negative direct impacts, by enhancing the resilience and adaptive capacity of island species and ecosystems, by enhancing ecosystem connectivity and other suitable interventions; (iii) determining and anticipating any potential indirect impacts from maladaptive measures; and (iv) minimising key negative indirect impacts. This reflects the increasingly accepted view that climate change and biodiversity loss are best addressed together in light of their degree of interdependency and the opportunities for synergies and co-benefits.

Within Europe, the islands in the Mediterranean and Macaronesian Regions appear as the leading priority, because they have the highest endemic biodiversity and can be expected to experience the most significant direct and indirect climate change impacts. Within these regions, sites hosting vulnerable or threatened endemic taxa should be given special consideration.

7. On many European islands the intensification of agricultural, pastoral and silvicultural practices and the abandonment of traditional low-intensity farming may have major effects on island species and habitats.

Agricultural, pastoral and silvicultural practices are critically important in the context of biodiversity management. Biodiversity may be negatively affected by both land-use intensification and the abandonment of farming. The former leads to enhanced pressures on biodiversity by removing important habitat elements from the agricultural landscape, and by increasing the chemical load of the environment. The latter will impact negatively on those species and habitats that have benefited from traditional human management practices and rely on the maintenance of those practices.

On European islands the switch from traditional biodiversity-friendly practices to more intensive methods gives reason for increasing concern. However special attention should also be paid to the abandonment of remote and sparsely-inhabited islands that have retained traditional low-intensity management, as this may have major effects on island habitats and species.

Where possible, incentives should be directed to deliver public benefits including cultural and environmental values for example by preventing undesirable intensification measures on the one hand, and encouraging the maintenance of traditional practices and biodiversity-enhancing low impact farming practices on the other hand.

8. Recognising that many European islands offer important opportunities for renewable energy generation, the potentially serious effects of some forms of renewable energy make it imperative that impact assessments fully consider potential effects on island biodiversity.

Islands across the world are increasingly exploring means to exploit their local renewable energy resources, in order to achieve energy autonomy and export energy to consumers elsewhere. The renewable energies considered include especially solar, offshore and onshore wind, biomass, tidal stream and tidal impoundment, wave energy, geothermal and small and large-scale hydroelectric sources. Widely considered to be clean and green energies, the construction, operation and decommissioning of generation and transmission infrastructures may nevertheless have significant impacts on biodiversity, primarily through habitat loss and disturbance effects but also by favouring the establishment of invasive alien species.

Renewable energy initiatives should therefore undergo careful strategic environmental assessments and environmental impact assessments that fully integrate biodiversity considerations in order to avoid, mitigate or compensate for any important negative impacts.

9. The management of waste presents a real challenge to many European islands and requires concerted action to prevent harmful long-term effects on biodiversity, ecosystems and the wider environment.

On the more densely populated European islands, and especially those receiving large numbers of seasonal visitors, the problems of waste management and disposal may be far more acute than in mainland areas. Many islands have very limited areas for landfill and the development of island-specific approaches to maximise re-use and recycling should be a priority. There may need to be particular approaches for dealing with large waste items such as vehicles and machinery, and providing bulk storage solutions for smaller islands to enable the intermittent removal of inert waste to facilities on larger islands or the mainland

Failure to manage waste leads to social, economic and environmental problems on islands; the accumulation of waste on land, and especially along the coasts and in the surrounding waters is an ever-growing challenge as it pollutes the environment, poses real threats to biodiversity and is counterproductive to tourism development. Failure to manage both primary and processed plastic wastes presents particular problems to marine wildlife through entanglement and ingestion of plastics. A means of reducing this risk is to minimise the use of plastics and maximise the use of biodegradable plastics on islands.

10. The situation and characteristics of islands require the development and application of specially-adapted approaches and tools for problem analyses and response measures.

Islands and their biodiversity often offer some specific challenges linked to their small size and large distance from the continent. Scientific methods, tools for analysis and management and policies and legislative frameworks aimed at the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity often originate from continental situations and may be inappropriate for island situations.

A better recognition of islands in national policy frameworks and the further development and adoption of island-specific approaches would be essential contributions in this regard. Such approaches should offer opportunities for problem analysis and solutions at appropriate scales, consider the resource and spatial constraints as well as ecological specificities inherent to most islands, and build ecological and social networks between islands. They should furthermore integrate socio-economic factors with biodiversity and wider environmental considerations aiming at holistic improvements.

11. The knowledge and sharing of scientific data on the biodiversity and living natural resources of European islands, including on the threats they face and their conservation status, remain limited, and renewed efforts should be made to fill the priority gaps.

Many island biotas remain surprisingly understudied, even in Europe. This applies especially to remote uninhabited islands and to islands exhibiting a higher biodiversity, most importantly those in the Mediterranean and Macaronesian regions. In the Canary Islands for instance, over the past decade one new species was described on average every six days. The characterisation and distribution of island species, communities and ecological interactions, across all biomes, is still far from complete.

To increase and openly share the knowledge base on the species, habitats and ecosystems on European islands, determining and monitoring their conservation status, exploring their ecological interactions, and defining their relationship with human activities is therefore a cornerstone of all efforts to protect and manage the biodiversity of these islands.

12. Biodiversity conservation and natural resource management on European islands require adequate financial means and institutional capacities, recognising that by affording greater means to islands, more may be achieved for biodiversity than by analogous investments in continental settings in Europe.

Success in the conservation and management of biodiversity and natural resources relies on institutional capacities and financial resources in proportion to the issues at stake. However, on European islands, the public and private sectors, and civil society organisations tend to lack the resources to build and maintain the capacity to adequately assess and respond to their respective biodiversity challenges. Island stakeholders continue to be relatively isolated, and different islands tend to adopt different approaches to the challenges they face.

Compared to mainland situations, investing in initiatives on islands is expected to contribute more to the conservation of biodiversity in relative terms, given the higher proportion and density of endemic and threatened species and unique ecosystems, and noting that biodiversity pressures can often be more easily controlled on islands.

National governments, local authorities and other stakeholder organisations should therefore provide financial resources in proportion to the biodiversity on islands; mobilise locally available financial resources but also seek or source external funding in cases where local economies are not in the position to cover the needs alone; consider market-based and other innovative financial mechanisms; and develop and undertake targeted and effective initiatives to build capacity and reduce isolation, making best use of local resourcefulness.

13. To achieve the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity on European islands it is fundamental to enhance local awareness and ownership.

Local people are pivotal to the success of any conservation and resource management initiative. The particular strength and nature of island communities emphasises the need for this across the islands of Europe. It is therefore essential to facilitate a better understanding of conservation objectives and build local ownership of related activities amongst islanders. Local support also helps secure the commitment from political leaders to consider the value and needs of biodiversity and ecosystem services in their decision-making.

Annex 1

Non-exclusive list of relevant sub-national and national policies, as well as international instruments, policies and initiatives:

Convention on Biological Diversity with its Strategic Plan 2011-2020, Resource Mobilisation Strategy, and the Programme of Work on Island Biodiversity and the closely linked Global Island Partnership (GLISPA);
Convention on Migratory Species;
Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species;
World Heritage Convention;
Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance;
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea;
EU Birds and Habitats Directives;
EU Water Framework Directive;
EU Common Agricultural Policy;
EU White Paper “Adapting to climate change: Towards a European framework for action”;
EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive;
EU Common Fisheries Policy and the various Regional Fisheries Management Organisations;
Helsinki Commission on Baltic Marine Environment Protection (HELCOM);
OSPAR Commission on the Protection and Conservation of the North-East Atlantic and its Resources;
Barcelona Convention with its Mediterranean Action Plan;
Convention and Action Plan for the Sustainable Development of the Smaller Islands of the Mediterranean;
North European and Baltic Network on Invasive Alien Species (NOBANIS);
European Small Island Network;
European Islands Network on Energy and Environment (ISLENET) convened under the Islands Commission of the Conference of Peripheral and Maritime Regions

NB_CE

Convention on the Conservation of

European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011 on the illegal killing, trapping and trade of wild birds

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Having regard to the aims of the Convention to conserve wild fauna and its natural habitats;

Recalling that Article 1, paragraph 2 of the Convention requires Parties to give particular emphasis to the conservation of endangered and vulnerable species, including endangered and vulnerable migratory species;

Recalling that Article 6 compels Parties to take the necessary and administrative measures to ensure the special protection of the wild fauna species specified in Appendix II, prohibiting in particular all forms of deliberate capture and keeping, and deliberate killing, as well as the possession and internal trade in these animals, alive or dead;

Recalling its Recommendation No. 5 (1986) on the prosecution of persons illegally catching, killing or trading in protected birds, which encouraged Parties to ensure the prosecution of persons illegally catching or killing birds or establishments commercialising live or protected birds;

Further recalling its Recommendation No. 90 (2001) on the catching, killing or trading of protected birds in Cyprus, which encouraged Cyprus to properly implement the actions suggested in Recommendation No. 5 (1986);

Noting with satisfaction that since the recommendations were adopted by the Standing Committee, most Parties have adopted national legislations prosecuting persons illegally catching, killing or trading in wild birds;

[Regretting that despite growing efforts by competent authorities, compliance with international obligations and enforcement of legislation are still weak and not always accompanied by appropriate sanctions;]

[Regretting that despite growing efforts by competent authorities, enforcement of domestic legislation intended to meet international obligations is weak and not always accompanied by appropriate sanctions.]

Recognising and regretting that illegal killing, trapping and trade of birds is still carried out, and that in some Parties these are a growing phenomena, sometimes involving other related issues, such as the transit of the killed and captured birds through third countries;

Bearing in mind the difficulties in identifying the illegally killed or captured species and proving the crimes before the Courts, in order to achieve the effective prosecution of offenders;

Bearing in mind the European Charter on Hunting and Biodiversity (document T-PVS (2007) 7 revised), adopted by the Standing Committee to the Bern Convention on 29 November 2007, and particularly its Principles No. 2 – Ensure that regulations are understandable and respected; No. 3 – Ensure that harvest is ecologically sustainable; No. 8 – Empower local stakeholders and hold them accountable; and No. 11 - Encourage cooperation between all stakeholders in management of harvested species, associated species and their habitats;

Regretting the negative conservation impact that results from the indiscriminate killing and trapping of birds by using prohibited means and methods of killing, capture and other forms of exploitation, listed in Appendix IV of the Convention;

Welcoming, and bearing in mind, the Strategic Plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2011-2020, and its Aichi targets;

Recalling the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 (COM (2011) 244) and, in particular, its target 1 “Fully implement the Birds and Habitats Directives”;

Recalling the provisions of the Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (2009/147/EC), in particular, its Articles 2 (objectives), 5 (general system of protection of all bird species), 6 (prohibition of trade), 7 (hunting), 8 (prohibited methods of capture or killing) and 9 (derogations from articles 5, 6, 7 and 8);

Recalling that Contracting Parties to the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA) shall ensure that any use of migratory waterbirds is sustainable for the species as well as for the ecological systems that support them, to develop and implement measures to reduce and, as far as possible, eliminate illegal taking and the use of poisoned baits, and to prohibit the possession or utilisation of, and trade in, birds and eggs which have been taken in contravention [of any laid down prohibition ;]

[of relevant prohibitions required under this agreement;]

Recalling also that the Action Plan of the Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation of Migratory Birds of Prey in Africa and Eurasia, under the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), has identified as a priority action the protection of the Memorandum of Understanding species from unlawful killing, including poisoning, shooting, persecution, and unsustainable exploitation;

Further recalling that the CMS Scientific Council has proposed the development of a Memorandum of Understanding for the conservation of African-Eurasian migratory land birds;

Recalling that the promotion of cultures and traditions, as well as of a European identity based on shared values should be respectful of human and fundamental rights, including animal welfare;

Recognising that effective measures to secure compliance with international obligations need to include actions aimed at education, changes in social attitudes and awareness campaigns;

Recognising that the need for improved knowledge should not in any way delay the undertaking of urgent measures in response to the growing problem of illegal bird killing, taking and trade reported by several Contracting Parties;

Recommends Contracting Parties to the Convention and invite Observers to:

1. General

a. Develop and support national communication strategies, promoting dialogue between all relevant interest groups, and noting traditions, cultures and values. These strategies should be aimed to the conservation of bird population and based on the following principles: (i.) this is about illegal killing of birds, not legal hunting; (ii.) zero tolerance of illegal killing of birds; (iii.) recognition of legal hunting and sustainable use.

2. Legal aspects

a. Consider birds as a European heritage and a valuable resource, thus applying a zero tolerance approach to illegal killing, trapping and trade of wild birds to support a shift of culture towards respectful shared values, and promote active stewardship;

b. Strengthen the enforcement at each stage of the bird-crime chain through appropriate political, operational, scientific and technical support and cooperation, and include a concerted focus on end-users;

c. Promote partnership and coordination between government agencies and stakeholders so as to streamline enforcement at the local, national and international level, and target awareness raising.

3. Biological aspects

a. Improve knowledge needed to support the solutions to the problem of illegal killing, trapping and trade of birds such as, in terms of priorities, a European bird migration atlas for the better knowledge of flyways of species and populations, seasonality of movements and connectivity among key areas for migratory birds;

b. Establish systematic monitoring and reporting systems for illegal activities using standardised methods for data collection, covering the major taxonomic groups, providing for common reporting format and taking into account population flyways;

c. Undertake prioritised actions in hotspots of bird concentration and illegal killing activities in order to facilitate a best practice approach across countries along flyways. The breakdown of the links between the demand for birds and the supply through illegal activities should be dealt with as a priority by the relevant countries and institutions;

d. Ensure the effective management of protected areas with the aim of maintaining and improving the connectivity of habitats in the wider landscapes thus ensuring the functionality of flyways;

e. Take forward the issue of poisoning of migratory species in a global context including lead poisoning, to Conferences or Meetings of Parties of CMS and respective agreements

4. Social / Cultural / Educational aspects:

a. Strengthen the capacity, human resources, budget and competencies of the relevant enforcement and judicial authorities to effectively prevent and punish wildlife crimes;

b. Where internal processes allow, encourage the creation of special units of judges and prosecutors, provided with specialist training on wildlife/bird crime, and ensure all relevant cases are assigned to them.

NB_CE

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on the European 2020 targets on Protected Areas

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Considering Articles 3 and 4 of the Convention;

Having regard to Resolution No. 1 (1989) on the provisions relating to the conservation of habitats;

Having regard to its Recommendation No. 16 (1989) on Areas of Special Conservation Interest;

Having regard to its Resolution No. 3 (1996) on the setting-up of a pan-European Ecological Network;

Having regard to its Resolution No. 5 (1998) concerning the rules for the Network of areas of special conservation interest (Emerald Network);

Recalling that the 10^th COP of the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted 20 headline targets for 2020 organised under five strategic goals, comprising both aspirations for achievement at global level and a flexible framework for the establishment of national and regional targets;

Further recalling Goal B “Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use” and Goal C “Improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity” of the Strategic Plan for biodiversity (2011-2020) of the CBD;

Recalling the Aichi Target 11: By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes;

Further recalling the Aichi Target 5: By 2020, the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, is at least halved and where feasible brought close to zero, and degradation and fragmentation is significantly reduced;

Stressing that protected areas and ecological networks equally contribute to the achievement of several other Aichi targets: Target 6 calling for a sustainable management of fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants; Target 10 on minimising the impact of climate change on coral reefs and other vulnerable ecosystems and Target 12 on preventing from extinction the most threatened species and improving and sustaining their conservation status;

Welcoming the EU 2020 biodiversity Strategy, adopted by the Council of the European Union in June 2011, which set several EU targets and more particularly its Target 1, calling on Member States to Fully implement the Birds and Habitats Directives by completing the establishment of the Network and ensuring its good management, finally aiming at halting the deterioration of and achieving a significant and measurable improvement in the status of all species and habitats covered by EU nature legislation;

Further welcoming Target 2 of the EU 2020 biodiversity strategy stating that By 2020, ecosystems and their services are maintained and enhanced by establishing green infrastructure and restoring at least 15 % of degraded ecosystems and taking note of recent progress in the development of an EU Green infrastructure Strategy by 2012;

Welcoming the considerable efforts of Contracting Parties on the implementation of the Calendar for the implementation of the Emerald Network (2011 – 2020) in view of the identification of potential Emerald sites on their territory;

Considering that one of the objectives of the Bern Convention is to support as appropriate, the regional implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity, particularly in the fields of competence and expertise of the Bern Convention;

Recommends that Contracting Parties adopt, at the national and European levels, the following targets for Protected Areas:

EU targets:

Target 1: Fully implement the Birds and Habitats Directives

Target 2: Maintain and restore ecosystems and their services

Other European targets:

1. By 2020, the Emerald Network of Areas of Special Conservation Interest is fully operational in all Contracting Parties and Observer states to the Bern Convention as planned in the 2020 Emerald Network Calendar (T-PVS/PA(2010)08revE).

1.1 By 2012, to help Contracting Parties to achieve the European and world targets, the Bern Convention Standing Committee adopts guidelines on management for the Emerald sites and the monitoring of their implementation.

1.2 By 2013, reporting guidelines on the management of the Emerald sites are developed and adopted by the Bern Convention Standing Committee.

1.3 By 2014, the list of endangered natural habitats requiring specific conservation measures (Res No. 4 (1996) and the list of species requiring specific habitat conservation measures (Res No. 6 (1998) are updated and amended for the whole pan European region.

1.4 By 2020, management arrangements for the designated Emerald sites are developed and fully implemented in all Contracting Parties and Observer states.

2. By 2020, in the light of the world Aichi targets, the Emerald Network is fully representative and covers at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water areas and 10% of coastal and marine areas.

3. By 2020, the European Diploma of Protected Areas is fully representative for the whole European continent and its eleven biogeographical regions.

4. By 2020, ecosystems and their services are maintained and enhanced, by the deployment of a broad European ecological network.

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on the status of candidate Emerald sites and guidelines on the criteria for their adoption

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention

Considering Articles 3 and 4 of the convention;

Having regard to Resolution No. 1 (1989) on the provisions relating to the conservation of habitats;

Having regard to its Recommendation No. 14 (1989) on species habitat conservation and on the conservation of endangered natural habitats;

Having regard to its Recommendation No. 16 (1989) on Areas of Special Conservation Interest;

Having regard to its Resolution No. 3 (1996) on the setting-up of a pan-European Ecological Network;

Recalling its Resolution No. 4 (1996) listing endangered natural habitats requiring specific habitat conservation measures;

Recalling its Resolution No. 5 (1998) concerning the rules for the Network of areas of special conservation interest (Emerald Network);

Recalling its Resolution No. 6 (1998) listing the species requiring specific habitat conservation measures;

Welcoming the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (2011 – 2020) and the ‘Aichi 2020 targets’ adopted at the 10^th COP of the Convention on Biological Diversity and taking note in particular of target 11, committing Parties to conserve at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water and 10% of coastal and marine areas through well managed, ecologically representative and connected protected areas;

Welcoming the EU 2020 biodiversity Strategy, adopted by the Council of the European Union in June 2011, and more particularly its target 1, which calls on Member States to fully implement the Birds and Habitats Directives;

Recognising the work of the European Union and its Member States on the development of the Natura 2000 Network and their current efforts on improving the management of the Network and achieving a favourable conservation status for threatened species and habitats;

Considering the Criteria for assessing the National Lists of proposed ASCIs at biogeographical level and procedure for examining and approving Emerald candidate sites adopted by the Standing Committee to the Bern Convention on 9^th December 2010, as well as the official “candidate Emerald site” status it provides for;

Conscious that the ecological quality of proposed Emerald sites should be preserved as soon as they are officially nominated as ‘candidate Emerald sites’ by the Standing Committee to the Bern Convention;

Recommends that Contracting Parties:

1. Take the necessary protection and conservation measures to preserve the species and habitats present in the proposed Emerald sites as soon as they have been officially nominated as candidate Emerald sites by the Standing Committee to the Bern Convention;

2. Ensure that, if and when appropriate, these measures include administrative, management or development plans corresponding to the ecological requirements for the long term survival of species and habitats of the Bern Convention Resolutions No. 4 (1996) and No. 6 (1998) or specified by Recommendation 16 (1989);

3. Ensure that the site proposals submitted to the Standing Committee to the Bern Convention for official adoption as candidate Emerald sites, comply with the minimum criteria proposed in the guidance set out in Appendix 1 to the present Recommendation.

APPENDIX

Guidance

This guidance draws on the discussions of the Group of Experts on Protected Areas and Ecological Networks at its 3^rd meeting (2011) as well as on the expert opinion of the European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity. It complements the provisions of the Criteria for assessing the National Lists of proposed ASCIs at biogeographical level and procedure for examining and approving Emerald candidate sites, adopted by the Standing Committee to the Bern Convention at its 30^th meeting in 2010.

National sites’ proposals can be submitted to the Standing Committee to the Bern Convention for official adoption as Emerald candidate sites once they fulfil the following minimum criteria:

a. Are described according to the Emerald standard data form (Appendix I to resolution No 5 (1998) of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention);

b. Contain at least one habitat and/or species listed in the Revised Annex I of Resolution 4 (1996) of the Bern Convention and/or in Resolution No 6 (1998) of the Bern Convention;

c. Provide information on site name, site code and site area, together with the site boundary in an agreed GIS format (in the case of an individual cave, the central coordinate of the cave entrance should be provided).

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on the implementation of an Action Plan for the conservation of the White-tailed Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) along the Danube

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under Article 14 of the convention;

Having regard to the aims of the convention, which are to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats;

Recalling that the convention gives particular emphasis to the conservation of endangered and vulnerable species;

Recalling that Article 3 of the convention requires Parties to take the necessary steps to promote national policies for the conservation of wild flora, wild fauna and natural habitats, with particular attention to endangered and vulnerable species, especially endemic ones, and endangered habitats;

Recalling that Article 4.1 of the convention requires Parties to take appropriate and necessary legislative and administrative measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of the wild flora and fauna species, especially those specified in Appendices I and II, and the conservation of endangered natural habitats;

Recalling its Recommendations No. 48 (1996) on the conservation of European globally threatened birds; No. 60 (1997) on the implementation of the actions plans for globally threatened birds in Europe; No. 62 (1997) on the conservation of regionally threatened birds in the Macaronesian and Mediterranean regions; No. 75 (1999) on the implementation of new action plans for globally threatened birds in Europe; No. 88 (2001) on the implementation of five new Action Plans for globally threatened birds in Europe; No. 92 (2002) on sixteen new Action Plans for most threatened birds in the Convention’s area; and No. 103 (2003) on five new Action Plans for most threatened birds in the Convention’s area; No. 121 (2006) of the Standing Committee on the implementation of six new action plans for most threatened birds in the Convention’s area

Aware that the design and implementation of recovery plans may be a useful tool to redress the situation of European globally threatened birds and recalling in this context its Recommendation No. 59 (1997) on the drafting and implementation of action plans of wild fauna species;

Referring to the Action Plan submitted by DANUBEPARKS – The Danube River Network of Protected Areas, and presented in the following document: T-PVS/Inf(2011)X on the conservation of the White-tailed Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) along the Danube;

Emphasising that the White Tailed Sea Eagle is an excellent European flagship for biodiversity conservation that highlights the need for cross-boarder conservation efforts;

Noting that Protected Areas play a pivotal role as breeding sites for the White-tailed Sea Eagle in the Danube region;

Recommends that Contracting Parties and observer States to the Convention:

1. Draw-up and implement national action plans or other relevant measures, as appropriate, on the White-tailed Sea Eagle, taking into account the international action plan mentioned above.

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Recommendation No. … (2011) of the Standing Committee, adopted on … December 2011, on Marine Biodiversity and Climate Change

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Having regard to the aims of the Convention to conserve wild flora and fauna and its natural habitats;

Aware that the conservation of natural habitats is a vital component of the protection and conservation of wild flora and fauna;

Recalling that Article 2 of the Convention requires Parties to take requisite measures to maintain the populations of wild flora and fauna at a level which corresponds in particular to ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, while taking account of economic requirements;

Recalling that Article 3 of the Convention requires Parties to undertake to have regard to the conservation of wild fauna and flora in their planning and development policies, and in their measures against pollution;

Recalling that Article 4 of the Convention requires Parties to take appropriate measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of wild flora and fauna species as well as of endangered natural habitats; and give particular attention to the protection of areas of importance for migratory species;

Recognising that climate change affects biological diversity in the territory covered by the Convention, including species, habitats and the Areas of Special Conservation Interest of the Emerald Network;

Recognising the need to adapt conservation work to the challenges of climate change so as to minimise its impacts on the species and natural habitats protected under the Convention;

Particularly concerned by the raise in global warming and by the related changes, including retreat of sea-ice cover, changes in salinity, oxygen levels, circulation rates and pollution, as well as habitat loss, disruption of marine food webs and general alteration of ocean biogeochemistry;

Further concerned by the accelerating rise in sea level, affecting the littoral ecosystems and mainly the wetlands, the foreshores, islands and low-lying islets which constitute a unique or privileged habitat for numerous animal and plant species which again will be affected by accelerated erosion;

Recognising the many ecosystem services provided by marine communities, including a large potential for sequestering and storing carbon, particularly in coastal habitats, and stressing that changes in the functional attributes of ecosystems often affect their ability to deliver several of the ecosystem services upon which human society depends;

Noting that marine and coastal biodiversity is also threatened by increasing pressure from human activity (particularly construction work), contributing to the shrinkage of coastal wetlands and mangroves, the disappearance of lagoons and grassbeds, shoreline retreat and coastal erosion, over-exploitation of marine resources through fishing and the introduction of invasive species;

Having regard to other relevant Council of Europe’s legal and policy frameworks such as the European Landscape Convention and the EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement;

Having regard to the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly’s Resolution 1794 (2011) on “Preserving the environment in the Mediterranean”, Recommendation 1630 (2003) on “Erosion of the Mediterranean coastline: implications for tourism”, “Resolution 1693 (2009) on water: a strategic challenge for the Mediterranean Basin” and Recommendation 1883 (2009) on “The challenges posed by climate change”

Having regard also to Recommendation 271 (2009) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe on “The global challenges of climate change: Local responses”;

Recognising the work on vulnerability and impacts of climate change on the biodiversity of the Mediterranean sea, carried out under the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean (Barcelona Convention, 1976);

Recalling CBD COP Decision X/29 on “Marine and coastal biodiversity” which invites Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations to further integrate climate change-related aspects of marine and coastal biodiversity into relevant national strategies, action plans and programmes (…) and urges Parties and other Governments to achieve long-term conservation, management and sustainable use of marine resources and coastal habitats, and to effectively manage marine protected areas;

Recalling also the guidance included in CBD COP Decision X/33 on “Biodiversity and climate change” to enhance the conservation, sustainable use and restoration of marine and coastal habitats that are vulnerable to the effects of climate change or which contribute to climate-change mitigation;

Taking into account the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, and more particularly Target 10 aiming at minimising, by 2015, the multiple anthropogenic pressures on coral reefs, and other vulnerable ecosystems impacted by climate change, as well as Target 15 aiming at enhancing, by 2020, ecosystem resilience as well as the contribution of biodiversity to carbon stocks, and conserving and restoring at least 15 per cent of degraded ecosystems, thereby contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation and to combating desertification;

Recognising the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy, namely the strategic objective aiming at a more climate-resilient, low-carbon economy; bearing in mind the work carried out by the EU Ad Hoc Expert Working Group on Biodiversity and Climate Change in the preparation of a EU strategy on adaptation to climate change, to be issued by 2013;

Recalling the “Message from Reunion Island” issued at the conference “The European Union and its Overseas Entities: Strategies to Counter Climate Change and Biodiversity Loss” (July 2008) and the exceptional importance of the biodiversity of the EU’s Overseas Countries and Territories and Outermost Regions and their vulnerability to climate change;

Recognising the importance of the work of the European Environment Agency on biodiversity and climate change indicators, and the launch of the European Topic Centre on Climate Change;

Recognising the need to improve co-operation between and amongst the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on Migratory Species and its related agreements, and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, and welcoming the joint outreach activity through the Rio Conventions' Pavilion with a view to harness synergy and promote collaboration;

Recalling Recommendation No. 122 (2006) of the Standing Committee, on the conservation of biological diversity in the context of climate change, adopted on 30 November 2006;

Recalling Recommendation No. 135 (2008) of the Standing Committee, on addressing the impacts of climate change on biodiversity, adopted on 27 November 2008;

Recalling Recommendation No. 142 (2009) of the Standing Committee, recommending Parties and inviting Observers to the Convention to interpret the term “alien species” for the purpose of the implementation of the European Strategy on Invasive Alien Species as not including native species naturally extending their range in response to climate change;

Recalling Recommendation No. 143 (2009) on further guidance for Parties on biodiversity and climate change;

Recalling Recommendation No. 146 (2010) on guidance for Parties on biodiversity and climate change in European islands;

Welcoming and bearing in mind the following expert reports: “Conserving European biodiversity in the context of climate change”, by Mr. Michael B. Usher [doc. T-PVS (2005) 21], “Climatic change and the conservation of European biodiversity: towards the development of adaptation strategies” by Mr. Brian Huntley [doc. T-PVS/Inf(2007)03], “Protected areas and climate change in Europe” by M. B. Araújo [doc. T-PVS/Inf (2009) 10 rev], “Climate change and the biodiversity of European islands” by Ms Cordula Epple and Mr Yves de Soye [doc. T-PVS/Inf (2010)09E], and “Impact of Climate Change on Marine and Coastal Biodiversity: current state of Knowledge”, by UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA;

Recommends Contracting Parties to the Convention and invites Observer States to:

1. Increase efforts to develop robust ecological models pertaining not only to species but specifically also to the biotic/abiotic mechanisms and processes regulating marine ecosystems so as to evaluate their resilience to climate change, bearing in mind that uncertainties surrounding the precise nature of future climate change and its impacts on biodiversity should not delay practical conservation action.

2. Develop cross-cutting and sectoral adaptation and mitigation policies and measures to take account of the different climate change scenarios, particularly focussing on mitigating current and potential impacts on already vulnerable marine and coastal areas.

3. Improve the status of marine biodiversity by stepping-up the designation of marine and coastal protected areas, including under the Emerald and the Natura 2000 networks, and ensure that they are managed in a sustainable way.

4. Improve the knowledge-base of effects of climate change on marine and coastal biodiversity, including improved understanding of mitigation and adaptation measures to effectively inform the conservation of marine and coastal biodiversity, and ecosystem services. Ensure mechanisms are in place, to facilitate sharing of data and information at national, regional and international levels, making full use, where possible, of already-established mechanisms, including the Global Biodiversity Information Facility;

5. Examine how marine invasive alien species, in particular Lessepsian species, may affect native Mediterranean biodiversity; and

6. Continue to engage in the development and application of further guidance to implement the Convention in this regard.

Convention on the Conservation

of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

Standing Committee

Draft Revised Resolution No. 2 (1993) on the scope of Articles 8 and 9 of the Bern Convention, adopted on … December 2011

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention;

Considering that it would be useful to further clarify the conditions laid down in Article 9 for the granting of exceptions and the submission of two-yearly reports on such exceptions;

RECOMMENDS that the Contracting Parties bring the appended document, which contains useful guidance for interpreting the scope of Article 9, to the attention of all those responsible for applying and interpreting the Convention in their respective countries;

RESOLVES that, in future, the reports which the Contracting Parties are required to submit every two years under Article 9 on the exceptions made from the provisions of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 should cover only:

a. General exceptions;

b. Individual exceptions if they are so numerous as to result in a generalised practice;

c. Individual exceptions concerning more than ten individuals of a species;

d. Individual exceptions concerning individuals of endangered or vulnerable populations of species;

RESOLVES that, following common procedures and guidance in other fora, derogation reports should specify, as appropriate, additional information to help provide an understanding of the reasoning behind the derogations and monitor their impacts, including for example:

a. Information on the conservation status of the derogated species;

b. Justification for derogation for a species in an unfavourable conservation status;

c. Alternative solutions considered and scientific data used to compare them;

d. Results of derogations implemented, including cumulative effects and the effects of any compensation measure taken, where relevant.

RESOLVES that, for Contracting Parties that are Member States of the European Union, and the EU itself, the reports submitted under the Habitats and Birds Directives Derogation System (Habides) format is considered to meet the reporting obligations under this resolution

Appendix to Resolution No. 2

Interpretation of Articles 8 and 9 of the Bern Convention

I. PROHIBITED MEANS OF CAPTURE AND KILLING

1. Article 8 of the Convention requires Parties, in respect of the species specified in Appendices III and II (in the case of exceptions under Article 9), to prohibit the use of:

a) all indiscriminate means of capture and killing;

b) means capable of causing local disappearance of populations of a species; and

c) means capable of causing serious disturbance to populations of a species.

2. Article 8 refers, in connection with the prohibited means, to Appendix IV of the Convention, which lists means and methods of hunting and other prohibited forms of exploitation, in respect of birds and other animals.

3. It should be noted that the use of some of the means listed in Appendix IV is not prohibited absolutely, but only in certain circumstances. Thus, the footnotes indicate that:

a) explosives to be prohibited "except for whale hunting";

b) nets and traps to be prohibited "if applied for large-scale or non-selective capture or killing";

c) snares are not to be allowed "except Lagopus north of latitude 58°North".

II. EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED BY ARTICLE 9

4. Article 9 allows exceptions to the provisions of a number of articles of the Convention, and in particular derogations in respect of:

a) prohibited activities in respect of the strictly protected species listed in Appendices I and II; and

b) the use of non-selective means of capture and killing and the other means prohibited in Article 8, in respect of the species listed in Appendices II and III.

5. The possibility of derogating from the articles of the Convention is subject to two very clear general conditions, and the non cumulative specific reasons for which the exceptions may be granted are listed exhaustively in Article 9.

6. The two general conditions that should be met are:

a) that there is no other satisfactory solution; and

b) that the exception will not be detrimental to the survival of the population concerned.

7. These two conditions are mandatory and cumulative, but the first raises a difficult problem of interpretation.

The existence of another satisfactory solution should be appreciated by considering possible alternatives which, in fact, depend on the motives for the derogation whilst ensuring that the survival of the population is not threatened. Thus, for example, in the case of the first derogation under Article 9 (1), "for the protection of flora and fauna", alternatives which are likely to cause as little damage as possible to flora and fauna should be taken into consideration. In the case of the last indent of paragraph 1, since the motives for the derogations are not spelled out in Article 9 and States are free to decide for what reasons derogations have to be granted, it is up to them to ensure that the condition "no other satisfactory solution" is satisfied. The Standing Committee of the Bern Convention can only examine this condition if the State who presents the report on derogations based on the last indent, states spontaneously the motive for the derogation.

8. If the two general conditions indicated at paragraph 6 above are fulfilled, exceptions are allowed:

i) for the protection of flora and fauna;

ii) to prevent serious damage to crops, livestock, forests, fisheries, water and other forms of property;

iii) in the interests of public health and safety, air safety or other overriding public interests;

iv) for the purposes of research and education, of repopulation, of reintroduction and for the necessary breeding;

v) to permit, under strictly supervised conditions, on a selective basis and to a limited extent, the taking, keeping or other judicious exploitation of certain wild animals and plants in small numbers.

9. There is an important difference between the reasons given under paragraph 8 i) to iv) above and those given under v). In the first case, the Convention specifies the purpose of the exception (protection of flora and fauna, prevention of serious damage to crops, interests of health, etc), whereas in the second the Convention merely specifies the characteristics of the means to be used, without indicating the purpose for which the exception is granted.

10. The relevant characteristics are:

- the strictly supervised conditions under which the exception can be granted;

- the selective nature of the means used; and

- the limited numbers of individuals whose taking, keeping or other judicious exploitation are permitted.

11. From the differing nature of the exceptions contained in the last indent of paragraph 1 of Article 9, it follows that these exceptions, while they conform to the general conditions indicated in paragraph 6 above and the special characteristics indicated in paragraph 10 above:

a) may be decided by a Contracting Party for any reason which to it seems valid (for instance, hunting, recreation, etc) and without any reason having to be given;

b) may not necessarily be temporary, in other words they may be granted for a long duration, or at the very least renewed from time to time.

It can be taken that, from the legal angle, the application of the conditions laid down in Article 9 remains the same irrespective of the species in question, with no possibility of a distinction being drawn on the basis of the Appendices in which the species appears. However, when granting the exception referred to in paragraph 8 and when setting the special conditions (paragraph 10), regard should be had to the state of populations of species. The expression "small numbers" should thus be construed in the light of the state of preservation of the population of a species.

12. It follows from the above that in the case of this exception the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention is not required to check the merits of the purpose of the exception, but to ensure that the other conditions are satisfied, i.e.:

a) The provision "under strictly supervised conditions" should be interpreted to mean that the authority granting the exception must possess the necessary means for checking on such exceptions either beforehand (e.g., a system of individual authorisations) or afterwards (e.g., effective on-the-spot supervision), or also combining the two possibilities;

b) The expression "on a selective basis" raises difficult problems of interpretation in view of its apparent contradiction with the wording of Article 9 in that it could lead to the following paradox: exceptions to the prohibition of using the non-selective means mentioned in Article 8 are permitted provided that the capture is done on a selective basis. In reality, this contradiction disappears if the indent in question is interpreted in the following manner: the non-selective means may be used provided it is used for the purpose of permitting the "taking, keeping or other judicious exploitation" on a selective basis. In other words, the means used must allow the individuals of the species in question to be kept ("selection") and those of other species to be released without harm. In other words, the means used must either allow individuals of the species in question to be kept ("selection") and those of other species to be released unharmed or enable the capture of individuals of the species to be avoided by appropriate methods, or else permit a combination of the two.

c) The expression "other judicious exploitation" should be interpreted to mean activities other than taking or keeping allowed by way of an exception that is "reasonable", as distinct from any "excessive" action that would prejudice the conservation of the populations concerned in favourable conditions. Exploitation of the species other than taking or keeping can comprise, for example, the taking of eggs, the use of down, selling, and the disturbance of animals by tourists, etc.

c) The expression "to a limited extent" suggests that the means authorised should not be general, but should be limited in both space and time;

d) The expression "small numbers" is more difficult to interpret, especially if considered from a global point of view. How, in fact, can "small numbers" be defined at national or regional levels? In contrast, if applied to the individual granted the exception, the expression acquires a meaning in that the means employed must not allow the whole-scale taking of members of the species concerned. Of course, from an overall point of view, the introductory sentence of paragraph 1 of Article 9 still applies since the number of persons granted exceptions must not be such as to be detrimental "to the survival of the population concerned".

13. The purpose of the exception indicated in the third indent of paragraph 1 of Article 9 raises a very difficult problem, namely the interpretation of the expression "other overriding public interests".

14. With regard to the definition of the scope of similar concepts, e.g. "public order", experience with other international conventions (including the European Convention on Human Rights) has in fact shown that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to find a general, prior interpretation for such concepts.

15. In contrast, under the Bern Convention it is possible for the Standing Committee to consider whether a particular exception is justified on the grounds put forward, in this case "other overriding public interests". Consequently, if the grounds in question were put forward, the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention could assess the merits of the exception in the light of all the provisions contained in the Convention. Article 18 could be applied in the event of difficulties.

16. A further interpretation issue which arises in connection with Article 9, paragraph 1, second sub-paragraph, is that of how to interpret "serious damage" (to crops, livestock, forests, fisheries, water and other forms of property). If "damage" is taken to mean prejudice sustained by a person as a result of damage caused to those items of property that are listed in Article 9, paragraph 1, second sub-paragraph, and it seems legitimate to do so, then the adjective "serious" must be evaluated in terms of the intensity and duration of the prejudicial action, the direct or indirect links between that action and the results, and the scale of the destruction or deterioration committed. "Serious" does not, of course, necessarily mean that the damage was widespread: in some cases the item of property affected may cover only a limited geographical area (for example, a region), or even a particular farm or group of farms. However, the exceptions should be proportional to the damage suffered: the fact that an isolated farm sustains damage would not appear to justify the capture or killing of a species over a very wide area, unless there is evidence that the damage could extend to other areas.

^{^[1]} i.e. those located in the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea, Baltic Sea, Arctic Sea, North Sea, and the north and east Atlantic Ocean. Those African and near eastern countries with islands in the Mediterranean Sea are also encouraged to collaborate in delivering this Charter.

Standing Committee

Document containing

presented to the Standing Committee

Contents

DR on the implementation of an Action Plan for the conservation of the

White-tailed Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) along the Danube