1. National level

24
Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3 Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) CODE: 2110 NAME: 2110 Embryonic shifting dunes 1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL 2. Biogeographical or marine level 2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2110 (Embryonic shifting dunes) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep 2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000 2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region 2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 3 2.3.2 Date of range determination 2000-2006 2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys 2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

Transcript of 1. National level

Page 1: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2110 NAME: 2110 Embryonic shifting dunes

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2110 (Embryonic shifting dunes) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 3

2.3.2 Date of range determination 2000-2006

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

Page 2: 1. National level

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1994-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

0.19

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 2000-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Increasing (+)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) N/A

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 720 Trampling, overuse 871 - sea defense or coast protection works 900 Erosion

2.4.11 Threats 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 720 Trampling, overuse 900 Erosion

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

3

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) Much more than field 2.4.1 0.19

2.5.3 Typical species Atriplex glabriuscula

2.5.3 Typical species Atriplex laciniata

2.5.3 Typical species Atriplex littoralis

2.5.3 Typical species Beta vulgaris L. subsp. maritima

2.5.3 Typical species Cakile maritima

2.5.3 Typical species Crambe maritima

2.5.3 Typical species Crithmum maritimum

2.5.3 Typical species Elymus farctus

2.5.3 Typical species Glaucium flavum

2.5.3 Typical species Honkenya peploides

2.5.3 Typical species Polygonum oxyspermum

2.5.3 Typical species Salsola kali subsp. kali

2.5.4 Typical species assessment Flora distribution squares are considered as well developed when more than 5 typical species occur.

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

Although the area estimation has a good quality, trends are approached by expert judgement.

Conclusion Biogeographical or Conclusions within

Page 3: 1. National level

marine level Natura 2000 sites (optional)

(2.3) Range Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

(2.4) Area Bad but improving (U2+) Bad but improving (U2+)

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Future prospects Inadequate (U1) Inadequate (U1)

Overall assessment Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Page 4: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2120 NAME: 2120 Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (white dunes)

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2120 (Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (white dunes)) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 77

2.3.2 Date of range determination 1997-2006

Page 5: 1. National level

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1994-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

5.4

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 1997-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Decreasing (-)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) N/A

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 400 Urbanised areas, human habitation 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 622 - walking, horseriding and non-motorised vehicles 720 Trampling, overuse 871 - sea defense or coast protection works 971 - competition

2.4.11 Threats 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 622 - walking, horseriding and non-motorised vehicles 720 Trampling, overuse 971 - competition

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

77

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) More than field 2.4.1 5.4

2.5.3 Typical species Ammophila arenaria

2.5.3 Typical species Calystegia soldanella

2.5.3 Typical species Eryngium maritimum

2.5.3 Typical species Euphorbia paralias

2.5.3 Typical species Festuca juncifolia

2.5.3 Typical species Leymus arenarius

2.5.4 Typical species assessment Flora distribution grid cells are considered as well developed when more than 5 typical species occur. Also the development degree of the Belgian Biological Valuation Map is used to approach this assessment.

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

Although the area estimation has a good quality, trends are approached by expert judgement.

Conclusion Biogeographical or marine level

Conclusions within Natura 2000 sites

Page 6: 1. National level

(optional)

(2.3) Range Favourable (FV) N/A

(2.4) Area Inadequate (U1) N/A

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Bad (U2) N/A

Future prospects Inadequate (U1) N/A

Overall assessment Bad (U2) N/A

Page 7: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2130 NAME: 2130 Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (grey dunes)

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2130 (Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (grey dunes)) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 77

2.3.2 Date of range determination 1997-2006

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

Page 8: 1. National level

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1994-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

8.5

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 1997-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Increasing (+)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) N/A

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 400 Urbanised areas, human habitation 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 622 - walking, horseriding and non-motorised vehicles 720 Trampling, overuse 971 - competition

2.4.11 Threats 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 622 - walking, horseriding and non-motorised vehicles 720 Trampling, overuse 971 - competition

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

77

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) Much more than field 2.4.1 8.5

2.5.3 Typical species Trifolium scabrum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Arabis hirsuta / (L.) Scop.

2.5.3 Typical species Potentilla neumanniana / Reichenb.

2.5.3 Typical species Avenula pubescens / (Huds.) Dum.

2.5.3 Typical species Vicia lathyroides / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Bromus thominei / Hardouin

2.5.3 Typical species Myosotis ramosissima / Rochel ex Schult.

2.5.3 Typical species Thesium humifusum / DC.

2.5.3 Typical species Bromus erectus / Huds.

2.5.3 Typical species Trifolium subterraneum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Primula veris / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Helianthemum nummularium / (L.) Mill.

2.5.3 Typical species Koeleria albescens / DC.

2.5.3 Typical species Asperula cynanchica / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Silene conica / L.

Page 9: 1. National level

2.5.3 Typical species Silene nutans / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Orobanche caryophyllacea / Smith

2.5.3 Typical species Galium verum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Linum catharticum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Anthyllis vulneraria / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Rhinanthus minor / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Briza media / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Thymus pulegioides / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Vulpia ciliata / Dum. subsp. ambigua (Le Gall) Stace et Auquier

2.5.3 Typical species Anacamptis pyramidalis / (L.) L.C.M. Rich.

2.5.3 Typical species Vulpia membranacea / (L.) Dum

2.5.3 Typical species Medicago minima / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Vulpia fasciculata / (Forssk.) Fritsch

2.5.3 Typical species Mibora minima / (L.) Desv

2.5.3 Typical species Phleum arenarium / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Cerastium semidecandrum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Himantoglossum hircinum / (L.) Spreng.

2.5.3 Typical species Erodium lebelii / Jord.

2.5.3 Typical species Trifolium striatum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Brachypodium pinnatum / (L.) Beauv.

2.5.3 Typical species Phleum nodosum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Cirsium acaule / Scop.

2.5.3 Typical species Orobanche purpurea / Jacq.

2.5.3 Typical species Ononis repens / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Asparagus officinalis subsp. prostratus / L. (Dum.) Corb.

2.5.4 Typical species assessment Flora distribution squares are favourable when more than 9 typical species occur.

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

Although the area estimation has a good quality, trends are approached by expert judgement.

Conclusion Biogeographical or marine level

Conclusions within Natura 2000 sites (optional)

(2.3) Range Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

(2.4) Area Bad but improving (U2+) Bad but improving (U2+)

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Future prospects Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

Overall assessment Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Page 10: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2150 NAME: 2150 Atlantic decalcified fixed dunes (Calluno-Ulicetea)

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2150 (Atlantic decalcified fixed dunes (Calluno-Ulicetea)) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 1.17

2.3.2 Date of range determination 1997-2006

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

Page 11: 1. National level

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1996-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Not applicable

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

0.12

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 1997-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Stable (=)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) 0

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Not applicable

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 120 Fertilisation 400 Urbanised areas, human habitation 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 622 - walking, horseriding and non-motorised vehicles 720 Trampling, overuse 971 - competition

2.4.11 Threats 120 Fertilisation 620 Outdoor sports and leisure activities 622 - walking, horseriding and non-motorised vehicles 720 Trampling, overuse 971 - competition

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

3.15

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) Much more than field 2.4.1 0.12

2.5.3 Typical species Calluna vulgaris / (L.) Hull

2.5.3 Typical species Carex arenaria / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Corynephorus canescens / (L.) Beauv.

2.5.3 Typical species Cytisus scoparius / (L.) Link

2.5.3 Typical species Rumex acetosella / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Salix repens / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Teesdalia nudicaulis / (L.) R. Brown

2.5.4 Typical species assessment expert judgement

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

Although the area estimation has a good quality, trends are approached by expert judgement.

Conclusion Biogeographical or marine level

Conclusions within Natura 2000 sites (optional)

Page 12: 1. National level

(2.3) Range Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

(2.4) Area Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Bad but improving (U2+) Bad but improving (U2+)

Future prospects Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

Overall assessment Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Page 13: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2160 NAME: 2160 Dunes with Hippophae rhamnoides

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2160 (Dunes with Hippophae rhamnoides) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 77

2.3.2 Date of range determination 1997-2006

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

Page 14: 1. National level

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1994-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Not applicable

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

6.6

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 1997-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Decreasing (-)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) N/A

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 102 - mowing / cutting 400 Urbanised areas, human habitation 954 - invasion by a species 971 - competition

2.4.11 Threats 102 - mowing / cutting 954 - invasion by a species 971 - competition

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

77

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) 6.6

2.5.3 Typical species Anthriscus caucalis / Bieb.

2.5.3 Typical species Bryonia cretica / L. subsp. dioica (Jacq.) Tutin

2.5.3 Typical species Crataegus monogyna / Jacq.

2.5.3 Typical species Hippophae rhamnoides / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Ligustrum vulgare / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Lithospermum officinale / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Prunus spinosa / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Rhamnus catharticus / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Ribes uva-crispa / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Rosa canina / L. s.l.

2.5.3 Typical species Rosa rubiginosa / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Salix repens / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Sambucus nigra / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Stellaria pallida / (Dum.) Piré

2.5.4 Typical species assessment Flora distribution squares are favourable when more than 8 typical speceis occur.

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

Although the area estimation has a good quality, trends are approached by expert judgement. The deceasing area is due to

Page 15: 1. National level

restoration of other, more rare and endangered dune habitat types and hence this is not evaluated as unfavourable (in fact FRA should be lower than today).

Conclusion Biogeographical or marine level

Conclusions within Natura 2000 sites (optional)

(2.3) Range Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

(2.4) Area Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

Future prospects Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

Overall assessment Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

Page 16: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2170 NAME: 2170 Dunes with Salix repens ssp argentea (Salicion arenariae)

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2170 (Dunes with Salix repens ssp. argentea (Salicion arenariae)) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 77

2.3.2 Date of range determination 1997-2006

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

Page 17: 1. National level

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1994-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

0.75

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 1997-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Stable (=)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) N/A

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 400 Urbanised areas, human habitation 850 Modification of hydrographic functioning, general 971 - competition

2.4.11 Threats 971 - competition

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

77

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) Much more than field 2.4.1 0.75

2.5.3 Typical species Carex arenaria / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Carex flacca / Schreb.

2.5.3 Typical species Carlina vulgaris / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Epipactis helleborine / (L.) Crantz var. neerlandica Verm.

2.5.3 Typical species Inula conyza / (Griesselich) Meikle

2.5.3 Typical species Monotropa hypopitys / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Polygala vulgaris / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Pyrola rotundifolia / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Salix repens / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Thalictrum minus / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Viola canina / L.

2.5.4 Typical species assessment Flora distribution squares are considered as well developed when more than 5 typical species occur. One of them must be Salix repens.

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

Although the area estimation has a good quality, trends are approached by expert judgement.

Conclusion Biogeographical or marine level

Conclusions within Natura 2000 sites (optional)

Page 18: 1. National level

(2.3) Range Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

(2.4) Area Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Future prospects Inadequate (U1) Inadequate (U1)

Overall assessment Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Page 19: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2180 NAME: 2180 Wooded dunes of the Atlantic, Continental and Boreal region

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2180 (Wooded dunes of the Atlantic, Continental and Boreal region) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000be

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 77

2.3.2 Date of range determination 1997-2006

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

Page 20: 1. National level

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1994-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

2.45

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 1997-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Decreasing (-)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) N/A

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 162 - artificial planting 164 - forestry clearance 400 Urbanised areas, human habitation 501 - paths, tracks, cycling tracks 601 - golf course 608 - camping and caravans 701 - water pollution 702 - air pollution 720 Trampling, overuse 853 - management of water levels 871 - sea defense or coast protection works 890 Other human induced changes in hydraulic conditions

2.4.11 Threats 720 Trampling, overuse 853 - management of water levels 890 Other human induced changes in hydraulic conditions

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

77

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) 2.45

2.5.3 Typical species

2.5.4 Typical species assessment The assessment of the Specific strustures and functions is based on expert judgement. The diversity and broad ecological amplitude of habitat 2180 makes it difficult to use a list of typical species.

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

N/A

Conclusion Biogeographical or marine level

Conclusions within Natura 2000 sites (optional)

(2.3) Range Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

(2.4) Area Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

Page 21: 1. National level

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Future prospects Favourable (FV) Favourable (FV)

Overall assessment Bad (U2) Bad (U2)

Page 22: 1. National level

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D) 1/3

Report on the main results of the surveillance under article 11 for annex I habitat types (Annex D)

CODE: 2190 NAME: 2190 Humid dune slacks

1. National level Biogeographic regions and/or marine regions concerned within the member state: ATL

2. Biogeographical or marine level

2.1 Biogeographic region or marine region: Atlantic

T’ Jollyn F., Provoost S., Van Landuyt W., Van Hove M. & Paelinckx D. (2008) Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitat 2190 (Humid dune slacks) for the Belgian Atlantic region, In: Paelinckx D., Van Landuyt W. & De Bruyn L. (ed.). Conservation status of the Natura 2000 habitats and species. Report of the Research Institute for Nature and Forest, INBO.R.2008.15. Brussels. In prep

2.2 Published sources and/or websites www.inbo.be/natura2000

2.3 Range of the habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.3.1 Surface area of range in km2 77

2.3.2 Date of range determination 1997-2006

2.3.3 Quality of data concerning range Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.3.4 Range trend Stable (=)

Page 23: 1. National level

2.3.5 Range trend magnitude in km2 (optional)

N/A

2.3.6 Range trend period 1994-2006

2.3.7 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4 Area covered by habitat type in the biogeographic region or marine region

2.4.1 Surface area of the habitat type (km2)

0.49

2.4.2 Date of area estimation 1997-2006

2.4.3 Method used for area estimation Ground based survey (based on field mapping, possibly using stratified random sampling

2.4.4 Quality of data on area Good e.g based on extensive surveys

2.4.5 Area trend Increasing (+)

2.4.6 Area trend magnitude (km2) N/A

2.4.7 Area trend period 1994-2006

2.4.8 Reasons for reported trend Direct human influence (restoration, deterioration, destruction)

Other (specify) N/A

2.4.9 Justification of % thresholds for trends (optional)

N/A

2.4.10 Main pressures 400 Urbanised areas, human habitation 850 Modification of hydrographic functioning, general 971 - competition 990 Other natural processes

2.4.11 Threats 850 Modification of hydrographic functioning, general 971 - competition 990 Other natural processes

2.5 Complementary information

2.5.1 Favourable reference range (km2)

77

2.5.2 Favourable reference area (km2) Much more than field 2.4.1 0.49

2.5.3 Typical species Anagallis tenella / (L.) L.

2.5.3 Typical species Blackstonia perfoliata / (L.) Huds.

2.5.3 Typical species Carex trinervis / Degl.

2.5.3 Typical species Carex serotina / Mérat

2.5.3 Typical species Centaurium littorale / (D. Turn.) Gilm.

2.5.3 Typical species Dactylorhiza fuchsii / (Druce) Soó

2.5.3 Typical species Dactylorhiza incarnata / (L.) Soó

2.5.3 Typical species Dactylorhiza praetermissa / (Druce) Soó

2.5.3 Typical species Epipactis palustris / (L.) Crantz

2.5.3 Typical species Equisetum variegatum / Schleich.

2.5.3 Typical species Euphrasia stricta / J.P. Wolff ex Lehm.

2.5.3 Typical species Gentianella uliginosa / (Willd.) Börner

2.5.3 Typical species Herminium monorchis / (L.) R. Brown

2.5.3 Typical species Juncus subnodulosus / Schrank

2.5.3 Typical species Linum catharticum / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Parnassia palustris / L.

2.5.3 Typical species Pyrola rotundifolia / L.

Page 24: 1. National level

2.5.3 Typical species Sagina nodosa / (L.) Fenzl

2.5.4 Typical species assessment Flora distribution squares are favourable when more than 5 typical species occur.

2.5.5 Other relevant information (optional)

Although the area estimation has a good quality, trends are approached by expert judgement.

Conclusion Biogeographical or marine level

Conclusions within Natura 2000 sites (optional)

(2.3) Range Favourable (FV) N/A

(2.4) Area Bad but improving (U2+) N/A

(2.5) Structure and function, including typical species

Bad (U2) N/A

Future prospects Favourable (FV) N/A

Overall assessment Bad (U2) N/A