Approaches of european ecologists to typology and mapping of habitats

Abstract

The presence of appropriate habitats is a necessary condition for the existence of flora and fauna. In recent decades, it has become obvious that monitoring of a state not only populations of rare species, and, first, habitats which for a biota are vital, is necessary (Galdenzi et al., 2012; Rodríguez et al., 2012; Izco, 2015; Keith et al., 2015; etc.). The paper discusses the main European programs and projects devoted to the classification, mapping and inventory of habitats, the formation of lists of biotopes in need of protection (Berne Convention, Habitats Directive, Nature 2000, CORINE, EUNIS, etc.). The implementation of these projects makes a significant contribution to the state environmental policy of European countries. Since the Berne Convention for the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, adopted in 1979 and to date, great importance has been given to the protection of natural habitats in the countries of the European Union. Given their diversity, the most important tasks of diagnostics and monitoring of habitats were the development of classification schemes, inventory and allocation of biotopes that require protection. In 1985, the European Commission initiated the CORINE (Coordination of Information on the Environment) project on the inventory of habitats or biotopes. Its main goal was information support for pan-European and national policies in the field of environmental management, control of their consequences and the proposal of corrective measures. The CORINE habitat classification was first published in 1991 and served as the basis for the selection of habitats listed in Annex I of the 1992 (EU Habitat Directive 92/43/EEC). Since the adoption of this document, known as the “Habitats Directive”, there has been a turning point in the EU in the prospects for the management of biological diversity and the transition of scientific research in the field of ecology and nature protection to a qualitatively new level. Annex I lists 233 European types of natural habitats, including 71 priority ones, that are at risk of extinction and whose natural areas mainly distributed into the EU. The most important achievement of the Habitats Directive is the creation of a network of protected areas in Europe, known as Natura 2000, the world’s largest ecological network created to protect the rarest and most endangered species of plants, animals and habitats in Europe. Natura 2000 is not a Specially Protected Natural Areas system, but also includes all EU protected areas, although most of the land in this network is privately owned. EU member States have an obligation to ensure the sustainable management of all Natura 2000 facilities, regardless of ownership, both environmentally and economically. In 1995, the International Seminar in Paris recognized the need to develop an improved European classification. Since that time, the development of the EUNIS (European Union Nature Information System) habitat classification has begun. This classification covers all European habitats: marine, terrestrial and freshwater, natural, semi-natural and anthropogenic and is currently one of the main systems developed for the study and protection of European Union habitats. Despite its shortcomings, EUNIS serves as a pan-European integration system with certain standards for the identification and characterization of habitats. It ensures compara­bility between national and international classifications. The system provides extensive opportunities to establish relationships (crosswalks) of habitat categories with other pan-European (Habitat Directive, NATURE 2000, CORINE, Palaearctic Habitats) and national classifications. Approaches to mapping habitats at different scales are considered — display on the map physiognomically and topographically expressed territorial units of vegetation using remote sensing, reflecting the ecological characteristics and originality of the earth’s surface. It is noted that the diagnostics and inventory of habitats, their mapping are based, first of all, on the materials of geobotanical mapping. The mapping of habitat types and categories can be presented at different scales. For inventory and monitoring purposes, large-scale mapping is most widely used, which is based on the allocation and diagnosis of territorial units of vegetation. A review of several dozen European projects showed that the scale from 1 : 5 000 to 1 : 50 000 is mainly used to display habitat types on the map (Terrestrial ..., 2014). A smaller scale is used to map the distribution of individual habitat types and categories within wide areas. In this case, a grid with cells of different sizes (from 1 to 10 km2) is often used. One of the main tasks in the study and evaluation of the current state of habitats is the identification and organization of monitoring of biotopes that are under the threat of degradation or complete disappearance under the impact, first of all, of human activities. For this purpose, pan-European and national Red Lists of Habitats are being created, which are taken into account in the development plans of the territories of the EU countries. The problems of classification, mapping and inventory of habitats, the preparation of Red Lists of Habitats are currently among the priority areas of environmental science and make a significant contribution to the state environmental policy of the EU countries. The high efficiency of this approach at all levels, from municipal to European, is evidenced by the large number of programs implemented in Europe in the last decade, which were funded both at the national and EU level. Considering that such an approach underlies the formation of an environmentally orien­ted economy and environmental protection activities in many European countries, it seems promising to implement it in the Russian Federation and, first of all, for the Arctic, as the territory most vulnerable to the impact of anthropogenic and climatic factors. This region is currently experiencing a significant anthropogenic impact due to the development of dozens of hydrocarbon deposits, the construction of industrial facilities and infrastructure elements, and numerous oil and gas pipelines. At the same time, the Russian Arctic is a territory of high concentration of species of biota in need of protection, numerous populations of waterfowl and mammals (polar bear, walrus), many of which have international protection status. Due to the high sensitivity to anthropogenic and climatic factors, not only individual protected areas, but the entire territory of the Russian Arctic should be under constant control by the state. In the context of industrial development of Arctic territories, it is necessary to monitor the state not only of populations of certain species of plants and animals in need of protection, but especially habitats that are vital to them. Among the top-priority tasks is the preparation of a list of habitats in the Russian Arctic requiring constant control and protection by the state (Red List of Russian Arctic Habitats). These include areas of concentration of populations of Red Data Book species, the most important resource species and species that are of high importance for maintaining homeostasis and supporting the potential of Arctic ecosystems. The creation of such a list will significantly complement the system of protected areas in the Arctic, since it will allow taking into account and monitoring the state of not only the natural complexes of the existing reserves, but also habitats outside this system, which are of great importance for the preservation of arctic ecosystems and biota. Giving them the status of protected areas of a certain rank, given their multiplicity and dispersion in the territory, is certainly impractical. However, when planning economic activities, special attention will need to be paid to the presence of Red List Habitats and to monitor their condition. The latter, taking into account Remote Sensing technologies, is now quite feasible, and allows for large-scale monitoring in such a vast area.