Biodiversity management

Project information

Index: 0340R1
Acronym:COMMONS
Priority:2: Environment and risk prevention
Sub Theme:Biodiversity and preservation of natural heritage (including air quality)
Location ESPAÑA ESTE Alt Urgell Cataluña Start/End date of the practice
Start: 2002

Topic of the practice

Biodiversity management in a forest owned by a public body in Southern side of Pyrenees. How manage economical profit of forest without damage the biodiversity. Forestry management for wildlife conservation

Good Practice Information

Brief description of the intervention: It is really a set of measures for the preservation of biodiversity. These actions are carried out following different plans and technical documents like the Forest Management Plan, annual plans depending of the Cadí National Hunting Reserve or even, some initiatives from the Council of Lavansa-Fórnols that indirectly helps the biodiversity preservation. In addition there are some actions concerning all Catalonia that are specially important in this context like those for endangered species like capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) or Tengmalm’s owl (Aegolius funereus) or the regulation of driving by forest roads.

-Actions in the FMP. This forest management plan was written by the CTFC by assignment of the Council of Lavansa-Fórnols in 2002. The main idea of this plan is to prevent the forest against some risks like fire, the sustainable profit of the resources (mainly timber), the promotion of tourism and the conservation of the biodiversity. This last point was specially marked as priority for the ownership.
So, certain measures were taken in the FMP:
- leaving a number of dead trees in the forest with the aim of feed some insectivorous birds and mammals and provide holes for the nesting of animals like troglodytic birds and some mammals.
- Cutting is not allowed near gullies and where the slope were higher than 60% or in those areas showing erosion signs.
- Do not cut trees in the protective sides of the riverbeds.
- Planning water pools for the fighting against fire.
- Planning the maintenance of forest roads in order to facilitate the access in case of fire.
- Planning the tourism equipments like paths, mountain bike routes, etc, program them so that reduce the impact on natural resources.
- Promote the mixed masses with pines and deciduous trees.

-Actions depending of the annual planning of the Cadí National Hunting Reserve. Game of big mammals (chamois, wild boar and roe deer) is controlled by the Cadí NH
Bodies involved and relationship among the bodies

The Environmental Department of the Catalan Government (Departament de Medi Ambient de la Generalitat de Catalunya) as the body with competences in environment, so it is the body in charge of the planning large-scale, surveillance of conservation actions and subsidize the actions through distribution of UE funds or with its own funds. For example recovery of drinking pools was made in Nature 2000 area inside the Lavansa Common Forest by means of a grant for the development of the European networking.

The Council of Lavansa-Fórnols, as a public body has the competence on land planning in the municipality. The opinion expressed by legal representatives of the council is that conservation of natural resources and biodiversity is essential in the development pattern of this municipality.

The CTFC is a technological centre with advisor functions on conservation of natural resources and biodiversity, between others.

Stakeholders targeted and involved:

- Council of Lavansa-Fórnols. It has a double role: owner and representative of the neighbourhood of Lavansa-Fórnols. As owner, is the promoter of the low level planning (for instance, the FMP). As representative of neighbourhood, it has the goal of guarantee the conservation of the main source of rural development: the landscape and biodiversity.
- Catalan Government. It has the power on environment and general level planning of Catalonia.
- Commoners with rights on pastures. They are the main benefited by measures such as recovery or shepherd's huts or the drinking pools. They are too the stakeholders in charge of keep this activity.
- NGOs and environmental associations. They are in charge of monitoring some species and habitat.
- Hunting and fishing associations in defence of their activities.

Legal framework

This action has no specific legal framework, but it is supported by different laws in a general way:

1. Legal framework affecting l

Evidence of success

Concrete results of the intervention:
As some results of these interventions biodiversity has a better level of conservation in this area. The Lavansa Common Forest shows a high level of biodiversity and some endangered species find there the habitat they need for their development.
One important result is on the local population that perceives a healthy natural environment like a key for their economical and social development.

Main strengths (success factors):
One of the main strengths is that some highlights on conservation are planned in a formal document like FMP.
The local population is supporting these actions.
Main weaknesses:
The lack of a global planning on biodiversity conservation. Although policy makers have the overview necessary to fix it in a document that defines the course of actions.
The current economical situation makes difficult invest in conservation of biodiversity.

Difficulties encountered and solutions adopted:
The main difficulty is funding these actions. The solution is always partial, by investing when there is an opportunity in specific actions.

Lessons learned from the practice:
The planning is needed in a policy of conservation of biodiversity.
The forest needs time to response to improvement actions. It is a system with high resilience.
The local population perception is always capital in a biodiversity conservation action.
Some traditional activities like grazing are the best alliance in the fight for stop the loss of biodiversity.

Recommendation from improvement:
There is the challenge of working for the conservation of biodiversity bring new forms of social and economic development. Some alternatives on ecotourism are unexplored yet, in this case one challenge is to find the revenue system for investing in conservation.

Contact details to obtain further information on the practice

Carles Santana i García

Centre Tecnològic Forestal de Catalunya

carlessantana@yahoo.es

www.ctfc.cat/

Annex completed on: 06-30-2011

As of 31 December 2015, this website is no longer updated. Follow news on interregional cooperation at www.interregeurope.eu