DANUBEPARKS project – The Danube River Network … project – The Danube River Network of...

2

This Management Plan for Land Purchased was elaborated within the frame of the DANUBEPARKS project – The Danube River Network of Protected Areas - Development and Implementation of Transnational Strategies for the Conservation of the Natural Heritage at the Danube River (SEE/A/064/2.3/X), in the frame of WP4 Floodplain Management and Habitat Network - 4.1 JOINT ELABORATION OF MANAGEMENT PLANS and WP5 Conservation of Danube Flagship Species – 5.2 SCIENTIFIC & CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES for WHITE-TAILED EAGLE.

3

Table of Content 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4

A. Land purchase for connectivity and enlargement of protected areas ............................................... 4

1. Background ...................................................................................................................................... 4

2. Conservation strategy in the ETC-project “Danubeparks” .............................................................. 5

3. Location ........................................................................................................................................... 6

3.1. General description of the location .............................................................................................. 6

3.2. Location in detail .......................................................................................................................... 7

4. Sustainability and innovative character .......................................................................................... 7

B. Land purchase for White-tailed Eagle ................................................................................................. 8

1. Background ...................................................................................................................................... 8

2. Conservation strategy in the ETC-project “Danubeparks” .............................................................. 9

2.1. General strategy for White-tailed Eagle in “Danubeparks” ......................................................... 9

2.2. Concept of “stepping stones” ..................................................................................................... 11

3. The role of land purchase for the transnational conservation strategy ....................................... 11

4. Location ......................................................................................................................................... 12

4.1. General description of the location ............................................................................................ 12

4.2. Location in detail ........................................................................................................................ 12

5. Sustainability and innovative character ........................................................................................ 14

2. Conservation actions implemented by BROZ within the project area .......................................... 14

A. Concrete restoration actions in the field ...................................................................................... 14

B. Concepts and studies for the project area elaborated ..................................................................... 20

3. Land Purchased in the Slovak Project Area ................................................................................... 21

WP4.1 .................................................................................................................................................... 21

WP5.2 .................................................................................................................................................... 26

4. Future Perspectives ....................................................................................................................... 33

Forests ................................................................................................................................................... 33

Permanent grasslands ........................................................................................................................... 34

Water bodies ......................................................................................................................................... 34

Arable land, other land .......................................................................................................................... 34

4

1. Introduction

A. Land purchase for connectivity and enlargement of protected areas

1. Background

Purchase or lease of the land for nature conservation purposes is an effective measure to preserve and connect transnational protected areas and to support conservation of the White-tailed Eagle Due to high pressure on floodplain areas (forestry, settlements, tourism etc.) habitat fragmentation is one of the main challenges the Danube PA are faced with. Based on concepts for habitat connectivity in combination with management plans for selected reserves BROZ will act as model area for the work on the enlargement of existing PA and the protection of stepping stones between preserved areas which is essential for the implementation of NATURA 2000. Selected floodplain areas will be protected by land purchase acting as stepping stones between existing reserves in Slovak floodplain or could serv to connect PA in Slovakia with neighbouring reserves in Austria and Hungary. This activities are focused on "key" habitats - either for conservation issues (purchase of important habitats) or for restoration tasks (purchase of habitats in bad condition).

5

2. Conservation strategy in the ETC-project “Danubeparks”

Land was purchased especially in strategic locations, connecting existing nature conservation zones and reserves. Several key areas important for nature and biodiversity of Danube floodplains have been selected for purchase for nature conservation purposes. These areas represent best preserved natural habitats, are important as nesting, feeding and/ or resting areas of endangered bird species or create buffer zones of such areas. Targeted land includes also degraded land with high restoration potential. Prioritized will be especially connections and natural corridors, stepping stones and areas to connect transnational natural areas on different site on the country borders.

1. Land purchase was realized by transnational approach and it is directly related to objectives of the project.

2. Land purchased will contribute to maintaining and restoring the integrity of the Danube protected areas.

3. Land purchase is the most effective, and often the only possible way how to implement conservation actions on private lands.

4. The land will be purchased by BROZ as established nature conservation NGO, which has all the necessary competence and experience in the land purchase/ lease for nature conservation purposes in the area targeted.

5. Land purchased will be the subject of specific conservation actions restoration or management. In some case, no management can be applied for climax habitats, when strategic to the project objectives.

In general, four main types of activities were planned to be realized on the land purchased for nature conservation purposes:

(i) Active management and restoration activities – will be implemented on land where project actions can achieve significant improvement of habitats serving for targeted endangered bird species for feeding, nesting, wintering, gathering during day or night, etc. On this land, actions of improving water regime/ flooding, changing of land management practices and application of management which previous private owner were not willing to do because of economic reasons (such as planting of native trees instead of fast growing hybrid poplars or changing arable land into meadows that result in much smaller possible economic income). Land ownership may be the only way, how it is possible to compensate lower incomes that may result from the change of arable land to meadow to the land owners. Removing of the bank embankment is also problematic on private land because there will be risk of small scale erosion during floods, however it is not problem on land owned by nature conservation organization.

(ii) Passive conservation – will be implemented on lands with habitats in good

conservation status, which do not need any management. Free development of preserved habitats and undisturbed natural processes are often the best way how to achieve natural structure of habitats, suitable for targeted birds. This is important especially for species preferring natural forests or wetlands for nesting.

(iii) Elimination of disturbance of sensitive species. For many species targeted, disturbance

by human activities is the key factor limiting their nesting success in the project site. Disturbance is also limiting possibilities of birds to fully use existing optimal feeding habitats. Ownership and use of the land will allow to close and/ or remove the roads (private forest roads not officially used by public traffic), exclude hunting and intensive recreation, etc. Such actions will contribute to creation of “wilderness zones” – quiet

6

areas with good conditions for nesting of the endangered bird species, which can secure their survival and long-term vital existence in the project site, even if most of the adjacent areas will be intensively managed and utilized.

(iv) Preventing negative development of the land. Development of human activities is a

serious problem on private lands in the project site – camping, construction of huts, houseboats, recreational buildings later transformed to normal houses etc. are activities which are normally forbidden in the strict reserves, but are allowed in surrounding areas. Anyway it has serious negative impacts on environment and bird species even in the reserves. Land purchase can prevent this at least in buffer zones and can secure functional connection between nature reserves. Ownership of the land by nature conservation organization is the best way to prevent such unwanted development on private lands. By purchase of small areas strategically located in the project site, we can protect large areas from improper development.

It is only possible to implement above mentioned conservation actions on private lands by purchase of the land for nature conservation purposes. Existing standard nature conservation regulations and compensations schemes are not sufficient, which is evident on worsening of conservation status on private lands in many areas of the project site, even if formal protection is in place. Previous negotiations with land owners in the project site area showed that many of them are willing to sell or lease their land to BROZ. BROZ is rather experienced in implementing this kind of actions in the project area – it has already in the ownership or long-term lease 530 ha of the land within the project site serving for nature conservation purposes. Moreover these activities by BROZ should act as best practice for habitat connectivity for all Danube PA. Accordingly, they were presented by study visits and discussed in the permanent task group. Reasons why this action is necessary: Purchase of land is – where the ownership structure allows – the most effective, and often the only possible way how to implement conservation actions on private lands. Organization which owns the land can restore natural habitats (e.g. change commercial plantations to natural forests, arable land to meadows or forests); it can renew the artificially disturbed flooding of wetlands; or it can allow no management of natural habitats leading to the climax state. Land ownership also allows implementation of other actions, which otherwise would not be possible even in the strictly protected areas – close and/ or remove the roads, exclude hunting and intensive recreation, etc. Such actions will contribute to creation of “wilderness zones” – quiet areas with good conditions for nesting of the endangered bird species, which can secure their survival and long-term vital existence in the project site, even if most of the adjacent areas will be intensively managed and utilized. Land ownership is one of the most effective ways how to protect or enable creating of new nesting places for disturbance-sensitive bird species – such as White-tailed Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla), black stork (Ciconia nigra), black kite (Milvus migrans) and many other. This action contributes to successful implementation of the other project actions. 3. Location

3.1. General description of the location

Investments were set in the Protected Landscape Area Danube Floodplains in Slovakia, within NATURA 2000 areas. Areas with highest potential for land purchase have been identified.

7

These areas represent the sites, where the biggest conservation effect can be achieved and will be targeted by this project action. The potential area for land purchase was originally larger than could be achieved with limited financial resources. On the other hand it was large enough to find suitable land for reasonable price. Large size of potential area allowed to avoid sites which would be problematic to purchase for any reasons. 3.2. Location in detail

Four main potential areas for land purchase have been originally identified and proposed as effective measure to establish or improve transnational conservation zones:

1. Area along the Morava river (near the confluence with Danube river), Devínske jazero 2. Area along the Danube and border with Austria 3. Area along the Danube and border with Hungary near Vojka 4. Large area along the Danube and border with Hungary, Medveďov – Nová Stráž

4. Sustainability and innovative character

will be developed on transnational level (task force “Floodplain management &

networking” and task force “Birds”)

will follow a transnational strategy elaborated within ETC-SEE “Danubeparks” (transnational action plan for White-tailed Eagle)

have a clear cross-border functional link by connecting existing PA in Slovakia

will contribute to the implementation of cross-border conservation concept (act. 4.1)

will act as stepping stones on cross-border level (among PA) as well as on

transnational level (among core population of White-tailed Eagle and small populations upstream)

will be best practice solutions for the Upper Danube including Slovakia, Austria and

Hungary

will be transferred to Lower Danube by presentation on international meetings and know-how transfer within project task groups to be base for follow-up projects in Bulgaria and Romania

8

B. Land purchase for White-tailed Eagle

1. Background

As top predator in riverine forests the White-tailed Eagle is one of the flagship species for conservation tasks in floodplain habitats. Its habitat requirements – old growth stands as breeding site closely linked with wetlands and water habitats as feeding sites – make this species a unique bio-indicator. Additionally, due to very large home-ranges protection activities has to be implanted on transnational level – no single country in central Europe is able to protect a viable population by its own. The population at Danube River Basin is more or less isolated of population in northern Europe. Breeding population is estimated 500-600 breeding pairs and therefore of European relevance. Most breeding pairs are concentrated to the Middle Danube (Hungary, Croatia and Serbia), whereas, actually in the Upper and Lower Danube the White-tailed Eagle occurs only in small population size. Nevertheless, these sections offer high habitat potential including good possibilities for a positive development of the breeding population if supported by conservation activities. To develop the Danube river as backbone of the White-tailed Eagle population in central Europe is main aim of ETC-SEE “Danubeparks” which should be realized by different activities including the establishment of stepping stones of suitable habitats.

9

2. Conservation strategy in the ETC-project “Danubeparks”

2.1. General strategy for White-tailed Eagle in “Danubeparks”

For most PA at Danube River the White-tailed Eagle is one of the key species for their conservation tasks. In the past, most activities were implemented on local or on national level. The first steps for cross-border conservation activities e.g. Hungary, Croatia and Serbia can act as best practice. Their big success underlines the importance of transnational concepts. In 2007 the first International Workshop for White-tailed Eagle with clear focus on the population in the Danube River Basin happened in Illmitz (2007). Following the agenda of this workshop, coordinated scientific and conservation activities are of highest priority for the long-term conservation of White-tailed Eagle (Probst et al 2009, in press). In the application form of ETC-project “Danubeparks”, the WP 5 is strongly influenced by this international workshop. Lessons learned in Illmitz are the base for the detailed design of act. 5.1 – act. 5.3. In the transnational action plan (act. 5.1) a joint strategy for the conservation of White-tailed Eagle was elaborated in the ETC-project “Danubeparks” by the participation of all PP. Main focal points are conservation of nesting sites, activities against poisoning etc. Concrete pilot projects (act. 5.2) were implemented as first steps to bring the action plan to live including joint scientific programs (monitoring, transnational database, radio tagging, ringing) as well as concrete conservation measures (reduction of disturbance, artificial nests, land purchase) and public awareness (folder, webcam). To bring together all experiences of the ETC-project “Danubeparks” for the conservation of White-tailed Eagle a follow-up workshop was organized. This International Workshop took place in Duna-Dráva National Park and was used to present of the transnational action plan and to discuss the several conservation activities as best practice for other areas.

10

International Conference for the Conservation of White-tailed Eagle (Illmitz, 2007)

Clear appeal for transnational conservation activities in Danube countries

Concept for ETC-„Danubeparks“

Task group Transnational action plan Scientific & conservation activities (incl. land

purchase)

Implementation ETC-„Danubeparks“:

Elaboration of transnational action plan for White-tailed Eagle

Artificial nesting sites (Romania, Slovakia)

Land purchase (Slovakia) Activities for reduction of disturbance at

nesting site

Local & national activities for the conservation of White-tailed Eagle

Presentation of best practice pilot projects at the International Conference (Duna-Dráva NP) and planning of follow-up projects

11

2.2. Concept of “stepping stones”

The population of the White-tailed Eagle is important on European level. The concentration of more than 87 % to the Middle Danube (Hungary, Croatia, Serbia) and very low population size in all other Danube countries underlines the necessity of habitat stepping stones for this species to connect the core areas with potential breeding areas upstream and downstream. Within ETC-SEE “Danubeparks”, for the first, stepping stones will be protected and established to connect the core areas with the suitable habitats upstream. In this concept, Slovakia plays a key role for the enlargement of Eagles distribution in the Upper Danube. If the activities for the sustainable establishment of stepping stones succeed this is not only of importance for the Slovakian population but of strategic relevance for the whole population in central Europe. Furthermore, the implementation of land purchase of nesting sites should act as best practice for a similar concept downstream to connect the core population with huge potential breeding areas in the floodplains in Bulgaria and Romania. 3. The role of land purchase for the transnational conservation strategy

The experience of the last decades underlines the importance of the protection of existing and potential nesting sites for the sustainable conservation of the White-tailed Eagle. The habitat requirements for the nesting site are very specific. Beside a suitable nesting tree – mostly old and huge trees - the White-tailed Eagle prefers old growth forests for nesting. Therefore, intensive forestry is one main limiting factor. Beside this, during breeding period this species is very sensitive against human disturbance. Taking these limiting factors into consideration, the protection of existing and known nesting site accompanied by offering suitable potential sites is crucial. This makes large PA to key players for the conservation of White-tailed Eagle. Nevertheless, the protected sites only will not be large enough to cover viable populations on a long term. Therefore, stepping stones for this species has to be established to link the PA and to give a perspective to the White-tailed Eagle to enlarge its core areas of distribution. Land purchase is the adequate and sometimes the only measure to ensure the protection of nesting sites on a long term. According to that, protected nesting zones are in development in many countries but still waiting for full implementation for many years, e.g. in the Upper Danube (Slovakia, Austria, Hungary). This gives this action innovative character and guarantees sustainability. Breeding pairs sometimes inhabit their nests for many decades. Long-time partnership and durable constancy with the nesting site make breeding pairs most successful. Vice versa, permanent changes in nesting sites influence the breeding success and number of juveniles per brood negatively. This makes sustainable conservation activities like land purchase highly relevant for the conservation of this species.

4. Location

4.1. General description of the location

Investments were set in the Protected Landscape Area in Slovakian Danube Floodplains, within NATURA 2000 areas. For the first, the strategy is creating stepping stones focus on the countries upstream of the core area of White-tailed Eagle. Therefore the conservation of existing nesting sites outside of strictly PA and the establishment of potential nesting zones should strengthen habitat connectivity for this species among the core population in Duna-Dráva National Park, Kopacki rit and Gornje Podunavlje with areas in the Upper Danube region. Following this strategy land purchase for (potential) nesting and feeding sites was implemented:

in Upper Danube region (upstream of the core population in Hungary, Croatia, Serbia) in Slovakia (due to its geographical position this country plays a core role for the

White-tailed Eagle population in the Upper Danube region)

outside strictly PA (nesting sites within PA are well protected; this underlines the importance of land purchase)

mostly in NATURA 2000 areas or in their vicinity with potential of later including to

NATURA 2000

4.2. Location in detail

Slovakia

1

2 3

4

13

The map of distribution by Bohuš et al. presents the latest results of the distribution of White-tailed Eagle in Slovakia and will be published in the Conference report of the International Conference in Illmitz (Remo Probst, in press). Location for activities: Actually, at the Danube river section on the border between Slovakia and Hungary downstream the mouth of river Raab no breeding pair of White-tailed Eagle is known in Slovakia. This seems to be mainly the result of intensive forestry in the floodplains which has bad influence on the breeding habitat of White-tailed Eagle. In this area, combination of land purchase and the fixation of artificial nest could bring best results. Suitable areas for the conservation of potential nesting sites by land purchase is in the area between Medveďov and Nová Stráž. In these areas, several unsuccessful attempts of White-tailed Eagle nesting have been observed, including winter 2008/2009. It was not successful due to disturbance and small size of suitable habitats. Most important breeding site of White-tailed Eagle in Slovakia is the floodplain located between Bratislava and Gabčíkovo. Nevertheless, with 5 breeding pairs (actually, 2009 only 3 pairs) in this huge floodplain area the breeding density is quite low. Additionally, only one of the nesting sites is located within strictly protected areas. In this area protection of nesting site by land purchase is of highest priority in the area of Danube inland Delta near Vojka, just across the Danube and national border from suitable habitats in Hungary. The floodplains upstream of Bratislava are of special interest for cross-border conservation activities with Donau-Auen National Park/Austria. In the ETC-project “Danubeparks” a bilateral conservation concept was elaborated for this region (WP4, act. 4.1). Actually, in this area White-tailed Eagles can be regularly observed and there seems to be suitable breeding habitats. Land purchase of suitable habitats in combination with the cross-border conservation concept for the floodplains on the border Austria - Slovakia and with the habitat restoration actions is believed to be most effective approach. The border region along the Morava river – one of the largest tributaries in this section of the Danube – is one of the floodplains with the high potential for White-tailed Eagle in Slovakia. Whereas, on the Austrian side of the Morava river, White-tailed Eagle is a regular breeding bird, on the Slovakian side there is no brood confirmed at the moment but single pairs are willing to breed if suitable habitat conditions are offered.

1

2

3

4

14

5. Sustainability and innovative character

land purchase guarantees sustainability for conservation tasks in forest habitats better than all other activities

natural areas untouched by human impact is a limiting factor especially in European floodplains; therefore, land purchase for keeping areas untouched by human impact can be seen as very innovative investment

BROZ is one of the biggest landowner in the Danube floodplains in Slovakia with long-term experience in management of PA

the majority of investment sites are located in NATURA 2000 and therefore it is a contribution to its implementation

purchased land could promote enlargement of PA which would be really an investment for the future

the conservation concept presented here is to initiate a long term viable population at the Danube River

2. Conservation actions implemented by BROZ within the project area

A. Concrete restoration actions in the field

In the period of project duration (11.3.2009-29.2.2012) BROZ NGO has implemented different practical nature conservation and restoration measures, which succeed to improve the floodplain habitat connectivity and conditions for protection of White-tailed Eagle.

Here are listed the most important ones:

11.3.2011: designation of the Nature Reserve Slovanský ostrov Island with the 5th the highest degree of protection

1.11.2009-29.4.2010: planting of 3 500 pcs. of native tree species in Číčov (Populus x canescens, Populus alba, Populus nigra, Quercus robur, Alnus glutinosa, Fraxinus angustifolia, Salix alba) and 2.5.-16.5.2011 planting of 3 500 pcs. of Fraxinus angustifolia and 1 550 pcs. of Quercus robur

15

2.4.2010-26.5.2010: planting of 4 325 oak trees from seeds by pilot use of a new inventive planting method

1.-30.6.2010 - after planting care for afforested localities

in Číčov and Veľký Lél and 16.2.-5.3.2011 in Číčov

28.12.2010 – opening and reconnection of the side arm of Nová Stráž near Komárno on two places implemented in co-operation with the Slovavak Water Management

Enterprise

16

22.3.2011 public ceremony with designation of new Nature Reserve Soví les Forest attended by the Mayor of Bratislava-Petržalka, stakeholders and broad public

7.3.2011: restoration (cleaning) of old river canal which supplies a river branch system of PLA Danube Floodplains with water, this part of inundation serves thanks to regular floods and persistent contact with the old river bed as an important spawning place for fish, as a consequence of previous logging the rest of the wood blocked the canal bed and created an obstacle for migrating fish, securing of patency and linkage (lateral integrity) is crucial for conservation of natural fish population, this small scale restoration measure was implemented by BROZ in cooperation with State Nature Conservancy and two other nature conservation NGOs – Umbra and Pangaea

17

summer 2011: restoration of steep river banks as in Chľaba (close to the confluence of Danube and Ipoly) as potential nesting habitats for Sand Martin

September 2011: implementation of nature conservation management by mowing (Nature Reserve and SCI SKUEV0078 Mostové)

9.1.-14.2.2012: reconstruction of adjustable water management object

18

19.9.-22.11.2011: removal of invasive and non-native tree species on Veľký Lél Island (Negundo aceroides, Fraxinus pensylvanica, Fraxinus americana) on 32,5 ha

24.11.-12.12.2011: trimming of head willows (45 pcs.) on Veľký Lél Island

21.11.-2.12.2011: removal of invasive bush species Amorpha fruticosa in Chľaba on

8,5 ha

19

12.9.-30.9.2011: removal of humus layer as a base for free flowing of the river branch system

16.12.2011-14.2.2012: re-cultivation of selected areas as predisposition for following

tree planting and restoration of floodplain forest habitats (6,24 ha) 28.12.2011-20.1.2012: restoration of forest steppes in PLA Danube Floodplains -

locality Ostrovné lúčky, on 12,5 ha (including: removal of invasive species, mowing, removal of biomass)

November 2011-

February 2012: management of water bodies covered by reed by reed cutting in Nature Reserve and SCI SKUEV0077 Dunajské trstiny

20

1.9.2011-31.1.2012: constant monitoring of the nesting pairs of White-Tailed Eagle 1.12.2011-31.1.2012: supplying wintering birds with food (meat, fish) 1.9.2011-31.12.2011: identification of suitable trees for installation of artificial nests

3.1.-30.1.2012: installation of 6 artificial nests for

White-tailed Eagle, purchased previously by SNC SR partner, in the area of Slovak Danube Floodplains

yearly participation on the winter counting along the whole SK Danube section

B. Concepts and studies for the project area elaborated

Woody Plant Care Concept In Veľký Lél and Číčov Area The Impact of Operation of Gabčíkovo Waterworks Parts on Surface and Groundwater

Level Regime in the Area of Bratislava Floodplain Forests and Moson-Danube Concept for Restoration of NATURA 2000 Sites in Bratislava Capital Region Revitalisation of the Danube Distributary in the Devín Area Cross-border Conservation Concept Austria – Slovakia along the Danube Perspectives for Danube Floodplain Forests

21

3. Land Purchased in the Slovak Project Area During the whole project period BROZ continuously surveyed the project area and searched for localities according to planned objectives within the floodplain management and White-tailed Eagle protection. BROZ members and externally contracted employee intensively lead the negotiations with land owners of land potential for buying. Different types of land as forest, permanent grassland, water bodies, arable land and other land purchased will need different types of restoration management, respectively in case of valuable forest non-management regime could be accepted. Until the project end BROZ managed to purchased together 74,0439 ha of land. From this 50,5136 ha were purchased in the frame of WP4 and 23,5303 ha within WP5. Here is the summary of all purchased land:

WP4.1

Cadastral area

Former owner

Parcel type

Ownership certificate

Nr.

Parcel NR.

Surface (m2)

Type of land

Číčov Ema Kovácsová

E 1369 1391 337,33 forest


E 1369 1392 378 permanent grassland


E 1369 1393 84,78 forest


E 1953 1363 459,56 forest


E 1953 1364/1 611,11

permanent grassland


E 1953 1364/3 94

permanent grassland


E 1953 1365 384,44 forest


E 1953 1366 175,78 water body


E 1951 1353 337,67 forest


E 1951 1354/1 2,22

permanent grassland


E 1951 1354/3 512,11

permanent grassland


E 1951 1355 448,78

forest


E 1951 1356 332,89

forest


E 1951 1357/1 407

permanent grassland


E 1951 1357/3 16

permanent grassland


E 1951 1358 254,44 forest

22


E 1951 1359 83,11 water body


E 1951 1360 313,33 forest


E 1951 1361/1 52

permanent grassland


E 1951 1361/3 525

permanent grassland


E 1951 1362 397,22

forest


E 1951 1445 47,56

forest


E 1951 1446 397,22 permanent grassland


E 1951 1447 162,67 forest




E 1952 1277 1033,08 water body




E 1954 1477 87,25 forest




E 1383 750 808,04 arable land


E 1383 751 227,56 arable land


E 1997 1486 196,17 forest




E 1997 1488 659,31 forest

Číčov Ing. Milan Hostomský

and Ing. Eszter

Hostomská

E 1954

1477 174,5 forest Číčov Ing. Milan

Hostomský and Ing. Eszter

Hostomská

E 1954

1478 440,5 permanent grassland Číčov Ing. Milan


E 1383

750 832,53

arable land

23

Hostomská Číčov Ing. Milan


Hostomská

E 1383

751 234,46

arable land


and Ing. Eszter

Hostomská

E 1997



Hostomská

E 1997

1487 1430,13 permanent grassland Číčov Ing. Milan


Hostomská

E 1997



Hostomská

E 1349

1372/3 45,63 permanent grassland Číčov Ing. Milan


Hostomská

E 1349



Hostomská

E 1349

1374 58,88 arable land Číčov Ing. Milan


Hostomská

E 1350

1371 200,5

forest


and Ing. Eszter

Hostomská

E 1350

1372/1 280

permanent grassland


and Ing. Eszter

Hostomská

E 1337 1351/3 95,5 permanent grassland

24

Číčov Ing. Eszter Hostomská

E 761 1350/3 84,55

forest

Číčov Ing. Eszter Hostomská

E 761 1352/3 69,8 forest

Číčov Agricultural company Sokolce

E 1369

1391 168,67

forest


E 1369

1392 189

permanent grassland


E 1369 1393 42,39

forest

Číčov Ing. Richard

Gallas and Ing. Iveta Gallasová

E 919

1073 77,34

water body



E 919

1074/1 113,5

water body



E 919

1074/2 72,4

water body



E 919

1075 53,1

water body



E 1659

988 98,42

permanent grassland



E 1659

989 124,39

water body



E 1659

1127/1 102,75

water body


Gallas and

E 1659

1127/2 285,21

water body

25

Ing. Iveta Gallasová



E 1659

1128/1 190,58

water body



E 1659

1128/2 394,40

water body



E 1566

544 479,71

permanent grassland



E 1566

1129 19,93

water body



E 1566

1130 13,58

water body




Veľké Kosihy

Municipality of Veľké Kosihy

C 476 177 20 243

water body

Veľké Kosihy


C 476 198/2 638

water body

Veľké Kosihy


C 476 198/3 1 388

water body

Veľké Kosihy


C 476 198/4 346

water body

Veľké Kosihy


C 476 852 931

water body

Veľké Kosihy


C 476 854 310 592

water body

26

Veľké Kosihy


C 476 856/2 1 115

water body

Čilizská Radvaň

Bc. Eva Öllösová

C 1135 2079/4 144601 permanent grassland

WP5.2

Cadastral area

Former owner

Parcel type

Ownership certificate

Nr.

Parcel Nr.

Surface (m2)

Type of land

Číčov Ladislav Füssy

E 1006 826 46,44 forest


E 1368 820/1 26,78 forest


E 1369 1391 337,33 forest




E 1369 1393 84,78 forest


E 1953 1363 459,56 forest




E 1953 1364/3 94 permanent grassland


E 1953 1365 384,44 forest


E 1953 1366 157,78 water body


E 1951 3030 336,67 forest






E 1951 4039 448,78 forest


E 1951 2996 332,89 forest






E 1951 2290 254,44 forest


E 1951 748 83,11 water body

27


E 1951 2820 313,33 forest






E 1951 3575 397,22 forest


E 1951 428 47,56 forest




E 1951 1464 162,67 forest




E 1952 1277 399,15 water body




E 965 810 20

forest


E 965 827/1 12,78

forest


E 965 1731/3 137,11 arable land


E 965 1739 828,44

arable land


E 965 1740 1033,44

arable land


E 965 1741 1274,78

arable land


E 965 1742 1061,78

arable land


E 965 1743 981,11

arable land


E 965 1744 1234,44

arable land


E 965 1751 110,78

arable land

Čilizská Radvaň

Bc. Eva Öllösová

C 1135 2079/4 14412 permanent grassland

Číčov Karol Staraba

E 912 1168 2 0907 permanent grassland


E 912 1169 1 6146 permanent grassland


E 912 1170 1885 water body



28

Imeľ Júlia Jóbová E 1395 4769/74 290,5 water body Imeľ Júlia Jóbová E 2795 2100/10 2120,25 permanent grassland Imeľ Júlia Jóbová E 2795 3564/6 3194,5 permanent grassland Imeľ Júlia Jóbová E 2795 4346/1 2752 permanent grassland Imeľ Júlia Jóbová E 2795 4346/2 1565 permanent grassland Imeľ Júlia Jóbová E 2795 5482/6 60,25 permanent grassland Imeľ Júlia Jóbová E 2795 5582/7 314,75 permanent grassland

Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 2584 7621/4 3025,72 permanent grassland Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 2708 7618/4 62,69 arable land Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 2708 7619/3 42,75 permanent grassland Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 2708 7620/4 4,87 permanent grassland Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 2708 7623/1 8,3 forest Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 2708 7625/9 53,65 water body Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 2708 7628/3 7,91 arable land Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 3287 7618/5 97,38 arable land Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 3287 7619/2 56,25 permanent grassland Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 3375 7621/5 393,59 arable land Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 3378 7625/10 2,77 water body Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 3380 7615/3 1092,87 water body Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 4548 7621/6 459,25 permanent grassland Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 4549 7621/3 49,11 permanent grassland Nesvady Júlia Jóbová E 7103 7620/3 8,96 permanent grassland

Číčov Municipality of Číčov

E 1457 2075/1 4873

water body


E 1457 2075/2 151

water body


E 1457 2141 374

water body


E 1457 2142 263 arable land


E 1457 2145 665

water body


E 1457 2149 651

water body


E 1457 2153 615

water body


E 1457 2156 381

water body


E 1457 2159 338

water body


E 1457 2162 273

water body


E 1457 2167 701

water body


E 1457 2168 633 forest


C 741 1303 1515 forest


C 741 1850 8457 water body

29


C 741 2199 15216 other land


C 741 2231 2296 water body


C 741 2241 5286 other land


C 741 2242 1809 other land


C 741 2282 4751 forest


C 741 3838 7819 forest


C 741 3920 2679 water body

Tôň

Gejza Németh, Valéria

Némethová, Tibor

Leisztner, Ľudovít

Leisztner

E

586 925 4382

permanent grassland

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E

474 729 11 326

arable land

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 474

730 712

permanent grassland

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 474

731 2 302

arable land

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor

E 474

732 3 280

arable land

30


Leisztner

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 475

924 348,67

arable land

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 475

926 4795,66

arable land

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 475

927 4304

arable land

Tôň


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 475

928 952

permanent grassland

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E

671 1622/3 108

arable land

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 671

1623/2 4 417

arable land

31

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 671

1624/2 2 158

permanent grassland

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 671

1627/2 1 255

water body

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 671

1628/2 727

arable land

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 849

1621/2 1 001

permanent grassland

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 849

1621/4 382

permanent grassland

Kližská Nemá


Némethová, Tibor


Leisztner

E 849

1621/5 20

permanent grassland

Opatovský Sokolec

Edmund Fábianffy and Marta

C 884 1687/4 21698 arable land

32

Fábianffyová Opatovský

Sokolec Edmund Fábianffy and Marta

Fábianffyová

C 1388 1326/33 12179 arable land

Okoč Tomáš Puzsér, Štefan Lénárth

C 1809 2704/2 462 other land

Okoč Tomáš Puzsér, Štefan Lénárth

C 1809 2712/13 14118 arable land

Nesvady Ing. Zsolt Fördős

E 5732 2674/ 1 2 370 arable land


E 5732 2674/ 2 1 953

arable land


E 5732 4052/ 2 2 302

arable land


E 5732 4222/ 2 1 683

arable land


E 5732 5550/ 1 3 000

arable land


E 5732 6933/ 5 3 402

permanent grassland


E 5732 6934/ 4 5 025

permanent grassland


E 5732 6937/ 21 18

permanent grassland


E 5732 8598/ 2 1 798 arable land


E 5732 8599/ 2 1 687

permanent grassland


E 5732 8600 1 924

permanent grassland


E 5732 8601 2 230 arable land


E 5732 10565/ 1 2 715 permanent grassland


E 5732 10566/ 1 554 water body


E 5732 10567/ 1 327 permanent grassland


E 5732 10568/ 1 1 021 water body


E 5732 10569/ 1 219

permanent grassland


E 5732 10570/ 1 1 565

permanent grassland

Nesvady Ing. Zsolt E 5732 11065/ 1 176 permanent grassland

33

Fördős 1 Nesvady Ing. Zsolt

Fördős E 5732 11066/

1 252 permanent grassland


E 5732 11067/ 1 867 water body


E 5732 11068/ 1 2 777

arable land


E 5732 11069/ 1 137

arable land


E 5732 13153/ 2 557 arable land


E 5732 13970/ 2 2 715

permanent grassland


E 5732 13971/ 2 586

permanent grassland


E 5732 13972/ 2 1 568

permanent grassland


E 5732 13973 759

permanent grassland


E 5732 13974 219

permanent grassland


E 5732 13975 1 493

permanent grassland


E 5732 15122/ 1 7 467

permanent grassland


E 6831 13056 189

arable land

4. Future Perspectives Some of the restoration management was already done on the acquired land (e.g. mowing of grasslands, cutting of reed, etc.). As it was not possible (according to restricted time and financial sources) to implement conservation measures on all land purchased we elaborated this management plan counting with conservation management after project from other financial resources for further treatment divided according to different land types as follows:

Forests In case of old valuable forest stands we propose creation of non-management zones, on other forest land we want to continue with the typical activities of BROZ which we are implementing continuously in the area of Danube floodplain forests i.e. planting of native tree species (Acer platanoides, Alnus glutinosa, Carpinus betulus, Cerasus avium, Fraxinus angustifolia, Malus sylvestris, Populus × canescens, Populus alba, Populus nigra, Pyrus pyraster, Quercus robur, Salix alba, Salix fragilis, Tilia cordata, Ulmus laevis, Ulmus minor). Planting of trees will be done in two following ways: 1. Planting groups of native tree species between and into the plantations of non-native trees. 2. Planting of whole forest stands by native trees on the areas where non-native trees were logged and removed.

34

Creation of the forest habitats will be done by planting of young trees (1- 3 years old). Following three years after planting, the care for young trees will be provided to prevent damage from game browsing, overgrowing by weeds, etc. Invasive species are serious problem in floodplain forests. Removal of invasive plant species will be implemented on most threatened locations overgrown by neophytes. The gentlest method of treatment for removal will be selected. The action will focus on non-native tree species Fraxinus americana, Fraxinus lanceolata, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Ailanthus altissima, Negundo aceroides and partly also on Phallopia japonica/ bohemica, when occurring in forest habitats. Marking and preserving valuable trees and modification of logging will follow thanks to co-operation with foresters before logging – joint marking of valuable forest stands and solitary old native trees of outstanding values with foresters. E.g. trees of rare species (Ulmus sp., Alnus sp., Pyrus sp.), trees as source of seed for natural forest regeneration, trees important for nesting of birds, bats, instects, etc.

Permanent grasslands On overgrown habitats cutting of trees and shrubs will be implemented. The weeds and non-native tree species will be held back by appropriate chemicals. The purpose of the restoration management of the lowland grasslands and wet alluvial meadows is the transformation from the unfavourable conservational status to the state, when traditional form of use could be introduced, i.e. to renew mowing on overgrown parts of the sites. The restoration will include sowing of seeds collected from grasslands with natural species composition or alternatively transfer of hay. Long-term sustainable maintaining management should optimal follow by grazing of farm animals (cows, sheep, goats, horses).

Water bodies Dried-up, destroyed or isolated river branches will be restored by removal of sediments and other various barriers from the abandoned sections of the branches. Other measure will be applied on river branches and on the floodplain wetlands with the goal to improve the quality of the wetland and increase the aquatic habitat area, it will consist of restoration of artificially modified banks and of removal of sediments and waste from the bottom of the water bodies. Special type of water bodies covered by reed vegetation will be periodically restored by reed cutting (as already implemented in Nature Reserve and SCI SKUEV0077 Dunajské trstiny in 2011-2012).

Arable land, other land In these types of land purchase we see a big potential for improvement of the conservation status. These areas will be transferred to meadows by sowing of seeds collected from grasslands with natural species composition or alternatively transfer of hay. Planting of native tree species can be also applied.

35

Date post:	09-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vuongphuc
View:	218 times
Download:	4 times

DANUBEPARKS project – The Danube River Network … project – The Danube River Network of...

Documents