Časopis vydává Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny ČR ve spolupráci se Správou
jeskyní ČR. V tištěné podobě vychází již od roku 1946.

cs / en

Výzkum a dokumentace

Ochrana přírody 3/2014 24. 8. 2014 Výzkum a dokumentace Tištěná verze článku v pdf

P. Lustyk, V. Oušková, L. Kratochvílová & K. Chobot: 2013 Report on the Conservation Status of Natur

Hodnocení stavu a trendů evropsky významných typů přírodních stanovišť

autoři: Pavel Lustyk, Karel Chobot, Lucie Kratochvílová, Veronika Oušková

P. Lustyk, V. Oušková, L. Kratochvílová & K. Chobot: 2013 Report on the Conservation Status of Natur

In 2013, pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, as amended later, commonly known as the Habitats Directive, the Czech Republic as a European Union Member State submitted an assessment report on natural habitats.

At the EU level, the reports are a necessary and due to their extent and unified structure unique information source. They are submitted each six years: the 2013 reports have been the second ones. For the individual habitats, the reports were elaborated separately for the Pannonian biogeograhical region (south-eastern Moravia) and for the Continental region. In total, 60 natural habitat types listed in Annex to the Habitats Directive occur in the Czech Republic (58 in the Continental, 35 in Pannonian biogeographical regions). Thus, 93 assessments were developed by the Nature Conservation Agency of the Czech Republic on behalf of the Czech Republic. For drafting the assessments, the following parameters are used: distribution and possible range in the Czech Republic, the area currently covered by it, effects and threats to it, structure and functions and future prospects of the respective natural habitat type. The updated natural habitat mapping layer as of June, 2012 was used as a primary data source. For assessing the individual parameters, expert opinion was also largely used.

Although the comparison between results obtained in the Czech Republic in 2007 and 20013 looks at first sight quite optimistically, a real improvement in natural habitat quality is rather rare. The current results, in comparison with the 2007 ones, are significantly influenced by better and more precise data on the individual natural habitat types gathered in the course of updating habitat mapping data across the country.