Diverse Habitat Reconstructions in the Őrség National Park in Hungary

General

National Id:

HU_4

Site name:

Csörnöc-Herpenyő river, Vas County, Nádasd village

Summary:

There are three measures applied in the national park area primarily for nature rehabilitation, but all measures have water retention aspects. (1) Creating ponds in the forest where run off from forestry roads are collected. The main goal is to create safe breeding ground for reptiles instead of temporary sumps on the roads. (2) Re-vegetating shelterbelts (groves, wetlands) in agricultural land where 50 years ago these landscape elements were destroyed for agro efficiency reasons. (3) Building closures in the drainage channels to enable the flooding of the alder (Alnus) forest and wet meadow to improve their natural quality an important site in the ecological corridor along the stream Csörnöc.

NUTS Code:

Nyugat-Dunántúl

RBD code:

HU1000

Transboundary:

0

Data provider:

Gábor Ungvári, REKK

Source(s):

Komplex élőhelyrehabilitációs tevékenység az Őrségi Nemzeti Park Igazgatóság működési területén.Complex habitat reconstruction in the Őrség National Park

NWRM(s) implemented in the case study:

Wetland restoration and management

Buffer strips and hedges

Site information

Climate zone:

warm temperate moist

Mean annual rainfall:

600 - 900 mm

Mean rainfall unit:

mm/year

Type:

Case Study Info

Light or indepth?:

Light

Monitoring maintenance

Monitoring impacts effects:

0

Performance

Performance impact estimation method:

Unknown

Lessons, risks, implications...

Key lessons:

Rehabilitation of habitats where the initial status is still remembered and the land is already publicly owned is a "low hanging fruit" to implement. EU funds have an important role to make these changes happen. While at the same time these good examples are the first but not sufficient elements to initiate similar changes in privately owned agricultural lands

Success factor(s):

Type	Role	Comments
Existing staff and consultant knowledge	main factor
Financing possibilities	main factor

Financing:

Type	Comments
EU-funds: Cohesion and regional development funds

Barrier:

Driver:

Type	Role	Comments
Organisation committed to it	main driver	The financial sources provided the possibility for implementing measures that were considered necessary.
Availability of subsidies	main driver

Socio-economic

Costs investment:

194400

Costs investment information:

EUR 2012 Exchange rate 1st component breeding ponds 22,000€ 2nd component habitat mosaics 154,300€ 3rd component closures 18,100€

Costs capital:

194400

Costs land acquisition:

2100

Costs land acquisition unit:

€ (total value)

Costs operation maintenance:

560

Costs operational:

260

Costs operational information:

1st component cleaning of the ponds

Costs maintenance:

300

Costs maintenance information:

2nd component for ten years initial care for the new habitat mosaicss

Information on Ecosystem improved biodiversity:

1st component: Collected run off in forest provide safe conditions for reptiles to breed - habitat provision. Flood security was not named among the services because the small scale of the sites. 2nd component, habitat mosaics in agricultural land provide habitat service, and amenity services. The nutrient reduction potential was not named. 3rd component the closure of the drainage channel provides stability to the wetland-forest ecosystem (amenities). It also enhances biomass production. Decreasing run off is obvious, but its scale is small in itself. The site is an important element of the migration path along the stream †“ habitat services.

Policy, general governance and design targets

Policy description:

Environmental degradation due to former agricultural and forestry practices.

Part of wider plan:

0

Policy pressure:

Policy requirement directive:

Policy impact:

Policy wider plan:

Policy area:

Policy target:

Target purpose
Improved Biodiversity

Design & implementations

Application scale:

Field Scale

Age:

1

Performance timescale:

1 - 4 years

Area subject to Land use change or Management/Practice change (ha):

13100

Favourable preconditions:

Positive way: The areas belong to the National Park only small territories were required to be purchased

Design contractual arrangement:

Design consultation activity:

Design land use change:

Design authority:

Authority type	Role	Responsibility	Name	Comments
Other	Implementation		Årség National Park Directorate	National Park

Log in to post comments

Last updated: 12 Jan 2015 | Top

Miscellanous

Main menu

Diverse Habitat Reconstructions in the Őrség National Park in Hungary

Partners