Expert Group on the Birds and Habitats Directives

DRAFT MINUTES

EXPERT GROUP ON THE BIRDS AND HABITATS DIRECTIVES

established under Directive 92/43/EEC & Directive 2009/147/EC

1stMeeting of 15-16 October 2014

Brussels, Centre Albert Borschette & DG ENV, Room C

Chairman:Stefan Leiner, Head of the Nature Unit, DG Environment

List of participants:see Annex I

Absent Member States: Greece

1GENERAL

a.Adoption of the Agenda

The agenda was adopted, with one additional point under AOB (progress of the Bats multispecies conservation plan).

b. Update on the Nature Fitness check

The Commission updated the Expert Group about the Fitness Check evaluation of EU Nature Legislation (as part ofthe REFIT programme) and the steps necessary to ensure its completion. It was first recalled that the Fitness check is an “all-Commission” exercise (not only DG ENV). Its mandate includes an evaluation on the following five categories:

Effectiveness: Have the objectives been met?
Efficiency: Were costs reasonable in relation to benefits?
Coherence:Is the policy in line with other (sectorial) policies?
Relevance:Is the EU action still necessary?
EU Added-value

25 questions have been developed for these 5 categoriesto evaluate the Habitats and Birds Directives. A contractor is beingselected to assist the Commission in carrying out this task. The selected contracting consortium will have the necessary multi-disciplinary expertise, including legal, scientific, economicand policy integration skills. The contractor will support the Commission in collecting evidence, synthesize and structure this information in order to answer the 25 questions. In addition to reviewing available information there will be consultation with key stakeholder groups in all Member States: This will involve the competent authorities for nature legislation, other public sector, environmental NGOs and private sector in all Member States.

The contractor will examine the situation in greater detail in 10 representative Member States. Anonline public consultation will also be set up, in order to collect further evidence from civil society. There are also plans for a dedicated conferencein autumn 2015 to discuss the draft results of the fitness check. The exercise will be finalized in the beginning of 2016, with a final analysis provided by the Commission.

The Commission invited MS to already start their preparations to contribute to the fitness check and to ensuregood co-ordination with a view toproviding relevant information and inputs in a timely manner to achieve a high quality result in this critical exercise. The contractor will start to contact MS in the beginning of 2015.

The Commission clarified that a review of the legislation does not necessarily imply a revision. The results of the fitness check will provide an informed basis to consider future policy options in relation to the nature legislation.

Main comments made by MS:

How other sectors other than Environment are to be selected in order to assess the fitness of the Nature Directives in the context of each MS? The Commission clarifiedthat the purpose is to get feedback from a range ofsectors across the MSfor which the nature Directives have implications. e.g.: renewable energy, agriculture, fisheries, etc. The Commission is open to views and advice to see which sectors would be the most relevant ones.
It was recalled that limited data is available for the Marine Environment, and Commission was asked to ensure that proper attention is given to the marine and fisheries sectors in the exercise.
How to ensure coordination during the consultation process in different administrations and ministries of a given Member State was raised, especially with a view to avoid, where possible, contradictory statements and positions. The Commission assured MS delegates that the members of the Habitats Committee would be the focal points, unless the Nature Director in a MS provided an alternative focal point, and will be contacted first before any contact is made with other ministries.

c. Update on the Structured Implementation and Information Framework (SIIF)

The European Commission presented an update of the SIIF for nature. A study is being undertaken to examine to what extent information related to the implementation of the Habitats and Birds Directives is available online and disseminated actively to the public. The concept of SIIF was announced in 2012 and piloted first under the Urban Waste Water Directive, ensuring that information was made available for the general public on this topic. This has involved a pilot study to collect information on the availability and easiness of access to online information. 10 MS have beencontacted for further details, with lessons and good practices drawn from their experiences.

A dedicated workshop will take place on Oct. 24thto share the draft results of the study led by a consortium called ARCADIS. The workshop will include discussions and possible recommendations, allowing forfeedback from nature experts, information and public access experts, etc. The Commission also underlined the relevance of this study to the Fitness Check of EU nature legislation.

2NATURA 2000

a. Natura 2000 site boundary changes

A presentation was given by the Commission as a reminder of the rules applying for reporting Natura 2000 site boundary changes (see presentation "Point 2a. Boundary changes to sites" on Circa-BC).

The Commission noticed that an increasing number of changes proposed by MS raise significant issues, while boundaries and changes on the ground can now be more easily monitored by DG.ENV with the help of new tools. The Commission also announced its intention to add further improvements to the Natura 2000 Viewer, which will allow users of the tool to visualise site boundary changes over time. The Commission asked MS to very carefully review internally whether boundary changes are really necessary and if they can be justified according to the principles outlined in the Document DocHab 05-06/02 - Updating of the Natura 2000 Standard Data Forms and Database(see Annex 2) before they are sent to the Commission. MS were also advised to inform the Commission about planed changes before they officially submit a new Natura 2000 database.

Main comments made by MS:

A MS asked if these rules were applying to SACs in the same way as to SCIs. The Commission replied that this is indeed the case.
Some concerns were raised on changes due to more accurate data on habitats and species coverage which could lead to national and socio-economic pressures to delete parts of the area which do not have these habitats and species in a given site. The Commission reminded that MS must be restrictive towardssuch pressures given that this could challenge the integrity of a Site (including buffer zones) and/orits overall management.
A MS asked about the existence of acceptance thresholds for boundary changes, and if article 2.3 of the Habitats Directive could be used to declassify a site. The Commission answered that there were no percentage rules in that procedure and that if changes are duly explained and acceptable according to the rules, substantial boundary changes can occur. As for article 2.3, the Commission stressed that this article as such was not to be considered to justify boundary changes of particular sites (as already established by court rulings).
Some MS explained that changes in spatial data are often due to technical matters (digitalisation) or results of scientific errors. The Commission confirmed that such changes areusually accepted.

b. Guidance documents

1 –Updating of the guidance document regarding the provisions of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive.

The Commission explained as an introduction that the updating of the guidance document "Managing Natura 2000 – the provisions of Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC"had been on the agenda of the previous meeting of the group where the background and rationale for the proposed changes had been presented already. The need for this updating comes primarily from relevant Rulings of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU); It takes also into account recent Commission sectoral guidelines as well as Commission notes on SAC designation, conservation objectives and management measures, and will result in a shorter, consolidated guidance document as it will also integrate the 2007 update of the Article 6(4) section of the guide. As a whole the envisaged changes confirm and clarify further the current interpretations.The Expert Group was then invited by the Commission to consider the draft update of the guide and express its opinion on it.

Main comments made by MS:

Several MS welcomed this consolidated, comprehensive version of the guidance document, including the document summarizing the CJEU rulings.
Some MS asked the Commission to provide a version of the updated document with "tracked changes", especially regarding aspects that are new due to recent CJEU Rulings. The Commission agreed to upload a "tracked changes" version as soon as possible.
One Member State expressed its interest in seeing more information on the differences between mitigation and compensation measures. The Commission highlighted that a specific sectionis now dedicated to the mitigation concept and related CJEU rulings.
A clarification was asked regarding a CJEU ruling specifying that "purely administrative measures or voluntary measures"were not sufficient for the purposes of Art. 6(2).

The Commission concluded that the draft document was generally welcomed. Member States are invited to make written comments to the document by 30 November 2014 so that an updated version can be sent to the members of the Expert Group in advance of the next Expert Group meeting. The Commission would seek approval of the guidance at this next Expert Group meeting.

2 - Updates regarding thematic guidance documents

Guidance on "Natura 2000 and forests" –final consultations and discussions are currently ongoing following the conclusions of the ad-hoc working group; a revised draft should be available for the end of the year. The document will then be submitted to the members of the Expert Group on Birds and Habitats Directives and the Standing Forestry Committee in early 2015 and a final draft will be submitted in spring 2015 for approval, in order to be published by June 2015.
Guidance on "Natura 2000 and energy infrastructures" – The technical work for this document is completed. The document includes a section on marine infrastructures. This document willnow be submitted to consultation with other Commission services and will then be published.
Guidance on "Natura 2000 and hydropower" – The technical work is ongoing with the support of external consultants. A first draft will be available in early 2015 for consultation.

c. Article 8 – Financing Natura 2000

A presentation was given by the Commission on "Financing Natura 2000", in the context of the Prioritized Action Frameworks (PAFs), Operational Programmes (OPs) and LIFE (see presentation "Point 2c – Financing Natura 2000).

Main comments made by MS:

Several MS asked for feedback from the Commission regarding their PAFs. The Commission explained that individual feedback was only provided where there was an obvious problem.
MSs also expressed concerns about the real scale of investments in nature and biodiversity from different OPs and about the level of consistency with the PAFs. They enquired how the Commission envisages future steps for the PAFs.

The Commission explained that an internal reflection process was currently ongoing on the next steps. Once the OPs have been adopted and data on allocations is available, a paper is envisaged to summarise the results as a basis for a structured debate on this matter.The Commission is interested in receiving the feedback from the MS about the PAFs, their usefulness and the level of consistency with the OPs. The form of this consultation has not been decided yet, but ad hoc feedback from the MS is more than welcome. A more structured debate will take place after the Commission has a better picture of the programming exercise (including aggregated data on allocations to nature related categories of expenditure). The policies which are crucial for financing nature (agriculture, regional and marine policies) will undergo a mid-term review. It would be important to have the updated PAFs for this review to better influence the process.

In conclusion, the Commission suggested that a discussion onthe update and review of PAFs could be organized at the next expert group, with more information and data available from the OPs.

d.Natura 2000 Biogeographical Process

The European Commission briefly presented the recent developments of the Natura 2000 Biogeographical Processes as well as theNatura 2000 Platform, which has been created as a supportivetool for implementation. Recent and planned developments were presented, as well as the platform statistics. The kick-off Natura 2000 Seminar for launching the Process for the Continental, Pannonian, Black-Sea and Steppic regions will take place in Luxembourg from 29 June to 1 July 2015. The kick-off seminar for the Marine regions is scheduled to take place in St. Malo (France) in early May 2015 (see presentation "Point 2d – Biogeographical process" on CIRCA-BC).

The Commission encourages follow-up events with the support of the Commissions’ contractor, as has happened in Slovakia, the UK and the Boreal region, all of which have proven very useful. Cross-border, bilateral and multilateral events are particularly encouraged. The Commission welcomes the growing interest and positive results of these continuous processes and its implication in encouraging networking and cooperation, raising awareness, increasing stakeholder mobilisation and fostering a sharper focus on common priorities.

Main comments made by MS:

One MS mentioned the objectives of an upcoming seminar to be organized in 2015 for the Macaronesian Biogeographical region.Logistics and resources needswere assessed with the support of the Commission and its contractor.

3REPORTING

a. Reporting under Art. 17/12

1 – Reporting process and preliminary results

A presentation was given by the European Environmental Agency (EEA) showing the time-planning and preliminary results (see presentation "Point 3a - Preliminary results 17-12" on Circa-BC).

The EEA also mentioned issues regarding the baseline for Target 1 of the Biodiversity strategy that were discussed during the reporting group meeting.

Main comments made by MS:

Several MS expressed concerns on altering the baseline of Target 1(due to better data). It was stressed that in any case it would be hard to compare data/assessments; a focus on trends would be more reliable.
Several options to deal with the problem were mentioned, including only looking at genuine changes and presenting a reservation on the baseline.
Some MS regarded the exercise of re-assessing the baseline at national level as a supplementary burden that could not be achieved in time, and would not always reflect the multiple factors leading to an "unknown" status for a given species of habitat.
Some MS highlighted that the same situation might occur for the next reporting period, as more accurate data will be available on some species and habitats that were previously considered as ‘unknown’.

Thestill numerous "unknown" statuses of species and habitat types is greatly impeding the EEA and ETC/BD work to compare and aggregate data at biogeographical and EU level. The EEA and European Commission suggested that this reassessment should first be realized at EU level by the EEA and ETC/BD as a pilot to see how this would influence the baseline and the progress made so far. The MS generally agreed on this proposition.

2 – Technical report and Composite report

The Commission briefly presented the proposed outline of the composite report called "State of Nature in the European Union" (see presentation "point 3a – structure of composite report" on Circa-BC). The composite report will be a short report to Council and Parliament (about 15 pages) presenting the key results, with some case studies illustrating the main findings. A more detailed technical report prepared by the EEA will be annexed. The Commission welcomes comments on the outline and encouraged MS to submit best practice examples or case studies that theyconsider as noteworthy examples of maintaining or restoring conservation status.

Main comments made by MS:

A MS asked for clarifications on the nature and content of the composite report (technical or/and political report) and if it will mention current issues regarding the limitation of available data. The Commission explained that, while the composite report will not set out new policy it shouldcontain the main findings of the assessment. It will constitute a criticalinput to the Fitness check as well asthe Biodiversity Strategy Mid-term Review.Issues regarding data availability as well as the baseline and progress towards Target 1 will be covered and the report is expected to include a few illustrative examples.
A MS suggested that for migrating birds the report should also underlinethe importance of processes occurring outside the EU.

b. Derogation Reporting – the new Habides+ tool

A short presentation was given by the Commission on the newdraft online Habides+ tool (see presentation "Point 3b – New Habides+" on CIRCA-BC).

Main comments made by MS:

Several MS welcomed this new tool and asked for clarification as to when this new tool will apply, what the main changes are compared to the current tool, if this tool will be a supplementary burden for local authorities and how and when the public search option for derogation data will be made available. The Commission replied that as regards the format (i.e. the reporting fields) few changes will occur, some sections were slightly reorganized, but no additional sections or obligations were added. The new online version of the tool will be easier for MS and their local contact pointsto use, hence alleviating the burden arising from technical constraints linked to an offline tool.

As this tool is still being tested, the use of this tool will apply from the end of 2015 onwards for the Birds Directive derogations and from 2016 onwards for the Habitats Directive derogations. Therefore, for the time being, the current version of Habides shall still be used. The public search option will only be developed in a second step once the Habides+tool is finalised.

4POINTS RELATING TO THE HABITATS DIRECTIVE ONLY

a. Streamlining nature/marine/water