Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
to their destruction or impairment is prohibited
(Germany Report 2005). More recently, the 2007
National Strategy on Biological Diversity links
quantitative targets for improvements in ecologi-
cal wellbeing to other European Union legisla-
tion such as the Water Framework Directive and
Birds Directive (Germany Report 2008).
Further, wetland protection is included in
German legislation concerning pollution con-
trols and federal forestry, mining, and hunting
laws. This provides an additional measure of
protection for wetland habitats. German states
(or Länder) have the ability to further widen the
scope of this protection by enacting supplemen-
tary policies that may be implemented region-
ally and where applicable. Alternatively, states
can also provide permits for wetland conver-
sions when this is in the public interest or
where mitigation activities are employed; thus
balancing development goals with conservation
practices (Germany Report 2005).
The United Kingdom, meanwhile, incorpo-
rates both site-specii c and policy-based mecha-
nisms for wetland management and protection
(United Kingdom (UK) Report 2005). To that
end, Ramsar-designated wetland sites across the
United Kingdom and its territories are moni-
tored and protected under various existing
federal laws including, most notably, the Wild-
life and Countryside Act of 1981, the 2003 Water
Act, and align with European Union Water
Framework and Habitat directives (UK Report
2008). A targeted approach adopted by the gov-
ernment identii es key habitats and species and
necessitates the development and implementa-
tion of action plans for their protection.
Overall, policy adopted across the United
Kingdom is largely designed to incorporate
Ramsar prescribed best-use wetland practices,
monitor signii cant sites, encourage land-use
policies that accommodate wetland habitats,
and implement conservation strategies that are
holistic (UK Report 2005). All of these goals are
supported by regulatory frameworks and imple-
mentation plans like the Estuary Plan, Shoreline
Plan, or Water Management Plan (UK Report
2005).
In the United Kingdom, governmental agen-
cies have also made forging partnerships with
private stakeholders an important aspect of
their conservation goals. Beyond these efforts,
non-proi t conservation organizations are active
in the United Kingdom. One example is the
Wildl ower & Wetlands Trust, which has engaged
in wetland habitat and species protection and
restoration over the past 50 years. The Trust is
now also supporting wetland conservation and
education programs in countries across the
globe (Wildl ower and Wetlands Trust 2008).
14.3.4 Central Europe
Running through central Europe from Estonia
to Poland and from Slovakia to Bulgaria are a
series of countries that were once part of the
Soviet Union or came under Soviet domination
and are now sovereign countries. Many are
now members, or candidate members, of the
European Union and are working to implement
EU standards in all aspects including wetlands.
During the Soviet period, wetlands, along with
other natural environments were neglected or
treated as economic resources to be exploited.
In Estonia, for example, bogs were drained for
forestry and agriculture (Fig. 14-7), and peat
was mined for fuel (Fig. 14-8). Bogs in north-
eastern Estonia were heavily impacted by dep-
osition of l y ash from nearby power plants
fueled by oil shale; pH and calcium increased
and
Sphagnum
mosses disappeared (Karofeld
1996).
In spite of this bureaucratic situation, some
progress was made on bog research and con-
servation. The Ramsar Treaty led to protected
status for several essential wetlands. In 1981,
mire protection areas were designated in wet-
lands that were considered most important for
hydrologic aspects and for richness in berries.
Additional mire reserves were established in the
1980s and 90s. Estonia therefore has a substan-
tial number of wetlands, with a large total area,
in protected status today (Fig. 14-9).
Sphagnum
moss is beginning to grow again in bogs of
northeastern Estonia following reduction in l y
ash emissions from power plants (Karofeld
1996). The mires of Estonia now attract consid-
erable interest from scientists and ecotourists
as exemplary wetlands in Europe, where only
