Can Natura 2000 Sites Benefit from River Basin Management Planning Under a Changing Climate? Lessons from Germany - Wetlands and Water Framework Directive: Protection, Management and Climate Change - page 41

management plans primarily promote developmental aspects in Natura 2000 sites or
whether conservation objectives in these areas are also supported, and if so to what
extent (Stratmann et al. 2012b , p. 105).
However, not every management plan reveals the extent to which adequately
concrete nature conservation objectives have contributed to the speci

cation of
management plan objectives. In order to understand the true facts of each case, it
would be necessary to assess background documentation and/or conduct interviews
(Wendler and Albrecht 2012 , p. 37).

Further needs for coordination and good practice examples

￿

Potential con fl icts can usually be solved if measures are coordinated — spatially

and contentwise synchronised and adapted to one another (cf. also Fuchs et al.

2010 ). In the course of drawing up the management plans, the necessary processes
for agreement between water management and nature conservation have clearly
begun, but they can in no way be regarded as complete. For a total of six types of
measure in Germany as a whole there is, for example, overlapping between the
planning units stipulated for the measure and between 67 and 95 % of HD areas
with species protected under the directive that are sensitive to the measure in
question. Therefore, solutions have to be found on subsequent planning levels for
the con

—

icts documented in the management plans (Hofmann and Schmidt 2012 ,
p. 220 et seq.).
The intensive involvement of representatives of nature conservation on all levels
of water management planning is the basic precondition for the emergence of win-
win situations. A positive example of this is the specialist agreement made between
water management and nature conservation administrations in Bavaria with regards
to the hydromorphological programme of measures (Stratmann et al. 2012b , p. 117).
In the course of drawing up this programme, Natura 2000 sites representing water-
dependent habitat types where the habitat type was in

fl

uenced by surface waters
were considered. The water-relevant Natura 2000 conservation objectives speci

fl

cto
the areas in question were translated into corresponding hydromorphological mea-
sures, and agreement between the water management and nature conservation
administrations reached. This procedure was documented in the environmental
report for the PoM.
Frequently, however, it is not possible to determine the nature of cooperation
between water management and nature conservation, at least not from the manage-
ment plans and PoMs. This is partly because in many plans the composition of
advisory boards is not detailed and individual actors remained unnamed. However, in
all cases where the composition of advisory boards or forums or other participatory
institutions was documented, then nature conservation representatives were included.
In addition, representatives of agriculture, industry and commerce, mining, shipping,
and cities and municipalities were involved (Stratmann et al. 2012b , p. 117 et seq.).
Formal public participation in the drafting of management plans varied greatly.
In Bavaria, ca. 7,000 opinions were submitted and over 10,000 completed ques-
tionnaires were returned by post from France and Wallonia regarding the RBMP for
the Rhine River. In the light of this considerable amount of participation, it should