# European Red List of Habitats Table

Habitat Description:
These are coniferous woodlands of shallow to deep peats and peaty mineral soils sustained by high ground water in gentle depressions on plains, on river terraces and at the margins of treeless mires throughout the boreal and more locally in the nemoral zones. The Pinus mire woodland can develop on a clearly ombrotrophic active bog surface on deep peat, but it can also be minerotrophic, located on shallower peaty soils at mire margins, though it could be more extensive on the mire surface. Tree cover can be sparse with low-growing individuals when the associated flora is very similar to the open mire surface, while under more closed canopies, shade-tolerant species prevail. An uneven age structure among the trees is characteristic of natural sites. Pinus species are the canopy dominant, mostly Pinus sylvestris but there are distinct subtypes with Pinus mugo s.l. (including Pinus uncinata ssp. uliginosa = P. rotundata, Pinus x rhaetica, Pinus mugo s.str., Pinus x ascendens). Pinus growth forms vary from upright tree form to more compact low-growth forms. Picea abies ssp. abies and ssp. obovata, Betula pubescens and Salix spp. are common associates. The field layer has such dwarf shrubs as Vaccinium myrtillus, V. uliginosum, V. oxycoccos, V. vitis-idaea, Ledum palustre, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Rubus chamaemorus with Eriophorum vaginatum, Carex globularis and peat-forming Sphagna like S. angustifolium, S. fuscum and S. magellanicum with big pleurocarpous mosses on drier hummocks. Trickles of moving water can sustain more minerotrophic species such as Menyanthes trifoliata, Equisetum fluviatile, E. palustre and Comarum palustre.
Indicators of quality:
• No forest exploitation.
• Intact natural mire hydrology.
• Natural composition of canopy with dominant Pinus species.
• Structural diversity/complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers.
• Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi.
• Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity.
• Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora and fauna).
• No signs of eutrophication or pollution
Characteristic species:
Tree canopy: Pinus sylvestris, Pinus mugo, P. x rhaetica, P. x ascendens s.l., Pinus uncinata ssp. uliginosa, Betula pubescens, Frangula alnus.
Field layer: Vaccinium uliginosum, V. oxycoccos, Ledum palustre, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum, Eriophorum vaginatum, E. angustifolium, Carex globularis, Molinia caerulea, Andromeda polifolia, Drosera rotundifolia.
Bryophytes: Sphagnum russowii, S. fallax, S. flexuosum, S. fuscum, S.m capillifolium, S.magellanicum, Dicranum bergeri, Polytrichum commune, P. strictum, Mylia anomala, Aulacomnium palustre.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.D Boreal bog conifer woodland
G3.E Temperate bog conifer woodland
EuroVegChecklist alliances:
Eriophoro-Pinion sylvestris Passarge 1968
Vaccinio uliginosi-Pinion sylvestris Passarge 1968
Annex I:
91D0 Bog woodland
Emerald:
G3.D Boreal bog conifer woodland
G3.E Nemoral bog conifer woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.1 Boreal Forest
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
11.1 Conifer dominated or mixed mire forests
VME:
Boreal and hemiboreal pine forests

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This is an azonal habitat type, which occurs in several biogeographic regions.

Map Description:
The map is very incomplete, but potential distribution is given (based on Annex I type 91D0) for the EU. Data sources: EVA, Art17.

Comment EU28:
The area is without countries which gave data for G3.D/E only

Comment EU28+:
The area is without Norway and other countries which gave data for G3.D/E only

Trends in Quantity:
There is a 35% decrease in the EU 28 region, calculated with trend data based on all countries except Austria and Latvia. Calculating trends in quantity for the EU 28+ region was not possible, since trend data were missing from Norway. The greatest decrease (55%) occurred in Finland, which also has the largest area of this habitat. The most important reason for the decline has been by far the drainage of peatlands for forestry. The area of the habitat is currently more or less stable. In the future the habitat will decrease in the nemoral and boreonemoral zones as the threats continue to persist and will remain stable in the boreal zone, where drainage of new peatland sites for forestry is not practiced any more.
Austria, Romania, Slovenia, Norway, Slovakia and France have reported this type and G3.Db Picea mire woodland together. In these cases areas above are given in the form 0-total, i.e. assuming that the area could be anything from 0 km2 to the total reported by the country. Trend calculations for EU 28 were made using both 0 km2 and the total reported. The result did not differ much, since all of these countries, except Norway, had a very small area of this type.
In the territorial data of some countries it is unclear whether drained mires are included in the reported area or not. For instance, in the territorial data of Sweden the area of the habitat has increased 13.5% in the past 50 years, even though it is known that some drainage has occurred during that time. On the other hand, the territorial data of Finland reports area of undrained mires only, which explains the drastic decline.

Trends in Quality:
There has been a slight decline (30%) in the quality of this habitat, affecting 28% of its extent, calculated based on trend data from all countries except Austria, Slovakia, Italy, Estonia and Latvia. Calculating a trend in quality for the EU 28+ region was not possible, since quality data from Norway were missing. The degradation of this habitat has been both abiotic and biotic. The most important reasons for the decline in quality are drainage of peatlands for forestry and forest cuttings. The current trend is decreasing in almost all countries, and it is possible that in the future climate change will also have negative effects on the quality of this habitat type.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Less than 50% of the current distribution of the habitat type lies within the EU28. There are large areas of this habitat in Russia and in Norway, and some area also in other countries outside EU 28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a very large area and a wide distribution in Europe.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has a very large area and a wide distribution in Europe.

Pressures and Threats:
Drainage of peatlands for forestry, forest cuttings, peat extraction, eutrophication due to pollution (especially on ombrotrophic and oligotrophic sites), and climate change are the main threats to this habitat. In many countries, drainage of new peatland sites is not practiced any more. There is not much scientific knowledge available on development of bog ecosystems with developing secondary stands after clear-cutting. The influence of climate change is likely to increase in the future.

Conservation and Management:
The most common approaches currently involve establishing protected areas/sites, establishing wilderness areas, restoring/improving habitats, usually by restoring hydrological conditions and adapting forest management. Some of the additional actions needed include further optimizing the use of funds for conservation (what kind of areas are chosen for conservation and where), further improving methods for conservation/nature management in managed forests (e.g. regarding deadwood), adptation of spatial planning (roads, etc.), and bringing climate change under control.

Conservation Status:
91D0: ALP FV, ATL U2, BOR U1, CON U1, MAC U1, PAN U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The habitat has a potential to recover, but recovery will be very slow. It always requires restoration of hydrological conditions.

Summary:
This habitat comprises various Pinus woodlands growing on shallow to deep peats and peaty mineral soils sustained by high ground water in gentle depressions on plains, on river terraces and at the margins of treeless mires throughout the boreal and more locally in the nemoral zones, though more scattered further south and west. An uneven age structure among the trees is characteristic of natural sites but tree cover can be sparse with low-growing individuals when the associated flora is very similar to the open mire surface, while under more closed canopies, shade-tolerant species prevail. The field layer has dwarf shrubs, peat-forming Sphagna with big pleurocarpous mosses on drier hummocks. Trickles of moving water can sustain a more minerotrophic flora. Drainage of peatlands for forestry, forest cuttings, peat extraction, eutrophication due to pollution and climate change will continue to be the most important pressures in the future. Establishing protected areas, controlling hydrology and improving forestry are conservation needs.

References:
Bohn, U., Gollub, G., Hettwer, C., Neuhauslova, Z., Rause, T., Schlüter, H. and Weber, H. 2004. Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz.
Council of Europe. 2010. Interpretation Manual of the Emerald Habitats. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Davies, C.E., Moss, D. and Hill, M.O. 2004. EUNIS Habitat Classification, revised. Report to the European Topic Centre, European Environment Agency.
European Commission DG Environment. 2007. Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. Strasbourg: European Commission DG Environment.
European Environment Agency. 2006. European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006, Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. and Rodwell, J.S. 2013. Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

Criterion A Text:
During the past 50 years there has been a 35% reduction in the quantity of this habitat in the EU 28, based on territorial data, and the habitat is therefore assessed as Vulnerable under criterion A1. Data on quantitative trends in Austria, Latvia, Norway and Serbia are missing. A relatively large area of this habitat type may lie within Norway, and, due to the lack of quantitative data, the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient under criterion A in the EU 28+. There is no information on future or historic reductions for this habitat type.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat is very widely distributed and occupies a very large area. Its extent of occurrence (EOO) is larger than 50,000 km2 and its area of occupancy (AOO) is larger than 50. It is therefore assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
In the past 50 years, 28% of the habitat area in the EU 28 was affected by a slight reduction in quality (30% relative severity), and this habitat is therefore assessed as Least Concern under criteria C/D1. The type of quality degradation was usually both abiotic and biotic. A majority of the area with reduced quality was affected with mild severity. Trend data of qualitative degradation were missing in Austria, Estonia, Italy, Latvia, Norway, Serbia, and Slovakia. A relatively large part of the area of this type may lie within Norway, and this habitat is, therefore, assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion C/D in the EU 28+.

Criterion E Text:
There is no analysis available on the probability of collapse of this habitat, which is therefore assessed as Data Deficient under criterion E.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Vulnerable under criterion A1 in the EU 28, as there has been a 35% reduction in quantity over the past 50 years. However, the area of the habitat is currently stable, since drainage of new peatland sites for forestry is not practiced any more in Northern Europe. The habitat quality continues to decline in most EU 28 countries. Trend data on reduction in quantity were missing from Austria, Latvia, Norway and Serbia. Trend data on reduction in quality was missing from Austria, Estonia, Italy, Latvia, Norway, Serbia and Slovakia. Six of the countries (including Norway) reported their data of this type combined with the type G3.Db Picea mire woodland. This habitat type is assessed as Data Deficient in the EU 28+ region since a relatively large part of its area may lie within Norway but precise values are unknown due to the combination of this habitat type with type G3. Db Picea mire woodland.

Contributors:
Type description: J. Rodwell & A. Ssymank
Territorial data: S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, L. Aunina, E. Bendiksen, C. Bita-Nicolae, G. Buffa, A. Carni, M. Chytry, J. Dahlgren, R. Delarze, M. Dimitrov, P. Finck, N. Juvan, Z. Kacki, K.J. Kirby, T. Kontula, V. Rasomavicius, U. Raths, B. Renaux, U. Riecken, I. Sell, A. Ssymank, V. Stupar, M. Valachovic, W. Willner
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G1.5 Broadleaved bog woodland on acid peat

Habitat Description:
This habitat is broadleaved deciduous woodland on wet acid, oligotrophic peat on the surfaces of bogs or transition mires, around pools and along laggs throughout the Atlantic and into the Boreal zones; more locally, where ground water conditions permit, it occurs also in the Continental zone. The woodland is typically dominated by Betula pubescens, the canopy is often only a few metres tall and the trees sometimes have a naturally decrepit appearance, infected early with Piptoporus. Alnus glutinosa is generally excluded from the canopy because of nutrient shortage. There is never more than a minority component of conifers, though Pinus sylvestris increasingly replaces Betula as the dominant in similar situations in the colder Boreal zone and as a pioneer species in Massif central. Deciduous woody associates, such as shrubby Salix spp. and Frangula alnus can occur, though typically at low cover and never forming an extensive understorey. The field layer generally shows strong continuity with the adjacent bog vegetation and can be quite luxuriant but more shade-tolerant species gain the ascendancy under the birch canopy, sometimes producing a rather species-poor cover of, for example, tussocks of Molinia caerulea. The often extensive carpets of Sphagnum on lower wetter ground between the trees include some distinctive species such as S. fimbriatum and S. russowii. Only naturally developed stands should be included here (primary stands and secondary stands due to older/ former changes in hydrology) and drying or cut-over bogs onto which Betula and other tree species spread in the past should be considered as poorer-quality examples of bog forests. Young succession stages or stages without stabilized hydrology are not considered under this type.
Indicators of quality:
Intact (semi)natural hydrology
Absence of forest exploitation
Typical structure and composition of canopy with an open or patchy cover with dying and keeling birch trees are natural
Typical flora and fauna composition of the region, especially a field layer typical of wet acid peat without any indication of drying, eutrophicaqtion or pollution, for example the overwhelming spread of Molinia caerulea
Absence of non-native tree species and absence of invasive aliens in all layers (fauna, flora), such as conifers or non-native Rhododendron such as happens where bogs have been drained.

Characteristic species:
Tree canopy: Betula pubescens, Alnus glutinosa (rare), Frangula alnus, Pinus sylvestris. 
Understorey, field layer: Sorbus aucuparia, Salix aurita, S. cinerea, Molinia caerulea, Erica tetralix, Carex laevigata, Vaccinium myrtillus, V. uliginosum, V. oxycoccos, Andromeda polifolia, Dryopteris dilatata, Eriophorum vaginatum, Juncus effusus, Deschampsia flexuosa. Mosses: Mnium hornum, Sphagnum palustre, S. fimbriatum, S. magellanicum, S. papillosum, S. fallax, S. flexuosum, S. angustifolium, Polytrichum commune, P. strictum, Aulacomnium palustre, Tomentypnum nitens.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G1.5 Broadleaved swamp woodland on acid peat
EuroVegChecklist alliances:
Sphagno-Betulion pubescentis Passarge 1968
Pleurozio-Betulion pubescentis Passarge 1968
Annex 1:
91D0 Bog woodland
(parts may be assigned under 7120 Degraded raised bogs still capable of natural regeneration)
Emerald:
G1.51 Sphagnum Betula woods
MAES:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.1 Boreal Forest
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
11.3 Birch swamp forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This is an azonal type across most of its range.

Map Description:
Map is incomplete and therefore the potential distribution for the EU is given, with remaining data gaps in the Balkan. Data sources: Art17, EVA, BOHN, ETS.

Trends in Quantity:
The long-term historical trend in quantity (last 200 yrs) is unknown in many countries, especially Finland and Sweeden where most of the current extent lies. An increase is reported in some countries of Western Europe (France, the Netherlands) due to agricultural decline (former grazed wetlands abandoned and recolonized by willows, alders and birches). A decline is reported in other countries (Belgium, Germany, Swizerland), possibly because of wetlands drying-out or forest conifers planting.
More data are available for the recent past, and a decrease is reported in most countries, especially Finland (40 to 50 decrease), in the Czech Republic and Germany, with about -40%. Slovakia, Slovenia and Switzerland also report a -11 to -25% decline. The reported trend in France and the Netherlands is the same for the last 200 years. No trend is reported for Sweden (where an area similar to Finland can be found, according to Article 17 2007-2012 reporting), Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Romania and the UK (where smaller areas can be found).
The average recent past trend is a 40% decline in EU 28 and 28+, mostly due to the situation in Finland where most of the area lie.
The current trend must be much more closer to stability, but still slightly decreasing according to the situation in Finland. The average current trend for EU 28 and 28+ depends a lot on the situation in Sweden for which there are no data but where the Article 17 catagory 2007-2012 was better than in Finland and a stable trend has been reported. Bosnia and Herzegovina, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Slovakia and Slovenia report a decrease, Belgium and Lithuania an increase, and Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK a stable current trend. The impact of nature conservation programs has sometimes been positive but can also be negative, as the clearing of Broadleaved swamp woodlands has been reported on many sites in France in favor of non-wooded habitats.

Trends in Quality:
No historical trend can be assessed as no data were provided but most countries report a recent-past decline in quality, except France and the Netherlands because of aging of young stands that have recolonized former agricultural lands since early-mid 20th century. Today, Belgium and the Netherlands are the only countries to report an increase in quality, due to nature conservation mesures. The impact of nature conservation programs can sometimes be negative, and the grazing (or even clearing) of this habitat has been reported on many sites in France.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
The area of EU 28+ is very close to EU28, because only a few km² lie in Norway, Switzerland or other countries. Concerning the Area in Europe outside EU 28, hundreds or thousands km² must lie in Russia, Bielorussia and Ukraine. A rought estimate of 25 % of the current area must lie in EU 28, depending on the area in Russia.

Justification of Restricted Area:
In part of the range the habitat may have intrinsically small areas, but especially in Scandinavia the habitat may form large stands.

Pressures and Threats:
Modification of hydrographic functioning by drainage is reported by all countries as one of the first threats, except in Slovenia. Water abstraction from groundwater is reported by Belgium, with more or less the same effects. Forestry and especially clearance (less often thinning, logging, or plantation of alien species) is cited in half of the countries. Eutrophication, mostly because of nitrogen deposits, is reported in several cases (Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, the UK).
Though reported in few countries (Finland and Ireland) peat extraction could destroy important surfaces too, especally in boreal zone. Other rarely cited threats are damage by herbivores (game species), competition by other exotic species than trees (Rhododendron in the UK) and "missing or wrongly directed conservation measures". The exact meaning of this is not explained in Belgium, but the clearance of most wooded bogs in protected areas as been reported for Article 17 in France, as no balance is sought between open and wooded habitats. Indeed, wooded bogs only represent between 5 and 10% of the peatlands area in Massif central for example, mostly because of the grazing and cutting of trees in the case of swamp woodland on acid peat (for other woodlands on peat, especially raised bogs ones, trees are often naturaly absent due to natural conditions).
Climate change has also been reported but surprisingly in few countries and is only the 5th cited threat, after vegetation succession. such evolution to more mature and shade tolerant forest types is natural but it would be quickened by climate change.

Conservation and Management:
On damaged sites, the restoration of the abiotic and biotic condition is the most important approach in peatland conservation. This means good water supply in quantity by filling or putting dams on the drains, and also dealing with water quality. An increase of the water level with a bad quality water could completely damage the habitat, with very few chances to restore an oligotrophic vegetation. On a lot of sites, broadleaves swamp woodland on acid peat occurs on the wetter part of the bog, and water can come from the surroundings : the water supply should be protected from pollution, due for example to agriculture. Conservation measures cannot apply only on the bog itself but must also cover the surroundings. Extensive agriculture with no fertilization or forestry without large clearcuts (to protect soils and hydrological fonctioning) are possible measures. Changes on hydrology outside the site can also have important effects.
Grazing has to be prohibited because of regeneration problems and destruction of the Sphagnum layer. Even where the habitat covers large surfaces, a restoration of the hydrological conditions followed by strict protection (no forestry nor agriculture use) seems appropriate, because forestry on such wet soils implies drainage, and is not compatible with the habitat conservation. This approach is even more important in area where the habitat is rare (south-western part of the distribution area), and rare remaining sites have to be strictly protected.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
91D0: ALP FV,  BOR U1, CON U1, MAC U1, PAN U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The main intervention is to restore hygrological functioning of the habitat, both in quality and quantity. Species will be able to recolonize and planting is not necessary most of the time. Alien species (eg. Picea abies outside its natural range) must be removed. During late 20th - early 21st centuries, the restoration of former wet grasslands has been systematically choosed in some areas, and no balance between open land and wooded habitats was sought. Both habitat types deserves to be conserved, and a balance has to be found.

Summary:
Broadleaved swamp woodland on acid peat, typically dominated by a rather open cover of Betula pubescens, can be found all over Europe, except in the Mediterranean zone, occuring on active lowland bogs and transition mires. The trees cast relatively light shade and the associated flora includes a contingent of bog species as well as more shade-tolerant plants typical of wet nutrient-poor conditions. Stands across most of the range are mostly small and isolated and the habitat covers large areas only in the Boreal and north Continental zones, particularly in Finland and Sweden. The habitat depends on the maintenance of natural hydrographic conditions and has been widely affected by drainage, peat cutting, water pollution and shifts to other land use, notably forestry.  Such a delicate habitat is difficult to reclaim without an ability to restore hydrographic integrity.

References:
Katz N.S. 1926. - Sphagnum bogs of central Russia: phytosociology, ecology, and succession. Journal of Ecology 14 : 177-202.
Laasimer L. & Masing V. 1995. - Taimestik ja taimkate [Flora and plant cover]. In Estonia. Nature (Raukas, A., ed.), : 364.396. Valgus, Tallinn [in Estonian, with English summary].
Paal J., 2005 – Estonian mires. Stapfia 85, zugleich Kataloge der OÖ. Landesmuseen Neue Serie 35, 117-146
Mériaux J.L., Schumacker R., Tombal P., de Zuttere Ph. 1980. - Contribution à l'étude des boulaies à sphaignes dans le Nord de la France, l'Île-de-France et les Ardennes. In : La végétation des sols tourbeux, Lille 1978. Colloques Phytosociologiques, VII : 477-494.
Renaux B. 2014. - Les tourbières boisées du Massif central.  Actes des secondes rencontres végétales du Massif central - Limoges 2012. : 27-54.
Rodwell, J. S. & Dring, J (2001).  The European significance of British woodland types.  Lancaster: Unit of Vegetation Science report to English Nature.
Rydin H. & Jeglum J.K. 2006. - The Biology of Peatlands. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 392 p.

Criterion A Text:
The average recent past trend is a 41% decline in EU 28 and 28+, mostly due to the situation in Finland where most of the area lie. This trend would lead to the VU category  but can only be calculated across about 60% of the extent, due to the complete lack data from Sweden (the area of the habitat in Sweeden is close to its area in Finland according to Article 17). Even if the situation seems better in Sweden (according to the Article 17 2007-2012 assessment), the decline in reported countries seems strong enough to assume a 30 to 50 % decline in the whole EU 28 and 28+. Indeed, only a small decline (7,5 %) in Sweden would lead to give a 30% decline in EU 28 and 28+. A stable trend in Sweden would for example give a 26 % decline in Eu 28 and 28+, a 15 % decline would give -32%, etc.)

Criterion B Text:
The EOO, AOO and number of locations exceed the thresholds for assessment under this criterion.

Criterion C/D Text:
As the trend in quantity, the trend in quality can only be calculated on about 60% of the area because there is no data for Sweeden. A slight decline (36%) affecting more than half of the area (55%) could only qualify the NT category, and the better trend in Sweden (according to art. 17 report) is likely to ameliorate the global trend for EU 28 and 28+. The VU category (qualified for the past-present trend in quantity) would not probably be reached with Sweden.

Synthesis:
The VU category is attained because of the reduction in quantity during the last 50 years, especially in Finland. Even if the area ouside Finland and Sweeden is much smaller, most other countries reports a similar decline. We lack data for Sweden, and a trend in quantity can only be calculated on about 60% of the area in EU28 and 28+. Even so, we assume that the trend in Sweeden must not be good enough to improve the average trend and make it go bellow the 30% decline required to qualify the VU category.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Western Atlantic types of this habitat are rarer and smaller in extent than Boreal ones, and have suffered greatly within longer historic times from reclamation and land-use changes. They could thus can be more threatened than

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Rodwell
Territorial data experts: P.A. Aarrestad, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, L. Aunina, G. Buffa,  A. ÄŒarni, M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, P. Finck, J. Janssen, K.J. Kirby, T. Kontula, B. Nygaard, F. O'Neill, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, B. Renaux, U. Riecken, Z. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, V. Stupar, M. ValachoviÄ, L. Wibail, W. Willner
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
This habitat includes woods, in contact with the underground water table, often riparian, formed by the palm tree Phoenix theophrasti, found on the island of Crete and south-western Anatolia. The majority of occurrences of Phoenix theophrasti in Crete, and all existing records made outside Crete and southwest Turkey, are represented only by scattered or isolated trees. Within the EU, Crete holds the only palm groves that are representative for the habitat type. Only two sites are known in Crete with several hundreds of trees: Vai and Preveli, the former is the most extensive (ca. 20 ha). The tertiary relict Phoenix theophrasti woods of Crete and south-western Anatolia (Datça peninsula) are restricted to damp, mostly sandy coastal valleys below 250 m; here are included: a) the most extensive grove in Crete, the forest of Vai in the east of the island, characterized by the luxuriant palm growth, accompanied by a thick shrubby undergrowth rich in Nerium oleander, and b) a few other smaller coastal groves, notably on the south coast of the prefecture of Rethimnon. The westernmost occurrence is in southwest Crete, on coastal plains south of the monastery of Chrisoskalitissa. Phoenix theophrasti trees are known also from some Greek islands (Crete, Karpathos, Kos, Rodhos, Thira, Nisyros, Amorgos) and from the Turkish southeast Aegean sites of Datça and Kumluca-Karaöz, with additional populations in Bodrum-Gölköy, all in southwest Anatolia. In the Aegean palm groves, Phoenix theophrasti is a rather rare constituent of the Aegean Nerio-Tamaricetea vegetation and is restricted to semiarid climate (generally with 400-600 mm annual precipitation). The habitat may be either riparian (with the palm forming temporarily inundated gallery forest along permanent fresh or brackish waters), or related to seasonally or episodically flooded coastal valleys. In the latter, the palm trees are generally more scattered, and they may be restricted to rocky low slopes. Underground water level is high and sufficiently permanent to control habitat ecology and species combination. The soils are frequently sandy but the habitat type does not include mobile dunes. The vegetation belongs to the alliance Rubo sancti-Nerion oleandri but more isolated trees or clusters are surrounded by Pistacio-Rhamnetalia or Cisto-Micromerietalia vegetation. Associated of Phoenix theophrasti are species of wet or semiwet habitats, as well as species with a wider ecological range (see the list of characteristic species below).
Indicators of quality:
No forest exploitations in the majority of the area covered by the habitat
Intact natural hydrology
Natural composition of canopy
Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration
Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora & fauna)
No signs of eutrophication or pollution

The indicators of good quality are primarily related to the maintenance of the natural structure of the Phoenix theophrasti woods. The presence of rejuvenation of Phoenix theophrasti in all sites of its occurrence, as well as the undisturbed soil (no significant trampling or erosion), the natural relief, the stratified stands (tree, shrub, herb layer present), the closed canopy of Phoenix theophrasti woods ≥25% and Phoenix individuals mostly higher than 3 m are indicators that the structure and functions of the habitat are in favourable conservation status to a significant part of its distribution. Its adjacency to, or its interdigitation with Mediterranean salt meadows of the Juncetalia maritimi (1410 - Annex I of the Dir. 92/43/EEC), and/or Mediterranean tall humid herb grasslands of the Molinio-Holoschoenion (6420 -Annex I of the Dir. 92/43/EEC) are also considered as indicators related to the long-term conservation of the habitat.
Characteristic species:
Phoenix theophrasti, Aristolochia cretica, Juncus heldreichianus, Myrtus communis, Erica manipuliflora, Nerium oleander, Narcissus tazetta, Rubia peregrina, Schoenus nigricans, Scirpoides holoschoenus, Pistacia lentiscus, Smilax aspera.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G2.5 Phoenix groves
EuroVegChecklist:
Rubo sancti - Nerion oleandri Brullo et al. 2004
Annex 1:
9370 Palm groves of Phoenix
Emerald:
G2 Broadleaved evergreen woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and Forest
IUCN: 1.4
Temperate Forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Within the EU, Crete holds the only palm groves that are representative for the habitat type. Only two sites are known in Crete with several hundreds of trees: Vai and Preveli, the former is the most extensive (ca. 20 ha), but both remarkable from an ecological point of view.

Map Description:
The distribution of this habitat is restricted to ithe island of Crete and south-western Anatolia. The majority of occurrences of Phoenix theophrasti in Crete, and all existing records made outside Crete and southwest Turkey, are represented only by scattered or isolated presences. The map is complete. Data sources: Art17, EVA.

Trends in Quantity:
Repeated measures on the population size of Phoenix theophrasti and of the extension of the habitat type have not been performed in any of its distribution sites. From what is known, no recent decline has been observed, although in a few sites land-use in the vicinity has undergone change, which might result in decreasing numbers of trees and size area. Overall, the trend in quantity is considered stable. After the fire of 2005 that burnt part of the second more extensive spot with Phoenix theophrasti woods (Preveli area), the forest has completely and naturally restored (based on monitoring data from 2010).

Trends in Quality:
The existence of Phoenix theophrasti rejuvenation in all the sites of its occurrence, as well as the undisturbed soil (no significant trampling or erosion), the natural relief, the stratified stands (tree, shrub, herb layer present), the closed canopy of Phoenix theophrasti woods ≥25% and Phoenix individuals mostly higher than 3m are indicators that the structure and functions of the habitat are in favourable conservation status to a significant part of its distribution. The quality is stable and partly could be considered as increasing due to conservation measures taken at the Vai forest.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
More than 90% of the current distribution of the habitat type lies within the EU 28 (we estimate that almost 10% of its total extent is present in SW Anatolia).

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The EOO of the South-Aegean Phoenix theophrasti woods is < 50,000 Km2, but no decline has been recorded during the last 50 years at the Phoenix theophrasti woodlands in the island of Crete.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Phoenix theophrasti is known to be a tertiary relict, now restricted to the south Aegean and the Anatolian coast. This relict habitat with Phoenix theophrasti woods in Crete and south-western Anatolia (Datça peninsula) covers s

Pressures and Threats:
The Aegean Phoenix theophrasti groves could be considered as potentially vulnerable due to future changes in land-use; the most significant threat is due to potential manipulation of ground-water for irrigation purposes. Green houses have been constructed near some of the sites. There is still some pressure by domestic animals. In Preveli, the touristic impact on the stand is high, with numerous foot paths dissected, occasional illegal camping and fire-making (after the fire of 2005, there are strict rules and control of all these activities within the Phoenix woodlands in Prevel). The naturalness of the Preveli Palm stands is affected by some planted Eucalyptus which may, moreover, be fatal to the water and nutrient balance of the palm grove. Although to some degree fire-tolerant, too frequent or too intensive fires represent a potential threat to the palm trees. In Vai, efficient measures have been applied to control tourism (fencing).

Conservation and Management:
No specific conservation measures are performed. The core area of the largest Greek Phoenix population at Vai was fenced in 1983; monitoring using permanent plots was established recently within the forest area of Vai and Chrysoskalitissa. Permanently high ground-water level has to be assured in all sites but, first of all, ground-water level measures need to be taken as part of the regular monitoring. In the most important sites of the present habitat type, Vai and Preveli, which are frequented by a considerable, and increasing, number of tourists, more environmental and biological information should be offered. Fencing against grazing domestic animals should be more effective. Eucalyptus trees are to be removed; wild camping in the stand and defecation has to be controlled. Some palms in Preveli and elsewhere show traces of fire. Manipulation of groundwater should be prohibited in all sites. Monitoring is required both for the control of vitality and seedling and juvenile establishment, and of ground-water level. Reliable and reproducible data on the size of the area and the population size need to be taken as baseline information for monitoring. The population area and its vicinity require regular monitoring. Annual surveys are indispensable and possible factors that may press and threat the populations need to be documented.

Conservation Status:
9370: MED U1 (source: data for Greece where the part of this habitat type with Phoenix theoprasti woods is present; unpublished data not yet uploaded to the EIONET for the reporting period 2007-2012).

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
After fire: the natural regeneration of the Phoenix theophrasti woodland stands at the Preveli site (fire in 2005), is a clear evidence on the sucess of the species to natural regeneration; currently the forest stands are completely restored 10 years after the fire. In any case, although to some degree Phoenix theophrasti is fire-tolerant, the frequent or too intensive fires represent a potential threat to the palm trees. Water abstraction: We have no evidence on the recovering capacity of Phoenix theophrasti, after high water abstraction for irrigation purposes, since the manipulation of ground-water for irrigation purposes is the most significant potential threat for this habitat type. The period given for regeneration is related only to the fire. Longer periods would be necessary after water abstraction and through intervention.

Summary:
The tertiary relict Phoenix theophrasti woods of Crete and south-western Anatolia are restricted to damp, mostly sandy coastal valleys below 250 m, either on the banks of fresh or brackish waters, or in seasonally or episodically flooded coastal valleys. The most significant threat is from manipulation of ground-water for irrigation of horticulture and there is some pressure by domestic animals and tourism. The naturalness of the Phoenix stands can also be affected by planted Eucalyptus and too frequent fires can be damaging.  Control of all these threats is required for conservation.

References:
Bohn, U., Gollub, G. Hettwer, C., Neuhauslova, Z., Rause, T., Schlüter, H. & Weber, H. (2004). Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe.  Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz. Council of Europe (2010), Interpretation Manual of the Emerald Habitats.  Strasbourg: Council of Europe. 
Brullo S., Guarino R., Minissale P., Scelsi F., Spampinato G. (2004). Indagine fitosociologica sulla vegetazione forestale dell’Egeo meriodionale. Colloq Phytosoc 28: 401–466.                                                           
Davies, C.E., Moss, D. & Hill, M.O. (2004). EUNIS Habitat Classification, revised.  Report to the European Topic Centre, European Environment Agency.   
Dimopoulos P., E. Bergmeier, K. Georghiou & C.A. Thanos (2005). Monitoring Plan for species and a priority habitat type of the Dir. 92/43/EEC at the Plant Micro-Reserves  in Western Crete. National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. CRETAPLANT, A Pilot Network of Plant Micro-Reserves in Western Crete. (LIFE04NAT_GR_000104).
European Commission DG Environment (2013). Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. Strasbourg: European Commission DG Environment.                                              
European Environment Agency (2006). European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006, Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.         
Greuter W. (1995). Phoenix theophrasti Greuter. In: Phitos D., Strid A., Snogerup S. & Greuter W. (1995). The Red Data Book of Rare and threatened plants of Greece. WWF, Athens, xlvii + 527 pp.                                                               
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. & Rodwell,  J.S. (2013), Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.  
Thymakis N. (2009). Phoenix theophrasti Greuter. In: Phitos D., Constantinides Th. and Kamari G. (2009) The Red Data Book of Rare and Threatened Plants of Greece, vol. 2: 256-258, Hellenic Botanical Society, EPPER, Patras.

Criterion A Text:
No decline has been recorded to the extent of the habitat over the last 50 years. In the period before 1957, an area of 9 ha (of the 130 ha that is currently the total cover of the habitat) that was covered by Phoenix theophrasti wood, was cleared for agricultural use. Currently, the abandoned cultivation land (with a high frequency of natural regeneration) in combination with the performed restoration actions in the frame of a LIFE project (15 years ago), resulted in the almost complete recovery of the Phoenix woodland in the more extensive palm forest of Crete in the site of Vai. The estimation of the A2a and A2b Criteria is based on expert judgement taking into consideration the current state and the conservation management actions planned and/or implemented.

Criterion B Text:
The EOO and AOO are both smaller than the thresholds for criteria b1 and B2, respectively, however there is no continuing decline in quantity or quality or future threat.

Criterion C/D Text:
Both biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat have not substantially reduced the last 50 years; only at certain spots of limited extent, some signs of structural changes of the Phoenix woodland have been recorded due to human pressures such as grazing and paths (before the Vai forest was fenced). The percentage of the reduction in quality is based on the scientific record on the cleared Phoenix woodland (for agricultural purposes) almost 60 years ago, which now have been managed and are in the direction of complete restoration.

Synthesis:
The habitat, although having a very restricted range and area, is assessed at the Least Concern status, because no decline has been recorded to the extent and the quality characteristics of the habitat over the last 50 years and no threats are foreseen for the near future.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
All the Aegean palm groves with Phoenix theophrasti have been assigned to the Nerio-Tamaricetea vegetation and are restricted to semiarid climate (generally with 400-600 mm annual precipitation). The habitat might be differentiated in

Contributors:
Type description: P. Dimopoulos
Territorial data: P. Dimopoulos
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
These are evergreen coniferous woodlands of the montane and sub-alpine belt in the nemoral zone of Europe, where increased winter coldness towards the more easterly Continental mountains favour Picea abies against its main competitors of more temperate ranges, Fagus sylvatica and Abies alba. Here, at altitudes usually between 1000 and 2000m in the Alps, on the borders of Czechia, Germany and Poland, through the Carpathians, and in the Balkan mountains, spruce dominates on a variety of soils, even those that are very nutrient-poor, wet and cold, or fragmentarily developed on scree or rock exposures. These woodlands can give way at lower altitudes to G3.1b Abies woodland (though the forester’s preference for spruce has often extended its lower limits) and above, where spruce thins to a more open patchy cover, to G3.2/3 Temperate subalpine Larix, Pinus cembra or P. uncinata woodland. Exceptional relict populations of Picea in the lowlands (natural occurrences) are also included. The relict Picea omorika woodland of the Dinaric mountains is also included here. Depending on the particular site conditions, other trees in the canopy include Abies alba, Larix decidua (particularly in the Alps where it is a pioneer for spruce establishment), Pinus sylvestris, P. cembra, P. peuce and rarely Fagus. There can be some Sorbus aucuparia, Lonicera nigra, L. caerulea, L. xylosteum and Rosa pendulina in a patchy understorey. On the more usual acid soils, the field layer characteristically has a rather generalised calcifuge flora with Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Deschampsia flexuosa, Luzula luzulina, L. sylvatica, Calamagrostis villosa, Melampyrum sylvaticum, M. pratense, Lycopodium annotinum, Oxalis acetosella, Homogyne alpina, Moneses uniflora, Blechnum spicant, Dryopteris dilatata, D. expansa and bulky mosses such as Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus, Hylocomium splendens, Pleurozium schreberi, Polytrichum formosum and Sphagnum girgensohnii. At higher altitudes, a tall herb contingent can be prominent with Adenostyles alliariae, Chaerophyllum hirsutum and Rumex arifolius while, on the more base-rich soils derived from limestones and dolomite, such more basiphilous plants as Adenostyles glabra, Valeriana tripteris, Calamgrostis varia, Carex alba, Polystichum lonchitis, Sesleria albicans, Cirsium erisithales are typical with some beech forest species like Mercurialis perennis, Daphne mezereum, Veronica urticifolia, Primula elatior and, in the eastern Alps and Dinarids, Helleborus niger and Cardamine enneaphyllos. Distinctive geographical floras are associated with the Picea woodlands of the Western Carpathians, the Eastern and Southern Carpathians, the central Balkan peninsula and in Bulgaria and north-east Greece where spruce reaches its southern limit in Europe. On the mountains of the Bosnia/Serbia border, Picea omorika, a rather uncompetitive tree but one able to thrive on limestone screes, in timber clearings or after fire, dominates in woodlands of this same general type with a well- developed understorey and numerous Illyrian and south-east European species including Daphne blagayana, Hieracium rotundatum, Aremonia agrimonoides, Festuca drymeja, Epimedium alpinum, Cardamine trifolia and the Balkan Doronicum columnae, Dianthus petraeus, Athamantha turbith, Sesleria rigida and Edraianthus graminifolius.
Indicators of quality:
Natural dominance of Picea abies with modest canopy contributions from Abies alba, Fagus sylvatica and pines
Uneven-age canopy with signs of spruce regeneration, distinctively patchy where favourable microsites extend spruce cover into the sub-alpine
Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying and standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of natural disturbance such as windfall openings with natural regeneration
Sufficient proportion of historically old (ancient) woodland with high species diversity
Presence of well-developed associated flora and fauna reflecting soil conditions and regional climate
Absence of non-native tree species and absence of invasive aliens in all layers (fauna, flora)
No signs of eutrophication or pollution with e.g. pronounced invasion on nutrient-demanding herbs
No fragmentation and isolation with enough stands to support species which need large undisturbed forest habitats (such as wildcat, lynx etc. )

Characteristic species:
Flora:
Vascular plants:
Tree layer: Picea abies (incl. P. omorika), Abies alba.
Understorey: Sorbus aucuparia.
Field layer: Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Deschampsia flexuosa, Luzula luzulina, L. sylvatica, Calamagrostis villosa, Melampyrum sylvaticum, M. pratense, Lycopodium annotinum, Oxalis acetosella, Homogyne alpina, Moneses uniflora, Blechnum spicant, Dryopteris dilatata, D. expansa. 
Bryophytes:
Hylocomium splendens, Pleurozium schreberi, Polytrichum formosum, Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus, Sphagnum girgensohnii.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.1 Abies and Picea woodland
EuroVegChecklist: 
Piceion excelsae Pawlowski et al. 1928 
Abieti-Piceion (Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939) Soó 1964
Chrysanthemo rotundifolii-Piceion (Krajina 1934) Brezina et Hadac in Hadac 1962 
Calamagrostio arundinaceae-Abietion Horvat 1962 nom. invers. propos.
Aconito rubicundi-Abietion sibiricae Anekhonov et Chytrý 1998
Annex 1:
9410 Acidophilous Picea forests of the montane to alpine levels (Vaccinio-Piceetea)
Emerald:
G3.1B Alpine and Carpathian subalpine Picea forests
G3.1C Inner range montane Picea forests
G3.1D Hercynian subalpine Picea forests
G3.1E Southern European Picea abies forests
G3.1F Enclave Picea abies forests
G3.1G Picea omorika forests
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
6.2.3 Nemoral spruce forest
6.3.2 Subalpine and mountainous spruce and mountainous mixed spruce-silver fir forest
VME:
D4.2 Altimontane, partly montane, spruce and mixed spruce forests

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat type represents the climax vegetation of the upper mountain belt in many continental mountain ranges. These forests types are the natural habitat of many typical animal species, including birds and large mammals, and primary habitat of Picea abies (with local populations of genetical interest), or rarer species like Picea omorika.

Comment EU28:
Poland missing, estimated from art 17 report for 9410 habitat (6,331 kmÂ² for whole 9410, containing also more or less a quarter of Fir forests ).

Comment EU28+:
Poland missing, estimated from art 17 report for 9410 habitat  (6,331 kmÂ²). Data missing for other countries in the Balkans with probalby large surfaces in Serbia. The whole area can only be roughly e

Trends in Quantity:
According to some territorial experts, the total area has probably increased between the late 18th/mid 19th and early/mid 20th century. In contrast, a slight decline has been observed during the last 50 years (EU28: -8.5%; EU28+:-6.4%). A lot of spruce has been planted, but those artificial stands, often outside the natural range of the spruce, are not included in the habitat we are dealing with.
The current trend is still a decrease in 4 out of 14 countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Republic of Macedonia and Romania) representing almost half of the area, stable in 8 countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, Greece, Italy, Slovakia, Slovenia and Switzerland) representing 47% of the area, and increasing in a few countries (Germany and France).
The trends in quantity are given for 96% of the EU28+ (93% of the EU28) but are certainly mostly based on experts estimates.

Trends in Quality:
A slight decrease in quality has been reported by most of the countries for last the 50 years but only affects a small area (16% of the area). The current trend is somewhat better but is still a decrease (decrease on 40 % of the area, stable on 60 %). The habitat quality is still decreasing in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Romania, France and Croatia; increasing in Greece and Germany; stable in the rest of the reported countries.
The territorial data concerning historical trends are lacking. Concerning future trends, an impact of climate change on mountain forests can be expected, according to national studies and models (Marage & Gégout 2011; Van der Veken et al. 2004; Lenoir et al. 2008; Lenoir 2009; Grabherr et al. 1994; Klanderud & Birks 2003). The increase of drought and temperature can lead to forest dieback in spruce mountain forest at lower altitudes, with a replacement of fir by beech or pines, and a degradation in quality (before a complete loss of the habitat occurs).

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 85% lies in the EU28, the rest in EU28+.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The occurrence of the habitat type is neither restricted to small spots, nor does it have a small total area because of naturally restricted distribution range and area.
Some variants, with Picea omorika for example, have a restricted ar

Pressures and Threats:
In most countries, the main pressures and threats are related to forestry: forest exploitation without replanting or natural regrowth or just logging are mentioned, but other pressures such as removal of forest undergrowth or cutting of dead and dying trees may be included. Deforestation or cutting is mentioned in some countries (and certainly occurs in all countries where surfaces are decreasing (Romania, Austria, Macedonia, Bulgaria). This deforestation is sometimes due to the construction or expansion of skiing complexes and sports and leisure structures, and these pressures also induce degradation in remaining spruce forests, such as pollution, damages to the undergrowth etc.
Other pressures are due to pollution (especially air pollution) and climate change (global warming, droughts). As it has been reported for Bulgaria, it causes a replacement of spruce by beech at low altitudes but this may also occur in other countries. Furthermore, phytopathogens and bark-beetle calamities are natural phenomena but can be a problem if they occur too frequently and on vast surfaces. This happens frequently in forests weakened by acid rain, drought or too intensive silviculture (in Bayerischer Wald National park for instance). The habitat type is also affected by eutrophication, which may be linked to nitrogen deposits. Additionally, fires have been reported as a threat in Montenegro (an increase of forest fires can possibly result from climate change).
Damages by herbivores are also cited. Though it is a natural pressure it can be a problem due to excess population density, especially where predators have been eliminated or where herbivore density is artificial (due to feeding of game animals).

Conservation and Management:
Both integrative and segregative approaches are needed for the conservation of temperate mountain spruce woodlands. On most surfaces, the development of sustainable forest management measures can help conserving most of the structures, functions and characteristic species. The prevention of large clear-cuttings and planting of exotic trees, the conservation of deadwood, veteran trees and trees with microhabitats (broken tops, cracks or scars, hollow chambers, stem cavities, bark bowls and pockets, burls) play a key role in maintaining not only forest biodiversity but also social and economic functions (forest productivity especially concerning deadwood, protection against erosion or avalanches if no large clear-cuttings are made, etc.). Sustainable forest management can be promoted by forest certification, in the Natura 2000 network, public forests, category V and VI of IUCN protected areas.
Even in the most sustainably managed forest, logging cuts the end of the forest cycle (the mature and veteran stands are rare, deadwood volumes can never be the same as in unmanaged forests). It stresses the need for a network of vast (more than 100 ha each) unmanaged forests, where the whole forest cycle can be fully accomplished. Those strictly protected areas should especially be  located in category I and II IUCN protected areas, and should also protect the most remarkable forests (rare habitats, virgin or quasi-virgin forests, semi-natural forests unmanaged for a long time etc.).
To face global warming, the ability of spruce mountain forests to colonize new sites at higher altitudes is very important, especially on actual open land. For variants on peat, the restoration of the hydrological regime is crucial if it has been perturbated.
Finally, for some rare subtypes on peat or wet soil, restoring or improving the hydrological regime may be necessary.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1 types:
9410: ALP U1, CON U1, MED FV

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
If the habitat has been severely damaged by intensive logging (with a removal of all deadwood and large trees), it takes more than 50 years to recover large enough trees and enough deadwood for the specific fauna, fungi and flora. The first positive effects of an abandonment of exploitation can be seen after 30 years of free evolution (Paillet et al. 2010). A clear-cutting followed by agricultural use would make all characteristic species disappear, and the forest soil would turn to agricultural one, and it would take centuries to recover the typical flora (Dupouey et al. 2002). Plantation can quicken the habitat recovery a little but most of the recovery process would have to occur naturally, with a slow recolonization of typical forest species.

Summary:
This is evergreen coniferous woodland of the montane and sub-alpine belt in the nemoral zone of Europe, where increased winter coldness towards the more easterly Continental mountains favour Picea abies against its main competitors of more temperate ranges, Fagus sylvatica and Abies alba. Here spruce can dominate on a variety of soils, even those that are very nutrient-poor, wet and cold, or fragmentarily developed on scree or rock exposures. On the more usual acid soils, the field layer characteristically has a rather generalised calcifuge and heathy flora, with montane tall herbs at higher altitudes and, more locally, there can be herbs of base-rich soils. More distinctive floristic elements appear in the Carpathians and Balkans. Intensive forest exploitation, illegal logging, deforestation and pollution are the main threats and the habitat may be adversely affected by climate change. Conservation measures require both sustainable forest management and meaintenance of a network of unmanaged forests.

References:
Bohn, U., Gollub, G. Hettwer, C., Neuhauslova, Z., Raus, T., Schlüter, H. and Weber, H., 2004. Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Bundesamt für Naturschutz, Bonn.
Council of Europe, 2010. Interpretation Manual of the Emerald Habitats. Council of Europe, Strasbourg. 
Davies, C.E., Moss, D. and Hill, M.O., 2004. EUNIS Habitat Classification, revised. Report to the European Topic Centre, European Environment Agency.
European Commission DG Environment, 2007. Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. European Commission DG Environment, Strasbourg.
European Environment Agency, 2006. European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
Lenoir J., Gégout J. C, Marquet P. A, Ruffray P. de and Brisse H., 2008. A Significant Upward Shift in Plant Species Optimum Elevation During the 20th Century. Science 320 (5884): 1768-1771.
Paillet Y., Bergès L., Hjältén J., Odor P., Avon C., Bernhardt-Römermann M., Bijlsma R.J., De Bruyn L., Fuhr M., Grandin U., Kanka R., Lundin L., Luque S., Magura T., Matesanz S., Mészáros I., Sebastià M.T., Schmidt W., Standovár T., Tóthmérész B., Uotila A., Valladares F., Vellak K. and Virtanen R., 2010. Biodiversity differences between managed and unmanaged forests: meta-analysis of species richness in Europe. Conservation Biology 24 (1): 101-112.
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. and Rodwell, J.S., 2013. Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.

Piedallu C., Perez V., Gegout J.C., Lebourgeois F. and Bertrand R., 2009. Impact potentiel du changement climatique sur la distribution de l’Epicéa, du Sapin, du Hêtre et du Chêne sessile en France. Revue Forestière Française 61 (6): 567-594.

Criterion A Text:
The provided figures have been calculated from the territorial data sheet. The trend in quantity for the last 50 years is a slight decrease both in EU28 and EU28+. The surface of the habitat is only slightly increasing in Germany, Switzerland and maybe France (no data for France because it is impossible to separate facts and developments concerning spruce plantations from facts and developments concerning natural and semi-natural spruce forests). The overall surface of spruce stands is increasing in Europe but most of them correspond to plantations outside the natural range of spruce mountain forests and are not included in this habitat type.

Criterion B Text:
Both EOO and AOO are well above the thresholds to qualify for category Near threatened (NT).

Criterion C/D Text:
The reduction in quality is not substantial (between no and slight degradation on half of the surface) and leads to the Least concern (LC) category. Models (Piedallu et al. 2009) predict that climate change would threaten Picea abies over the next 100 years by an increase of temperatures (favouring spruce competitors) and an increase of drought. This would lead to a degradation of most of the surfaces, especially at lower altitudes or in southern Europe. The response of spruce is not certain within the next 50 years all over Europe. The demand for conifer wood is probably increasing in the next years, and will affect the conservation of spruce forests with intensive management. Such a bad trend (concerning forestry and climate change) would lead to the Vulnerable (VU) category, but can't be supported by facts yet. Therefore, future trends in quality have to be evaluated as Data deficient (DD).

Synthesis:
Due to a relatively small decline in both quality and quantity over the last 50 years, the habitat type has been assessed as Least concern (LC) both for EU28 and EU28+.The separate assessment of some rare subtypes, especially at lower altitudes, on peat, rocks or with Picea omorika, would have led to a higher category of threat for those types. Pressures from logging and abiotic pressures due to global change are likely to increase in the future but such a negative trend can't be supported by sufficient facts and data yet.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Some local types (e. g. with Picea omorika) or low-altitude subtypes are likely to be more sensitive to climate change, and should be assessed separately in the future. Also rare azonal subtypes, on rocks and cold slopes, are pr

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Rodwell and B. Renaux.
Territorial data: S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, C. Bita-Nicolae, G. Buffa, A. ÄŒarni,  M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, P. Dimopoulos, M. Dimitrov, P. Finck, N. Juvan, V. Matevski, U. Raths, B. Renaux, U. Riecken, Z. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, V. Stupar, M. ValachoviÄ, N. Velkovski, D. Viciani, W. Willner.
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G1.Aa Carpinus and Quercus mesic deciduous woodland

Habitat Description:
These are deciduous broadleaved woodlands typical of free-draining to somewhat-strongly impeded brown earth soils and gleys of quite low, moderate to high base-status and moderate to high nutrient content across the lowlands and foothills of the temperate zone of western, central and southern Europe, with local extensions into regions of sub-Mediterranean, Pannonian and Boreal climate.  Partially this includes alluvial Quercus/ Carpinus-dominated forests in mountain valleys with infrequent indundation. The canopy is typically of mixed composition with oaks figuring prominently, notably Quercus robur and Q. petraea but with regional contributions from other oaks, along with Carpinus betulus, Fraxinus excelsior, F. angustifolia, Acer pseudoplatanus, A. campestre, A. platanoides, Ulmus glabra, Tilia cordata and T. tomentosa. Typically, Fagus sylvatica is at most a minor component here because it does not tolerate the stagnation in gley soils and is disadvantaged competitively, though transitions to more mesophilous and immature stands of free-draining G1.6a Fagus woodland on non-acid soils are quite common.  
The tree canopy can have a complex multi-layered structure (often much affected by sylviculture) but it casts a relatively light shade, so there is often a rich and extensive understorey of saplings, small trees, shrubs and lianes. Among the latter, Crataegus monogyna, C. laevigata, Corylus avellana, Euonymus europaeus, Viburnum opulus, Daphne mezereum, Lonicera xylosteum and Hedera helix are frequent throughout with other associates figuring according to regional or local climatic and edaphic conditions.  
The field layer too has a core of characteristic widely distributed hemicryptophytes and geophytes throughout the range with other contingents according to major climatic differences and local site conditions.  Viola reichenbachiana, Polygonatum multiflorum, Lamiastrum galeobdolon, Milium effusum, Campanula trachelium, Carex sylvatica, Pulmonaria obscura, P. officinalis, Scrophularia nodosa, Brachypodium sylvaticum, Galium odoratum, Poa nemoralis, Paris quadrifolia, Sanicula europaea, Adoxa moschatellina, Ranunculus auricomus, Arum maculatum are common throughout with Deschampsia cespitosa, Festuca gigantea, Stachys sylvatica, Circaea lutetiana, Impatiens noli-tangere and Athyrium filix-femina in moister situations.  There, too, especially where the soils are freshly aerated and more nutrient-rich, can be a striking vernal geophyte element with Ranunculus ficaria, Allium ursinum, Anemone nemorosa, Leucojum vernum and, in the Atlantic north-west, Hyacinthoides non-scripta.  
Within this broad frame, the geographic and climatic extremes can present rather striking contrasts.  To the Atlantic west, through Great Britain, Ireland and the foothills of northern Spain, Fraxinus excelsior can often exceed the oaks in its cover, is often accompanied by Ulmus glabra and, among the smaller trees of the understorey, Ilex aquifolium with Lonicera periclymenum a common liana.  Ferns such as Polystichum setiferum, P. aculeatum, Dryopteris filix-mas, D. affinis, Asplenium scolopendrium and A. trichomanes and a lush cover of bryophytes, especially bulky pleurocarpous mosses, reflect the humid atmosphere.  In northern Spain, Quercus ilex, Q. pyrenaica,  Laurus nobilis and Rhamnus alaternus in the canopy, Smilax aspera and Euphorbia peregrina as lianes and Helleborus viridis, Pulmonaria affinis and P. longifola among the herbs, reflect the warmer oceanic conditions adjacent to the sub-Mediterranean zone. 
Towards the east of its range, this habitat grades into the lime-oak woodlands which extend far into the Russian lowlands.  In the transitional types, Tilia cordata becomes more important in the canopy, along with occasional T. tomentosa, and Q. polycarpa and Q. dalechampii can figure among the oaks.  Further south, extending from the foothills of Austria, through Slovenia, into the Balkans, the flora has a distinct Illyrian aspect with Quercus cerris, Q. frainetto, Carpinus orientalis, Fraxinus ornus and a large contingent of herbs among which Epimedium alpinum, Erythronium dens-canis, Hellebrous dumetorum ssp. atrorubens, Knautia drymeia, Cyclamen purpurescens, Staphyles pinnata and Helleborus odorus are the most frequent.
Indicators of good quality:
Typical structure and composition of canopy: High forest stands should have a complex composition with a mixed age structure, well-developed understorey and active regeneration but diverse patterns of exploitation mean that there are numerous other quality states for this habitat and this also affects the kinds of regeneration that can occur.
Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying and standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of mosaics of developmental stages including gaps
Sufficient proportion of historically old (ancient) woodland with high species diversity
Survival of larger stands of forest without fragmentation and isolation
Absnce of non-native tree species and absence of invasive aliens in all layers (fauna, flora).
No eutrophication and pronounced invasion of nutrient-demanding herbs due to eutrophication from atmospheric deposition or ground-water enrichment

Characteristic species:
Tree layer: Quercus robur, Q. petraea, Carpinus betulus, Fraxinus excelsior, Acer pseudoplatanus, A. campestre, Ulmus glabra, Tilia cordata, Acer platanoides, Prunus avium;
Shrub layer: Corylus avellana, Crataegus laevigata, C. monogyna, Euonymus europaeus, E. verrucosus, Sambucus nigra, Prunus avium, Sorbus aucuparia, Cornus sanguinea, Rosa arvensis, Ligustrum vulgare, Sorbus torminalis;
Herb layer: Lamiastrum galeobdolon, Galium odoratum, Poa nemoralis, Mercurialis perennis, Hedera helix, Geranium robertianum, Geum urbanum, Dryopteris filix-mas, Polygonatum multiflorum, Viola reichanbachiana, Brachypodum sylvaticum, Oxalis acetosella, Stellaria holostea, Pulmonaria officinalis, Anemone nemorosa, Anemone ranuculoides, Ranunculus auricomus, Vinca minor, Galium sylvaticum, Carex montana, Primula veris, Mycelis muralis, Aegopodium podagraria, Fragaria vesca, Athyrium filix-femina, Melica uniflora, Campanula trachelium, Ajuga reptans, Carex sylvatica in the more subcontinental forests also Galium schultesii, Hepatica nobilis, Lathyrus vernus and Asarum europaeum.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G1.Aa Carpinus and Quercus mesic deciduous woodland.
EuroVeg checklist:
Carpinion betuli Issler 1931
Pulmonario longifoliae-Quercion roboris Rivas-Mart. et Izco in Rivas-Mart. et al. 2002
Physospermo verticillati-Quercion cerridis Biondi et al. ex Biondi, Casavecchia et Biscotti 2013
Erythronio-Carpinion (Horvat 1958) Marincek in Wallnöfer et al. 1993
Castaneo-Carpinion betuli Quézel et al. 1992
Querco roboris-Tilion cordatae Solomeshch et Laivinš ex Bulokhov et Solomeshch 2003
Annex I:
9020 Fennoscandian hemiboreal natural old broadleaved deciduous forests (Quercus, Tilia, Acer, Fraxinus or Ulmus) rich in epiphytes
9160 Sub-Atlantic and medio-European oak or oak-hornbeam forests of the Carpinion betuli
9170 Galio-Carpinetum oak-hornberam forests
91G0 Pannonic woods with Quercus petraea and Carpnius betulus
91L0 Illyrian oak-hornbeam forests (Erythronio-Carpinion) Ëƒ 91Y0 Dacian oak & hornbeam forests
91Y0 Dacian oak and hornbeam forests
Emerald:
G1.A1 Quercus - Fraxinus - Carpinus betulus woodland on eutrophic and mesotrophic soils
MAES-2:
Woodland & Forest
IUCN:
1.1 Boreal Forest
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
5.1 Pedunculate oak-hornbeam forest
5.2 Sessile oak-hornbeam forest
5.3 Ashwood and oak-ash forest
5.4 Maple-oak forest
5.5 Lime-oak forest
5.9 Other mesophytic deciduous forests
VME:
F2 Mixed oak-ask forests
F3 Mixed oak-hornbeam forests

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
These are deciduous woodlands typical of much of the central and western European lowlands with a rich structure, many ancient woodland species and a typical vernal aspect on soils which escaped clearance and exploitation due to impeded, often stagnating conditions.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete. Data sources: Art17, EVA, Bohn.

Trends in Quantity:
The calculated trends for EU28 and EU28+ are negative (about -10%) but overall (30% extent) the area is reported as more or less stable with about equal percentages (about 15% of total extent) increasing and decreasing. For the remaining 40% the trend is unknown but probably not much different from neighbouring countries with known trend.

Trends in Quality:
Overall declining in countries with large areas of this woodland type (e.g. Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Poland, Lithuania). Only increasing in Belgium.  Remainder stable.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
From the available data, 96% assuming EU28+ corresponds to 100%.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
Although not explicitly calculated from the map, the EEO will be much greater than 50,000 km2 and there is no evidence of an important decline in the recent past.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The woodland type has a large range and occurs on a variety of mesic soils.

Pressures and Threats:
Forest exploitation of various kinds seems the most important overall pressure as well as clearance and removal of dead wood. In northwestern Europe, eutrophication due to airborne nitrogen is an additional major threat. Fragmentation, drainage and overgrazing are explicitly reported by some countries.

Conservation and Management:
Management and restoration should be directed to maintanance of large, unfragmented stands of ancient woodland with a rich structure of native shrubs and trees and a mosaic of developmental stages including gaps.  Where woodlands are grazed, this should not be so intensive as to prevent regeneration.

Conservation Status:
Annex I types:
9020: BOR U2, CON U2
9160: ALP U2, ATL U2, BOR U2, CON U1, MED XX
9170: ALP U1, ATL U2, BLS FV, CON U1, PAN U2
91G0: ALP U1, BLS U1, CON U1, PAN U1
91L0: ALP U2, CON U1, MED U1, PAN U1
91Y0: CON U1, ST

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Severe damage will require a very long time for recovery because of the high species diversity of this forest type including many ancient woodland species with low dispersal capacity and requirements for a mesic woodland climate.

Summary:
These are mixed deciduous broadleaved woodlands typical of free-draining or impeded brown soils of moderate to high base-status and nutrient content across the lowlands and foothills of temperate Europe, with local extensions into the submediterranean, Pannonian and Boreal zones. The canopy can be rich and varied in composition and of complex structure, often with an extensive understorey, and these woodlands have long been affected by diverse traditions of sustainable silviculture, giving high cultural value. Virgin old-growth stands are very few. The field layer has a core of widely distributed mesophyte herbs with some striking regional differences. The major threat is clearance and replacement by other commercial forest types and agriculture, poor silvicultural management of remaining stands, eutrophication and over-grazing. Restoration of fragmented stands is a priority wherever possible to facilitate the population dynamics and spread of dispersal-limited ancient woodland species.

References:
Knollová, I. & Chytrý, M. (2004) Oak-hornbeam forests of the Czech Republic:geographical and ecological approaches to vegetation classification. Preslia 76: 291-311.
Rodwell, J.S. & Dring, J. (2001).  European significance of British woodland types. Lancaster: Unit of Vegetation Science Report to English Nature.
Suck, R., Bushart, M, Hofmann, G. & Schröder, L. (2013). Karte der Potentiellen Natürlichen Vegetation Deutschlands. Band II. Kartierungseinheiten. BfN-Skripten 349. Bonn.

Criterion A Text:
Based on countries with complete data excluding Norway (with inconsistent data), representing 60% of the total area: 30% is reported as stable, 12% as increasing and 18% as decreasing.

Criterion B Text:
EOO and AOO are very large. Reports indicate a slight but continuing overall decline in extent and threats in the next 20 years caused by forest use, drainage and fragmentation.

Criterion C/D Text:
This combination of moderate decrease in quality across a relatively large proportion of the extent results in an assessment of Near Threatened (NT) under criterion C/D1.

Synthesis:
This mesic deciduous woodland type is evaluated Near Threatened (NT) because of a moderate decline in area affecting relatively large parts of the area (criterion C/D1). The habitat is assessed Least concern (LC) with respect to all other criteria, because the calculated trend in area over the lats 50 years is relatively low (-10%, criterion A) and this forest type is widespread in Europe.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
This woodland habitat has distinctive Atlantic and Continental types with transitions to the submediterranean Iberia and the Balkan which may warrant separate assessment. Also the unfavourable conservation status of its most important Annex I

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J.S. Rodwell, with additions of R.-J. Bijlsma
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, L. Aunina, S. Bagella, E. Bendiksen, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Bölöni, T.E. Brandrud, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, J.A. Campos, A. ÄŒarni, L. Casella, R. Delarze, M. Dimitrov, D. Espírito-Santo, P. Finck, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, L. De Keersmaeker, J. Janssen, N. Juvan, K. J. Kirby, T. Kontula, V. Matevski, F. O’Neill, B. Nygaard, G. Pezzi, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, U. Riecken, V. Stupar, A. Thomaes, M.ValachoviÄ, K. Vanderkerkhove, N. Velkovski, D. Viciani, L. Wibail, W. Willner
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G1.7a Temperate and submediterranean thermophilous deciduous woodland

Habitat Description:
These thermophilous broadleaved deciduous woodlands form a wide, but interrupted, belt across the submediterranean zone of Europe, with milder winters and warmer drought-prone summers than sustain the broadleaved temperate woodlands, but colder, intermittently frosty and snowy winters than are typical for the evergreen broadleaved woodlands and scrub of the Mediterranean. To the north, they tend to occupy lower altitude, drier and warmer sites, to the south, rainier sites at higher altitudes, but the relief and parent materials differ widely across the range and the weakly base-rich to moderately acidic soils are of varied types. The canopy, rarely very tall, is dominated by thermophilous and drought-resistant deciduous (and some evergreen) trees, among which oaks are the commonest contributors to an upper tier. Quercus petraea and Q. robur remain important in the sub-Continental thermophilous woodlands of the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Ukraine and the northern Balkans but, across much of the range through France, northern Spain, Switzerland, northern Italy, the Pannonian Basin, around the Adriatic and in Greece, Q. pubescens is the leading oak, with Q. cerris and Q. frainetto becoming important from Italy eastwards. Q. dalechampii, Q. polycarpa and Q. virgiliana are common associates, with Q. trojana in the Balkans. In the Iberian Peninsula, Q. pyrenaica, Q. faginea ssp. faginea, Q. faginea ssp. broteroi and Q. canariensis replace these oaks as dominants. In less modified stands there is a second tier of trees with, across much of the range, Sorbus torminalis, S. domestica, S. aria, Ulmus minor, Acer campestre, A. monspessulanum and Pyrus pyraster, with Fraxinus ornus, Ostrya carpinifolia and Carpinus orientalis commoner in the south-eastern regions, Acer tataricum and Tilia tomentosa mainly in the more Continental east. The light shade cast by the oaks and thinning of the canopy characteristically permit a dense shrub layer among which Cornus mas, Viburnum lantana, Ligustrum vulgare, Ruscus aculeatus, Crataegus monogyna, Prunus spinosa and Cotinus coggygria are frequent along with more mesic shrubs like Corylus avellana, Cornus sanguinea and Euonymus europaeus. To the west, Buxus sempervirens and Rubus ulmifolius occur, to the southeast Paliurus spina-christi, Hippocrepis emerus, Pistacia mutica and Juniperus excelsa and, in the warmer south, evergreen Mediterranean species such as Phillyrea latifolia, Arbutus unedo, Pistacia lentiscus, P. terebinthus, Viburnum tinus and Erica arborea. Lianas are common with Clematis vitalba, Lonicera caprifolium, L. etrusca, Tamus communis, Rubia peregrina and Hedera helix the most consistent species throughout. The herb layer is rich with sub-Mediterranean species making a prominent contribution: Lithospermum purpurocaeruleum, Lathyrus venetus, Melittis melissophyllum, Tanacetum corymbosum, Silene coronaria, Potentilla micrantha, Vincetoxicum hirundinaria, Physospermum cornubiense, Hellebrous odorus, H. foetidus, Mercurialis ovata and Viola hirta are characteristic through much of the range, with many other species occurring in particular regional types.
Indicators of quality:
• Natural composition of canopy
• Structural diversity/complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
• Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
• Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
• Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration
• Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
• Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which needs large undisturbed forests)
• Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora & fauna)
• No signs of eutrophication or pollution
• No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates
Characteristic species:
Flora (vascular plants):
Canopy trees: Quercus pubescens, Q. cerris, Q. frainetto, Q. dalechampii, Q. polycarpa, Q. virgiliana, Q. petraea, Q. robur, Q. pyrenaica, Q. faginea ssp. faginea, Q. faginea ssp. broteroi, Q. canariensis, Q. trojana, Sorbus torminalis, S. domestica, S. aria, Ulmus minor, Acer campestre, A. monspessulanum, Pyrus pyraster, Fraxinus ornus, Ostrya carpinifolia, Carpinus orientalis, Acer tataricum, Tilia tomentosa.
Shrub layer: Cornus mas, Viburnum lantana, Ligustrum vulgare, Ruscus aculeatus, Crataegus monogyna, Prunus spinosa, Cotinus coggygria, Corylus avellana, Cornus sanguinea, Euonymus europaeus, Buxus sempervirens, Rubus ulmifolius, Paliurus spina-christi, Hippocrepis emerus, Pistacia mutica, Juniperus excelsa, Phillyrea latifolia, Arbutus unedo, Pistacia lentiscus, P. terebinthus, Viburnum tinus, Erica arborea.
Herb layer: Lithospermum purpurocaeruleum, Lathyrus niger, L. venetus, Melittis melissophyllum, Tanacetum corymbosum, Silene coronaria, Potentilla micrantha, Vincetoxicum hirundinaria, Brachypodium pinnatum, Physospermum cornubiense, Hellebrous odorus, H. foetidus, Mercurialis ovata, Polygonatum odoratum, Viola hirta plus additional species of the regional floras.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G1.7 Thermophilous deciduous woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Junipero excelsae-Quercion pubescentis Jakucs 1960
Aceri tatarici-Quercion Zólyomi 1957
Quercion petraeae Issler 1931
Convallario majalis-Quercion roboris Shevchyk et Solomakha in Shevchyk et al. 1996
Erythronio-Quercion petraeae Ubaldi et al. 1988
Carpino orientalis-Quercion pubescentis Korzhenevsky et Shelyag-Sosonko 1983
Elytrigio nodosae-Quercion pubescentis Didukh 1996
Carpino betuli–Quercion petraeae Grebenshchikov et al. 1990
Quercion confertae Horvat 1958
Quercion petraeae-cerridis LakušiÄ‡ et JovanoviÄ‡ in B. JovanoviÄ‡ ex ÄŒarni et Mucina 2013
Fraxino orni-Ostryion TomaÅ¾iÄ‡ 1940
Crataego laevigati-Quercion cerridis Arrigoni 1997
Pino calabricae-Quercion congestae S. Brullo et al. 1999
Aceri granatensis-Quercion fagineae (Rivas Goday, Rigual et Rivas-Mart. in Rivas Goday et al. 1960) Rivas-Mart. 1987
Quercion pubescentis-petraeae Br.-Bl. 1932 nom. mut.
Carpinion orientalis Horvat 1958
Syringo-Carpinion Jakucs (1959) 1960
Annex I:

91AA Eastern white oak woods
91B0 Thermophilous Fraxinus angustifolia woods
91H0 Pannonian woods with Quercus pubescens
91I0 Euro-Siberian steppic woods with Quercus spp
91M0 Pannonian-Balkanic turkey oak–sessile oak forests
91N0 Pannonic inland sand dune thicket (Junipero-Populetum albae)
91Z0 Moesian silver lime woods
9230 Galicio-Portuguese oak woods with Quercus robur and Quercus pyrenaica
9240 Quercus faginea and Quercus canariensis Iberian woods
9250 Quercus trojana woods
9310 Aegean Quercus brachyphylla woods
Emerald:
G1.7 Thermophilous deciduous woodland
G1.A7 Mixed deciduous woodland of the Black and Caspian Seas
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
8.1 Downy oak forest
8.2 Turkey oak, Hungarian oak and Sessile oak forest
8.3 Pyrenean oak forest
8.4 Portugese oak and Mirbeck's oak Iberian forest
8.5 Macedonian oak forest
8.6 Valonia oak forest
8.7 Chestnut forest
8.8 Other thermophilous deciduous forests
VME:
G Thermophilous mixed deciduous broadleaved forests

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
In the Pannonian region, this habitat type represents one of the most widespread forest types on drier soils. In the Continental region, it is a common forest type in the southern part of this region, especially on the Balkan Peninsula.

Comment EU28:
Current estimated Total Area is an underestimated minimum value because of missing data from some countries.

Comment EU28+:
Current estimated Total Area is an underestimated minimum value because of missing data from some countries.

Trends in Quantity:
The calculated overall trend in quantity is a decrease by 4% (EU28) and 2% (EU28+), respectively. Various trends (increase, stability or decrease) have been reported from different countries. The area of this habitat is decreasing especially in the countries of Central Europe, where this habitat is at the northern limit of its distribution. In contrast, an increase has been reported for most of the countries of Southern Europe, where this habitat represents zonal vegetation in the sub-Mediterranean belt.

Trends in Quality:
Altogether, there has been a decline in habitat quality affecting slightly more than 20% of the total area. The calculated relative severity of degradation is 37% (EU28) and 42% (EU28+), respectively. There are different trends in quality in different parts of the geographical range of this type. While in Southern Europe, quality tends to be stable at most sites, in Central Europe it is generally decreasing, especially due to the spread of shading mesophilous trees in forests in which traditional management by coppicing or livestock grazing has been abandoned.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The EOO of the habitat type is > 50,000 km2, but it is declining especially in the northern part of its distribution range. For example, the spread of mesophilous shading trees such as Carpinus betulus in thermophilous oak forests

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has a broad natural range and occurs often in large stands.

Pressures and Threats:
These forests are threatened by inappropriate forestry management, especially cutting which is occasionally followed by establishment of forestry plantations. Fires are problematic especially in the southern part of the geographical range of this habitat while natural succession towards mesic forests is more typical for the northern part of its range in Central Europe. At many sites, these forests are negatively influenced by overgrazing by game (e.g. mouflon), eutrophication and the spread of alien species.

Conservation and Management:
In the southern part of its geographic range this habitat does not need any specific management, however cutting followed by conversion to forestry plantations should be avoided. In the northern part of the range some of these forests may have developed as a legacy of the historical management such as coppicing or forest grazing; in such cases, restoration of these historical management practices may be needed. Overgrazing by game should be reduced by controlling the game population size.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
91AA: ALP XX, BLS U1, CON U2, MED U2, STE U1
91B0: CON U2, MED U1
91H0: ALP U2, BLS U1, CON U1, PAN U1
91I0: ALP FV, BLS U1, CON U1, PAN U2, STE U2
91M0: ALP U1, BLS U1, CON U1, MED U1, PAN U1, STE U1
91N0:

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The recovery of this habitat should occur mainly by natural means (spontaneous regeneration of canopy trees from stumps). If this does not occur (after several events of disturbance), canopy trees can be planted. In both cases, the typical character and functionality of this habitat can be restored after 50+ years.

Summary:
These thermophilous broadleaved deciduous woodlands form a wide, but interrupted, belt across the submediterranean zone of Europe, with milder winters and warmer drought-prone summers than sustain the broadleaved temperate woodlands, but colder, intermittently frosty and snowy winters than are typical for the evergreen broadleaved woodlands and scrub of the Mediterranean. To the north, they tend to occupy lower altitude, drier and warmer sites, to the south, rainier sites at higher altitudes, but the relief and parent materials differ widely across the range and soils can be the weakly base-rich to moderately acidic. The canopy, rarely very tall, is dominated by thermophilous and drought-resistant deciduous (and some evergreen) trees, among which a diversity of Quercus spp. play an important role. The light shade encourages a rich understorey and herb layer, the composition of which varies with regional climate. The main threats are inappropriate forestry interventions and, in Central Europe, natural succession after cessation of traditional management by coppicing and livestock grazing. Some areas suffer from fires, overgrazing by game and the spread of alien species. The habitat requires nature-friendly forestry management or no management (especially in the south) or restoration of traditional management practices (especially in the north).

References:
European Environment Agency 2006. European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DK.
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. and Rodwell,  J.S. 2013. Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005.  European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DK.

Criterion A Text:
The estimates of the percentage decline over the last 50 years were derived from summarizing expert judgements for several European countries.

Criterion B Text:
The EOO, AOO and number of locations are all far above the thresholds for B criteria.

Criterion C/D Text:
Both biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat is reduced. The Extent of degradation ranges from less than 5% in some western Balkan countries to more than 50% in some countries of Central Europe, where the degradation can be severe. The information was compiled from the country-based estimation by national experts.

Synthesis:
The habitat type is assessed as Least Concern under all criteria, both for EU28 and EU28+, although about 22-23% of its area has experienced a slight decline in quality on average. However, several of its subtypes (e.g. Annex I types) and most of its occurrences in some regions (especially in Central Europe) have been affected by severe decline in quality over large areas.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
This habitat type is defined very broadly and although in general it is classified as NT, it contains several subtypes that are clearly of much higher conservation concern. In particular, most occurrences of this habitat in Central Europe, especially o

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J.S. Rodwell.
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Bölöni, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, L. Casella, M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, M. Dimitrov, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, P. Finck, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, N. Juvan, C. Marcenò, V. Matevski , G. Pezzi, U. Raths, B. Renaux, U. Riecken, S. Sciandrello, Å½. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, V. Stupar, M. ValachoviÄ, N. Velkovski , D. Viciani, W. Willner.
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G3.4a Temperate continental Pinus sylvestris woodland

Habitat Description:
These are Pinus sylvestris woodlands with patchy occurrence across the hemiboreal and northern temperate zone of Europe. This light-demanding tree has a competitive advantage on more nutrient-poor soils that are less favourable to Picea abies or broad-leaved deciduous trees, or are beyond their geographical range. The pine canopy is often rather open in southern Scandinavia, more closed to the west in Scotland and further south where the woodland occurs across north Germany, Poland, Latvia and Lithuania and into Ukraine and Russia. Unable to rejuvenate beneath denser canopies or in a thick moss and litter carpet, the pine is naturally dependent on fire or canopy clearance for regeneration, so even-aged groves are common. Common associates in the canopy are Betula pendula, B. pubescens, Populus tremula, Juniperus communis and Sorbus aucuparia. Other local Sorbus spp., Quercus robur and Frangula alnus are found more commonly further south. Beneath, there is a cover of Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Rubus saxatilis and Melampyrum pratense together with more thermophilous nemoral plants such as Hepatica nobilis, Melica nutans, Anemone nemorosa, Carex digitata and Epipactis atrorubens. Contrasts in soils also exert an influence on the associated flora, a dry grassland and meadow contingent with basiphilous species characterizing the pine woodlands of limestones with rendzinas in southern Sweden, Öland and Gotland, while more calcifuge species appearing on the podzols of the outwash plains, periglacial deposits and river terraces of the northern European plain – Luzula pilosa, Pyrola chlorantha, Carex digitata, Hylocomium splendens, Dicranum scoparium, D. polysetum and Pleurozium schreberi. On the inland sands of Poland, psammophytic pine woodlands have Peucedanum oreoselinum, Anthericum ramosum and Dianthus carthusianorum. In some subtypes extensive cover of lichens can occur with mostly Cetraria and Cladonia species.
Indicators of quality:
• No forest exploitations (if applicable, mainly azonal types with high nature value).
• Natural composition of canopy.
• Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers.
• Typical flora and fauna composition of the region.
• Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi.
• Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration.
• Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity.
• Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests).
• Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora and fauna).
• No signs of eutrophication or pollution.
• No signs of acidification (relevant mainly for oligotrophic or acidic types).
• No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates.
Characteristic species:
Canopy trees and shrubs: Pinus sylvestris, Betula pendula, B. pubescens, Populus tremula, Juniperus communis, Sorbus aucuparia, Quercus robur, Frangula alnus.
Field layer: Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Rubus saxatilis, Melampyrum pratense, Agrostis coarctata, Avenella flexuosa, Pyrola chlorantha.
Mosses: Hylocomium splendens, Pleurozium schreberi, Leucobryum glaucum, Dicranum polysetum, Polytrichum piliferum, P. juniperinum.
Lichens: Cladonia arbuscula, Cladonia portentosa, C. furcata, C. rangiferina and Cetraria islandica.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.4 [Pinus sylvestris] woodland south of the taiga
G3.5 [Pinus nigra] woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Caragano fruticis-Pinion sylvestris Solomeshch et al. 2002
Veronico teucrii-Pinion sylvestris Ermakov et Solomeshch in Ermakov et al. 2000
Trollio europaei-Pinion sylvestris Fedorov ex Ermakov et al. 2000
Dicrano-Pinion (Libbert 1933) W. Matuszkiewicz 1962
Festuco-Pinion sylvestris Passarge 1968
Koelerio glaucae-Pinion sylvestris Ermakov 1999
Annex I:
9060 Coniferous forest on, or connected to , glaciofulvial eskers
91C0 Caledonian forest
91T0 Central European lichen scots pine forests
91U0 Sarmatic steppe pine forest
Emerald:
G3.41 Caledonian forest
G3.4232 Sarmatic steppe Pinus sylvestris forests
G3.4233 Carpathian steppe Pinus sylvestris woods
G3.4234 Pannonic steppe Pinus sylvestris woods
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
2.2 Nemoral Scots pine forest
EVM:
D5.3.1 Hemiboreal and nemoral pine forests: Lowland to submontane types & Middle and southern boreal to hemiboreal pine forests: montane type.

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
In the temperate zone Pinus sylvestris forests are azonal vegetation. They are more characteristic of the boreal zone.

Comment EU28:
Current estimated Total Area cannot be provided because of missing data from some countries. The figure represents the minimum area of occurrence.

Comment EU28+:
Current estimated Total Area cannot be provided because of missing data from some countries. The figure represents the minimum area of occurrence.

Trends in Quantity:
The extent of this habitat tends to be stable in the northern part of its geographic range and in moutainous areas. In contrast, it tends to decline in the lowland areas of Central Europe.

Trends in Quality:
Large areas of this habitat (about 86%) have been affected by degradation, which is on average moderate, in places slight, in other places severe. Across most of its range this habitat type is decreasing in quality, though in some areas, especially in the Alps, it can be stable. Severe degradation and decrease in quality is more common especially in areas affected by nitrogen deposition, in the lowlands and in the southern part the habitat's range. To a large extent, the decrease in quality is probably related to eutrophication due to atmospheric nitrogen accumulation. Increased nitrogen availability results in the spread of nutrient-demanding, often invasive and competitively strong plant species, which tend to outcompete oligotrophic, competitively week species of the herb layer that are typical of this habitat. An example of a subtype that has experienced severe decline in quality is the lichen-rich pine forests in the Central European lowlands (e.g. in Poland, Annex I type 91T0 Central European lichen Scots pine forests), which are loosing their formerly rich synusiae of terricolous macrolichens, partly perhaps due to nutrient enrichment, but the increase in winter temperatures can also be responsible.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 30% (the main range of this type is in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia) of the habitat type lies within the EU 28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has not undergone a major regression.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has a large range, but a small area of occupancy within this range.

Pressures and Threats:
There are various threats affecting this habitat, including forestry management such as logging and conversion to forestry plantations, extraction of sand or stone, development of infrastructure, eutrophication, natural succession and forest grazing.

Conservation and Management:
The conservation measures suggested to protect this habitat include protection of existing stands, application of nature-friendly forestry management, and continuation of historical management in places where these forests are a legacy of past management.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
9060: BOR U2
91C0: ATL U2
91T0: ALP XX, ATL U2, BOR U2, CON U2, PAN U2
91U0: CON U2

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
After major disturbance, this habitat can regenerate through natural succession within 20-30 years. No intervention is needed.

Summary:
This habitat occurs patchily across the hemiboreal and northern temperate zone of Europe where the light-demanding Pinus sylvestris has a competitive advantage on more nutrient-poor soils less favourable to Picea abies or broad-leaved deciduous trees, or beyond their geographical range. The density of the pine canopy can vary and unable to rejuvenate beneath denser canopies or in a thick moss and litter carpet, the Pinus is naturally dependent on fire or canopy clearance for regeneration, so even-aged groves are common. Woody associates and the heathy field layer reflect the more common acidic character of the soils but distinctive basiphilous and psammophilous floras appear locally where the habitat develops on limestones and inland sands. Logging and conversion to forestry plantations, extraction of sand or stone, development of infrastructure, eutrophication, natural succession and forest grazing all threaten this habitat. Conservation measures suggested for this habitat include protection of existing stands, application of nature-friendly forestry management, and continuation of historical management in places where these forests are a legacy of the past.

References:
Schaminée, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. and Rodwell, J.S. 2013. Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DK.

Criterion A Text:
Based on country assessments done by national experts, this habitat is considered to have undergone approximately 3% reduction in quantity over the last 50 years. There is no available information on historic or future reductions and this habitat is therefore assessed as Least Concern under Criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
Taking into account the large geographic distribution of this habiat, it is assessed as Least Concern under Criterion B. There is a continuing decline in abiotic and biotic quality. The number of locations was not calculated and is therefore unknown. Data source: Art17 excl. FI + EVA CH UA.

Criterion C/D Text:
Summarizing estimates provided by national experts revealed that there has been a a slight decline in quality of ca. 42-43% severity affecting approximately 66% of the extent extent of this habitat in the last 50 years, which is close to the threshold for Vulnerable. This habitat is therefore assessed as Near Threatened under Criterion C/D1. There is no available information on historic or future trends in the quality of this habitat.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Near Threatened (NT) based on criterion C/D1, because it has experienced a slight decline in quality (42-43% severity affecting 66% of its extent, which is close to the threshold for Vulnerable (50% decline affecting 50% of the extent of the habitat).

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Central European lowland subtypes of this habitat type are of special conservation concern, since they are threatened by eutrophication and associated succession involving replacement of pine with broad-leaved trees. This habitat type also includes Ann

Contributors:
Habitat description: J. Rodwell
Territorial data:  S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, L. Aunina, E. Bendiksen, T.E. Brandrud, G. Buffa, A. ÄŒarni, M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, P. Finck, N. Juvan, Z. KÄ…cki, G. Király, K.J.. Kirby, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, B. Renaux, U. Riecken, I. Sell, A. Ssymank, M. ValachoviÄ, W. Willner
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G3.4b Temperate and submediterranean montane Pinus sylvestris-Pinus nigra woodland

Habitat Description:
This habitat is formed by Scots and Black Pine forests (mostly xerophilous, but also some mesophilous), distributed in isolated and not very large stands on calcareous (limestone, dolomite) or ultramafic (serpentine) rocks, in the Alps, Jura, Bohemian-Moravian Highlands, Carpathian, Dinaride and Bulgarian mountains. The Black Pine forests of the Crimean Mountains which are rich in steppe and submediterranean species also belong to this habitat. These communities are mainly relic and limited to specific kinds of terrain. They occur in different vegetation belts, from the xerothermic oak belt, through the mesophilic hornbeam-beech forest belt up to the microthermic coniferous forest belt and hence fall into different climatic and geographical territorial subdivisions. The aspect of the slopes with Black Pine forest can vary but is mainly southern, sometimes eastern or western and the slopes can be very steep. The Scots Pine forests mainly occupy slopes with a northerly exposure and inhabit the low and middle part of mountains and valleys in the Alps, with altitudes between 500 and 1,400 m asl. The terrain is mostly steep or very steep slopes, with many rock outcrops. The soils are mostly shallow immature rendzic leptosols, often eroded. The humidity can vary throughout the growing season from low to moderate. These forests are mostly monodominant or, less commonly, have a mixed canopy with various other conifers, for example Picea abies and Larix decidua, and deciduous trees including Sorbus aria, depending on the neighbouring communities. The forests are open, the trees often not much taller than 10 m, with a rich shrub or herbaceous layer and the flora is characterized by a significant proportion of central and south-European (submediterranean) species; many species of the boreal/continental taiga are absent. On dry alluvial plains and fans, there are more mesophytic pine woodlands with Salix purpurea, S. elaeagnos and S. daphnoides and a grassy field layer with Calamagrostis varia and Molinia arundinacea. In the western Alps, herbs such as Ononis rotundifolia, Astragalus monspessulanus and A. vesicarius provide a floristic link with the open pine woodlands of the southern slopes of the Pyrenees where Juniperus communis subsp. hermisphaerica, Buxus sempervirens and Cytisus oromediterraneus occur in the shrub layer, accompanied on more siliceous rocks by Vaccinium myrtillus, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi and Calluna vulgaris. The Scots Pine forests of the Southern Alps have a dense understorey of Erica carnea (Erico carneae-Pinion) while distinctive Scots Pine forests occur locally in the Slovakian Carpathians with endemics such as Pulsatilla slavica, Thymus carpathicus, Campanula carpatica, Festuca tatrae (Pulsatilo slavicae-Pinion). The Scots Pine forests on amphibolites and limestone in the Southern Carpathians also have a diverse understorey with some relict and submediterranean species such as Daphne blagayana, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Sesleria rigida. The forests dominated by Black Pine (Erico-Fraxinion orni, Fraxino orni-Pinion nigrae, Chamaecytiso hirsuti-Pinion pallasianae) are more diverse and have endemic subspecies in the southern part of habitat’s range – Italian and Slovenian Alps, Dinarides, Bulgarian mountains and Romanian Carpathians. The dominant species there are represented by different subspecies – subsp. nigra to the north, subsp. pallasiana to the south, subsp. dalmatica as a local endemic in the Croatian Dinarides. The shrubs and herb layers are even more diverse than in Scots Pine forests and include many species from neighbouring deciduous and coniferous forests. On serpentine rocks, there are also some typical serpentinophytes. The age of forests can be 80-100 years, even up to 200 years in some stands. Throughout the range of this habitat, Black and Scots pines are widely cultivated and numerous coniferous plantations exist often alongside the natural forests. These plantations, if occurring at sites where Black or Scots pine forest is not natural vegetation, are not included in the habitat.
Indicators of quality:
• No forest exploitations (if applicable, mainly azonal types with high nature value).
• Natural composition of canopy.
• Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers.
• Typical flora and fauna composition of the region.
• Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi.
• Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration.
• Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity.
• Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests).
• Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora and fauna).
• No signs of eutrophication or pollution.
• No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates.
Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Abies alba, Amelanchier ovalis, Anthericum ramosum, Anthemis carpatica, Aquilegia einseleana, A. vulgaris, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Armeria elongata subsp. serpentini, Asperula capitata, Asplenium cuneifolium, Berberis vulgaris, Betula pendula, Biscutella laevigata, Brachypodium pinnatum, Bruckenthalia spiculifolia, Buphthalmum salicifolium, Campanula divergens, Calamagrostis varia, Calluna vulgaris, Campanula carpatica, C. cervicaria, C. kladniana, Carex alba, C. flacca, C. humilis, C. ornithopoda, Carpinus orientalis, Ceterach officinarum, Centaurea rhenana, C. scabiosa, Chamaecytisus supinus, Coronilla vaginalis, Corylus colurna, Cotoneaster integerrimus, C. nebrodensis, Cotinus coggygria, Crocus veluchensis, Cyclamen purpurascens, Daphne blagayana, D. cneorum, Deschampsia flexuosa, Dianthus carthusianorum, D. petraeus, D. spiculifolius, Epipactis atrorubens, Erica carnea, Erythronium dens-canis, Euphorbia amygdaloides, E. glabriflora, E. saxatilis, Festuca xanthina, F. tatrae, Galium lucidum, Genista januensis, G. radiata, Geranium sanguineum, Gymnadenia odoratissima, Globularia aphyllanthes, Goodyera repens, Fagus sylvatica, Festuca xanthina, Fraxinus ornus, Genista radiata, Helianthemum nummularium, Helleborus niger, Hepatica nobilis, Hieracium bifidum, Hippocrepis comosa, Hypericum rochelii, Iris ruthenica, Juniperus communis, Kernera saxatilis, Lembotropis nigricans, Laserpitium krapfii, Leontodon incanus, Linum flavum, Luzula sylvatica, Melampyrum angustissimum, M. pratense, M. sylvaticum, Molinia caerulea, Monotropa hypopitys, Neottia nidus-avis, Ostrya carpinifolia, Phyteuma orbiculare, Picea abies, Pimpinella saxifraga, Pinus nigra, P. sylvestris, Populus tremula, Potentilla heptaphylla, Primula auricula ssp. hungarica, Polygala chamaebuxus, Pteridium aquilinum, Pulsatilla slavica, Pyrola chlorantha, Seseli libanotis, Sesleria caerulea (= albicans), S. rigida, Sorbus aria, Rosa pendulina, Rubus saxatilis, Stachys scardica, Sorbus aria, Symphytum tuberosum, Teucrium chamaedrys, Thymus carpathicus, T. comosus, T. pulcherrimus, Tolpis staticifolia, Vaccinium myrtillus, Veronica chamaedrys, Vicia villosa.
Mosses: Bryum capillare, Dicranum polysetum, D. scoparium, Ditrichum flexicaule, Homalothecium philipeanum, Hypnum cupressiforme, Hylocomium splendens, Leucobryum glaucum, Pleurozium schreberi, Pseudoscleropodium purum, Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus, Rhytidium rugosum, Tortella tortuosa
Lichens: Cladonia fimbriata, C. furcata, C. rangiferina, Solorina saccata

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.4 Pinus sylvestris woodland south of the taiga
G3.5 Pinus nigra woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Erico carneae-Pinion Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 nom. invers. propos.
Pulsatillo slavicae-Pinion Fajmonová 1978
Erico-Fraxinion orni Horvat 1959 nom. invers. propos.
Fraxino orni-Pinion nigrae Em 1978
Chamaecytiso hirsuti-Pinion pallasianae Barbero et Quézel ex Quézel 1992
Pinion pallasianae Korzhenevsky 1998
Libanotido intermediate-Pinion sylvestris Didukh 2003
Annex I:
91CA Rhodopide and Balkan Range Scots pine forests
91Q0 Western Carpathian calcicolous Pinus sylvestris forests
91R0 Dinaric dolomite Scots pine forests (Genisto januensisâ€‘Pinetum)
9530 (Sub-) Mediterranean pine forests with endemic black pines (in parts of Greece and Bulgaria)
Emerald:
G3.43 Inner-Alpine Ononis steppe forests
G3.44 Spring heath Pinus sylvestris forests
G3.4C Southeastern European Pinus sylvestris forests
G3.5 Pinus nigra woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate forests
EFT:
3.3 Alpine Scots pine and Black pine forest
VME:
K1 Xerophytic pine forests and woodlands

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
These forests are typical of the Alpine biogeographic region, with most occurrences concentrated to this region.

Map Description:
The map is incomplete in the Balkan countries. Data sources: Art17, EVA, ETS.

Trends in Quantity:
While in some areas the quantity of this habitat  is slightly increasing (e.g. France) or slightly decreasing (e.g. Switzerland), the general trend in quantity of this habitat is stable.

Trends in Quality:
The quality of this habitat is stable in the main areas of its distribution (larger mountain ranges), but it is decreasing especially in the marginal areas of its distribution, e.g. at lower altitudes.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Of the current distribution of this habitat, approximately 60% lies within the EU 28. This habitat is further distributed in Switzerland, the countries of ex-Yugoslavia, Turkey and Crimea.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
There has been no significant regression of the natural range of this habitat.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat occurs across several mountain ranges.

Pressures and Threats:
The habitat is threatened by logging, fires, inappropriate forestry management, stone quarrying, temperature change, skiing and phytopatogen infestations, especially the pine processionary moth (Thaumetopoea pityocampa).

Conservation and Management:
In most cases these forests do not require any management. They should be protected from logging and destruction by opening and extension of stone quarries.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
91CA: ALP U1, CON U1
91Q0: ALP FV
91R0: ALP FV, CON FV

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
After logging or burning these forests can regenerate within 20 years by natural succession without human intervation.

Summary:
This habitat comprises Pinus sylvestris and P. nigra forests occurring often as isolated and smallish stands within temperate and submediterranean Europe, often confined to distinctive kinds of terrain. Favoured situations are mostly steep slopes, with many rock outcrops and  shallow immature soils. The humidity can vary throughout the growing season from low to moderate. These forests are mostly monodominant or, less commonly, have a mixed canopy with various other conifers and deciduous trees, usually open, the trees often not much taller than 10 m. There can be rich shrub and herbaceous layers and the flora varies considerably through the different mountain ranges and according to the particular substrate. The habitat is threatened mainly by inappropriate forestry management and stone quarrying. To achieve favourable conservation status, in most cases these forests should be left to spontaneous development, protected from logging and from the opening and expansion of stone quarries.

References:
Chytrý, M. 2013. Bazifilní podhorské bory (Erico-Pinetea). In: Chytrý, M. (ed.). Vegetation of the Czech Republic. 4. Forest and scrub vegetation. Academia, Praha, pp. 366–371.
European Environment Agency. 2006. European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DK.
DoniÈ›Äƒ, N., ChiriÈ›Äƒ, C. and StÄƒnescu, V. (eds.). 1990. Tipuri de ecosisteme forestiere din România. C.M.D.P.A., I.C.A.S., BucureÈ™ti, RO.
Horvat, I. 1959. Sistematski odnosi termofilnih hrastovih iborovih suma Jugoistocne Evrope. Bioloski glasnik 12: 1–40.
Minghetti, P. 2003. Le pinete a Pinus sylvestris del Trentino-Alto Adige (Alpi italiane). Tipologia, ecologia e corologia. Braun-Blanquetia 33: 1–95.
Schaminée, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. and Rodwell, J.S. 2013. Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DK.
ZupanÄiÄ‡, M. 2007. Syntaxonomic problems of the classes Vaccinio-Piceetea and Erico-Pinetea in Slovenia. Fitosociologia 44 (2): 3–13.

Criterion A Text:
Based on country assessments done by national experts, this habitat is considered to have undergone a 3.2% reduction in quantity in the EU 28 over the last 50 years, and a 3% reduction in quantity in the EU 28+ region over the same time period. There is no available information on historic or future reductions and this habitat is therefore assessed as Least Concern under Criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
Taking into account the large geographic distribution of this habitat, it is assessed as Least Concern under Criterion B. Sources: HT 91Q0 + 91R0 + EVA data.

Criterion C/D Text:
There has been a slight decline (approximately 27% relative severity) in quality affecting approximately 14% of the extent of this habitat over the past 50 years. This decline in quality was established by summarizing estimates provided by national experts. There is no available information on historic or future reductions in quality, and this habitat is therefore assessed as Least Concern under Criterion C/D1.

Synthesis:
This habitat is assessed as Least Concern (LC), because it has an extensive distribution across several European mountain ranges, the reduction in area has been small (in some areas this habitat type has been stable or even slightly spreading) and the decline in quality only affects a small proportion of the total area.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Occurrences at the distribution limit of this habitat, especially in the foothill areas of the large mountain ranges, require special attention. Many of these stands have specific species composition and ecology, but they tend to occur in small patches

Contributors:
Type description: R. Tzonev
Territorial data: O. Argagnon, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, C. Bita-Nicolae, G. Buffa, A. ÄŒarni, M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, M. Dimitrov, P. Dimopoulos, P. Finck, N. Juvan, Z. KÄ…cki, G. Király, V. Matevski, G. Pezzi, U. Raths, U. Riecken, Å½. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, D. SteševiÄ‡, V. Stupar, N. Velkovski, D. Viciani, W. Willner
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
This habitat combines conifer woods dominated by Cupressus sempervirens and/or various juniper species, including Juniperus excelsa, J. drupacea, J. foetidissima and J. thurifera. The few stands of Juniperus phoenicea and J. oxycedrus that qualify as woodlands are also attributed in this unit. The following sub-types can be distinguished: • Natural Cupressus sempervirens-dominated woodlands are found in South Anatolia, Cyprus, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, Cyrenaica and the islands of southeast Greece, while isolated occurrences are also reported in Iran, Tunisia and Morocco. They form moderately open (cover ca. 60%) to open canopies often with thermophillous coastal pines (Pinus halepensis, P. brutia) or forming mixed stands with Acer sempervirens and Quercus coccifera. The woodlands are found on mountainous rocky slopes, in a wide range of altitudes, slopes and expositions. C. sempervirens form stands from the thermo- to the upper levels of the supra-Mediterranean zones and exhibits no clear preference for geological substrate, growing on shallow and dry to deep and moist soils. • Juniperus excelsa woodlands are distributed throughout the eastern Mediterranean, from the southern and central Balkans (Greece, Albania, Bulgaria, FYROM), through Anatolia (regionally widespread and continuously distributed along the Taurus chain in southern Anatolia), to Ukraine and Crimea, central and southwest Asia (Turkmenistan, Cyprus, Iran, Lebanon, Syria), Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia) and east Africa (Quézel and Médail 2003). The species does not occur in regions with annual precipitation below 500 mm. In the Balkan peninsula, the altitudinal range of distribution is from 100 to 1300 m, yet in Turkey it goes up to 2200 m. It occurs in xerothermic sites, most frequently on limestone, diabase or serpentine, and often forms rather small, almost pure associations. • Juniperus foetidissima woodlands are found in mountainous areas of the eastern Mediterranean region, mainly in the central and south Balkans (Albania, FYROM, Greece), Cyprus, Lebanon, Syria, Asiatic Turkey (rare or absent on the interior plateau), SE Caucasus to the coast of the Caspian Sea in Azerbaijan, along the coast of the Black Sea near Novorossiysk and in the Crimea (Farjon 1992). The Juniperus excelsa and J. foetididissima woodlands exhibit growth plasticity and can adapt to the soil dryness of the mountainous rocky slopes, forming the human-induced tree limits. They mainly occur on limestones in the meso- to upper supra-Mediterannean zone. Their canopy is moderately open (cover ca 60%) to open (cover <50%). Deciduous elements in the canopy are not uncommon, as for example Fraxinus ornus, Carpinus orientalis and Quercus pubescens, while at the higher altitudes the junipers are often associated with Astracantha cretica, Daphne oleoides and Stipa pennata. • Juniperus drupacea woodlands are distributed in the Mediterranean, where they occur in Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Southern Turkey and two mountain locations in Greece (the species just reaches southeastern Europe). In the south Peloponnese mountains in Greece (Parnon and Taigetos), they occupy somewhat extended areas, but in general these woodlands are more widespread outside Europe in Turkey and the Middle East. Within this distribution range, J. drupacea forms mixed montane conifer forests with Abies cilicica, A. cephalonica, Pinus brutia, P. nigra, Cedrus libani, Juniperus excelsa, J. foetidissima, J. oxycedrus, Quercus coccifera, Q. ilex and sometimes with Fagus orientalis. Much of its habitat has been modified into maquis vegetation. It grows on shallow, rocky soils, usually on calcareous or granite rocks at altitudes of between 600-1800 m and occurs in small groups or as solitary trees mixed with other conifer species. • Juniperus thurifera woodlands are scattered throughout the western Mediterranean basin and are relicts from the Tertiary distribution of the species pattern, a now disjunct spread occurring from Algeria and Morocco over the Iberian Peninsula and the Pyrenees to the French and Italian Alps and to Corsica. In general, these woodlands occur in a wide ecological amplitude, forming open stands from an altitude of 140m in Spain to more than 3000m in Mt. Atlas, Morocco. More specifically, and in contrast to the situation in Europe and Algeria, where J. thurifera occurs from 200 to 1800m, the Moroccan stands are associated with sub-humid cold winter bioclimates at the tree line, mainly between elevations of 1800 and 3150m. In Algeria, thuriferous juniper is limited to the Aurès mountains with a number of scattered and often very large trees that are probably the remains of formerly more extensive stands. The Juniperus thurifera woodlands are found on various substrates, slopes and inclinations of the supra-Mediterranean zone. The juniper is often associated with Pinus nigra subsp. nigra, Quercus pubescens, Q. ilex and other Juniper species. • Woodlands of Tetraclinis articulata are restricted to the dry coastal region of Cartagena in south-east Spain (regarding Europe), where these occur as scattered stands with a typical maquis understorey; in North Africa these woodlands are widespread in lowland areas of Morocco and Algeria. Since the canopy of all Cupressaceae woodlands is open, the presence of typical woodland species in the ground-flora is expected to be relatively limited, while, on the other hand, perennial steppe species are expected to dominate
Indicators of quality:
No forest exploitations (if applicable, mainly azonal types with high nature value)
Natural composition of canopy
Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
Typical flora and fauna composition
Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration
Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests)
Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora & fauna)    
No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates
Absence of i) soil trampling signs, ii)  deformation of woody species due to over-browsing, iii) logging, iv) fire signs, v) ruderal taxa.

Characteristic species:
Juniperus thurifera woodlands: Hormathophylla spinosa, Berberis hispanica, B.  vulgaris ssp. cantabrica, Bupleurum fruticescens subsp. spinosum, Daphne laureola, Ephedra major, Juniperus communis subsp. hemisphaerica, J. Juniperus communis subsp. nana, J. sabina, Pinus sylvestris, P. nigra subsp. salzmannii, Prunus prostrata, Rhamnus alpinus, Viburnum lantana; 
Cupressus sempervirens woodlands: Acer sempervirens, Asperula rigida, Centaurea raphanina, Crepis fraasii, Cupressus sempervirens, Cylcamen creticum, Erica arborea, Lamyropsis cynaroides, Luzula nodulosa, Pistacia lentiscus, Prasium majus, Quercus coccifera, Q. Ilex, Ruscus aculeatus, Teucrium microphyllum;  
Juniperus drupacea woodlands: Abies cephalonica, Galium peloponnesiacum, Juniperus drupacea, Iris unguicularis, Phillyrea latifolia, Luzula nudulosa, Digitalis ferruginea ;
Juniperus excelsa & J. foetidissima woodlands: Juniperus excelsa, J. foetidissima, Astracantha cretica, Berteroa obliqua, Melica ciliata, Festuca jeanpertii, Juniperus oxycedrus, Malcolmia graeca subsp. bicolor, Teucrium chamaedrys subsp. chamaedrys, Pterocephalus perennis, Scutellaria rupestris subsp. parnassica, Ajuga orientalis, Stipa pulcherrima, Achillea fraasii, Morina persica, Minuartia hamata, Silene congesta;
Tetraclinis articulara woodlands:  Peroploca angustifolia, Euphorbia dendroides, Juniperus phoenicea subsp. turbinata, Calicotome infesta, Ephedra fragilis, Retama raetam subsp. gussoniei, Pistacia lentiscus, Teucrium fruticans, Asparagus acutifolius, Phillyrea latifolia, Ruta chalapensis, Erica multiflora, Asphodelus ramosus, Hyparrhenia hirta.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.9b Mediterranean Cupressaceae woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Acero sempervirentis-Cupression sempervirentis Barbero et Quézel ex Quézel et al. 1993
Juniperion thuriferae Rivas-Mart. 1969
Junipero excelsae-Quercion pubescentis Jakucs 1960
Juniperion excelsae Em 1985
Abietion cephalonicae Horvat et al. 1974
Juniperion excelsae-foetidissimae Em ex Matevski et al. 2010 (Matevski et.al. 2010)
Berberido creticae-Juniperion foetidissimae Brullo, Giusso & Guarino 2001 (Brullo et.al. 2001)
Annex 1:
9290 *Cupressus forests (Acero-Cupression)
9560 *Endemic forests with Juniperus spp.
9570 *Tetraclinis articulata forests
Emerald:
G 3.9 Coniferous woodland dominated by Cupressaceae or Taxaceae
MAES:
Woodland and Forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate forest
EFT:
10.7 Juniper forests, 10.8 Cypress forest, 10.9 Cedar forest, 10.10 Tetralcinis articulata stands
VME:
K3 Juniper & Cypress open woodlands and scrub

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat includes various sub-habitats, of which the only the Cupressus sempervirens woodlands represent an outstanding example of the Mediterranean biogeographical region from the point of view of their unique presence and total cover in two Mediterranean countries: >98% in Greece and ca. 2% in Cyprus. This broad in concept habitat has a primarily Mediterranenan character which it is represented in other regions as a remnant of a past broader distribution (relictual).

Map Description:
The map is rather complete, although some gaps along the Eastern Adriatic coast may exist. Dat sources: Art17, EVA.

Comment EU28:
Based on the existing data provided by EU Member States. This number is well representing the current actual total area.

Comment EU28+:
Based on the data provided by one of the EU28+ countries. This number is partially and with uncertainty representing the current actual total area.

Trends in Quantity:
The trends of increase and stability in quantity (extent, distribution) have been reported from different countries. The increase and/or stability is mainly related to the reduction of the intensity of the human pressures applied in the Juniperus and Cupressus woodland communities in the EU28, as well as in the EU28+.

Trends in Quality:
From the countries that have provided territorial data on quality, it becomes evident that either there is no negative trend or there is only slight decline in quality in parts of its distribution range.

Pressures and Threats:
The most significant pressure and threat for the Juniperus and Cupressus woodlands -applied more intensively in the past- is extensive woodcutting for timber, firewood, charcoal and fodder at the distribution limits of these Mediterranean woodlands. Large trees have been utilized in the past for making of durables like furniture, but its commercial use is now limited. In some areas firewood may still be extracted from the all the species of Juniperus, as well as of Cupressus sempervirens. Uncontrolled logging, forest clearance, intensive (over-) grazing and browsing, as well as uncontrolled logging may severely influence regeneration patterns and typical structure affecting the conservation status of these woodlands. Competition with broad-leaved deciduous species also contributes to structural and functional changes of the Mediterranean Cupressaceae woodlands.

Conservation and Management:
According to the present knowledge, no specific management measures are implemented within the distribution area of this habitat (EU28, EU28+); it is rather not necessary for the conservation of the Mediterranean Cupressaceae woodlands, due also to the changes in the pastoral systems and the abandonment of villages. Permanent plots monitoring of the structural elements (including their floristic composition) would support the restoration measures to be undertaken in the cases of unfavorable conservation status. The management measures should be in the direction of keeping the openings among the sparsely distributed Juniperus spp. and Cupressus woodlands.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
9290 MED FV
9560: ALP U1, ATL XX, CON U1, MAC U1, MED U2
9570: MED U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The recovery of this habitat should only be based on natural processes (spontaneous regeneration), under the precondition that a well worked out management plan will be implemented regulating the grazing and thus the survival of the seedlings from the trampling and browsing.

Summary:
This habitat combines conifer woodland dominated by Cupressus sempervirens and/or various Juniperus species, and very locally Tetraclinis articulata, on mountainous rocky slopes, in a wide range of altitudes, slopes and expositions at scattered localities through the Mediterranean region. There is usually a moderately open canopy often with thermophilous coastal pines or some Mediterranean broadleaves, and a diversity of associated floras reflecting the terrain and local climate. Firewood collection and charcoal production have much affected this habitat but abandonment offers opportunities for its spread. Forest clearance and intensive grazing and browsing remain as threats to existence or regeneration. Competition with broad-leaved deciduous species also contributes to structural and functional changes. Conservation should focus on encouraging natural regeneration.

References:
Bauer EM, Bergmeier E (2011) The mountain woodlands of Western Crete - plant communities, forest goods, grazing impact and conservation. Phytocoenologia 41 (2): 73-105
Brofas G, Karetsos G, Dimopoulos P, Tsagari C (2006) The natural environment of Cupressus sempervirens in Greece as a basis for its use in the Mediterranean region. Land degradation & Development 17:645-659
Brullo S, Giusso del Galdo G, Guarino R (2001). The orophilous communities of the Pino-Juniperetea class in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean area. Feddes Repertorium 112 (3-4):261-308. doi:10.1002/fedr.20011120308
European Commission DG Environment (2013) Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats
Farjon A (2013) Juniperus thurifera In: IUCN 2014. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed 16 June 2014
Maroulis G, Georgiadis T (2005) The vegetation of supra–forest meadows and rock crevices of Mount Erimanthos (NW Peloponnisos, Greece). Fitosociologia 42 (1):33-56
Matevski V, ÄŒarni A, Kostadinovski M, Marinšek A, Mucina L, PaušiÄ A, Šilc U (2010) Notes on phytosociology of Juniperus excelsa in Macedonia (Southern Balkan Peninsula). Hacquetia 9 (1):161-165. doi:10.2478/v10028-010-0005-z

Criterion A Text:
The reduction in quantity is very slight; the calculation (estimation of the decline) is based on almost all the countries that have provided territorial data (except France for which no trend has been reported).

Criterion B Text:
The habitat is relatively widespread in the Mediterranean with main distribution areas in Portugal and Spain to the western part of the Mediterranean and in Greece to the eastern part of the Mediterranean. The EOO is larger than 50000 and the AOO larger than 50 km2.

Criterion C/D Text:
The dedcline in quality is estimated on the basis of the national experts etimates (countries that have provided data); no or slightly affeted area (0.25%) of low severity has been reported for the habitat. The current trend regarding the biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat is stable to slightly decrasing to one country.

Synthesis:
Although the quantitive data for quality are lacking for almost half of the countries where the habitat is distributed, the Red List Criteria qualify for a Least Concern Status. This assessment is due to the extensive distribution in across the Mediterranean, the reduction in area has been small (mostly stable or slight reduction) and the quality decline occurs over small proportion of the total area.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
A very variable habitat, which combines conifer woods dominated by Cupressus sempervirens and/or various juniper species, including Juniperus excelsa, J. drupacea, J. foetidissima and J. thurifera. The few s

Contributors:
Habitat definition: P. Dimopoulos & F. Xystrakis
Territorial data: O. Argagnon, S. Bagella, G. Buffa, J.Capelo, M. Dimitrov, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, J. Loidi, V. Matevski, N. Velkovski
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G2.1 Mediterranean evergreen Quercus woodland

Habitat Description:
This woodland habitat is naturally dominated by evergreen oaks with associated broadleaved sclerophyllous and lauriphyllous evergreen trees and shrubs adapted to the summer drought of the thermo-mediterranean climate. Stands have been modified in various degrees due to long histories of exploitation, clearance and regrowth, as well as by natural disturbance from fires, disease and insect infestation, interventions which affect both the structure and species composition of stands. Transitional degraded stages  of these woodlands to maquis and garrigues, are widespread throughout the distribution area of the habitat; in some regions there are transitions to the savannah-like vegetation of dehesas (Spain) or montado (Portugal) (Annex I habitat type 6310: Dehesas with evergreen Quercus), where the underlying vegetation can be largely unshaded pasture quite different from the associated flora of this woodland. In representative stands of this habitat, the tree canopy can be up to 15m (or more) high,  although it is often lower; the layer beneath the oaks tree canopy typically consists of other sclerophyllous or lauriphyllous species, as well as few deciduous tree and shrub species. Different dominants and co-dominants and associates prevail in different regions and on different terrains; Q. ilex is the most widespread oak in these woodlands largely occurring on base-rich substrata throughout the meso-Mediterranean altitudinal belt. Quercus ilex subsp. ilex occurring from northern and western Iberia through France to the Adriatic region and Greece is the dominant species and the deciduous oak species Q. pubescens participant at the tree layer; Pinus halepensis is also a component of these woods in the Balkan peninsula localities. Q. ilex subsp. rotundifolia is extensive in Portugal and Spain in rather drier sites and more common in dehesas. Quercus coccifera is also widespread and often replaces Q. ilex around the Aegean, dominating in distinctive woodlands of Crete but elsewhere is less common in woodlands and mostly dominates maquis vegetation derived both from evergreen oak woodlands and thermophilous broadleaved woodlands. Q. alnifolia also dominates in some distinctive woodlands of Cyprus. Q. suber is primarily a western Mediterranean tree demanding moister climatic conditions than other evergreen oaks (500-1000mm annual precipitation) and can replace Q. ilex on more acidic and less fertile soils. Quercus suber is mainly distributed in Spain and Portugal and extends eastwards to a coastal belt in southern Italy; Q. suber has been of great commercial interest for its cork bark and acorns being a subsidiary crop used for feeding pigs. In cases that the evergreen oak woodlands occur on coastal dunes throughout the Mediterranean zone, these are considered part of the EUNIS habitat B1.7b: Mediterranean wooded dunes with Quercus spp.
Indicators of quality:
No forest exploitations, especially in sub-type dominated by Q. suber no cork harvesting and forest management for ecological improvement purposes
Natural composition of canopy
Structural diversity/complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration
Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests)
No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Quercus ilex ssp. ilex, Q. ilex ssp. rotundifolia, Q. coccifera, Q. suber, Arbutus unedo, Pistacia lentiscus, Rhamnus alaternus, Fraxinus ornus, Juniperus oxycedrus, Crataegus monogyna, Erica arborea, Phillyrea latifolia, P. angustifolia, Rubia peregrina, Smilax aspera, Hedera helix, Lonicera implexa, Tamus communis, Clematis flammula; Asparagus acutifolius, Ruscus aculeatus, Rubus ulmifolius, Teucrium chamaedrys, Brachypodium sylvaticum, Carex hallerana.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G2.1 Mediterranean evergreen [Quercus] woodland
EuroVeg Checklist:
Quercion calliprini Zohary ex Quézel et al. 1992
Quercion alnifoliae Barbero et Quézel 1979
Quercion ilicis Br.-Bl. ex Molinier 1934
Querco rotundifoliae-Oleion sylvestris Barbero et al. in Rivas-Mart. et al. 1986
Quercion broteroi Br.-Bl. et al. 1956 corr. Rivas-Mart. 1972
Fraxino orni-Quercion ilicis Biondi et al. ex Biondi, Casavecchia et Gigante 2013
Cyclamini cretici-Quercion ilicis Barbero et Quézel ex Quézel et al
Arbuto andrachnes-Quercion cocciferae Barbero et Quézel 1979 Erico-Quercion ilicis S. Brullo et al. 1977
Annex I:
9330 Quercus suber forests
9340 Quercus ilex and Quercus rotundifolia forests
9390 Scrub and low forest vegetation with Quercus alnifolia
93A0 Woodlands with Quercus infectoria (Anagyro foetidae-Quercetum infectoriae)
Emerald:
G2 Broadleaved evergreen woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN :
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
9.1 Mediterranean evergreen oak forest
VME:
G Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest and scrub

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat represents an outstanding example of typical characteristic of the Mediterranean biogeographical region, in terms of area, species composition, structure and functioning.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete. Data sources: Art17, EVA, BOHN and NAT.

Trends in Quantity:
The area of this habitat is considered to be stable or increasing everywhere in Europe.

Trends in Quality:
Based on the calculation of the extent and severity of degradation respectively of 31% and 25%, the current quality trend is considered stable or increasing. Not enough data are reported to estimate the historical and future quality trends.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 90% of the total distribution of the habitat lies within the EU28 countries.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The EOO is greater than 50.000 Km2 and there is no trend of decline in the EU28, except for Italy where a slight (-5%) decline is reported.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat is quite widespread across Europe with significant extent in several countries as Italy, France, Greece, Portugal and Spain.

Pressures and Threats:
Major pressures and threats to this habitat type are considered the fires, the forestry exploitation (harvesting cork) and grazing in forest/woodland.

Conservation and Management:
The suggested conservation approach for this habitat could be the adoption and implementation of an appropriate forest management plan with mild interventions; the applied management measures would allow for a structural improvement of these woodlands with more stands reaching at maturity stage. Through the abandonment of cork exploitation and/or woodland grazing, the Q. suber woodlands might turn into Q. ilex or mixed Q. ilex / Q. suber woodlands.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1 types:
9330: ATL U2, MED U1
9340 : ALP U1, ATL U1, CON FV, MED U1
9390 : MED FV
93A0 : MED FV

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The natural regeneration capacity of the key species plays a crucial role in recovering of this habitat type after damage; no additional actions are necessary to be taken, except avoiding disturbances on natural succession process.

Summary:
This woodland habitat is naturally dominated by evergreen oaks with associated broadleaved sclerophyllous and lauriphyllous evergreen trees and shrubs adapted to the summer drought of the hot climate of the Mediterranean. It has been modified by long histories of exploitation, clearance and regrowth, as well as by natural disturbance from fires, disease and insect infestation. Such interventions have affected both the structure and species composition of stands and transitional degraded stages to maquis and garrigues and, in some regions, to savannah-like vegetation, are common. The tree canopy is often quite low and the layer beneath typically consists of other sclerophyllous or lauriphyllous species, as well as few deciduous tree and shrub species. Different trees and associates prevail in different regions and on different terrains. Major threats to this habitat type are fire, intensive forestry exploitation and grazing. Appropriate forest management with mild interventions and control of grazing are important for conservation.

References:
Aronson, J., Pereira, J. S., & Pausas, J. G. (Eds.). (2012). Cork oak woodlands on the edge: ecology, adaptive management, and restoration. Island Press.
Barbero, M., Loisel, R., & Quézel, P. (1992). Biogeography, ecology and history of Mediterranean Quercus ilex ecosystems. In Quercus ilex L. ecosystems: function, dynamics and management (pp. 19-34). Springer Netherlands.
Biondi, E., Casavecchia, S., & Gigante, D. (2003). Contribution to the syntaxonomic knowledge of the Quercus ilex L. woods of the Central European Mediterranean Basin. Fitosociologia, 40(1), 129-156.
Bugalho, M., Plieninger, T., Aronson, J., Ellatifi, M., & Crespo, D. G. (2009). Open woodlands: a diversity of uses (and overuses). Cork oak woodlands on the edge. Ecology, adaptive management, and restoration, 1st edn. Society for Ecological Restoration International, Island Press, Washington, 33-45.
Rivas-Martínez, S. (1975). La vegetación de la clase Quercetea ilicis en España y Portugal. Anal. Inst. Bot. Cavanilles 31: 205-259.
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. & Rodwell, J.S. (2013). Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005.  Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.   
Tsiourlis, G., Konstantinidis, P., & Xofis, P. (2009). Syntaxonomy and synecology of Quercus coccifera Mediterranean shrublands in Greece. Journal of Plant Biology, 52(5), 433-447.

Criterion A Text:
The habitat has been reported to be stable or increasing throughout its range, with a total of +3.5% positive trend in quantity calculated over the past 50 years. Only Italy has reported a negative trend of about -5% over the past 50 years.

Criterion B Text:
The habitat is widespread with an EOO far larger than 50.000 Km2, AOO much karger than 50 grid cells (10x10 km), and many locations.

Criterion C/D Text:
Most countries reported no or only slight declines, and the average values lie below the thresholds for Near Threatened.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Least Concern for the EU28 and EU28+. The current trend in quantity is stable or increasing. Only in Italy and Spain a decreasing quality trend has been reported. The most important reason for the decline in quality has been cork exploitation and forest management. Overall an improvement of quality is expected due to more forest stands reaching maturity stage.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
A subtype of Quercus suber dominated woodlands may be taken into account for further assessment, because it is declining in part of the range (Italy).

Contributors:
Habitat description: J.S. Rodwell
Territorial Data: E. Agrillo, O Argagnon, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, L. Casella, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, N. Juvan, J. Loidi, C. Marcenò, G. Pezzi, S. Sciandrello, Z. Škvorc, D. SteševiÄ‡ , V. Stupar, D. Viciani
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
Abies alba is a conifer of central and southern Europe where it occupies an intermediate position between Fagus sylvatica and Picea abies, both geographically favouring climates that are only moderately continental, and altitudinally. In areas where both fir and spruce are present, it rarely dominates in a belt between forests of beech and fir, but more often occurs intermixed with these two trees, here especially with beech towards the sub-montane limits of the occurrence of this woodland type. These fir and fir-beech forests are most extensive in the mountain ranges of western and central France, the Black Forest, the Swiss Alps, Austria and the Carpathians, with outliers in the Pyrenees, Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, the Balkans, occurring on usually base-poor soils but extending also on to more base-rich and mesotrophic profiles where distinctive contingents of associates occur, especially in the field layer. Abies temperate moutain woodlands can also be found in Corsica, Italy (mainland) and reaches the north of Greece. Though located in mountain near the mediteranean belt, those fir forests do not correspond to the Mediteranean Abies mountain (see G3.1c) type (with A. Cephalonica...). The dominant trees here are Fir or mixtures of Fir, Spruce and Beech. Except in the Pyrenees, Massif central and most parts of the Vosges (where it is alien), Picea abies can also occur, particularly where site conditions are harsher, and it has been very widely planted in preference to Abies. Other broadleaves can occur, notably Acer pseudoplatanus, A, platanoides Betula pendula, Populus tremula, Sorbus aucuparia, Quercus robur (towards the sub-montane zone), and, in more Atlantic regions like the Pyrenees, Massif central, the Vosges and the Black Forest, where this kind of woodland is most extensive, Ilex aquifolium. In the Balkans and northern Greece, A. borisii-regis and Fagus moesiaca replace Abies alba, and Acer heldreichii and A. obtusatum occur among the associates in this woodland at its southern limit among xerothermic oak forests. Towards the upper mountain or sub-alpine zone, Abies alba dominates, expecially where Picea abies is absent. On acidic soils, the flora resembles that of the heathy spruce forests and Picea abies can be quite abundant, along with Pinus sylvestris. Saplings of the canopy trees are often the most abundant element of the understorey with Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Deschampsia flexuosa, Dryopteris carthusiana, D. dilatatae, Luzula luzuloides, L. nivea, L. sylvatica, Listera cordata, Maianthemum bifolium, Oxalis acetosella, Hieracium murorum in the field layer, together with bulky mosses such as Polytrichum formosum, Dicranum scoparium, Hylocomnium splendens and Pleurozium schreberi. At the sub-alpine zone, the flora is very close to the flora of sub-alpine spruce forests, with Homogyne alpina, Rhododendron ferrugineum, Sphagnum div. sp., Lycopodium annotinum, Bazzania trilobata, Rhytidiadelphus loreus… On less impoverished and moister soils, Abies alba often dominates more substantially with Fraxinus excelsior and Ulmus glabra figuring among the canopy trees, Rubus idaeus, R. fruticosus and Lonicera nigra in the understorey. Galium rotundifolium, Oxalis acetosella, Prenanthes purpurea, Sanicula europaea, Mercurialis perennis, Crepis paludosa, Chaerophyllum hirsutum, Adenostyles glabra, Valeriana tripteris, Carex alba, C. digitata, Cirsium erisithales can occur in the field layer. Like Spruce mountain forest, fir forests can also be found at lower altitudes (among beech forests) on rocks or peat.
Indicators of quality:
Spruce forestry is very widely practiced in the zone where this kind of woodland is the natural dominant, so signs of quality are:
Natural dominance of fir and/or mixed dominance of fir, spruce and beech with canopy and understorey associates appropriate to the soil conditions and region
Mixed age structure of canopy with natural regeneration of the dominant trees -
Presence of old trees, a variety of dead wood (lying and standing) and trees with microhabitats (hollows, cracks, broken tops...), and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of natural disturbance such as windfall openings with natural regeneration -
Sufficient proportion of historically old (ancient) woodland with high species diversity
Absence of anthropogenic invaders with disturbance of forestry operations 
Absence of non-native tree species and absence of invasive aliens in all layers (fauna, flora) 
No signs of eutrophication or pollution with e.g. pronounced invasion on nutrient-demanding herbs

Characteristic species:
Flora:
Vascular Plants:
 Tree canopy: Abies alba, Fagus sylvatica, Picea abies.
Field layer: Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Deschampsia flexuosa, Luzula luzuloides, L. nivea, L. sylvatica, Maianthemum bifolium, Oxalis acetosella, Hieracium murorum, Hieracium lachenalii.
Bryophytes:
Polytrichum formosum, Dicranum scoparium, Pleurozium schreberi, Hylocomnium splendens.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.1 Fir and spruce woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Geranio striati-Fagion Gentile 1970
Fagion moesiacae Blecic et Lakušic 1970
Symphyto cordati-Fagion (Vida 1963) Täuber 1982
Fagion sylvaticae Luquet 1926
Lonicero alpigenae-Fagion (Borhidi ex Soó 1964) Dierschke
Aremonio-Fagion Török et al. ex Marincek et al. 1993
Fagion orientalis Soó 1964
Luzulo-Fagion sylvaticae Lohmeyer et Tx. In Tx. 1954
Vaccinio-Fagion orientalis Passarge 1981
Piceion excelsae  Pawlowski in Pawlowski et al. 1928 (Bulgarian Abies forests - Rhodopi)
Annex 1:
91BA Moesian silver fir forests
91P0 Holy Cross fir forests (Abietum polonicum)
Emerald:
G3.134 Holy Cross fir forests
G3.16 Moesian Abies alba forests
G3.17 Balkano-Pontic Abies forests
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
3.2 Subalpine and mountainous spruce and mountainous mixed spruce-silver fir forest
2.8 Nemoral Silver fir forest
7.9 Mountainous Silver fir forest
VME:
D4.1 Montane, partly sub-montane fir and mixed fir forests

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The worldwide centre of distribution of Abies forests is Europe, where it represents the vegetation climax of the upper mountain belt in many atlantic and continental mountain ranges, especially outside the natural range of Spruce (Pyrennees and mid-altitude mountain areas of western to central Europe). This forest is the natural habitat of many typical animal species, including birds such as Tengmalm's owl and black grouse as well as large mammals.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete, with possible data gaps in the Balkan countries. Data sources: EVA, Art17, ETS.

Comment EU28:
Poland is missing but the area for 91P0 Holy Cross fir forest (Abietetum polonicum) is 65 kmÂ² and for 9410 more than 6,000 (containing probably 1/4 to 1/10 fir forests) according to Annex 1 article 17

Comment EU28+:
Data for Poland (see above) and Serbia are missing.

Trends in Quantity:
The trend in quantity for the last 50 years is close to stable. It varies between -1.8% in EU28+ and -0.1% in EU28 though data are missing for relatively large surfaces, especially in Serbia. The average current trend is an increase.
These calculated average trends mask very different situations across Europe. In western Europe, (e.g. France, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Italy) the area of fir woodlands has been increasing over the last 150 years because of agricultural decline. The current trend is now close to stable but the area is still slightly increasing. In contrast, the surface in central Europe (Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria) has been decreasing for at least 150 years and the present and estimated future trend are still negative.
On a longer period, the initial area of the habitat has decreased a lot because of agricultural settlement. Most of the lost surfaces were clear-cut during the last 2000 years.

Trends in Quality:
A slight decrease in quality has been observed in most countries over the last 50 years, which affects a large part of the total area (62%). The current trend is better (still decreasing in France, Czech Republic, Romania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Bulgaria; increasing in Switzerland, stable in the rest of the countries). In general, there is a lack of dead wood and spruce has been replacing fir on many former fir stands (the seeds are coming from plantations in the surrounding areas).
There are not enough territorial data to report on historical trends. Concerning future trends, an impact of climate change on mountain forests can be expected, according to national studies and models (e.g. Marage & Gégout 2011; Van der Veken et al. 2004; Lenoir et al. 2008; Lenoir 2009; Grabherr et al. 1994; Klanderud & Birks 2003). The increase of drought and temperature can lead to forest dieback in fir mountain forest at lower altitudes, with a replacement of fir by beech or Scots pine, and a degradation in quality (before a complete loss of the habitat occurs).

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Between 60 to 75% of the area might lie within the EU28, the rest in EU28 + (the result depends on the area in Serbia and Poland, which has not been reported).

Justification of Restricted Area:
The occurrence of the habitat is neither restricted to small spots, nor does it have a small total area. The distribution range is not naturally restricted.

Pressures and Threats:
The major pressures are related to forestry: reforestation (especially with spruce) or forestry favouring other species than fir, forest exploitation without reforestation or natural regrowth or logging are mentioned, but other pressures such as removal of forest undergrowth or removal of dead and dying trees may be included. Deforestation due to construction of roads and illegal logging have been reported as pressures in Romania and Montenegro and certainly occur in other countries where surfaces are decreasing (Slovakia, Czech Republic, Bulgaria), as well. To a lesser extent, deforestation and quality degradation occur due to outdoor activities, such as skiing or activities during the vegetation period. Further threats are due to pollution (especially air pollution), global change (global warming, droughts)and  eutrophication, which is probably linked to nitrogen deposition. Eutrophication causes a replacement of fir by other species at lower altitudes for example in Bulgaria but probably also in other countries. Phytopathogens and bark-beetle are natural phenomenona but can cause problems if they occur too frequently and on vast surfaces. Other threats are due to damage by herbivores (e.g. Austria) and due to fire (e.g. Montenegro).

Conservation and Management:
The conservation of temperate mountain fir woodlands requires both integrative and segregative approaches. On most surfaces, the development of sustainable forest management measures plays a key role in the conservation of  the characteristic structures and functions and characteristic species. Especially the conservation of deadwood, veteran trees and trees offering microhabitats (e.g. broken tops, cracks or scars, hollow chambers, stem cavities, bark bowls and pockets, burls) is crucial for maintaining not only forest biodiversity but also social and economic functions (forest productivity, protection against erosion or avalanches etc.). Large clear-cuttings and the planting of exotic tree species must be avoided and it is necessary to carry out appropriate management measures in regard to introduced alien species. Sustainable forest management can be promoted by forest certification, in the Natura 2000 network, in public forests and in category V and VI of IUCN protected areas. Even in the most sustainably managed forests, logging cuts the end of the forest cycle: the mature and veteran stands are rare and deadwood volumes can never be the same as in unmanaged forests. Therefore, the appropriate protection of this habitat type stresses the need for a network of vast (more than 100 ha each) unmanaged forests, where the whole forest cycle can be fully accomplished. Those strictly protected areas should be mainly located in category I and II IUCN protected areas, and should also protect the most remarkable forests (rare habitats, virgin or quasi-virgin forests, semi-natural forests unmanaged for a long time etc.). For variants on peat, the restoration of the hydrological regime is crucial if it has been perturbated.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1 types:
91BA: ALP U1, CON U1
91P0: CON U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
If the habitat has been severely damaged by intensive logging (with removal of all deadwood and large trees), it takes more than 50 years to recover large enough trees and enough deadwood for the specific fauna, fungi and flora. The first positive effects of an abandonment of exploitation can be seen after 30 years of free evolution (Paillet et al. 2010). A clear-cutting followed by agricultural use would make all characteristic species disappear, and the forest soil would turn to agricultural one, and it would take centuries to recover the typical flora (Dupouey et al. 2002). Plantation can quicken the habitat recovery a bit but most of the recovery process would have to occur naturally.

Summary:
This habitat comprises Abies alba forests in the mountain ranges of temperate and moderately continental Europe, at lower altitudes sometimes mixed with Fagus sylvatica and, at higher altitudes and where site conditions are harsher, Picea abies. It occurs mostly on acidic base-poor soils where there is a heathy character to the field layer but also on more base-rich and less impoverished profiles, where mesophytic trees and herbs appear. Intensive logging, replacement of Abies by Picea, the impact of ski resorts and climate change are the main threats Conservation measures should include both sustainable forest management and maintenance of a network of unmanaged forests.

References:
Bohn, U., Gollub, G. Hettwer, C., Neuhauslova, Z., Raus, T., Schlüter, H. and Weber, H. 2004. Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Bundesamt für Naturschutz, Bonn.
Council of Europe. 2010. Interpretation Manual of the Emerald Habitats. Council of Europe, Strasbourg. 
Davies, C.E., Moss, D. and Hill, M.O. 2004. EUNIS Habitat Classification, revised.  Report to the European Topic Centre, European Environment Agency.
European Commission DG Environment. 2007. Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. European Commission DG Environment, Strasbourg.
European Environment Agency. 2006. European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
Lenoir, J., Gégout, J.C., Marquet, P.A., de Ruffray, P. and Brisse, H. 2008. A Significant Upward Shift in Plant Species Optimum Elevation During the 20th Century. Science 320(5884): 1768-1771.
Paillet Y., Bergès L., Hjältén J., Odor P., Avon C., Bernhardt-Römermann M., Bijlsma R.J., De Bruyn L., Fuhr
M., Grandin U., Kanka R., Lundin L., Luque S., Magura T., Matesanz S., Mészáros I., Sebastià M.T., Schmidt
W., Standovár T., Tóthmérész B., Uotila A., Valladares F., Vellak K. and Virtanen R. 2010. Biodiversity differences between managed and unmanaged forests: meta-analysis of species richness in Europe. Conservation Biology 24(1): 101-112.
Piedallu, C., Perez, V., Gegout, J.C., Lebourgeois, F. and Bertrand, R. 2009. Impact potentiel du changement climatique sur la distribution de l’Epicéa, du Sapin, du Hêtre et du Chêne sessile en France. Revue Forestière Française 61(6): 567-594.
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. and Rodwell, J.S. 2013. Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.

Criterion A Text:
The figures for A1 have been calculated by using the territorial data sheets. The average trend over the last 50 years is more or less stable in EU28+ and close to stable in EU28. The calculated values result in category Least concern.
This average trend masks very different situations in Western and Central/Eastern Europe. Though the area has been increasing in western Europe (10% increase in average for Spain, Switzerland, France, Germany, and Italy), the average past-present trend for the Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, and Bulgaria, which represents the eastern limit of the habitat, is a decrease of -39%. Therefore, the habitat type would qualify for the Vulnerable category in these countries.

Criterion B Text:
Both EOO and AOO are relatively large and are well above the thresholds to qualify for a Red List category.

Criterion C/D Text:
The figures for C/D1 have been calculated from the territorial data sheets. The reduction in quality over the last 50 years affects 62% (EU28) and 40% (EU28+), respectively. The severity of degradation ist slight. The calculated figures result in category Near threatened (NT) in EU28. The situation seems to be better in EU28+: the calculated figures result in category Least concern (LC), despite deficient data from Serbia.
The future trend uality in can't be assessed but an impact of climate change on mountain fir forests has to be expected, according to national studies and models (e.g. Marage & Gégout 2011; Van der Veken et al. 2004; Lenoir et al. 2008; Lenoir 2009; Grabherr et al. 1994; Klanderud & Birks 2003). The territorial experts have already reported on changes in species composition due to climate change (e. g. replacement of fir by beech). Climate change threatens Abies alba by favouring fir competitors and the increase of droughts. This could lead to a degradation of most of the surfaces, especially at lower altitudes or in southern Europe. The response of fir is not absolutely certain within the next 50 years all over Europe, but such a trend would lead to a decrease in surfaces and habitat quality. The demand of conifer wood is probably increasing in the next years, and will affect the conservation of fir forests with intensive management and the plantation of more productive species (e.g. spruce, douglas fir at lower altitudes). Such a bad future trend would lead to a threatened category (VU or EN), but can't be supported by  facts. Therefore, future trends in quality have to be evaluated as Data deficient (DD).

Synthesis:
There has been a slight decline in quality over the last 50 years affecting 62% of the area of EU28, which results in the Near threatened category, although the habitat still has a large total area with more or less stable trends in quantity over the last 50 years. 90% of the surfaces in France show a slight decline in quality which is due to a lack of deadwood (90% of the area with less than 10 m³). The pressures from logging and abiotic pressures due to global change are likely to increase in the future and would certainly lead to the Vulnerable category but such a negative trend is not certain yet. Even if the future trend in quality remains Data deficient, the observed and forecasted effects of climate change confirm the choice of the Near threatened category for the overall Red List category.
The overall situation in EU28+ is better because of more favourable trends in Bosnia and Switzerland (but with lacking data for Serbia), which results in category Least Concern.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Southern or low-altitude subtypes are likely to be more sensitive to climate change and should be assessed separately in the future, especially Annex 1 types 91BA "Moesian silver fir forests" and 91P0 "Holy Cross

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Rodwell & B. Renaux.
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, C. Bita-Nicolae, G. Buffa, J.A. Campos, A. ÄŒarni,  L. Casella, M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, M. Dimitrov, P. Finck, C. Giancola, N. Juvan, V. Matevski, U. Raths, B. Renaux, U. Riecken, Z. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, V. Stupar, M. ValachoviÄ, N. Velkovski, D. Viciani, W. Willner.
Working Group Forests: A. Ssymank, F. Attore, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano.


Habitat Type Name:
G3.6 Mediterranean and Balkan subalpine Pinus heldreichii-Pinus peuce woodland

Habitat Description:
This habitat comprises timberline coniferous woodland in southern Italy, the southern Balkans and Greece, dominated by the two pine species Pinus peuce and P. heldreichii, trees which survive better in the summer-drought conditions of southern Europe than Picea abies or Fagus sylvatica, which extend as dominants to the timberline further north. Both these pines are considered to be Tertiary relict species, but these woodlands are not relicts, as pines survived glaciations at lower altitude. P. peuce can be found on non-carbonate bedrock, whereas P. heldreichii occurs on carbonate deposits. P. peuce can be found above altitudes of 1500 m and forms canopies of even 30-40 m tall, often mixed with Picea abies, Fagus sylvatica or Abies borisii-regis, but it also extends to lower altitudes and can dominate on sites that were originally occupied by Fagus sylvatica and deforested.
The soil in the stands is poor in nutrients with a lot of bedrock on the surface, which suggests that the stands of P. peuce can be of secondary origin. Pinus heldreichii grows at altitudes above 1000m and is a heliophilous tree, surviving better then P. peuce in dry conditions, growing more slowly and forming canopies up to 20-30m high. Its stands are often monodominant, especially on rocky, sunny slopes, but it can occur mixed with P. sylvestris or P. nigra, on Monte Pollino (Italy) also with Abies alba and Fagus sylvatica. The populations of both endemic pine trees are occur scattered and fragmented, due to the specific soil conditions.
Indicators of good quality:
Overwhelming dominance of the pines
Species richness
Absence of logging and intensive grazing and consequent erosion
Absence of intensive destructive fires

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Abies alba, A. borisii-regis, Fagus sylvatica, Pinus heldreichii, P . peuce, Sorbus aucuparia, Sorbus graeca, Anemone nemorosa, Aremonia agrimonioides, Avenella flexuosa, Brachypodium pinnatum, Festuca penzesii, Calamagrostis arundinacea, Calamintha grandiflora, Cotoneaster nebrodensis , Daphne mezereum, Drypoteris filix-mas, Fragaria vesca, Galium rotundifolium, Gentiana asclepiadea, Geranium macrorhizum, Geranium sylvaticum, Homogyne alpina, Juniperus communis, Juniperus hemisphaerica, Luzula luzuloides, Luzula sylvatica, Mycelis muralis, Orthilia secunda, Oxalis acetosella, Polystichum lonchitis, Pteridium aquilinum, Rosa pendulina, Vaccinium myrtillus, Veratrum album, Veronica chamaedrys, Veronica officinalis, Viola reichenbachiana, Wulfenia carinthiaca.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.6 Subalpine Mediterranean Pinus woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Pinion heldreichii Horvat 1946
Pinion peucis Horvat 1950
Annex 1:
95A0 High oro-Mediterranean pine forest
Emerald:
G3.6 Subalpine mediterranean Pinus woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
10.5 Alti-Mediterranean pine forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat is restricted to mountains in Southern Italy and submediterranean parts of the Balkan.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete, but some data gaps may exist in Macedonia. Data sources: EVA, Art17, LIT, GBIF.

Comment EU28+:
Data from Albania, Kosovo and Serbia are still missing (for EOO and AOO). Kosovo habitat area has been included in Current estimated Total Area

Trends in Quantity:
A small reduction of about 5% over the last 50 years is reported for Bulgaria, Italy and Bosnia. In Greece the habitat is stable, while in Macedonia a slight increase is shown. Past quantitative data are not reported for Montenegro, which has a current area of 189 sqkm with an undefined decrease. The overall recent trend is a small reduction of about 2 %. Historical estimates indicate a reduction for Bulgaria and Bosnia, respectively of 10 and 20 %. Future estimates forecast a general small decrease (5%) with the exception of Macedonia.

Trends in Quality:
Estimates of recent quality trend report a slight decrease for Bosnia and Bulgaria, and a stable trend for Greece and Macedonia. Although highly fragmented, many forest stands of the two characteristic species of the habitat are healthy and in regeneration. So the trends are slightly decreasing.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 50% of the habitat is found in the EU, while 100% of the habitat is confined to the EU28+ region.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a EOO for both EU28 and EU28+ of 349100 km2 and the reported average decline is only about 2%.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Despite the range, the habitat occurs in fragmented and relatively small populations on specific soil conditions.

Pressures and Threats:
Fire, forest management activities including afforestation and plantation and building of winter touristic infrastructures are considered the most significant pressures. A risk of hybridization with Pinus nigra is also hypothesized for Pinus heldreichii.

Conservation and Management:
Several locations of the habitat are already within protected areas. As both of the characteristic species are minor timber trees, natural stands are less intensively exploited than in the past.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
In general the habitat has a significant capacity of recovering after damage. Only a combination of factors such as high intensity fire and grazing may prevent this.

Summary:
This habitat of subalpine Pinus heldreichii-peuce woodland occurs in southern Italy (only with P. heldreichii) and in the Balkans on extremely sunny drought-prone situation with nutrient-poor, rocky soils, base-rich for P. heldreichii, base-poor for P. peuce . Although highly fragmented, several sub-populations of the two tertiary relict species are sustainable and little interest in the timber of the two species has reduced their forest exploitation. High intensity fires are the major threat and thereafter grazing can reduce the capacity of the habitat to recover its natural structure and composition. Site protection is needed for conservation.

References:
Bonin, G. (1978). Contribution à la connaissance de la végétation des montagnes de l'Apennin centro-méridional (Doctoral dissertation, These sci. Aix-Marseille. 2 vols.: Aix-Marseille 318p.. Ref. in Bull. Signal., Biol. Physiol. Veg. Silvic., 40 (6): 6057 (1979).
Bonin, G., & Pennacchini, V. (1975). Pinus leucodermis Ant. e Pinus nigra Arn. en Calabre septentrionale. Ecol. Medit.(1), 35-61.
Gargano, D., & Bernardo, L. (2006). Defining population structure and environmental suitability for the conservation of Pinus leucodermis Antoine in central Mediterranean areas. Plant Biosystems, 140(3), 245-254.
Todaro, L., Andreu, L., D’Alessandro, C. M., Gutiérrez, E., Cherubini, P., & Saracino, A. (2007). Response of Pinus leucodermis to climate and anthropogenic activity in the National Park of Pollino (Basilicata, Southern Italy). Biological Conservation, 137(4), 507-519.
Rakaj, M. (2009). Floristic and chorological news from north Albania. Botanica Serbica, 33(2), 177-183.
Redzic S. (2011). Phytogeographic and syntaxonomic diversity of high mountain vegetation in Dinaric Alps (Western Balkan, SE Europe). Journal of Mountain Science, 8(6), 767-786.
Schaminée, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. & Rodwell, J.S. (2013), Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
Vendramin, G. G., Fineschi, S., & Fady, B. Technical Guidelines for genetic conservation of Bosnian pine (Pinus heldreichii syn. Pinus leucodermis). Bioversity International.

Criterion A Text:
Only an overall quantitative assessment for the recent trend was possible.

Criterion B Text:
The EOO is larger than 50000, leading to Least concern for B1. However, the AOO is characterized by a number of distribution grid cells slightly higher than 50 for the EU28, and relatively more for the EU28+. As there are some continuing declines in quality in part of the EU-range (Bulgaria, Italy), the assessment leads to Near Threatened for the EU28 under B2, but Least Concern for EU28+ under B2, because of the larger AOO.

Criterion C/D Text:
Calculations were based only on data from Bulgaria and Bosnia & Herzegovina. The values result in the category Least Concern.

Synthesis:
Although the habitat is characterized by a wide range (EOO) and only a small decline of the area has been reported over the last 50 years, the high fragmentation and restricted distribution of the populations (AOO close to 50), accompanied by a continuing degradation in part of the current distribution, makes the habitat qualify as Near Threatened for the European Union under criterion B2. As the habitat is more widespread outside the EU in Balkan countries, the final category for EU28+ is Least Concern.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
No subhabitats need to be distinguished.

Contributors:
Type description: A. Carni
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, L. Casella, M. Dimitrov, P. Dimopoulos, G. Giusso del Galdo, C. Marcenò, F. Millaku, V. Stupar, V. Matevski, N. Velkovski
Working Group Forests: F. Attorre, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
Taxus baccata is an evergreen tree which figures as a prominent associate in various woodland types on more base-rich substrates, a bird-sown species capable of establishing in rocky terrain or in grasslands, provided those herbivores to which its foliage is palatable are absent, and persisting under the shade, even dense shade, of other trees, notably Fagus sylvatica, sometimes also Abies alba and Picea abies, which can overtop it. Those situations are included elsewhere, as in G1.6a Fagus woodland on non-acid soils. This G3.9a habitat includes two distinct types of woodland united by the dominance of Taxus baccata: one occurs very locally in the Mediterranean, particularly in Corsica and Sardinia, Apennines, Spain and northern and central Portugal; the other occurs in Ireland and the British Isles, where the woodland type strongly favours those locally hot drought-prone south-facing slopes which provide an echo of conditions on limestones in warmer latitudes. In both situations, the stands are typically isolated and there is often a suggestion (particularly in the Mediterranean) that the dominance of the tree is an accident of succession where, for some reason, Taxus has excluded possible subsequent invaders or remains as a relict senescent phase of some kind of beech forest. For the British, the fact that Taxus provided the wood for the longbow, enabling some epic victories over its foes, has entered national mythology, but some stands may really have been encouraged for supplying this important medieval weapon. Widely through Europe, by virtue of its longevity, Taxus and its woodlands have also been endowed with spiritual value and protected. In the woodland included here, Taxus is the sole dominant, though often accompanied in the Mediterranean stands by Ilex aquifolium and Buxus sempervirens (in the UK the latter is questionably native). Sorbus aria is another typical associate in both regions. Juniperus communis, which is among the junipers associated with other kinds of G3.9 Cupressaceae woodlands, is the seral precursor and protective nurse to Taxus where this kind of habitat establishes in basiphilous grasslands in the UK, its skeletal remains then remaining beneath each maturing Taxus. Otherwise there is often no understorey, apart from occasional Sambucus nigra, favouring the latrines of local rabbit colonies. The extremely dense shade cast by the Taxus canopy can exclude all but the most tolerant herbs and bryophytes, among which sparse and puny individuals of Mercurialis perennis and other representatives of the local basiphilous woodland flora are typical.
Indicators of good quality:
• Dominance of Taxus baccata in the canopy
• Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
• Sufficient structural diversity/ complexity (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
• Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying and standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
• Presence of natural disturbance such as windfall openings with natural regeneration
• Low game density to enable Taxus regeneration
• Absence of non-native tree species and absence of invasive aliens in all layers (fauna, flora)
Characteristic species:
Taxus baccata, Ilex aquifolium, Sorbus aria, Buxus sempervirens, Mercurialis perennis.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.9 Coniferous woodland dominated by Cupressaceae or Taxaceae has been split into 3 separate habitats, dependent on the dominant tree and distribution. Of the other two, Mediterranean Cupressaceae woodland has been split off into G3.9b, with Macaronesian Juniperus woodland in G3.9c.
EuroVeg Checklist:
Lathyro veneti-Taxion baccatae Carni et Mucina 2013 Maybe relict stands of Cephalanthero-Fagion and Tilio-Acerion
Annex 1:
91J0 Taxus baccata woods of the British Isles
9580 Mediterranean Taxus baccata woods
Emerald:
G3.9 Coniferous woodland dominated by Cupressaceae or Taxaceae
MAES-2: 
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
Other:
EFT 10.11 Mediterranean yew stands

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat occurs in two distinct regions, Atlantic and Mediterranean, but its flora is so poor that it cannot be said to be representative of the climate of either region.

Map Description:
The map is likely to be incomplete outside the EU. Data sources: Art17, EVA.

Trends in Quantity:
In three countries (France, Ireland, Portugal) the area is very small and stable to increasing in the recent past, in the UK and Sardinia/Sicily, where there is more the situation is stable, in Spain where there is most of all countries making a response, there has been a decrease which continues now.   Outside the EU, there are no data to make an assessment.

Trends in Quality:
The overall trend is hard to assess since three out of six countries - Croatia, Greece and Portugal - reported 'unknown', in Spain and Sardinia/Sicily 'decreasing, in the UK 'stable' andf in Ireland 'increasing'.  Available data made impossible to estimate the percentage of the current extent subject to degradation.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
There is no available data from the EU28+ countries to provide a reliable answer.  More widely, Taxus baccata is widespread in the Caucasus as well as from Turkey eastwards to northern Iran and in North Africa (Morocco and Algeria), it can be hypothesized that in the EU28/EU28+ the habitat covers about the 30/40 % of its total distribution.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is characterized by a EOO and a AOO greater than respectively 50000km2 and 50 points.  It is unknown whether the loss of marginal sites has lked to a reduction in either criterion.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has a very large overall range but the individual stands are usually small and the country totals also usually small.

Pressures and Threats:
Currently the main threat is the grazing by livestock and wild herbivores, which together with the low regeneration of the yew determined almost everywhere in the range an unbalanced population structure. Occasionally fire can damage the forest structure with the same above mentioned effect. In the future, the ongoing climate change with increasing drought can threat the habitat at its southernmost limit favoring the expansion towards the north. Alien invasive species are also indicated as a potential threat changing the structure and composition of the habitat.

Conservation and Management:
The main conservation requirement is fencing the habitat in order to prevent livestock from grazing so as to protect the regeneration of yew. Fire control and management is also required. A more even population structure can also increase the capacity of the habitat to adapt to new climatic conditions.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
91J0: ATL U2
9580: ATL U1, MED U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The slow growth of Taxus baccata makes the habitat unable to rapidly recover after severe damage such as a fire or a clear-cut. Plantation and fencing are required to facilitate the recovery. In the long term competition with other species has to be assessed.

Summary:
This habitat includes far-flung Taxus baccata woodlands in the Mediterranean and Atlantic regions, where this long-lived tree dominates locally on hot, rocky slopes of lime-rich rocks, often with some Sorbus aria, Ilex aquifolium and Buxus sempervirens, though, in the deep shade beneath, with usually few herbaceous associates. In both regions, particularly in the Mediterranean, there is sometimes a suggestion that the dominance of the tree is an accident of succession where, for some reason, Taxus has excluded possible subsequent invaders or remains as a relict senescent phase of some kind of beech forest. Grazing by livestock and wild herbivores can inhibit regeneration, fire can damage the woodland structure and invasive aliens change the species composition. Conservation needs control of these threats.

References:
Farris, E. & Filigheddu, R. (2008). Effects of browsing in relation to vegetation cover on common yew (Taxus baccata L.) recruitment in Mediterranean environments. Plant Ecology 199: 309-318.
Farris, E.; Fenu, G., & Bacchetta, G. (2012). Mediterranean Taxus baccata woodlands in Sardinia: a characterization of the EU priority habitat 9580. Phytocoenologia 41(4): 231-246.
García, D. & Obeso, J.R. (2003). Facilitation by herbivore mediated nurse plants in a threatened tree, Taxus baccata: local effects and landscape level consistency. Ecography 26: 739-750.
García, D., Zamora, R., Hódar, J.A., Gómez, J.M. & Castro, J. (2000). Yew (Taxus baccata L.) regeneration is facilitated by fleshy-fruited shrubs in Mediterranean environments. Biological Conservation 95: 31-38.
Perrin, P.M., Kelly, D.L. & Mitchell, F.J.G. (2006). Long–term deer exclusion in yew-wood and oakwood habitats in southwest Ireland: natural regeneration and stand dynamics. Forest Ecology and Management 236: 356-367.
Rodwell, J.S. & Dring, J. (2001). The European significance of British woodland types.  Lancaster: Unit of Vegetation Science Report to English Narure.
Svenning, J.-C. & Magård, E. (1999). Population ecology and conservation status of the last natural population of English yew Taxus baccata in Denmark. Biological Conservation 88: 173-182.
Thomas, P.A. & Polwart, A. (2003). Biological flora of the British Isles: Taxus baccata L. Journal of Ecology 91: 489-524.
Williamson, R. (1978). The Great Yew Forest. London: Macmillan.

Criterion A Text:
Taxus baccata woodland covers a small area (<1sqkm) in three out of six countries in which has been recorded (France, Ireland and Portugal. In the other three (Italy: Sardinia/Sicily, Spain and the UK) its cover varies form 13 to 35 sqkm. The small declines reported for Italy and Spain is compensated by the increase in UK, so no overall decline can be registered over the last 50 years. Data are not enough to estimate historical and future trends.

Criterion B Text:
The EOO is greater than 50000km2and but the AOO is probably greater than 50.

Criterion C/D Text:
Data provided do not allow the estimation of change in habitat quality.

Synthesis:
Overall, there are few data to provide an overall assessment of the condition of this habitat but what little there is points to Least Concern.  It includes woodlands in far-flung regions with very different extent in different countries and with differing estimates of change in extent and quality in the recent past.  However, with some marginal countries having small extent and in a vulnerable state, there could be a critical loss of AOO.  This fragmentation and small total cover make this habitat vulnerable to future threats.

Contributors:
Type description: J.S. Rodwell
Territorial Data: E. Agrillo, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, J.Capelo, L. Casella, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, C. Giancola, G. Giusso del Galdo, K. J. Kirby, J. Loidi, C. Marcenò, F. O'Neill, J. Reymann, S. Sciandrello
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
This is forest vegetation of sub-xeric, xeric and barren sites on mineral soils in the boreal and boreonemoral zones. The soils are usually podzolic with a raw humus layer. The tree canopy is almost always dominated by Pinus sylvestris, but mixed forests and even stands dominated by Betula pendula, B. pubescens or Picea abies can be found. Canopy composition is nowadays usually regulated by forestry. Alnus incana, Populus tremula, Salix caprea and Sorbus aucuparia may occur as individual trees usually on sub-xeric sites. Juniperus communis is common, but other shrubs, like Salix phylicifolia and S. starkeana, rarely occur. The understorey vegetation is dominated by dwarf shrubs, the most abundant species being Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum, Vaccinium myrtillus and V. vitis-idaea. In the middle and northern boreal subzones V. uliginosum, Diphasiastrum complanatum and Ledum palustre are common. Towards the north, the abundance of V. myrtillus and E. nigrum increases and the abundance of V. vitis-idaea decreases. Herb and grass species are few, and they are usually entirely missing from barren sites. Convallaria majalis, Epilobium angustifolium, Maianthemum bifolium , Pteridium aquilinum, Solidago virgaurea and Trientalis europaea are the most common herbs, but their small and pale shoots are often sterile. Antennaria dioica thrives on xeric sites. Graminoids include Calamagrostis epigejos, Deschampsia flexuosa, Festuca ovina and Luzula pilosa, but they are seldom abundant. In stands of this forest type on eskers there is some specialist flora, e.g. Oxytropis campestris and Thymys serpyllum. The ground layer is continuous. On sub-xeric sites, it is dominated by feather mosses, on barren sites by lichens. The number of moss, liverwort and lichen species increases towards the northern boreal subzone. The most dominant moss species are Hylocomium splendens and Pleurozium schreberi, followed by Dicranum polysetum, D. scoparium and Polytrichum juniperinum. In the northern boreal subzone, Dicranum drummondii and D. fuscescens are also common. Dominant lichens include Cladina arbuscula, C. mitis, C. rangiferina, C. stellaris, Cetraria islandica and Stereocaulon spp. In addition, on xeric and barren sites there usually are numerous Cladonia species. After a major disturbance such as forest fire, windfall or regeneration cutting, grasses usually increase moderately, bryophytes decrease and lichens increase.
Indicators of good quality:
• Natural composition of canopy
• Structural diversity/ -complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
• Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
• Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
• Presence of natural disturbance with natural regeneration
• Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
• Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests)
• Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora & fauna)
• No signs of eutrophication or pollution
• No signs of acidification (relevant mainly for oligotrophic or acidic types)
• No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates
Characteristic species:
Tree canopy: Alnus incana, Betula pendula, B. pubescens, Picea abies, Pinus sylvestris, Populus tremula, Sorbus aucuparia.
Shrubs: Juniperus communis, Salix phylicifolia, Salix starkeana.
Field layer: Dwarf shrubs: Arctostaphylos alpina, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Betula nana, Calluna vulgaris, Diphasiastrum complanatum, Empetrum nigrum, Ledum palustre, Linnaea borealis, Phyllodoce caerulea, Vaccinium myrtillus, V. uliginosum, V. vitis-idaea. Herbs: Antennaria dioica, Convallaria majalis, Epilobium angustifolium, Maianthemum bifolium, Melampyrum pratense, Pteridium aquilinum, Solidago virgaurea,Trientalis europaea. Graminoids: Calamagrostis epigejos, Calamagrostis lapponica, Deschampsia flexuosa, Festuca ovina, Luzula pilosa.
Mosses and liverworts: Dicranum drummondii, Dicranum fuscescens, Dicranum polysetum, Dicranum scoparium, Hylocomium splendens, Pleurozium schreberi, Polytrichum juniperinum, Polytrichum piliferum, Ptilidium ciliare, Ptilium crista-castrensis.
Lichens: Cetraria ericetorum, C. islandica, Cladina arbuscula, C. mitis, C. rangiferina, C. stellaris, Cladonia spp., Flavocetraria nivalis, Nephroma arcticum, Stereocaulon spp.
Birds: Caprimulgus europaeus, Falco columbarius, Loxia pytyopsittacus, Lullula arborea, Phoenicurus phoenicurus. Old growth forests: Certhia familiaris, Dryocopus martius, Parus cinctus, Perisoreus infaustus, Phylloscopus trochiloides, Pinicola enucleator, Picoides tridactylus, Tetrao urogallus, Turdus viscivorus.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.B Pinus sylvestris taiga woodland
EuroVegChecklist alliances:
Dicrano-Pinion (Libbert 1933) W. Matuszkiewicz 1962
Cladonio stellaris-Pinion sylvestris Kielland-Lund ex Ermakov et Morozova 2011
Annex I:
9010 Western taiga
9060 Coniferous forests on, or connected to, glaciofluvial eskers
Emerald:
? G1.918 Eurasian boreal Betula woods
G3.B Pinus taiga woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.1 Boreal forest
EFT:
1.2 Pine and pine-birch boreal forest
EVM:
D5.1 Northern boreal pine forests, Middle & southern boreal to hemiboreal pine forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat represents an outstanding example of typical characteristics of the boreal region. It covers a large area and contains typical species and communities of the region.

Map Description:
The map is rather good, but the coverage in Sweden and Norway is possibly incomplete. Data sources: Art17, EVA, BOHN.

Trends in Quantity:
The habitat area has decreased -13% in EU 28 and -10% in EU28+ over the last 50 years, based on calculations using data from Finland, Lithuania, Sweden and Norway. The larget decrease (-24%) has occurred in Finland. Data on the extent of trend in quantity are missing for Estonia, Latvia and Poland. There are no historical data for 250-50 years ago. In the future the habitat is expected to decrease in Latvia, Estonia and Finland, be stable in Sweden and weakly increase in Norway. Most of the decrease comes from transformation of this type into G3.A Picea taiga woodland. It is a recognized eutrophication phenomenon in Finland, but there is no evidence on its causes. It has been suggested to be caused by multiple factors, like lack of forest fires, increased shading, increased nutrient circulation as a result of forest cuttings, nitrogen deposition, climate change and reindeer grazing (northern boreal subzone). In Finland a possible reason in the southern and middle boreal subzones might also be that a large part of forest soils have been in a process of recovery from an intensive use for slash-and-burn cultivation and cattle grazing (ca. years 1550-1900), which was known to weaken the nutrient status of the soil.

Trends in Quality:
The extent of degradation in the past 50 years in the EU28 region is 44%, and the severity of degradation is 33%, based on trend data from Finland, Sweden and Lithuania, as trend data from other countries are missing. However, all countries reported a decreasing trend. The same calculation of reduction of quality is less certain for EU28+, because trend data for Norway were missing, and a relatively large area of this habitat is found there. The degradation has been both biotic and abiotic. The most important  forms of degradation are lack of dead wood and breakage of dead wood continuum, decrease in number of of large trees, changes in stand age distribution, eutrophication, disturbance caused by forest cuttings and soil amelioration, lack of forest fires and in the northern boreal subzone ecosystem changes caused by reindeer grazing. Changes caused by climate change are already possible, especially in the northern boreal subzone.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Less than 50 %. The largest part of this habitat lies within Russia. A large part of the habitat is also located in Norway and Belarus.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a very large area and a wide distribution in the Northern Europe.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has a very large area and a wide distribution in the Northern Europe.

Pressures and Threats:
Many of the threats have a connection with forestry. Regeneration cuttings, removal of dead and dying trees, thinning of tree layer, lack of natural stand dynamics and soil amelioration are leading to forests with even stand structure, shortage of old trees, missing deadwood and deadwood continuum as well as to simplified tree species composition. Especially on xeric and barren sites, eutrophication is a common problem. It might be caused by increased shading, increased nutrient cycling due to forestry, N deposition, lack of forest fires and/or climate change, but there is no evidence on influence of any of the suggested reasons so far. In the northern boreal subzone and in Latvia overgrazing is a threat. In Norway infrastructure development can affect this habitat.

Conservation and Management:
Current most common approaches involve establishing protected areas/sites, establishing wilderness areas/allowing succession, restoring/improving forest habitats and adaptation of forest management. Additional actions needed include further optimizing the use of funds for conservation (what kind of areas are chosen for conservation and where, conservation of all successional stages (protection of natural old forests, creating (simulated) young successional stages of natural forests), increasing prescribed burning and simulated forest fires, further developing methods for conservation/nature management in managed forests (e.g. deadwood), control of overgrazing and control of climate change.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
9010: ALP U1, BOR U2, CON U2
9060: BOR U2

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The habitat has a capacity to recover naturally after a severe damage, but a full recovery including deadwood and species which are dependent on it will take a very long time. The rate of recovery is also dependent on the extent of the damaged area. Measures like prescribed burning, planting trees or sowing tree seeds and adding artificial deadwood is likely to fasten the process considerably.

Summary:
This is woodland of sub-xeric, xeric and barren sites on mineral soils occurring widely the boreal and boreonemoral zones, usually on podzolic soils with raw humus. The tree canopy is almost always dominated by Pinus sylvestris, but mixed forests and even stands dominated by Betula pendula, B. pubescens or Picea abies can be found. Shrubs tend to be sparse but there is typically a heathy dwarf shrub, a thin sometimes almost absent field layer and an extensive moss or lichen carpet. After wildfires or cutting, the proportions of the field and ground layer change. During the last 50 years the habitat has declined, as a part of its area has transformed into Picea taiga woodland and sub-xeric or xeric sites have become more mesic and lichens have suffered. Many threats are linked to forestry: lack of dead wood and breakage of dead wood continuum, decrease in number of large trees, changes in stand age distribution, disturbance caused by forest cuttings and soil amelioration, eutrophication, lack of forest fires and in the northern boreal subzone reindeer grazing. Climate change is probably already having an influence. Protected areas, improved forestry and control of grazing are conservation needs.

References:
Bohn, U., Gollub, G. Hettwer, C., Neuhauslova, Z., Rause, T., Schlüter, H. & Weber, H. (2004) Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz.
Council of Europe (2010), Interpretation Manual of the Emerald Habitats. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Davies, C.E., Moss, D. & Hill, M.O. (2004), EUNIS Habitat Classification, revised. Report to the European Topic Centre, European Environment Agency.
European Commission DG Environment (2007), Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. Strasbourg: European Commission DG Environment.
European Environment Agency (2006), European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006, Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. & Rodwell, J.S. (2013), Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

Criterion A Text:
During the past 50 years there has been a 13 % and 10 % reduction in the quantity of this habitat in the EU28 and EU28+ regions, respectively. The habitat is, therefore, assessed as Least Concern under criterion A1 for both regions. The calculations were based on quantitative data from Finland, Lithuania, Sweden and Norway. Data on quantitative trends in Estonia, Latvia and Poland were missing. There are no data on future or historic reductions for this habitat type.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat is very widely distributed and occupies a very large area in numerous locations. Therefore it is assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
In the past 50 years, 44% of the habitat area in the EU28 was affected by a reduction in quality with 33 % relative severity, and the habitat is therefore assessed as Least Concern under criteria C/D1. The type of quality degradation usually was both abiotic and biotic. A majority of the area with reduced quality was affected with slight severity. There are trend data on qualitative degradation from Finland, Lithuania and Sweden only. Data from Estonia, Latvia, Norway and Poland are missing. A relatively large part of the area of this type lies within Norway, from where data are lacking, and therefore the provided figures for this habitat iin the EU28+ are less certain. Over a longer time-frame (before the 1960's) a much more severe decline in quality occurred, but no quantitative data are available. In Finland for example systematic forestry started in the late 19th century, and thinnings were based on cutting of the largest and most valuable trees, leading to a decline in the habitat's quality.

Criterion E Text:
There is no analysis available of the probability of collapse of this habitat, which is therefore assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion E.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Least Concern (LC) under criterion A1 in both EU28 and EU28+, as there has been only a small decline in its quantity within the last 50 years. The area of the habitat is currently stable in some and declining in other countries of Europe. There has also been a slight reduction in the quality of this habitat, leading to the same category (Least Concern) under criterion C/D1. The habitat quality continues to decrease throughout Europe. A more severe decline in quality has occurred already before the 1960's, but data on this decline are not available.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Lichen-rich, sun-exposed esker forests (Annex 1 type 9060), pine forests on calcareous soils and pine forests on ultramafic soils are rare, possibly endangered subtypes with specialist flora and fauna.

Contributors:
Type description: T. Tonteri & M. Mikkola-Roos (birds)
Territorial data: L. Aunina, E. Bendiksen, J. Dahlgren, Z. Kacki, V. Rasomavicius, I. Sell, T. Tonteri
Working group forests: F. Attorre, R.-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
This habitat comprises of mesic to herb-rich forest vegetation on mineral soils in the boreal and boreonemoral zones. The soils are often podzolic, but other soil types occur and the humus is raw or mull. The canopy is often dominated by Picea abies but, despite the name of the habitat, stands dominated by Pinus sylvestris or Betula pendula or mixtures of these trees are also common. Other tree species include Alnus incana, Betula pubescens, Populus tremula, Salix caprea, Sorbus aucuparia, and in the boreonemoral and southern boreal subzones also Acer platanoides, Alnus glutinosa, Quercus robur, Tilia cordata, Ulmus glabra and Ulmus laevis. Under natural conditions, forest succession will lead to the development of a Picea abies forest, but the proportions of tree species are nowadays largely regulated by forestry. The shrub layer is best developed in moist herb-rich stands, where Frangula alnus, Lonicera xylosteum, Prunus padus, Ribes spp., Rubus idaeus and other shrubs can form dense thickets. On mesic sites, by contrast, the only true shrubs are Juniperus communis, Salix caprea and other Salix spp. Understorey vegetation varies from the dwarf shrub and feather moss dominated vegetation in mesic situations to the most luxurious and species-rich herb dominated vegetation. In mesic situations, Vaccinium myrtillus usually dominates, followed by Vaccinium vitis-idaea, Linnaea borealis and, in the middle and northern boreal subzones, even Empetrum nigrum, Ledum palustre and Vaccinium uliginosum. The commonest herbs are Convallaria majalis, Dryopteris carthusiana, Epilobium angustifolium, Maianthemum bifolium, Melampyrum pratense, Melampyrum sylvaticum, Pteridium aquilinum, Solidago virgaurea and Trientalis europaea, while species like Lathyrus vernus and Oxalis acetosella grow on slightly more nutrient-rich soils. Calamagrostis arundinacea and Deschampsia flexuosa are the most abundant grasses on mesic sites. Common graminoids also include Carex digitata, Carex globularis, Deschampsia cespitosa, Luzula pilosa and Melica nutans. There is great compositional variation in the herb layer of the richer sites, depending on the geographic location, soil moisture, soil nutrient status and canopy composition. In general, the number of herb species is high, and there are also many graminoids, but dwarf shrubs are few or non-existent. However, the number of vascular species decreases towards the north of the range. In addition to species thriving on mesic sites, examples of typical herb species are Aegopodium podagraria, Anemone nemorosa, Angelica sylvestris, Anthriscus sylvestris, Athyrium filix-femina, Cirsium helenioides, Cornus suecica, Corydalis solida, Dryopteris carthusiana, Dryopteris expansa, Filipendula ulmaria, Fragaria vesca, Galium boreale, Geranium sylvaticum, Geum rivale, Gymnocarpium dryopteris, Hepatica nobilis, Matteuccia struthiopteris, Paris quadrifolia, Pulmonaria obscura, Ranunculus auricomus, Ranunculus fallax, Stellaria nemorum, and common grasses are Agrostis capillaris, Calamagrostis purpurea, Melica nutans, Milium effusum and Poa nemoralis. On mesic sites the moss layer is usually continuous and dominated by feather mosses like Pleurozium schreberi and Hylocomium splendens. Other common species are Dicranum fuscescens, D. majus, D. polysetum, D. scoparium, Polytrichum commune, Ptilium crista-castrensis and on slightly more nutrient-rich sites Climacium dendroides, Rhodobryum roseum and Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus. The abundance and number of liverwort species, like Barbilophozia lycopodioides, increases towards north. On mesic sites there may even be some terricolous lichens. On herb-rich sites, the cover of the moss layer is usually small, and feather mosses are scarce. Instead, there is a rich flora of nutrient-demanding mosses and liverworts like Brachythecium spp., Cirriphyllum piliferum, Plagiochila asplenioides, Plagiomnium spp., Plagiothecium spp., Pseudobryum cinclidioides and Rhizomnium spp. After a major disturbance such as windfall, forest fire or regeneration cutting, herbs and grasses increase, Vaccinium myrtillus declines and bryophytes decrease.
Indicators of good quality:
• Natural composition of canopy
• Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
• Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
• Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
• Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration
• Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
• Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests)
• Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora & fauna)
• No signs of eutrophication or pollution
• No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates
Characteristic species:
Tree canopy: Acer platanoides, Alnus glutinosa, A.incana, Betula pendula, B. pubescens, Picea abies, Pinus sylvestris, Populus tremula, Salix caprea, Sorbus aucuparia, Tilia cordata.
Shrubs: Corylus avellana, Daphne mezereum, Frangula alnus, Juniperus communis, Lonicera xylosteum, Prunus padus, Ribes spp., Rosa majalis, Rubus idaeus, Salix spp.
Field layer: Dwarf shrubs: Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Huperzia selago, Linnaea borealis, Lycopodium annotinum, L. clavatum. Herbs: Actaea erythrocarpa, Actaea spicata, Aegopodium podagraria, Anemone nemorosa, Angelica sylvestris, Anthriscus sylvestris, Athyrium filix-femina, Circaea alpina, Cirsium helenioides, Convallaria majalis, Cornus suecica, Corydalis solida, Dryopteris carthusiana, Dryopteris expansa, Epilobium angustifolium, Equisetum sylvestris, Filipendula ulmaria, Fragaria vesca, Gagea lutea, Geranium sylvaticum, Geum rivale, Gymnocarpium dryopteris, Hepatica nobilis, Lathyrus vernus, Maianthemum bifolium, Matteuccia struthiopteris, Melampyrum pratense, Melampyrum sylvaticum, Oxalis acetosella, Paris quadrifolia, Pteridium aquilinum, Pulmonaria obscura, Pyrola minor, Pyrola rotundifolia, Ranunculus auricomus, Ranunculus fallax, Rubus saxatilis, Solidago virgaurea, Stellaria nemorum, Trientalis europaea, Orthilia secunda, Viola riviniana. Graminoids: Agrostis capillaris, Calamagrostis arundinacea, Calamagrostis purpurea, Carex digitata, Carex globularis, Deschampsia cespitosa, Deschampsia flexuosa, Luzula pilosa, Melica nutans, Milium effusum, Poa nemoralis.
Mosses and liverworts: Aulacomnium palustre, Barbilophozia lycopodioides, Brachythecium spp., Cirriphyllum piliferum, Climacium dendroides, Dicranum fuscescens, D. polysetum, D. majus, D. scoparium, Hylocomium splendens, Polytrichum commune, Plagiochila asplenioides, Plagiomnium spp., Plagiothecium spp., Pleurozium schreberi, Pseudobryum cinclidioides, Ptilium crista-castrensis, Rhizomnium spp., Rhodobryum roseum, Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus, Spagnum centrale, Sphagnum russowii, Sphagnum girgensohnii, Sphagnum squarrosum.
Birds: Forests dominated by Picea abies: Carduelis spinus, Erithacus rubecula, Loxia curvirostris, Parus ater, Phylloscopus collybita, Regulus regulus, Turdus philomelos. Deciduous forests: Hippolais icterina, Oriolus oriolus, Parus caeruleus, Phylloscopus sibilatrix, Scolopax rusticola, Sylvia atricapilla, Sylvia borin, Troglodytes troglodytes, Turdus merula. Old growth forests: Certhia familiaris, Dryocopus martius, Parus cinctus, Perisoreus infaustus, Phylloscopus trochiloides, Pinicola enucleator, Picoides tridactylus, Tetrao urogallus, Turdus viscivorus

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.A Picea taiga woodland
EuroVegChecklist alliances:
Piceion excelsae Pawlowski et al. 1928
Aconito septentrionalis-Piceion obovatae Solomeshch et al. ex Martynenko et al. 2008
Empetro-Piceion obovatae Morozova et al. 2008
Annex I:
9010 Western taiga
9050 Fennoscandian herb-rich forests with Picea abies
Emerald:
G3.A Picea taiga woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.1 Boreal forest
EFT:
1.1 Spruce-dominated boreal forest
VME:
D1 Western boreal spruce forests

Map Description:
The map is rather complete. Data sources: Art17, EVA, BOHN.

Trends in Quantity:
The habitat area has increased +8 % in EU28 and +6 % in EU28+ over the last 50 years, based on calculations using data from Finland, Lithuania, Sweden and Norway. The greatest increase (+25 %) has occurred in Finland. Data on the extent of trend in quantity are missing for Estonia, Latvia and Poland. In the future the habitat will decrease in Latvia, be stable in Estonia, increase in Finland and weakly increase in Norway. The main reason for the increase is that some of the area of the type G3.B Pinus sylvestris taiga forest is transforming to this type as its sites of occupancy are becoming more mesic. This phenomenon has been recognized in Finland, but there in no evidence of its causes. There are no historical data for 250-50 years ago.

Trends in Quality:
The extent of degradation in the past 50 years in the EU 28 region is 52 %, and the severity of degradation is 36 %, based on trend data from Finland, Sweden and Lithuania, as trend data from other countries are missing. However, all countries reported a decreasing trend. Calculation of degradation of quality for EU28+ is more unreliable, because trend data from Norway were missing, and a large area of this habitat occurs there (about 20% of the EU28 area). The degradation has been both biotic and abiotic. The most important forms of degradation are lack of dead wood and breakage of dead wood continuum, decrease in number of of large trees, changes in stand age distribution, disturbance caused by forest cuttings and soil amelioration, lack of natural stand dynamics and in the northern boreal subzone ecosystem changes caused by reindeer grazing. Changes caused by climate change are already possible, especially in the northern boreal subzone.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Less than 50 % of the habitat is located within EU 28. A majority of the habitat lies within Russia. There is a relatively large area of the habitat also in Norway.

Pressures and Threats:
Many of the threats have a connection with forestry. Regeneration cuttings, removal of dead and dying trees, thinning of tree layer, lack of natural stand dynamics and soil amelioration are likely to lead to forests with even stand structure, shortage of old trees, missing deadwood and deadwood continuum as well as to simplified tree species composition. In the northern parts of Fennoscandia and in Latvia overgrazing is a threat. In Norway infrastructure development can also affect this habitat. In the future climate change is likely to influence this habitat.

Conservation and Management:
Current most common approaches are establishing protected areas/sites, establishing wilderness areas/allowing succession, restoring/improving forest habitats and adaptation of forest management. Additional actions needed are further optimizing the use of funds for conservation (what kind of areas are chosen for conservation and where), conservation of all successional stages (protection of natural old forests, creating (simulated) young successional stages of natural forests), further improving methods for conservation/nature management in managed forests (e.g. regarding deadwood) and control of overgrazing.

Conservation Status:
9010: ALP U1, BOR U2, CON U2
9050: ALP U1, BOR U2

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The habitat has a capacity to recover naturally after a severe damage, but a full recovery including deadwood and species which are dependent on it will take a very long time. The rate of recovery is also dependent on the extent of the damaged area. Measures like planting trees or sowing tree seeds, planting large pieces of humus layer with attached vegetation and adding artificial deadwood is likely to fasten the process considerably.

Summary:
This habitat comprises mesic to herb-rich woodland on mineral soils through the boreal and boreonemoral zones, often dominated by Picea abies but sometimes by Pinus sylvestris or Betula pendula or mixtures of these trees. Broadleaved trees can also occur and though, under natural conditions, forest succession will lead to the development of a Picea forest, the proportions of tree species are nowadays largely regulated by forestry. The soils are usually podzolic with mor humus but sometimes more mesic with mull and the associated shrubs, dwarf shrubs, herbs and bryophytes all reflect these differences as well as the regional climate. Many of the threats relate to forestry: cuttings, removal of dead and dying trees, thinning of tree layer, lack of natural stand dynamics and soil amelioration are likely to lead to forests with an even stand structure, shortage of old trees, missing deadwood and deadwood continuum as well as to simplified tree species composition. In the northern parts of Fennoscandia and in Latvia overgrazing is a threat and in Norway infrastructure development. In the future climate change is likely to influence this habitat. Conservation measures can include establishing protected areas/sites for succession, restoring/improving forest habitats and adaptation of forest management.

Criterion A Text:
During the past 50 years there has been a 8 % and 6 % increase in the quantity of this habitat in the EU 28 and EU 28+, respectively. The habitat is, therefore, assessed as Least Concern under criterion A1 for both areas. The calculations were based on territorial data. Data on change in quantity are available from Finland, Lithuania, Sweden and Norway only. Data on quantitative trends in Estonia, Latvia and Poland are missing. There are no data on future or historic reductions for this habitat type.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat is very widely distributed and occupies a very large area in numerous locations. Its extent of occurrence (EOO) is larger than 50,000 km2, and its area of occupancy (AOO) is larger than 50. Therefore it is assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
During the past 50 years, 52% of the habitat area in the EU28 was affected by a reduction in quality with 36% relative severity, and the habitat is therefore assessed as Near Threatened (NT) under criteria C/D1. The type of quality degradation usually was both abiotic and biotic. There are trend data on qualitative degradation from Finland, Lithuania and Sweden only. Data from Estonia, Latvia, Norway and Poland are missing. A relatively large part of the area of this type lies within Norway, and therefore the same EU28+ result (Near Threatened) is more uncertain than for the EU28. Most of the quality degradation has occurred already before the 1960's, but data on these decline are not available.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Least Concern (LC) under criterion A1 (decline in quantity) in both EU28 and EU28+, as there has been a small increase in its quantity over the last 50 years. The area of the habitat is currently stable or increasing in the Nordic countries, but declining in the Baltic countries. However, in the same period there has been a reduction in the quality of this habitat, affecting 52% of its extent with moderate severity, and the habitat therefore is assessed as Near Threatened (NT) under criterion C/D1. The habitat quality continues to decrease throughout Europe. The assessment for EU28+ is the same as for EU28, but as Norway holds a relatively large part of the habitat's area, the result for the EU28+ is more uncertain. Most of the quality degradation has occurred already before the 1960's, and long-term trends may lead to a more trheatened status, but data on these decline are not available.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Boreal herb-rich forests with Picea abies on brown soils (related to Annex 1 type 9050) are floristically diverse forests, which contain many vegetation types, of which many are potentially threatened.

Contributors:
Type description: T. Tonteri & M. Mikkola-Roos
Territorial data: L. Aunina, E. Bendiksen, Z. Kacki, V. Rasomavicius,  I. Sell, T. Tonteri
Working group forests: F. Attorre, R.-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G1.9a Boreal-nemoral mountain Betula and Populus tremula woodland on mineral soils

Habitat Description:
This habitat includes deciduous woodlands growing in mountains at the extreme cold climatic limit towards the arctic or, oroarctic zone, where the short growing season, the prevalence of frost, snow conditions and high exposure limit both the possible dominants and the structure of the woodland. Silicate soils predominate, strongly acidic, often podzolised, sometimes showing cryogenic microrelief. But, nutrient-rich and moist brown soils also exist. Birch is the typical dominant tree, in northern Fennoscandia Betula pubescens ssp. czerepanovii (= B. tortuosa), which typically forms a very open, sometimes krummholz, canopy usually only 3-10m tall, with occasional Picea abies ssp. obovata towards the east. Beneath this, there is a layer of dwarf-shrubs including Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, V. uliginosum, Empetrum hermaphroditum, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Betula nana, Rubus chamaemorus and Ledum palustre, monocotyledons and herbs such as Deschampsia flexuosa, Carex globularis, Cornus suecica and Trientalis europaea and a carpet of mosses and lichens. Similar field layers occur beneath short canopies of B. pubescens ssp. carpatica in the higher parts of the Scottish Highlands, so such woodland qualify as part of this habitat.
Indicators of good quality:
• Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
• Presence of natural disturbance
• Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
• Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests)
• Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora & fauna)
• No signs of eutrophication or pollution
• No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates
Characteristic species:
Tree canopy: Betula pubescens ssp. czrepanovii (Fennoscandia), or ssp. carpatica (UK).
Field layer: Dwarf shrubs: Arctostaphylos alpina, Diphasiastrum spp., Empetrum nigrum, Linnaea borealis, Lycopodium spp., Phyllodoce coerulea, Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea. Herbs: Cornus suecica, Geranium sylvaticum, Melampyrum pratense, Pedicularis lapponica, Solidago virgaurea, Trientalis europaea, Viola biflora. Graminoids: Calamagrostis lapponica, Carex bigelowii, Deschampsia flexuosa, Festuca ovina, Juncus trifidus.
Bryophytes: Barbilophozia lycopodioides, Dicranum spp., Hylocomium splendens, Pleurozium schreberi.
Lichens: Cladina spp., Nephroma arcticum, Peltigera aphthosa.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G1.9 Non-riverine woodland with [Betula], [Populus tremula] or [Sorbus aucuparia]
EuroVegChecklist alliances:
Betulion tortuosae Doing ex Mucina all. nova hoc loco
Annex I:
9040 Nordic subalpine/subarctic forests with Betula pubescens ssp. czerepanovii
Emerald:
G1.917 Oroboreal Betula woods and thickets
G1.925 Boreal Populus tremula woods
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.1 Boreal Forest
EFT:
13.3 Mountain birch forest
VME:
C.1 Eastern boreal open woodlands

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat covers relatively large areas at the border of the boreal and alpine regions, therefore usually representing more azonal than zonal vegetation. However, in the northernmost parts of Norway, it also occurs at sea level.

Map Description:
The map overestimates the distribution in Iceland and Scandinavia, and underestimates the distribution in Central Europe. Data sources: EVA, BOHN.

Trends in Quantity:
The decrease of the habitat area was calculated to be -8% for EU28 over the last 50 years, using data from Finland, Germany, Ireland and Sweden, therefore resulting mostly from an inferred decrease of 20% in Finland. This leads to the conclusion Least Concern. Data on the extent of decrease are missing from Austria, UK and Norway, even though Norway reported increase of this habitat type during the past 50 years. Quantitative data from Iceland are missing, but it is known that the area is increasing in that country. Therefore, also for the EU28+ the conclusion Least Concern is made. There are no historical data for 250-50 years ago. The decrease observed in Finland was mainly caused by massive outbreaks of the moth Epirrita autumnata in the 1960's. The current trend in quantity is stable in most countries.

Trends in Quality:
Extent of degradation in EU28 was calculated to be 32%. Severity of degradation in EU28 was calculated to be 31%. Data from Finland, Germany, Sweden and UK were used in calculations. Austria, Ireland and Norway reported an unknown or uncertain trend. All data from Iceland were missing. As a result, the data are not sufficient for red list assessment in EU28+. The degradation has been biotic in all countries except in Germany, where it was abiotic. The most important reason for the decline of quality has been intensive grazing, which is caused by reindeer in Fennoscandia and by sheep or deer in other areas. Massive outbreaks of moths (e.g. Epirrita autumnata) have worsened the situation and in the outbreak areas intensive grazing has prevented regeneration of mountain birch. Other reasons for quality decline are natural succession and loss of aspen trees. There are no quantitative data for degradation 50-250 yrs ago.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Less than 30 % of the habitat area lies within the EU28. There are large areas of this habitat in Norway, Iceland and Russia.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a very large area and a wide distribution in Northern Europe.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat can occur in large stands and has a large EOO.

Pressures and Threats:
The most important pressures and threats are: overgrazing (by reindeer in Fennoscandia, other animals in other areas), climate change, which is likely to alter and decrease the habitat, herbivory by the moth Epirrita autumnata, establishment of recreational cottages (Norway), lack of grazing (Norway) and invasion of Rhododendron (UK, Ireland).

Conservation and Management:
The most common approaches currently involve establishing protected areas/sites and establishing wilderness areas. Additional actions needed, depending on area, are restrictions of overgrazing and/or allowing grazing in undergrazed areas, further assessments about which subtypes of the habitat are threatened, management of recreational use (Norway), Rhododendron control (UK, Ireland) and control of climate change.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
It is likely that a severely damaged habitat will recover, but it will take a very long time. Intervention would in many cases mean regulation of reindeer grazing.

Summary:
This habitat includes Betula pubescens ssp. czerepanovii/carpatica-dominated woodland growing in mountains at the extreme cold climatic limit towards the boreal/arctic border and in alpine Fennoscandia, with more scattered occurrences in nemoral mountains. The short growing season, prevalence of frost, snow and high exposure limit both the possible dominants and the structure of the woodland. Silicate soils predominate, strongly acidic, often podzolised, sometimes showing cryogenic microrelief. The field layer is of sub-shrubs and calcifuge herbs with a moss carpet. Infestation by a moth, inappropriate grazing by reindeer and sheep, bioenergy harvesting and invasion of non-native species have decreased the quality of the habitat.  Climate change may have a strong impact on this habitat in the future. Establishing protected areas and control of grazing are the important conservation measures.

References:
Bohn, U., Gollub, G. Hettwer, C., Neuhauslova, Z., Rause, T., Schlüter, H. & Weber, H. (2004) Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz.
Council of Europe (2010), Interpretation Manual of the Emerald Habitats. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Davies, C.E., Moss, D. & Hill, M.O. (2004), EUNIS Habitat Classification, revised. Report to the European Topic Centre, European Environment Agency.
European Commission DG Environment (2007), Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. Strasbourg: European Commission DG Environment.
European Environment Agency (2006), European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006, Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
Schamineé, J.H.J., Chytrý, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. & Rodwell, J.S. (2013), Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
Wöll, C. (2008). Treeline of mountain birch (Betula pubescens Ehrh.) in Iceland and its relationship to temperature. Technical University Dresden, Department of Forestry, diploma thesis in Forest Botany.

Criterion A Text:
During the past 50 years the habitat area has decreased -8 % in EU28 based on territorial data, which is why the habitat is assessed as Least Concern under criterion A1. Data on quantitative trends in Austria, UK, Iceland and Norway are missing. The by far largest part of this habitat type lies within Norway and Iceland. In Iceland the area is increasing, and therefore the habitat is assessed as Least Concern under criterion A for the EU 28+ as well.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat is widely distributed and occupies a very large area in numerous locations. Therefore it is assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
In the past 50 years 32% of the habitat area in EU28 was affected by a reduction of quality with 31 % relative severity, resulting in assessment as Least Concern under criteria C/D1. The type of quality degradation was mainly biotic, but also abiotic. A majority of the area with reduced quality was affected with slight severity. Data on qualitative trends in Austria, Ireland, Iceland and Norway are missing. The largest part of this habitat type lies within Norway and Iceland. This habitat is assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion C/D in EU28+.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Least Concern for EU28 and EU28+. In the EU28 its area has decreased -8% within the last 50 years and the area of the habitat is currently stable. A slight decline of quality has occurred on 32% of the area of this habitat in EU28 in the last 50 years. The habitat quality continues to decrease in some, but is stable in most EU28 countries. Trend data on reduction in quantity and quality were available only for a small number of EU countries, while a large part of the area of this type lies within Iceland and Norway. In Iceland the area is increasing, but the trend in quality (criterion C/D1) for the EU28+ is assessed as Data Deficient.

Contributors:
Type description: J. Rodwell
Territorial data: E. Bendiksen, J. Dahlgren, P. Finck, K.J. Kirby, T. Kontula, F. O'Neill, U. Raths, U. Riecken, A. Ssymank, W. Willner
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
The habitat includes sparse Phoenix canariensis groves (palmares) on colluvial deposits, mostly on flat mid-slope sites or at the base of irregular temporary streams. Endemic only to the Canary Islands, they are dependent on brief, temporary water-tables present in sporadic torrential flows during winter. Thus, they are azonal in the dry to arid bioclimatic belts of the infra-thermomediterranean where the zonal vegetation consists of xerophytic scrub (F8.1: Canary Island xerophytic scrub). As the Canarian palms were probably much exploited by humans in historic times (and still are found as semi-anthropogenic formations for the extraction of ‘palm honey’ or guarapo, a syrup made of the palm sap), the palm groves are considered to be impoverished versions of a former microphanerophytic dense community that was probably co-dominated also by dragon trees (Dracaena draco) and had some characteristics of a dry edapho-hygrophilous forest with climbers and tall-shrubs. Usually, the groves are in contact with the xerophytic sclerophyllous or scale-leaf communities (Mayteno-Juniperion canariensis) or canarian-spurge communities (the cardonales and tabaibales of Aeonio-Euphorbion canariensis) included in the G3.9c Macaronesian Juniperus woodland or F8.1 Canary Island xerophytic scrub.
Indicators of quality:
No forest exploitations in the majority of the area covered by the habitat
Intact natural hydrology
Natural composition of canopy
Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration
Long historical continuity (ancient woodland) with high species diversity
Absence of non-native species (such as Opuntia spp. and Agave sp.) in all layers (flora & fauna)
Low cover of nitrophilous species of the Forskaleo-Rumicetalia lunariae

Characteristic species:
Phoenix canariensis, Dracaena draco, Plocama pendula, Periploca laevigata, Dracaena tamaranae.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G2.5 [Phoenix] groves
EuroVegChecklist:
Phoenicion canariensis Rivas-Mart. et Del Arco in Rivas-Mart. et al. 2011
Annex 1:
9370 Palm groves of Phoenix
Emerald:
G2 Broadleaved evergreen woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and Forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat is an outstanding example of the Macaronesian biogeographical zone, due to its endemic occurrence only to the Canary Islands.

Trends in Quantity:
The steady increase in some of the islands is due to the reduction of rural pressure, which however is partially balanced by the roads construction and housing.

Trends in Quality:
The quality of this habitat is stable in its distribution area and currently is slightly increasing.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The natural range with EOO =13250 Km2 is not due to deterioration and destruction of the Phoenix canariensis woodlands. However it is noted that the Canarian palms were much exploited by humans in historic times and still are found

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat occurs across all the Canary islands.

Pressures and Threats:
The main threat for the Canarian Phoenix groves is related to the ecological characteristics of the habitat: these are dependent on temporary water-tables present in sporadic torrential flows during the winter, as well as to the fact that the Canarian palms were probably much exploited by humans in historic times and still are found as semi-anthropogenic formations for the extraction of "palm honey".

Conservation and Management:
The conservation and management actions suggested for the restoration of the Phoenix canariensis woodlands are mainly related to the pressures and threats that currently act or potentially could be applied.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Based on expert judgement, the habitat recovers rather quickly.

Summary:
This endemic habitat of the Canaries comprises sparse Phoenix canariensis groves on colluvial deposits, mostly on flat mid-slope sites or at the base of  irregular temporary streams and dependent on brief, temporary water-tables present in sporadic winter torrential flows.  As the Canarian palms were probably much exploited by humans in historic times, the palm groves are considered to be impoverished versions of former dense micro-forest vegetation. The main threat is from hydrological changes which should be prevented for conservation.

References:
Del Arco, M. (Ed.) 2006. Mapa de vegetación de Canarias. Mapas y memoria general. Grafcan Eds.
Rivas-Martínez, S., Widpret, W., Del Arco, M., Rodríguez, O., Pérez de Paz, P.L., García-Gallo, A., Acebes, J.R., Díaz, T.E. & Fernández-González, F. 1993. Las comunidades vegetales de la isla de Tenerife (Islas Canarias). Itinera Geobot 7: 169-374.

Criterion A Text:
The calculation of the recent decline in quantity is based on territorial data provided by national experts and the current trend in habitat quantity is steadily increasing.

Criterion B Text:
The habitat has a very small range (EOO = 38,250 km2) and AOO (50 grid cells). In combination with a continuing negative pressure in quality due to water extraction, this leads to the category Vulnerable (VU) for B1 and B2. The number of location is not known.

Criterion C/D Text:
The trend in quality (extent affected and severity of degradation) is calculated by summarizing national expert assessment. The values are too low to reach the thresholds for Near Threatened.

Criterion E Text:
There is no quantitative analysis available to estimate the probability this habitat collapses.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Vulnerable (VU) as it has a very small distribution and range (AOO, EOO) combined with an experienced decline in quality during the last 50 years, which is expected to continue in future. The area of the habitat is more or less stable.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
No sub-habitat types are in need of further examination.

Contributors:
Type description: J. Capelo
Territorial data: J. Loidi
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
G3.4d Mediterranean montane Cedrus woodland

Habitat Description:
To describe the habitat, we refer at first to the native Cedrus species in the Mediterranean: Cedrus atlantica  and Cedrus libani. The latter species includes two subspecies: libani and brevifolia. Cedrus atlantica is distributed in Morocco (Rif, Middle Atlas and north-east of the High Atlas) and Algeria (Aurés, Belezma, Hodna, Djbel Babor, Djurdjura, Blida and Ouarsenis). Cedrus libani subsp. libani is distributed in Lebanon, Syria and Asiatic Turkey. In Turkey and especially on the Taurus Mountains it forms extensive forests, while in the other two countries it is represented by small populations.
Within the geographical scope of the Red List project only the woodlands with Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia are of relevance. Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia is endemic to Cyprus, growing in a restricted area of the Paphos forest. It is found in the meso-Mediterranean to the mid supra-Mediterranean zone (altitude 900–1.400 m a.s.l.) in areas with sub-humid climate. It forms pure forests or mixed ones with Pinus brutia or Quercus alnifolia and it grows mainly on serpentine (diabase) substrates and on shallow to deep soils.
Indicators of quality:
No forest exploitations
Natural composition of canopy, canopy of woodland species not fragmented and competitive dominance of Cedrus species against other tree species;
Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi)natural age structure or completeness of layers
Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
Presence of old aged trees with spreading crown, large height and basal area and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Presence of natural disturbance such as treefall openings with natural regeneration
Survival of larger stands of forest without anthropogenic fragmentation and isolation (to support fauna which need large undisturbed forests)
Absence of non-native species in all layers (flora & fauna)
No signs of disturbance (e.g. grazing, unregulated logging) or regressive succession;
No man-induced very high population levels of ungulates

Characteristic species:
Trees: Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia, Quercus alnifolia
Understorey: Arrhenatherum album subsp. cypricola, Crepis fraasii, Cyclamen cyprium, Lactuca cyprica, Lecokia cretica, Pteridium aquilinum, Stellaria cilicica

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.9 Coniferous woodland dominated by [Cupressaceae] or [Taxaceae]
EuroVegChecklist:
Querco-Cedrion libani Barbero et al. 1974
Annex I:
9590 *Cedrus brevifolia forests (Cedrosetum brevifoliae)
Emerald:
G3.9 Coniferous woodland dominated by Cupressaceae or Taxaceae
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 (Temperate Forest)
EFT:
6.10.9 Cedar forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The endemic Cedrus woodlands in Cyprus represent an outstanding example of the Mediterranean biogeographic region, as the genus Cedrus is native to the Mediterranean region of Morocco, Algeria, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey (Anatolia) and Cyprus.

Trends in Quantity:
The trend in the area covered by the habitat, as well as its distribution is stable within the EU (Cyprus). It is decreasing to stable in the not EU28+ countries of the distribution of the Mediterranean montane Cedrus woodland.

Trends in Quality:
Based on the conservation status of the structure and functions of the habitat type 9590, it is evident that the current quality is favourable and the future prospects are also favourable. All the indicators of quality document the current trend in quality:
Regeneration of Cedrus species as well as of the other typical tree species of the Cedrus forest communities;
Existence of old aged trees with spreading crown, large height and basal area;
Existence of dead wood with cover higher than 5%;
Natural stand (not formed by reforestation);
Competitive dominance of Cedrus species against other tree species;
No signs of disturbance (e.g. grazing, unregulated logging) or regressive succession;
Canopy of woodland species not fragmented;
Low levels of soil compactness, absence of trampling and erosion (especially in the form of rills and gullies), high cover of litter and well developed Ah horizon.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
100% for the endemic habitat with Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia. However, if the habitat is defined to include all Mediterranean Cedrus woodland, the percentage within the EU is less than 1% (the total Cedrus woodland area is estimated to be 2800 km2).

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
As far as it is known, there are no records of reduction in the natural range of the Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia woodlands due to deterioration or destruction of their stands in Cyprus. So, even if the range is very small, the ans

Justification of Restricted Area:
The pure forests or mixed ones with Pinus brutia or Quercus alnifolia of Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia which are endemic to Cyprus, occur in a restricted area of the Paphos forest on serpentine (diabase) substrata.

Pressures and Threats:
The main threat to the habitat is related to the climate change and the possible effects to the structure and functions of the Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia forests in Cyprus. Outside Europe (non EU 28+), in the countries of its distribution, grazing, logging, fire, winter sports and urbanization are the main threats for the conservation the habitat woodland stands.

Conservation and Management:
The management measures applied at the Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia forests within the Natura 2000 site "Koilada ton Kedron-Kampos" is sufficient and effective for their conservation at Favorable status.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
As far as known there is no scientific documentation on the recovery of the Cedrus brevifolia forests in Cyprus. However it should be mentioned that Cedrus libani subsp. brevifolia has been used the previous years by the Forestry Depertment for reforestation efforts implemented at the forests of Troodos, Pafos and Adelfoi.

Summary:
In Europe, C. libani subsp. brevifolia woodlands are endemic to Cyprus occurring in a restricted area of the Paphos forest where there is a sub-humid bioclimate. They occur as pure stands or mixed with Pinus brutia or Quercus alnifolia and grow on shallow to deep serpentine soils.  The main threats are fire, grazing and logging and the habitat needs legal protection and appropriate management.

References:
Andreou M., Kadis K., Koutsovoulou K. & Thanos C.A. 2010. Management plan for the Plant Micro-Reserve of the species *Arabis kennedyae Meikle and the habitat type ‘*9590 Cedrus brevifolia forests’ at the Natura 2000 site ‘Koilada Kedron-Kampos’. Report Project PLANT-NET CY: LIFE08 NAT/CY/000453, Frederick University, Nicosia.
Barbéro, M. & Quézel, P. 1979. Contribution à l'étude des groupments foréstiers de Chypre. Documents phytosociologiques 4: 9-34.
Delipetrou P. & Christodoulou C.S. 2010. Identification and Mapping Guide of Annex I Habitat Types (Dir. 92/43/EEC) in Cyprus. Department of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment. Lefkosia, Cyprus (in Greek).
Dimopoulos P. & Tsiripidis I. 2013. Surveillance and conservation status assessment for the Annex I habitat types (Dir. 92/43/EEC) in Cyprus. Department of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment. Lefkosia, Cyprus.
Eliades, N.-G., Gailing, O., Leinemann, L., Fady, B. & Finkeldey, R. 2011. High genetic diversity and significant population structure in Cedrus brevifolia Henry, a narrow endemic Mediterranean tree from Cyprus. Plant Systematics and Evolution 294: 185-198.

Criterion A Text:
A stable trend for the recent past wasbased on territorial data provided by the national experts in Cyprus and information provided from the Forestry of Department in Cyprus.

Criterion B Text:
The AOO and EOO are extremely small, but the subcriteria (a) and (b) for B1 and B2 are not met, as there are no continuing declines or current threatening processes. However, the habitat can be assumed to exist at very few locations (< 10); thus in the case of fire (a stochastic event) may cause a decline in area in the future. Therefore, the habitat is assessed as Vulnerable under B1 and B2 according to subcriteria (c) and under B3.

Criterion C/D Text:
Both biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat have not substantially reduced during the last 50 yearsin the stands of the habitat in Cyprus.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Vulnerable (VU) for the EU28 (and EU28+) based on the criteria B1, B2 and B3, due to the very few locations where the habitat is present, making it vulnerable to stochastic events, especially fire. For all other criteria for which data are available the habitat is assessed as Least Concern.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
As concerns the habitat within its European-Mediterranean distribution limits, no differentiation in sub-habitat types is neccessary, and no sub-habitats have been recognized within the Annex I habitat typology. If we take the distribution range as a t

Contributors:
Type description: I. Tsiripidis, P. Dimopoulos
Territorial data: Ch. Christodoulou
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
Glaciers are permanent or near-permanent ice masses, created by the compaction of the snow accumulated in cold climates. These deposits, when they are under pressure, behave like a viscous liquid. So, a glacier is a mobile element, because of its ability to slowly flow along a slope under the effect of gravity. Different types of glacier exist. Characteristic for the arctic regions, ice sheets and ice caps are dome-like ice masses unconstrained by topography. More characteristic of the large mountain ranges, but also present in the arctic regions, most glaciers are constrained by topography. This is the case for cirque glaciers, valley glaciers, mountain glaciers and piedmont glaciers. The smallest form of glacier is derived from snow-drifting, avalanches, or ice deposition in cold-bottom karst dolines. Called glacierets, these small ice masses may have an existence limited to a few years. They are especially sensitive to global warming of the climate. Climate change may cause variations in both temperature and snowfall, causing changes in the surface mass balance. Due to the extreme conditions of this habitat, especially at low temperatures, very few organisms occur in this environment, which could almost be considered sterile. Only some unicellular algae occasionally grow on the melting snow cover of glaciers during summer. These ice formations are found in high altitude or high latitude. In Europe, they occur only in the summit region of the Alps, the Pyrenees, the Scandes, and in the arctic regions.
Indicators of good quality:
Long-term balance between accumulation of ice and melting (crucial for sustainable surviving of glaciers), usually expressed as “mass balance” or “surface mass balance” (SMB) and in this way used as a sensitive climate indicator for glaciers.

Characteristic species:
Flora, Algae: Chlamydomonas nivalis

Classification:
EUNIS:
H4.2 Ice caps and true glaciers
Euroveg Checklist:
Mesotaenion berggrenii Bültmann et Takeuchi in Bültmann et al. 2014
Annex 1:
8340 Permanent glaciers
Emerald:
H4.2 Ice caps and true glaciers
MAES-2:
Sparsely vegetated land
IUCN:
-

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat is restricted to the arctic zone and the alpine biogeographical region (including alpine areas in the boreal region).

Map Description:
The map is complete, but maybe a bit overestimated for the Pyrenees. It is based on the Potential Vegetation Map of Europe (Bohn).

Trends in Quantity:
The trend in quantity is generally considered as decreasing in whole Europe.

Trends in Quality:
Human interference during the last century increased, with atmospheric pollution and rising temperature due greenhouse gases as min pressures. This has reduced the (abiotic) quality of the habitat over large parts of the range. No quantitative data are available however.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
< 5%. Within Europe a much larger area of glaciers is found in the EU28+ countries, compared to the EU28 countries. In the northern hemisphere many glaciers exist elsewhere, outside Europe.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
A regression is documented in many scientific papers, but the habitat has a wide range.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat occupies large patches in a wide range.

Pressures and Threats:
The glaciers are threatened by direct human input, such as 1. skiing off the tracks, by 2. other recreation activities and by 3. air pollution from industry and traffic. More problematic reason for threat is 4. global warming (higher temperature, radiation) and 5. input of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in atmosphere. In some localities lying in volcanic active territories also activity of volcanoes can be considered as potential threat.

Conservation and Management:
The mass balance, meaning the difference between ice accumulation and melting (or sublimation) of a glacier, is crucial to the survival of glaciers. To manage these processes is beyond the present possibilities of human, even though glacier melting is a highly popular theme for politicians. The decrease of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is a big task for the near future. Many important measures are needed, but they are not yet implemented or not sufficiently respected. The glaciers are threatened by other, direct human input, such as skiing off the tracks, by recreation activities and by air pollution from industry and traffic.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Glacier retreat is visible in the (relatively) low elevation regions. At higher altitudes climatic conditions are cooler and the decline has lower proportions. The increasing of mass balance can potentially reestablishing equilibrium. Restoration takes a long time period and can only happen through a natural way.

Summary:
Ice sheets and ice caps are permanent or near-permanent dome-like ice masses unconstrained by topography. Developing from long-compacted snow, they are typical for large and high cold mountain ranges and more extensively at lower altitudes in the arctic. Very few organisms can survive here, but there can be unicellular algae on the melting surface in summer. They are especially sensitive to climate warming which affects both snowfall and surface mass balance. Some ice caps in Iceland are also vulnerable to catastrophic volvanic eruption beneath.

References:
Benn D.I. & Evans D. (1998). Glaciers & Glaciation. Arnold, London. 734 p.
Bennett, M. & Glasser N.  (1996). Glacial Geology: Ice Sheets and Landforms. John Wiley and Sons Ltd., Chichester, England. 364 p.
Haeberli, W. &Beniston, M. 1998. Climate change and its impacts on glaciers and permafrost in the Alps. Ambio 27: 258-265.
Kuhn, M., Lambrecht, A., Abermann, J., Patzelt, G. & Gross, G. 2009. Die österreichischen Gletscher 1998 und 1969, Flächen- und Volumenänderungen. Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, 128 p.
Lambrecht, A. & Kuhn, M. 2007. Glacier changes in the Austrian Alps during the last three decades, derived from the new Austrian glacier inventory. Annals of Glaciology 46(1): 177-184.
Lindgaard, A. &Henriksen, S. 2011 (eds). The 2011 Norwegian Red list for ecosystems and habiat types. Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre, Trondheim. 124 p.
Traxler, A., Minarz, E., Englisch, T., Fink, B., Zechmeister, H. & Essl, F. 2005. Rote Liste der gefährdeten Biotoptypen Österreichs. Moore, Sümpfe und Quellfluren, Hochgebirgsrasen, Polsterfluren, Rasenfragmente und Schneeböden. Monographien, Band 174, Wien, 268 p.
Zryd A. (2001), Les glaciers. la nature dans les Alpes. Éditions Pillet. Société Valaisanne des Sciences Naturelles; Saint-Augustin, St-Maurice, Switzerland. 325 p.

Criterion A Text:
Average European trends were calculated based on reported data from five countries (Austria, Slovakia, Germany, France and Switzerland). The present area of the habitat in these countries covers about 60% of the EU28 total area, but only less than 5% of the EU28+ data. For the EU28+ important trend data is missing from Norway and Iceland. However, it is likely that also there glaciers have decreased in area, though maybe less than in the Alps. Long historical trend data was reported by four of the five countries (Austria, Germany, France and Switzerland). The trends lead to the assessment Vulnerable for EU28 and Near Threatened for EU28+ for both criteria A1 and A3.

Criterion B Text:
The extent of occurrence (EOO) and Area of occupancy (AOO) are much larger than the thresholds for criterion B, and the habitat occurs in many locations. So, even if there ar severe threats and ongoing declines, the habitat is assessed as Least Concern for criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
Quantitative data on extent and severity of decline over the last 50 years was reported from four countries (Austria, Germany, Slovenia and Switzerland) and this data (covering 35% of the EU28 total and <5% of the EU28+ total) were used to calculate European average trends in quality. For the EU28+ it can be assumed that also in Iceland and Norway (from which countries trend data is lacking) large areas of glaciers have been slightly affected in the last decennia by increasing temperatures. No data were available for long historical and future trends in quality. The decline in quality relates mainly to abiotic changes, while nearly nothing is known about biotic declines. Therefore the same data can be used under criteria C/D1 and C1. They lead to the conclusion Vulnerable for criteria C/D1 and C1.

Synthesis:
The trend in quantity over the last 50 years and over a longer time period both result in the Red List category Vulnerable (VU) for the EU28 countries. For the EU28+ countries the declines are slightly smaller, leading to the Near Threatened (NT) category. Additionally, the trends in quality (large areas declined with slight severity) lead to the category Vulnerable for both the EU28 and EU28+.

Contributors:
Type description: R. Delarze
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, G. Buffa, L. Casella, A. ÄŒarni, R. Delarze, N. Juvan, J. Loidi, A. Mikolajczak, P. Finck, D. Paternoster, U. Raths, U. Riecken, A. Ssymank 
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: F. Essl, G. Giusso Del Galdo, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. ValachoviÄ, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
Evergreen lauriphyllous forests with a very rich and luxuriant associated flora and fauna typical of the humid to hyper-humid, frost-free, mist-bound cloud belt of the Macaronesian islands.  So-called ‘Atlantic rain forest’, this habitat forms the most complex and remarkable relict of the humid sub-tropical vegetation of the Miocene-Pliocene period in southern Europe.  Occurring at 500-1500m, it is typical of slopes with deep soils kept permanently moist by rain and fog-drip. Humidity tends to decline from north to south among these archipelagos but, particularly on Madeira and the more westerly Canary Islands, more dramatic topography has a strong influence on the local climatic conditions. 
In contrast to the G2.7 Macaronesian heathy woodlands which are dominated by shrubby ericaceous plants, the canopy here is composed of laurel-leaved trees and shrubs, many of them ancient endemics to the islands.  The canopy of these highly productive woodlands can reach over 30m with some of the tree species suckering over and again to produce dense multi-stemmed individuals.  There can be up to 20 different tree species in a few hectares, prominent among them Laurus azorica, L. novocanariensis, Myrica faya, Ocotea foetens, Persea indica, Apollonias barbujana, Clethra arborea, Erica arborea, E. azorica, Ilex canariensis, I. perado ssp. azorica, I. perado ssp. perado, Isoplexis canariensis, Ixanthus viscosus, Picconia azorica and P. excelsa.  In general, these laurel forests also have more climbing plants, ferns and epiphytic mosses than the Macaronesian heaths. The lush bryophyte cover, including some liverworts, is important in intercepting and retaining atmospheric moisture.   
The woodlands show variation according to the local climatic conditions, sub-humid forms favouring southern slopes within areas of 500mm annual precipitation and little influence of the cloud-belt (eg. the Visneo-Apollonion and Canarian Ixantho-Laurion); humid types with precipitation of up to 1200mm, sunshine and temperature lessened by fogs (eg. Azorean Dryopterido-Laurion); and the hyper-humid with precipitation over 1500mm and permanent fogs, conditions typical of mountains of Madeira and the Azores (eg. the Sibthorpio-Clethrion).  Local endemism also means that particular islands can have a highly distinctive character and, in some places, degradation and invasion of introduced taxa like Pittosporum undulatum affects the floristic composition (as in the Myrico-Pittosporion of coastal slopes on the Azores).
Indicators of quality:
Particularly at lower altitudes and on less difficult terrain, areas of intact laurel forests have been drastically reduced by forest exploitation in clear-cutting for charcoal, tool-making and compost production, by planting of replacement forests of commercial timber trees; or by dairy-cattle grazing which hinders regeneration and causes eutrophication.  Road construction through forests also allows the spread of invading species. Signs of high quality in remaining stands are:
the continuance of structural and floristic integrity of the forest vegetation without secondary regeneration after interventions or the dense growth that develops with abandonment of operations
survival of larger stands of forest without fragmentation and isolation
absence of damage from fires, particularly threatening in the sub-humid Canarian forests, with death of older hollow trees, consumption of deadwood and litter and development of combustible pioneer vegetation afterwards
absence of introduced invaders such as Pittosporum undulatum, Hedychium gardnerianum, Clethra arborea (an endemic but cultivated as an ornamental), particularly threatening on the Azores and Madeira. 

Characteristic species:
Tree canopy: Laurus azorica, L. novocanariensis, Myrica faya, Ocotea foetens, Persea indica, Apollonias barbujana, Clethra arborea, Erica arborea, E. azorica, Ilex canariensis, I. perado ssp. azorica, I. perado ssp. perado, Isoplexis canariensis, Ixanthus viscosus, Picconia azorica and P. excelsa, Viburnum tinus, Frangula azorica, Viburnum tinus ssp. subcordatum, Juniperus brevifolia, Prunus lusitanica, Sambucus lanceolata, S. palmensis, Ruscus streptophyllus, Phillis nobla, Ocotea foerens, Rubia peregrina, Tamus edulis, Rubus ulmifolius; Field layer: Asplenium onopteris, Dryopteris oligodonta, Pteridium aquilinum, Asparagus fallax, Galium scabrum. Diplazium caudatum, Woodwardia radicans, Brachypodium syklvaticun, Sibthorpia peregrine Eupatorium adenophorum, Ixanthus viscosus, Carex canariensis, C. peregrina. 
Some endemic bird species live almost entirely in the laurel forests: Madeiran laureal pigeon Columba trocaz, Canarian dark-tailed laurel pigeon C. bollii and white-tailed laurel pigeon C. junoniae and the Azores bullfinch Pyrrhula murina.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G2.3 Macaronesian [Laurus] woodland
EuroVegChecklist alliances:
Culcito macrocarpae-Juniperion brevifoliae Lüpnitz 1975
Dryopterido azoricae-Laurion azoricae Rivas-Mart. et al. 2002
Myrico fayae-Pittosporion undulati Lüpnitz 1976
Ixantho viscosae-Laurion azoricae Oberd. ex Santos in Rivas-Mart. et al. 1977
Sibthorpio peregrinae-Clethrion arboreae Capelo et al. 2000
Visneo mocanerae-Apollonion barbujanae Rivas-Mart. in Capelo et al. 2000
Annex 1:
9360 Macaronesian laurel forests (Laurus, Ocotea)
Emerald:
G2. Broadleaved evergreen woodland
MAES:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
9.4 Macaronesian laurisilva

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat stands for relict forest vegetation with strong affinities with Tertiary subtropical vegetation ('geoflora'). Contrary to continental european forest vegetation, it was not influenced by glaciations during the Pleistocene and thus lacks both deciduous elements (artho-tertiary flora) and mediterranean sclerophyllous  trees (paleomediterranean elements). It is found in the Azores, Madeira and Canary Islands, with an empoverished very small spot in the Morocco atlantic coast. It has an absolute compositional and structural originality and very high degree of endemism. The Azorean variant is quite distinct from that of Madeira and Canary Islands.

Trends in Quantity:
Altough historically much reduced, from logging for timber, firewood and conversion to agriculture: - territorial estimates for the Canary Islands amount to ca. 80% of area reduction since 1500 CE, for instance - the recent tendency , i.e. estimates within the scope of the last 50 years show a clear tendecy of recover. This is due to abandonment of agricultural land and recovery of secondary forest. Territorial estimates for the Canary Islands amount to 50.000 ha of abandoned agricultural land, as changes in political and macroeconomic settings  As a result, the present and future tendency is of clear increase of laurel forests, as a result of the PAC and effective nature conservation policies. If these genaral conditions are kept, increase in area is to be expected all the same. As for Madeira and the Azores, there are no objective data to account for estimates but the situation is putatively analogous to that of the Canaries.

Trends in Quality:
Current conditions of most laurel forests are of good preservation in terms of presence of most characteristic species and structure. Nevertheless, due to some afforestations in the recent past (aprox. 50 years) with exotic species (Eucalyptus and chestnut trees) and areas that are nowadays the result of secondary regenerations an amout of 30% with reduced ecological quality has been estimated (severity unknown). These factors that are degradative of quality have, in the present, almost ceased. Thus, near future trends are of stable or even incresing of quality.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
More than 95% lies within the EU28. The few moroccan spots are small and species-poor.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
In the last 50 years scope, there is evidence of incresing of the habitat´s area, mustly due to change in agricultural common policies and macroeconomic ameloration impling less preassure on forest for fuel and timber.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Although restricted to the Azores, Madeira and the Canaries due to paleobiogeographical reasons, it´s range is large enough not to be taken as 'small' (EOO>50000 Km2).

Pressures and Threats:
Although expansion of exotic forest (eucaliptus, non-native conifers and chestnut) is not to be expected, their persistence in areas of potential laurel forest is a threat because it prevents natural regeneration of native laurel forest. Conversion of such exotic forests  to regeneration of laurel is not many times straightforward. Analogous issues can be assumed for agriculture (banana, vineyards, greenhouse crops).Preassure issuing from urban or touristic expansion is still to be taken on account as social and institutional conflicts do not favor nature conservation everytime. Climate change may cause bioclimatic optima to change and such vegetation-belt altitude changes that might cause ecological disruption of laurel forest vegetation along with the loss of species or promotion of aliens. Although a rare event, wildfire during drought or heat-spells may be a serious threat to laurel forests.

Conservation and Management:
Keeping local, regional, national and UE conservation status aswell as keeping the actual protected areas and management practices will guarantee habitat persistence.
In addition, elimination of alien plants that are frequent in secondary laurel forest should be sought.
Protection against wildfires and urbanization preassures should be the most strict as possible.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
As a mature forest, depending on the extent of damage, it will count on ecological sucession to establish a comparable state in terms of structure, composition and function (mature closed forest). It is expected that, if the soil was not severely eroded and disturbance regimes causing  disruption will cease, that forest species will be able to establish and be ecologically dominant again in a time span of several decades to a century. Silvucultural practices of elimination of dominated individual trees might accelerate tree sucession towards mature laurel forests. Otherwise, sucession through self-thinning will take longer although the risk of deriving to an somewhat artificial habitat (the former option) is much reduced.

Summary:
This evergreen lauriphyllous forest with a very rich and luxuriant associated flora and fauna is confined to the humid to hyper-humid, frost-free, mist-bound cloud belt of the Macaronesian islands where deep soils are kept permanently moist by rain and fog-drip. The diverse canopy of laurel-leaved trees and shrubs, many of them ancient endemics to the islands, can be very tall, with some of the tree species suckering over and again to produce dense multi-stemmed individuals. In general, these forests have more climbing plants, ferns and epiphytic mosses than the Macaronesian heaths and the lush bryophyte cover is important in intercepting and retaining atmospheric moisture. The woodlands show variation according to the local climatic conditions across the archipelagoes and there is some striking local endemism on different islands. Competing land uses and natural hazards like fire and climate change are potential threats and conservation demands limits to urbanisation, wildfires and invasion of non-native plants.

References:
CAPELO, J., J. C. COSTA, M. LOUSÃ, S. FONTINHA, R. JARDIM, M. SEQUEIRA & S. RIVAS-MARTÍNEZ (2000). Vegetação da Madeira (Portugal): aproximação à tipologia fitossociológica. Silva Lusitana 7(2) : 257 – 279.
CAPELO, J., M. SEQUEIRA, R., JARDIM, S. MESQUITA & J. C. COSTA (2005) The vegetation of Madeira Island (Portugal). A brief overview and excursion guide. Quercetea 7: 105 -122
COSTA, J.C., C.NETO, C. AGUIAR, J. CAPELO, M.D. ESPÍRITO-SANTO, J. HONRADO, C. PINTO-GOMES, T. MONTEIRO-HENRIQUES, M. SEQUEIRA & M. LOUSÃ (2012) Vascular Plant Communities in Portugal (continental, Azores & Madeira) Global Geobotany 2: 1 -180.
COSTA, J.C., J. CAPELO, R. JARDIM, M. SEQUEIRA, D. ESPÍRITO-SANTO, M. LOUSÃ, S. FONTINHA, C. AGUIAR & S. RIVAS-MARTÍNEZ in CAPELO, J. (ed.) (2004) Catálogo sintaxonómico e florístico das comunidades vegetais da Madeira e Porto Santo. Quercetea 6: 61-186.
RIVAS-MARTÍNEZ, S., W. WILDPRET, M. DEL ARCO, O. RODRÍGUEZ, P.L. PÉREZ DE PAZ, A. GARCIA-GALLO, J.R. ACEBES, T.E. DÍAZ & F. FERNÁNDEZ-GONZÁLEZ (1993) – Las comunidades vegetales de la Isla de Tenerife (Islas Canarias). Itinera Geobotanica 7: 169-374.

Criterion A Text:
For Madeira and Azores, maps of national forest inventory from 1974 allowed an estimate of area of laurel forest increase of 50%. For the Canary Islands an expert estimate amounts to 10% increase since 1960. The average value of 40% is thus assumed to the set of three archipelagos. Simple extrapolation for the next 50 years period would yield and increase around 40% or more, but such a simple reasoning is arbitrary and uncertain and the values for A2a and A2b are considered unknown. Historical reduction (A3 criterion) is estimated to be between 50 to 70% of the original area (1750 C.E.) based on literary or intitutional descriptions and comparison of actual area to Natural Potential Vegetation Maps.

Criterion B Text:
Especially the AOO values is close to the threshold for B2, but as there are no continuing declines or threats all criteria under B are assessed Least Concern.

Criterion C/D Text:
Territorial estimates for the Canary Islands yield a reduction in quality on 30% of the area since 1960, with unknown severity of degradation, but mostly due to cutting for firewood and habitat replacement with conifer/exotic hardwood aforestattion. Based on the main degradation effects cited (cutting and exotic afforestation), severity is estimated to be slight tor moderate. No such estimates exist for the Azores and Madeira. The values do not lead to any Red List status for criterion C/D1.

Synthesis:
There is historical evidence, from a time span dating back to the XVI century that the habitat's area has been much reduced. Historical descriptions of fire, cutting for timber and clearing land for agriculture are inequivocal for all the three archipelagos. Comparison with Natural Potential Vegetation Maps supports the idea of a large reduction. Thus, in spite of a recent and present favourable status (an area increase of about 40%), the strong historical reduction (criterion A3) leads to the category Vulnerable (VU). Besides, parts of the habitat have undergone a reduction in abiotic and biotic quality in the last 50 years due to cutting for timber and replacement by afforestations, but quantitative values are uncertain and not expected to lead to a Red List category.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Sub-types with a different species composition may be distinguished for each archipelago (azorean, madeirean, canarian).

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Rodwell
Territorial data: D. Espírito-Santo, J. Capelo, J. Loidi
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
The habitat type comprises successionally mature, zonal microforests of Madeira and the Canary Islands with a luxuriant canopy 3 to 12m tall, dominated by one or more of Erica canariensis Rivas Mart., M. Osório & Wildpret (=E. arborea sensu auct. mad & can. and not E. arborea L.), E. platycodon subsp. platycodon (Canarian) or E. platycodon subsp. maderincola (Madeiran) usually with some broadleafs, including Lauraceae. Heath scrub, even if arborescent, that is pioneer, seral or secondary to mature forest, is not included here but placed in F4.3 Macaronesian heath, vegetation typical of cambisols with mor humus. Four distinct subtypes of these primary woodlands can be recognized with notable stretches of types 2 and 4 on Tenerife (Anaga) , Gomera and La Palma.
1. Madeiran, upper mesotemperate to supratemperate, hyper-humid tree-heath forests above the
upper limit of laurel forest from ca. 1500 up to 1862m, on andosols or cambisols, with absolute dominance of heaths reaching up to 12m tall, either E. canariensis or E. platycodon subsp. maderincola (Polysticho falcinelli-Ericion canariensis). Intense cold probably excludes laurels but there can be some other broadleafs (Vaccinium padifolium, Sorbus maderensis) and endemics in the understorey and clearings (e.g. Teucrium francoi, Odontites holliana, Polystichum falcinellum). In pristine stands, Juniperus cedrus subsp. maderensis used to be much more abundant in the forest, having been subsequently cut for timber and charcoal and now surviving as sparse individuals.
2. Tree-heath/Canarian holly forests of the sub-humid to humid mesomediterranean zone on rocky outcrops, but under almost permanent heavy fogs such that the thin soils with low water-holding capacity are kept permanently wet. These forests are co-dominated by Erica platycodon subsp. platycodon and elements of the Canarian laurel forest (Ixantho-Laurion), e.g. Laurus novocanariensis Rivas Mart. et al. (=Laurus azorica sensu auct. can. non (Seub.) Franco), Viburnum tinus subsp. rugosum and Ilex canariensis var. canariensis..
3. Madeiran equivalents of type 2 have Erica platycodon subsp. maderincola, madeiran blueberries (Vaccinium padifolium) and elements of the madeiran laurel forest (Sibthorpio-Clethrion) on deep cambisols.
4. On west Canaries with a dry to subhumid thermomediterranean climate, there are tree heath/ Canarian strawberry tree microforests dominated by Arbutus canariensis, Erica canariensis, Ilex canariensis var. canariensis with Visnea mocanera and Syderoxylon marmulano. Madeiran strawberry tree forests have no large tree-heath individuals.
Indicators of quality:
Closed canopy layer and richness of both dominant and understory characteristic taxa.
Large gaps in crown layer occurring naturally by death of individual trees or sometimes mass movements of soil in steep slopes.
No tendency to dominance by shrub thickets of E. platycodon subsp. pl., Teline sp. pl., Cistus symphytifolius, C. monspeliensis, Globularia salicina, Carlina sp. pl. or tall perennial grasses (Hyparrhenia sinaica, H. podotricha).
Absence of invasive aliens such as Cytisus scoparius, Ulex europaeus and Leptospermum scoparius or even Australian wattles (Acacia sp. pl.), taking advantage of gaps or wildfires.
Absence of trampling by humans.

Characteristic species:
Flora:
Vascular plants: Erica canariensis (= E. arborea sensu auct. mad & can.) (dom.), Erica platycodon subsp. platycodon (dom.), E. platycodon subsp. maderincola (dom.), Ilex canariensis (dom.), Laurus novocanariensis (= L. azorica sensu auct. mad & can.) (dom.), Morella faya (= Myrica faya) (dom.), Rhamnus glandulosa, Semele androgyna, Smilax canariensis, S. pendulina, Apollonias barbujana, Arbutus canariensis (dom.), Carex perraudieriana, Diplazium caudatum, Dryopteris oligodonta, Euphorbia mellifera, Heberdenia excelsa, Ilex perado, Pleiomeris canariensis, Prunus lusitanica subsp. hixa (dom.), Pteris incompleta, Syderoxylon marmulano, Visnea mocanera, Viburnum tinus subsp. rugosum(dom.) , Hypericum inodorum, Phyllis nobla, Teline canariensis, Apollonias barbujana, Persea indica, Picconia excelsa, Cedronella canariensis, Hypericum glandulosum, Hypericum grandifolium, Arachnoides webbianum, Berberis maderensis, Carex lowei, Cirsium latifolium, Clethra arborea, Dryopteris aintoniana, Dryopteris x furadensis, Dryopteris maderensis, Festuca donax, Goodyera macrophylla, Hedera maderensis subsp. maderensis, Luzula seubertii, Pittosporum coriaceum (extremely rare), Polystichum drepanum, Rosa mandonii, Rubus grandifolius, Ruscus streptophyllus, Sibthorpia peregrina, Teucrium betonicum, Teucrium abutiloides, Vaccinium padifolium (dom.), Arum italicum subsp. canariensis, Dryopteris aemula, Bystropogon punctatus, Juniperus cedrus subsp. cedrus, J. cedrus subsp. maderensis, Polystichum falcinellum, Ranunculus cortusifolius var. minor, Sorbus maderensis. The genera Picconia, Semele, Gesnouinia, Lactucosonchus and Ixanthus are entirely endemic to these forests and others such as Isoplexus, Visnea and Phyllis reach their maximum development here.
Fauna:
Birds: Columba bollet, C. junionae, C. trocaz, Fringilla coelebs subsp. ombriosa, F. teydea.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G2.7 Macaronesian heathy woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Polysthico falcinelli-Ericion arboreae
Sibthorpio peregrinae-Clethrion arboreae (part).
Ixantho viscosae-Laurion azoricae (part)
Visneo mocanerae-Apollonion barbujanae (part)
Annex 1:
9360 Macaronesian laurel forests (Laurus, Ocotea)
Emerald:
G2 Broadleaved evergreen woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat stands for relict forest or arborescent vegetation with strong affinities with Tertiary subtropical vegetation ('geoflora'). Contrary to continental European forest vegetation, it was not influenced by glaciations during the Pleistocene and thus lacks both deciduous elements (artho-tertiary flora) and mediterranean sclerophyllous trees (paleomediterranean elements). It is found in the Azores, Madeira and Canary Islands, with an impoverished very small spot in Morocco's atlantic coast. It has an absolute compositional and structural originality and very high degree of endemism. The Azorean variant is quite distinct from that of Madeira and Canary Islands.

Map Description:
The map is likely to be complete. Data sources: NAT, EXP.

Trends in Quantity:
Similarly to macaronesian laurel forest, heathy woodland was historically much reduced, for the production of firewood, charcoal production and conversion to agriculture. Although territorial estimates of heathy forest for the Canary Islands are unknown, it is plausible that the amount of historical reduction was analogous to laurel forest (G2.3), i.e. up to ca. 80% of area reduction since 1500 CE. The recent tendency , i.e. estimates within the scope of the last 50 years, show a clear tendency of recovery in the case of Madeira (increase of 40%). This is due to abandonment of agricultural land and recovery of secondary forest. Territorial estimates for the Canary Islands amount to 50.000 ha of abandoned agricultural land, as a consequence of changes in political and macroeconomic settings, and some will correspond to heathy woodland but the proportion is unknown. Nevertheless, territorial evaluation is set as 'stable', meaning that no variation should be accounted. As a result, the present and future tendency is to admit some increase of heathy forests, as a result of the PAC and effective nature conservation policies. If these general conditions are kept, some increase in area is expected. It should be noted, that this is a habitat mostly found either at higher altitudes, in steep rocky slopes or as a secondary forest of laurel forest. The increase is probably due to agricultural abandonment in the latter areas. As for the Azores, there are no objective data to account for estimates but the situation is putatively similar to that of Madeira. The general increase value was taken as the average increase value: 35.1%.

Trends in Quality:
Territorial information from the Canary Islands is absent for current and historical times, although it may be taken as stable for future trends in the perspective of charcoal, timber and competitive land-uses (agricultural and exotic forestry) and mostly by the setting of conservation policies. The same may be assumed for the case of Madeira and Azores.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
The whole (100%) of the habitat area lies within the EU28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is estimated to have increased ca. 35% in the last 50 years time span.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Although restricted to Macaronesia, it is not considered to have a small area (EOO > 50000 km²).

Pressures and Threats:
As in the case of laurel forest, the expansion of exotic forest (eucalyptus, non-native conifers, and chestnut) is not to be expected anymore, but their persistence in areas of potential heathy forest is a threat because it prevents natural regeneration of native heathy forest. The conversion of such exotic forests to a regeneration of tree-heath is not many times straightforward. Analogous issues can be assumed for agriculture (banana, vineyards, greenhouse crops). Pressures issuing from urban or touristic expansion have still to be taken on account as social and institutional conflicts do not favour nature conservation every time. Climate change may cause bioclimatic optima to change and such vegetation-belt altitude changes might cause ecological disruption of heathy forest vegetation along with the loss of species or promotion of aliens and putatively diminish the potential area of this habitat in altitude areas, as the lower altitudinal limit would rise (termicity rises) and the higher is kept (excess of cold). Although a rare event, wildfires during drought or heat spells may be a serious threat to laurel forests.

Conservation and Management:
The maintenance of local, regional, national and EU-wide conservation statuses, as well as the maintenance of actually protected areas and management practices, will guarantee the persistence of the habitat. In addition, the elimination of alien plants that are frequent in secondary laurel forest should be sought. The reconversion of former exotic afforestations to heath-forest would lead, by succession, to secondary heath forest that gradually would incorporate characteristic species resulting in a raising of the habitat quality. The protection against wildfires and urbanization pressures should be as strict as possible.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
As a mature forest occurring in steep rocky slopes under frequent fogs, depending on the extent of damage, it will count on ecological succession to establish a comparable state in terms of structure, composition and function (mature closed forest). If the soil was not severely eroded and disturbance regimes causing disruption will cease, it is expected that forest species (tree-heaths) will be able to establish and be ecologically dominant again in a time span of several decades to a century. Silvicultural practices of elimination of dominant individual trees might accelerate tree succession towards mature laurel forests. Otherwise, succession through self-thinning will take longer although the risk of a transformation into a somewhat artificial habitat (the former option) is much reduced.

Summary:
Forest dominated by tall individuals of arborescent Ericaceae are a relict habitat restricted to the Azores, Madeira and Canary archipelagos. They contain a great wealth of endemic species with variation across the archipelagoes. Threats come from urbanisation, agriculture, exotic forestry, tourism, and also natural hazards like fire and climate change. Limitation of these is necessary for conservation.

References:
Capelo, J., Costa, J. C., Lousã, M., Fontinha, S., Jardim, R., Sequeira, M. and Rivas-Martinez, S. 2000. Vegetação da Madeira (Portugal): aproximação à tipologia fitossociológica. Silva Lusitana 7(2): 257–279.
Capelo, J., Sequeira, M., Jardim, R., Mesquita, S. and Costa, J.C. 2005. The vegetation of Madeira Island (Portugal). A brief overview and excursion guide. Quercetea 7: 105-122
Costa, J.C., Neto, C., Aguiar, C., Capelo, J., Espirito-Santo, M.D., Honrado, J., Pinto-Gomes, C., Monteiro-Henriques, T., Sequeira, M. and Lousã, M. 2012. Vascular Plant Communities in Portugal (continental, Azores & Madeira). Global Geobotany 2: 1-180.
Costa, J.C., Capelo, J.Jardim, R. Sequeira, M., Espirito-Santo, D., Lousã, M., Fontinha, S., Aguiar, C. and Rivas-Martinez, S. in Capelo, J. (ed.) 2004. Catálogo sintaxonómico e florístico das comunidades vegetais da Madeira e Porto Santo. Quercetea 6: 61-186.
Rivas-Martinez, S., Wildpret, W., del Arco, M., Rodriguez, O., Perez de Paz, P.L., Garcia-Gallo, A., Acebes, J.R., Diaz, T.E. and Fernandez-Gonzalez, F. 1993. Las comunidades vegetales de la Isla de Tenerife (Islas Canarias). Itinera Geobotanica 7: 169-374.

Criterion A Text:
For Madeira and Azores, the maps of national forest inventory from 1974 allowed to estimate an increase in area of 40%. For the Canary Islands, according to an experts estimate, the area has remained more or less stable since 1960, so the variation is 0%. For the whole of the habitat range, the weighted average (area proportions) value is an increase of 35%. A simple extrapolation for the next 40 years period would yield an increase around 40% or more. Nevertheless, such a simple reasoning is arbitrary and uncertain and not considered numerically. The historical reduction (A3 sub-criterion) is estimated to be larger than 50% of the original area (1750 C.E.) based on historical evidence, literature or institutional descriptions and comparison of actual area to maps of the potential natural vegetation.

Criterion B Text:
Both the area and the number of locations are relatively small. The EOO is not far above the 50000 km² threshold foo criterion B1 and the AOO is even lower than the 50 grid cells threshold for AOO. However, as there is no continuing decline in area or quality and no foreseen future threats, the evaluation of criteria B leads to the conclusion Least Concern. Number of locations are not known.

Criterion C/D Text:
There are no territorial data on quality for the whole range of the habitat. Mentioned threats that may have reduced the quality are related to agriculture, afforestation, and urban expansion. In the more distant past, we could presume that cutting for charcoal has also been an important pressure.

Synthesis:
In the past 50 years, an increase in area has occurred and this trend is likely to continue in the future. Nevertheless, the habitat type qualifies as Vulnerable (VU) under criterion A3 due to evidence for a large-scale historical loss in area in the more distant past (since the XVI to XVIII centuries on), which surely has been larger than 50%.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
There are three sub-types, one for each archipelago, i) Azorean, ii) Madeirean, and iii) Canarian that have a different species composition and structure (each with other endemics) and may require further examination for Red List assessment.

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Capelo
Territorial data: J.A. Campos, J. Capelo, D. Espírito-Santo
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
Micro-woodlands of small trees or tall shrubs up to 10 m tall, dominated or co-dominated by taxa of the genus Juniperus L., all endemic to Macaronesia’s archipelagos: Azores, Madeira and the Canaries. Four distinct taxa dominate several distinct subtypes of the habitat G3.9c, each with specific sinecological traits, biogeography and floristic character (no common shared characteristic infrageneric taxa among them); Juniperus turbinata subsp. canariensis (the Canaries and a single location in Madeira), Juniperus cedrus subsp. cedrus (the Canaries), Juniperus cedrus subsp. maderensis (Madeira) and Juniperus brevifolia (Azores). The five subtypes are:
1.       Juniperus turbinata subsp. canariensis habitats of the Canary Islands (Mayteno canariensis-Juniperion canariensis). Tall shrublands dominated by hard leathery leaves or scaly-leaved plants in low altitude infra-thermomediterranean semi-arid to dry localites, on thin mediterranean volcanic rock-derived soils (leptosols or thin cambisols). Dominated or co-dominated by J. turbinata subsp. canariensis, Olea europaea subsp. cerasiformis, Rhamnus crenulata and Maytenus canariensis; secondarily also by Euphorbia bertholothii, Euphorbia  wildpretii, E. atropurpurea, Pistacia atlantica, P. lentiscus, Hypericum canariense and other characteristic shrubs can be locally dominant (see Characteristic species). Most of the habitat occupies rocky hillslopes in valleys not higher than 300 m a.s.l, but reaching sporadic very rocky locations and volcano craters and hillsides, up to 1900 m a.s.l. It is found in the islands of Tenerife, La Gomera, La Palma, El Hierro and sporadically in Gran Canaria. Low-altitude versions are in contact, in general, with Phoenix canariensis palm-groves (G2.5b). Regional floristic combinations of dominants (and co-dominants) in the Canaries are: a) Tenerife: J. turbinata subsp. canariensis, Olea europaea subsp. cerasiformis, Pistacia atlantica, Hypericum canariense. Contacts with Euphorbia atropurea scrubland can include characteristic plants of the later community: E. atropurpurea, E. lamarkii, Aeonium hahworthii, Retama rhodorhyzoides; b) La Gomera: J. turbinata subsp. canariensis, Brachypodium arbuscula, Jasminum odoratissimum, Euphorbia bertholothii; c) La Palma: J. turbinata subsp. canariensis, Olea europaea subsp. cerasiformis, Rubia fruticosa; d) El Hierro: J. turbinata subsp. canariensis, J. odoratissimum, Euphorbia wildepretii, Rubia fruticosa; e) Gran Canaria: Olea europaea subsp. cerasiformis but with sporadic J. turbinata subsp. canariensis, Pistacia lentiscus, Bupleurum aciphyllum, Asparagus plocamoides.
2.       Juniperus turbinata subsp. c.f. canariensis habitats of Madeira (Mayteno umbellatae-Oleion maderensis). Very rare habitat of Madeira, in an inacessible single location with a few tens of individuals of juniper in a  NE slope of Madeira Island. The taxononomical status of this juniper is incertain at the subspecies level, but so far it seems to be included in subsp. canariensis. The floristic combination of the community is: Maytenus umbellata, Globularia salicina, Erica arborea subsp. arborea and Helichrysum melaleucum.
3.       Juniperus cedrus subsp. cedrus in the Canaries (Juniperion cedri).  Although J. cedrus subsp. cedrus is found inside Pinus canariensis forests, and is thought to have been abundant there and historically eliminated by cutting, the greatest abundance is nowadays in the shrub communities (also with shrubby individuals of Pinus canariensis) just above the Pinus canariensis timberline, already outside (above) the cloud belt. Thus, we interpret the later ecological situation alone as the habitat G3.9c, being the presence in canarian pinewood secondary. These communities are found in Tenerife mostly from ca. 1900 to 2200 m a.s.l., reaching the Cañadas del Teide, and contacting with Spartocytisus nubigenius (Spartocytision nubigeni)  communities. It occurs also in the external fringe of Taburiente’s crater, in La Palma.  Very isolated occurrences are those in Gran Canaria y La Gomera. These are xerophytic communities in rocky outcrops (lithosols) under upper mesomediterranean to supramediterranean dry to humid bioclimate. Floristic dominants are, in Tenerife: J. cedrus subsp. cedrus, Adenocarpus viscosus, Echium wildpretii and Pterocephalus lasiospermus; in La Palma: J. cedrus subsp. cedrus, Adenocarpus spartioides, Echium trichosyphon and Pterocephalus porphyranthus.
4.       Juniperus cedrus subsp. maderensis habitats of Madeira (Polysticho falcinelli-Ericion canariensis). Rare habitats in the summits of Madeira´s mountains (Pico Ruivo, 1862 m a.s.l.). There is evidence that this small tree used to be much abundant and probably a co-dominant species in the actual tree-heath forest, Polysticho falcinelli-Ericetum canariensis, the community of Erica arborea subsp. canariensis of Madeira above 1.500 m a.s.l., but historically heavily cut for timber and charcoal. Probabily, less than ten individuals remain in the hillsides of Pico Ruivo in inaccessible locations. Dominant in the community are: Juniperus cedrus subsp. maderensis, Erica arborea subsp. canariensis, Erica platycodon subsp. maderincola, Sorbus maderensis (doubtful presence after wildfire in 2011), Polystichum falcinellum, Teucrium francoi.
5.       Juniperus brevifolia habitats of Azores (Culcito macrocarpae-Juniperion brevifoliae). Although Juniperus brevifolia spans the whole of the laurel forest in Azores, Lauro azoricae-Juniperetea brevifoliae vegetation class and associated vegetation (seral stages), its optimum is in the form of a needle-leaved micro- to nano-forest, in the meso- to supratemperate hyperhumid to ultra-hyperhumid bioclimate, on leptosols or deeper andosols with an iron pan layer (placic horizon) usually with a thick acid horizon of organic matter or a thick blanket Sphagnum sp. pl. bog in the ground layer. In this sense, the habitat G3.9c is restricted to the Culcito macrocarpae-Juniperion brevifoliae alliance. It is present in the whole of the Azores Islands. The common characteristics of habitat are (with dominance or co-dominance): Juniperus brevifolia, Myrsine retusa, Viburnum treleasi, Vaccinium cylindraceum, Rubus hoschttetorum, Hypericum foliosum, Myrtus communis, Erica azorica (the later is dominant in Erica azorica-dominated F4.3 habitat type, which is the main contact with G3.9c); other taxa:  Grammitis marginella subsp. azorica, Corema azorica.
Indicators of good quality:
In a general sense, the more coenotically satured, namely by characteristic taxa and the less plants of seral stages co-dominate, the greater integrity of habitat is. Some part of such habitats have been historically cut (many times selectively), grazed or under agriculture. Thus, secondary, or altered versions of it are always found. These are versions of the habitat with less dense woody plant stratum (sometimes a parkland instead of the typical dense community), and where the lower strata have been substituted by zoo-antropogenic vegetation (Cisto monspeliensis- Micromerion hyssopifoliae in the Canaries and Madeira) and neophyte-dominated vegetation (Holcus sp. pl. and Agrostis sp. pl., A. azorica excluded, in the Azores). These degraded versions of habitat have much less conservation value, but potential to ecological restauration.
Characteristic species:
Vascular plants
Subtype 1: J. turbinata subsp. canariensis (dom.), Olea europaea subsp. cerasiformis (dom.) , Rhamnus crenulata (dom.) , Maytenus canariensis (dom.) , Asparagus scoparius, Bupleurum salicifolium, Globularia salicina, Teucrium heterophyllum,  Euphorbia bertholothii, Euphorbia wildpretii, Euphorbia atropurpurea, Pistacia atlantica, P. lentiscus, Hypericum canariensis, Euphorbia lamarkii, Aeonium hahworthii, Retama rhodorhyzoides, Brachypodium arbuscula, Jasminum odoratissimum, Rubia fruticosa, Echium wildpretii, Bupleurum aciphyllum, Asparagus plocamoides, Erysimum bicolor, Anagyris latifolia, Androcybium hierrense, Argyranthemum calychryson, Argyranthemum escarrei, Asparagus umbellatus, Asteriscus sericeus, Bupleurum handiense, Bystropogon plumosus, Convolvulus lopezsocazi, Dorycnium eryophtalmum, Echium purpuriense, E, strictum, E. giganteum, Marcetella moquiniana, Ruta pinnata, Sideritis brevicaulis, Sideritis pumila, Spartocytisus filipes, Teline osyrioides subsp. sericea, Vicia cirrhosa.
Subtype 2 : Maytenus umbellata (dom.), Globularia salicina (dom.), Erica arborea subsp. arborea (dom.), Erica platycodon subsp. maderincola, Helichrysum melaleucum.
Subtype 3: Juniperus cedrus subsp. cedrus, Adenocarpus viscosus, Echium wildpretii, Pterocephalus lasiospermus, Adenocarpus spartioides, Echium trichosyphon, Pterocephalus porphyranthus, Pinus canariensis (shrub), Andryala teydensis, Bufonia paniculata, Carlina xeranthemoides, Erysimum scoparium, Nepeta teydea, Scrophularia glabrata, Sideritis oroteneriffae, Chamaecytisus calderae, Chamaecytisus proliferus subsp. hierrensis, Echium auberianum, Echium trichosyphon, Echium wildpretii.
Subtype 4: Juniperus cedrus subsp. maderensis, Erica arborea subsp. canariensis, Erica platycodon subsp. maderincola, Sorbus maderensis, Polystichum falcinellum, VacciniumTeucrium francoi, Polystichum x maderensis, Ranunculus cortusifolius var. minor.
Subtype 5: Juniperus brevifolia (dom.) , Myrsine retusa, Viburnum treleasi, Vaccinium cylindraceum, Rubus hoschttetorum, Hypericum foliosum, Erica azorica, Arceuthobium azoricum, Bellis azorica, Carex hochstetteriana, Cerastium vagans, Culcita macrocarp,  Dryopteris azorica, Dryopteris crispifolia, Elaphoglossum semicylindricum, Hedera azorica, Platanthera grex ‘micrantha’, Smilax divaricata, Euphrasia grandiflora, Euphorbia stygiana, Vaccinium cylindraceum, Rubia agostinhoi (non R. agostinhoi sensu auct. mad et iber. = R. occidens; Rubia agostinhoi is a strict azorean endemism).

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.9c Macaronesian Juniperus woodland
EuroVegChecklist:
Mayteno canariensis-Juniperion canariensis
Mayteno umbellatae-Oleion maderensis
Juniperion cedri
Polysticho falcinelli-Ericion canariensis
Culcito macrocarpae-Juniperion brevifoliae
Annex 1:
9560 *Endemic forests with Juniperus spp.
Emerald:
G3.9 Coniferous woodland dominated by Cupressaceae or Taxaceae
MAES:
Woodland & forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
10.7 Juniper forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Juniperus cedrus subsp. cedrus, J. cedrus subsp. maderensis, J. turbinata subsp. canariensis, J. brevifolia are arborescent shrubs endemic to Macaronesia, make up specific vegetation belts in the archipelagos and are dominant or co-dominant in Macaronesian ecosystems. The rarity of each taxon varies among the archipelagos: for instance J. cedrus subsp. maderensis is extremely rare in Madeira and conversely J. brevifolia is abundant in Azores. The habitats make up an important part of the altitude natural vegetation in all archipelagos. Altough analogous habitats might be found in continental Europe, the high floristic endemicity and ecological originality makes the juniper habitats of Macaronesia outstand as very important to conservation.

Trends in Quantity:
The portuguese area is, by far, greater than the spanish due to Juniperus brevifolia being an ubiquous plant in the Azores. On the contrary, J. cedrus subsp. maderensis has only a few wild individuals and is very rare. At the global count the portuguese area is increasing due to agriculture set aside, cutting for timber and coal, and conservation policies. Thus, great attention must be put in policies, because each case should be taken specifically. The Portuguese data suggest that the habitat increased in area of 32% in the 50 year-time span. Data is from 1974 National Forest Inventory. In turn, as concerns the Canary Islands, in spite of several references reporting about logging, husbandry with goats, housing, exotic plants invasion, the territorial data suggests a stable condition, so the trend in quantity can be considered as stable. The average variation is therefore around +31%.

For the assessment, historical data has been taken in account as evidence for a large reduction in quantity in the 250 years time-span. For instance, the Madeira's juniper is commonly found in large quantity in historical buildings (churches, public and private buildings) and is nowadays very rare in natural conditions. Historical reports of coal being extensively made from juniper exist from all the archipelagos.
As said, care should be taken in the average increase found from the whole of Macaronesia, because of the disproportion that azorean variant (subtype) induces in the average (of 31% increase), in spite of the canarian and madeirean ones might have been reduced and have a small distribution area. It adds that a wildfire in 2011 in Madeira might have affected the viability of survival of some of the few remaining individuals.

Trends in Quality:
The trend estimated by the territorial experts is stable (Spain) or unknown (Portugal). Nevertheless, some uses (e.g. under-canopy goat/sheep husbandry, selective cutting for coal, wood for fences, etc.) were mantained over time, so there was certainly a depletion of quality to some extent, at least in historical times but also during the last 50 years. However, a quantitative estimation of its proportion is not possible. Due to protection policies, which reduced both cutting and grazing, the current trend in quality should be increasing.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
100% of the habitat lies within the EU 28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
Due to abandonment of agriculture, cutting and protection policies, in global terms the habitat increased in the 50-years time span. The madeirean variant has, on the contrary, been much reduced due to natural causes (small population and wildfire). Hi

Justification of Restricted Area:
The global EEO is > 50.000 km2, so the range is not small.

Pressures and Threats:
Based on the territorial reports, the major threats for this habitat type are logging, husbandry with goats, housing, exotic plants invasion. Current and future threats for the rarest J. cedrus subsp. maderensis and even for J. cedrus subsp. cedrus, are due to natural hazards, e.g. wildfire or much reduced/isolated populations that might compromise the viability of the species.

Conservation and Management:
Keeping most habitat sites under strict protection regimes, together with a proper management of the use of the dominant species (only where they are abundant and belonging to the rural/natural managed landscape), are the most effective measures of conservation.
For the very rare variants, the continuous monitoring of juniper population status is paramount. Replanting from cultivated plants (botanical gardens, etc.) might be a necessary option in the very small depleted locations (1.2.measures needed and 3.1. Restoring).

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Depending on the damage extent, it might bring to collapse if it affects a spatialy restricted variant/location. In this case, replanting from cultivated plants could be be advisable to obtain fully grown individuals in more than 50 years. For natural regeneration, if possible, the time span would be greater (+200). In case of more abundant variants, sucession would be sufficient in a 200+ years time span.

Summary:
This Macaronesian woodland habitat consists of micro-woodlands and shrublands dominated by various endemic Juniperus species, specific to each archipelago. Some are extensive, others very rare, and they all show specific features in their flora in relation to the climatic, terrain and soils conditions of their localities. Historical use, mostly for charcoal, timber and freeing of land for grazing led to severe depletion and, now, wood harvesting, goat grazing, house-building and exotic plant invasions are the most widespread threats with wildifire especially endangering for the rarest sub-types. Strict protection regimes and programmes of regeneration for the rarest Juniperus spp. are essential for conservation.

References:
CAPELO, J., J. C. COSTA, M. LOUSÃ, S. FONTINHA, R. JARDIM, M. SEQUEIRA & S. RIVAS-MARTÍNEZ (2000).
Vegetação da Madeira (Portugal): aproximação à tipologia fitossociológica. Silva Lusitana 7(2) : 257 – 279.

CAPELO, J., M. SEQUEIRA, R., JARDIM, S. MESQUITA & J. C. COSTA (2005) The vegetation of Madeira Island
(Portugal). A brief overview and excursion guide. Quercetea 7: 105 -122

COSTA, J.C., C.NETO, C. AGUIAR, J. CAPELO, M.D. ESPÍRITO-SANTO, J. HONRADO, C. PINTO-GOMES, T.
MONTEIRO-HENRIQUES, M. SEQUEIRA & M. LOUSÃ (2012) Vascular Plant Communities in Portugal
(continental, Azores & Madeira) Global Geobotany 2: 1 -180.

COSTA, J.C., J. CAPELO, R. JARDIM, M. SEQUEIRA, D. ESPÍRITO-SANTO, M. LOUSÃ, S. FONTINHA, C. AGUIAR &
S. RIVAS-MARTÍNEZ in CAPELO, J. (ed.) (2004) Catálogo sintaxonómico e florístico das comunidades
vegetais da Madeira e Porto Santo. Quercetea 6: 61-186.

RIVAS-MARTÍNEZ, S., W. WILDPRET, M. DEL ARCO, O. RODRÍGUEZ, P.L. PÉREZ DE PAZ, A. GARCIA-GALLO,
J.R. ACEBES, T.E. DÍAZ & F. FERNÁNDEZ-GONZÁLEZ (1993) – Las comunidades vegetales de la Isla de
Tenerife (Islas Canarias). Itinera Geobotanica 7: 169-374.

Criterion A Text:
Average reported values for Spain and Portugal yields 31% for quantity increase. The remaining quantitative subcriteria (A2a and A2b) were not applied, but expert evaluation and evidence support an increase. Historical reduction (subcriterion A3) is estimated to be between 50 and 80% at least, but a more exact figure cannot be provided.

Criterion B Text:
The EOO is > 50.000 Km2 while the number of 10 x 10 grid locations (AOO) is only slightly greater than 50. However, there is no continuing decline or threat. As also the number of locations is larger than the thresholds all criteria under B lead to the conclusion Least Concern (LC).

Criterion C/D Text:
No complete data for quality are available for a reliable quantitative evaluation of criterion C/D1.

Synthesis:
A favourable overall status in the whole of Macaronesia is found over a 50 year time span, due to a 31% increase of the habitat area (with unknown quality trend), mainly as a result of agricultural abandonment. However there is evidence of a large area reduction in the original, historical area, with an estimated negative trend of more than 50%. Therefore, this habitat qualifies for the Vulnerable (VU) status for criterion A3. The amount of distribution grid cells is relatively low, but as there are no continuing declines or future threats, these figures do not lead to any category above Least Concern (LC).

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Each of the five variaties mentioned in the description could be assessed separately, mostly at regional (archipelago) level. The Juniperus cedrus subsp. maderensis variety in Madeira is likely to have the Critically Endangered (CR) s

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Capelo
Territorial data: J. Capelo, D. Espírito-Santo, J. Loidi
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
C6.1 Underground standing and running waterbody

Habitat Description:
The habitat includes running or standing water bodies that develop under the ground surface. In many cases these water bodies are part of cave systems. Groundwater systems in soil are not included here. The underground water body is a result of impermeable layers below the body that enables accumulation of water. Water can also be captured between two impermeable layers (artesian water). This habitat most often develops on limestone bedrock. By dissolution of limestone, the water creates underground caves that can be filled with water. Specific animals are adapted to these conditions, such as Proteus anguinus the only cave-dwelling chordate species found in Europe. It is an entirely aquatic animal, as it eats, sleeps, and breeds underwater. This animal is most notable for its adaptations to a life of complete darkness: eyes are undeveloped and the animal is blind, while its other senses, particularly smell and hearing, are acutely developed. It has also no pigmentation in its skin. Underground water bodies are an important source for drinking water, and in that sense threatened by pollution. This habitat type can be connected with other habitats developing above the ground surface, like temporary flooded habitats, turloughs, poljes and others karst structures.
Indicators of good quality:
Unaltered stalactites, stalagmites or other carbonate concretions testifying an active karst phenomenon
No groundwater capture or canalization
Presence of invertebrate and vertebrate species typical of this habitat
No touristic use of the cave

Characteristic species:
This habitat type is characterized by the almost total absence of photosynthetic organisms except for those that grows in the transitional part with the external environment.
Invertebrates: many species of invertebrate that populate the underground systems can be also found on the surface water and soil, however they present adaptations to the underground life (often miniaturization, lost of pigments, eyes, morphological simplification). Very common are planarians, oligochaetes (e.g. Lumbriculida and Tubificida), molluscs (e.g. Congeria kuscerii in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia), springtails (e.g. Bessoniella, Pseudosinella), diplurans (e.g. family Campodeidae), troglobiotic species of beetles, centipedes (e.g. Lithobius matulicii from Bosni and Herzegovina), millepedes, troglobiotic spiders and related groups , crustaceans such as copepods (e.g. Cyclopoida and Harpacticoida), ostracods, malacostracans (e.g. a variant of Gammarus lacustris in Norway), cirolanids, asellids. Specific of underground water bodies is the crustacean order Bathynellacea and the family Ingolfiellidae. Big crustaceans include the genus Troglocaris (Troglocaris anophthalmus in the Balkans and Italy).
Vertebrates: Also some amphibious species are adapted to this habitat, such as Proteus anguinus, cave salamanders (including Atylodes genei) and 7 species of the genus Speleomates (S. ambrosii, S. flavus, S. imperialis, S. sarrabusensis, S. italicus, S. strinatii, S. supramuntis), 6 of those are endemic of restrict areas of the Italian Peninsula.

Classification:
EUNIS:
H1.5. Underground standing water
H1.6 Underground running water
Annex 1:
8310 Caves not open to the public
Emerald:
H1 terrestrial underground caves, cave systems, passages and waterbodies
MAES:
-
IUCN:
5.18 Karst and Other Subterranean Inland Aquatic Systems
15.10 Karst and Other Subterranean Hydrological Systems

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The occurrence of this habitat is mainly determined by suitable geological conditions, which occur in different parts of Europe. However the invertebrate and vertebrate communities hosted by this habitat are usually geographically localized.

Map Description:
The map is very incomplete, based on distribution data from two typical fauna species (GBIF data), and a potential map indicating the distribution of caves in the EU. Data sources: GBIF, ART17.

Trends in Quantity:
The general trend in quantity is impossible to estimate because there are no sufficient data about the present and past surface of the habitat. However many countries reported, according to expert assessment, that the habitat is stable or slightly decreasing.

Trends in Quality:
Not enough quantitative data are available about the present and past surface of the habitat and its abiotic and biotic trends in quality. However many countries reported according to expert assessment that the habitat quality is stable or slightly decreasing.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Probably about 60% of this habitat type in Europe is within EU28 and 40% within EU28+. However these percentages are very rough estimations based on the assumption that most of the habitat is in those areas with extended carbonate formations. For almost all countries there are no data about the extension of this habitat. Underground standing and running waterbodies are very frequent around the world but in most of the cases they host very endemic and localized fauna species, therefore in every country they represent an almost unique habitat for very restricted ranges of species. Therefore, we consider the habitat not to extend far beyong the EU28+.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
Most countries reported unknown, stable or slight declining trend in quantity, while the natural range of the habitat is much higher than 50,000 Km2

Justification of Restricted Area:
The geographical range of the habitat (EOO) is very wide and in most cases the extension is unknown because these underground habitats are still not completely explored. The habitat is assumed to be quite extended in many European countries.

Pressures and Threats:
In most countries the exact extent of the habitat as well as the degree of degradation is unknown because often the habitat is unexplored or difficult to access. Despite this, it is possible to say that main pressures for this habitat are represented by pollution and abstraction of groundwater. Human intrusions can cause alteration of the abiotic and biotic conditions of this particular habitat (alteration of temperature, humidity, pH, introduction of microorganisms, etc.). However this kind of pressure is usually restricted to those parts of natural caves accessible to tourists, which represent only a small proportion of the habitat type. Natural geological phenomena such as earthquake and underground collapses can represent local pressures in active seismic areas. Sometimes earthquakes can generate new underground systems even increasing the surface of the habitat.

Conservation and Management:
The measures that should be taken to preserve this habitat type are, consistently with the pressures and threats, those related to human activities that can alter the abiotic and biotic conditions of the habitat: (a) regulating the human access to the habitat for touristic and mining purposes, (b) regulating the water abstraction, (c) regulating the industrial and urban waste management to avoid that underground water systems can be directly or indirectly polluted, (d) improving or restoring the water quality whenever the habitat is already compromised.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1 types:
8310: ALP U1, ATL U1, BLS U1, BOR FV, CON U1, MAC FV, MED U1, PAN U1, STE U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The capacity of this habitat to recover naturally or through intervention depends on the kind and severity of the damage that the habitat has undergone, by the geological substrate, the connection of the system with the surface and the time of groundwater renewal. The time for renewal of groundwater can naturally take thousands of years. Therefore, in case of water pollution, which is the most frequent cause of damage, after removal of the causes of pollution it may take decades or centuries to recover the habitat.

Summary:
This habitat includes running or standing water bodies that develop under the ground surface, in many cases as part of cave systems where impervious bedrocks occurs beneath pervious or between two impervious strata in artesian situations.  Specialised invertebrates and vertebrates, many of them endemci, can occur, adapted to the usually cold and dark conditions.  Pressures are mainly by direct or indirect pollution of water, touristic use of some parts of the underground systems, abstraction of drinking water and drainage due to construction of infrastructures. If the habitat is damaged its natural capability of recovering is generally very low and restoration takes usually over 50 years.

References:
Belles, X., 1987. Fauna cavernicola i intersticial de la Peninsula Iberica i les iles Balears. Consell Superior d’Investigacions Cientifiques. Madrid.
Bole, J., Drovenik, B., Mrsic, N., Sket, B., 1993. Endemic animals in hypogean habitats in Slovenia. Nase Jame 35: 43-56.
Culver, D.C., Sket, B., 2000. Hotspots of Subterranean Biodiversity in Caves and Wells. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies 62(1): 11-17.
Culver, D.C, Pipan, T., 2009. The Biology of Caves and Other Subterranean Habitats Oxford University Press, Oxford. 256 pp.
Lanza, B., Pastorelli, C., Laghi, P., Cimmaruta, R., 2005. A review of systematics, taxonomy, genetics, biogeography and natural history of the genus Speleomantes Dubois 1984 Amphibia Caudata Plethodontidae. Atti del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Trieste 52 (Suppl.): 5-135.
Østby, E., Lauritzen, S-E., 2013. A checklist of invertebrates from Norwegian caves and mines. Fauna Norvegica 33: 35-51.

Criterion A Text:
Despite the habitat occurring in 26 countries within EU28 and 9 within EU28+, most of the countries were not able to estimate past and current area of the habitat. Only 6 countries reported values of the current area and stated that the habitat remained stable in the last 50 years. The values of the current area for Romania and Portugal should be verified, because they seem unrealistically high (maybe they are in hectares). Two countries reported declines in area. The overall conclusion is that data is too limited to assess the reduction in area over the last 50 years, leading to the conclusion Data Deficient (DD).

Criterion B Text:
The EOO and AOO of this habitat are much higher respectively than 50,000 km2 and 50 km2 and the number of locations is very large. There are not sufficient data available about decline of spatial extent, and changes in abiotic or biotic quality. The conclusion for criterion B is Least Concern (LC).

Criterion C/D Text:
Very few countries provided quantitative data. Four countries reported no significant degradation of the habitat, while 6 countries reported slight to moderate degradation. However the degraded area is in most cases unknown, and therefore it is impossible to calculate the average extent of degradation in Europe.

Synthesis:
Less than 20% of the countries in which the habitat occurs provided some quantitative or qualitative data. Although most of these countries stated that the habitat is stable or only slightly declining and/or damaged, any assessment would be based on very poor data. Very little is known on trends in quality, while the water quality may be negatively influenced by drainage of polluted surface water in many sites. For this reason the habitat type is overall assessed as Data Deficient (DD).

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Further investigations are necessary for this habitat type in Europe. Despite the fact that this habitat is likely to be rather frequent and extended in Europe, especially in karst areas, the absence of connections among different underground systems a

Contributors:
Type description: A. ÄŒarni, F. Landucci, G. Arts, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen
Territorial data: D. Paternoster, J.-M. Couvreur, Ä. MilanoviÄ‡, P. Ivanov, K. Šumberová, J. Brophy, C. Bita-Nicolae, A. ÄŒarni, N. Juvan, J.A. Molina, E. von Wachenfeldt, J.Capelo, D. Espírito-Santo, R.Delarze, A. Ssymank, P. Finck, U. Raths, U. Riecken, E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, G. Buffa, L. Casella, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, C. Marcenò, G. Pezzi, D. Viciani, A. Mikolajczak, J. Šibík, Å½. Škvorc.
Working Group Freshwater Habitats: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen


Habitat Type Name:
G3.7 Mediterranean lowland to submontane Pinus woodland

Habitat Description:
Mediterranean lowland to submontane Pinus woodlands include forests of Pinus halepensis Mill., P. brutia Ten., P. pinaster Aiton and P. pinea L. These forests occur mainly within the Mediterranean biogeographic region of Europe, in areas with Csa, Csb and BSk climate type according to Köppen’s classification and play a fundamental role in shaping the Mediterranean landscape. The three former pine species are fire resilient and produce a high number of serotinous cones.
• P. halepensis is distributed all over southern Europe (from Spain to European Turkey), as well as North Africa but is more widespread in the western part of its range. It grows on a variety of soils, and although it occurs more frequently on limestone and marl, it can grow also on very strong acidic soils, as those formed on gneiss (e.g. in Chalkidiki region; NE Greece). It forms stands with understory of evergreen broadleaved species (e.g. Quercus coccifera, Phillyrea latifolia, Quercus ilex, Arbutus andrachne, Arbutus unedo, Pistacia lentiscus, Smilax aspera) or phyganic species (e.g. Erica manipuliflora, Cistus sp.pl.). The plant communities of Aleppo pine may be considered in many cases as paraclimax vegetation, although in some arid or semi-arid sites they represent mature, stable forests.
• P. brutia forests are distributed in the eastern Mediterranean area. In Europe, the P. brutia forests are found at the northeastern part of the Greek mainland, at the Aegean islands (e.g. Thasos, Samos, Chios, Kos, Rhodes, Crete) and in Cyprus. They cover lowland to mountainous areas (in Cyprus they reach the altitude of 1600 m a.s.l). P. brutia forms open forests, with an understory occupied mainly by Mediterranean woody species, such as Pistacia lentiscus, Arbutus unedo, Phillyrea latifolia, Olea europaea subsp. oleaster and Rhamnus lycioides subsp. oleoides. It prefers calcareous and fissured soils, but it can be found also on siliceous ones. P. brutia often forms climax vegetation types more than its ecologically similar species, P. halepensis.
• P. pinaster grows on a variety of substrates and is distributed naturally at the western Mediterranean area of Europe (Iberian Peninsula, France and Italy), as well as at the northwest part of Africa. However, it is considered indigenous only in the Iberian Peninula. It has been widely used in reforestation and afforestation. It occupies sites with an unstable substrate, where soil conditions prevent the development of Quercus forests.
• P. pinea is distributed all over southern Europe (from Portugal to Greece and Cyprus), as well as in Syria and Lebanon. Its forests are more common in Spain, Portugal and Italy, while are rare in the other countries. Because of its edible seeds, much of its distribution is of artificial origin and it is difficult to determine its natural range. It grows mainly on acidic and sandy soils.
Indicators of quality:
Natural composition of canopy
Structural diversity/ complexity with (semi) natural age structure or completeness of layers (diversity of Pinus species age classes and existence of at least two - dominant and dominated - tree layers)
High coverage of Pinus individuals in reproductive age (indicator of increased possibilities of successful post-fire recovery and low frequency of forest fires).
Typical flora and fauna composition of the region
Presence of old trees and a variety of dead wood (lying or standing) and the associated flora, fauna and fungi
Absence or low cover (<5%) of non-native, of ruderal and grassland plant species in all layers
Adequate regeneration of Pinus species in both the herb and shrub layers, although in some cases adequate regeneration is possible only after a forest fire.
Existence of a shrub layer with cover higher than 50% (indicates natural formed forests and not disturbed).
Low levels of soil compactness, absence of trampling and erosion (especially in the form of rills and gullies), high cover of litter and well developed Ah horizon (indicates low intense of disturbances and adequate nutrient cycle).

Characteristic species:
Acer monspessulanum, Aetheorhiza bulbosa, Allium subhirsutum, Alyssum lesbiacum, Anthyllis hermanniae, Arbutus andrachne,  Arbutus unedo, Arisarum vulgare, Asparagus acutifolius, Asparagus aphyllus, Carex distachya, Carex flacca, Carex hallerana, Ceratonia siliqua, Cistus albidus, Cistus creticus, Cistus monspeliensis, Cistus salviifolius, Clematis flammula, Coronilla minima, Crataegus monogyna, Crepis fraasii, Daphne gnidium, Erica arborea, Erica manipuliflora, Eryngium campestre, Euphorbia spinosa, Galium rubrum, Genista acanthoclada, Genista fasselata, Genista hispanica, Hedera helix, Hieracium pilosella, Hippocrepis emerus, Jasminum fruticans, Juniperus oxycedrus, Juniperus phoenicea, Lonicera implexa, Myrtus communis, Odontites luteus, Olea europaea, Ononis minutissima, Osyris alba, Phillyrea angustifolia, Phillyrea latifolia, Pinus brutia, Pinus halepensis, Pinus pinaster, Pinus pinea, Pistacia lentiscus, Pistacia terebinthus, Prasium majus, Psoralea bituminosa, Quercus coccifera, Quercus ilex, Rhamnus alaternus, Rhamnus lycioides, Rhamnus myrtifolius, Rhamnus velutinus, Rosa sempervirens, Rosmarinus officinalis, Rubia peregrina, Rubus ulmifolius, Ruscus aculeatus, Sanguisorba minor, Smilax aspera, Spartium junceum, Staehelina dubia, Stipa bromoides, Teucrium chamaedrys, Teucrium montanum, Thymus vulgaris.

Classification:
EUNIS:
G3.7 Lowland to montane mediterranean Pinus woodland (excluding Pinus nigra)
EuroVegChecklist:
Pistacio lentisci-Pinion halepensis Biondi, Blasi, Galdenzi, Pesaresi et Vagge in Biondi et al. 2014
Alkanno baeoticae-Pinion halepensis Mucina et Dimopoulos in Mucina et al. 2009
Salvio officinalis-Pinion brutiae Konstantinidis et Mucina in Willner et al. 2014
Pinion pineae Feinbrun 1959
Annex I:
9540 Mediterranean pine forests with endemic Mesogean pines
Emerald:
G3.7 Lowland to montane mediterranean Pinus woodland
MAES-2:
Woodland and forest
IUCN:
1.4 Temperate Forest
EFT:
10.1 Thermophilous pine forest

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The forests included to this habitat are typical and cover an extensive area in the Mediterranean biogeographical region.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete, with some data gaps for the eastern Adriatic coastal areas. Data sources: EVA, Art17.

Trends in Quantity:
The extent of this habitat is generally stable to increasing and only in Portugal it is given as slightly decreasing.

Trends in Quality:
The average trend in quality is more or less stable throughout the distribution range of the habitat, over the last 50 years. Most countries (among the ones that provided territorial data) report either no present-past decline in habitat quality or a slight decline with an intermediate severity, with reference to the last 50 years.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
More than 90% of the current distribution of the habitat type lies within the EU 28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a large EOO and there has been no significant regression of the natural range of this habitat.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has a large natural range and occurs across the Mediterranean lowland to submontane zones playing a fundamental role in shaping the Mediterranean landscape.

Pressures and Threats:
Fire, although considered an integral part of the Mediterranean ecosystems, is a major factor of disturbance, a destructive factor from the view of reducing large areas of Pinus woodlands in the Mediterranean region. Especially the forest fires in the wildland-urban interface have become very common in the Mediterranean, as population and human infrastructure facilities are disseminated throughout the forest zones, especially in the vicinity of large cities and tourist resorts and also due to afforestation of abandoned agricultural lands located close to settlements. Agrarian activities, land abandonment and development processes are important underlying factors of fire occurrence in the Mediterranean. Grazing is a factor affecting the post-fire restoration of the pine Mediterranean forests and the mentioned changes in the primary production model in many Mediterranean lowland and sub-mountainous areas are pressures and threats on the Pinus woodlands.

Conservation and Management:
The changes in the traditional landscape mosaic due to the application of reforestation practices (promoted the last five decades in the Mediterranean region), as well as the implementation of forest management practices in certain Pinus woodlands throughout their range, resulted in landscapes more susceptible to fuel accumulation which may lead to increased fire occurrence. The spatial variation in fuels is the most important factor influencing fire spread and severity. It is neccessary to implement integrated management plans of the landscape features, in order that a balance between the forest policies (leading to extensive reforestation and forest plantations) and a policy-driven management alternative in abandoned agricultural land is set.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The effects of fire on ecosystems and landscapes vary from region to region as a result of fire history, regeneration patterns and topographical constraints and depending on the species (Pinus halepensis, P. brutia and P. pinaster from the one side and P. pinea on the other side). The time for woodlands recovery also varies from 10 to 50 years. This is why we are using two alternatives (naturally and through intervention) when completing the information below on the required effort. The first choice should be to let the restoration process through natural regeneration.

Summary:
This habitat includes forests of Pinus halepensis, P. brutia, P. pinaster and P. pinea distributed on infertile soils mainly within the Mediterranean biogeographic region where they have played a fundamental role in shaping the traditional landscapes. They occur at a variety of altitudes on different substrates, the associated floras varying accordingly. Uncontrolled fire, often related to land abandonment and development processes, is a threat and grazing afterwards can influence regeneration. Integrated landscape management is essential to retain this habitat within the often complex contexts in which it occurs.

References:
Allegrezza M., Biondi E., Felici S., 2006. A Phytosociological analysis of the vegetation of the central adriatic sector of the Italian peninsula. Hacquetia 5: 135-175.
Biondi E., Guerra V., 2008. Vegetation and plant landscape of the “Gravine” in the Ionian coast [Vegetazione e paesaggio vegetale delle gravine dell’arco jonico]. Fitosociologia 45: 57-125.
Biondi E., Vagge I., 2015. The forests of Pinus pinaster Aiton subsp. pinaster of the NW Italian Tyrrhenian sector. Acta Botanica Gallica: Botany Letters, 162 (3): 239-250.
Bohn, U., Gollub, G. Hettwer, C., Neuhauslova, Z., Rause, T., SchluÌˆter, H. & Weber, H. (2004) Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Bonn: Bundesamt fuÌˆr Naturschutz.
Boydak, M. 2004. Silvicultural characteristics and natural regeneration of Pinus brutia Ten. - a review. Plant Ecology 171: 153-163.
Carrion, J.S., Navarro, C., Navarro, J. & Munuera, M. 2000. The distribution of cluster pine (Pinus pinaster) in Spain as derived from palaeoecological data: relationships with phytosociological classification. The Holocene 10(2): 243–252.
Council of Europe (2010), Interpretation Manual of the Emerald Habitats. Strasbourg:
Council of Europe. Davies, C.E., Moss, D. & Hill, M.O. (2004), EUNIS Habitat Classification, revised. Report to the European Topic Centre, European Environment Agency.
de las Heras, J., Moya, D., Vega, J.A., Daskalakou, E., Vallejo, R., Grigoriadis, N., Tsitsoni, T., Baeza, J., Valdecantos, A., Fernández, C. Espelta, J. & Fernandes, P. 2012. Post-Fire Management of serotinous pine forests., In: Moreira F. et al. (eds.), Post-fire management and restoration of southern European forests, Managing Forest Ecosystems 24, Springer Science+Business Media B.V., pp. 121-150.
European Commission DG Environment (2013), Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. Strasbourg: European Commission DG Environment.
European Environment Agency (2006), European Forest Types, EEA Technical report No 9/2006, Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
Schamineé, J.H.J., ChytryÌ, M., Hennekens, S., Jiménez-Alfaro, B., Mucina, L. & Rodwell, J.S. (2013), Review of EUNIS forest habitat classification, Report EEA/NSV/13/005. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
Barbero, M., Loisel, R., Quézel, P., Richardson, D. & Romane, F., 1998. Pines of the Mediterranean basin. In: Richardson, D.M. (ed.), Ecology and Biogeography of Pinus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 153–170.
Peel, M.C., Finlayson, B.L. & McMahon, T.A. 2007. Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 11: 1633–1644.
Quézel, P. 2000. Taxonomy and biogeography of Mediterranean pines (Pinus halepensis and P. brutia). In: Ne’eman, G. & Trabaud, L. (eds.) Ecology, biogeography and management of Pinus halepensis and P. brutia forest ecosystems in the Mediterranean basin. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp. 1-12.
Quézel, P. & Barbero, M. .1990 Les forÈ‡ts méditerranéennes. Problemes poses par leur signification historique, écologique et leur conservation. Acta Botanica Malacitana 15: 145–78.
Rivas-Martínez, S., Fernández-González, F., Loidi, J., Lousa M. & Penas, A. 2002. Vascular plant communities of Spain and Portugal, Addenda to the syntaxonomical checklist of 2001. Itinera Geobotanica 15(1): 433-922.

Criterion A Text:
The estimated reduction in quantity (area covered by the Pinus woodlands) is due to fires that have burnt extensive areas over the past 50 years in Portugal, Spain and Italy; for the other countries quantitative data on the trend are not provided. However the reduction in quantity, which locally is often higher, is compansated in most cases (e.g. France and Greece) by the increase of the pine forest extent due to the observed decrease of pastoral land use; this is also due to the abandonment of agro-pastoral practices which promotes the expansion of the Pinus forests of the habitat.

Criterion B Text:
The geographic distribution of the habitat is not restricted and there is not a reported continuing decline in spatial extent of the habitat. The Extent of Occurrence (EOO) and the Area of Occupancy (AOO) are substantially large (sources: HT 9540 + Alterra).

Criterion C/D Text:
Both biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat have not substantially reduced the last 50 years. Decline in quality has been summarized on the basis of the national experts assessments. From the calculations on the trend in quality, it is evident that over the last 50 years as an average no decline or a slight decline in quality (extent of degradation equals 2%) with moderate severity (44%) has been reported.

Synthesis:
The habitat type qualifies as Least Concern (LC) because it has an extensive distribution (total estimated area, EOO and AOO) across the Mediterranean and a small part also to the Continental biogeographical zones, the reduction in quantity over the past 50 years has been very small (ca 2%) and in most areas the habitat has been stable (regarding its spatial extent). The decline in quality (abiotic and/or biotic) is slight to moderate (average severity 44%) affecting 5% of the extent of the habitat throughout its distribution over the past 50 years.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
All described sub-habitat types, but especially the Pinus pinea indigenous woodlands, should be examined in a more detailed way.

Contributors:
Type description: I.Tsiripidis, F. Xystrakis
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, O. Argagnon, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, L. J.Capelo, Casella, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, J. Loidi,  C. Giancola, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, C. Marcenò, S. Sciandrello, D. SteševiÄ‡, Škvorc, D. Viciani
Working Group Forests: F. Attore, R-J. Bijlsma, M. Chytrý, P. Dimopoulos, B. Renaux, A. Ssymank, T. Tonteri, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
C3.5c Periodically exposed saline shore with pioneer or ephemeral vegetation

Habitat Description:
The habitat includes periodically flooded, saline and muddy, nutrient-rich shores and dried-up bottoms of saline standing water bodies, with low to moderate cover of short salt-adapted plant species, mostly from the Poaceae and Cyperaceae families. These include mainly annual plants, developing during the exposure phase, as well as perennial plants tolerant to temporary total flooding and brackish conditions. Typically the habitat is dominated by dwarf-grasses of the genus Crypsis (including Heleochloa).
The habitat is distributed over lowlands of the continental parts of Europe and arid Mediterranean regions. These ephemeral communities develop mostly on the bottom of small temporary brackish and saline lakes and pools. During the summer the bottom of these water bodies dry-up, colouring white from the salts. The vegetation often starts to grow only in the end of summer or in autumn. Besides, the habitat type occurs on riverbanks of some large rivers, like the Danube and Sava, in regions with a continental climate where there are some processes of salinization. The same plant communities can temporary occur in some artificial localities, such as fishponds, dams, or abandoned and flooded fields.
The dominant species in the continental regions (e.g. the Pannonian basin and adjacent territories) are Crypsis alopecuroides, Crypsis (Heleochloa) schoenoides, Crypsis (Heleochloa) aculeata, Cyperus (Acorellus) pannonicus and  Polypogon monspeliensis. These species are accompanied by annual and some perennial species from the class Bidentetea tripartiate (habitat C3.5a), while also transitions towards saline inland marshes and steppes (classes Festuco-Puccinellietea, Thero-Salicornietea; habitats E6.1, E6.2, E6.3) are found. Ephemeral communities with Salicornia ssp. in general are found on less eutrophic sites, often with higher salinity. In the Mediterranean region the communities of the alliance Verbenion supinae are by most authors considered part of the class Isoeto-Nanojuncetea (habitat C3.5b), but in some communities of this alliance the species of Crypsis are a characteristic species. Here they grow together with Chenopodium chenopodioides, Fimbristylis bisumbellata, Glinus lotoides, Polypogon maritimus, Heliotropium supinum, Samolus valerandi, and Verbena supina.
Typically the habitat does not develop during years with less suitable conditions. The areas covered by these communities may vary each year in size and location. Similar plant communities occur along the coast, but in that case they are in most cases considered part of coastal salt marshes (habitat A2.5d) or dune slacks (habitat B1.8b).
Indicators of good quality:
Natural relatively high concentration of salt in the soil
Natural high electrical conductivity of the water
No alteration of the natural salinity range
Exotic species absent or rare (e.g. Xanthium spinosum, Paspalum disticum, P. diatatum, Bidens spp.)
Absence of emergent plants, shrubs and trees
No signs of eutrophication nor dominance of ruderal species
No indicator of negative anthropogenic influence (e.g. regulation of the water level, chemical pollution

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Centaurium pulchellum, Chenopodium chenopodioides, Chenopodium glaucum, Corrigiola telephiifolia, C. littoralis, Coronopus squamatus, Cressa cretica, Crypsis aculeata, C. alopecuroides, C. schoenoides, Cyperus flavescens, C. pannonicus, Digitaria debilis, Eleocharis carniolica, Euphorbia chamaesyce, Fimbristylis bisumbellata, F. dichotoma, Glinus lotoides, Heliotropium supinum, Juncus articulatus, J. bufonius, J. hybridus, J. gerardii, J. tenageja, Lepidium latifolium, Lythum hyssopifolium, L. tribracteatum, Lotus tenuis, Panicum debile, Peplis portula, Persicaria lapathifolia, Paspalum distichum, Polygonum salsugineum, Polypogon maritimus, P. monspeliensis, Pulicaria paludosa, Pulicaria sicula, Samolus valerandi, Spergularia maritima, S. salina, Trifolium fragiferum, Verbena supina

Classification:
EUNIS:
E6.2 Continental inland salt steppes
EuroVeg Checklist:
Cypero-Spergularion salinae Slavnic 1948
Heleochloion schoenioidis Br.-Bl. ex Rivas Goday 1956
Lepidion latifolii Golub et Mirkin 1986
Verbenion supinae Slavnic 1951
Annex 1:
3170 Mediterranean temporary ponds
Emerald:
E6.1 Mediterranean inland salt steppes
E6.2 Continental inland salt steppes
C3.51 Euro-Siberian dwarf annual amphibious swards
MAES:
Rivers and lakes
IUCN ecosystems:
5.6. Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Lakes [over 8 ha]
5.8. Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Marshes/Pools [under 8 ha]

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Distribution of this habitat is limited to inland areas in the Pannonian, Mediterranean and (to a lesser extend) Continental regio,n where salt is present in soil due to geomorphological past processes and where the natural hydrological functioning has been preserved.

Map Description:
Map is incomplete, especially in the Pannonian plane and on the Balkan. Data sources: EVA, LIT, GBIF, NAT.

Trends in Quantity:
Estimated area is about 37 km2 based on data from five countries (Hungary, Austria, Slovakia, Spain, Bosnia and Herzegovina), with an estimated trend of -55% over the last 50-60 years. The long term trend is likely to be much larger (over 80%), but the calculation is based on relatively few data (three countries) and therefore not very reliable. Expected future trends, based on data provided by five countries, are further decreases by 5-10%.

Trends in Quality:
Extent of degradation is estimated at 62% with a severity of 55% based on data from four countries. Current trends are considered as decreasing for four countries. The quality is expected to decrease further in future.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
The range of the characteristic Crypsis-species goes far eastwards into the steppe zones of Asia, and includes also northern Africa and the eastern part of the Mediterranean region. A rough estimate is that less than 10% of the range is covered by the EU28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is sparsely distributed within a large range of more than 50,000 km2.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat requires specific conditions of salinity and hydroperiod. It occurs on relatively few and small areas within the large distribution range in Continental and Mediterranean Europe.

Pressures and Threats:
Land reclamation for expansion of agricultural and urban areas is responsible for most of the historical and current decline in periodically flooded saline shores with pioneer and ephemeral vegetation in Europe. Human-induced changes in hydraulic functioning are another major threat currently affecting this habitat. Surface water pollution, habitat succession (scrub encroachment), overgrazing, and proliferation of invasive plants are other threatening factors.

Conservation and Management:
The following conservation and management actions are relevant for this threatened habitat:
Avoid input of freshwater that would modify water (soil) salinity and prevents seasonal dry periods.
Avoid embankment, modification of cathment area or water derivation that would result in absence of seasonal flooding caused by sustained rainfalls.
Do not compensate the lack of rainfall by water input, since this ecosystem is adapted to variability and unpredictibility in abiotic conditions.
Promote extensive grazing, but avoid overgrazing which can also be a cause of degradation of the characteristic flora.
Install a high-level Biotope protection wherever this habitat occurs seasonally (destruction remains the major threat to this ecosystem).

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Recovery if the characteristic flora has disappeared requires active restoration.

Summary:
The habitat includes periodically flooded, saline and muddy, nutrient-rich shores and dried-up bottoms of saline standing water bodies and occasional saline river banks through the lowlands of Continental Europe and arid Mediterranean regions. There is a low to moderate cover of short salt-adapted plants, mostly grasses and sedges, mainly annuals, developing during the exposure phase, as well as perennials tolerant of temporary inundation with brackish water. During the summer, the bottom of these water bodies dries up, colouring white from the salts and the vegetation often starts to grow only in late summer. Much threatened by habitat destruction and anthropogenic changes in hydrological conditions, the most appropriate conservation measure is to reinforce measures of habitat protection.

References:
Elias, P., Dite D., Grulich V., Sadovsky M. 2008. Distribution and communities of Crypsis aculeata and Heleochloa schoenoides in Slovakia. Hacquetia 7/1: 5-20
Elias, P., D. Sopotlieva, D. DítÄ›, P.Hájková, I. Apostolova, D. Senko, Z. MeleÄková & M. Hájek 2013. Vegetation diversity of salt-rich grasslands in Southeast Europe. Applied Vegetation Science 16: 521–537.
Molnár, Zs., Borhidi, A. 2003. Hungarian alkali vegetation: Origins, landscape history, syntaxonomy, conservation. Phytocoenologia  33: 377-408.
Pop, I. 2002: Vegetatia solurior saraturoase den Romania. Contribua Botanice, Cluj 35(2): 287-332.
Rivas Goday, S. 1971. Revisión de las comunidades hispanas de la clase Isoeto-Nanojuncetea Br.-Bl. & Tüxen 1943. An. Inst. Bot. Cavanilles 27: 225-276.
Slavnic, Å½. 1948: Slatinska vegetacija Vojvodine. Arhiv za poljoprivredne nauke i tehniku, Beograd 3(4): 76–142.
Biondi, E., Blasi, C., Allegrezza, M., Anzellotti, I. Azzella, M.M., Carli, E., Casavecchia, S., Copiz, R., del Vico, E. (…), Zivkovic, L. 2014. Plant communities of Italy: The Vegetation Prodrome. Plant Biosystems 148:728-814.

Criterion A Text:
This habitat has suffered a 55% decline in area based on estimates provided by four countries in the EU28 (Spain, Hungary, Austria, Slovakia) and of 54% in the EU28+ (additional data from Bosnia-Herzegovina) over the last 50-60 years. Historical declines are likely to be larger, but there is limited data available. Expected furture trends for all four EU28 countries are decreasing. The values leads to the category Endangered for A1.

Criterion B Text:
A continuing decline in both the spatial extent and abiotic/biotic quality of the habitat has been reported, as well as a threatening process (proliferation of invasive plants) which is expected to cause continuing declines in quality over the next 20 years. The EOO is relatively large, but the AOO value is limited for both EU28 and EU28+, but still higher than the thresholds for criterion B2. Therefore the criteria B leads to the conclusion Least Concern.

Criterion C/D Text:
Over the last 50 years a decline in quality has been seen, affecting about 60% of the area with an average severity of more than 50%. This leads to the category Vulnerable for criterion C/D1. No historic trends in quality are provided by the experts. Quality is further expected to decrease due to dewatering, nutrient inputs and expansion of Paspalum, an invasive species. Decline in quality is considered as being caused by both abiotic and biotic factors.

Synthesis:
The habitat qualifies as Endangered (EN) under the criteria of decline in area over the last 50 to 60 years. Although this calculation is based on data from only five countries, it is likely that this estimation is accurate, as these countries cover large parts of this rare habitat within the EU28 and EU28+.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
A main division can be made between the continental varieties of this habitat versus the Mediterranean examples. Especially the continental (Pannonian) parts of the habitat suffered strong declines, while in the Mediterranean relatively few data on thi

Contributors:
Habitat description: R. Tzonev
Territorial data: C. Bita-Nicolae, P. Finck, D. Gigante, A. Mikolajczak, Ä. MilanoviÄ‡, J.A. Molina, Zs. Molnár, D. Paternoster, U. Raths, U. Riecken, J. Šibík, A. Ssymank, R. Tzonev, D. Viciani
Working Group Freshwater Habitats: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen


Habitat Description:
Habitat description Communities of tall helophytes characteristically occupy a zone from shallow water to upper parts of the geolittoral belt along lakes and rivers. Further they are found in nutrient-rich terrestrial sites on waterlogged ground. In marshes and large lakes tall helophytes, such as Phragmites australis or Typha angustifolia, together with other emergent herbs (e.g. Thelypteris palustris) can overgrow accumulations of plant residues and form with their rhizomes and roots floating carpets and islets on the water surface. This habitat often represents the shore component of the habitat types C1.1a, C1.1b, C1.2a, C1.2b and C1.4 and therefore is in contact with them. The habitat includes wide and dense stands along eutrophic water bodies, as well as tall-helophyte stands occurring as wide belts along larger oligo- and mesotrophic lakes. These communities have poor water exchange with the open water area, and show clear accumulation of organic material. Tall helophytes include grasses (Phragmites australis, Glyceria maxima, Scholochloa festucacea), bulrushes (Schoenoplectus spp., Bolboschoenus spp.), cattails (Typha spp.), horsetail (Equisetum fluviatile), often accompanied by some broad-leaved emergent herbs (Rumex hydrolapathum, Cicuta virosa, etc.).
Reed bed vegetation belongs to the most productive European plant communities in terms of annual production of biomass. Shoot height is often 2-3 m, sometimes much higher. Because of competitive ability of tall helophytes, their stands are species-poor and often dominated by one species or by a few co-dominants. Main determinants for dominant species are substratum, water depth, duration of flooding anoxic periods, herbivory and human influence. Dominants grow in vigorous clones, and chance may play an important role in the arrival and establishment of potential dominants. Cover and composition of understorey vary according to the trophic state, substratum, succession stage, and disturbance (grazing, mowing, water level fluctuations, eutrophication, in the north also ice erosion). Grasses and herbs dominate in understorey, aquatic plants and shore mosses can occur, but are usually not abundant. An exception form initial phases towards mire succession, in which mosses may have a high cover.
Besides growing in the littoral zone of natural standing waters, reed beds grow also in anthropogenic standing water, like canals, stagnant dykes and reservoirs. Further, they are abundant alongside running waters in wetter parts of flood plains, and in rivers and streams. Both organic and mineral soils are colonized. In the northern boreal region helophyte stands are sparse and low due to the harsh climate and frozen soil, in arctic in alpine area they are lacking.
Also reed bed stands along brackish to freshwater coastal waters are included in this habitat, like those on the shores of the Baltic Sea and Black Sea or reed beds in the freshwater influenced parts of estuaries along the Atlantic and Mediterranean coasts. As their functioning and species composition may somewhat differ from more inland stands, these coastal examples may be considered as a separate subtype of habitat C5.1a.
Reed bed vegetation has been influenced strongly by human activities. Earlier helophyte stands were largely grazed and mowed, resulting in lower vegetation. Eutrophication and cessation of shore grazing has led in many places to increase of reed beds and their density but with a higher abundance of nitrophilous species. Excessive nitrogen and prolonged anoxic condition of the sediments have in some cases caused dying of reed beds. Reed beds are also impacted by regulation of water levels, construction activities, clearing of agricultural land, boating and other recreational activities. Losses of reed beds are locally caused by herbivory (coypu, muskrats).
Indicators of good quality:
Reed beds with natural hydrology and water and substrate chemistry
Typical structure of vegetation and natural species pool (species poor stands)
Anthropogenic impacts low in terms of construction activities, eutrophication, drainage etc.
Natural density of helophyte stands, not enhanced biomass or density due to eutrophication
Absence of invasive alien species (also Glyceria maxima in the northern part of its range)
No or low abundance of ruderal and nitrophilus (tall-herb) species (Urtica dioica, Calystegia sepium, Bidens spp., Chenopodium spp., Amaranthus spp.)
No or low abundance of shrubs and climbing plants (e.g. Salix spp., Populus spp., Sambucus nigra, Vitis vinifera, Humulus lupulus)
Low cover of tall species from drier habitats (e.g. Cirsium spp., Galega officinalis, Eupatorium cannabinum, Sambucus ebulus)
Presence of characteristic breeding birds
Presence of characteristic insect fauna

Characteristic species:
Flora, Vascular plants: Acorus calamus, Alisma plantago-aquatica, Bolboschoenus laticarpus, B. maritimus, Butomus umbellata, C. rostrata, Calystegia sepium, Carex pseudocyperus,Cicuta virosa, Eleocharis palustris, Equisetum fluviatile, Eupatorium cannabinum, G. spicata, Glyceria fluitans, Glyceria maxima, Iris pseudacorus, Lythrum salicaria, Oenanthe aquatica, Phalaris arundinacea, Phragmites australis, Rumex hydrolapathum, Sagittaria sagittifolia, Schoenoplectus corymbosus, S. lacustris, S. tabernaemontani, Scolochloa festucacea, Solanum dulcamara, Sparganium erectum, S. neglectum, Typha angustifolia,T. domingensis, T. latifolia, T. laxmannii, T. minima, T. shuttleworthii
Frequently accompanying species are also Lycopus europaeus, Lysimachia vulgaris, Lythrum salicaria, Mentha aquatica, Rumex hydrolapatum, Sium latifolium, Thelypteris palustris, Cicuta virosa. Mosses: Drepanocladus spp., Campylium spp., Calliergon spp., in paludified stands also Sphagnum spp.
Fauna, Birds: Acrocephalus arundinaceus, A. scirpaceus, A. melanopogon, A. schoenobaneus , Alcedo atthis, Ardea cinerea, Aythya nyroca, Botaurus stellaris, Circus aeruginosus, Egretta garzetta, Fulica atra, Gallinula chloropus, Panurus biarmicus, Podiceps cristatus.

Classification:
EUNIS
C3.2 Water-fringing reedbeds and tall helophytes other than canes
D5.1 Reedbeds normally without free-standing water
EuroVegChecklist (alliances)
Phragmition communis Koch 1926
Typhion laxmannii Nedelcu 1968
Carici-Rumicion hydrolapathi Passarge 1964 (only those associations dominated by tall helophytes)
Scirpion maritimi Dahl et Hadac 1941 (not those associations of brackish and saline water)
Annex I:
-
Emerald:
-
MAES-2:
Wetlands - mires, bogs, fens (inland marshes)
IUCN:
5.7.  Permanent Freshwater Marshes/Pools [under 8 ha]

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
A dominant species of this habitat is Phragmites australis which is probably the flowering plant having the widest distribution on earth. However, only in Europe and Asia large reed stands (several thousands of hectares) having a specific bird fauna (eg Acrocephalus warblers) are found.

Map Description:
Map has many data gaps, depending on availability of data in EVA and GBIF. Data sources: EVA, GBIF, NAT.

Comment EU28:
estimates provided for 15 countries only

Comment EU28+:
estimates provided for 17 countries only

Trends in Quantity:
Recent trends (past 30-55 years) suggest a -22% decline in EU28 (14 countries) and a -29% decline in EU28+ (16 countries). Historical trends estimated for 4 EU28 and 5 EU28+ countries are -89% over a 90-250 yr period. Future trends are expected to be decreasing in 4 countries (estimated at -20% for 2 countries) and stable in 5 countries.

Trends in Quality:
The current extent of degradation is estimated at 51%  with a severity of 24% in based on 11 EU28  and 13 EU28+ countries. km). Severity of quality decline, however, increases to 42% when Finland (when large reed stands are expanding) is excluded. Experts provided little opinion about past (3 countries) and future (2 countries) trends in quality, but tendency is decreasing quality in the past and expected stability in the future.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This is a widely distributed habitat worldwide. Because large stands of Phragmites australis are more characteristic of Europe than of other continents, the EU 28 (3% of the land on earth) probably holds 4-8% of this habitat worldwide.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a worldwide distribution.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Like weltands in general, tall helophyte vegetation is a naturally fragmented habitat typically restricted to the shallow edge of freshwater bodies.

Pressures and Threats:
Land reclamation for expansion of agricultural and urban areas has been responsible for most of the historic decline in tall helophyte vegetation in Europe. Main current threats are natural succession processes not compensated by colonisation of new areas, stabilisation and rising of water levels translating into eutrophic and anoxic conditions, water shortage due to modification of catchment area (embankments, dams), decreased water quality (nutrient inputs from agriculture), as well as increased salinity associated with sea level rise in coastal areas. Wave action caused by motorized nautical sports and grazing by invasive mammals can be responsible for significant reedbed delcine in localised areas.

Conservation and Management:
Improving water quality: by reducing nitrate/phosphate inputs
Improving water level variation or water flow: In relatively small, confined water bodies (eg. marsh) the best water management for tall helophytes and their fauna is shallow water level in spring-summer (10-15 cm), with drawdown in late summer at least every five years. In large lake or estuaries where water level are typically higher (30cm), a good water flow is required to avoid anoxic/eutrophic conditions.
Vegetation management: Winter cutting of dry reed in mosaic (eg 25% each year) is a good way to slow down biomass accumulation and litter build up, providing a vegetation heterogeneity that benefits to the fauna.
Vegetation diversity: Maintaining gradual slopes will increase diversity of tall helophytes species and increase their area coverage.

Conservation Status:
There is no Annex 1-type habitat associated with Tall helophytes dominated by freshwater vegetation. However, this habitat forms the main biotope of several species from the Bird Directive.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Litter build up with scrub encroachment is rather irreversible, requiring soil scaping that cannot be conducted over large areas. Degradation caused by problems related to hydrological functioning (eg embankment, dams) can be compensated by adequate water control where applicable. Degradation caused by eutrophication can be most easily solved by drying out the water body in summer time or by insuring a regular water flow (input of oxygen-rich waters). Accelerated eutrophication caused by nutrient inputs from agriculture could be slow down by reducing fertilisant use.

Summary:
This habitat of tall helophytes characteristically occupies a zone from shallow to moderately deep mesotrophic to eutrophic fresh or slightly brackish waters along the banks of rivers and lakes and rivers, in artificial water bodies and in nutrient-rich terrestrial sites on waterlogged ground. It is very widespread, but naturally fragmented habitat, throughout the European lowlands. The main determinants for dominant species are substratum, water depth, duration of flooding, herbivory and human influence, some of the plants being cut for fodder or thatching. Because of the competitive ability and clonal growth of tall helophytes, the stands are usually species-poor and often dominated by one or a few co-dominants. The habitat is vulnerable to drainage and pollution, land reclamation for agricultural and urban development, and the decline of marshland exploitation for renewable crops.

References:
Dierssen, K. 1996. Vegetation Nordeuropas. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart. 838 pp.
Landucci, F., Gigante, D., Venanzoni, R., Chytrý, M. 2013. Wetland vegetation of the class Phragmito-Magno-Caricetea in central Italy. Phytocoenologia 43: 67–100.
ChytryÌ, M. (ed.) 2011. Vegetace ÄŒeské republiky 3. Vodní a mokÅ™adní vegetace. [Vegetation of the Czech Republic 3. Aquatic and wetland vegetation]. Academia, Praha, CZ.
Le Barz, C., M. Michas, and C. Fouque. 2009. Les roselières en France métropolitaine: premier inventaire (1998-2008). Faune Sauvage 283:14-26.
Påhlsson, l. (ed) 1994. Vegetationstyper i Norden. TemaNord 1994: 665. 626 pp.

Criterion A Text:
The A1 criteria has been estimated based on 14 EU28 and 16 EU28+ countries over a 30-55 yr period, including two EU28 countries where the habitat is considered as increasing. Historic data based on three EU28 and 5 EU28+ countries show a decline of 89%, but these data have been considered as insufficient for assessing EU28 or EU28+ trends. Future trends are expected to be decreasing (4 countries) or stable (5 countries).

Criterion B Text:
This cosmopolitan habitat is still widely distributed in spite of its declines. The large EOO, AOO and number of locations lead to a Least Concern assessment for criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
Estimates on quality trends are provided by 11 EU28 and 13 EU28+ countries, for an approximate area of 1914 and 1937 sq km, respectively. The decline is mainly caused by both abiotic factors (changes in hydraulic conditions, water pollution), but also to the natural sucession processes. No quality increase has been reported for any country. Experts provided little opinion about past and future trends in quality degradation.

Synthesis:
The habitat qualifies as Least Concern (LC) in both the EU28 and EU28+, based on calculations of trend in quality and quantity, using data of many countries. The conclusions are dominated largely by a positive trend in Finland. Some countries report very large historic reductions in quantity (50-95%), but it is not known whether these values are representative for Europe.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Several sub-habitats may be distinguished, of which some are probably more threatened than the broader defined habitat type. First of all, coastal reed bed (a.o. on the shores of the Baltic Sea) is likely not threatened, as it is expanding. More threat

Contributors:
Habitat description: H. Toivonen
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, G. Arts, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Brophy, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, L., Casella, R. Delarze, D. Espírito-Santo, P. Finck, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, N. Juvan, T. Kontula, C. Marcenò, A. Mikolajczak, Ä. MilanoviÄ‡, Zs. Molnár, D. Paelinckx, D. Paternoster, G. Pezzi, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, U. Riecken, J. Rodwell, S. Sciandrello, J. Šibík, Z. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, K. Šumberová, R. Tzonev, R. Venanzoni & D. Viciani
Working Group Freshwater Habitats: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina Abril, B. Poulin & H. Toivonen,


Habitat Description:
This habitat is characterized by the dominance of small and amphibious helophytes in oligotrophic to eutrophic water bodies. It is represented by shallow littoral zones of lakes, ponds and rivers subjected during the year to periodical and repeated changes of the water level. In both standing and running waters the small and amphibious vegetation may survive for short periods (1 to few seasons) and decline rapidly due to either exceptional flooding or succession towards tall helophyte-dominated vegetation. However, water bodies with a natural dynamic usually maintain a balanced proportion of small and tall helophyte vegetation. This habitat type has an important function for fauna, by offering shelter to benthic invertebrates, fish and amphibians and food to several species of birds. The general productivity of this habitat is lower than that of habitat C5.1a. In warmer parts of Europe during late summer this habitat may dry out and form transitions towards the habitat types C3.5a and C3.5b. Some amphibious species such as Alisma spp., Glyceria spp., Hippuris vulgaris, Sagittaria sagittifolia, Sparganium spp., typically growing in this habitat, have developed a dimorphism of the leaves (floating and terrestrial leaves) as an adaptation to the water level fluctuation and the water current. Also some small and medium size Cyperaceae, such as Eleocharis spp. and Bolboschoenus spp., are typical of this habitat type in standing water. This habitat usually represents the shore component of aquatic habitats (types C1.1a, C1.1b, C1.2a, C1.2b and C1.4) and therefore is in contact with them. Vegetation of small helophytes of the alliance Carici-Rumicion hydrolapathi, with species like Calla palustris, Comarum palustre, Menyanthes trifoliata, usually grows on organic muddy sediments of dystrophic and mesotrophic water bodies with relatively stable water levels.
Indicators of good quality:
Natural hydrology and chemistry of water and substrates
Typical structure of vegetation (species poor stands)
Anthropogenic impacts low in terms of construction activities, eutrophication and regulation of the water level.
No or low occurrence of tall helophytes, and nitrophilous species (e.g. Ranunculus sceleratus, Bidens spp., Chenopodium spp., Amaranthus spp.)
Low cover of species from drier habitats (e.g. Ranunculus repens, Potentilla reptans, Agrostis stolonifera)
No occurrence of invasive alien species (e.g. Ludwigia spp.)

Characteristic species:
Flora, Vascular plants: Alisma gramineum, A. lanceolata, A. plantago-aquatica, Alopecurus aequalis, Berula erecta, Bolboschoenus glaucus, B. yagara, B. planiculmis, Butomus umbellatus, Calla palustris, Comarum palustre, Eleocharis mamillata, E. palustris, E. uniglumis, Glyceria fluitans, G. nemoralis, G. notata, G. spicata, G. declinata, Helosciadium bermejoi, H. nodiflorum, Hippuris vulgaris, Juncus subnodulosus, Leersia oryzoides, Menyanthes trifoliata, Nasturtium officinale, Oenanthe aquatica, Rorippa amphibia, Sparganium emersum, S. erectum, Sagittaria sagittifolia, Veronica beccabunga, Veronica anagallis-aquatica.
Mosses: Fontinalis antipyretica

Classification:
EUNIS:
C3.1 Species-rich helophyte beds
C3.4 Species-poor beds of low-growing water-fringing or amphibious vegetation
EuroVegChecklist (alliances):
Glycerio-Sparganion Br.-Bl. et Sissingh in Boer 1942
Eleocharito palustris-Sagittarion sagittifoliae Passarge 1964
Alopecuro-Glycerietum spicatae S. Brullo et al. 1994
Carici-Rumicion hydrolapathi Passarge 1964 (partly)
Annex 1:
-
Emerald:
-
MAES:
Rivers and lakes
IUCN:
5.4.  Bogs, Marshes, Swamps, Fens, Peatlands
5.5.  Permanent Freshwater Lakes [over 8 ha]
5.7.  Permanent Freshwater Marshes/Pools [under 8 ha]

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat has a widespread distribution.

Comment EU28:
Data deficient - estimates based on 6 countries only

Comment EU28+:
Data deficient - estimates based on 7 countries only

Trends in Quantity:
Quantitative area trends could be calculated using data from only 7 out of 19 countries that reported on the habitat. The calculation is strongly dominated by the high amount of present area reported from Hungary (600 km2). Because of the limitations of these data, an average trend in quantity was calculated from the reported trend % only (available for 13 countries), without correcting for the relative amount in area in the countries. The average trend in area for both EU28/EU28+ was -28%.

Trends in Quality:
Extent of degradation is estimated at 26% with a severity of 27% based on data from only five EU countries. Current trends are considered as decreasing but are expected to be rather stable in the future.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
The percentage of the current distribution of this habitat in Europe relative to the worldwide distribution is considered as being equivalent to the land occupied by Europe on earth (3%), considering that this habitat has historically experienced a large decrease of its area in Europe along the shores of lakes resulting from the stabilisation of water levels.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat occurs over a widespread range with moderate or slight decrease over recent times.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat is restricted to shallow littoral zones of lakes, ponds and rivers subjected to periodical and repeated changes in water levels. Here, it often grows in small stands.

Pressures and Threats:
Land reclamation for expansion of agricultural and urban areas, are probably responsible for most of the historical decline in small amphibious helophyte-dominated freshwater vegetation in Europe. Declines over the last decades are most probably associated with river correction, reprofiling of streams and ponds, abandonment of grazing and physical disturbance. Main current threats are associated with modification of hydroperiod and hydrological functioning, water pollution and eutrophication.

Conservation and Management:
The most relevant management measures are (1) the preservation of shallow littoral zones of ponds, lakes, and meanders of streams and rivers, (2) maintain or restore natural water regime (fluctuating levels in water courses or regular dry periods in standing waters), (3) reduce water pollution (nutrient inputs from sewage/agricultural waters), and (4) promote extensive grazing where tall helophytes are expanding.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Yes, if adequate water levels/hydroperiods or shores can be restored the habitat can easily recover.

Summary:
Small and amphibious helophyte-dominated freshwater vegetation is a widespread, very common but fragmented habitat throughout the European lowlands, occurring in the shallow littoral zones of lakes, ponds and rivers subject to periodic and repeated variation in water levels. It is characterised by amphibious plants and provides an important habitat for benthic invertebrates, fish, amphibians and several species of birds, by offering shelter and food. Like other wetland types, this habitat has suffered much from intensification of agricultural land-use, including drainage, modification of flooding and reclamation, and expansion of urban areas.

References:
ChytryÌ, M. (ed.) 2011. Vegetace ÄŒeské republiky 3. Vodní a mokÅ™adní vegetace. [Vegetation of the Czech Republic 3. Aquatic and wetland vegetation]. Academia, Praha, CZ.
Dierssen, K. 1996. Vegetation Nordeuropas. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart. 838 pp.
Landucci, F., Gigante, D., Venanzoni, R., Chytrý, M. 2013. Wetland vegetation of the class Phragmito-Magno-Caricetea in central Italy. Phytocoenologia 43: 67–100.
Påhlsson, l. (ed) 1994. Vegetationstyper i Norden. TemaNord 1994: 665. 626 pp.

Criterion A Text:
Recent trends were calculated from trends provided in territorial data from 11 EU28 and 2 additional EU28+ countries, but without correction for present area. The average trend was -28% in both EU28 and EU28+, leading to the conclusion Near Threatened (NT). Too few data were available on future and historical trends.

Criterion C/D Text:
Again too few data were available for a good quantitative analysis of trend in quality, as only 3 countries reported both present area and quality trend data. Therefore mean estimations of extent and severity of degradation were calculated, without corrections for present area. The average values for EU28 and EU28+ were respectively 38% (extent)/51%(severity) and 40%(extent)/50%(severity) based on data from 12 EU28 countries and 1 additional EU28+ countries. These values lead to the category Near Threatened for criterion C/D1. Degradation in quality is primarily due to abiotic changes but also to biotic factors, in undefined proportions.

Synthesis:
As most countries were not able to report data on the present area, the assessment is less certain than for many other habitats. There has been a strong decline in area, ranging from -20 to -85% in many countries, with only two countries reporting slightly positive trends. Without any corrections for the relative area (due to data gaps), the average European trend in area is -27%, and therefore the habitat is assessed as Near Threatened (NT) under criterion A1. Also the trend in quality has been calculated without weighting for area, leading to results close to the thresholds for Vulnerable, and therefore also resulting in the Near Threatened category.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
No specific sub-types in particular need to be distinguished for further analysis.

Contributors:
Habitat definition: F. Landucci
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, J. Brophy, G. Buffa, A. ÄŒarni, L. Casella, R. Delarze, L. Delescaille, P. Finck, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, N. Juvan, T. Kontula, C. Marcenò, Zs. Molnar, D. Paternoster, G. Pezzi, B. Poulin, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, U. Riecken, S. Sciandrello, J. Šibík, A. Ssymank, K. Šumberová, R. Tzonev, R. Venanzoni, D. Viciani, E. Weeda
Working Group Freshwater Habitats: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen


Habitat Description:
This habitat type includes temporary freshwaters in the European temperate region. The associated plant communities seem not to be significant in the definition of the habitat which is mainly determined by hydrogeological and geomorphological conditions rather than by the biological component. These water bodies are characterized by large fluctuations of water level, which is related to the level of the underlying water table and to the amount of precipitation. In parts of the year, water is absent from these habitats and the plant and animal communities are mainly dependent by the seasonal hydrological regime, especially by the speed of drying out. The habitat can include a wide range of vegetation types, from wetland ones characterizing the areas where the water remains longer, to terrestrial ones in those areas where the water remains for a shorter time. The habitat includes the following distinct sub-types:
Turloughs have been described first as a habitat unique to Ireland but with a location also in Scotland and maybe Wales. However considering that this habitat is mainly determined by hydrological and geomorphological conditions it was recently recognized also in the Slovenian karst and other karstic areas of the temperate Europe and Mediterranean calcareous mountains. Turloughs are depressions of variable size developing on limestone, supporting vegetation and soils indicative of the prevalence of flooded conditions over at least part of the year. Flooding occurs annually in autumn mainly through springs and fissures in the underlying limestone though direct rainfall can have a secondary effect. Some turloughs in Ireland are affected by the tidal movements of coastal waters. In spring or summer draining often occurs through the same fissures or swallow-holes. Some turloughs can flood at any time within a few hours after heavy rainfall and subsequently may dry up again a few days later. This makes this habitat rather dynamic. The vegetation includes a range of vegetation alliances depending on flooding patterns, geomorphology, trophic status, grazing and climatic conditions. Mostly turloughs are grass- or sedge-dominated basins, which sometimes have a marsh or occasionally a permanent pond in the most depressed point. In the Burren, the high-water mark is often shown by Potentilla fruticosa. In Ireland the presence of the black moss Cinclidotus fontinaloides is a regular indicator of the location of a turlough. Moreover the habitat can includes rare wetland species such as the fen violet Viola persicifolia, the annual northern yellowcress Rorippa islandica and Callitriche palustris. In the Slovenian and Southern European karst systems, due to the different climatic and hydrological regimes, turloughs host mainly wet meadows. In these communities species such as Lotus corniculatus, Centaurea jacea, Galium verum, Ranunculus acris, R. repens, Agrostis stolonifera, Achillea millefolium are common. Turlough wetland communities can be classified into three main phytosociological classes: the Scheuzerio palustris-Caricetea fuscae of small-sedge communities, the Molinio-Arrhenatheretea including wet meadows and disturbed habitat communities, and the Littorelletea uniflorae lakeshore communities found on the margins of more permanent water bodies within turloughs. Caricion davallianae and Potentillion anserinae are the phytosociological alliances listed in the Habitats Directive as characteristic of this habitat. Aquatic and marsh communities often occur in the lower parts of turlough basins.
Lakes of gypsum karst is a very rare habitat, that includes small lakes that have developed by springs or spring complexes of active gypsum karst areas. The underlying rock might be gypsum or limestone, characterized by calcium sulphate and carbonate, respectively. Karst sinkholes might have a different shape and depth. They may appear as chains of funnel-shaped sinkholes and small hollows. They usually accumulate water but also fall dry periodically. The lakes are characterized by pronounced fluctuations of water level as well as high concentrations of calcium sulphate. Since lakes of gypsum karst significantly differ in shape, size, age and origin, their vegetation can be quite diverse. Older sinkholes can develop in lakes or bogs or into a terrestrial wet meadows vegetation. Younger ones can have a diverse vegetation including submerged and free-floating aquatic macrophytes. In general the vegetation is well adapted to fluctuating water levels (including semi-permanent conditions) and relatively high sulphate levels. Therefore, a number of alliances of the Littorelletea might be found in these habitats: Subularion aquaticae, Deschampsion litoralis, Lobelion dortmannae, Littorellion uniflorae, Hyperico elodis-Sparganion.
Indicators of good quality:
The periodical alternation of wet-and-dry regimes
The absence of heavy anthropogenic activities that can alter the hydrogeological system (e.g. water capitation and drainage)
The absence of communities and species indicating an excessive nitrification or disturbance such as ruderal and exotic species

Characteristic species:
The species of vascular plants that can occur in this habitat type are many and are usually not exclusive of this habitat. Therefore some species can be considered diagnostic of the habitat only in combination with the geomorphological and hydrogeological conditions.
Vascular plants: Viola persicifolia, Potentilla fruticosa, Rorippa islandica Callitriche palustris, Subularia aquatica, Deschampsia setacea, Lobelia dortmanna, Littorella uniflora, Hypericum elodis, Sparganium gramineum, Chara spp., Lotus corniculatus, Centaurea jacea, Galium verum, G. palustre, Ranunculus acris, R. repens, Agrostis stolonifera, Achillea millefolium, Juncus inflexus, J. effusus, Eleocharis palustris, Carex acuta, C. davalliana, C. paniculata, C. vesicaria, Lysimachia vulgaris, Trifolium fragiferum, Thalictrum flavum, Filipendula ulmaria, Mentha longifolia, Glyceria notata, G. fluitans, Alopecurus rendlei, Hordeum secalinum. 
Bryophytes: Cinclidotus fontinaloides, Fontinalis antipyretica, Drepanocladus spp., Calliergon spp.
Macroinvertebrates: insects, crustaceans, flatworms and snails are often abundant. Species frequently reported are Cleon dipterum, C. simile, Bithynia tentaculata, Lymnea peregra, L. palustris, L. stagnalis, Polycelis nigra, Chydorus sphaericus, Daphnia pulex, D. longispina, Diaptomus castor, D. cyaneus, Cyclops agilis, Ostracoda spp. Gammarus spp., Asselus spp., Hydroporus palustris, Porhydrus lineatus, Eurycercus glacialis, Eurycercus lamellatus, Hydra spp., Hygrotus quinquelineatus, Berosus signaticollis, Hygrotus impressopunctatus, Helophorus spp., Tanymastix stagnalis, Agonum lugens, A. livens, Badister meridionalis, Blethisa multipunctata, Pelophila borealis, Beetle species, Agonum lugens, Philonthus furcifer, Chirocephalus spp.
Vertebrates: When turloughs retain some water all year, they may be important bird haunts, e.g. Anser albifrons, Cygnus cygnus, Anas spp. and many waders can occur in winter. Amphibians such as Triturus spp., Bombina spp., Bufo spp., Hyla spp. and Rana spp. can use this temporary water bodies for reproduction during spring.

Classification:
EUNIS:
C1.6 Temporary lakes, ponds and pools
EurovegChecklist alloances:
Charion fragilis Krausch 1964
Subularion aquaticae Hadac 1971
Rorippion islandicae Béguin et Theurillat ined.
Deschampsion litoralis Oberd. et Dierßen in Dierßen 1975
Lobelion dortmannae Vanden Berghen 1964
Littorellion uniflorae Koch ex Klika 1935
Hyperico elodis-Sparganion Br.-Bl. et Tx. ex Oberd. 1957
Magno-Caricion gracilis Géhu 1961
Caricion davallianae Klika 1934
Potentillion anserinae Tx. 1947
Loto tenuis-Trifolion fragiferi Westhoff et Den Held ex de Foucault 2009
Thalictro flavi-Filipendulion ulmariae de Foucault in Royer et al. 2006
Mentho longifoliae-Juncion inflexi T. MuÌˆller et G.rs ex de Foucault 2009
Annex 1:
3180 Turloughs
3190 Lakes of gypsum karst
Emerald:
C1.66 Temporary inland saline and brackish waters
C1.67 Turlough and lake bottom meadows
MAES-2:
Fresh water, Rivers and lakes, Inland surface waters (water coursed and bodies)
IUCN:
5.6 Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Lakes [over 8 ha]
5.8 Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Marshes/Pools [under 8 ha]
5.18. Karst and Other Subterranean Hydrological Systems [inland]
WFD:
101, 201

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The occurrence of this habitat is mainly determined by suitable geological and geomorphological conditions. It occurs in all temperate Europe and some of the calcareous mountain systems of the Mediterranean area.

Map Description:
Map is incomplete, especially for Karst areas outside the EU28 like in Croatia. The habitat has been reported from 12 EU 28 countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, United Kingdom) and one EU 28+ (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Data sources: Art17, NAT.

Comment EU28:
Only 8 countries provided the actual total area of the habitat.

Comment EU28+:
Only Bosnia and Herzegovina provided the actual area. This country reported a very large area, which seems to be reliable considering the extension of calcareous massifs in the Balkans.

Trends in Quantity:
The habitat type is reported to have a decreasing trend in quantity in half of the countries (Germany, Italy, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Estonia, Slovakia) that provided data, while the other half of the countries (United Kingdom, Slovenia, Romania, Lithuania, Ireland and Croatia) reported a stable situation. The extent of this habitat is higher in the Northern and Southern Europe where the habitat is also better preserved. The quantity decrease is higher in central Europe, where the habitat is occurring in very few locations with small extent. Germany and Slovakia reported a decrease in the last 50 years between 50 and 90%, however this decrease almost did not influence the trend in quantity at the European scale because Germany, even if should have at least three locations, as known from the official Natura 2000 manual, did not specified the current area of the habitat and Slovakia reported an area of 0.01 km2.

Trends in Quality:
All the countries that provided data reported between a slight to severe degradation of 10 to 100% of the habitat area.  Consistently with the trend in quantity, the areas more affected by the degradations were reported to be the central European ones, while those with higher habitat area had slight to moderate degradation influencing not more than 30% of the areas. The causes of degradation mainly affect the groundwater – diffuse groundwater pollution, changes in the hydrology of the karst system due to water abstraction, canalization and amelioration. Pollution of soil and superficial water due to agricultural practices, tourism, climate changes, biocenotic changes, succession are also recorded as common causes of degradation. The extent of degradation is probably rather influenced by the position of this habitat in the landscape (whether in lowlands or in mountain areas) and the resources available in the surrounding, by cultural reasons (historical use and management of the landscape) and the inclusion or not of this habitat in protected areas.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 60% of this habitat type is expected to be within EU28 and the other 40% within EU28+. The habitat should occur especially in the Balkans (Albania, Serbia, Monte Negro, Kosovo) where karst systems are extensively developed. However such estimation is very hypothetical considering that for many countries there are no data about this habitat. Similar habitat types determined by similar geological and geomorphological conditions, but hosting different species and therefore attributable to other vegetation types, are also present in other part of the world.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
Some countries reported that the habitat is stable, others that the regression is ongoing due to anthropogenic factors. However the geographical range of the habitat (EOO) is very wide and seems to go far beyond 50,000 Km2.

Pressures and Threats:
Main pressures are of anthropogenic origin, especially those that have direct or indirect influence on the groundwater level and quality. Several karst plains can be affected by increasing farming activities, which can lead to water drainage, direct habitat destruction and an increase of water and soil pollution due to fertilization and the use of pesticide. Climate changes, especially the frequent changes of seasonal precipitation could cause the shifting groundwater level and consequently of the vegetation as far as the complete disappearance of some species and communities. Natural events like earthquake and underground collapse could also influence changes of the groundwater level, however these phenomena have usually only local impact.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat is threatened especially by anthropogenic activities that could alter the physical and chemical conditions, or even cause the progressive erosion of the habitat. Therefore measures for farming activities such as the regulation of the minimum distance of crops from the flood areas, the use of biocides, fertilizers and irrigation should be introduced in every country. Moreover measures should be also taken regarding the catchment of groundwater in the surrounding areas. In many cases, large areas in which this habitat occurs are already included in protected areas, however probably most of the smallest systems are not protected in any way in all of the countries. The inclusion of this habitat in protected areas is surely useful to limit the reduction of the habitat due to anthropogenic use of the land. Grazing and mowing may be positive for the maintenance of some vegetation types and a high biodiversity and for limiting the vegetation succession processes. However these activities should be properly regulated preventing overgrazing, nitrification and the reduction of the natural dispersal of seeds. Considering that this habitat develops exclusively on karst and gypsum geological formations, measures related to mining and quarrying may also be needed in some countries both to avoid direct and indirect erosion and damage of the habitat.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1 types:
3180: ALP U1, ATL U1, BOR U1, CON U1
3190: ALP FV, BOR XX, CON U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The capacity of this habitat to naturally recover is different according to the kind of damage that the habitat has undergone. If the damage concerned the groundwater level it may be possible to recover the habitat only through intervention, if at all. If the damage concerned only the land surface such as in the case of nitrification, pollution of soil or destruction of the natural vegetation due farming activities, the habitat can probably partially or totally recover through intervention (seed dispersal, removal of pollutants) in approximately a decade. Without intervention the habitat could require more years to recover. Although the functionality of the habitat can be easily recovered, the natural recovering of species composition could be difficult if the seed bank is destroyed.

Summary:
This habitat of fluctuating water bodies is related to very particular geological, geomorphological and climatic conditions which permit rise and fall of ground water through underlying limestone or gypsum. Turloughs and related limestone karst depressions vary in size and flood in autumn through swallow holes and fissures in the limestone, emptying in the spring. Gypsum karst lakes are very rare and develop where water accumulates in depressions and dries out periodically. The vegetation in such situations can include more or less permanent pools with aquatics, water margin vegetation, fens and wet meadows. The main threats are from interruption of the natural hydrology, eutrophication from farming and climate change.  Restoration after substantial damage is difficult and strict protection is necessary.

References:
AuniÅ†š, A. 2013 (ed.). European union protected habitats in Latvia. Interpretation manual. 2nd revised edition. Latvian Fund for Nature, Ministry of Environmental protection and regional development, Riga.
DreškoviÄ‡, N., Äug S., Stupar, V., HamziÄ‡, A., Lelo, S., MuratoviÄ‡, E., LukiÄ‡-Bilela, L., BrujiÄ‡ J., MilanoviÄ‡, Ä. and Kotrošan, D. 2011. NATURA 2000 u Bosni i Hercegovini. WWF Mediterranean Program Ofï¬ce, Europe’s Living Heart. Rome-Sarajevo.
Fossitt, J.A. 2000. A Guide to habitats in Ireland. The Heritage Council, Kilkenny.
Foster, G.N. , Nelson, B.H., Bilton, D.T. , Lott D.A., Merritt, R., Weyl, R.S. and Eyre, M.D. 1992. A classification and evaluation of Irish water beetle assemblages. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2: 185-208.
LakušiÄ‡, R. 1967. SpecifiÄnosti vegetacije dinraskih planina. Bilten biološkog društva SR BiH. pos. Izdanje 5: 1-87.
Moran, J., Sheehy Skeffington, M. and Gormally, M. 2008. The influence of hydrological regime and grazing management on the plant communities of a karst wetland (Skealoghan turlough) in Ireland. Applied Vegetation Science 11:13-24.
NPWS 2013. The Status of EU Protected Habitats and Species in Ireland. Habitat Assessments Volume 2. Version 1.0, National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Dublin, Ireland.
Paal J. 2007. Loodusdirektiivi elupaigatüüpide käsiraamat. [Handbook of the Habitat Directive habitats in Estonia]. 2nd ed. Auratrükk, Tallinn. 308 lk. (In Estonian).
Riecken, U., Fink, P., Raths, U., Schröder, E. and Ssymank, A.  2006. Rote Liste der gefährdeten Biotoptypen Deutschlands. Zweite Fortgeschriebene Fassung 2006. Münster (Landwirtschaftsverlag). Naturschutz und Biologische Vielfalt 34: 318 S.
Sheehy Skeffington, M., Moran, J., O´Connor, Á., Regan, E., Coxon, C. E., Scott, N. E. and Gormally, M. 2006. Turloughs - Ireland’s unique wetland habitat. Biological Conservation 133: 265-290.
Sheehy Skeffington, M., Scott N.E. 2008. Do turloughs occur in Slovenia? Acta Carsologica 37(2-3):291-306.

Criterion A Text:
The calculated trend in quantity resulted in a reduction of 23-24% during the last 50 years that corresponds to the category Least Concern. This calculation was performed using the quantitative data available, which however represent only 40-45% of the total countries in which the habitat should occur. This value is very close to the threshold of category Near Threatened. If we consider the extended lack of data, especially from Balkan countries within EU 28+ and Italy, France and Germany within EU 28, the habitat could also be Near Threatened both in EU 28 and EU 28+. However there is not sufficient information available to make such assumption.

Criterion B Text:
The habitat is largely extended in Europe therefore both EOO and AOO are far above the thresholds required by criterion B to consider the habitat threatened. However spatial extent, biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat are in continuing decline.

Criterion C/D Text:
The reduction in biotic and abiotic quality over the last 50 years affected 29% of the extent of the habitat in EU 28 countries with a severity of 49% and 19% of the extent of the habitat in EU 28+ with a severity of 37%. This calculation is based on data provided by only 30% of the countries in which the habitat is expected to occur. According to criterion C/D the habitat is Least Concern, however an underestimation or overestimation of the reduction in biotic and abiotic quality may be due to the large gap of data for countries with large extension of calcareous formations like Italy, France and most of the Balkan countries.

Criterion E Text:
There is no quantitative analysis available that estimates the probability of collapse of this habitat type..

Synthesis:
This habitat qualifies for Least Concern (LC) according to the wide distribution and small declines in quality and quantity. However trends in area are very close to the Near Threatened thresholds. Besides, the data are incomplete, especially for some Balkan countries which may contain large areas. The results of the assessment could change a lot, either positively or negatively, if more data from Balkan countries were available.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
For the Habitats Directive the subtypes 'lakes of gypsum karst' and 'turloughs' have been distinguished. Also the assessments for the Article 17 report a lack of information about the conservation status of 'lakes of gypsum karst

Contributors:
Type description: G. Arts
Territorial data: P. Ivanov, A. Ssymank, P. Finck, U. Raths, U. Riecken, E. Agrillo, F. Attorre, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, G. Buffa, L. Casella, D. Gigante, G. Pezzi, D. Viciani, A. Mikolajczak, J. Šibík, A. ÄŒarni, N. Juvan, J.A. Molina, Å½. Škvorc, V. Stupar, J. Rodwell
Working Group Freshwater Habitats: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen


Habitat Type Name:
C1.2a Oligotrophic to mesotrophic waterbody with Characeae

Habitat Description:
Water bodies belonging to this habitat are characterized by the occurrence of stonewart beds (Characeae family, so-called Chara-lakes). The waters are most often permanent, clear sometimes humic (brown) freshwater lakes and can be either mesotrophic or oligotrophic, either deep or shallow. The sediments are generally mineral (sand or clay) or lightly organic. The alliances Charion vulgaris and Nitellion syncarpo-tenuissimae are representative of more basic and nutrient rich (sometimes even eutrophic) waters. The waters are mostly rich in calcium (Ca > 20 mg/L) and are circumneutral to alkaline, moderately to highly buffered. The alliance Nitellion flexilis may occur in acid waters. In some cases this habitat type may be in contact with the habitat C1.2b (Mesotrophic to eutrophic waters with floating and/or submerged angiosperms). In Eastern Europe, Lychnothamnus barbatus may occur in this habitat; it is a rare species having its northern distribution in Poland and Lithuania.
Charophytes communities are usually poor in species diversity and are often represented by monospecific or very species-poor stands where one species is dominating. The stands may form an open or continuous and closed vegetation bed. The habitat includes pioneer vegetation types or vegetation types in an early successional stage. The habitat conditions that favour the development of Stonewart vegetation include: bare sandy or clayish substrate (e.g. after periodically dredging), relatively high influence of wind that contribute to maintain the lake surface without vegetation, dynamic water levels and periodical emergence of parts of the water body, high light conditions in early spring.
Temporary waters are included as far as related to Charion vulgaris vegetation type. It also includes calcium-rich marl and calcium supersaturated lakes, instead Chara-dominated communities of brackish waters belong to the Charion canescentis alliance and those are included in C1.5 (Permanent inland saline and brackish waters).
Aquatic vascular plants can accompany the Chara species, however stonewarts are largely dominating this habitat type.
Indicators of good quality:
Large stands of Chara species
Absence or very low abundance of plant species characteristic of eutrophic waters
Low abundance of plant species with other growth forms than the Chara growth form, e.g. rooting or floating plants such as Potamogeton spp. or Lemna spp.
Low concentrations of nutrients and chlorophyll (approximately P < 30 μg/L and chlorophyll < 7 μg/L)
Low turbidity and clear water due by low concentrations of chlorophyll and suspended detritus and sediments in the water column
pH weakly acid to circumneutral to alkaline (usually pH 6-8)
A thin layer of detritus (no accumulation of organic mud).

Note: Chemical and physical parameters are only indicative, they may change in different geographical area and climatic conditions.
Characteristic species: Flora: Macro-algae: Chara globularis, C. aspera, C. aculeolata, C. contraria, C. delicatula, C. hispida, C. rudis, C. vulgaris, C. intermedia, C. polyacantha, C. tomentosa, N. hyalina, N. tenuissima, N. syncarpa, Nitellopsis obtusa, Lychnothamnus barbatus.

Classification:
EUNIS:
C1.1 Permanent oligotrophic lakes, ponds and pools
C1.2 Permanent mesotrophic lakes, ponds and pools
Euroveg Checklist:
Charion intermediae Sauer 1937 (Syn. Charion fragilis Krausch 1964)
Nitellion syncarpo-tenuissimae W. Krause 1969
Charion vulgaris (W. Krause et Lang 1977) W. Krause 1981
Annex 1:
3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.
Emerald:
C1.1 Permanent oligotrophic lakes, ponds and pools
C1.25 Charophyte submerged carpets in mesotrophic waterbodies
C1.4 Permanent dysrtophic lakes, ponds and pools
MAES-2:
Rivers and lakes
IUCN:
5.5 Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 ha)
5.7 Permanent freshwater marshes and pools (under 8 ha)
Water Framework Directive:
IC201, LCB1, LCB2

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat has a wide distribution across Europe.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete for EU28, but data for Poland seems to be an underestimation. Data gaps exist outside the EU28 (a.o. in Norway). Data sources: Art17, EVA.

Comment EU28:
Poland is lacking and forms a large contribution to both AOO and EOO

Comment EU28+:
Poland is lacking and forms a large contribution to both EOO and AOO

Trends in Quantity:
For the EU 28 the trend in quantity during the last 50 years indicates a reduction of 46% and for the EU 28+ of 45%. However this trend is less severe than the historical one, which is 86% of reduction for EU 28 and 85% for EU 28+. Quantitative future trend data are largely absent, but territorial exerts have hypothesized a trend from stable to low decrease in the future. Human direct destruction is an important cause of reduction of this habitat in the past.

Trends in Quality:
The extent of degradation in Europe (EU 28 and EU 28+) is 72-77% and the severity of degradation is 42%. As a main causees of degradation, eutrophication and pollution are mentioned as the most frequent. In Norway around 50% of the area is at risk for not having good status, disturbed mainly by eutrophication and loss of habitats.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
The EU 28 probably hosts one third of the total worldwide distribution of the habitat type. The distribution area of this habitat include whole of the northern hemisphere.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has not a small natural range, however the decline is ongoing. Future decline is mainly expected due to climate change, however the extent of this decline is currently unknown.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has not a small natural range.

Pressures and Threats:
The main threats to habitat permanent oligotrophic to mesotrophic waters with Characeae is eutrophication induced by agricultural and forestry activities. In Northern Europe hydraulic changes form the main threat besides agricultural and forestry activities that have caused gradual eutrophication locally and have weakened the state of typical species of this habitat.

Conservation and Management:
The current approaches to conservation and management of permanent oligotrophic to mesotrophic waters with Characeae include minimizing the input of nutrients from agriculture and forestry. It requires the elimination of all external nutrient inputs into the lake. Characeae vegetation is especially vulnerable to eutrophication with phosphorous. Lowering the nutrient input might also require the inlet of water via a longer route or via an extra vegetation filter. Maintaining buffer zones around lakes might contribute to prevent direct nutrient inputs, as they prevent agricultural fields bordering the lakes. Lowering the nutrient status of this habitat might require lowering the hydraulic retention time of the water in the lake, if this is possible to realize in the water management scheme of the specific lake.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1 types:
3140: ALP U1, ATL U2, BLS U1, BOR U1, CON U2, MED U1, PAN U1, STE XX

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Experience from North-Western Atlantic Europe has shown that the vegetation can be restored from a hypertrophic status by a reduction of the hydraulic residence time, by intervention in the fish populations and by elimination of the external nutrient inputs. Intervention in the fish populations means the removal of big sediment-disturbing bream.

Summary:
This habitat includes permanent, oligotrophic to mesotrophic, calcium-rich waters with charophytes, mainly found in the north-western Atlantic and subatlantic regions and in central Europe.  The vegetation comprises pioneer and early successional stands of the charophytes, often monospecific, developing on bare sandy substrates subject to turbulent wave action and periodic emergence.  Eutrophication from agriculture and forestry and hydrological changes are the main pressures, with climate change in the future. Restoration measures include the elimination of external nutrient inputs, hydrological measures and management of fish populations.

References:
Berg, C., Dengler, J., Abdank, A. and Isermann, M, 2004. De Pflanzengesellschaften Mecklenburg-Vorpommerns un ihre Gefährdung. Textband. 606 pages. Landesamt für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Geologie Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Weissdorn-Verlag Jena.
Catteau, E., Duhamel, F., Baliga, M-F., Baso, F., Bedouet, F., Cornier, T., Mullie, B., Mora, F., Toussaint, B. and Valentin, B. 2009. Guide des Végétations zones humides de la Région Nord-pas de Calais. Centre regional de Phytosociologie. Agréé conservatoire botanique national de Bailleul.
DoniÅ£ã, N., Popescu, A., Paucã-Comãnescu, M., Mihãilescu S. and BiriÅŸ I-A., 2005. Habitatele din Romãnia. Editura Technicã Silvicã.

Criterion A Text:
Historical data have only been reported  by approximately 20% of the countries in which this habitat occurs. Therefore, even if the calculation of the historical trend resulted in a reduction of the habitat surface of 85-86% (corresponding to the category Endangered), the habitat is still considered as Vulnerable. In near future decreases in quantity are expected to be mainly due to eutrophication and climate change, but data are not available for most countries.

Criterion C/D Text:
Data for EU 28+ could only be assessed for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republic of Macedonia, Cyprus, Norway and Switzerland in addition to the 28 EU data.

Criterion E Text:
Risks for habitat collapse could not be quantified.

Synthesis:
This habitat reaches the qualification of Vulnerable, because of its reduction in quantity over the last 50 years and before, and for the high percentage of the habitat moderately affected by biotic and abiotic reduction. For this assessment data from Poland were not available. As Polish lakes form an important part of this habitat in Europe, the assessment is not complete. The assessment for EU 28+ was only slightly different from the assessment for EU 28 as only data from a few countries could be added.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
For this habitat, no subtypes need to be considered in the assessment.

Contributors:
Habitat definition: G. Arts
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, G. Arts, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, S. Bell, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Brophy, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, L. Casella, R. Delarze, L. Denys, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, P. Finck, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, R. Hall, P. Ivanov, J. Janssen, N. Juvan, K. Keulen, G. Király, T. Kontula, C. H. Mäemets, Marcenò, A. Mesterházy, A. Mikolajczak, Ä. MilanoviÄ‡, M. Mjelde, J.A. Molina, J. Packet, D. Paelinckx, D. Paternoster, G. Pezzi, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, U. Riecken, S. Sciandrello, J. Šibík, Å½. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, K. Šumberová, S. Trajanovska, D. Viciani, E. von Wachenfeldt
Working Group Freshwater Habitats: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen


