BILTEN PRIRODE PARK PARKA NATURE BULLETIN · 2019-05-07 · Bilten parka prirode Nature Park Bulletin Lonjsko polje Vol. 3/No. 1/2, 2001. Ovaj projekt je izraðen uz pomoæ LIFE financijskog

Go

din

a/V

ol.

3B

roj/N

o.1/2

ISS

N:

1332-0

688

UD

K:

502.4

Go

din

a/V

ol.

3B

roj/N

o.1/2

ISS

N:

1332-0

688

UD

K:

502.4

BILTEN PRIRODE PARKPARKA NATURE BULLETINBILTEN PRIRODE PARKPARKA NATURE BULLETIN

Bilten parka prirode

Nature Park BulletinLonjsko polje

Vol. 3/No. 1/2, 2001.

Ovaj projekt je izraðen uz pomoæ LIFE financijskog instrumenta Europske unije

This project has been carried out with the contribution of the LIFE financial instrument of the European Community

2 Bilten parka prirodeLonjsko polje

Nature Park BulletinVol. 3/No. 1/2, 2001

Nakladnik / Published by:

Glavni i odgovorni urednik / Editor in chief:

Uredništvo / Editorial board:

Tajnica uredništva / Administrative secretary:

Adresa uredništva / Adress of the Editorial Board:

Tel./faks:

E-mail:

Prijevod / Translation:

Lektor i korektor

Naklada:

Tisak

Javna ustanova "Park prirode Lonjsko polje"Lonjsko Polje Nature Park Public ServiceHR-44324 Jasenovac, Trg kralja Petra Svaèiæa bbHrvatska / Croatia

Goran Gugiæ

Darko Kovaèiæ, Radenko De�eliæ, Martin Schneider-Jacoby

Marija Kušina

Javna ustanova "Park prirode Lonjsko Polje"Bilten,HR-44324 Jasenovac,Trg kralja Petra Svaèiæa bb,HRVATSKA / CROATIA

++385 (0)44 672 080;

[email protected]

Graham McMaster, Ivana Maguire

Ivan Jindra

Izlazi dva puta godišnje / The Bulletin appears twice yearly

500 primjeraka

Gratis tiskara - Kutina

IMPRESSUM

SADR�AJ / CONTENTS

Bilten parka prirodeLonjsko poljeNature Park BulletinVol. 3/No. 1/2, 2001

3

Edina Biró (IUCN)Uvod ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

.................................................................................................................................................... 4

Mira Mileva:Razvojni uzorci samoodr�ivoga razvoja seoskih podruèja u CEEC-u .................................................... 6

.............................................................. 6

Erika Stanciu:Koraci prema suradnièkom upravljanju u Nacionalnom parku Retezat, Rumunjska .............................. 10

.................................... 10

Rossitza Zlatanova, Rossen Vassilev:Plan upravljanja Parkom Prirode Strandja .............................................................................................. 24

................................................................................................ 24

Darko Kovaèiæ, Goran Gugiæ, Blanka Bobetko Majstoroviæ, Zdenko Sešo:Zoniranje i zaštita prirode u Prostornom planu Parka prirode Lonjsko polje .......................................... 39

............................................ 39

Preface

Emerging models of sustainable rural development in CEECs

Steps Towards Collaborative Management in Retezat National Park, Romania

Strandja Nature Park Management Plan

Zoning and Nature protection in Lonjsko Polje Nature Park Physical Plan

PREFACE

IUCN - The World Conservation Union was foundedin 1948 and brings together 79 states, 113government agencies, 754 NGOs, 36 affiliates, andsome 10,000 scientists and experts from 181countries in a unique partnership. Itsmission is to influence, encourage and assistsocieties throughout the world to conserve theintegrity and diversity of nature and to ensure thatany use of natural resources is equitable andecologically sustainable. Within the framework ofglobal conventions IUCN has helped over 75countries to prepare and implement nationalconservation and biodiversity strategies.

-

world-wide

The European Regional Office (ERO) of IUCN aimsat contributing to a sustainable Europe byinfluencing policy development and integration ofbiodiversity and landscape conservation, restorationand sustainable use into economic sectors, applyingthe scientific expertise in IUCN's networks.

At the Sofia Conference of Environmental Ministersin 1995, IUCN presented a set of case studies ofseven selected “Showcase Sites” together with aGuideline for Best Practice for ConservationPlanning in Rural Areas. The existing sevenShowcase Sites are representing an occasional setof examples of protected area management. Theirexperience can be a good starting point to delineatethe main problems but is not enough to generaliseand answer the common challenges of the Central-and Eastern-European Region. Therefore the so-called Sofia Initiatives were established.

In the implementation process of the Sofia Initiativesthe REC, the Committee of EnvironmentalProtection of Albania and the Open SocietyFoundation Albania - Soros Foundation organisedthe "Central and East European BiodiversityInitiative Conference" in Tirana, 1997, and theBiodiversity Showcase Initiative was established.

The Initiative is aimed at facilitating theimplementation of the Pan-European Biological andLandscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS) and theEnvironment for Europe process as a whole, bybuilding an informational and co-operative networkof the already existing "Biodiversity ShowcaseProjects" and establish new ones all over the Centraland Eastern European (CEE) Region.

The goals of the initiative are the development of anecological network, the cooperation between thedifferent countries of the CEE Region, as well as thedifferent sectors of society (i.e. NGOs and GOs), theestablishment of an intensive communication and

UVOD

IUCN Svjetska udruga za zaštitu prirode, osnovana1948., udru�uje 79 zemalja, 113 vladinih agencija,754 nevladine udruge (NGO), 36 podru�nica i 10 000znanstvenika i struènjaka iz 181 zemlje u jedinstvenusvjetsku suradnju. Njezina je misija utjecati nadruštva iz cijeloga svijeta, poticati ih i pomagati im uoèuvanju cjelovitosti i biološke raznolikosti prirode teosigurati da svako iskorištavanje prirodnih izvorabude ispravno i ekološki samoodr�ivo. U okvirimaglobalne zaštite IUCN je pomogao više od 75 zemaljau pripremanju i primjeni nacionalnih strategija zaštitebiološke raznolikosti.

Europski regionalni ured (ERO) IUCN-a postavio si jecilj pomagati samoodr�ivoj Europi, utjeèuæi napolitièki razvoj i povezivanje zaštite biološke ikrajobrazne raznolikosti, obnovu i samoodr�ivuuporabu gospodarskih sektora, pr imjenuznanstvenih ekspertiza u IUCN-ovim radnimmre�ama (network).

Na Sofijskoj konferenciji ministara okoliša, 1995.,IUCN je predstavio niz primijenjenih studija u sedamodabranih tzv. oglednih podruèja (“ShowcaseSitess”), zajedno s Vodièem najboljih iskustava zaplaniranje zaštite seoskih podruèja. Postojeæihsedam oglednih podruèja na nizu primjeraobjašnjava upravljanje zaštiæenim podruèjima.Njihovo iskustvo mo�e biti dobro ishodište za prikazglavnih problema, ali nije dovoljno opæenito i neodgovara na opæe izazove srednjoeuropske iistoènoeuropske regije. Zato je osnovana takozvanaSofijska inicijativa.

U procesu primjene Sofijske inicijative, REC, Odborzaštite okoliša Albanije i Zaklada Otvoreno društvoAlbanije Soroševa zaklada, organizirali su 1997.“Konferenciju za poticanje biološke raznolikostisrednje i istoène Europe” u Tirani, gdje je utvrðenaInicijativa oglednih podruèja biološke raznolikosti.

Inicijativa je trebala olakšati primjenu Strategijepaneuropske biološke i krajobrazne raznolikosti(PEBLDS) i Okoliša za europske procese, kao takve,izgradnjom informacijske i suradnièke mre�e za veæpostojeæe “Projekte oglednih podruèja biološkeraznolikosti” i osnovati nove na podruèju cijelesrednje i istoène Europe (CEE).

Ciljevi Inicijative su razvoj ekološke mre�e, suradnjaizmeðu razlièitih zemalja u CEE regiji, kao i razlièitihsektora društva (tj. NGO-i i GO-i), zapoèinjanjeintenzivne komunikacije i kooperativne mre�eizmeðu postojeæih oglednih podruèja uz osnutaknovih. To bi potaknulo izgradnju europske ekološkemre�e i predstavljalo razlièite uspješne pristupe

Sofijska inicijativa o biološkoj raznolikosti - Izvješæe radionice "Lucernskih podruèja": “Sofija + 5”,29. - 30. studenoga 1999., Sisak, Hrvatska, Lonjsko polje

29 - 30 November 1999, Sisak, Croatia, Lonjsko poljeSofia Biodiversity InitiativeWorkshop - Report Lucern sites: “Sofia + 5”




5

zaštiti biološke raznolikosti, izgradnji kapaciteta ipraæenju napretka primijenjenih PEBLDS-a.

Za osnutak i upravljanje parkom prirode u CEEpodruèju treba se suoèiti s ozbiljnim problemimasadašnjice. Zato je skupljanje i dijeljenje informacija oaktualnim problemima upravljanja postojeæim CEEpodruèjem zaštite biološke raznolikosti, kako bi serazjasnili glavni èimbenici koji mogu raditi protivnjihova optimalnog funkcioniranja, zasnovano naiskustvima i poticaj je osnivanju novih.

Park prirode Lonjsko polje jedno je od podruèja kojeje IUCN odabrao 1995. Od tada je upravljaèki timParka organizirao radionicu, uz pomoæ REC i IUCN-ERO-a, kako bi prikazao svoj razvoj u upravljanjuzaštiæ enim podruèjem.

cooperation network between the already existingShowcase Sites, and the establishment of newShowcase Sites. These would promote the build-upof a European Ecological Network and present thesuccesses of various approaches to Biodiversityconservation, capacity building and monitoring theprogress of the implementation of the PEBLDS.

To establish and manage a nature park in the CEEregion one has to face serious problems nowadays.Therefore the collection and sharing of informationabout the actual management problems of theexisting CEE biodiversity conservation sites, toclarify the main factors which may act against theiroptimal operation and, based upon this experienceto initiate new ones are badly needed.

The Lonjsko Polje Nature Park was one of theidentified sites by IUCN in 1995. Since then themanagement team of the park organised a workshopwith the help of REC and IUCN-ERO to present theirdevelopment in protected area management.



Edina BiróIUCN /ERO

Bredasweg 3875037 LD TilburgThe Netherlands

[email protected]

RAZVOJNI UZORCI

SAMOODR�IVOGA RAZVOJA

SEOSKIH PODRUÈJA U CEEC-u

Sofijska inicijativa o biološkoj raznolikostiIzvješæe radionice "Lucernskih podruèja": “Sofija+5”29. 30. studenoga 1999.,Sisak, Hrvatska, Lonjsko polje

Godine 1995. sedam je prioritetnih podruèja biološkei krajobrazne raznolikosti - zaštiæeno podruèje laguneKaravasta (KLPA) u Albaniji, park prirode Strandja(SNP) u Bugarskoj, park prirode Lonjsko Polje(LPNP) u Hrvatskoj, Zelena pluæa (GL) Poljske,nacionalni park Retezat (RNP) i delta Dunava (DDR)u Rumunjskoj te Losinyi Ostrov (LOR) u Rusiji -odabrao IUCN kao uzorke za istra�ivanje moguænostizaštite biološke i krajobrazne raznolikosti sasamoodr�ivim razvojem lokalnih i regionalnihzajednica kao dijelom ciljeva i primjene EAP-a uCEEC-u.

Od 1995. “Sedam lucernskih podruèja” zapoèelo jeraditi na promicanju samoodr�ivoga razvoja, i topripremom i primjenom planova gospodarenja istrategija samoodr�ivoga razvoja seoskih podruèjabogatih biološkom raznolikošæu. Proces je zasnovanna ukljuèivanju više sektora gospodarstva i za njihodgovornih grana lokalne i dr�avne uprave.

Radionica, koju je organizirao Europski programIUC-a i Regionalni okolišni centar za srednju i istoènuEuropu, kao dio Sofijske inicijative biološkeraznolikosti, imala je za cilj vrednovati najboljaiskustva povezivanja razlièitih sektora u razvojunjihovih upravljaèkih i prostornih planova ili strategijai izvuèi pouke iz posljednjih pet godina. Predstavnici"Lucernskih podruèja", Uprave hrvatskih zaštiæenihpodruèja i Opæine Sisak raspravljali su o posebnimproblemima povezivanja planova zaštite seoskihpodruèja, slijedeæi upute Vodièa najboljih iskustavakoje je proizveo IUCN 1995. Tablica u privitku zbrajaiskustva iz proteklih prvih pet godina.

Suorganizatori Radionice bili su Uprava Parkaprirode Lonjsko polje i Dr�avni ured Regionalnogacentra za zaštitu okoliša (REC) Hrvatske.

1. Izrada web stranica koje se tièu "Lucernskihpodruèja"

Utvrðena su sljedeæa va�na pitanja od

zajednièkog interesa:

EMERGING MODELS OFSUSTAINABLE RURALDEVELOPMENT IN CEECS

Sofia Biodiversity InitiativeWorkshop Report Lucern sites: “Sofia + 5”29 - 30 November 1999,Sisak, Croatia Lonjsko polje

In 1995 seven top priority biological and landscape

diversity sites: Karavasta laguna protected area

(KLPA) in Albania, Strandja nature park (SNP) in

Bulgaria, Lonjsko Polje Nature Park (LPNP) in

Croatia, Green Lungs (GL) of Poland, Retezat

National park (RNP) and Danube Delta (DDR) in

Romania, and Losinyi Ostrov (LOR) in Russia, were

selected by IUCN as models for explore the

opportunities of the conservation of biological and

landscape diversity with sustainable development of

local and regional communities as a part of the

objectives and implementation of the EAP in CEECs.

Since 1995, the “Seven Lucern sites,” have

undertaken challenging steps toward the promotion

of sustainable development through the preparation

and implementation of management plans, and local

sustainable development strategies in rural areas

rich in biodiversity. The process has been based on

the involvement of multiple sectors of the economy,

and the branches of local or national government

that are responsible for them.

The workshop, organised by the European

Programme of IUCN and Regional Environmental

Center for Central and Eastern Europe, as a part of

the Sofia Biodiversity Initiative, was aimed to

evaluate the identify the best practices of the

integration of different sectors within developing their

management/spatial plans or strategies, to draw

lessons learned within last five years. The

representatives of the Lucern sites, the Croatian

Protected Areas Authorities, and the Municipality of

Sisak discussed the specific problems of integration

of conservation planning in rural areas, following the

guidelines of the Best Practice Guide produced by

IUCN in 1995. The attached table summarises the

experience from the first five years.

The co-orgainisors of the event were of the Lonjsko

pole NPAuthority and the Country Office of Regional

Environmental Center (REC) in Croatia.

The following important issues of common






7

2. Radionica tehnika komunikacije ili marketingzaštite prirode: vje�banje i uvje�bavatelji

3. Vodiè za osjetljivu arhitekturu u seoskimpodruèjima

4. Jaèanje lokalnih institucija kako bi se pribavilasredstva

5. Strategija obnove naselja u podruèjima parkova

6. Razmjena informacija / iskustava u privlaèenjuškolske djece i studenata

Radna mre�a (Network) izmeðu škola u zaštiæenimpodruèjima ("Lucernska podruèja")

interest have been identified:

1. Creation of a web site concerning Lucern sites

2. Workshop on communication techniques ormarketing nature conservation: train the trainers

3. Guidelines for sensitive architecture in ruralareas

4. Strengthening of the local institutions to attractfunds

5. Settlement renewable strategy for park areas

6. Information/experience exchange in attracting/foreign schoolchildren and students

7. Network of the schools in the protected areasbetween the Lucern sites

Mira Mileva (REC/IUCN ERO)



Mira MilevaThe Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe

2000 SzentendreAdy Endre st. 9-11

Hungary





Tablica 1. Iskustva Lucernskih podruèja u proteklih pet godina.



Table 1. Lucern sites experiences during the past five years.


9

KORACI PREMA SURADNIÈKOM

UPRAVLJANJU U NACIONALNOM

PARKU RETEZAN, RUMUNJSKA

I. UVOD

Rumunjska još posjeduje znaèajnu krajobraznu ibiološku raznolikost, kao i veoma vrijedne kulturne itradicionalne osobitosti u veæini svojih pokrajina.Najveæi dio delte Dunava (drugo najveæe moèvarnopodruèje u Europi) smješten je na njezinu podruèju, atu su i Karpati, s meðunarodno znaèajnimpovršinama nedirnutih prirodnih i poluprirodnih šumai visokoplaninskih staništa.

Promjene u vlasništvu zemlje i uporabi resursa(posebno šumarskih proizvoda, ispaše i turizma),koje su, i koje æe biti, povezane s tranzicijom, oddogovorne ekonomije do slobodnoga tr�išta, moguveoma negativno utjecati na ekosustave i njimapripadajuæe krajobraze.

U ovoj je zemlji 17 nacionalnih i parkova prirode,rezervata biosfere i više od 800 regionalno i lokalnozaštiæenih podruèja. Meðutim, Rumunjska nemasustava zaštiæenih poduèja koji bi djelovao nadr�avnoj razini. Institucionalna sposobnost zaštite,planiranja i upravljanja zaštiæenim podruèjima tek sepoèela razvijati, što ukljuèuje razvoj prvih uzorakaupravljanja sustavima parkova, i to u Nacionalnomparku Retezat, Nacionalnom parku Craiului i Park-šumi Vanatori Neamt.

Za ta tri parka novèanu je potporu dao GEF, prekoRumunjskog upravljaèkog projekta zaštite biološkeraznolikosti (BCMP). Rumunjska Vlada namjeravaproširiti upravljaèku praksu, temeljenu na uzorcimarazvijenim tim projektom, na ostala zaštiæenapodruèja u zemlji.

Uprave triju oglednih parkova zapoèele su djelovatiposve svjesne da primijenjeni upravljaèki pristupmora biti u javnosti prihvaæen ako se �eli da sustavbude djelotvoran.

STEPS TOWARDS COLLABORA-TIVE MANAGEMENT IN RETEZATNATIONAL PARK, ROMANIA

I. INTRODUCTION

Romania still possesses a remarkable diversity oflandscapes and biodiversity, together with high valuecultural and traditional features in most of its regions.The largest area of the Danube Delta (the secondlargest wetland in Europe) can be found on itsterritory, and the Carpathian Mountains support aninternationally significant area of pristine, natural andsemi-natural forests and high-mountain habitats.

Changes in land ownership and the use of resources(particularly forest products, grazing and tourism),which have been and continue to be associated withthe transition from a command economy to a freemarket, could have major negative impacts on theecosystems and associated landscapes.

There are 17 national and natural parks andbiosphere reserves in this country and more than800 regional and local protected areas. However,Romania does not possess a nationally functioningsystem of protected areas. The institutional capacityfor conservation and protected area planning andmanagement is now at the beginning of itsdevelopment, including the development of the firstmodels of park management systems at the RetezatNational Park, Piatra Craiului National Park and atVanatori Neamt Forest Park.

For the three parks mentioned above, financialsupport is given through a GEF grant, through theRomanian Biodiversity Conservation ManagementProject (BCMP). Based on the models developedthrough this project, the Romanian Governmentintends to extend management practices to the otherprotected areas in the country.

Park Administrations from the three model parksstarted their activities with a clear understanding thatparticipatory management approaches have to beadopted for an efficient management system.






11

II. KRATAK OPIS NACIONALNOGAPARKA I REZERVATA BIOSFERERETEZAT

Nacionalni park i rezervat biosfere Retezat (RNP)pokriva podruèje od 38 049 ha i smješten je veæimdijelom u istoimenom masivu. Ukljuèuje zaštiæenopodruèje I. kategorije, znanstveni rezervatGemenele, velièine 1600 ha.

Šume pokrivaju 52% toga podruèja. Visokoplaninsko(alpsko) podruèje (48%) prekriveno je borom Pinuspumila (28%) i planinskim livadama(14%); ostatak sesastoji od litica i vrhunaca te strmina prekrivenihsipinama i kamenjem.

U parku nadmorska visina varira izmeðu 765 m, upodruèju Gura Zlata, do 2509 m, na vrhu Peleaga.

Planina Retezat obiluje potocima i ima više od 80glacijalnih jezera. Najveæe jezero je Bucura, površine8,86 ha, a najdublje Zanoaga, dubine 29 m.

Znaèajne promjene su napravljene na jugozapadnojgranici parka, gdje je izgraðena velika brana na RâuMare, što je utjecalo na �ivot u rijeci i na ekološkuravnote�u u susjednim podruèjima.

Bogatstvo flore visokoplaninskog podruèja jedan jeod glavnih razloga zbog kojih je Retezat proglašennacionalnim parkom. Više od 1100 vrsta opisano jekao rezultat osnovnih istra�ivanja. Neke od vrsta suprilièno rijetke, npr. (garoful,karanfil, klinèac), (a gladuš),

(ušljivac),(dugocvjetni jaglac), (kozlinac),

(hudoljetnica) ,(pelin), (crni vranjak, crnosmilje), (runolist). Smatra seda je Retezat genetièki centar za vrste roda

(runjika) (257 taksona) i roda (livadnetrave) (31 takson). Izmeðu 62 endemièna taksona,najrasprostranjeniji su (gladuš),

(kupina), (vlasulja),(djetelina),

(runjika), (runjika),(gladuša),

(planinski mak).

Bogatstvu vrsta treba dodati mnoštvo opisanih biljnihzajednica: 61 vaskularna biljka i ostale mahovine ilišajevi. Vegetacija jezera i pripadajuæa moèvarnapodruèja sadr�e 631 vrstu, ukljuèujuæi alge.

Šume su dobro oèuvane, više od 30% ih je netaknutoi prirodno. Glavne vrste u parku su smreka (

) (81%), bukva ( ) (12%), jela

Dianthus glacialisDraba siliquosa

Pedicularis exaltata Primula halleriAstragalus australis

Erigeron uniflorus Artemisia erianthaNigritella nigra ssp. rubraLeontopodium alpinum

Hieracium Poa

Draba dorneri Rubusretezaticus Festuca pachyphyllaTrifolium retezaticum Hieracium borzae

Hieracium nigrilacus Drabasimonkaiana f. retyezatensis Papaveralpinum ssp. corona-sancti-stephani var.retyezaticum

Piceaabies Fagus sylvatica

II. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THERETEZAT N AT IONAL PARKBIOSPHERE RESERVE

The Retezat National Park and Biosphere Reserve(RNP) covers an area of 38.049 ha, mostly in theRetezat Massif. It includes a category I protectedarea, the Gemenele Scientific Reserve of 1.600 ha.

Forests cover 52% of the area. The alpine area(48%) is covered by dwarf-pine (28%) and alpinemeadows (14%), the remainder consisting of stoneedges and peaks, and slopes covered with screeand stones.

Significant changes were made on the South-Westboundary of the Park area, were a large dam wasbuilt on Râu Mare, which affected the river's life andthe ecological balance in surrounding areas.

The rich flora of the alpine area was one of the mainreasons for the Retezat to be declared a nationalpark. More than 1,100 species are listed as a resultof the baseline survey. Some of the species are quiterare e.g. (a pink),(a whitlow-grass), (a lousewort), (bird's eye primrose),

(a milk-wetch),(an alpine fleabane), (a

wormwood), (black vanilleorchid), (edelweiss). TheRetezat is considered to be a genetic centre for thespecies of (hawkweeds) (257 taxa) and

(meadow grasses) (31 taxa). Amongst the 62endemic taxa, the most widespread are

(a whitlow grass), (ablackberry), (a fescue),

(a clover), (ahawkweed), (a hawkweed),

(a whitlowgrass),

(a poppy).

In addition to this species-richness, many plantcommunities are described: 61 of vascular plantsand others of the mosses and of the lichens. Thevegetation of the lakes and associated wetlandscontain over 631 species, including algae.

Within the park the height varies from 765 m at GuraZlata to 2,509m at the Peleaga peak.

The Retezat mountain has abundant streams andmore than 80 glacial lakes. The largest lake isBucura with an area of 8.86 ha and the deepest oneis Zanoaga with a depth of 29 m.

Forests are well preserved, with more than 30% of

Dianthus glacialis Draba siliquosaPedicularis exaltata

Primula halleriAstragalus australis Erigeronuniflorus Artemisia eriantha

Nigritella nigra ssp. rubraLeontopodium alpinum

HieraciumPoa

Drabadorneri Rubus retezaticus

Festuca pachyphyllaTrifolium retezaticum Hieracium borzae

Hieracium nigrilacusDraba simonkaiana f. retyezatensis

Papaver alpinum ssp. corona-sancti-stephani var. retyezaticum



( ) (4%) i breza ( ) (2%), a uznanstvenom rezervatu limba ( ) èinioko 8% šumskoga drveæa. Bor krivulj ( )štiti strmine od odrona.

Fauna je bogata (više od 50 vrsta) i ukljuèujedivokozu ( ), obiènoga jelena(Cervus elaphus), srnu ( ), divljusvinju ( ), medvjeda ( ), risa( uobièajeni tragovi), divlju maèku (

), vuka ( ), lisicu ( ),kunu zlaticu ( ), kunu bjelicu (

), jazavca ( ), vidru ( ),zeca ( ), vjevericu ( ) isvisca ( introduciran 1972.).Insektivorne (kukcojedne) vrste, poput tamnoprsogje�a ( ) i krtice ( ),takoðer su prisutne.

U parku je stotinu šezdeset i osam ptièjih vrsta (odèega 80 gnjezdarica): planinski kos (

), mala muharica ( ), kreja( ), rujnica (

), troprsti djetliæ ( ),bjelohrpteni djetliæ ( ), crna�una ( ), lještarka (

), veliki tetrijeb ( ) i vrlo rijetkisuri orao ( ).

Pet vrsta vodozemaca i devet vrsta gmazova �ivi uRetezatu. Ribe su najzastupljenije potoènompastrvom ( ) i lipljanom (

).

Nacionalnoga parkaRetezat zaštita biološke raznolikosti, senzibilizacijajavnosti i edukacija. Znanstveni je rezervatGemenele podruèje posveæeno uglavnomistra�ivanjima pod vodstvom Rumunjske akademije.

Nakon nacionalizacije, provedene 1948., šumama(nekoliko godina i visokoplaninskim pašnjacima)upravljala je dr�avna agencija za šumarstvo, kojusada predstavlja Directia (Uprava) SilvicaHunedoara preko svojih šumarskih odjela: RetezatForest District (Šumarski kotar Retezat), Pui ForestDistrict (Šumarski kotar Pui) i Lupeni Forest District(Šumarski kotar Lupeni). Šumski nadzornici stalno sunazoèni i budni, u pokušajima da sprijeèe nezakonitusjeèu drveæa i šumske po�are, kao i krivolovce ipotajne ribare. Ispaša je bila dopuštena samo naodreðenim podruèjima, i to stadima lokalnoga

Abies alba Betula pendulaPinus cembra

Pinus mugo

Rupicapra rupicapraCapreolus capreolus

Sus scrofa Ursus arctosLynx lynx - Felis

silvestris Canis lupus Vulpes vulpesMartes martes Martes

foina Males males Lutra lutraLepus europeus Sciurus vulgaris

Marmota marmota -

Erinaceus europaeus Talpa europaea

Turdustorquatus Ficedula parvaNucifraga caryocatactes Carpodacus

erithrynus Picoides tridactylusDendrocopus leucotos

Dryocopus martius Bonasabonasia Tetrao urogallus

Aquila chrysaetos

Salmo trutta fario Thymalusthymalus

III. UPRAVLJAÈKA PITANJA IAKTIVNOSTI

Glavni je upravljaèki cilj

them pristine and natural. The major species in thepark are spruce ( ) (81%), beech (

) (12%), fir ( ) (4%) and birch( ) (2%), whilst in the scientific reserveArolla pine ( ) represents about 8% ofthe forest trees. Large dwarf pine ( )standes are protecting the sloaps.

Following their nationalisation in 1948, forests (andfor a few years the alpine pastures) were managedby the state agency for forestry now represented byDirectia Silvica Hunedoara through its forest units:Retezat Forest District, Pui Forest District andLupeni Forest District. Forest wardens werecontinually present and vigilant, trying to preventillegal tree cutting and forest fires, as well as illegalhunting and fishing. Grazing was allowed only in

Picea abies Fagussylvatica Abies albaBetula pendula

Pinus cembraPinus mugo

The fauna is rich (more than 50 species) andincludes: chamois ( ), red deer( ), roe deer ( ),wild-boar ( ), bear ( ), lynx( - usually tracks), wild-cat ( ),wolf ( ), fox ( ), pine marten( ), beech marten ( ),badger ( ), otter ( ). hare( ), squirrel ( ), andmarmot ( - introduced in 1972).Insectivores like Erinaceus europaeus and mole( ) are also present.

One hundred sixty eight bird species are regular inthe park, (of which 80 are breeding): ring ouzel( ), red-breasted flycatcher( ) , nutcracker (

), Carpodacus erithrynus, three-toedwoodpecker ( ), white-backedwoodpecker ( ), blackwoodpecker ( ), hazel hen( ), capercaillie ( ),and the very rare golden eagle ( ).

Five species of amphibians and 9 species of reptilesare present in Retezat. Fishes are mostlyrepresented by common trout ( )and grayling ( ).

for the RetezatNational Park are biodiversity conservation andpublic awareness raising and education. TheGemenele Scientific Reserve is an area dedicatedmainly for research, under the co-ordination of theRomanianAcademy.

Rupicapra rupicapraCervus elaphus Capreolus capreolus

Sus scrofa Ursus arctosLynx lynx Felis silvestris

Canis lupus Vulpes vulpesMartes martes Martes foina

Meles meles Lutra lutraLepus europaeus Sciurus vulgaris

Marmota marmota

Talpa europaea

Turdus torquatusFicedula parva Nuci f raga

caryocatarctesPicoides tridactylus

Dendrocopus leucotosDryocopus martius

Bonasa bonasia Tetrao urogallusAquila chrysaetos

Salmo trutta farioThymalus thymalus

III. MANAGEMENT ISSUES ANDACTIVITIES

The main management objectives






13

stanovništva, ali se u park nisu smjele uvoditi ovce.Meðutim, nije posveæena posebna pozornostintegriranom upravljanju zaštitom biološkeraznolikosti.

Šume su i danas pod upravom šumarskih kotara. Uznanstvenom rezervatu i u dijelu parka, otprilikepolovici, nije dopuštena sjeèa drveæa, pa èak ni tzv.“sanitarna sjeèa”.

Osam lokalnih odbora upravlja visokoplaninskimpodruèjem, gdje su 23 sela dobila g. 1922. dozvoluuporabe planinskih pašnjaka. Glavna opasnost zavrijednosti parka u posljednjih 10 godina potjeèe odpoveæane ispaše u visokoplaninskom podruèju.Svakoga ljeta stada ovaca se uspinju na tamošnjepašnjake, u podruèja gdje nije bila dopuštena ispašaovaca, i to u broju koje znatno premašuje sposobnostpodnošenja (kapacitet). Neka od tih stada dolaze izudaljenih zajednica, èak i iz drugih regija, a ne iz selakojima je izvorno ovdje bila dopuštena ispaša. Usvakom sluèaju, iznajmljivanje pašnjaèkih površinapastirima je dodatni izvor zarade i donosi koristlokalnoj zajednici.

Zajednice su smještene izvan granica parka, ali seslu�e prirodnim resursima podruèja parka.Tradicionalno ratarstvo još se primjenjuje i neke odtradicija su �ive, što pridonosi osnovnoj vrijednostiovog kraja. Ovdje se mogu naæi i mnogi kulturni ipovijesni spomenici i mali prirodni rezervati.

Svakoga ljeta prekrasan krajobraz u ove planineprivlaèi turiste. U posljednjih nekoliko godina, prijenego je RNPA osnovan, neke edukativne aktivnosti iaktivnosti nadgledanja (monitoringa), u okviruturistièke ponude, poduzimale su nevladine udruge(NGO-i). Organizirali su i akcije èišæenja kampova ituristièkih staza. Aktivnosti NGO-a nastavljaju se uzpomoæ i vodstvo Uprave Parka. Na�alost, NGO-i nisuproširili edukativne programe na škole u okoliciparka.

Iako je dobro saèuvan, zahvaljujuæi udaljenosti i brizipojedinih èuvara, novi je socio-ekonomski okolišdonio i nove prijetnje, pa i potrebu da se usklade sveaktivnosti u parku kako bi se zadovoljili ciljevioèuvanja. Uprava Parka je osnovana kako bipreuzela aktivnosti koordinacije u ostvarivanjuupravljaèkih ciljeva.

Uprava Nacionalnoga parka Retezat (RNPA)osnovana je u studenom 1999., kao podjedinicaNacionalne šumarske uprave Šumarskog kotaraHunedoare. Fond za globalni okoliš (GEF),rumunjska Vlada i Dr�avna šumarska upravapodupiru aktivnosti Parka Upravljaèkim projektomzaštite biološke raznolikosti.

prescribed areas for local people's livestock, but nosheep were allowed in the park. However, no specialattention was given to an integrated management ofbiodiversity conservation.

Today forests are still managed by the forest districts.In the scientific reserve and on about half of the parkno timber harvesting is allowed, not even the socalled “sanitary cuttings”.

Eight local councils are the administrators of thealpine area, where the right to use the alpinepastures was given in 1922 to 23 villages. A majorthreat to the park's value in the last 10 years arisesfrom intensified grazing activities in the alpine area.Every summer sheep flocks are going up to thealpine pastures, in areas where grazing was notallowed for sheep or in numbers well over thecarrying capacity. Some of these livestock comefrom distant communes, even from other regions,and not from the villages that originally have beengranted grazing rights in the area. However, rentinggrazing areas to shepherds coming from “outside”brings some income to the local communities.

Communities are located outside the Park area, butthey are using natural resources from the Park area.Traditional agriculture practices are still in use andsome of the traditions are alive, features that add asubstantial value to the area. Numerouscultural/historical monuments and small naturereserves can be also found in here.

Every summer the beautiful landscapes drawtourists to these mountains. In the last few years,before the RNPA was established, some isolatededucational and monitoring activities on tourismhave been undertaken by NGOs. They have alsoorganized activities to clean camping areas andtourist trails. NGO activities are continuing with thehelp and close supervision of the Park Authority.However, the NGOs did not extend educationalprograms to schools around the Park.

Although well preserved due to it remoteness andcare from some of the stakeholders, the new socio-economic environment brought in new threats andthe

The Park Administration was established toundertake the coordination activity in order toachieve the management objectives.

The Retezat National Park Administration (RNPA)was established in November 1999, as a subunit inthe National Forest Administration - HunedoaraForest District. The Global Environmental Facility(GEF), the Romanian Government and the NationalForestAdministration support Park activities throughthe Biodiversity Conservation Management Project.

need to coordinate activities in the Park areato meet in order to meet conservation objectives.



IV. OSNOVA SURADNIÈKEUPRAVE U RNP

Kratak opis u publikaciji Uprave trebao binagovijestiti slo�enost odnosa vlasnik zemlje / pravaUprave i nekih drugih interesa koji se udru�uju kad segovori o nacionalnom parku Retezat.

Kao rezultat analize razlièitih interesa povezanih sRNPA i aktivnostima Parka, Uprava Parka je utvrdilalistu interesnih skupina, kao što je prikazano u Prilogu1.

Jedno je od najva�nijih pitanja u toj analizi “na kogaæe utjecati aktivnosti Parka”. Oèiti je odgovor: navlasnike zemlje i Upravu, tj. lokalnu zajednicu išumarsko ravnateljstvo / kotare. Bilo kako bilo, naovom stupnju oni su ukljuèeni samo u strukture kojeimaju savjetodavnu ulogu u aktivnostima Parka, noznaju da æe u buduænosti imati koristi od postojanja iaktivnosti Parka.

Interesne skupine su okupljeni u dva razlièita vijeæa:

1. ima 25 èlanova,predstavnika interesnih skupina na lokalnoj iregionalnoj razini: lokalna zajednica, šumarskoravnateljstvo i šumarski kotari, ekipe planinskihspasilaca, školski inspektorat, prefekture,regionalno vijeæe, agenciju za zaštitu okoliša,vlasnike vikendica (brvnara, koliba), NGO-e idruge. Kao što je naglašeno i u imenu, Vijeæe imasavjetodavnu ulogu. Na polugodišnj imsastancima RNPA izvještava èlanove Vijeæa oostvarenim i planiranim aktivnostima i tra�i od njihkomentare i mišljenja, posebice o podruèjimaaktivnosti koji æe utjecati na razlièite interesneskupine. Sastanci su isto tako va�ni jer su to kratkevje�be o va�nosti zaštite biološke raznolikosti,iskorištavanju samoodr�ivih izvora i ostaliminteresnim podruèjima.

2. ima 12 èlanova, udru�ujepredstavnike Ministarstva voda i zaštite okoliša,Ministarstva poljoprivrede, hrane i šumarstva,Rumunjsku akademiju, MAB UNESCO odbor,Dr�avnu šumarsku upravu i sveuèilišta. Odbornadgleda aktivnosti Parka i odr�ava vezu izmeðuMinistarstva voda i zaštite okoliša i Rumunjskeakademije, kljuènih u odluèivanju u podruèjuzaštite biološke raznolikosti i upravljanjuzaštiæenim podruèjima.

Oba vijeæa su zakonski ustanovljena uredbomMinistarstva.

Savjetodavno vijeæe

Znanstveno vijeæe

IV. BACKGROUND FOR COLLA-BORATIVE MANAGEMENT IN RNP

The short description on the management issuesshould give a hint on the complexity of landownership/administration rights and of some of thedifferent interests that are coming together whenspeaking about the Retezat National Park.

As a result of the analysis on the different stakesrelated to the RNP and Park activities, the ParkAdministration ,as presented inAnnex 1.

One of the most important questions in this analysiswas “Who will be affected by Park activities?”. Theobvious answer is: land owners and administrations,i .e . loca l commun i t ies and the fo res tdirectorate/districts. However, at this stage they wereincluded only in a structure that has a consultativerole for Park activities, with serious thought given tothe idea that in the future they will have to receive realbenefits due to Park presence and activities.

Stakeholders were brought together in two differentcouncils:

1. The , with 25 members,representatives of local and county levelstakeholders include: local communities, ForestDirectorate and forest districts, mountain rescueteams, School Inspectorat, Prefecture, CountyCouncil, Environmental Protection Agency, cabinowners, NGO and others. As indicated in thename, this council has a consultative role. At thehalf-year meetings the RNPA informs councilmembers on accomplished and planned activitiesand asks for comments/opinions, especially onareas of activities that are going to affect thedifferent stakeholders. These meetings are alsoimportant as short “training sessions” on theimportance of biodiversity conservation,sustainable resource use and other areas ofinterest.

2. The , with 12 member, reunitesrepresentatives of the Ministry of Waters andEnvironmental Protection, Ministry of Agriculture,Food and Forestry, Romanian Academy, MABUNESCO Committee, Nat ional ForestAdministration and Universities. This committee issupervising the Park activities and represents thelink to the Ministry of Waters and EnvironmentalProtection and the Romanian Academy, the maindecision makers in the area of biodiversityconservation and protected area management.

Both Councils are legally established, throughMinisterial Orders.

has identified a list of stakeholders

Consultative Council

Scientific Council






15

V. MOGUÆNOSTI RAZVOJASURADNIÈKOG UPRAVLJANJA ZARNP

Odreðivanje interesnih skupina nije dovoljno ako seozbiljno �eli uspostaviti suradnièki sustav uprave.Prilog 2. istièe

. Zeleni kvadratioznaèavaju trenutaèni stupanj interesa (barem kakoje slu�beno iskazano).

Iako prilièno obeæavajuæi s nekima od interesnihskupina, stupanj zanimanja za biološku raznolikost izaštitu krajobraza, kao i za planiranje i primjenuupravljanja, vrlo je nizak, gotovo bi se moglo reæi da ine postoji.

je stvaran interes,posebno vlasnika zemlje i uprave (administracije), alinije nu�no povezano s potrebama samoodr�iveuporabe (osim, mo�da, u Dr�avnoj šumarskoj upravi,šumarskim kotarima, s jasnim i razumljivimplanovima upravljanja, uklopljenim pripremama zasamoodr�ivo šumarsko upravljanje).

stoje na popisu interesa samo dvijuinteresnih skupina, planinskih spasilaèkih ekipa ivlasnika vikendica (koliba, brvnara). No, s pravilnomstrategijom i planom akcije, oni mogu ponuditialternativne izvore prihoda. Svakako, treba uzeti uobzir i moguæi negativan utjecaj kad se raspravlja oovim podruèjima aktivnosti za Nacionalni park, alidjelotvoran plan, koji æe ukljuèiti oèekivanja i interes,mo�e biti napravljen samo ako je svima zanimljiv,odnosno ako sve interesne skupine prihvate svojeuloge i postanu njegovi aktivni provoditelji.

su aktivnosti odstvarnog interesa za sveuèilišta i škole, a te suustanove prednosti edukativnih programa poèeleotkrivati tek pošto su razvijene prve aktivnostizajedno s RNPA. Postoji potreba da u interesnimskupinama naraste zanimanje u ovoj sferi, pa trebarazviti djelotvornu mre�u koja æe poveæati svijest irazviti edukacijske programe. U ovoj sferi aktivnostine govorimo više samo o biološkoj raznolikosti izaštiti krajobraza nego i o poveæanju svijesti iedukaciji, o tradicionalnim i kulturnim vrijednostimalokalnih zajednica.

je bitno podruèje koje trebasagledati u bliskom odnosu s aktivnostima Parka.Iako lokalne zajednice nisu smještene na podruèjuparka, èinjenica je da se slu�e prirodnim resursima iznjega i njegove okolice i da æe veæina njih imati koristiod postojanja Parka i njegovih aktivnosti, što razvoj

stupanj interesa interesnih skupinau glavnim podruèjima aktivnosti

Upravljanje prirodnim resursima

Upravljanje posjetiteljima i odr�avanje turistièkeinfrastrukture

Edukacija i senzibilizacija javnosti

Razvoj lokalne zajednice

V. POSSIBILITIES TO DEVELOPCOLLABORATIVE MANAGEMENTFOR THE RNP

Identifying the stakeholders is not enough if seriousthoughts are given to establish a collaborativemanagement system. Annex 2 outlines the

. Green squares indicate the present levelof interest (at least as officially declared).

Although quite promising with some of thestakeholders, the level of interest for

and also for managementplanning and implementation is very low if not almostinexistent.

is of real interestespecially for land owners and administrators, but notnecessarily associated to the need of sustainableuse, (except maybe the state forest administrators,the forest districts, with clear and comprehensivemanagement plans incorporating provisions forsustainable forest management).

are on the interest list of only two of thestakeholder, mountain rescue teams and cabinowners. However, with the right strategy and actionplan these can offer alternative income possibilities.Of course, also possible negative impacts have to beconsidered when talking about this area of activity fora national park, but an efficient plan to address hopesand concerns can be developed only if allstakeholders accept their role and become active toimplement commonly agreed plans.

are of realinterest for universities and schools, but they havestarted to discover the benefits of educationalprograms only after the first activities were developedtogether with the RNPA. There is a need for increasedinterest in this area from the different stakeholders ifan efficient network for raising awareness and foreducational programs is to be established. In thisarea of activity we are not talking anymore only aboutbiodiversity and landscape conservation, but alsoabout awareness raising and education on traditionaland cultural values of the local communities.

is an important area to beconsidered in close relationship to Park activities.Although communities are not located in the Parkarea, the fact that they are using natural resourcesfrom and around the park and that most of them willbe affected and/or benefit from Park presence andactivities, make this area of activity a very importantone. Further more, the area is designated as a

level ofinterest that stakeholders have in the main areasof activity

biodiversity andlandscape conservation

Natural resource management

Visitor management and maintenance of tourisminfrastructure

Education and public awareness activities

Community development



lokalne zajednice èini veoma bitnim. Nadalje, to jepodruèje odreðeno kao rezervat biosfere prekoprograma MAB UNESCO. Promicanje aktivnosti kojeæe voditi k jasnijem odreðivanju razvojnih aktivnostiizvan granica parka trebalo bi pomoæi podupiranjuprograma koji potièu i potpoma�u uporabusamoodr�ivih prirodnih resursa, èak i izvan granicaparka, i razvoj samoodr�ivosti lokalnih zajednica.

zaštite trenutaènopotjeèe od meðunarodnoga donora, sa znaèajnimudjelom dr�ave i Dr�avne šumarske uprave. Zastvarno suradnièko upravljanje moraju se poveæatifinancijske obveze na dr�avnoj razini, a i lokalne biinteresne skupine morale pru�iti neku financijskupotporu. Ipak, interesne skupine neæe moæi pomoæidok bitne promjene u gospodarskom okolišu neomoguæe poveæanje proraèuna lokalne zajednice iostalih interesnih skupina. Neke aktivnosti Parkatrebale bi pomoæi lokalnom razvoju.

U Prilogu 2. crveni kvadrati oznaèuju vrednovanjekako bi trebalo porasti zanimanje razlièitih interesnihskupina vezano uz razlièita podruèja aktivnosti uParku, pod uvjetom da se suradnièko upravljanjeprimijeni u buduænosti.

Savjetodavno vijeæe je prvi korak u suradnièkomupravljanju i ima veæinom savjetodavnu ulogu. Onikoji donose odluke udru�eni su u Znanstvenomvijeæu, a tamo veæina interesnih skupina nije prisutna.Ipak, opaske i prijedloge interesnih skupina RNPA iZnanstveno vijeæe uzimaju u obzir i ukljuèuju uodluke, kao što æe biti predoèeno u «Primjerimaaktivnosti organiziranih od RNPA sa sudjelovanjeminteresnih skupina».

Bitan korak u dugom procesu razvoja sustavasuradnièkog upravljanja realna je analiza «gdjesmo», tj. , kao što je prikazano uPrilogu 3.

Kao što je naglašeno u prilogu, jedna od slabosti, kojase mo�e uputiti na RPMA, povezana je snedostatkom razumijevanja i posveæenosti zaštitibiološke raznolikosti i ciljevima Parka veæineinteresnih skupina.

Motiviran i veoma aktivan tim, vješt u tehnikamakomuniciranja, mo�e znatno pomoæi smanjenju teslabosti. Nedostatak financijskih i ljudskih resursa uRPNA mo�e usporiti ovaj proces koji mi smatramovrlo bitnim.

Financijska potpora za aktivnosti

VI. SURADNIÈKO UPRAVLJANJEZA RNP-SWOT ANALIZA

SWOT analiza

Biosphere Reserve under the MAB UNESCOprogram. Promoting activities that will lead to a moreclearly defined development area outside the Parkboundaries should help promoting programs thatinitiate and support sustainable natural resource useeven outside the Park and a sustainabledevelopment for local communities.

is given,for the time being, mostly from an international donor,with significant input from the state and the NationalForest Administration. For a real collaborativemanagement, financial commitment should increaseat the state level and some financial support shouldbe given from other stakeholders as well. However,stakeholders are not going to be able to contributebefore significant changes in the economicalenvironment will help the budget of local communitiesand other stakeholders to increase. Some of the Parkactivities are supposed to contribute to localdevelopment.

InAnnex 2 the red squares show an evaluation of howinterest of different stakeholders should increase forthe different areas of Park activities if an efficientcollaborative management is to be established in thefuture.

The Consultative Council is a first step in participatorymanagement, having mostly a consultative role.Decision makers are grouped in the ScientificCouncil, where most of the stakeholders are notrepresented. However, the comments/suggestionscoming form all stakeholders are seriouslyconsidered by the RNPA and the Scientific Counciland incorporated in decisions, as it will be illustratedin the “Examples of activities organized by the RNPAwith Stakeholder Participation.

An important step in the long process of developing acollaborative management system is to have arealistic analysis of “where we are”, i.e a

, as shown inAnnex 3.

As highlighted in the Annex, one of the weaknesses,that can be addressed by the RPMA, is related to thelack of understanding and commitment forbiodiversity conservation and Park objectives at mostof the stakeholders.

A motivated and very active team, with skills incommunication techniques, can help very much

Financial support for conservation activities

VI. COLLABORATIVEMANAGEMENT FOR THE RNP ASWOT ANALYSIS

SWOTanalysis






17

Iako zajednice djeluju s manjkavim ljudskim ifinancijskim izvorima, RNPA pokušava potaknutiaktivnosti kako bi se pojaèalo zanimanje i potaknulo(barem do nekog stupnja) razvoj aktivnosti zajednica.RNPA je svjestan da æe bez naprednih zajednicateško ostvariti ciljeve Parka. Program malih potpora,razvijen uz sudjelovanje predstavnika lokalnezajednice i financijskom potporom BCMP-a, dobar jeprimjer za razvoj aktivnosti zajednice, ohrabrendjelovanjem ekipe Parka.

" " prilagoðene uspostavisuradnièkoga upravljaèkog sustava mogu ukljuèitisljedeæe korake:

- suradnièko upravljanje (CM) glavne interesneskupine su ukljuèene u strukture koje nadziruodluèivanja

- ukljuèenost (Inv) interesne skupine su aktivnoukljuèene i donose odluke zajedno s UpravomParka. Imaju osjeæaj vlasništva u aktivnostimaprojekta

- sudjelovanje (Part) interesne skupine sudjeluju uaktivnostima, ali nemaju osjeæaj vlasništva

- savjetovanje (Cons) tra�e se mišljenja interesnihskupina i ona se bilje�e. Uprava Parka mo�epromijeniti pristup kao rezultat savjetovanja, aliinteresne skupine nemaju ulogu u donošenjuodluka.

- informacije (Inf) RNPA opskrbljuje interesneskupine informacijama, ali one ne mogu utjecati narad Uprave Parka.

- mišljenje (Pers) Uprava Parka izvješæuje interesneskupine što æe se dogoditi

RNPAnadzor (Contr) Uprava Parka ima pun nadzor inositelj je svih poslova bez ikakvih dodira sinteresnim skupinama

VII. PRIMJERI AKTIVNOSTIORGANIZIRANIH OD RNPA SINTERESNIM SKUPINAMA

Participacijske ljestve

reducing this weakness. Lack of financial and humanresources at the RNPA level can hinder this process,considered as very important by our team.

Although human and financial resources are notsignificant for community development programs, theRNPA tries to launch activities with the aim to raiseinterest for and to support (at least to some extent),community development activities. The RNPA is verymuch aware that without prosperous communities itwill be difficult to achieve Park objectives. The SmallGrant Program developed in a participatory way withlocal community representatives and with financialsupport from the BCMP is a good example forcommunity development activities fostered by thePark team.

A adapted for establishing acollaborative management system might comprise ofthe following steps:

- Collaborative Management (CM) the mainStakeholders are included in a structure that hascontrol of decisions

- Involvement (Inv) Stakeholders become activelyinvolved and arrive to decision jointly with the parkadministration. They have a sense of ownership ofproject activities.

- Participation (Part) Stakeholders participate in theactivity, but they do not have a sense of ownership

- Consultation (Cons) Stakeholders are consultedand their views are recorded. The parkadministration might change approach as a resultof the consultation, but the stakeholders do nothave a role in decision-making.

- Information (Inf) the RNPA provides information tothe stakeholders, but they can't influence the workof the park administration.

- Persuasion (Pers) the park administration tells tothe stakeholders what is going to happen

RNPA control (Contr) the park administration is in fullcontrol and carries out the work without any contactwith the stakeholders.

VII. EXAMPLES OF ACTIVITIESORGANIZED BY THE RNPA WITHSTAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

Participation Ladder





Primjer glavnih aktivnosti i stupanj ukljuèenosti razlièitih interesnih skupina pokazani su u sljedeæoj tablici:




19



Examples of main activities and the level of participation of different stakeholders are presentedin the following table:



VII. ZAKLJUÈCI

RNPA je prepoznao vrijednosti djelotvorne suradnjeupravljanja za dobrobit i buduænost parka te zasamoodr�ivi razvoj cijele regije, ukljuèujuæi i lokalnuzajednicu.

Meðutim, da bi se ostvario cilj uspostavesuradnièkog upravljaèkoga sustava u RNP, znamoda treba:

1. s dobrim sposobnostimalobiranja, pregovaranja, senzibiliziranja javnosti ikomuniciranja

2.razlièitih

ciljanih skupina, kako bi poveæali zanimanje imotivirali interesne skupine za djelatno ukljuèenjeu aktivnosti zaštite

3. uodgovarajuæim podruèj ima za uporabusamoodr�ivih izvora i suradnièkog upravljanja

4.kako bi ostvarili i ciljeve

Parka i ciljeve samoodr�ivog razvoja.

Iako zahtijeva vrijeme, dionièki upravljaèki sustav,ako je djelotvoran, zapravo smanjuje vrijemeprimjene i mo�e znatno povisiti uspješnost razlièitihaktivnosti, a ujedno bi trebao sprijeèiti veæe sukobetijekom provedbe.

Zašto je «prvi korak» u Suradnièko upravljanje Cmuza RNP? Zato što još nemamo upravljaèki ugovor sjasno izra�enim pravima i odgovornostima zainteresne skupine i RNPA. Upravljaèki plan bit æezavršen do sredine srpnja i najvjerojatnije potvrðentek u kolovozu/rujnu 2002. Propisi iz upravljaèkogplana o odgovornostima i ukljuèenim stranama èinitæe temelj buduæih ugovora s interesnim stranama.

Isto smo tako svjesni da pasivni èlanoviSavjetodavnog vijeæa neæe pomoæi u razvojudogovoranja s jasnim odgovornostima sudionika.Sljedeæi korak prema suradnièkom upravljanju uRNP-u morat æe dotaknuti pitanja povezana sastupnjem zanimanja razlièitih interesnih skupina zaaktivnosti Parka i morat æe ih ohrabriti da preuzmuaktivnu ulogu u upravljanju Parkom.

U svakom sluèaju, od samih poèetaka svogpostojanja RNPA pokušava ostvariti dionièki

motivirana ekipa

strategijski plan s djelotvornim aktivnostima

za lobiranje i senzibilizaciju javnosti

program vje�banja za interesne skupine

programe i projekte razvijene u suradnji s

interesnim skupinama

VII. CONCLUSIONS

The RNPA has recognized the importance of an

efficient collaborative management for the future of

the Park and for a sustainable development of the

area as a whole, including local communities.

However, we know that to achieve the goal of

establishing a collaborative management system for

the RNP, we need:

1. a with very good skills for

lobbying activities, negotiations, awareness

raising activities, communication;

2. a

raising at different

target groups, to raise interest and motivate

stakeholders for active involvement in

conservation activities;

3. in areas

relevant for sustainable resource use and

collaborative management;

4.

to achieve both Park objectives and

sustainable development objectives.

Apparently t ime consuming, part icipatory

management systems, if efficient, actually reduce

implementation time periods and could significantly

increase efficiency for the different activities, as it

shou ld p reven t ma jo r con f l i c ts du r i ng

implementation.

Why the “first steps” in CM for the RNP? Because we

do not have yet a specific management agreement

with clear rights and responsibilities of the

stakeholders and the RNPA. The Management Plan

is going to be finalized by mid July and most probably

will be approved only by August/September 2002.

Provisions from the Management Plan on

responsibilities and involved parties will form the

basis of future agreements with stakeholders.

We are also aware that passive members in the

Consultative Council will not help to develop

agreements with clear responsibilities. Next step

towards a collaborative management in the RNP will

have to address issues related to the level of interest

in Park related activities from the different

stakeholders and will have to encourage

stakeholders to have an active role in the Park

management.

motivated team

strategic plan with efficient activities forlobbying and awareness

training programs for stakeholders

programs and projects jointly developed withstakeholders




21



upravljaèki sustav za rumunjski prvi nacionalni park i,nadajmo se, buduæi uzor sustava upravljanja zaostala zaštiæena podruèja u našoj zemlji.

However, from the very beginning of its existence,

the RNPA tried to establish a participatory

management system for Romania's first national

park, hopefully a future model of management

system for other protected areas in our country.

Erica StanciuNational Forest AdministrationHunedoara Forest Directorate

Retezat National Park AdministrationRomania, 2700 Deva, b-dul 22 Decembrie, bl. 4 parter,

Tel/fax (4) 054 218829; e-mail [email protected]



Anex 1. Stakeholders, part of Collaborative Management in National Park, Romania.

Prilog 1. Ineresne skupine, dio suradnièkog upravljanja u Nacionalnom parku Retezat, Rumunjska.




23



Anex 3. SWOT analysis of the Collaborative management in Retezat National Park, Romania.

Prilog 3. SWOT analiza suradnièkog upravljanja u Nacionalnom parku Retezat, Rumunjska.

PLAN UPRAVLJANJA PARKOM

PRIRODE STRANDJA

Park prirode Strandja (PPS) osnovan je 1995. kako bise zaštitilo jedinstveno prirodno i kulturno naslijeðe uregiji i potaknulo njezin samoodr�ivi razvoj.Meðunarodno znaèenje podruèja prepoznato je1991. kada je IUCN regiju predstavio Europskomvijeæu i Ministarstvu okoliša (MoEW) Bugarske kaoprioritet za zaštitu biološke raznolikosti u okvirusamoodr�ivoga društvenog i gospodarskog razvoja.Vrijednost podruèja potvrðena je na Drugojkonferenciji ministarstava okoliša u Lucernu kad jeprojekt Strandja ukljuèen u Okolišni akcijski program(EAP) za srednju i istoènu Europu. Razvoj Parka jeukljuèen u nadgledanje unutar projekta «Najboljaiskustva u zaštiti biološke raznolikosti i samoodr�ivograzvoja poljodjelstva». Strandja je isto tako jedan odosam prirodnih lokaliteta ukljuèenih u Europskiprogram za suradnièko upravljanje «Parkovi za�ivot».

S površinom od 1160 km2 PP Strandja je najveæezaštiæeno podruèje u Bugarskoj. Nalazi se najugoistoku zemlje, na granici s Republikom Turskom.Park pokriva veæi dio planine Strandja, smješteneizmeðu porjeèja rijeka Veleka i Rezovska. Park posvepripada (okrugu) �upaniji Bourgas, pokrivajuæipotpuno opæinu Malko Turnovo i veæi dio opæineTsarevo. Šumama parka upravlja pet dr�avnihšumarskih slu�ba. Park ukljuèuje pet strogihrezervata, 11 zaštiæenih mjesta, 17 spomenikaprirode i jedno povijesno mjesto od nacionalnogznaèenja.

Poseban je polo�aj PP Strandja, na razmeðu Europei Azije, razlog njezinih jedinstvenih prirodnih ikulturnih osobina. Oko 80% ozemlja parkaprekriveno je šumom koja je saèuvala velik brojreliktnih vrsta i podvrsta skupine Euxinia iSubeuxinia, tipiènih za zapadnu kavkašku regiju,Colhis i obalu Crnoga mora u Maloj Aziji. Od 1666vaskularnih biljnih vrsta u parku, 63 su relikti, asedam ih se pojavljuje samo u tom dijelu Europe.Raznolikost �ivotinjskih vrsta odlikuje se velikimbrojem beskralje�njaka od kojih je 400 vrsta bitno uzaštiti; 41 vrsta riba, 23 vrste gmazova, 129 vrsta

1. POSEBNI PODACI

STRANDJA NATURE PARKMANAGEMENT PLAN

Strandja Nature Park (NP) was established in 1995to protect the unique natural and cultural heritage ofthe region and foster its sustainable development.The international importance of the site was firstrecognised in 1991, when the region was presentedby the IUCN to the European Council and to theMinistry of Environment (MoEW) of Bulgaria aspriority for biodiversity conservation in theframework of a sustainable social and economicdevelopment. The value of the territory wasacknowledged at the Second Conference of theMinisters of Environment in Lucerne when StrandjaProject was included in the Environment ActionProgram (EAP) for Central and Eastern Europe. Thedevelopment of the Park is under observation withinthe project “Best Practices in the BiodiversityConservation and Sustainable AgriculturalDevelopment”. Strandja is also one of the eightnature sites, included in the European programmefor management cooperation “Parks for Life”.

With its 1160 square kilometres, Strandja NP is thelargest protected area in Bulgaria. Located in theSouth-eastern part of the country, at the border withthe Republic of Turkey the Park covers a significantpart of the Strandja mountain locked between thewatersheds of the rivers Veleka and Rezovska. Thepark belongs entirely to the Bourgas district coveringthe whole territory of Malko Turnovo Municipality andthe greater part of Tsarevo Municipality. The forestswithin the park boundaries are managed by five stateforestry services. The Park includes five strictreserves, 11 protected sites, 17 nature monumentsand one historic place of national importance.

The specific location of Strandja NP at the approachof Europe to Asia has become the reason for itsunique natural and cultural features. Some 80% ofthe Park territory is covered by forests whichpreserve a great number of relict Euxinian and sub-Euxinian species typical for the Western Caucasusregion, Colhis and the Black Sea coastline of AsiaMinor. From 1666 vascular plant species within thePark boundaries 63 species are relict and 7occurring only in this part of Europe. The diversity ofanimal species is presented by a great number ofinvertebrates of which 400 species are of a

1. SPECIFIC DATA






25

ptica gnjezdarica i 63 vrste sisavaca koji serazmno�avaju na podruèju parka. Posljednji èine68% svih terestrièkih sisavaca zemlje i 43% izvorniheuropskih vrsta. Od njih su 23 globalno ugro�ene.Opisano je 120 staništa, a šumska staništa,ponajviše potrebita zaštite, èine 80% ukupnih šumaunutar granica parka.

Regija je iznimno bogata kulturnim i povijesnimartefaktima iz razlièitih razdoblja. Proglašena jeposebnim etno-kulturnim podruèjem jedinstvenooèuvane narodne tradicije, obièaja, stila �ivljenja imjesnog narjeèja. Posebnost podruèja oèituje se,dakle, u prepletanju visoke prirodne i kulturnevrijednosti mjesta.

Za razliku od veæine zaštiæenih podruèja u zemlji, PPStrandja ima u svojim granicama 21 naselje, sukupno 8000 stanovnika. Njihova su glavnazanimanja šumarstvo, turizam, ratarstvo i ribarstvo.Osim ogranièenih iskapanja minerala, rudarstvo,koje se prije dr�alo bitnim u regiji, gotovo je zamrlo.Prostor je vrijedan izvor za razvoj okolišu prijateljskogratarstva, šumarstva i svih oblika turizma.Jedinstvena biološka raznolikost pru�a izvanredneprilike za edukativne aktivnosti. Postoji i visokipotencijal za suradnju s privatnim sektorom iopæinama, kao i za prekograniènu suradnju sTurskom.

Bugarski zavod za biološku raznolikost, kojiprimjenjuje bugarsko-švicarski program zaštitebiološke raznolikosti (BSBCP), razraðuje Programupravljanja Parkom prirode Strandja od 1999. kad seo dogovorenim zadaæama (Terms of Reference-ToR), Plana raspravljalo s glavnim interesnimskupinama na ozemlju, a pravi je posao na Planupoèeo potkraj godine, pošto je MoEW potvrdio ToR.

Proces planiranja upravljanjem NP Strandjapodudara se s razvojem zakonodavnih osnovazaštite prirode u dr�avi. Zato je ToR za Planupravljanja NP Strandja bio prekratak, odveæ opæeniti poprilièno razlièit od ToR-ova planova upravljanjakoji su slijedili.

Veæina se posebnih zakona doticala aktivnosti poputšumarstva, lovstva i ribarstva, a uporaba biljaka

2. POSTUPAK PLANIRANJA IPRISTUP PLANIRANJU

conservation importance, 41 fish species, 23 reptilespecies, 129 nesting bird species and 63 mammalspecies breeding within the park. The latter present68% of all terrestrial mammals of the country and43% of the native European species. Of them 23species are globally endangered. The habitatsdescribed come to 120 and the forest habitats ofpriority conservation concern occupy some 80% ofthe forests in the Park boundaries.

The region is extremely rich in cultural and historicalartefacts from different ages. It is considered aspecific ethno-cultural district of preserved uniquefor the country tradition, habits, lifestyle and localdialect. Specific for the area is the overlapping ofsites of high natural and cultural value.

Unlike most of the protected areas in the countryStrandja NP envelops in its boundaries 21settlements inhabited by 8000 people. Their mainoccupation is forestry, tourism, agriculture andfishing. Except for the limited mineral extractionmining which was considered a vocation of theterritory in the past has practically ceased. Theterritory has valuable resources for the developmentof environmentally friendly agriculture, forestry andall forms of tourism. The unique biodiversity providesexceptional opportunities for interpretativeeducation activities. There is high potential forcooperation and partnership with the private sectorand the municipalities, as well as trans-border co-operation with Turkey.

The Bulgarian Biodiversity Foundation implementingthe Bulgarian-Swiss Biodiversity ConservationProgramme (BSBCP) was engaged with theelaboration of the Strandja Nature ParkManagement Plan (MP) in 1999 when the Terms ofReference (ToR) of the plan were discussed with thekey stakeholders on the territory while the effectivework on the plan began at the end of the year afterthe approval of the ToR by the MoEW .

Strandja NP management planning processcoincided with the development of the Natureprotection legislative base in the country. This wasthe reason why the ToR for Strandja NP MP was tooshort, too generalized and quite different from theToRs of the management plans that followed. Most ofthe specific laws concerning activities such asforestry, hunting and fishing, use of medicinal plants,agriculture, tourism and construction were under

2. PLANNING PROCESS ANDPLANNING APPROACH



primjenjivih u medicini, ratarstvo, turizam igraditeljstvo bili su u pripremi ili u postupku potpunihpromjena. Praksa planiranja upravljanjem uBugarskoj se tek pojavila i nedostatak suglasnosti ometodi planiranja postao je izazov. Razrada plana zazaštiæena podruèja ove velièine sama je po sebipothvat, a poteškoæe na koje se naišlo samo supridonijele da stanje bude zamršenije.

Èetiri godine poslije, nakon dugog teškog razdobljapionirskih napora, Plan upravljanja NP Strandjanapokon je dosegnuo prihvatljiv stupanj preko dvava�na koraka:

Priprema grubog nacrta NP Strandja MP

Rasprava o grubom nacrtu i priprema prvog nacrtaza javnu raspravu.

Prihvaæeni pristup planiranju poznat je kao injime se �eljelo osigurati ravnote�u izmeðu razlièitihinteresa i osigurati donošenje Plana i njegovuprimjenu. Proces uvoðenja i formulacije Planazapoèeo je odreðivanjem interesnih skupina i njihoveuloge u razraðivanju i primjeni Plana. Va�an korak uprocesu planiranja bio je utvrditi poèetne grupe, kakobi se iskazali glavni problemi, i pomoæi osnovnomtimu da naðe prikladna rješenja. To je provedeno nanizu seminara posveæenih trima glavnim temama:zaštiti biološke raznolikosti i šumarstva, turizmu ikulturnom naslijeðu, razvoju i poljodjelstvu. Na svimseminarima sudjelovali su predstavnici glavnihustanova i lokalnih interesnih skupina - NGO-i iprivatni sektor, dok su pitanja razmatrana naradionicama dala va�nu povratnu informaciju.

Glavni je uèinak seminara bio razvoj zajednièkogagledanja svih partnera na buduænost podruèja,uèvršæivanje dugoroènih ciljeva upravljanja,prepoznavanja namjera i projekata razlièitihpartnera, rasprava o konkretnim ponudama zasamoodr�ivu uporabu prirodnih resursa. Èesto suseminari poslu�ili kao osnova za razgovor i bilisredstvo senzibilizacije javnosti o znaèajnosti zaštitenjihova ozemlja.

Poticaj drugoj fazi bio je oznaèen osnutkomsavjetodavne grupe (CG) koja je ukljuèilapredstavnike izabranih institucija, kao što su Dr�avnaslu�ba zaštite prirode (NNPS), Dr�avni odbor zašumarstvo (NFB), Ministarstvo regionalnog razvoja ijavnih radova (MRDPW), Uprava NP Strandja,regionalne vlasti, Regionalni odbor za šumarstvo(RFB) i BSBCP. Glavni zadatak CG-a bio je

�

�

dionièki

preparation or in a process of total change.Management planning practice in Bulgaria was justemerging and the lack of consensus on the planningmethods was another challenge. The elaboration ofa plan for protected area of this size was quite aventure in itself and the difficulties encountered justadded to the intricacy of the situation.

Four years later after a long and difficult time ofpioneer efforts Strandja NP management plan hasfinally reached its adoption stage.

The Plan formulation process so far went throughtwo main stages:

Preparation of a Strandja NP MP Rough Draft;

Discussion of the Rough Draft and preparation ofthe First Draft for submission to official PublicHearing.

The adopted planning approach is known asand was meant to ensure balance

between different interests and guarantee theapproval of the plan and its implementation. Theprocess of initiation and formulation of the plan wasstarted with the identification of the stakeholders andtheir role in the elaboration and implementation ofthe plan. Important step in the planning process wasthe establishment of issue groups aimed to formulatemajor problems and help the core team to findrelevant solutions. This happened via series ofseminars dedicated to three major topics:Biodiversity Conservation and Forestry, Tourism andCultural Heritage, Development ofAgriculture.All theseminars were attended by representatives of themajor institutions and local interested groups -NGO's and private sector, while the inquiriesperformed within the workshops presented animportant feedback.

The major effect of the seminars was seen asdevelopment of common to the partners vision on thefuture of the territory, consolidation around the long-term management objectives, identification of theintentions and projects of the different partners,discussion of concrete proposals for the sustainableuse of natural resources. In many cases theseminars served as a dialogue platform and meansof raising the public awareness of the conservationvalue of the territory.

The inception of the second stage was marked withconstitution of a consultative group (CG), whichcomprised representatives of selected institutions,such as the National Nature Protectin Service(NNPS), the National Forestry Board (NFB), theMinistry of Regional Development and Public Works(MRDPW), Strandja NP Directorate, the Regional

�

�

participatory






27

pregledati grubi nacrt i posavjetovati se o buduæemrazvoju na struènoj razini.

Savjetovanje na struènoj razini ukljuèuje struènuprocjenu biotièke va�nosti Plana, koju je napraviosavjetnik Andrey Bibic, kao i pribavljanje pismenihkomentara o grubom nacrtu, koje su napisala dvaopæinara, Ministarstvo gospodarstva, Dr�avni institutza spomenike i kulturu. Ukljuèivanjem tih institucija iorganizacija pokriven je bitan dio onih koji donoseodluke i zainteresiranih strana.

Na ovom je stupnju ukljuèivanje javnosti nastavljenorazvo jem i pr imjenom

koja podrazumijeva sociološkoistra�ivanje meðu lokalnom populacijom kako bi seprovjerila socijalna stajališta prema parku, njegovimproblemima i predlo�enim rješenjima u Planu, sjedne strane, i pripremi i dijeljenju listiæa sobjašnjenjima Plana, odgovorima na èestopostavljana pitanja i sl., s druge strane. Glavnimpostignuæem na tom stupnju smatra se privlaèenje iaktivno ukljuèivanje u rad nacionalnih, regionalnih ilokalnih sredstava javnog komuniciranja upodupiranju ideja MP.

Povratna informacija struènjaka i javnosti, dobivena udrugoj fazi procesa planiranja, bila je izvanrednokorisna u pripremi Prvog nacrta. Sve su relevantneopaske uzete u obzir i integrirane u Plan. Kaorezultat, postignuta je suglasnost o obliku Plana,znaèajnosti procjene, kao i o broju i ulozi razlièitihzona, broju i sadr�aju programa, projekata i ciljeva.

Integracija dionièkog pristupa prihvaæenog od MPtima u slu�benom postupku elaboriranja ipotvrðivanja ovog dokumenta prikazana je u Prilogu1.

Formuliranje Plana slijedi nakon MP ToR i temelji sena posljednjem EUROSITE obrascu, s nu�nimprilagodbama, napravljenim u skladu s propisima oplaniranju upravljanja zaštiæenim podruèjima.

Dokument pokriva pet osnovnih sekcija:

strategi je javne

komunikacije

opis i prvu

procjenu (vrednovanje) teritorija, idealne i

operativne ciljeve; prostorno planiranje

(zoniranje) - propise, uvjete, norme i preporuke za

primjenu aktivnosti; programe, projekte i ciljeve,

3. FORMULIRANJE PLANAUPRAVLJANJA

Authority, the Regional Forestry Board (RFB) andBSBCP. The main task of the CG was to review theRough Draft and consult its futher development onexpert level.

The consultations on expert level included expertassessment of the biotic evaluation section of theplan by the consultant Andrey Bibic as well asobtaining written comments on the Rough Draft bythe two municipalities, the Ministry of Economy, theNational Institute for the Monuments of Culture. Withthe involvement of the latter institutions andorganizations a considerable coverage of decision-makers and stakeholders was provided.

In this stage the involvement of the general publiccontinued through development and implementationof whichcomprised sociological research among the localpopulation aimed at verifying the social attitudetowards the Park, its problems and the proposedsolutions in the Plan on the one hand andpreparation and dissemination of explanatoryleaflets about the plan, answers to frequently askedquestions, etc. A real achievement at this stage isconsidered the attraction and active work of thenational, regional and local media in support of theMP ideas.

The feedback on expert and public level provided inthe second stage of the planning process wasextremely useful for the preparation of the First Draft.All the relevant remarks were taken into account andintegrated in the Plan. As a result it was achievedagreement on the format of the plan, the relevance ofthe evaluation as well as the number and purpose ofdifferent zones, the number and contents of theprogrammes, projects and tasks.

The integration of the participatory approachadopted by the MP team in the official procedure forelaboration and approval of this type of documents isillustrated in Annex 1.

The formulation of the plan follows the MP ToR,based on the latest EUROSITE format withnecessary adjustments, made according to theRegulation on Protected Area ManagementPlanning.

The document covers five basic sections:

public communication strategy

Description and First Evaluation of the Territory;Ideal and Operational Objectives; Zoning -R e g i m e s , C o n d i t i o n s , N o r m s , a n d

3.FORMULATION OF THEMANAGEMENT PLAN



praæenje primjene plana.

3.1. Pregledavanje podruèja

U prvom dijelu Plana bilo je kljuèno sastaviti toèan iopse�an opis ozemlja i odrediti dinamiku.

Va�an korak u fazi uvida bila je razrada cjelovitogadigitaliziranog modela parka, zasnovana nanajnovijim informacijama Odjela za zemlju i šume,popraæenog digitalnim informacijama trenutaènogplana upravljanja šumarstvom, plana uporabezemljišta i ostalih relevantnih djelatnosti koje tupostoje. Uporedo s time pripreman je i GIS NPStrandja projekt kako bi vodio posao skupljanjaanalitièkih i tematskih karata koje ilustriraju tekst.Iako æe razvoj GIS-a biti predmet odvojenogaprojekta, predviðenoga Planom, priprema digitalnogmodela parka, zajedno s GIS projektom, dr�i sebitnim korakom u osnivanju GIS-a zaštiæenogapodruèja.

Zbog velike površine parka, nije bilo moguæe voditiširoki spektar istra�ivanja i terenskih istra�ivanja.Zato su snage usmjerene prema skupljanjuinformacija o biološkim skupinama i staništima zakoja nedostaju informacije koje su bile bitne zapravilno vrednovanje PA. Tako su popunjene velikepraznine u podacima o velikim sisavcima, šišmišima,glodavcima, gmazovima i fauni riba u rijekamaStrandje.

Neka istra�ivanja nisu bila planirana, ali su poduzetazbog zahtjeva zadanih izmjenama zakona i procesasavjetovanja. Tako je bilo s aktualizacijom pedološkekarte, dodatnog istra�ivanja u podruèju klimatskihpromjena i hidrologije. Zbog ekološke osjetljivosti,bilo je nu�no odrediti, unutar Plana, rasporedpoplavnih terasa, koje su stavljene pod zaštitu premanedavnom donesenom Zakonu o zaštiti voda.

Osim standardnih metoda upotrijebljenih zaprikupljanje informacija o socio-ekonomskoj situaciji,socio-ekonomsko istra�ivanje provedeno je tijekompripremanja Prvog nacrta, što je dalo va�nuinformaciju o senzibiliziranosti javnosti o va�nostizaštite ozemlja, stajalištu prema parku, stupnjuokolišne kulture lokalnog stanovništva i njihovepripravnosti da prihvate odreðena ogranièenja u imezaštite prirode.

Recommendations for the Implementation of theActivities; Programmes, Projects and Tasks,Monitoring of the Implementation of the Plan

3.1. Scanning the area

It was essential in the first section of the Plan tocompose a correct and comprehensive picture ofthe territory and define its dynamism.

Important step at the inception phase was theelaboration of integrated digital model of the Parkbased on the latest information of the land and forestdivision plans and accomplished with the digitalinformation of the current forestry managementplans, land-use plans and other relevant policy input.Parallel to that a project for GIS of Strandja NP wasprepared to guide the work on the generation of theanalytical and thematic maps illustrating the text.Although the development of GIS will be subject to aseparate project envisaged in the plan thepreparation of the digital model of the park togetherwith the GIS project can be considered a veryimportant step to establishment of GIS of theprotected area.

Due to the size of the Park it was not really possible toconduct a wide scale research and field study. This iswhy efforts were directed towards collectinginformation about biological groups and habitatswhere the information was definitely insufficient butassessed necessary for the proper evaluation of thePA. Thus to a great extent the gaps in the data aboutbig mammals, bats, rodents, reptiles and theichtyofauna in the Strandja rivers were filled in.

Some of the research work was not really plannedbut followed the requirements of the changinglegislation and the process of consultations. Thiswas the case with the actualization of the soilstructure map, the additional research into theclimatic changes and hydrology. Due to theirecological fragility it was found necessary todetermine within the plan the range of the floodedriver terraces, which were set under protectionaccording to the recently enacted Water ProtectionAct.

Beside the standard methods used for collectinginformation on the socio-economic situation a socio-economic research was conducted during thepreparation of the First Draft, which gave importantinformation on the public awareness of theconservation value of the territory, the attitudetowards the park, the level of environmental cultureof the local people and their readiness to acceptcertain restrictions in the name of nature protection.






29

3.2. Vrednovanje i problematika

Glavni su ciljevi vrednovanja parka bili da se istakne

znaèenje zaštite podruèja, posebnih pitanja i

problema upravljanja.

Ekološko vrednovanje napravljeno je

tipiènost, prirodnost, raznolikost

vrsta i staništa, ugro�enost, rijetkost, velièina parka,

stabilnost ekosustava i populaci ja vrsta,

regenerativni potencijal.

ekološkog vrednovanja

lovo rv i šn je=

Laurocerasus

potencijalno

mjesto svjetskog naslijeða s visokom prirodnom i

povijesnom vrijednošæu, trajni izvor nacionalnog

ponosa i duha; potencijalni centar za pokazivanje i

u skladu sasljedeæim kriterijima:

Zbog velike površine parka i brojnosti zaštiæenihvrsta, s jedne strane, te ogranièenih resursa zazaštitu, s druge strane, bilo je nu�no odrediti vrste istaništa od primarne potrebe za zaštitom u razdobljuprovoðenja Plana. To je uèinjeno na temelju izvornemetodologije (autor Geko Spiridonov). Kao rezultat, uprioritete za zaštitu su ukljuèena 22 staništa, 23vaskularne biljne vrste, 4 vrste gljiva, 14 vrsta lišajevai 82 vrste kralje�njaka.

Rezultat vrednovanja prema odvojenim kriterijimapribavljen je s jedne strane sveobuhvatnimvrednovanjem teritorija na temelju botanièkogznaèenja (Slika 1.) i, s druge strane, u skladu snjegovim faunistièkim znaèenjem (Slika 2.).Slo�enost osobina znaèajnih za zaštitu teritorija jerezultat preklapanja dvaju vrednovanja iprepoznavanja ozemlja visoke i vrlo visokeznaèajnosti za oèuvanje biološke raznolikosti (Slika3.). Ti su lokaliteti uzeti kao mjesta s posebnoupravljanim aktivnostima kako bi se saèuvala njihovaautentiènost.

Opæeniti je zakljuèak Parkada zauzima prvo mjesto u dr�avi po broju tipovastaništa i jedini je europski predstavnik sub-bioma«širokolisnih ljeti zelenih šuma umjerene klime saz imze len im š i ka rama t i pa

. Od globalnog je znaèenja, uzevši uobzir vaskularne biljke, sisavce i šumska staništa stercijarnom vegetacijom. Dobro oèuvana prirodnostrijeke Strandje, pješèanih dina, atraktivnegeomorfologije, raznolikosti t la s ri jetkimsastavnicama, jedinstvene znaèajke klime, èist okoliši tipièan krajobraz, sve su to neodvojivi atributi kojipridonose vrijednosti ovog ozemlja.

Socio-ekonomsko vrednovanje dodaje novudimenziju vrijednostima podruèja kao

3.2. Values and Issues

The basic objective of the Evaluation of the Park wasto outline the conservation value of the territory andits specific issues and management problems.

ecological evaluation was madetypicality, naturalness, diversity

of species and habitats, vulnerability, rarity, size ofthe Park, stability of the ecosystems and thepopulations of species, regeneration potential.

ecological evaluation

laurocerasus type

potentialWorld Heritage site of high natural and historic value,lasting source of national pride and spirit; potentialcentre for demonstration and interpretation of uniquenatural and cultural heritage, traditional lifestyle,local habits and rituals; site for educational activities,connected with the environmental awareness of the

The according tothe following criteria:

Due to the size of the Park and the amount of speciesof conservation status on the one hand and thelimited resources for conservation on the other it wasessential to define the species and habitats of priorityconservation concern in the plan implementationperiod. This was made on the basis of originalmethodology (author Geko Spiridonov). As a resultpriority for conservation were considered 22 habitats, 23 vascular plant species, 4 mushroom species, 14moss species and 82 vertebrate species

Resulting from the evaluation according to theseparate criteria, an overall evaluation of the territorywas provided in view of its botanical value (fig. 1) onthe one hand, and in respect of its faunal value (fig.2)on the other. The complex characteristics of theconservation significance of the territory is a result ofthe overlapping of the two evaluations and theidentifying of the territories of high and especiallyhigh biodiversity conservation values (fig.3). Thesesites were considered subject of special regulation ofactivities in order to preserve their authenticity.

The general conclusions of therank the Park at the first place in the country in termsof the number of habitat types and the only Europeanrepresentative of the sub-biome “broad-leavedsummer green forests of the temperate climate withevergreen underbrush of ”. It is ofglobal importance in terms of the vascular plants, theinvertebrates, the mammals and the forest habitatsof Tertiary vegetation. The well preservednaturalness of the Strandja rivers, sand dunes,attractive geomorphology, diversity of soils with rarecomponents, unique features of the climate, cleanenvironment and typical landscapes are inseparableattributes to the value of the territory.

The socio-economic evaluation added newdimensions to the value of the site as a



objašnjavanje jedinstvenog prirodnog i kulturnog

naslijeða, tradicionalnoga naèina �ivota, lokalnih

obièaja i rituala; mjesto za edukativne aktivnosti,

povezano s visokom svijesti lokalne zajednice i

posjetitelja o okolišu; potencijalno �arište za

kompleksna znanstvena istra�ivanja; atraktivni

prirodni okoliš za razvoj turizma, športa i rekreacije;

mjesto za buduæe naraštaje uz samoodr�ivu, prirodi

prijateljsku uporabu i oèuvanje prirode; mjesto za

suradnju i partnerstvo.

Glavni problemi se mogu sumirati kako slijedi:

Unatoè tome što je u podruèju veæ bilo istra�ivanja,još ima praznina u znanju glede prioriteta zaštitevrsta i staništa, a osjeæa se nedostatak sustavnogmotrenja (monitoringa) bioloških procesa unutarparka i utjecaj razlièitih uporaba ekosustava. Zbogkrivolova, nedostatka odgovarajuæih sredstava inepromišljene uporabe, neke su vrste kritiènougro�ene i mogle bi nestati tijekom sljedeæih 10godina. Neprikladno upravljanje šumskim staništima,koja su od primarnog znaèenja za zaštitu, dovodi uopasnost njihovu potencijalnu vrijednost. Stanjeglavnih rijeka i njihova �ivog svijeta, kao i reliktnihvrsta od primarnog znaèenja za zaštitu i njihovihstaništa umnogome ovise o upravljanju vodama išumama u susjednoj Turskoj.

Unatoè dobroj kakvoæi okolišnih sastavnica, oèit jenedostatak što nema upravljanja otpadom u parku,što još postoje ilegalna odlagališta otpada, ošteæenapodruèja, napuštena gradilišta, erozija uglavnomuzrokovana upotrebom neadekvatne tehnologije uupravljanju šumama i okolišu neprilagoðenainfrastruktura. Unatoè tome što se pripremaju planovilokalnog razvoja i strategija, sustav proèišæavanjaotpadnih voda ne postoji.

Glavni je problem povezan s nesamoodr�ivomuporabom resursa, što je veæinom posljedica:

opadanja tradicionalnih aktivnosti i nerazvijenihalternativa za okolišu prijateljsku upotrebu

promjene u strukturi vlasništva, što rezultirapojavom novih vlasnika koji nemaju iskustva ušumarstvu, ratarstvu, stoèarstvu, s nejasnim

Pitanja zaštite biološke raznolikosti

Problemi okoliša

Nesamoodr�ivi razvoj

�

�

local communities and visitors; potential focus ofcomplex scientific research; attractive naturalenvironment for tourism development, sports andrecreation; place for income generation throughsustainable, nature friendly uses and natureconservation; place for co-operation andpartnership.

The major issues can be summarized as follows:

Despite previous large scale research conducted inthe area there are still gaps in knowledge concerningpriority conservation species and habitats, lack ofsystematic monitoring of the biological processeswithin the Park and the impact of different uses onthe ecosystems. Due to poaching, lack of adequatemaintenance and unwise uses some species arecritically endangered and may disappear within the10 year plan period. The inadequate management ofthe forest habitats of priority conservation concernputs at risk their potential value. The state of themain rivers and their biota as well as the relictspecies of priority conservation concern and theirbiotopes are largely dependent on the water andforest management in the neighbouring Turkey.

Despite the good quality of the components of theenvironment there are obvious deficienciesconcerning the lack of waste management schemefor the park, still existing illegal waste deposit sites,impaired areas and derelict constructions, erosionmainly due to the use of inadequate technologies forforest management and insensitive infrastructure.Despite the provisions of the local developmentplans and strategies the waste water purificationsystem is still lacking.

A major problem was related to the unsustainableuse of resources, which was to a large extent due to:

decline of traditional activities and undevelopedalternatives for environmentally friendly uses;

changes in the structure of the ownership,resulting in the appearance of new owners withlack of experience in forestry, agriculture andlivestock breeding and with unclear investmentintentions;

occurrence of different owners and users with

Biodiversity protection issues

Environmental problems

Unsustainable development

�

�

�






31

namjerama investiranja

pojava razlièitih vlasnika i korisnika s opreèniminteresima (uzgajivaèi stoke - farmeri, uzgajivaèistoke - šumari, vlasnici šuma; vlasnici zemlje -organizacije zaštite prirode; turisti - organizacijezaštite prirode, industrija - turistièke kompanije,organizacije zaštite prirode- šumari, itd.)

nedostatak ljudstva i sredstava za provoðenjedjelotvornih mjera razvoja i zaštite

nepostojanje primjerenog osposobljavanjakorisnika za djelovanje u okolišu parka

nedostatak stvarnog poticaja za razvoj prirodiprijateljske uporabe,

nerazvijena mre�a cesta i transportnih usluga,nedovoljno razvijena tehnièka infrastruktura,posebice koja se tièe opskrbe vodom i kanalizacije

zastarjela tehnièka sredstva i neadekvatnatehnologija upravljanja šumama i zemljištem.

pritisku na stoljeæima stare autohtone šume kojesu uvelike preduvjet za planove upravljanjašumama,

pritisku na ihtiofaunu, što je rezultiralouništavanjem ribljeg fonda i prijeti nestankomnekih vrsta,

pritisku tr�išta na biljke koje se primjenjuju umedicini,

nekontroliranoj ispaši u šumama, pogotovo koza iistoènobalkanskih svinja,

pritisku izgradnje na osjetljivim mjestima, kao štosu terase rijeka i obalna podruèja i moguæaugro�enost preoptereæenošæu pješèanih pla�a,

kršenje obredaba postojeæih prostornih planova izoniranja posebno ilegalnom izgradnjom.

Primjeæeni gubitak lokalnog identitetadjelomièno je posljedica procesa asimilacije uobalnom podruèju i propadanja tradicionalnogagraðevinarstva i kulturnog naslijeða u unutrašnjostiparka. Ostali èimbenici koji utjeèu na problem su padtradicionalnih zanata, degradacija kulturnogkrajobraza, kao razultat sukcesije šuma nanapuštenim zemljištima, rudarstvo i aktivnosti urudnicima i intenzivno graditeljstvo. Gubitak iskustva

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

Specifiène dimenzije problema su vidljive u:

Prijetnja lokalnom identitetu

conflicting interests (cattle breeders - farmers,cattle breeders - foresters, owners of forests;owners of lands- nature conservat ionorganizations; tourists - nature conservationorganizations, extraction industry - touristcompanies, nature conservation organizations,foresters, etc.);

shortage of human and financial resources for theimplementation of effective measures for thedevelopment and conservation;

lack of adequate training of users for operation inpark environment;

lack of real incentives and stimuli for thedevelopment of nature friendly uses;

underdeveloped road network and transportservices, underdeveloped technical infrastructureespecially concerning water supply andsewerage;

obsolete machinery and inadequate technologiesfor forest and land management.

Pressure on century old indigenous forests whichwas to a great extent preconditioned with theforestry management plans;

Pressure on the ichtyofauna which resulted indepletion of the fish stock and threat ofextinguishing of some species.

Market pressure on medicinal plants;

Uncontrolled grazing in the forests, especially ofgoats and the East- Balkan Pig;

Pressure for construction in vulnerable placessuch as the river terraces and the coastal area andpotential threat of overloading sand-beaches;

Violation of existing zoning regulations and illegalconstruction.

The observed loss of local identity is partially due toassimilation processes in the coastal area and decayof the traditional urban fabric and cultural heritage inthe inland areas of the Park. Other factorscontributing to the problem are the decline of thetraditional crafts, the degradation of the culturallandscape, as a result of the forest successions inthe abandoned, lands, mining and quarryingactivities and insensitive building and markingdesign. The loss of experience in traditional

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

Specific dimensions of the problem foundexpression in:

Local identity threatened



u tradicionalnoj poljoprivredi i nestanak lokalnih sortai sojeva, zajedno s unošenjem stranih vrst biljakanastavlja mijenjati sliku podruèja. Lov na blaga,ilegalni ulasci i ošteæivanje špilja, slaba briga i zaštitanaslijeða prijeti opustošenjem povijesnih vrijednosti iunutrašnje ljepote regije.

Iako je razvijen lokalni ponos, osjetljivost javnosti oznaèenju zaštite podruèja nije dovoljno razvijena, nitisu stanovnici upoznati s prednostima i boljitcimazaštite, što uvelike onemoguæuje da javnost podupreciljeve upravljanja. To je djelomièno posljedicanedovoljne razvijenosti mre�e koja bi objasnilamoguænosti i program. Nerazvijena okolišna izaštitarska kultura lokalnih korisnika i nedovoljnaupuæenost o funkcioniranju u okolišu parka sprjeèavaintegraciju zaštite biološke raznolikosti utradicionalnoj uporabi ozemlja parka i smanjujekoristi (probitke).

Iako je slu�beno priznata kao glavni upraviteljozemlja parka prirode, Uprava ne djeluje uspješno,uglavnom zbog organizacijskih i strukturalnihnesuglasica, nemjerodavnog osoblja i slabe tehnièkeopremljenosti, nerazvijenog informacijskog sustava inedovoljne novèane potpore. Unutrašnji nedostatakje premalo iskustvo u suradnièkom upravljanju i slabapovezanost s ostalim upravnim slu�bama idonosiocima odluka. S druge strane, komunikacija sinteresnim skupinama je dodatno ote�ana zbognedostatka profesionalne organiziranosti udoticajima s ciljanim skupinama (udruga vlasnikazemlje i šuma, proizvoðaèa i korisnika). Mehanizamza financiranje Uprave Parka nije utemeljen i potpunorazvijen. Unatoè pripremi novoga šumarskogzakona, nadglednici Parka nisu odreðeni i njihovedu�nosti još obavljaju šumski èuvari koji nisupoduèeni u zaštiti biološke raznolikosti i primjenuZakona o zaštiti prirode.

Predlo�ena rješenja u Planu su zasnovana naispitivanju razlièitih strategijskih opcija za ostvarenjeodreðenih planova upravljanja. Zato je prvi korak u

Nedovoljna obaviještenost javnosti s

vrijednostima zaštite PA

Institucionalni problemi

3.3. Rješenja

agriculture and the extinction of local breeds andvarieties, together with the introduction of someforeign plant species continue to change the imageof the site. Treasure hunting, illegal penetration anddamage to the caves, the poor maintenance andsafeguarding of the heritage threaten to deprive theregion of its historical memory and intrinsic beauty.

Despite the developed local pride and spirit publicawareness of the conservation value of the territoryis not really developed neither is the population wellinformed about the benefits from conservation whichprevents to a great extent the public support of themanagement objectives. This is partially due to theunderdeveloped network of interpretation facilitiesand programs. The underdeveloped environmentaland conservation culture of local users andinsufficient training to operate in the Parkenvironment hinders the integration of biodiversityprotection in the traditional uses of the park territoryand reduces the benefits.

The proposed solutions in the Plan are based ontesting different strategic options for achieving the

Insufficient public awareness of theconservation value of the PA

Institutional problems

3.3.Solutions

Although its legal recognition as chief manager of theterritory the Nature Park Directorate is operatinginefficiently mainly due to its organisational andstructural discrepancies, still insufficient staffing andtechnical equipment, undeveloped informationsystem and inadequate financial backing. Internaldeficiency is the insufficient experience incollaborative management and poor cohesion withthe other managing authorities and decision makers.On the other hand the communication withstakeholders is additionally hindered by externalfactors such as lack of professional organisations toease access to target groups (associations of theowners of lands and forests, of the producers and theusers). The mechanism for income generation forthe Park management is not well established andfully developed. Despite the provision of the newForestry Act Park rangers have not been appointedand their functions are still fulfilled by the forestguards who lack specific knowledge on biodiversityprotection and implementation of nature protectionlegislation.






33

donošenju ispravnih odluka, vezanih uz odreðeneprobleme, jasna formulacija glavnih i posebnihupravljaèkih ciljeva i pravilna procjena ostvarivihrezultata u razdoblju provedbe Plana.

Opæeniti smjer razvoja parka istaknut je u šestdugoroènih opæenitih ciljeva koji su u sna�noj vezi sutvrðenim problemima:

smanjenje ljudskog utjecaja na odreðenapodruèja visokog znaèenja za zaštitu biološkeraznolikosti regulacijom izgreda, uporabomprirodnih materijala u graditeljstvu

oèuvanje elemenata bitnih za primarnu zaštitu(staništa i vrste) smanjivanjem pritiska na njih krozupravljaèke aktivnosti

uspostava dugoroènih sustava nadgledanja(monitoringa) biološke raznolikosti i utjecajarazlièitih korisnika

potpora senzibilnog i uravnote�enog razvojaturizma i tehnièke infrastrukture

oèuvanje obradivog zemljišta i tradicionalnogkrajobraza upravljanom gradnjom u postojeæimnaseljima i njihovim širenjem

prihvaæenje suradnièkog upravljanja s lokalniminteresnim skupinama kako bi se osiguraointegriran i kompleksan razvoj parka

prekogranièna suradnja kako bi se oèuvalereliktne šume Strandje i rijeèna staništa

razvoj samoodr�ive i okolišu prijateljskepoljoprivrede, šumarstva i turizma, kao glavnih

oèuvanje prirodnih

ekosustava, raznolikosti staništa i vrsta u parku,

s njihovim tipiènim fondom gena i populacija;

oèuvanje kakvoæe abiotièkih èimbenika u parku;

postizanje samoodr�ive uporabe obnovljivih

prirodnih izvora dok se razvijaju tipovi

tradicionalne prakse i uporabe, koji su u skladu s

prirodom i oèuvanjem socijalnog i kulturnoga

tkiva lokalnih zajednica; oèuvanje lokalnoga

duha, kulturnog naslijeða i tradicionalnog

krajobraza koji potpoma�u oèuvanju lokalnog

identiteta; razvoj znanstvenih, edukativnih

aktivnosti i aktivnosti koje objašnjavaju i poma�u

dugoroènom napredovanju lokalnih zajednica i

njihove ekološke prosvijeæenosti. Institucionalni

razvoj i stjecanje trajne potpore za postizanje

ciljeva upravljanja.

Postizanje gornjih ciljeva je zasnovano na

sljedeæim naèelima:

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

defined management goals. Therefore the first stepto proper solutions of the defined problems isconsidered the clear formulation of the major andspecific management objectives and the properassessment of achievable results in the planimplementation period.

The general direction of the park development issteered by 6 long-term general objectives whichhighly correspond to the defined issues:

reducing human impact of the defined areas ofhigh biodiversity conservation value throughregulation of access, uses of natural resourcesand construction;

Preservation of the elements of priorityconservation concern (habitats and species)through reducing pressure on them and activemanagement;

Establishment a long-term systematic monitoringon biodiversity and impact of different uses;

Supporting sensitive and balanced developmentof tourist and technical infrastructure;

preservation of arable land and traditionallandscapes through steering construction in theexisting settlements and their expansions;

Adopt collaborative management with localstakeholders to provide integrity and complexdevelopment of the park.

Trans-border co-operation to preserve the relictStrandja forests and river habitats

Development of sustainable and environmentally

Preservation of the natural ecosystems,diversity of habitats and species in the park withtheir typical genetic fund and vibrantpopulations; Preservation of the quality of theabiotic components in the Park; Achievingsustainable use of the renewable naturalresources while developing those types oftraditional practices and uses, which harmonizewith nature and preserve the social and culturalfabric of the local communities; Preservation ofthe local spirit, cultural heritage and traditionallandscape which contribute to the preservationof the local identity; Development of scientific,educational and interpretative activitiescontributing to the long-term prosperity of thelocal population and its environmentaleducation; Institutional development andobtaining lasting support for achieving themanagement goals

The achievement of the above objectives isbased on the following principles:

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�



izvora prihoda

potpora lokalnim inicijativama kako bi se dobilapotpora javnosti

sredstva za adekvatno uvje�bavanje korisnika iposjetitelja

inst i tucionalna izgradnja i pobol jšanjesposobnosti Uprave Parka

Kako bi se ostvarili ciljevi upravljanja, Plan ukljuèujeposebne upravljaèke alate - prostornu regulaciju -zoniranje, program provedbe Plana, dosljedanpodrobni tehnièki plan, razvoj suradnièkogupravljanja, uvoðenje GIS-a. Posljednja tri suukljuèena u program implementacije Plana.

glavni alat za ostvarenje idealnihoperativnih ciljeva i usklaðen je s bugarskim PAA. Usluèaju Strandje zoniranja korespondira sa zaštitomvrijednosti podruèja, dok se uzima u obzir njegovapostojeæa funkcionalna struktura i naèin �ivota, koji jekompatibilan s PAA(fig. 4).

Strandja NPMP je odredio pet upravljaèkih prostornihzona:

Svaka zona pokriva jedan dio utvrðen Planom, imasvoje upravljaèke ciljeve, re�ime, norme, uvjete ipreporuke koje se odnose na uporabu dobara,gradnju, pristup posjetitelja, znanstvene i edukativneaktivnosti itd.

ukljuèuje postojeæe prirodnerezervate u parku. Regulativu je ovdje odredio PAA,dok Plan razraðuje pristup infrastrukture i objekata odposebnog interesa u zoni i njihovu uporabu, uvjeteistra�ivanja i edukacijske aktivnosti.

ukljuèujepodruèja s postojeæim statusom zaštite, kao što suzaštiæeni lokaliteti, spomenici prirode, pufer zone

�

�

�

4.ALATI UPRAVLJANJA

4.1. Prostorno planiranje - zoniranje

Zoniranje je

strogo zaštiæena zona, zona s ogranièenim

ljudskim utjecajem, zona samoodr�ivog razvoja,

zona usmjerena turizmu, zona predviðena za

infrastrukturu

Strogo zaštiæena zona

Zona s ogranièenim ljudskim utjecajem

friendly agriculture, forestry and tourism as majorincome generating sectors compatible with thePark management objectives

Support of local initiative to obtain public support

Provision for adequate training of users andvisitors

Institutional and capacity building of the ParkDirectorate

viewed as the major tool for theachievement of the ideal and operational objectivesand is set up with the Bulgarian PAA. In the case ofStrandja zoning corresponds to the conservationvalue of the territory, while taking into account itsexisting functional structure and regimes, that arecompatible with the PAA. (fig.4)

Strandja NPMP designates five management zones:

Each zone covers certain area fixed in the Plan, hasits management objectives, regimes, norms,conditions and recommendations concerning use ofthe resources, construction, visitors access,scientific and educational activities etc.,

Zone includes the existingnature reserves in the park. The regulations here aredefined by the PAAwhile the plan specifies access toinfrastructure and special interest objects within theZone and their maintenance, the conditions forresearch and educational activities.

includes areaswith existing conservation status such as protected

�

�

�

4. THE MANAGEMENTTOOLS

For the achievement of the management objectivesthe plan employs specific management tools -zoning regulations, plan implementation program,consequent detai led technical planning,development of collaborative management,introduction of GIS. The latter three are incorporatedin the Plan implementation program.

4.1. Zoning

The zoning is

Strict Protection Zone, Limited Human ImpactZone; Sustainable Development Zone; TourismSpecialised Zone; Infrastructure SpecialisedZone

The Strict Protection

The Limited Human Impact Zone






35

rezervata, spomenici kulture, itd., kao i podruèjavisoke konzervacijske vrijednosti odreðene MP.Ogranièenja u ovoj zoni osiguravaju zaštitu onihelemenata koji pridonose nacionalnom i globalnomznaèenju PA. Odreðenije gledano, prostornoplaniranje u toj zoni znaèi ogranièenja u graði, ispašidomaæih �ivotinja, lovstvu, ribarstvu i uporabiljekovitog bilja, šumskog voæa i gljiva. Kako bi seosigurao djelotvoran nadzor, uvedene su normeispaše, sjeèe i graditeljstva.

pokriva veæi dioteritorija, a ukljuèuje šumarke, uzgojene šumecrnogorice, kao i ošteæena podruèja i veæi diopoljoprivrednog zemljišta. Svrha je zone dopustitiobnovu autohtonih šuma i ošteæenih podruèja, kao isamoodr�iva uporaba prirodnih dobara. Ogranièenjau toj zoni su nametnuta sa svrhom prevencije brzogiscrpljivanja dobara i oneèišæenja okolišnihsastavnica.

pokriva postojeæe iplanirane turistièke rute, jednostavne turistièkeobjekte i informacijske table, lokalitete od posebnoginteresa, razvoj turizma i rekreacije i odvojeneturistièke graðevine izvan granica naselja.Upravljaèki je cilj tu zonu opskrbiti novim i razlièitimponudama prirodi priljateljskih oblika turizma dok suregulacije prvenstveno usmjerene na prevencijuoneèišæenja i pretjeranog pritiska na prirodne izvore,kao i osiguranje uravnote�ene raspodjele protokaturista.

ukljuèujepostojeæe i planirane elemente tehnièke, upravljaèkei proizvodne infrastrukture, strukture i objektespecijalne uporabe. Regulacije te zone imaju ciljsvesti na najmanju mjeru utjecaj infrastrukture natradicionalni krajobraz i biološku raznolikost.

Predstavlja set programa, projekata i konkretnihzadataka, koji su komplementarni urbanistièkimplanovima kako bi se ostvarili ciljevi upravljanja. Planprovedbe programa obuhvaæa šest glavnih osi kojeodgovaraju opæim dugoroènim ciljevima:

oèuvanje, odr�avanje i restauracija biološke

Zona samoodr�ivog razvoja

Zona usmjerena turizmu

Zona predviðena za infrastrukturu

4.2. Plan primjene programa

�

sites, nature monuments, buffer zones of thereserves, monuments of culture, etc. as well asareas of high conservation value determined with theMP. The restrictions in this zone ensure protection ofthose elements, which attribute the PA national andglobal significance. More specifically the zoningregulations in this zone impose restrictions onconstruction, and regulations on grazing of domesticanimals, hunting, fishing and use of herbs, forestfruits and mushrooms. To ensure efficient controlgrazing, felling and construction norms areintroduced.

covers thegreater part of the territory including coppice forestsand coniferous forest cultures as well as the impairedareas and the greater part of the agricultural lands.The purpose of the zone is to allow the restoration ofindigenous forests, the restoration of thedeteriorated areas and sustainable use of the naturalresources. The imposed restrictions in this zone areaimed at prevention of fast depletion of resourcesand pollution of the environmental components.

covers existing andplanned tourist routs, light tourist facilities aninformation boards, special interest sites, tourismand recreation developments and separate touristconstructions outside the settlement boundaries.The management objective of this zone is to providefor new and diverse opportunities of nature-friendlyforms of tourism while regulations are basicallyaimed at prevention of pollution and excessivepressure on the natural resource, as well as ensuringbalanced distribution of the tourist flow.

includes theexisting and planned elements of the technical,management and product ion support inginfrastructure, special use structures and facilities.The regulations of this zone aim to minimise theimpact of the infrastructure on the traditionallandscapes and biodiversity.

The Sustainable Development Zone

The Tourism Specialised Zone

The Infrastructure Specialised Zone

4.2 Plan Implementation Program

It presents a set of programmes, projects andconcrete tasks, which are complementary to zoningin achieving the management objectives. The PlanImplementation Programme comprises 6 main axescorresponding to the general long term objectives:



raznolikosti u parku - ukljuèuje programe i projektekoji osigurava sustavno nadgledanje (monitoring),oèuvanje i restauraciju prioritetnih staništa, vrsta ibiotopa

oèuvanje, odr�avanje i restauracija abiotièkihèimbenika - ukljuèuje programe i projekte kojiosiguravaju unaprijeðenu zaštitu okolišnihkomponenti i restauraciju ošteæenih podruèjaparka

samoodr�ivi okolišu prijateljski razvoj podruèjaparka - ukljuèuje programe i projekte koji podupirurazvoj okolišu prijateljskog šumarstva, ratarstva istoèarstva, raznoliku ponudu turistièkih proizvoda injihov marketing, samoodr�ivu uporabumedicinskih biljaka, osnutak samoodr�ivoglovstva i ribarstva

razvoj lokalnog identiteta - ukljuèuje programe iprojekte koji osiguravaju prouèavanje i adekvatanopis kulturnog naslijeða i tradicionalnogkrajobraza zajedno sa senzibilnom uporabomzemlje i planovima gradnje

znanstveno istra�ivanje, edukacija, informacija iinterpretacija - ukljuèuje programe i projekte kojiosiguravaju edukaciju o okolišu, uvje�bavanjeciljanih skupina za red u okru�ju parka, razvojprograma informiranja i interpretacija teposveæenosti znanosti samoodr�ivom razvojupodruèja

jaèanje institucije i suradništva - glavna aktivnost uovoj osi osigurava kapacitet gradnje uprave parka iunaprjeðivanje upravljaèke djelotvornostijaèanjem suradništva na nacionalnoj imeðunarodnoj razini.

Upravljaèki plan NP Strandja je statutarni dokumentkoji je pripremljen u promjenjivoj i kompleksnojstvarnosti. U velikoj mjeri on ukljuèuje karakteristikestrateškog planiranja, zasnovane na problemima idokumentima koji su usmjereni prema rezultatima ikoji se pouzdaju u pokretanje široke baze sredstava iizvora te pristanka javnosti.

Unatoè naporima da se zadobije potpora javnosti, odsamog poèetka procesa planiranja, ima politièkih igospodarskih pritisaka koji mogu usporiti donošenjeplana na naèin kao što je prikazano u nacrtnoj verziji.Financijske zapreke mogu isto tako uzrokovati

�

�

�

�

�

ZAKLJUÈAK

�

�

�

�

�

�

Preservation, maintenance and restoration of thebiodiversity in the Park - includes programmesand projects providing for systematic moni-29-toring, preservation and restoration of priorityhabitats, species and biotopes;

Preservation, maintenance and restoration of theabiotic components - includes programmes andprojects providing for improved protection ofenvironmental components and restoration of theimpaired areas in the Park;

Sustainable environmental ly - fr iendlydevelopment of the Park territory - includesprogrammes and pro jec ts suppor t ingdevelopment of environmentally - friendlyforestry, agriculture and farming, diversity of softtourism products and their marketing, sustainableuse of medicinal plants, establishment ofsustainable hunting and fishing practices;

Development of the local identity - includesprogrammes and projects providing for study andadequate exposition of cultural heritage andtraditional landscape together with sensitive land-use and construction plans.

Scientific research, education, information andinterpretation- includes programmes and projectsproviding for environmental education, training oftarget groups for work in park environment,development of information and interpretationfacilities and programs commitment of science tothe sustainable development of the territory;

Institutional strengthening and partnerships - themajor activities in this axis provide for capacitybuilding of the park directorate and improvementof its management efficiency through buildingpartnerships at local national and internationallevels.

The Strandja Management Plan is a statutorydocument prepared in a changing and complexreality. To a great extent it incorporates the featuresof strategic planning being a framework, issue-based and result-oriented document relying onmobilization of larger resource base and publiccommitment.

Despite the efforts to attain public support from thevery beginning of the planning process there arepolitical and economic pressures which may hinderthe adoption of the plan the way it was presented inits draft version. Financial obstacles may also cause

CONCLUSION






37

probleme u provedbi seta programa.

Bugarska zaklada biološke raznolikosti ispitujemoguænosti nastavljanja potpore Parku prirodeStrandja - kako bi se slu�beno prihvatio Planupravljanja, kako bi se uèvrstila Uprava Parka i razviojavni dijalog te ukljuèilo interesne skupine uupravljanje Parkom.

problems in the implementation of the set ofprograms.

The Bulgarian Biodiversity Foundation is examiningthe options to continue its support to Strandja Naturepark - for the official adoption of the Managementplan, for the strengthening of the Park directorate,and for the development of the public dialogue andstakeholders involvement in the management of thePark.

Rossitza ZlatanovaRossen Vassilev

Bulgarian Biodiversity FoundationSofia 1000, Lavele 8Email: [email protected]://www.bsbcp.org







OSNOVE ZONIRANJA I ZAŠTITE

PRIRODE U PROSTORNOM

PLANU PARKA PRIRODE

LONJSKO POLJE

UVOD

Zakonom o proglašenju Parka prirode “Lonjsko polje”od 1990. godine, šire podruèje Lonjskog i Mokrogpolja uz lijevu obalu Save (50 650 ha), proglašeno jeParkom prirode. Zaštiæujuæi prostor Parka prirode,Vlada Republike Hrvatske je planirala zaštititiprirodno bogatstvo ovog kraja, kao vrlo vrijedan ali iosjetljiv prirodni, socijalni, gospodarski i kulturnisustav, ali i omoguæiti razvoj i normalan �ivotstanovništva ovog prostora, kako bi se sprijeèiladaljnje demografsko urušavanje. Oèuvanost prirode,ugro�enih i rijetkih vrsta bilja i �ivotinja, te kulturnogidentiteta ovog kraja, tradicionalnog naèina �ivota irada ljudi, predstavlja jedinstveno “mješovitopodruèje zaštiæene prirodne i kulturne baštine”. Parkprirode se pru�a uz lijevu obalu Save od Ivaniæ Gradado Stare Gradiške .

Ovo podruèje je najveæe je zaštiæeno vla�no podruèjeu Hrvatskoj, na listi je Ramsarskih podruèja i na listiva�nih staništa za ptice (Important Bird Area). PanEuropska strategija za oèuvanje biološke ikrajobrazne raznolikosti prepoznaje rijeèni sustavSave kao prioritetno podruèje za zaštitu biološke ikrajobrazne raznolikosti, te se ono nalazi uAkcijskomplanu (Akcijska tema br. 6) za izradu programazaštite prirodnih i poluprirodnih rijeka i njihovihvla�nih podruèja. Krajobraz parka je mozaik što gaèine poplavne hrastove, jasenove, johine i vrbovešume, vla�ni pašnjaci, vodene površine tekuèica istajaæica, usitnjene poljoprivrene površine i izdu�enasela sa uskim okuænicama, vrtovima i voænjacima(Tablica 1.). Mozaièki krajolik kakav nalazimo uLonjskom polju predstavlja jedinstvenost u Europi.Vla�na staništa u Posavini predstavljaju tipièansrednjeeuropski krajolik rijeènih dolina kakav jepostojao prije 150-tak godina.

Program prostornog ureðenja Republike Hrvatske(poglavlje 5.4.) koji se odnosi na krajolik, obvezuje naèuvanje i naglašavanje identiteta ovog podruèja kaokrajolika s visokim stupnjem prirodnosti.

THE FOUNDATIONS FOR ZONINGAND NATURE CONSERVANCY INTHE PHYSICAL PLAN OFLONJSKO POLJE NATURE PARK

INTRODUCTION

In the Law Proclaiming the Lonjsko Polje NaturePark of 1990, the wider area of Lonjsko Polje andMokro Polje, along the left bank of the Sava River(50,650 hectares), was proclaimed a nature park. Inprotecting the area of the Nature Park, theGovernment of the Republic of Croatia planned toprotect the natural riches of the area, which is a veryvaluable but also very vulnerable natural, social,economic and cultural system, as well as to facilitateboth development and the normal way of life of thepopulation, so as to prevent further demographicimplosion. The state of preservation of nature, of theendangered and rare species of plants and animals,and the cultural identity of the area, the traditionalpattern of life and work among the humanpopulation: all this constituted a unique “mixed areaof protected natural and cultural heritage”.

The Nature Park stretches along the left bank of theSava from Ivaniæ Grad to Stara Gradiška.

This area is the largest protected area of wetlands inCroatia; it is on the list of the Ramsar Areas, and hasalso been declared an Important BirdArea (IBA). ThePan-European strategy for the preservation ofbiological and landscape diversity has identified theSava river system as a priority area for the protectionof biological and landscape diversity, and it is to befound in the Action Plan (Action Theme no. 6) for theelaboration of programmes of conservation of naturaland semi-natural rivers and their wetland areas. Thelandscape of the park is a mosaic formed of riparianoak, narrow-leaved ash, alder and willow woods,moist pastures, areas of water, both running andstanding water, fragmented agricultural holdings andelongated villages with narrow yards, gardens andorchards (Table 1). The mosaic landscape of the kindthat we can find in Lonjsko Polje is unique in Europe.The wetland habitats in Posavina represent the typicalCentral European landscape of the river valleys thatexisted more generally some 150 years ago.

The Physical Planning Programme of the Republic ofCroatia (Chapter 5.4), relating to the landscape,commits itself to the preservation of and focus on theidentity of this area, as a landscape with a highdegree of naturalness.


39



Korištenje površina u Parku prirodeLonjsko polje

Poljoprivreda je tradicionalanog tipa i po uzgajanimbiljnim i �ivotinjskim vrstama i po naèinu korištenjaresursa (Gugiæ, 1999). Livade se koriste kao pašnjaciili “košenice” na kojima pasu autohtone pasmine:Turopoljske svinje, konj Hrvatski posavac. Šume uPPPLP pokrivaju više od polovice prostora parka. Uparku se nalazi 58 % nizinskih šuma Srednjegposavlja. To su uglavnom šume hrasta lu�njaka sgrabom ( ; šumehrasta lu�njaka s �utilovkom (

); šume poljskog jasena s kasnimdrijemovcem ( ).Šume su ekonomske na 99 % površina. Trenutnosamo 1% šuma ima zaštitnu ili sliènu namjenu.Ekonomski su vrlo va�ne jer sadr�e èak oko12.000.000 m vrijedne drvne mase (na 35.000 ha;I.Milkoviæ usmeno, Hrvatske šume Zagreb). Unaseljima je oèuvana tradicionalna drvena gradnja istari naèina �ivota (Mavar, 2000). Bioraznolikostpodruèja iskazana je posebice bogatstvom fauneptica (234 vrste/134 gnjezdarice) i nazoènošæu vrstakao što su �lièarka ( ), štekavac( ), orao kliktaš ( ),patka njorka nyroca), crna ( ) ibijela roda ( ) s oko 500 gnijezdeæihparova u podruèju, kosac ( ) sa 400pjevajuæih mu�jaka ( 1999).Bogatstvo druge faune, naprimjer riba, 45 vrsta(Mrakovèiæ i sur. 2002), a meðu beskralje�njacimavretenaca - 39 vrsta (Hill, 1998; Jelenkoviæ, 1983),potvrðuje veliku bioraznolikost podruèja. Oèuvanoststarih antropogenih staništa poput vla�nih pašnjaka ilivada podr�ava oko 600 biljnih vrsta, napose vrstalivada i moèvara (Wattendorf, 2001).

Svjetska zaštiæena baština se dugo vremena dijelilana kulturnu i prirodnu. Tek u posljednje vrijemezakljuèeno je da su neki lokaliteti zanimljivi iz obarazloga, kulturnog i prirodnog. Lonjsko polje svakakopripada toj skupini.

Tablica 1.

Carpino betuli - Quercetum roboris

Genisto elate -

Quercetum roboris

Leucoio-Fraxinetum angustifoliae

Platalea leucorodia

Haliaeetus albicilla Aquila pomarina

(Aythya Ciconia nigra

Ciconia ciconia

Crex cerex

Schneider-Jacoby,

3

Table 1. Land Use in Lonjsko Polje Nature Park

Agriculture is of the traditional type, with respect toboth the animal and plant species raised and the wayin which resources are used (Gugiæ, 1999). Themeadows are used as pastureland or as haymeadows in which indigenous breeds graze: theTuropolje hog, the Posavac breed of horse. Theforests in Lonjsko Polje Nature Park cover more thanhalf the area of the park. The park contains 58% ofthe lowland forests of Central Posavina. There aremainly common oak and hornbeam forests (

); common oak with broom( ); forests ofnarrow-leaved ash with snowflake(

). Over 99% of the area,the woods are used commercially. At the moment,only 1% of the forest area has a conservation orsimilar purpose. The woods are economically veryimportant because they contain about 12,000,000cubic metres of valuable timber reerve (over 35,000ha; oral communication, I. Miloviæ, Croatian Forests,Zagreb). In the settlements the traditional woodenarchitecture and manner of life has been preserved(Mavar, 2000). The biodiversity is manifestedparticularly in the richness of the bird life (234species/134 nesting species), and the presence ofsuch species as the spoonbill ( ),the white tailed eagle ( ), the seaeagle ( ), the ferruginous duck( ), the black ( ) and whitestork ( ), of which there are about 500nesting Paris in the area, the corn crake ( )with about 400 singing males ( ,1999). The abundance of other animals, fish forexample (Mrakovèiæ et al. 2002), and among theinvertebrates the dragonflies - 39 species (Hill, 1998;Jelenkoviæ, 1983) confirms the enormousbiodiversity of the area. The degree of conservationof the old anthropogenic habitats, like the moistpastures and the water meadows, supports about600 plant species, particularly meadow and marshspecies (Watenndorf, 2001).

The protected heritage of the world has for a longtime been divided into the cultural and the natural.Only in recent times has it been determined thatsome sites are interesting for both reasons, the

Carpinobetuli - Quercetum roborisGenisto elate - Quercetum roboris

Leucoio-Fraxinetum angustofoliae

Platalea leucorodiaHaliaeetus ablicilla

Aquila pomarinaAythya nyroca Ciconia nigra

Ciconia ciconiaCrex cerex

Schneider-Jacoby





Demogafsko stanje u PPLP oznaèavaju depopulacijai rast prosjeène starosti stanovnika (Kovaèeviæ,2001). Park je naseljen sa 4370 stanovnika unaseljima u parku (Tablica 1.). No treba uzeti u obzir iokolna naselja èiji stanovnici koriste dobra u parku.

cultural and the natural. And Lonjsko Polje certainlybelongs to this group.

The demographic state of Lonjsko Polje Nature Parkis characterised by depopulation and a rise in theaverage age of the inhabitants (Kovaèeviæ, 2002).The Park has a population of 4370 in its settlements(Table). But the surrounding settlements theinhabitants of which use the goods in the Park shouldalso be taken into consideration.


41

Tablica 1. Promjena broja stanovnika u naseljima PP Lonjsko polje u zadnjih 30 godina.



Table 1. Changes in the population of the settlements of Lonjsko Polje Nature Park in the last 30 years

U populaciji prevladavaju starije dobne skupine uzjasno vidljiv manjak mladih.

starosna struktura stanovništva naselja je sljedeæa.

od 0 - 19 godina starosti 24,6 %od 20 - 59 godina starosti 50,5 %60 i više godina starosti 24,9%

Stanovništvo se uglavnom bavi poljoprivredom namalim površinama i uzgaja uglavnom tradicijskekulture (kukuruz, pšenica). Do 3 ha po domaæinstvuima oko 60 % kuæanstava (Štambuk 2001). Glavniprihod po domaæinstvu ipak samo u 40%domaæinstava potjeæe od poljoprivrede (Poljanec-Boriæ 2001). Veæe okrupnjene oraniène površine bilesu do 1990. u vlasništvu Poljoprivrednih kombinata, asada ih obraðuje mali broj poduzetnika i neštodomaæih poljoprivrednika.

Prostor parka prirode veæim dijelom je dio sustavaobrane od poplava Srednjeg posavlja. Najni�i dijelovi(veæinom u vlasništvu dr�ave) pokriveni najvrednijimvla�nim staništima (pašnjaci, šume, manji vodenitokovi) dio su retencijskog prostora u koji se upuštajuvisoke vode Save za vrijeme opasnosti od poplava.Na taj se naæim imitira prirodna dinamika plavljenjaovih prostora. No izgraðenost vodoprivredneinfrastrukture i dimamika upotrebe prosotra za tenamjene ipak u nekoliko odstupa od prirodnesituacije i orginalnih planova izraðenih na poèetkuostvarenja ideje (Petrièec i drugi 2004).

Park prirode je u Hrvatskoj, prema Zakonu o zaštitiprirode (“Narodne novine” broj 30/94), prostrano,prirodno ili dijelom kultivirano podruèje snaglašenim estetskim, ekološkim, odgojno -obrazovnim, kulturno - povijesnim i turistièko -rekreacijskim vrijednostima. U Parku prirode sudopuštene djelatnosti i radnje kojima se ne

�

�

�

TEMELJNE POSTAVKE IZRADEPROSTORNOG PLANA PARKAPRIRODE LONJSKO POLJE

The population is dominated by the elderly groups,with a clearly visible shortfall of young people.

the age structure of the population is as follows:

from 0 - 19 years of age, 24.6%from 20 - 59 years, 50.5%60 and above, 24.9%

The population is mainly agricultural, occupying smallfarms and mainly cultivating the traditional corps(maize and wheat). About 60% of households haveup to 3 hectares (Štambuk 2001). The earnings perhousehold only in 40% of all the households thoughderive principally from agriculture (Poljanec -Boriæ2001). Any major consolidated arable land was up to1990 owned by the socialist-style agribusinesses(called PIKs), now farmed by a small number ofentrepreneurs and some of the local farmers.

The land of the Nature Park is mostly part of the flooddefence system of Central Posavina. The lowestparts (mainly owned by the state) are covered withthe most valuable wetland habitats (pastures,forests, small streams) and are part of the floodwaterretention area into which the high waters of the Savaare released during the time of danger from floods.In this manner the natural dynamics of flooding in thearea are mimicked. But the development of the watermanagement infrastructure and the dynamics ofland use for this purpose nevertheless diverge inseveral ways from the natural situation and theoriginal plans drawn up at the beginning of theimplementation of the idea (Petrièec et al, 2004).

A Nature Park in Croatia, according to the NatureProtection Law (Official Gazette, no. 30/94) is anextensive, natural or partially cultivated area withmarked aesthetic, ecological, educational, culturaland historical, tourist and recreational values.Economic activities and actions that do notjeopardise its basic roles and features are permittedwithin it.

�

�

�

THE FUNDAMENTAL PREMISESBEHIND THE ELABORATION OFTHE ZONING PLAN OF LONJSKOPOLJE NATURE PARK





ugro�avaju njegove bitne znaèajke i uloge.

Specifiènost Parka prirode Lonjsko polje odra�avase i u ovom Prostornom planu, koji kroz zaštitu iodr�avanje njegovih prirodnih vrijednosti, opstanakmalih seoskih cjelina i njihove socijalne strukture,tradicionalne poljoprivrede i zaštite kulturne baštine,nastoji osuvremeniti �ivot i podiæi kulturu i standard�ivljenja na Europske standarde 21. stoljeæa.Institucija Parka prirode nameæe se pri tome ne samokao garant oèuvanja prirodne baštine veæ i pokretaèsocio-ekonomskog razvoja kraja kao instrumentcentralne dr�ave koja skrbi o ukupnim vrijednosti ipotencijalima podruèja (Poljanec-Boriæ, 2001.,Štambuk, Poljanec-Boriæ, 2001).

Ovakovo veliko podruèje od cca 506 km , postavlja uzaštiti vrlo velike i zahtjevne ciljeve.

Razlièiti interesi korisnika prostora (Hrvatskih šuma,Hrvatskih voda, poljoprivrednika, domaæegstanovništva, turista, lovaca, ribolovaca, zaštitaraprirode i kulturne baštine, šire društvene zajednice..)nametnuli su usklaðivanje i dogovaranje (Gugiæ1999a).

Iz svega ovoga proizašlo je nekoliko temeljnihodrednica na kojima se zasniva organizacijaprostora, zoniranje, odnosno ovaj Prostorni planPPLP, a to su:

oèuvanje prirode (biljnih i �ivotinjskih vrsta,staništa) i posebno vrijednih dijelova okoliša

oèuvanje tradicionalne kulturne baštine

oèuvanje tradicionalnog oblika poljoprivredneproizvodnje

usklaðivanje rada, �ivota i proizvodnje sazahtjevima zaštite Parka prirode

uravnote�enje i podizanje demografske strukture

spreèavanje i reorganizacija intervencija na okoliš,kao što su lov, ribolov, sjeèa šuma, kontrolapoplavljivanja i sl.

razvoj turizma i poljoprivrede

podizanje standarda �ivota i rada na naèin da se neugro�avaju prirodne i kulturne vrijednosti.

Za razliku od stanja drugdje u Europi gdje se zaštitariprirode suoèavaju sa problemima kako ponovnouspostaviti tradicionalne oblike korištenja zemljišta ioèuvanja prirode, zadatak ovog prostornog plana jebio odr�ati najpovoljnije zateèene odnose priroda-èovjek-prostor.

2

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

The specific features of Lonjsko Polje Nature Park isreflected in the Zoning Plan, which throughconservation and the maintenance of its naturalvalues, through the survival of the small ruralsettlements and their social structure, traditionalagriculture and the conservation of the culturalheritage, endeavours to bring life up to date and toraise the culture and living standard to the Europeanlevels of the 21st century. The institution of naturepark has not been invoked only as guarantee of thepreservation of the natural heritage, but also as agenerator of social and economic development forthe region, an instrument of the central government,which is concerned with the overall values andpotentials of the area (Poljanec-Boriæ, 2001;Štambuk, Poljanec-Boriæ, 2001).

An area of this large size, ca 506 square kilometres,necessarily involves very large and demandingconservation goals.

The various interests of the users of the area (CroatianForests, Croatian Water, farmers, the local population,tourists, hunters, anglers and fishermen, nature andculture conservationists, and broadly-based socialcommunities) have meant that there was a necessityfor negotiation and agreement (Gugiæ 1999a).

From all this, a number a number of basicdetermining factors on which the organisation of theland, that is, this Zoning Plan of Lonjsko Polje NaturePark are based, as follows:

conservation of nature (plant and animal species,habitats) and particularly valuable parts of theenvironment;

conservation of the traditional cultural heritage;

conservation of the traditional form of agriculturalproduction;

harmonising work, life and production with therequirements to protect the nature Park;

balancing and improving the demographicstructure;

prevention of, or reorganisation of, interventions inthe environment, such as hunting, fishing, felling,flood control and so on;

development of tourism and agriculture;

raising the standard of life and work in such a waythat they do not jeopardise the natural and culturalvalues.

Unlike the situation elsewhere in Europe, whereconservationists are faced with problems of how to re-establish traditional forms of land use and preservationof nature, the assignment of this zoning plan was tomaintain the most useful and beneficial relationsbetween man-nature-land already there in situ.

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�


43



ZONIRANJE

Podjela zaštiæenog podruèja u zasebne (ilipreklopljene) dijelove (zone) radi lakšeg isvrsishodnijeg upravljanja i ostvarivanja ciljevazaštite u Hrvatskoj nije razraðena. Poseban problempostoji u primjeni zoniranja na razini Prostornihplanova. U njima sezone pojavljuju kao rezervacijaprostora za odreðene namjene. Tu se pojavljujep rob lem uk lapan ja funkc i ja p ros to ra upojednostavljenu dvodimenzionalnu sliku kojuprostorni planovi najèešæe opisuju. Planoviupravljanja koji u Hrvatskoj još ne postoje zazaštiæena podruèja, zone ipak do�ivljavaju namultifunkcionalnoj razini i višedimenzionalnomprikazu. Postojeæa rješenja u planovima nacionalnihparkova i nekih parkova prirode svode se ipak naklasiènu podjelu na zonu stroge zaštite, zonuvišenamjenske upotrebe, zonu infrastrukture inaselja i (ako) zaštitnu zonu (buffer). Ova podjela jemanje više usvojena kao temelj za izradu Hrvatskogstandarda zoniranja zaštiæenih podruèja u programuizrade Planova upravljanja u KEC projektu. Predla�use slijedeæe zone: Zona stroge zaštite, Zona aktivnezaštite, Zona korištenja, Tampon (prijelazna) zona.

Dok je ova podjela unekoliko prihvaljiva za Planoveupravljanja (prije svega u nacionalnim parkovima),za potrebe zoniranja na razini Prostornog planapojavljuju se teškoæe u njenoj primjeni. Posebno seodnosi na podruèja kao što je PPLP u kojima se ciljevizaštite teško mogu ogranièiti na mala podruèja ilidrugaèiji reèeno cijeli prostor tra�i mjere anaga�iranezaštite jer vrijednost koja se zaštiæuje ovisi o socio-ekološkom djelovanju cijelog prostora. IUCN-ovapodjela na Zonu stroge zaštite, Zonu aktivne zaštite iZonu korištenja, mo�e biti samo osnovna podloga zazoniranje takvog podruèja. Višenamjenska prirodapodrèja PPLP kada se isti prostor koristi za najmanjetri svrhe zahtjevao je poseban pristup i naodreðivanju prirode zona u smislu re�ima koji u njimavladaju. Osnovni pristupi: propisane moguænosti(odreðene raznim dozvolama za korištenje dobara,preskriptivni pristup), te zabranjivanje moguænosti(potpuno iskljuæivanje odreðenih radnji, restriktivnipristup), primjenjeni su u odreðivanju re�imaupotrebe više u korist preskriptivnih mjera. Razlog jesvakako priroda PPLP u kojem ekonomskedjelatnosti razumno odreðene u provoðenju nenarušavaju (èesto suprotno) prirodne vrijednostipodruèja. Trajnost potsavljenih zona u Prostornom

ZONING

The division of protected areas into separate oroverlapping parts or zones for easier and moreeffective management and for the achievement of theobjectives of conservation has not been worked out inCroatia as a whole. A special problem inheres in theapplication of zoning at the level of various physicalplans. In them, zones figure as land areas set aside forgiven purposes. There is the problem of working thefunctions of the land into a simplified two-dimensionalimage that physical or zoning plans most oftendescribe. The management plans, which do not yetexist in Croatia for conservation areas, neverthelesstake zones at a multi-functional level and in a multi-dimensional depiction. The existing approaches inthe plans for the national parks and some of the natureparks nevertheless come down to the classicaldivision into a zone of strict conservation, a zone ofmulti-purpose use, a zone for the infrastructure andthe settlements and (if it exists) a buffer zone. Thisdivision has been more or less adopted as a basis forthe elaboration of the Croatian standard zoning ofconservation areas in the programme for theelaboration of the Management Plans in the KECproject. The following zones are proposed: StrictConservation Zone, Active Conservation Zone, UseZone, Buffer or Transition Zone.

While this division is to some extent acceptable formanagement plans (above all in the national parks),for the purpose of zoning at the level of the PhysicalPlan certain difficulties appear when it needs to beapplied. This particularly refers to areas such asLonjsko Polje Nature Park in which the objectives ofconservation can hardly be restricted to small areasor, in other words, the whole of the area requiresmeasures of engaged or active, hands-on,conservation, because the value that is beingprotected depends on the socio-ecological activity ofthe whole area. The IUCN division into a StrictConservation Zone, an Active Conservation Zoneand a Use Zone can be only the basic point ofdeparture for the zoning of such an area. The multi-purpose nature of the area of the Lonjsko PoljeNature Park, when the same land area is used for atleast three purposes, required a distinctive andseparate approach, and the definition of the nature ofthe zones from the point of view of the regimesprevailing in them. The basic approaches: theregulation of opportunities (by various licenses forthe use of assets, goods, a prescriptive approach),and the prohibition of opportunities (total exclusion ofcertain actions, a restrictive approach), have beenapplied in the determination of use regimesprivileging rather prescriptive measures. The reasonlies in the particular character of Lonjsko Polje





planu kao i u Planovima upravljanja mo�e varirati odprivremenih zona (bli�e upravljaèkim potrebama), dodugotrajnih zona. Zone u PPLP su uglavnompostavljene kao dugotrajno zamišljene zone.Preklapanje podruèja pojedinih zona mo�e stvoritizbrku u shvaèanju korisnika (interesnih skupina) i uzakonskim odredbama vezanim uz zone. Ono jeuglavnom izbjegnuto u zoniranju PPLP. No podruèjaobavljanja pojedinih aktivnosti (posjeèivanje, ribolov -športski i tradicijski i sl. preklapaju se sa osnovnimzonama i prote�u se obièno kroz nekoliko susjednihzona ukoliko je to dozvoljeno.

Radi svega navedenog osnovni pristup zoniranjuPPLP temeljio se na višekorisnièkoj prirodi zona,èinjenici da ukupan prostor nosi vrijednosti radi kojihje park ustanovljen, da je nu�no zoniranjem podr�atitradicijski naèin gospodarenja, prije svegaekstenzivno stoèarstvo, da zaštita i prirodne i kulturnebaštine ovisi o demografskom stanju u parku koje sene smije dodatno ote�avati, da gospodarenješumama i stanje šuma u parku nu�no dovode dopromjena u staništu koje su na pojedinih lokalitetimanepo�eljne (npr. plandišta kao dio pašnjaèkogsustava), da planovi za ureðenje i korištenje rijekeSave kao plovnog puta zahtjevaju poseban cjelovitpristup zaštit njene obale, da je do sada istra�ensamo dio prirodnih vrijednosti parka i mehanizamakoji ih podr�avaju, da je park dio šireg prostora dolineSave sliènih ili istih prirodnih i kulturnih vrijednosti. Zaprostor PPLP utvrðene su zone prikazane u tablici 2.i slici 1.:

Nature Park in which reasonably delimited economicactivities do not in their performance disturb (rather,frequently the opposite) the natural values of thearea. The duration of the zones established in theNature Park, as well as in the management plans,can vary from temporary zones (closer toadministrative requirements) to long-lasting zones.The zones in the Lonjsko Polje Nature Park have inthe main been set up as zones intended to be long-lasting. The overlapping of the areas of individualzones can create some confusion in theunderstandings of users (interest groups) and in thelegal provisions related to the zones. This is on thewhole avoided in the zoning in Lonjsko Polje. Theareas in which given activities are carried out -visiting, fishing, including angling and traditionalfisheries, and so on, overlap with the basic zones,and usually extend through several neighbouringzones, as far as is permitted.

For all this, the basic approach to zoning in theLonjsko Polje Nature Park is based on the multi-usenature of the zones, on the fact that the overall spacehas the values because of which the park wasestablished; and that it is necessary to support,through the zoning, the traditional nature of farming,primarily with extensive animal husbandry; thatconservation of the natural and the cultural heritageis intimately dependent on the demographic state ofthe park, which must not be further aggravated; thatthe management of the forests and the condition ofthe forests in the park necessarily lead to changes inthe habitat that are undesirable in some of thelocalities (at the rest and shade areas, which are apart of the pasturing system); that plans forengineering and using the Sava River as a navigablewaterway require a special and overall approach tothe protection of its banks; that so far only some ofthe natural values of the park and the mechanismsthat support them have been explored, and that thepark is a part of the wider area of the Sava valley,which has similar or the same natural and culturalvalues. For the area of the Lonjsko Polje NaturePark, the zones shown in Table 2 and Figure 1 havebeen laid down:


45





Tablica 2. Zone zaštite u prijedlogu Prostornog plana Parka prirode Lonjsko polje.



Table 2. Zone 1. - Zone of the special protection in proposal of the Phisical Plan for Lonjsko Polje Nature Park


47

Za svaku zonu zaštite utvrðeni su kriteriji korištenjaprostora, kao i moguænosti i naèin obnove postojeæih iizgradnje novih graðevina, te postupanja u prostorutemeljem odredbi opæih zakona dr�ave, posebnihpravila Parka ili lokalne uprave.

Svi vodotoci, osim rijeke Save (koja predstavljaposebnu zonu - V zonu zaštite), predstavljaju diozone u koju su uvršteni, te se s njima postupa premaodredbama za odreðenu zonu.

jezona koja ukljuèuje ove dijelove Parka prirode koji posvojim znaèajkama predstavljaju posebnu ilinajvrijedniju (po bioraznolikosti, krajobraznojvrijednosti, ekološkoj ulozi, samostalno ili kao diosustava) ili tipiènu prirodnu pojavu unutar pojedinogtipa staništa. U ovu zonu su ukljuèena:

podruèje najveæe bioraznolikosti/ vrijednostikljuèno podruèje za opstanak posebno ugro�enihbiljnih i �ivotinjskih vrstapodruèje krajobraznih vrijednosti.

Predlo�ena podruèja odgovaraju po prirodi i ciljevimazaštite kategorijama opisanim u Zakonu o zaštitiprirode kao:

strogi rezervatposebni rezervatzaštiæeni krajolik

te podruèja odreðena Zakonom o šumama iPravilnikom o ureðenju šuma kao:

zaštitne šume.

Pojedina šumska podruèja uvrštena su u ovu zonuzaštite iako su prirodne vrijednosti u njima jednakeokolnim šumskim cjelinama iz razloga kako bi seuspostavila mre�a šumskih dijelova u kojima æe seosigurati odr�ivi, što prirodniji razvoj šumskihzajednica kao osnove moguænosti gnije�ðenjaorlova, crnih roda, sova, manjih ptica gnjezdaricaduplji, fauni šišmiša i raznih skupina bezkralje�njaka(osigurati povezanostcijelog susstava šuma). U 28izdvojih podruèja u ovoj zoni re�im aktivnostiograniæen je od potpune zabrane (osim istra�ivanja inekih zahvata zaštite), do ciljanih ograniæenja ilipromjena prirode upravljanja (primjer mjera i re�imana plandištu: Šumu-plandište treba odr�avatineprekidno u obliku visoke šume. Uklanjati samostabla koja predstavljaju opasnost za stoku. Zaštitašuma od štetnika smije se provoditi u sluèaju jakogkalamiteta i stvarne opasnosti za okolne šume. Pri

1. ZONA ZAŠTITE - ZONA POSEBNE ZAŠTITE

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

For each zone, criteria for the use of the area havebeen established, as have the possibilities and themanner of renovating existing and the construction ofnew buildings, and the procedures in the landaccording to the provisions of the universal laws ofthe country, and the special rules of the Park and thelocal administration.

All the streams, apart from the Sava River (which is aspecial zone in itself, Conservation Zone V), are partof the zone in which they are located, and they aredealt with according to the provisions established forthat given zone.

is a zone that includes allthe parts of the Nature Park that according to theircharacteristics constitute a special, particular, that is,the most valuable area (in terms of biodiversity,landscape value, ecological role, independently oras part of a system) or some typical naturalphenomenon within a given type of habitat. Thiszone includes:

the area of the greatest biodiversity / valuethe key area for the survival of particularlyendangered plant and animal species the areaof landscape values.

The areas proposed correspond in their nature andconservation objectives to the categories describedin the Nature Conservation Law, as:

strict reservespecial reserveprotected landscape

ad areas defined by the Forests Law and the ForestManagement Regulations as:

conservation forests.

Given forest areas are put into this protection zone ifthe natural values in them are the same as thesurrounding forest units, so that a network of parts ofthe forests should be established in which asustainable and as far as possible naturaldevelopment of the forest communities can beensured, for they are the basic requirements for thenesting of eagles, black storks, owls, small birds thatnest in hollow trees, bats and various groups ofinvertebrates (ensuring the linkage of the wholesystem of the forests). In the 28 distinguishable areasin this zone, the activity regime is restricted in a rangefrom total prohibition (except for research and somekind of conservation operations) to targetedrestrictions or changes in the nature of themanagement (for example, the measures and regimeat the rest-and-shade areas: “A forest rest-and-shade area should be uninterruptedly maintained inthe form of high forest. Only those trees are to beremoved that are dangerous to the animals. Protection

C O N S E R VAT I O N Z O N E I - S P E C I A LCONSERVATION ZONE

�

�

�

�

�

�



tome koristiti prvenstveno biološke preparate. Nijedozvoljen lov na površini zaštiæenog krajolika.Lokalitet je namijenjen posjeæivanju. šume uvijek uobliku zrele sastojine). Ova zona ukljuèuje i veæ prijeproglašene rezervate: - posebni rezervat(zoološki - ornitološki)proglašen 1963. godineornitološkim rezervatom; - posebni rezervat(ornitološki), proglašena je specijalnim ornitološkimrezervatom 1969. godine.

je zona koja obuhvaæa dijeloveParka prirode na kojima se osnovne djelatnosti ukontinuitetu obavljaju na tradicionalan naèin, više ilimanje usklaðen s prirodnim ciklusima i potrebamaopstanka pojedinih vrsta i zajednica.

Obzirom na osnovnu djelatnost ovo podruèje jepodijeljeno na:

2.a. zonu tradicionalnog pašnjaèkog sustava2.b. zonu nizinskih poplavnih šuma2.c. zonu poljoprivrede na mozaiku usitnjenihparcela

Zona 2.a. - zona tradicionalnog pašnjaèkog sustavaukljuèuje sve pašnjaèke površine u dr�avnomvlasništvu i sjenokoše unutar i izvan retencijskogprostora, kao i površine u obalnom pojasu rijekeSave koje se redovito koriste za ispašu krupne stoke iperadi (tzv. poloji). Re�im korištenja vezan je uzodr�anje djelatnost tradicionalne poljoprivrede, kojuèini stoèarska poljopriiredna proizvodnja, s prete�noautohtonim ili udomaæenim pasminama konja, krava,svinja i gusaka prilagoðena uvjetima nizinskogpoplavnog podruèja, koja se temelji na sustavu"pašarenja."

Zona 2.b. - zona nizinskih poplavnih šuma ukljuèujesve šume i šumska zemljišta u Parku prirode, osimšuma u uskom pojasu od rijeke do nasipa uz rijekuSavu, te šuma koje su svrstane u 1 zonu zaštite.Re�im:

Krapje ðol

Rakita

2. ZONA ZAŠTITE - ZONA TRADICIONALNOG

GOSPODARENJA

�

�

�

U zoni 2b dozvoljeno je gospodarenje

šumama na temelju šumsko - gospodarskih osnova,

godišnjih planova gospodarenja, te odredaba

Pravilnika o unutarnjem redu Parka prirode. Ali u cilju

zaštite autohtonih pasmina i tradicijskog pašnjaèkog

sustava: Ispaša svinja i �irenje imaju posebnu

zaštitu.

Ispaša svinja je dozvoljena iskljuèivo u razdoblju i na

površinama predviðenim šumsko-gospodarskom

osnovom, odnosno predviðenim Planom upravljanja

"pašnjacima."

of the forest from pests can be carried out in the caseof some major disaster or real danger for thesurrounding forest. In so doing, it is primarily biologicalpreparations that are to be used. It is not allowed tohunt in the area of a protected landscape. A localitymeant for visiting the forest must always be in the formof a mature stand.”). This zone includes the firstreserves proclaimed: - a special reserve(zoological and ornithological) was proclaimed a birdsanctuary in 1963; - a special ornithologicalreserve was so proclaimed in 1969.

is a zone that covers theparts of the Nature Park in which the basic activities, inan unbroken or ongoing way, are and have beencarried out in a traditional manner, more or less inharmony with the natural cycles and the needs for thesurvival of given species and communities.

With reference to the basic activity, this area issubdivided into:

2a, Traditional Pasturing System Zone2b, Lowland Riparian Forest Zone2 c, Mosaic Farming Zone.

Zone 2 a - the traditional pasturing system zone,includes all the grazing or pasturing land owned bythe state and the hayfields within and outside thefloodwater retention area, as well as the areas in theriparian zone of the Sava that are regularly used forthe grazing of large animals and fowl (they are calledpoloj, dykes). The use regime is related to themaintenance of the traditional agriculture, consistingof animal husbandry, with mainly indigenous anddomesticated breeds of horse, cow, hog and goose,adapted to the conditions of the lowland floodplainareas, which are the basis of the system of“pasturing”.

Zone 2 b - the zone of lowland riparian forests,including all the forests and forest lands in the NP,apart from the forests in the narrow zone from theriver to the embankment along the Sava River, andthe forests that are classified into Conservation ZoneI. The Regime:

Krapje ðol

Rakita

CONSERVATION ZONE II - ZONE OFTRADITIONAL LAND USE

�

�

�

In Zone 2b, forest management isallowed according to the forest management plan,the annual management plans, and the provisions ofthe NP House Rules. But for the purpose of theconservation of the indigenous breeds and thetraditional pasturing system: The grazing of hogsand foraging are protected separately. The grazingof hogs is allowed only in the period and in the areasprovided for by the forest management plan, orprovided for in the Pasture Management Plan.Croatian Forests is charged with providing in theforest management areas, if some interest isexpressed, areas for the grazing of hogs.






49

Hrvatske šume su du�ene u šumskogospodarskim

jedinicama, za koje postoji interes, osigurati površine

za ispašu svinja.

U ovoj zoni zabranjene

su radnje koje trajno mijenjaju prirodnu dinamiku i

svojstva rijeène obale (u smislu tipa podloge, tipa

vegetacije, nagiba, meandriranja i sl). Iznimno,

dopuštena je izgradnja drvenih pristana za turistièke

brodove, postava vodenica (rekonstrukcija) i

ureðenje skelnih prijelaza. Zabranjena je sadnja i

uzgajanje alohtonih šumskih vrsta u planta�ama.

Obalna zona rijeke Save u naseljima treba biti

Zona 2.c. - zona poljoprivrede na mozaiku usitnjenihparcela ukljuèuje vrtove, voænjake, oranice i livade namozaiku usitnjenih parcela izmeðu Èigoèa i Trebe�a,oko Osekova, Kraljeve Velik*, Piljenice* i Plesma* . (*naselja su izvan granica Lonjskog polja)

ukljuèuje poljoprivredne površine u Parku prirodekoje su veæ obuhvaæene postupcima komasacije, aneke su i meliorirane. Kako potpuno moderniziranapoljoprivredna proizvodnja sa svim negativnimuèincima nije primjerena Parku prirode, ova je zonapodijeljena u dvije podzone:

3.a. - zona prilagoðavanja poljoprivredneproizvodnje3.b. - zona prenamjene zemljišta.

Zona 3b je zona prenamjene i restauracije zemljišta,a èini je poljoprivredno zemljište uz rijeku Savu ublokovima: Bukovica (t.j. Puska); Višnjièki Bok (t.j.Drenov Bok); Košutarica; Gornji Bok i Donji Bok (t.j.Mlaka I i Mlaka II), a predviðeno je za djelomiènu ilipotpunu obnovu re�ima plavljenja.

ukljuèuje zonenaselja, ceste, pruge, veæe privredne i drugegraðevne objekte koji predstavljaju suvisle cjeline inisu izdvojeno smještene u nekoj drugoj zoni. U ovojzoni znatan je utjecaj èovjeka, te je naèin rada,gradnja i gospodarenje propisano s ciljem oèuvanjatradicijske strukture naselja i autohtonosti drvenoggraditeljstva.

ukljuèuje obalu rijeke Save u pojasu od crte srednjegvodostaja do prvog nasipa odnosno ceste u dijelu odsela Mlaka nizvodno. Re�im:

3. ZONA ZAŠTITE - ZONA POLJOPRIVREDE NA

OKRUPNJENIM I MELIORIRANIM PARCELAMA

4. ZONA ZAŠTITE - ZONA NASELJA,

PROMETNICAI INFRASTRUKTURE

5. ZONA ZAŠTITE- OBALNA ZONA RIJEKE SAVE

�

�

Zone 2c - the zone of farming on a mosaic of smallplots, including gardens, orchards, ploughed fieldsand meadows, between Èigoè and Trebe�, aroundOsekovo, Kraljeva Velik*, Piljenica* and Plesma*(settlements beyond the borders of Lonjsko Polje)

includes the agricultural areas inthe NP that have already been involved inconsolidation operations, some of them also havingbeen improved. Since totally modernised agriculturalproduction with all its negative effects is notappropriate to the NP, this zone has been divided intotwo sub-zones:

3a - zone of adjustment of agricultural production3b - zone of change of use of land.

Zone 3b is a zone in which the land is planned forchange of use, or restoration to the previous state; itconsists of agricultural land along the Sava River, inthe blocks: Bukovica (i.e. Puska); Višnjièki Bok (i.e.Drenov Bok); Košutarica; Gornji Bok and Donji Bok(i.e. Mlaka I and Mlaka II); this area is planned forpartial or total renewal of the inundation regime.

includes the zones of villages,roads, railway lines, major industrial or other built upareas that constitute coherent wholes and are notseparately located in some other zone. In this zonethe human impact is considerable, and the manner ofwork, construction and management are prescribedwith the aim of preserving the traditional structure ofthe settlements and the indigenous local woodenarchitecture.

- includes the banks of the Sava inthe zone stretching from the line of mean water levelto the first embankment or road in the part from thevillage of Mlaka downstream. The regime is:

CONSERVATION ZONE II I - ZONE OFAGRICULTURE ON CONSOLIDATED ANDIMPROVED LAND

CONSERVATION ZONE IV - ZONE OFSETTLEMENTS, ROADS AND RAILWAYS,INFRASTRUCTURE

CONSERVATION ZONE V - RIPARIAN ZONE OFTHE SAVA RIVER

�

�

In thiszone actions are prohibited if they permanentlychange the natural dynamics and the characteristicsof the river banks (in the sense of type of soil, type ofvegetation, slope, meandering and so on).Exceptionally, the construction of wooden wharvesfor tourist boats, the establishment of water mills(reconstructions) and the development of ferries areallowed. It is forbidden to plant and cultivate importedforest species in plantations. The riparian zone of theSava in the settlements has to be organised in such a



ureðena na naèin oèuvanja karakteristiènih vizura na

vodotok i uspostavljanje vizurnog kontakta naselja i

vode.

Zakljuèci:

Park prirode Lonjsko polje je veliko podruèje (510km2) koje se prote�e lijevom obalom rijeke Save iobuhvæa mozaik staništa sa oæuvanim velikimkompleksima doprirodnih nizinskih šuma i vla�nihstaništa, vrijedne bioraznolikosti i oèuvane kulturnebaštine.

Zoniranje kao alat u upravljanju podruèjem iuspješnom oèuvanju i razvoju njegovih vrijednostimoralo se temeljiti na uva�avanju kompleksnostipodruèja i višenamjenskom korištenju podruèja sajasnom dominacijom potreba obrane od poplava,ekonomskog šumarstva, tradicijske poljoprivrede.

Podruèje je podijeljeno u pet zona:

: 2.a. zonu tradicionalnog pašnjaèkogsustava, 2.b. zonu nizinskih poplavnih šuma, 2.c.zonu poljoprivrede na mozaiku usitnjenih parcela;

spodzonama:3.a.-zona prilagoðavanja poljoprivredneproizvodnje, 3.b.-zona prenamjene zemljišta;

.

U zoniranju je zadr�ana zona posebne zaštite iako iona u višenamjenskom smislu i èesto u slu�bipodr�avanja i bioraznolikosti i osnovnog èimbenikapo�eljnih ekoloških procesa (tradicijsko stoèarenje).Ona ukupno zauzima oko 10 % površine parka štoodgovara IUCN-ovim preporukama za ovaj tipzaštiæenih podruèja.

Druge zone su odreðene na naæin da objedine svefunkcije va�ne za vrijednosti i procese koji proizlazeiz prirode, povijesti i re�ima koji omoguæuju gotovouobièajenu razinu ekonomskih akt ivnost istanovništva i drugih korisnika, a koje su utjecaniodreðenim pravilima u cilju sprijeèavanjanarušavanja po�eljnog stanja, onemoguæavanjapoboljšavanja stanja ili trajnog mjenjanja potencijalapodruèja.

Zoniranje PPLP u Prostornom planu je dobra osnovaza zoniranje PPLP u buduæem Planu upravljanja.Ono ne mora nu�no biti istovjetno ovom uProstornom planu, te mora biti detaljnije razraðeno -bli�e svakodnevnoj operativnoj slici upravljanjaparkom prirode.

Zona posebne

zaštite, Zona tradicijskog korištenja s

podzonama

Zona poljoprivrede na okrupnjenim površinama

Zona

naselja, prometnica i infrastrukture, Zona obale

rijeke Save

way as to preserve the characteristic views onto thewatercourse and the establishment of visual contactbetween the settlements and the water.

Conclusions:

Lonjsko Polje Nature Park is a large area, of some510 square kilometres, stretching along the left bankof the Sava River, embracing a mosaic of habitats,with well-preserved large complexes of semi-naturallowland forests and wetland habitats, of greatbiodiversity and a preserved cultural heritage.

Zoning as a tool in the management andadministration of the area and the successfulpreservation and development of its values had to bebased on respect for the complexity of the area andthe multi-purpose use of the area, with the needs forflood defence, commercial forestry, and traditionalagriculture being openly privileged.

The area is divided into five zones:

(2a, traditional pasturing zone; 2b,lowland riparian forests zone; 2c, mosaic agriculturezone);

with its sub-zones (3a, zone of adjustment toagricultural production, 3b, zone meant for change ofuse);

.

In the zoning process, a special conservation zonehas been retained, although it too is often inmultipurpose use, and it is often used for maintainingbiodiversity and the basic factor of desirableecological process (traditional animal husbandry). Itoccupies all told about 10% of the area of the park,which complies with IUCN recommendations for thistype of protected area.

The other zones are defined in such a way as to uniteall the functions that are important for the values andprocesses that derive from the nature, history andthe regimes that have enabled an almost regularlevel of economic activities for the population andother users, and that are affected by certain rules inorder to prevent any inroads being made upon thedesirable state of affairs, or of preventingimprovements to the state of affairs, or ofpermanently changing the potentials of the area.

The zoning of the Lonjsko Polje Nature Park in thePhysical Plan is a good basis for the zoning of the NPin the future Management Plan. It does notnecessarily have to be the same as in the PhysicalPlan, and it has to be worked out in detail - so as tobring it closer to the everyday operational realities ofthe management of the nature park.

the specialconservation zone, the traditional use zone, withits sub-zones

the agriculture on consolidated holdingszone

the settlements, roads and infrastructurezone; and the Sava River riparian zone






51

Zoniranje, kao i Prostorni plan bili su dio zajednièkognapora struènjaka, Uprave parka i interesnihskupina, provedenog kroz procese prepoznavanjavrijednosti, formuliranja jasnih stavova interesnihskupina i njihovog pozitivnog sukobljavanja, testvaranja dugoroène slike razvoja i zaštite parka išireg podruèja.

The Zoning and the Physical Plan were realisedthrough the common efforts of experts, the ParkAdministration and interest groups, carried outthrough processes of identifying the values,formulating the clear standpoints of the interestgroups and their positive interfacing, and thecreation of a long-term picture of the developmentand protection of the park and the wider area.







PRIJEDLOG UREÐENJA ZONAU PROSTORNOM PLANU PARKA PRIRODELONJSKO POLJE

Slika 1.

Figure 1.

Karta zona u prijedlogu Prostornog plana Parka prirode Lonjsko polje.

Map of zoning in proposal of the Phisical Plan for Lonjsko Polje Nature Park

I zona - zona posebne zaštiteI Zone of the special protection

II a zona - zona tradicijskog pašnjaèkog sustavaII a Zone of the traditional pasturing system

II b zona - zona nizinskih šumaII b Zone of the lowland forests

III a - zona prilagoðavanja poljoprivredne proizvodnjeIII a Zone of the adapted agriculture

III b - zona prenamjene zemljišta.III b Zone of the renaturate arable land

II c zona - zona poljoprivrede na mozaiku usitnjenih površinaII c Zone of the agriculture on the small parcels mosaic

Fig

.4.M

ap

ofzonin

g.

Slik

a4.K

art

azoniranja

.

Fig

.2.D

istr

ibution

ofth

epriority

anim

alspecie

s.

Slik

a2.R

aspro

sra

nje

nostpro

rite

tnih

vrs

ta�iv

otinja

.

Fig

.3.A

reas

ofbio

div

ers

ity

conserv

ations

import

ance

Silk

a3.P

odru

èja

od

va�nosti

za

zaštitu

bio

raznolik

osti.

Fig

.1.D

istr

ibution

ofth

ehabitats

and

priority

pla

ntspecie

s.

Slik

a1.P

rikaz

sta

niš

taipriorite

tnih

vrs

tabilj

aka. Anex

2.S

takehold

ers

Inte

restfo

rP

ark

Activitie

sP

rilo

g2.Z

ain

tere

siranostin

tere

snih

skupin

aza

aktivnosti

uP

ark

u

Documents

BILTEN PRIRODE PARK PARKA NATURE BULLETIN · 2019-05-07 · Bilten parka prirode Nature Park Bulletin Lonjsko polje Vol. 3/No. 1/2, 2001. Ovaj projekt je izraðen uz pomoæ LIFE financijskog