Ministers’ Deputies

CM Documents

CM(2005)42     22 March 2005[1]

——————————————

924 Meeting, 20 April 2005
9 Sustainable development

9.1 Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats

(Bern Convention, STE No. 104)
24th meeting of the Standing Committee (Strasbourg, 29 November-3 December 2004)

——————————————


1.         The Standing Committee of the Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats (ETS No. 104) met in Strasbourg from 29 November to 3 December 2004.

2.         In accordance with Article 14, paragraph 1, the Standing Committee followed the application of the Convention and it elected Mrs Véronique Herrenschmidt (France), Chair, and Mr Jòn Gunnar Ottòsson (Iceland), Vice-Chair. Mrs Ilona Jepsena (Latvia) is still member of the Bureau.

3.         The Committee decided unanimously to invite the following non-member states to attend its 25th meeting: Algeria, Belarus, Cape Verde, Holy See, Kazakhstan, Kyrghystan, Mauritania, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.

4.         The Committee adopted the following recommendations and declarations:

‑           Recommendation No. 109 (2004) on minimising adverse effects of wind power generation on wildlife (appendix 1);

‑           Recommendation No. 110 (2004) on minimizing adverse effects of above-ground electricity transmission facilities (power lines) on birds (appendix 2);

‑           Recommendation No. 111 (2004) on the proposed waterway through the Bystroe estuary (Danube Delta, Ukraine) (appendix 3);[2]

‑           Recommendation No. 112 (2004) on hydroelectric dams at Kárahnjúkar and Nordlingaalda (Iceland) (appendix 4);

‑           Recommendation No. 113 (2004) on the installation of a new antenna (Pluto II) in the Sovereign Base Areas (Akrotiri, Cyprus) (appendix 5);

‑           Declaration on the role of the Bern Convention in the preservation of biodiversity (appendix 6).

5.         The Committee requested the Secretariat to forward the recommendations and the declaration above to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for communication to the governments of all Council of Europe member states and other Parties to the Bern Convention.

6.         The Committee approved a work programme and budget for the year 2004, for a total amount of
€ 247,500  using around € 115,000 provided by the Council of Europe, and a reserve of some € 10,000 remaining from non-spent voluntary contributions. Parties are expected to provide new voluntary contributions in 2005.

7.         The Committee decided to hold its 25th meeting from 28 November to 2 December 2005.


Appendix 1

Recommendation No. 109 (2004) adopted on 3 December 2004 on minimising adverse effects of wind power generation on wildlife

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention,

Having regard to the aims of the Convention to conserve wild fauna and its natural habitats;

Recalling that Article 2 of the Convention requires Parties to take requisite measures to maintain the population of wild fauna at a level which corresponds in particular to ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, while taking account of economic requirements;

Recalling that Article 3.2 of the Convention requires each Contracting Party to undertake, in its planning and development policies and in its measures against pollution, to have regard to the conservation of wild fauna;

Recalling also the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) with its Resolution 7.5 on Wind Turbines and Migratory Species adopted by the 7th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (2002) (appendix 1) and recognising the intention of the CMS to increase cooperation with the Bern Convention;

Recalling also the Agreement on the Conservation of European Populations of Bats (EUROBATS) with its Resolution 4.7 on wind turbines and bat populations adopted by the 4th Session of the meeting of Parties (2003) (appendix 2);

Recognising the environmental benefits of wind energy especially for addressing climate change, and the significance of reducing climate change for the long-term survival of Europe’s wild species and their habitats;

Noting that wind farms in marine areas represent a relatively new technology for large-scale energy production, the actual effects of which on nature and on different components of biodiversity cannot be fully assessed or predicted on the basis of the currently available information;

Concerned to minimise the potential adverse impacts of wind turbines and associated infrastructure on wildlife and migratory species, as well as on their food sources and habitats, including:

(a)        loss of, or damage to, and disturbance of habitat (including permanent or temporary feeding, resting, and breeding habitats);

(b)        disturbance leading to displacement or exclusion, including barriers to movement (and commuting corridors);

(c)        collision mortality of birds in flight;

Recognising the need for a thorough environmental assessment procedure prior to selecting appropriate building sites and deciding on construction permits, in order to avoid damage to areas of particular ecological value;

Referring to the report Wind Farms and Birds: an analysis of the effects of wind farms on birds and guidance on environmental assessment criteria and site selection issues, prepared by BirdLife International for the Council of Europe T-PVS/Inf (2003) 12;


Aware of the need for robust, objective baseline studies to inform sensitive siting to minimise deleterious effects on birds, other wildlife and their habitats, and the need for regular post-construction monitoring at consented installations where there are environmental sensitivities;

Recommends that Contracting Parties to the Convention:

1.         take appropriate measures to minimise the potential adverse effects of wind turbines in wildlife;

2.         support and advance by involving also the wind energy sector and adequate monitoring and surveillance to improve understanding of the impact of wind farms and through this to provide the broader public with trustworthy information.[3]

Invites observer states to take note of this recommendation and implement it as appropriate.

Urges the Secretariat to develop appropriate guidelines on standard study methods, to inform the public of the Environmental Impact Assessment process and relevant legal procedures designed for habitat and species protection. For this purpose the Secretariat is advised to establish an open-ended group of experts and through it to open a broad consultation process involving the non-governmental organisations and representatives from the sector concerned.


Appendix 2

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species

of Wild Animals

Resolution 7.5*

WIND TURBINES AND MIGRATORY SPECIES

Adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its Seventh Meeting (Bonn, 18-24 September 2002)

       Recalling that Article II of the Convention acknowledges the need to take action to avoid any migratory species becoming endangered;

       Recalling also the need to preserve wildlife in the marine environment as stipulated in the relevant legislation of the European Community and in the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR), the Helsinki Convention on the Protection of the Baltic Sea Area, the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, and the Bergen Declaration of the Fifth International Conference on the Protection of the North Sea;

       Acknowledging Article VII of the Convention whereby the Conference of the Parties may make recommendations to the Parties for improving the effectiveness of this Convention;

       Considering that the Strategic Plan for 2000 ‑ 2005 adopted by Resolution 6.4 requires Parties to review the special problems faced by migratory animals in relation to various obstacles to migration and to propose remedial measures that may have widespread applicability;

       Recognising that Resolution 4.5 directs the Scientific Council inter alia to recommend solutions to the Conference of the Parties to problems relating to the scientific aspects of the implementation of the Convention in particular with regard to the habitats of migratory species;

       Recognising the environmental benefits of wind energy especially for addressing climate change, and the significance of reducing climate change for the long‑term survival of migratory species;

       Noting that wind turbines especially in marine areas represent a new technique of large scale energy production, the actual effects of which on nature and on different components of biodiversity cannot be fully assessed or predicted at present;

       Recognising the lack of sufficient and relevant research on such effects, especially on nature, and the lack of data on the distribution and migration of species concerned;

       Concerned about the possible negative impacts of wind turbines on migratory species of mammals and birds, as well as on their food sources and habitats e.g.:

(a)   destruction or disturbance of permanent or temporary feeding, resting, and breeding habitats;

(b)   increased collision risk for birds in flight;


(c)   through electric and magnetic fields of connecting power cables; or

(d)    emission of noise and vibrations into the water;

        Recognising the need for a thorough environmental impact assessment prior to selecting appropriate building sites and issuing construction permits, in order to avoid areas of particular ecological value and habitats with high nature conservation needs;

        Aware of the need to regularly monitor and assess the actual impacts of wind turbines by exchange of international experience and site-specific effect monitoring programmes in existing wind turbine plants; and

        Noting especially the potential risk that several hundred of such marine installations with heights up to 150 metres may present as obstacles in flyways, and wishing to minimise possible adverse effects on nature;

The Conference of the Parties to the

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

1.             Calls upon the Parties:

(a)       to identify areas where migratory species are vulnerable to wind turbines and where wind turbines should be evaluated to protect migratory species;

(b)      to apply and strengthen, where major developments of wind turbines are planned, comprehensive strategic environmental impact assessment procedures to identify appropriate construction sites;

(c)       to evaluate the possible negative ecological impacts of wind turbines on nature, particularly migratory species, prior to deciding upon permission for wind turbines;

(d)      to assess the cumulative environmental impacts of installed wind turbines on migratory species;

(e)       to take full account of the precautionary principle in the development of wind turbine plants, and to develop wind energy parks taking account of environmental impact data and monitoring information as it emerges and taking account of exchange of information provided through the spatial planning processes;

2.   Instructs the Scientific Council to assess existing and potential threats from offshore wind turbines in relation to migratory mammals and birds, including their habitats and food sources, to develop specific guidelines for the establishment of such plants and to report to the Conference of the Parties accordingly at its next meeting; and

3.    Invites relevant intergovernmental organizations as well as the European Community and the private sector to cooperate with CMS in efforts to minimise possible negative impacts of offshore wind turbines on migratory species.

* * *


Appendix 3

The Agreement of the Conservation of

European Populations of Bats

Resolution No. 4.7

WIND TURBINES AND BAT POPULATIONS

Adopted by the Session of the Meeting of Parties (Sofia, 22-24 September 2003)

The Meeting of the Parties to the Agreement on the Conservations of Populations of European Bats (hereafter “the Agreement”),

Recalling Article III, Paragraph 6 of the Agreement, which stipulates that “Each Party shall take such additional action as it considers necessary to safeguard populations of bats which it identifies as being subject to threat and shall report under Article VI on the action taken.”;

Appreciating Resolution 7.5 adopted by the Seventh Meeting of the Conference of Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) concerning Wind Turbines and Migratory Species;

Recognising that the Terms of Reference for the Advisory Committee give it the task to recommend solutions to the Meeting of Parties to problems relating to the scientific aspects of the implementation of the Agreement;

Further recognising the environmental benefits of wind energy especially for addressing climate change and the significance of reducing climate change for the longterm survival of bat populations;

Noting the potential of large scale development of wind turbines as a new technique of energy production for which the actual effects on bats are not fully assessed or predicted at present;

Noting also that there is existing evidence of mortalities of bats from wind turbines;

Concerned about the possible negative impacts of wind turbines on bat populations as well as their prey and habitats e.g.:

- destruction and disturbance of habitats and commuting corridors,

- destruction or disturbance of roosts,

- increased collision risk for bats in flight,

- through emission of ultrasound noise.

Recognising the need for a thorough environmental impact assessment prior to selecting appropriate construction sites in order to avoid areas of particular value to bat populations;

Aware of the need to regularly monitor and assess the actual impact of wind turbines by international exchange of information and by monitoring programmes at existing wind turbine plants;

Recognising the need for adequate relevant research on such effects on bats and the limited data available on bat populations potentially affected;

Noting especially the potential risk to bat populations that such installations may present; and

Wishing to minimise possible adverse effects on bat populations;


Decides to:

Request the Advisory Committee to assess the evidence of the impacts of wind turbines on bat populations and, if appropriate, to develop guidelines for assessing potential impacts on bats and for the establishment of wind turbines in accordance with the ecological requirements of bat populations;

Emphasise that until this task is completed, the Parties and Range States should take full account of the precautionary principle in the development of wind turbine plants and to take account of bats in planning processes relating to the siting of wind turbines, especially along migration routes and in areas of particular value to bat populations;

Encourage the Parties and Non-Party Range States to initiate and support further investigations and research on the impact of wind turbines on bats.


Appendix 4

Recommendation No. 110 (adopted on 3 December 2004) on minimizing adverse effects of above-ground electricity transmission facilities (power lines) on birds

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention,

Having regard to the aims of the Convention to conserve wild fauna and its natural habitats;

Recalling that Article 2 of the Convention requires Parties to take requisite measures to maintain the population of wild fauna at a level which corresponds in particular to ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, while taking account of economic requirements;

Recalling that Article 3.2 of the Convention requires each Contracting Party to undertake, in its planning and development policies and in its measures against pollution, to have regard to the conservation of wild fauna.

Recalling also the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) Resolution 7.4 on Electrocution of Migratory Birds adopted by the 7th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (2002) and recognising the intention of the CMS to increase cooperation with the Bern Convention;

Recognising the importance of maintaining energy supplies and for actions taken to protect birds to be proportionate in terms of cost and to avoid reduction in overall level of safety of transmission lines or in stability of supply;

Recognising the importance of maintaining a stable energy supply and avoiding a reduction in the overall level of safety of transmission lines;

Recognising also that actions taken to protect birds should be proportionate in terms of cost,

Referring to the information presented in the report T-PVS/Inf (2003) 15 Protecting birds from powerlines: a practical guide to minimising the risks to birds from electricity transmission facilities, prepared by BirdLife International for the Council of Europe, informing of the negative impact on many species of wild bird (including migratory species) across Europe and the world, from overhead electricity transmission lines, conductors and towers (including those associated with railway infrastructure) through increased mortality due to electrocution, collision and also through reduction of suitability of staging, wintering and breeding areas, especially when powerlines cross open landscapes;

Concerned that a significant number of bird species suffering from electricity transmission facilities are listed in Annex II to the Convention, and that the threat is increasing due to the continuing construction of dangerous electricity transmission facilities;

Concerned particularly that, without action to minimize threats to birds from electricity transmission facilities, many populations and potentially species, including globally threatened species such as Aquila adalberti may be severely affected;

Recognising that, especially in arid zones, electrocution of birds on transmission lines can cause disastrous forest fires affecting both wildlife and people and for which electric utility companies can expect to be made liable;

Aware that technical solutions are available to eliminate or reduce transmission line electrocution and collision risk posed to birds and that such solutions which are safer for birds also correspond to a better energy supply and therefore are an advantage to supplying companies; most existing facilities do not incorporate such solutions


Desiring to raise awareness among the public, developers and decision-makers of the serious, widespread risks posed to birds by powerlines and that these can readily be minimised;

Recommends that Contracting Parties to the Convention:

1.    take appropriate cost-effective measures to reduce bird mortality from electric transmission facilities taking into account Resolution 7.4 of the Seventh meeting of the Parties of the Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Appendix 2), applying those cautions to cases where non-migratory species may be affected;

2.    apply as far as possible the measures for bird safety suggested in the report mentioned in the consideranda above, and in particular those suggested in the enclosed Appendix 1, taking into account that, to ensure appropriately located and safe constructions, the following measures need to be considered:

To avoid electrocution

a)    banning of the most dangerous types of pole

b)    use of state-of-the-art recommended technical standards for bird safety for new and retrofitted facilities

To avoid collisions and reduction of habitat availability, while improving air safety

c)    encouraging underground location of cables where possible in technical and financial terms; or

d)    in locations of particular importance to birds, and where birds may be vulnerable to collision, consents should be conditional upon examination of different routing alternatives prior to and during the planning phase, involving a minimum of one year of ornithological investigations including of bird movements during both day and night ;

e)    constructions should obstruct only a minimum of air space in a vertical direction i.e. single-level arrangement of conductor cables with no neutral cable above or clearly visible black-and-white markers should be attached to high-risk cables;

3.    consider replacing underground overhead powerlines in areas of exceptional high interest for birds, particularly in protected areas and in areas designated for the Natura 2000 and Emerald Networks for their bird interest.

4.    systematically collect information with respect to collisions and electrocutions on electricity transmission lines;

5.    communicate to the Standing Committee the relevant steps that have been adopted or envisaged concerning the implementation of this recommendation as well as information on the outcome of measures adopted;

Invites observer states to take note of this recommendation and implement it as appropriate.


Appendix 5

Examples of measures that may be considered as appropriate for minimising the negative impacts on birds of electricity transmission facilities are listed for implementation by Contracting Parties. Additional standards, including stricter standards, may be adopted by Contracting Parties. The design and route of electricity transmission lines is critically important to avoiding deleterious impacts on birds.

In considering these examples of possible bird mitigation measures, it is recognised that the electricity industries in Contracting Parties will necessarily have to work at actions that might be taken to protect birds in a wider context. This includes cost, stability of supply and overall safety of transmission lines.

A.    Criteria for Environmental Assessment

(a)   Thorough environmental assessment[4] should be undertaken for all electricity transmission lines that have the potential for damaging effects on wild birds or in areas where there is uncertainty as to the potential effects.  .

(b)   The use of standard methods is essential to ensure comparability, adopting the Before-After Control-Impact (BACI) approach with consistent application of these methods before, during and after construction in the vicinity of the power line and a reference area for comparison

(c)   There is a need for best practice guidance on standard study methods, to inform the EIA process.

(d)   In case of lacking knowledge and in areas of particular importance to birds, a minimum one-year baseline field study should be undertaken to determine the use of the study-area by birds.

(e)   Post-construction monitoring needs to enable short- and long-term effects and impacts to be distinguished and satisfactorily addressed.

The following list of bird families are indicative of those that should tend to be focal species for environmental assessments where they are at risk as they are considered to be particularly sensitive, or potentially so, to power lines (electrocution, collision, displacement including barrier to movement). Key: 0 - no casualties reported or likely; I - casualties reported, but no apparent threat to the bird population; II - regionally or locally high casualties; but with no significant impact on the overall species population; III - casualties are a major mortality factor; threatening a species with extinction, regionally or on a larger scale.

(a) due to electrocution

(b) due to collisions

Loons (Gaviidae) and Grebes (Podicipedidae)

0

II

Shearwaters, Petrels (Procellariidae)

0

I  -  II

Bobbies, Gannets (Sulidae)

0

I  -  II

Pelicans (Pelicanidae)

I

II - III

Cormorants (Phalacrocoracidae)

I

II

Herons, Bitterns (Ardeidae)

I

II

Storks (Ciconidae)

III

III


Ibisses (Threskiornithidae)

I

II

Flamingos (Phoenicopteridae)

0

II

Ducks, Geese, Swans, Mergansers (Anatidae)

0

II

Raptors (Accipitriformes and Falconiformes))

II - III

I  -  II

Partridges, Quails, Grouses (Galliformes)

0

II - III

Rails, Gallinules, Coots (Rallidae)

0

II - III

Cranes (Gruidae)

0

II - III

Bustards (Otidae)

0

III

Shorebirds / Waders (Charadriidae + Scolopacidae)

I

II - III

Skuas (Sterkorariidae) and Gulls (Laridae)

I

II

Terns (Sternidae)

0  -  I

II

Auks (Alcidae)

0

I

Sandgrouses (Pteroclididae)

0

II

Pigeons, Doves (Columbidae)

II

II

Cuckoos (Cuculidae)

0

II

Owls (Strigiformes)

I  -  II

II - III

Nightjars (Caprimulgidae) and Swifts (Apodidae)

0

II

Hoopoes (Upudidae) and  Kingfishers (Alcedinidae)

I

II

Bee-eaters (Meropidae)

0 - I

II

Rollers (Coraciidae) and Parrots (Psittadidae)

I

II

Woodpeckers (Picidae)

I

II

Ravens, Crows, Jays (Corvidae)

II - III

I  - II

Medium-sized and small songbirds (Passeriformes)

I

II

B.    Precautions for route selection for electricity transmission lines

(a)   There should be precautionary avoidance of locating power lines farms in designated or qualifying sites for nature conservation, including Important Bird Areas (IBAs). 

(b)   As part of effective regional planning, there is a need to identify species and areas of concern, to map potential and potentially sensitive locations for electricity transmission lines based on nature conservation concerns, for example avoidance of migratory corridors and other large concentrations of birds. 


C.         Technical Standards to protect birds from electrocution

Newly erected power poles and technical hardware should be constructed to exclude the possibility of bird electrocution. Crossarms, insulators and other parts of medium voltage (1KV – 60 KV) powerlines should be constructed so that birds are not able to perch near energized powerlines that might be hazardous.

Mitigating measures should be undertaken on existing power poles and technical hardware in the medium voltage range in locations of particular importance for birds

Power poles  for medium voltage (1KV – 60 KV) should reflect the state-of-the-art in design for bird safety and should follow the detailed design guidelines and criteria described in the catalogue „Vogelschutz an Freileitungen“, VDEW-Verlag, 2nd edition, 1991 (Comments on Section 8.10 Bird Protection of German Industry Norm VDE 0210/12.85).

The following describes the most widely used types of power poles worldwide, their potential risk and steps towards mitigation. Recommendations are made for power poles made of concrete, steel, composite steel and wood. This report is based on standards set up by the Vereinigung Deutscher Elektrizitätswerke (1991) as well as studies carried out by the NABU National Working Group on Electrocution (2002).

The safety of the installations depends primarily on:

·            how insulators are attached to the poles and

·            the actual space between the power cables and other energized and grounded parts.


A) POWER POLES WITH UPRIGHT INSULATORS

Power poles, constructed on pre-stressed concrete or metal with upright insulators, are widely used and rank as the most dangerous of all types. The gap between the cables and the crossarm is small.

Risk: high

In wet weather wooden poles with upright insulators can be a hazard as well as poles that are grounded. For mitigation, the top of armless poles has to be well above the uppermost wire (right).

Mitigating electrocution effectively is possible either by treating poles (a) with insulating caps made of plastic for outdoor use 130 cm in length or (b) insulating powerlines with tubing 130 cm in length. The conductors have to be spaced at a distance of at least 140 cm. If this is not possible, they should be insulated with tubing.

Suggested Practices:

(a)   Insulated caps (above)

(b)   Tubing (below)

B) POWER POLES WITH SUSPENDED INSULATORS

Poles with suspended insulators are fairly safe provided the distance between a likely perch (crossarm) to the energized parts (conduc­tors) is at least 60 cm. Conductors should be spaced at least 140 cm apart. Hardware that is used to prevent arcing (“St. Elmo´s fire” on both sides of the insulators) should not be used.

Risk: low

C) STRAIN POLES

Strain poles with powerlines below the crossarm:

Risk low, if the insulators are long enough (at least 60 cm).

Strain poles with one conductor above the crossarm.

Risk high (see also Fig. 3):

Bird-safe strain poles require insulating chains at least 60 cm in length. Hazardous construc­tions can be mitigated by

(a) lengthening the chains or

(b) installing perch rejectors (upright “whisk brooms”) on the crossarms.

Suggested practices:

Lengthening of the chain (a, above)

Perch rejectors, made of plastic rods (b, below)


In instance where the conductors run above or too close to the crossarm, (c) tubing should be used. Junction power poles should be treated in the same way (insulation of conductors which come too near to a perching site – closer than 60 cm).

Suggested practices:

Insulated hood or insulated tubing (c)

(see also Fig. 30)

D) TERMINAL POLES AND TOWER STATIONS

Terminal pole

Risk: high

Suggested practices (see legend)

Frequently over voltage reactors extend above the tops of terminal poles and tower stations. This hazard for birds can be avoided if the over voltage reactor is attached below the crossarm and all down leading wires are insulated with tubing. On tower stations all contacts directly above the switch as well as between the switch and transformer should be treated likewise. Hardware used to prevent electrical arcs should not be used (mitigation measure: dismantle).


Tower Station

Risk: high

Suggested practices (see legend)

E) SWITCH TOWERS

The safest switch towers have their switches attached below the crossarm. Otherwise, mitigation measures are more complicated and do not provide the same high degree of safety for birds. As hooding is usually not possible, various techniques have been tested.

Switch tower

 Risk: high

Suggested practices:

(a) Insulated perch sites


Insulated perch sites can be installed

(a) lengthwise to the crossarm or (c) at its edge. They should be as long as possible and have a rough texture. Perching deterrents

(“St. Andrew`s Cross”) (b) installed above the switch keep birds from perching on the poles, as does the installation of acrylic glass rods (c).

(b) St. Andrew`s Cross

(c) Insulated perch sites lengthwise to the                      crossarm and acrylic glass rods

In the case of medium-voltage railway powerlines , similar modifications or new constructions must become mandatory: they reduce bird losses and improve railway safety. In Germany, railway engineers, conservationists and government representatives are in the process of elaborating detailed technical standards and design guidelines, which take into consideration bird safety. Fig. 16 illustrates that bird safety can be introduced without large technical effort.

D.    Priorities for research to enable impacts of electricity transmission lines to be minimized

(a)    Research and monitoring should be implemented by national governments and the energy utility companies, in consultation with relevant experts, to improve our understanding of the impacts of electricity transmission installations. This will be an iterative process that will inform decision-making, appropriate route selection and design of installations. The results of research should be published in international scientific journals, including a summary, preferably in English, to ensure wider dissemination including to electro-engineering periodicals.

(b)    Research and monitoring requirements should encompass the following:

i      effects and potential population level impacts on birds of electrocution, collision and displacement from habitats and barriers to movement;

ii     effectiveness of different designs of installation at minimising bird mortality, while taking account of their cost effectiveness, including durability.

(c)   There need to be incentives to ongoing technological development of electricity transmission installations which minimise impacts on birds eg while being durable and removing neutral cables which are at different heights from other cables.

(d)   A useful subject for further study is to look in detail at individual case studies to evaluate examples of conflict resolution, case law, or trends in casework throughout the Council of Europe area.


Appendix 6

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species

of Wild Animals

Resolution 7.4*

ELECTROCUTION OF MIGRATORY BIRDS

Adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its Seventh Meeting (Bonn, 18-24 September 2002)

           

Recognising that, under Article II of the Convention, Range States agree to take action for the conservation of migratory species whenever possible and appropriate, paying special attention to migratory species the conservation status of which is unfavourable, and taking individually or in cooperation appropriate and necessary steps to conserve such species and their habitats;

Recognising that Article II of the Convention requires all Parties to take action to avoid any migratory species becoming endangered and, in particular, to endeavour to provide immediate protection for migratory species listed in Appendix I to the Convention;

Recognising that Article III (4) (b) of the Convention requires Parties to endeavour inter alia to prevent, remove, compensate for or minimise, as appropriate, the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede or prevent the migration of migratory species;

Concerned by the information presented in document UNEP/CMS/Inf.7.21 to the Seventh Meeting of the Conference of the Parties concerning the worldwide and increasing impact of electricity transmission lines, conductors and towers in causing injury and death by electrocution to species of large birds, including migratory species;

Noting that a significant number of migratory bird species that are significantly exposed to electrocution danger are listed in the Appendices to the Convention;

Concerned that such species are increasingly threatened by continuing construction of medium‑voltage overhead transmission lines;

       Concerned particularly that, without action to reduce or mitigate threats of electrocution, many populations and potentially species, including Aquila adalberti and Hieraaetus fasciatus, may be severely affected;

       Recognising that, especially in arid zones, electrocution of birds on transmission lines can cause disastrous forest fires affecting both wildlife and people;

       Desiring to raise awareness among the public, developers and decision‑makers of the serious, widespread electrocution risk posed to birds;

       Aware that technical solutions are available to eliminate or minimise transmission line electrocution risk posed to birds;

       Recognising that power lines that are considered safer for birds also correspond to a better energy supply and therefore are an advantage to supplying companies;


Bearing in mind that collision with power lines is also a problem for birds, and that preventive measures should also be applied to mitigate its effects; and

Bearing in mind that electrocution on electricity transmission lines of railway infrastructure may also be a problem, and preventive measures should be envisaged;

The Conference of the Parties to the

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

1.     Calls on all Parties and non-Parties to curb the increasing electrocution risk from medium-voltage transmission lines to migratory birds and to minimise this risk in the long term;

2.     Calls on all Parties and non-Parties to include appropriate measures in legislation and other provisions for planning and consenting medium-voltage electricity transmission lines and associated towers, to secure safe constructions and thus minimise electrocution impacts on birds;

3.     Encourages constructors and operators of new medium‑voltage transmission lines and associated towers to incorporate appropriate measures aimed at protecting migrating birds against electrocution;

4.     Calls on Parties and non-Parties to appropriately neutralise existing towers and parts of medium‑voltage transmission lines to ensure that migratory birds are protected against electrocution;

5.     Invites all concerned to apply as far as possible the catalogue of measures contained in document UNEP/CMS/Inf.7.21, which are based on the principle that birds should not be allowed to sit on parts that are dangerously close to the transmission parts under voltage;

6.       Encourages constructors and operators to cooperate with ornithologists, conservation organizations, competent authorities and appropriate financial bodies in order to reduce the electrocution risk posed to birds from transmission lines; and

7.     Requests the Secretariat to collect more information with respect to collisions and electrocutions on electricity transmission lines of railway infrastructure and other related issues.


Appendix 7

Recommendation No. 111 (2004) of the Standing Committee, adopted on 3 December 2004, on the proposed navigable waterway through the Bystroe estuary (Danube Delta, Ukraine)

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention,

Having regard to the aims of the Convention to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats;

Recalling that under Article 4 of the Convention each Contracting Party shall take appropriate and necessary legislative and administrative measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of wild flora and fauna species, especially those specified in Appendices I and II, and the conservation of endangered natural habitats;

Recalling that Article 4 of the Convention stipulates that the Contracting Parties in their planning and development policies shall have regard to the conservation requirements of the areas protected under the preceding paragraph, so as to avoid or minimise as far as possible any deterioration of such areas;

Referring to the report of Mr Hervé Lethier on the project to re-excavate a shipping canal in the Bystroe estuary (Danube Delta, Ukraine), drawn up following his on-the-spot appraisal [document  T‑PVS/Files (2004)03];

Bearing in mind the work carried out by the Council of Europe under the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy, notably the code of practice for the introduction of biological and landscape diversity considerations into the transport sector, as well as the targets for the setting-up of the Pan-European Ecological Network decided at the 5th Ministerial Conference “an Environment for Europe” (Kyiv, May 2003);

Noting that the Danube Delta constitutes one of the most important hotspots of biological diversity of the whole continent, supporting globally threatened and other rare species and habitats of European and world importance, and that Ukraine has undertaken to protect the Ukrainian part of the delta under its national and international legislation;

Considering that the protected area concerned is  an important wetland in Ukraine, and a wetland of international importance as designated by Ukraine under the Ramsar Convention, has received international recognition of its value as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and will be a major component in the implementation of the Bern Convention Emerald Network;

Conscious that economic imperatives linked to the development of the Danube Delta region should take into account environmental considerations on the long-term conservation of the area;

Noting with concern that the limits of the protected area have been modified to exclude the Bystroe estuary so that the proposed development could legally proceed;

Firmly stating that the modification of limits of protected areas to accommodate development projects should in general be avoided, as it weakens any system of protected areas;

Considering that the implementation of the Bystroe project and future use of this channel might cause significant environmental damage and change the hydrological regime of part of the delta;

Noting that no environmental impact assessment was made available to the experts at the time of the mission, in July 2004; 

Noting that the establishing of the navigable waterway and its exploitation may deteriorate natural habitats protected under Article 4 of the Convention and that the development could affect populations of species protected under Article 6 of the Convention;

Noting that such engineering works and future shipping exploitation in an area of paramount biological importance can only be contemplated as “exceptions” in the sense of Article 9 paragraph 1 of the Convention, that states that Parties “may make exceptions from the  provisions of Articles 4, 5 , 6 and 7”, among other reasons in the interests of public health and safety, air safety or other overriding public interests”;


Noting, however, that Article 9, paragraph 1 of the Convention, states that a Party “may make exceptions of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7  ...  provided that there is no other satisfactory solution” and conscious that viable alternative solutions have not been sufficiently explored and analysed yet ;

Noting that in this case Ukraine has failed to fulfil completely the terms of the Convention;

Transboundary aspects

Taking into account the transboundary aspects of the projects and the fact that not enough consultation has been established with neighbouring states that may be affected;

Recalling that, as the planned activities might have significant adverse environmental impacts in a transboundary context, the Espoo Convention has begun the process of investigation by setting up an Inquiry Commission on compliance of Ukraine with the provisions of this Convention;

Recalling that, under the aegis of the Council of Europe, the Minister of Environment and Territorial Planning of the Republic of Moldova, the Minister of Waters, Forests and Environmental Protection of Romania and the Minister of the Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine signed in Bucharest, on 5th June 2000 an Agreement for the creation and management of a cross-border protected area between Moldova, Romania and Ukraine in the Danube Delta and the lower River Prut nature protected areas (document

STRA-REP (2000) 8);

Regretting that the above-mentioned Agreement  has failed to enter into force, as its article 7 states that the “Agreement shall take effect on the date of receipt by the depositary of the last notification in which the Parties shall inform on the completion of the legal procedures required under their national law for the entry into force of this Agreement”, such notifications having not yet taken place;

Considering, however that by signing such Agreement the three states concerned have shown a willingness to co-operate in the issues dealt with by the Agreement;

Recalling that Article 2 of the above-mentioned Agreement states that “the Parties undertake to conserve its natural heritage (fauna, flora, habitats) and preserve its ecological and physical assets” and that “the Parties undertake to harmonise their methods of management and to co-ordinate all development projects or improvements by means of a comprehensive action programme leading ultimately to the development of a joint management plan” and noting with regret that the project to establish a navigable waterway through the Bystroe estuary has not been subject to the co-ordination referred to in the Agreement;

Noting that the Agreement has not been properly implemented by the signatory Ministries and that dialogue between neighbouring states concerning this project and other issues concerning the ecological preservation of the Danube Delta has been imperfect;

Conscious of the need to reconcile the economic and ecological issues raised by this project and convinced of the necessity to further explore alternatives that, being economically sound and affordable, would be compatible with the preservation of the ecological character and functioning of the Danube Delta,

Recommends Ukraine to:

1.   suspend works, except the completion of phase 1, and do notproceed with phase 2 of the project until:

-      the EIA for phase 2 isundertaken to international standards and submitted to the relevant international experts and organizations;

-      the public consultation on the EIA for phase 2 takes place and the proposals made during the discussions are duly considered;

-     the data collected during the additional monitoring program with involvement of international experts is analyzed and adequate recommendations are elaborated.


2.    provide additional information on ecological and socio-economic aspects of alternative solutions and viable options of further development of shipping activities in the Ukrainian part of the Danube Delta; to this end prepare an Environmental Impact Assessment report with independent international experts, including from neighbouring states;

3.   provide, for measures of ecological compensation and mitigation for any possible environmental damage; in that context finalize the official approval of proposed zonation which foresees the considerable expansion both in quality and quantity of the protected area; analyse the impact of phase 1 of the project;

4.   invite in the coming months the international community to participate in a process to elaborate a Strategic Development Plan for the region that would stress the sustainability of social and economic activities and would assure the maintenance of the unique ecological values of the area and their long-term preservation;

5.   consolidate a large area of strict protection free as far as possible of human interference, placing outside the protected area economic activities that are likely to negatively affect biological diversity, such as industrial activities linked to shipping, new building, etc.

Recommends Moldova, Romania and Ukraine to:

6.    complete the legal procedures required under their national law for the entry into force of the “Agreement for the creation and management of a cross-border protected area between Moldova, Romania and Ukraine in the Danube Delta and the lower River Prut nature protected areas”, which specifically aims at fostering dialogue among the three states concerning the maintenance of natural landscapes, the conservation, monitoring and management of the Danube’s Delta natural heritage, the protection of cultural heritage, the promotion of education for sustainable development, the supervision and guidance of economic, social and cultural activities, among other issues; notify the Council of Europe, as depositary of the Agreement , of the completion of appropriate legal procedures;

7.    develop constructive dialogue between the national and local authorities, local communities, non-governmental organisations, and scientists, and communicate openly about the progress of decision making;

8.    welcoming Ukraine’s initiative to launch a scientific monitoring programme to assess, in the long term, the environmental state of the Danube delta, including the effects of the navigable waterway and the success of any mitigation and compensation measures, invite experts from the Danube basin countries to participate in the programme and hold periodic meetings and consultation;

9.    use the framework of that agreement and the Bern Convention to promote dialogue on environmental issues affecting the biological diversity of the Danube Delta;

Recommends that Ukraine:

10.   call, under the auspices of the Council of Europe, for a meeting of the states signatories of the Agreement to discuss relevant matters concerning this and other issues dealt with in the Agreement.

Invites the Council of Europe, in its capacity of depositary of the Bern Convention to:

-       support and facilitate as appropriate dialogue among the states sharing the Danube delta concerning the conservation and sustainable development of the area, in cooperation with other relevant international organisations;

-       consider the possibility to participate in the whole process of monitoring of the ecological situation in the Danube Delta and further development of the project in a sustainable way;

-       undertake a transboundary strategic environmental assessment of the entire Danube delta according to international standards, taking into account the ecosystem approach.


Appendix 8

Recommendation No. 112 (2004) of the Standing Committee, adopted on 3 December 2004, on hydroelectric dams at Kárahnjúkar and Nordlingaalda (Iceland)

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention,

Having regard to the aims of the Convention to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats;

Recalling that under Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Convention, the Parties agree that “Each Contracting Party shall take steps to promote national policies for the conservation of wild flora, wild fauna and natural habitats, with particular attention to endangered and vulnerable species, especially endemic ones, and endangered habitats, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention” and that “Each Contraction Party undertakes, in its planning and development policies and in its measures against pollution, to have regard to the conservation of wild flora and fauna”;

Recalling that under Article 4 of the Convention each Contracting Party shall take appropriate and necessary legislative and administrative measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of the wild flora and fauna species, especially those specified in Appendices I and II, and the conservation of endangered natural habitats;

Recalling that Article 4 of the Convention stipulates that the Contracting Parties in their planning and development policies shall have regard to the conservation requirements of the areas protected under the preceeding paragraph, so as to avoid or minimise as far as possible any deterioration of such areas;

Recalling the Recommendation (2002) 96 of the Standing Committee, on conservation of natural habitats and wildlife, specially birds, in afforestation of lowland in Iceland, and the European Strategy on Invasive Alien Species developed by the Bern Convention;

Referring to the other Convention provisions regarding the protection of habitats and conservation of species;

Referring to the report of Mr Joe Sultana drawn up following his on-the-spot appraisal [document T‑PVS/Files (2004) 5];

Concluding that no Bern Convention species will be seriously affected by the Kárahnjúkar and Nordlingaalda projects and that there is no need to open a case file on this issue;

Considering that the sites concerned by the hydropower projects contain species and habitats of European importance listed in the Appendices to the Convention, in particular, the internationally important population of the Pink-footed-goose (Anser brachyrhynchus), the Greylag goose (Anser anser), the Arctic skua (Stercorarius parasiticus) and the Great skua (Catharacta skua), as well as the Harbour seal (Phoca vitulina);

Noting that the hydropower projects are motivated by the policy of the Icelandic Government to promote increased utilisation of renewable energy resources in harmony with the environment and noting the positive achievement that about 70% of all energy consumption in Iceland comes from renewable sources;

Desirous to reduce and compensate the negative impacts that the hydropower projects are likely to have on biodiversity and recognising the importance of functioning ecosystems, and the significance of habitat integrity in maintaining biodiversity, and over the long term enabling adaptation to climate change;

Noting that both the Kárahnjúkar and Nordlingaalda projects are part of a first phase of a larger Icelandic hydro and geothermal energy Master Plan encompassing nearly fifty potential hydropower projects;


Noting that both projects have been evaluated with respect to their impact on nature, cultural heritage, alternate land-use potential, economic gain and regional development, in full accordance with national environmental legislation and international obligations, including the provisions of the Bern Convention;

Noting that the Kárahnjúkar hydropower project has been given the go-ahead by the authorities and work is in progress; noting also that the proposed Nordlingaalda hydropower dam has been temporarily postponed;

Recommends that the Government of Iceland:

1.      Address cumulative negative effects on Bern Convention species while conducting a strategic environmental impact assessment in accordance with the European Community SEA Directive (2001/42/EC), based on the Master Plan for hydro and geothermal energy resources;

2.      Recognising the value of the monitoring board established under the Kárahnjúkar hydropower project, consider the establishment of a similar process for appropriate hydro and geothermal projects that are approved and implemented, ensuring that these processes are effective and transparent, addressing negative impacts and in compliance with imposed conditions;

Relating to Kárahnjúkar hydropower project:

3.      Avoid disturbance and pressures in the area of Eyjabakkar Important Bird Area (IBA) by restricting access during the moulting period of the Pink-footed goose (Anser brachyrhynchus). Furthermore, take appropriate measures to ensure that favourable conservation status of the area is maintained;

4.      Maintain a favourable conservation status of the Úthérad to ensure the ornithological integrity of this IBA;

5.      Consider wetland restoration in the Úthérad IBA to compensate for negative impacts resulting from the project;

Relating to Nordlingaalda hydropower dam (Thjórsárver):

6.       Maintain the favourable conservation status of the Thjórsárver to ensure the ecological integrity of this ecosystem and protect against significant negative impacts that may arise as a result of energy projects.


Appendix 9

Recommendation No. 113 (2004) of the Standing Committee, adopted on 3 December 2004, on the installation of a new antenna (Pluto II) in the Sovereign Base Area (Akrotiri, Cyprus)

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, acting under the terms of Article 14 of the Convention,

Having regard to the aims of the Convention to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats;

Recalling that under Article 4 of the Convention each Contracting Party shall take appropriate and necessary legislative and administrative measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of the wild flora and fauna species, especially those specified in Appendices I and II, and the conservation of endangered natural habitats;

Recalling that Article 4 of the Convention stipulates that the Contracting Parties in their planning and development policies shall have regard to the conservation requirements of the areas protected under the preceding paragraph, so as to avoid or minimise as far as possible any deterioration of such areas;

Recalling that Article 4 of the Convention stipulates that the Contracting Parties undertake to give special attention to the protection of areas that are of importance for the migratory species specified in Appendices II and III and which are appropriately situated in relation to migration routes, as wintering, staging, feeding, breeding or moulting areas;

Noting however that Article 9, paragraph 1, states that a Party may make exceptions from the provisions of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7 and from the prohibition of the use of the means mentioned in Article 8 provided that there is no other satisfactory solution and that the exception will not be detrimental to the survival of the population concerned;

Referring to the report of Mr Eckhart Kuijken drawn up following his on-the-spot appraisal [document  T‑PVS/Files (2004) 21];

Bearing in mind the work carried out by the independent international panel of experts of the IEMA (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, Lincoln, United Kingdom) as well as the findings of the Ramsar Convention mission conducted in June 2002 to the Akrotiri Salt Lake;

Noting that the construction of the communication antennae is considered vital on security grounds and that they are an essential part of worldwide communication networks;

Noting that the Akrotiri wetland contains a combination of inland saline and freshwater wetland habitats unique in the biogeographic region of the eastern Mediterranean;

Noting that this ecosystem is listed as an “Important Bird Area” and was designated by the United Kingdom as a wetland of international importance under the Ramsar Convention as agreed with the Cypriot Ministry of Foreign Affairs;

Considering that this area is a major component in the implementation of the Natura 2000 / Emerald Network;

Having taken note that the local population of Akrotiri village has expressed serious concern over the health risk from the repeated exposure to radiation;

Convinced of the need for cooperation between the Sovereign Base Area (SBA) and the Cypriot authorities and the non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in order to ensure regular monitoring and to carry out field observations and research;

Stressing also the need for good communication with local residents, especially on the subject of health;


Having noted monitoring of bird movements by night vision equipment illustrating that some mortality occurs (RPS-Ecoscope Report);

Aware of the mitigation measures already taken by the British authorities to prevent bird collisions;

Recognising furthermore the de facto contribution of the military presence to the conservation of natural values of Akrotiri and surrounding coastal strips,

Further noting that the natural value of the site makes it an inherently inappropriate location for developments that pose a potential threat to wildlife;

Wishing that the possible establishment of a new antennae in the area or the expansion of the existing antennae or other development that may lead to deterioration of the site be subject to a thorough prior Environmental Impact Assessment and to a wide public consultation procedures involving, as appropriate, Cyprus authorities;

Recommends to:

1.     Further monitor on a long-term basis the consequences of the construction of the Pluto I and II antennae in a site with ornithological values of international importance, especially in order to better estimate the overall level of bird mortality; it is recommended to establish networks of SBA experts together with NGOs and the Cypriot authorities and to join efforts for both monitoring and the design of additional experimental research and the development of further mitigating measures to minimise the effects of the antenna park on bird movements;

2.     Monitor radiation levels in order to assess effects on bird orientation, but in the first place to assure local populations that there are no health problems even when the antennae are operated simultaneously; independent validation of monitoring data is to be guaranteed and additional opportunities for biological experimental research are to be considered in view of the precautionary principle;

3.     Draw up an integrated management plan for the whole wetland complex of the Salt Lake and Fissouri Marsh, including surrounding areas of outstanding ecological importance (beaches, dunes, rocky shorelines), taking into account the requirements of the Ramsar and Bern Conventions and of the European Union directives in order to safeguard the international values;

4.     Ensure that the establishment of the management plan or other plans and projects are based on public consultation and mutual agreements between the SBA, the Cypriot authorities and specialised NGOs and that it is communicated to all stakeholders, especially local residents.

Crucial aspects to be included are, among others:

i.        water management (quantity and quality, influence by agricultural chemicals, etc.), coastal protection, bird preservation, habitat conservation and vegetation management;

ii.       specific actions to avoid bird disturbances (by cars, visitors, shooting, bird trapping, model airplanes), including the mitigating measures in the antennae park;

iii.      regulations concerning recreational land use and physical planning taking into account the limits of the area’s carrying capacity by preventing irreversible development of beach recreation facilities;

iv.      a restricted policy for building permissions in order to prevent increased pressure on the environment;

v.       a chapter on further establishment of environmental and nature education, monitoring and research, including provision of budgets for personnel, equipment and functioning costs (leaflets, exhibitions, etc);


5.     Remove gradually the western edge of the eucalyptus belt north of the Salt Lake and on the south-eastern edge of Fissouri Marsh in order to alleviate the risks of bird collisions with Pluto antennae; the effects of cuttings must be carefully monitored for all groups of species (waterbirds, raptors, passerines) as well as the ecological consequences on the water level and the potential for vegetation restoration;

6.     Take steps to ensure that the archaeological, historical and ecological values of Akrotiri, which represent an underestimated opportunity for environmental and cultural education, especially for schools but also for the public at large be recognised; open and improve some of the signposted trails in the military area as a specific programme of the Akrotiri Information Centre and the future permanent visitors centre, in order to better communicate with the Cypriot population.


Appendix 10

Strasbourg Declaration on the role of the Bern Convention in the preservation of biological diversity (adopted on 30 November 2004)

The Standing Committee of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats,

Meeting in Strasbourg from 29 November to 3 December 2004 under the auspices of the Council of Europe;

Celebrating the 25th anniversary of the signature of the Convention;

Recognising the pioneer role of the Convention in proposing a comprehensive approach through legislative and administrative measures aimed at the conservation and sustainable use of wild flora and fauna and natural habitats;

Aware that the preservation and sustainable use of biological diversity is of paramount importance for the well-being of societies and for the maintenance of ecological systems;

Worried that biological diversity is still being lost at unsustainable rates, in process of a constant erosion of the world’s natural heritage;

Wishing to contribute to the goals of the Johannesburg “World Summit on Sustainable Development” to achieve by 2010 significant reduction in the current rate of loss of biological diversity;

Celebrating that in the 25 years since its signature the Bern Convention has contributed significantly to fostering conservation of biological diversity in its Contracting Parties, mainly through the improvement and implementation of national legislation, and its common programmes in the field of threatened species and the conservation and sustainable use of natural habitats;

Sharing the concerns of the United Nations Millemium Declaration adopted by the General Assembly in September 2000, which mentions “respect for nature” among the fundamental values essential to international relations in the twenty-first century and states that “Prudence must be shown in the management of all living species and natural resources, in accordance with the precepts of sustainable development. Only in this way can the immeasurable riches provided to us by nature be preserved and passed on to our descendants. The current unsustainable patterns of production and consumption must be changed in the interest of our future welfare and that of our descendants”;

Conscious that 25 years after the Convention was signed, wildlife and natural habitats are still under stress by threats that have intensified in importance, such as climate change, habitat fragmentation, land-use change, invasive alien species, industrial accidents or pressures on the natural heritage driven by globalisation and unsustainable consumption patterns;

Recalling the 1995 Monaco Declaration on the role of the Bern Convention in the implementation of worldwide international instruments for the protection of biodiversity and its Resolution No. 7 (2000) on the Strategic Development of the Convention,

Recalling the Resolution on Biodiversity adopted in Kyiv (Ukraine) at the Fifth Ministerial Conference “An Environment for Europe” (May 2003);

Considering that conservation of biological diversity in the framework sustainable development is one of the priorities of the Council of Europe for the next decade;

Acknowledges that:

A.    The Bern Convention, which to date counts with 45 Contracting Parties, constitutes an instrument of major importance for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity at the regional level by reason of its aims, its geographical coverage and commitment of its Parties to implementation;


B.    The Bern Convention has a solid conservation work behind, a strong expertise and a great potential to continue contributing, in synergy with other multilateral environmental agreements, European Union directives and other biodiversity related instruments, to the goals of conservation and sustainable use of the world’s biological diversity;

Adopts the following resolutions, which are an integral part of this Declaration:

1.             Promote the expression and adoption of a political consensus on the values attached to the fundamental entitlement to live in a healthy environment and to benefit from the sustainable use of biological diversity while guaranteeing sustainable development and solidarity for present and future generations;

2.             Strengthen the monitoring of the implementation by Parties of the provisions of the Convention, both through the elaboration of country reports, the regular check up of compliance with selected recommendations and the further development of the case-file system as a tool for negotiation and prevention of conflict where appropriate;

3.             Continue its work on species conservation through the preparation, implementation and follow-up of action plans, strategies and recommendations, the monitoring of populations at risk and the prevention of the effects of Invasive Alien Species on wildlife and natural habitats, supporting as appropriate the Convention’s specialised groups of experts;

4.             Strengthen the implementation of its decisions concerning the Areas of Special Conservation Interest which set up the framework of the development of the Emerald Network, encouraging States to designate areas and build the network at the national level;

5.             Devote more efforts to analysing the impact of sectoral policies on biological diversity, evaluating the sustainibility of such policies, proposing ways and means to better integrate biological diversity consideration into sectoral policies and promoting remedial action where appropriate;

6.      Continue awareness-raising activities to concerned sectors, decision makers and the general public;

7.             Work more closely with other Council of Europe sectors in the field of sustainable development, identifying crosscutting issues, exploiting appropriate synergies, improving the visibility of the Convention and enhancing its political dimension within the Organisation;

8.             Enhance work on the ways and means to assure the financial sustainability of the Convention, encouraging Parties to make voluntary contributions and to support environment programmes at the Council of Europe;

9.             Pursue and reinforce the implementation of the Memorandum of Cooperation between the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in his capacity as Secretary of the Bern Convention, and the Executive Secretary of the Convention of Biological Diversity, signed in November 2001, including the exchange of information, the co-ordination of work programmes and the implementation at the regional level of CBD initiatives; in this context maintain the existing synergy with the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy and other biodiversity related treaties and initiatives; continue and strengthen cooperation with UNEP, UNESCO and other relevant United Nations bodies;

10.          Strengthen working relationships with the European Community, aiming at the enhancement of common activities and improvement of coherence in the monitoring of implementation, by State Members of the European Union, of the obligations under the Bern Convention; in that context, pursue and reinforce the implementation of the Memorandum of Cooperation between the Council of Europe and the European Environment Agency, in particular in the field of information on ecological networks, collection and harmonisation of data on species and biodiversity indicators;

11.          Continue and develop the involvement of relevant non-governmental organisations and experts as their contribution is essential to the success of the Convention;

12.              Deploy appropriate efforts to encourage the six member states of the Council of Europe that have not yet ratified the Convention to do so.



[1] This document has been classified restricted at the date of issue. Unless the Committee of Ministers decides otherwise, it will be declassified according to the rules set up in Resolution Res(2001)6 on access to Council of Europe documents.

[2] On this recommendation the Standing Committee requested the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to ensure, by whatever means are more appropriate, of the follow-up of the implementation of the recommendation, creating a space of dialogue among the interested states, international organisations and NGOs.

[3] In the case of member states of the European Community surveillance will take into account Article 6 of Directive 2001/77/EC which requires member states to streamline and expedite procedures at the appropriate administrative level for the authorisation of installations for the production of electricity from renewable energy.

* The original draft of this resolution, considered by the Conference of the Parties, was numbered 7.13.

[4] For example, as set out in Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ‘Assessment of certain public and private projects on the environment’(EIA Directive) as amended by Directive 97/11/EC.

* The original draft of this resolution, considered by the Conference of the Parties, was numbered 7.12.