LIFE09 NAT/RO/000618

STIPA
Trnava Mare SCI: Saving Transylvanias
Important Pastoral Ecosystems

CONSERVATION ACTION PLAN

Author:

Jan effer, Daphne Institute for Applied Ecology, Bratislava

With assistance from:
Viera efferov, Daphne Institute for Applied Ecology, Bratislava
Sabin Bdru, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca
Nat Page and Rzvan Popa, Fundaia ADEPT Transilvania

Date

15 December 2012

Plan for the conservation of two priority dry grassland habitats in the Trnava Mare
area:
6210* Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous
substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) (*important orchid sites)
6240* Sub-pannonic steppic grasslands.
This Conservation Action Plan is the result of dry grassland habitat inventories, field
studies and consultation with the farmers and local authorities of the communes of
the STIPA project area: Buneti, Saschiz, Vnatori, Albeti, Apold, Danes, Laslea,
Biertan, over the period January 2011-December 2012.
The Conservation Action Plan can only succeed with the active support of local
authorities and farmers. We are pleased that this plan has been well received by
stakeholders, since it will bring financial benefits to local people through increased
productive grassland areas, and increased access to Common Agricultural Policy
funding: both Direct Payments and agri-environment payments.
This work was carried out under EU LIFE+ project Trnava Mare SCI: Saving
Transylvanias Important Pastoral Ecosystems (LIFE09 NAT/RO/000618) STIPA.

Table of contents

General Description

6210* Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

(Festuco-Brometalia) with important orchid sites: description and species composition.. 4
6240* Sub-pannonic steppic grasslands: description and species composition

62C0* Ponto-Sarmatic steppe: description and species composition

40A0* Subcontinental peri-Pannonic scrub: description and species composition 7

Threats
..
Undergrazing.
Invading scrub
Overgrazing
...

8
8
9
10

The problem of the priority and rare species

10

Management/restoration models

11

Restoration measures .

12

Identification of dry grassland habitat types 6210 and 6240. 13

6210 and 6240: maps showing distribution, representativity and threats.. 15
Explanations of basic methods of habitat restoration..

21

Calculation of areas restored: 26

Achieving/maintaining favourable conservation status for 75% of 6210* and 6240* .. 29
Maps and tables of restored areas...

30

Continued actions in 2013. 39

Literature . 40

GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Romania retains extensive contiguous traditionally farmed landscapes dominated by seminatural grasslands. In particular, the dry grasslands are well-developed, large in area, and
with a rich and varied plant species composition.
The dry grasslands comprise a complex mosaic in space and time of plant communities and
species. The most important dry grassland habitats fall under 6210* Semi-natural dry
grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) (*important
orchid sites), 6240* Sub-Pannonic steppic grasslands, and 62C0* Pontic and Sarmatic
steppes, but a wide range of species-rich associations exists, that include many species
Red-listed in Romania.
Even by Romanian standards, the Saxon Villages area is extremely rich in dry grassland
communities. This reflects an 800-year history of careful farming, allowing the survival of
biodiversity, and will only be maintained by management along similar traditional lines.
Protection of these special habitats involves not only creative design and application of
traditional practices, but also conserving and buffering the habitats as part of the broader
farmed landscape. It is not enough to protect fragments, even if they are linked by ecological
corridors.
Some areas of particularly remarkable rarity and diversity, notably on movile and other steep
and dry slopes, are suitable candidates for the establishment of micro-reserves. These small,
designated areas, often no more than 1 ha in extent and with a 1-page management plan,
have been established in several parts of S Europe to protect pockets of biodiversity that
cannot readily be included in conventional protected areas. The management plant, agreed
with the landowner and local people, usually encourages management practices that already
exist.
The management of dry grassland for biodiversity need not conflict with farm grassland
management and, indeed, will enhance pasture and hay-meadows managed for extensive
agriculture and quality food production. Furthermore, the greatest concentration of rare
plants biodiversity hotspots is on marginal land such as the steepest slopes and eroding
surfaces.

Description of target habitats

In the Sighioara-Trnava Mare pSCI there are 3 priority dry grassland habitat types: 6210*
Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (FestucoBrometalia) (*important orchid sites), 6240* Sub-pannonic steppic grasslands and 62C0*
Ponto-Sarmatic steppe. On steep and dry slopes are dry grasslands occurring rarely with
another priority habitat type - 40A0* Subcontinental peri-Pannonic scrub, which is low
deciduous scrub vegetation. They are located within a matrix of mesic grasslands, intensive
pastures and often also arable or fallow arable land, determined by location on slopes and
geological land-slips, also small slumping hills. Dry grasslands on the slopes are always
located in the mosaic. Habitat type 6210* is common in the area and other two types are
much rarer, conditioned by location on steep slopes with shallow soil.
Three plant species present in dry grassland in the area, Crambe tataria, Iris aphylla and
Echium russicum are listed on Annex II of the EU Habitats Directive. Together with

Romanian endemic species such as Cephalaria radiata and Salvia transsylvanica those
species are good indicators of quality of dry grasslands in the area. Except those species,
significant from international point of view, there are many other threatened and important
species from national point of view as Salvia nutans, Oxytropis pilosa, Astragalus exscapus
and many others.
Some of the best xeric grassland sites in this area are on the small slumping hills, termed
movile in Romanian (Jones 2009). They are considered a unique botanical treasure of the
project area, on a par with some of the best botanical sites in Europe, for their exceptional
botanical diversity at both habitat and species level, which is packed into small areas, often
30 m or less across (Jones et al. 2010).
Dry grasslands in the Sighioara-Trnava Mare pSCI are impressive by its scale and
relatively good status, as the area is still well maintained by traditional management
measures, comparing to the rest of the Europe. Grasslands of Festuco-Brometalia were once
widespread in the hilly calcareous regions of Western Europe but due to changes in
agricultural practices (either intensification or abandonment of grazing by sheep and cattle,
and the consequent succession towards forest) their extent has decreased dramatically and
the remaining areas have become extremely fragmented (Butaye et al. 2005). The same
trend is in Central Europe. Taking into account the dependency of agricultural habitats on
certain management measures, it is generally recognized that agricultural habitats are
amongst the most threatened. The low-intensity management practices that formed the rich
biodiversity of European agricultural landscapes for centuries became unprofitable during
recent decades and they are continuously disappearingdue to both intensification of
agriculture and abandonment of unprofitable land (Halada et. al. 2010).
Dry grasslands in the Sighioara-Trnava Mare pSCI represent important example of high
species richness due to still preserved traditional and big scale management practices.
6210* Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates
(Festuco-Brometalia) (*important orchid sites)
Description and species composition
Festuco-Brometalia grasslands, present in almost the entire European continent, are among
the most species-rich plant communities in Europe and contain a large number of rare and
endangered species (Calaciura, Spinelli 2008). These communities are dominated by
mixtures of grasses and herbs and can develop on different types of substrata. The habitat is
considered a priority type (6210*) only if it is an important orchid site (EC 2007). Important
orchid sites are sites that are important on the basis of one or more of the following three
criteria:
(a) the site hosts a rich suite of orchid species;
(b) the site hosts an important population of at least one orchid species considered not
very common on the national territory;
(c) the site hosts one or several orchid species considered to be rare, very rare or
exceptional on the national territory.
In the Trnava Mare SCI site these species are usually Orchis tridentata, Orchis coriophora,
Orchis morio, Orchis ustulata, Orchis militaris, sometimes Orchis purpurea and Limodorum
abortivum.

This Annex I category includes various forms of grasslands referable in European terms to
the Mesobromion (syn. Cirsio-Brachypodion pinnati) and Xerobromion (syn. Bromion erecti)
alliances. The structural and floristic characteristics of the habitat are strongly influenced by
microrelief, climatic factors and management practices, in particular the intensity of grazing.
According to Manual for interpreting Natura 2000 habitats from Romania (Gafta, Mountford
2008), also species from wide phytosociological unit Festucetalia valesiacae are present in
this habitat type. It means that ecological gradient is very wide, from xeric to mesoxeric
types.
Mesobromion is characteristic by dominance of tall grass Brachypodium pinnatum. It
develops on deeper soils in the warm and dry areas. The grasslands of Xerobromion are
distributed in the cooler regions and are characteristic by dominance of tall grass Bromus
erectus. Nevertheless, the ranges and the species compositions of these two alliances
overlap considerably. Brachypodium pinnatum dominated semi-dry grasslands are dominant
in the region; swards with Bromus erectus are much rarer. From the grasses and sedges we
can mention Festuca rupiloca, F. valesiaca, Carex humilis and C. caryophylea. There is a
great variety of herbs occurring in this habitat type. As an example, we can mention Linum
flavum, Linum hirsutum, Onobrychis vicifolia, Dianthus carthusianorum, Centaurea scabiosa,
Polygala comosa, Jurinea mollis, Cirsium pannonicum, Inula ensifolia, Astragalus onobrychis
and many others.

Species rich dry tomesophytic grasslands of Cirsio-Brachypodion.

Photo by: Viera efferov. Location: Saschiz, 8.7.2011
Slightly more mesophytic grassland which includes the dominants Brachypodium pinnatum
and Sesleria heuflerana (a sub- Carpathian endemic) are much richer in wildflower species,
comparing to true dry grassland habitats.
Brachypodium pinnatum dominated semi-dry grasslands are dominant in the region; swards
with Bromus erectus are much rarer in the area.

6240* Sub-pannonic steppic grasslands

Description and species composition
This habitat includes steppe grasslands, restricted to the dry and steep slopes, belonging to
Festucion valesiacae alliance. This occurs on the steepest, mostly south-facing slopes. This
alliance includes narrow-leaved continental steppe grasslands dominated by tussocky
fescues (Festuca valesiaca and F. rupicola), Carex humilis and various species of Stipa - S.
pulcherrima, S. pennata, S. capillata. Grasslands have typically a high cover of xerophytic
grass species such as Agropyron intermedium and Botriochloa ischaemum. Typical species
are: Adonis vernalis, Astragalus danicus, Astragalus austriacus, A. onobrychis, Campanula
sibirica, Potentilla arenaria, Scorzonera purpurea, Allium flavum, Iris pumila, Teucrium
chamaedrys, Artemisia austriaca, Chrysopogon gryllus.
Habitat is hosting many rare and endangered species as Crambe tataria, Iris aphylla,
Oxytropis pilosa, Astragalus exscapus, A. monspessulanus, Salvia nutans, Serratula radiata,
Cephalaria radiata, Dianthus giganteus.

Transylvanian stands of Stipa sp. occur on steep, south-facing slopes.

Photo by: Viera efferov. Location: Viscri, 9. 7. 2011
Distribution and threats
These grasslands are usually small scale and not so frequent in Sighioara-Trnava Mare
pSCI. They are known from famous slumping hills as Apold, Saschiz, Viscri.
They are maintained by sheep and goat grazing, although their ecological setting makes
them rather stable even after the cessation of human activities. Also fire can be considered
as a stabilising factor for these communities. Low intensity grazing in combination with dry

soils maintains the very open nature of the vegetation. Traditional low-intensity grazing
enabled the steppe species to persist. Due to their high species richness and the occurrence
of rare and endangered species, grasslands are a focus of conservation.
62C0* Ponto-Sarmatic steppe
This habitat is not in the Standard data form for Sighioara-Trnava Mare pSCI. However,
according to opinion of some specialists and publications (Jones et al. 2010), it is occurring
in the area. By species composition and ecological requirements it is very close to habitat
6240* Sub-pannonic steppic grasslands, as associations with dominance of Stipa spp. are
sometimes classified within alliance Festucion valesiacae in Romania . Another sub-type is
alliance Stipion lessingianae (Gafta, Mountford 2008), which is known from Transylvanian
Lowland. It s are steppe-like grasslands dominated by feather grasses (Stipa spp.). Two
associations occur in Transylvania: the Stipetum lessingianae So 1947 and the Stipetum
pulcherrimae So 1942 (Ruprecht et al. 2009). Due to their high species richness and the
occurrence of rare and endangered species grasslands dominated by Stipa spp. are a focus
of conservation. They are very rare.
40A0* Subcontinental peri-Pannonic scrub
Low deciduous scrub communities of alliance Prunion fruticosae are located on steep slopes
in mosaic with dry grasslands. It includes the subshrubs Prunus tenella (syn. Amygdalus
nana) and P. fruticosus. They can be threatened by inappropriate management and lack of
grazing. Habitat is relatively rare in the area.

Subscrubs with dominance of Amygdalus nana within complex of dry grassland species.
Photo by: Viera efferov. Location: Viscri, 9. 7. 2011

Threats
Undergrazing

Low intensity grazing impact on 6210* habitat with occurrence of orchid species Orchis
ustulata. The site is overgrowing by shrubs and competitive grasses, in this case
Brachypodium pinnatum. It is suppressing less competitive species.
Photo by: Viera efferov. Location: Archita, 8.7.2011
One of the typical plant species spreading successfully in areas where former human
management has been abandoned is also Calamagrostis epigejos. Its spreading is not
intensive in the area and we found only several patches. It is only potential threat to the area.
In the advanced succession stages, woody species gradually enter grassland communities
and force profound and fast changes to the vegetation by shading and producing a large
amount of litter.

Spreading of invasive grass species

Calamagrostis epigejos represents a
potential threat in the area if there is
lack of management.
Photo by: Viera efferov.
Location: Saschiz, 8.7.2011

Invading scrub
Another phenomenon we couldnt foresee is the growing importance of woody species. This
can be seen as the continuation of spontaneous overgrowing with woody species after
traditional management was abandoned or intensity of grazing was decreased. Scrub
encroachment is the most frequently documented cause of change in 6210* sites. Scrub
invasion is considered to be an acute threat because it can result in an increase in soil
nutrients and a decline of richness in grassland species (Calaciura, Spinelli 2008).
The most serious threat to dry grassland habitats is the invasion of the allochtonous, strongly
aggressive tree Robinia pseudacacia (black locust). An intensive vegetative spread as well
as production of a large quantity of seeds makes this species a superior competitor in
secondary succession.

Small scale invasion of black locust on small slumping hills of Apold.

Photo by: Viera efferov. Location: Apold, 10. 7. 2011

Bigger scale invasion of Robinia pseudoacacia. Species is directly changing soil conditions,
making them unfavourable for typical plants of dry grasslands.
Photo by: Viera efferov. Location: Copsa Mare, 11. 7. 2011

Native scrub species overgrowing dry grasslands are Ligustrum vulgare, Cornus mas,
Crataegus sp. div., Rosa sp. div. etc. In the advanced successional stages, woody species
gradually enter grassland communities and force profound and fast changes to the
vegetation by shading and producing a large amount of litter.
Overgrazing
Overgrazing by sheep is a significant threat in the area. This leads to the spread of ruderal
and invasive plant species that respond positively to high fertility, and loss of less competitive
species.

Overgrazing on steep dry slopes causing

damage erosion and species loss

Sheepfold eutrophication leading

to invasive nitrophilous species

The problem of the priority and rare species.

Priority species present in these habitats are Echium rossicum, Iris aphylla and Crambe
tataria. Inula bifrons, also included on the list of priority species and not rare in the site is a
species with clear ruderal affinities indeed almost a weed which should not benefit from
special protection measures! However all these are not so rare in Transylvania, while others
present in the site have a much higher scientific value despite the fact that through
negligence they were not included among the so-called priority species. In a realistic
scientific project they should be undoubtedly be included and considered for special
management measures.
Among such species already identified are Salvia nutans, Peucedanum tauricum,
Calamintha nepeta (ssp. transsilvanica?), Polygala sibirica, Centaurea orientalis,
Hyacinthella leucophaea, Centaurea atropurpurea, Gypsophila collina and others. A great
surprise for the researchers was the identification of two Sub-Mediterranean species in the
site, Fraxinus ornus and Dianthus giganteus with consistent populations.

10

Management/restoration models
Traditional management of these steppe-like grasslands was grazing by sheep or cattle from
spring to autumn. Through the last 50 years, land-use has changed in this region greatly
influencing several dry grassland sites. Livestock number has decreased due to the low
profitability, and because these dry grasslands have the lowest productivity (600 g m-2 yr1dry matter) among the regions grasslands, they were the first to be abandoned (Ruprecht
et al. 2009). The open and unfenced grasslands are currently managed by sheep and cattle
grazing in extensive systems and by hay cutting and occasional burning to control scrub
(Jones 2010). Hence it is important to control scrub and provide appropriate levels of
grazing/cutting as grassland soil seed banks under long-term scrub cover may not be longlived.
EU
Code

Habitat

Distribution

6210*

Semi-natural dry
grasslands and
scrubland facies on
calcareous substrates
(Festuco Brometalia)

Most common in the

region, located on steep
to shallow slopes.
Ecological gradient is
wide, from xeric to
mesoxeric types.

6240*

Sub-continental steppic
grasslands

62C0*

Ponto-Sarmatic steppe

40A0*

Subcontinental periPannonic scrub

Dry xeric grasslands

located on steep slopes.
Rare in the region.
Dry xeric grasslands
located on steep slopes.
Very rare in the region.
Low deciduous scrub
communities. Rare in the
region.

11

Interaction with farming

The structural and floristic
characteristics of the habitat
are strongly influenced by
management practices, in
particular the intensity of
grazing/or less frequent
mowing.
Low-intensity grazing is
required to maintain the
grassland habitat.
Low-intensity grazing is
required to maintain the
grassland habitat.
Grazing by goats should not
be allowed.

The following restoration measures will be implemented during the project:

Cutting of scrub
Scrub and trees should be cut during late summer or early autumn (second half of August,
beginning of September), so that the shoots freeze and die during winter in the case of black
locust. This method can be more efficient, if the freshly cut trunks surface is painted by
herbicide. The shoots appearing will be cut in July of the second year. Follow-up treatment is
needed up to 3 years to achieve suppression of the alien species and rehabilitation of
targeted habitats.
Mowing
The expansion of highly competitive grass species on dry grasslands will be suppressed by
mowing, using specialist Brielmeier equipment purchased under the STIPA project. We plan
that this will be carried out once, as a single restoration action subsidised by the project, as a
condition of which we will establish with farmers the need that they maintain annual
grazing/mowing after the restoration has taken place. Frequent mowing has been confirmed
in other projects as an effective tool for reducing the cover of Calamagrostis epigejos and
increasing the overall community diversity after about 45 years.
Burning
If burning of dry grassland is carried out too late in the year, or too frequently, it is destructive
of plant species diversity. However, if carried out only in limited problem areas, as early in
the year as the disappearance of snow cover allows (late February/early March, ideally) as a
one-off action not repeated at all or at least for several years, then we believe that burning
may be a viable way of restoring these habitats when suffering from profound effects of
abandonment (thatch of dead material at ground level, invasive scrub, etc.).
However, after consultation with the MARD and MoE, with local authorities and with local
farmers, we have concluded that it is not sufficiently accepted at national or local level to use
this method under the current project. Firstly, there are unresolved legal problems: farmers
whose land has been cleared by controlled burning risk losing their eligibility to Direct
Payments (SAPS, Pillar I of CAP) and to agri-environment payments (Pillar II of CAP).
Secondly, if the project carries out controlled burning, local authorities believe that this will
b=be interpreted widely as a general approval of such practice, which could lead to the
increase of uncontrolled burning especially by shepherds, over large areas.
Reducing stocking rates
Sheep overgrazing either due to excessive stocking rates over a large area, or by failure to
move flocks frequently, will be prevented by establishing proper flock management with
shepherds. Two areas have been restored in 2012 by working with shepherds to ameliorate
the problem of overgrazing, which was severely damaging the conservation status of these
areas of target habitat. This was not paid for: in one case, Stelica, we used our mowers to
clear the scrub (see photos C2 Viscri Stelica), in exchange for shepherds agreement to keep
stocking rates low. In the other case, this is a future micro-reserve and we agreed with the
local grazing association to minimise grazing, in view of importance of the area, without
compensation being required.

12

Identification of dry grassland habitat types *6210 and *6240

Based on field observations of vegetation scientists dry grasslands climatic and soil
conditions are along with human influence concerned to be the most important factors
affecting their floristic composition (Ellenberg, 1986). Most of dry grassland communities
inhabit slopes and plateau that differ in local climatic conditions from the regional climate
(Janiov, 2005). For identification of slopes we used digital terrain model (DTM).
The DTM was generated using a topographical map at 1:25000 scale. From this map the
contour lines were extracted at an interval of 5 m elevation. The elevation value for each
contour line was introduced in a database table. The final table with all the contour lines in
the area included a number of 9136 lines, each with its own elevation value. Using the data
obtained through digitizing we applied a GIS function and obtained the DTM for the area. The
raw DTM was analysed, checked for errors and corrected. The resulting spatial resolution for
the DTM is 5m.
Further GIS tools were applied in order to obtain the slope raster map, at a high resolution of
5m. This tool calculates the maximum rate of change between each raster cell and its
neighbours, more particularly the maximum change in elevation over the distance between
one raster cell and its eight neighbours. In the output raster every cell has a slope value.
lower values characterize flat areas while higher values indicate a ore steeper terrain.
For our purpose the slope values were expressed in degree and not as percent of slope.

The rate of change (delta) of the surface in the horizontal (dz/dx) and vertical (dz/dy)
directions from the center cell determines the slope. The basic algorithm used to calculate
the slope is:
slope_radians = ATAN ( ( [dz/dx]2 + [dz/dy]2 ) )
First classification of slopes was tested in the field on occurrence of target habitats. Totally,
23 sites were tested in whole project area in July 2011. Twelve detail records with complete
list of species composition and detail description of site were elaborated in the same period.
After field test new classification of slopes have been elaborated:
1.
<15-0;
2.
15-20;
3.
20-25;
4.
25-30;
5.
30-35;
6.
>35.

13

Last phase was elimination of slopes in the forests, which was done based on aerial photos.
Result of identification of dry grasslands is shows their distribution in Figure 1. Total
estimated area is 5,895 ha. We can see that western part of project area has much higher
occurrence of dry grassland habitats.
This estimation can be biased by preciseness of DTM in case small slopes, which can be
neglected. On the other side, flat parts of hills with dry grasslands are omitted as well.

Figure 1: Synthesis of distribution, representativity and main threat

to dry grassland habitat types *6210 and *6240
For the synthesis we used data from grassland inventory, which resulted in 568 polygons
(physical blocks) for 6210* Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous
substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) (*important orchid sites) and 312 polygons with occurrence
of 6240* Sub-pannonic steppic grasslands.
Two main target habitat types are analysed by their quality (representativity data from
grassland inventory), threat by shrub succession (% of shrubs data from grassland
inventory) and exact location (data from slope model). We have prepared three maps for
each habitat type by splitting area to western, middle and eastern part (scale 1:100 000). The
most important green areas (dark and light green) with excellent respectively good
representativity outlined by red or orange line (shrubs over 20% resp. 5%). In such cases we
have very good quality of habitats under overgrowing. These should be primarily target of
restoration effort.

14

Figure 2: 6210 distribution, representativity and threat, western part of SCI

15

Figure 3: 6210 distribution, representativity and threat, middle part of SCI

16

Figure 4: 6210 distribution, representativity and threat, eastern part of SCI

17

Figure 5: 6240 distribution, representativity and threat, western part of SCI

18

Figure 6: 6240 distribution, representativity and threat, middle part of SCI

19

Figure 7: 6240 distribution, representativity and threat, eastern part of SCI

20

Explanations
We are using 3 basic methods of habitat restoration
1. Clearing of scrub with Brielmeier and strimmers: a one-off action backed up by
continued management by the farmer.

Fig. 8: Site selected for clearing (Hoghilag, Point 23 on map): before clearing. May 2012.

Fig 9: Site selected for clearing (Hoghilag): during clearing with Brielmeier. May 2012

Fig 10: Site selected for clearing (Hoghilag): after clearing. May 2012.

21

2. Clearing of invasive species at sheepfolds: invasive nitrophilous species are often

observed spreading and damaging habitats near sheepfolds, as a result of failure to
move sheep enclosures sufficiently frequently. We are cutting these patches 3 times
in a year, after which the shepherd agrees to move his flock more frequently see
figures Tarla 1-Tarla 5 below.
3. Improving grazing management over a sheep grazing area, by agreeing with the
shepherd that he will use lower stocking rates/shorter grazing periods on areas of
target habitat, See figures Grazing 1 and Grazing 2 below.

Fig 11: Sheepfold (Tarla) 1 (point 26 on map)

22

Fig 12: Tarla 2 (point 27 on map)

23

Fig 13: Tarla 3 (point 28 on map)

24

Fig 14: Tarla 4 (point 29 on map)

25

Calculation of areas restored:

Since the management unit, and the unit by which farmers receive agri-environment
payments, is the Physical Block (PB), then if a sufficient percentage of the PB is cleared of
scrub, the conservation status of the entire PB is improved and the PB becomes eligible for
agri-environment payments, thus securing the long-term good conservation management of
the habitat after the one-off restoration activity carried out under STIPA.
We have concluded that 10% is a practical threshold, for this calculation to be valid from a
conservation and a future management/payment pint of view.
Thus, for all these methods 1 -3 above, where <10% of a PB has been cleared of scrub, we
include only the physical area cleared as brought under improved conservation status.
Where >10% of a PB has been cleared, we include the whole area of the PB as having been
brought under improved conservation status.

We use an example to illustrate this: Stelica sheepfold.

Fig 15: Stelica sheep grazing area (193 ha (point 33 on map) showing target habitat
distribution

26

Calculations:
A

Physical block
(PB) code

Area of
BF

%age of
target
habitat
in PB

Area of
BF with
target
habitat

Area of BF
managed
by Stelica

Area of
habitat
managed
by Stelica

%age of
habitat
managed
by Stelica

Area used
for
calculation:

508689-507669

39.36

100

39.36

3.95

3.95

10.04

39.36

509160-507277

25.18

100

25.18

24.92

24.92

98.97

24.92

508580-507000

21.53

80

17.22

20.53

16.42

76.28

17.22

510297-507003

8.19

0.77

0.06

8.19

0.06

0.77

0.06

510110-506778

6.07

0.46

0.03

5.07

0.02

0.38

0.02

509156-508244

34

0.2

0.07

6.02

0.01

0.04

0.01

510228-507549

101.96

12.42

12.66

100.42

12.47

12.23

100.42

510679-506668

30.37

0.13

0.04

22.98

0.03

0.10

0.03

510881-507763

63.9

0.53

0.34

0.92

0.00

0.01

330.56

294.51

94.96

193

57.90

TOTAL

For the reporting of results of cleared areas, we have used

1. Column D area if Column G is >10%
2. Column F area if column G is <10%.
Thus in this case:

Area managed by Stelica= 193

Area managed by Stelica with habitat = 57.9
restored by improved grazing Percentage = 30%
Areas recorded as restored= 193ha

27

182.04

Calculation of areas restored in the micro-reserves

Fig 16: Saschiz micro-reserve (49.93 ha, point 32 on map) showing target habitat
distribution
In the case of micro-reserves restored by grazing management, we include the whole grazed
area of target habitat brought under agreement, regardless of PB, as having been brought
under improved conservation status.

Area of micro-reserve: 49.93 ha (delineated by purple in map above).

Within the polygon there are 7.36 hectares of target habitat: 14.74%.
Thus area calculated as restored (where target habitat exceeds 10%) is total area =
49.93.

28

Achieve/maintain favourable conservation status for 75% of 6210* and 6240* habitats
through sympathetic management by 2013 project and (Sept 2013).
In addition to the up to 1,000ha of concrete conservation actions under C2 of the project,
STIPA also has a target to achieve/maintain favourable conservation status for 75% of 6210*
and 6240* habitats through sympathetic management by 2013 project and (Sept 2013).
The target area is (75% x 5,895 ha identified target habitats =) 4,421.25ha.
We will achieve this by direct actions under C2 (approx 1,000 ha), plus actions to increase
awareness of the opportunities represented by good habitat management, improved
management through meetings, workshops, with the incentive to farmers of:
1. Increased income from more productive grasslands
2. Increased income from improved access to agri-environment payments.
We are using village meetings, printed materials and farm visits for awareness-raising. As a
result of these awareness-raising actions, participation of Trnava Mare area farmers in the
High Nature Value grassland agri-environment non-mechanised grassland measure, typical
for target dry grassland habitats, has increased from 20,695.23 in 2008, to 24,505.75 in
2012. See Table below.
Table 1: take-up of grassland agri-environment measures in STIPA communes before and
after awareness-raising by Fundatia ADEPT staff (data from APIA, Romanian payments
agency, 2012)
SCI

Measure
Agri-environment measure 214/2 (non-
mechanised)

2008

2012

20,695.23

24,505.75

This shows an increase of 3,810.52 ha in the non-machanised grassland agrienvironment scheme between 2008 and 2012.
The majority of this grassland is target habitat. This shows quantitive measurement of
results of awareness-raising. This measurement, although approximate, shows over
3,000 ha of target habitat entering the non-machanised grassland agri-environment
schemes since 2008, largely the result of ADEPT awareness-raising activities.
In addition, target habitats already within agri-environment schemes are being brought
under better management through Fundaia ADEPT guidance.

29

MAPS OF WORK CARRIED OUT IN 2011 AND 2012

Fig 17: Sites for restoration by clearing of scrub, Restored in 2011

Table 2: Restored in 2011 by clearing of scrub

Code

Action

Location

Name

Area (PB) in
hectares

Target habitat
restored

Percentage of
PB (target
habitat)
restored

Code

Action

Location

Name

Area (PB) in
hectares

Cleared areas
(ha)

Percentage of
PB cleared

C1

Boiu

0.00

0.00

C1

Archita

C1

Malancrav

C1

Noul Sasesc

C1

Floresti

n/a

7.00

Land area
restored

Details/
observations
Details/observati
ons
outside the SCI
but still
demonstration
point

C2

Malancrav

Asociatia crescatorilor de
bovine

C2

Malancrav

Rolf Roth

C2

Bunesti

Stanciu Viorica

C2

Bunesti

Adi Palasan

101.96

6.00

5.88

6.00

clearing

10

C2

Bunesti

Palasan Ioan

42.80

0.50

1.17

1.17

clearing

11

C2

Mesendorf

Adrian Stoian

4.92

2.00

40.65

4.92

clearing

12

C2

Viscri

Gheghiceanu Neculai

5.01

2.00

39.92

5.01

clearing

13

C2

Viscri

Walter Fernolend

42.50

2.00

4.71

2.00

clearing

14

C2

Viscri

Marcu Stelian

46.20

5.00

10.82

46.20

clearing

15

C2

Viscri

Casaru Gheorghe

38.25

2.50

6.54

2.50

clearing

16

C2

Viscri

Molnar Adrian

20.17

1.50

7.44

1.50

clearing

17

C2

Daia

Tomuta Ioan

67.20

2.00

2.98

2.00

clearing

40.83

48.00

117.56

40.83

clearing

72.44

6.00

8.28

72.44

clearing

4.40

7.00

159.09

4.40

clearing

Total 195.97 ha

n/a

Restored
area
recorded
(ha)

31

Fig. 18: Restored 2012: by clearing of scrub

32

Table 3: Restored in 2012 by clearing of scrub

Code

Area (PB)
in hectares

Action

Location

Name

18

C2

Archita

19

C2

Archita

20

C2

Archita
Mihai
Vitezul

Intre Archita si Mureni

Archita est, langa granita cu jud.
Harghita
Archita est, langa granita cu jud.
Harghita
Mihai Viteazul est, coasta insorita

131.15

21

Percentage
of PB (target
habitat)
restored

Restored
area
recorded
(ha)

Details/
observations

48.30

6.30

13.04

48.30

clearing

94.28

7.00

7.42

7.00

clearing

208.60

23.00

11.03

23.00
0.00

clearing
plantation
(excluded)

22

C2

Valchid

Valchid vest, valea Sesului

21.35

3.00

14.05

21.35

clearing

23

C1

Valchid

Valchid vest, valea Sesului

3.34

4.00

119.76

4.00

clearing

24

C2

Viscri

Viscri Pm parcela 2

34.00

22.80

67.06

34.00

clearing

25

C2

Viscri

Stipa+Viscri parcela1

67.20

21.01

31.26

67.20

clearing

Total 204.85 ha

Target
habitat
restored

33

Fig 19: Restored 2012 by improved grazing management correcting overgrazing

34

Table 4: Restored 2012 by improved grazing management correcting overgrazing

Code

Action

Location

Name

26

C2

Laslea

Sheepfold1

27

C2

Valchid

28

C2

Hoghilag

29

C2

32
33

Target
habitat
restored

Area (PB) in
hectares

Restored
area
recorded
(ha)

Details/observations

10.79

2.40

22.24

10.79

clearing

Sheepfold2

9.95

0.52

5.23

0.52

clearing

Sheepfold3

39.68

0.41

1.03

0.41

clearing

Danes

Sheepfold4

47.63

0.10

0.21

0.10

C2

Saschiz

Microreserve Saschiz

49.93

7.36

14.74

49.93

C2

Bunesti

Stelica sheepfold

193

57.9

30

193

clearing
Grazing management
2012
Grazing management
2012

Total 254.75 ha

Percentage of
PB (target
habitat)
restored

35

Fig 20: General map showing all actions 2011-2012

36

Table 5: summarising all actions 2011-2012

Code

Action

Location

C1

Boiu

2011

C1

Archita

2011

C1

Malancrav

2011

C1

Noul Sasesc

2011

C1

Floresti

year

2011

Area (PB) in
hectares

0.00

n/a

Percentage of
PB (target
habitat)
restored

Restored
area
recorded
(ha)

Details /
observations
outside the SCI
but still
demonstrative
point

0.00

7.00 n/a

C2

Malancrav

Asociatia crescatorilor de
bovine

C2

Malancrav

Rolf Roth

2011

C2

Bunesti

Stanciu Viorica

2011

4.40

7.00

159.09

4.40

clearing

C2

Bunesti

Adi Palasan

2011

101.96

6.00

5.88

6.00

clearing

10

C2

Bunesti

Palasan Ioan

2011

42.80

0.50

1.17

1.17

clearing

11

C2

Mesendorf

Adrian Stoian

2011

4.92

2.00

40.65

4.92

clearing

12

C2

Viscri

Gheghiceanu Neculai

2011

5.01

2.00

39.92

5.01

clearing

13

C2

Viscri

Walter Fernolend

2011

42.50

2.00

4.71

2.00

clearing

14

C2

Viscri

Marcu Stelian

2011

46.20

5.00

10.82

46.20

clearing

15

C2

Viscri

Casaru Gheorghe

2011

38.25

2.50

6.54

2.50

clearing

16

C2

Viscri

Molnar Adrian

2011

20.17

1.50

7.44

1.50

clearing

17

C2

Daia

Tomuta Ioan

2011

67.20

2.00

2.98

2.00

clearing

18

C2

Archita

2012

48.30

6.30

13.04

48.30

clearing

19

C2

Archita

2012

94.28

7.00

7.42

7.00

clearing

20

C2

Archita

2012

208.60

23.00

11.03

23.00

Mihai Vitezul

Intre Archita si Mureni

Archita est, langa granita cu
jud. Harghita
Archita est, langa granita cu
jud. Harghita
Mihai Viteazul est, coasta
insorita

2011

131.15

Valchid

Valchid vest, valea Sesului

2012

21.35

21
22

Name

Target
habitat
restored

C2

2011

40.83

48.00

117.56

40.83

clearing

72.44

6.00

8.28

72.44

clearing

37

0.00
3.00

14.05

21.35

clearing
plantation
(excluded)
clearing

23

C1

Valchid

Valchid vest, valea Sesului

2012

3.34

4.00

119.76

4.00

clearing

24

C2

Viscri

Viscri Pm parcela 2

2012

34.00

22.80

67.06

34.00

clearing

25

C2

Viscri

Stipa+Viscri parcela1

2012

67.20

21.01

31.26

67.20

clearing

26

C2

Laslea

Sheepfold1

2012

10.79

2.40

22.24

10.79

clearing

27

C2

Valchid

Sheepfold2

2012

9.95

0.52

5.23

0.52

clearing

28

C2

Hoghilag

Sheepfold3

2012

39.68

0.41

1.03

0.41

clearing

29

C2

Danes

Sheepfold4

2012

47.63

0.10

0.21

0.10

32

C2

Saschiz

Microreserve Saschiz

2012

49.93

7.36

14.74

49.93

33

C2

Bunesti

Stelica sheepfold

2012

193

57.9

30

193

clearing
Grazing
management
2012
Grazing
management
2012

Total 655.57 ha
Of which:
2011: 195.97
2012: 459.60

38

Continued actions in 2013

A. Habitat restoration: target up to 1,000 ha.
We will continue to use the 3 methods above in 2013.
1. Clearing of scrub with Brielmeier and strimmers: a one-off action backed up by
continued management by the farmer
2. Clearing of invasive species at sheepfolds: invasive nitrophilous species are often
observed spreading and damaging habitats near sheepfolds, as a result of failure
to move sheep enclosures sufficiently frequently. We are cutting these patches 3
times in a year, after which the shepherd agrees to move his flock more frequently
see figures Tarla 1-Tarla 5 below.
3. Improving grazing management over a sheep grazing area, by agreeing with the
shepherd that he will use lower stocking rates/shorter grazing periods on areas of
target habitat, See figures Grazing 1 and Grazing 2 below.
We expect to meet or even exceed the 1,000 ha target for habitat restoration in this
project.
We have identified suitable areas for all 3 methods, two of which (Apold and Daia microreserves) are marked on the General map above.
B. Achieve/maintain favourable conservation status for 75% of 6210* and 6240*
habitats (75% x 5,895 ha = 4,421.25ha) through sympathetic management by 2013
project and (Sept 2013).
We will achieve this by direct actions under A above (approx 1,000 ha), plus actions to
increase awareness of the opportunities represented by good habitat management:
1. Increased income from more productive grasslands
2. Increased income from improved access to agri-environment payments.
We will continue to use village meetings, printed materials and farm visits for awarenessraising, so that the positive trend (an increase of 3,810.52 ha in grassland agrienvironment schemes between 2008 and 2012, of which 3,000 ha is target habitat)
reported above is continued.
We do not expect such significant increases in land under agri-environment actions in
2011 and 2012 have already attracted most potential participants improved conservation
status will be achieved mainly by bringing target habitats already within agri-environment
schemes under better management through Fundaia ADEPT guidance.

Literature

Burrough, P. A. and McDonell, R.A., 1998. Principles of Geographical Information

Systems (Oxford University Press, New York), p. 190.

Calaciura B., Spinelli O. 2008. Management of Natura 2000 habitats. 6210 Seminatural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (FestucoBrometalia) (*important orchid sites). European Commission.

Ellenberg, H., 1986: Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen in kologischer Sicht. 4 th
ed. Ulmer, Stuttgart, Germany.

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 2007. Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats

EUR27. European Commission, DG Environment, Brussels: 144 pp.

GAFTA, D. & MOUNTFORD, J. O. (2008) [Eds.]: Manual de interpretare a habitatelor

Natura 2000 din Romnia (Manual for interpreting Natura 2000 habitats from
Romania).[in Romanian]. Risoprint, Cluj: 101 pp.

Halada L., Evans D., Roma C., Petersen J.E. 2010: Which habitats of European
importance depend on agricultural practices? Biodivers Conserv

Janiov, M., 2005: Vegetation-environment relationships in dry calcareous

grasslands. Ekolgia (Bratislava) Vol. 24, No. 1, p. 1327.

Jones, A. T. (2009): Wildflower species indicators for lowland grassland habitat

conservation in Transylvania (Romania). Contrib. Bot. 44: 5766. Cluj-Napoca.

Ruprecht, E., Szab, A., Enyedi, M. Z., Dengler, J. 2009. Steppe-like grasslands in
Transylvania (Romania): characterisation and influence of management on species
diversity and composition. Tuexenia, 29, pp. 353-368.

Jones A., Akeroyd J., Beldean M., Turtureanu D. 2010: Characterization and
conservation of xeric grasslands in the Trnava Mare area of Transylvania (Romania).
Tuexenia 30: 445456.