ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?

As a result of discussions held at the Innsbruck CRAYNET meeting and the answers given to a subsequent questionnaire sent out to the National Co-ordinators of the 11 countries/regions, it is clear that most European countries aim at trying to protect their indigenous crayfish species (ICS) from over...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: HOLDICH D. M., PÖCKL M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: EDP Sciences 2005-07-01
Series:Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/kmae:2005034
_version_ 1818936330595336192
author HOLDICH D. M.
PÖCKL M.
author_facet HOLDICH D. M.
PÖCKL M.
author_sort HOLDICH D. M.
collection DOAJ
description As a result of discussions held at the Innsbruck CRAYNET meeting and the answers given to a subsequent questionnaire sent out to the National Co-ordinators of the 11 countries/regions, it is clear that most European countries aim at trying to protect their indigenous crayfish species (ICS) from overexploitation, habitat modification, pollution, and spread of non-indigenous crayfish species (NICS) and crayfish plague. Two detailed case studies are given for Austria and England plus a summary of the questionnaires. These clearly illustrate the different attitudes of countries to protecting and managing their ICS and NICS. The situation is highly complex and differs depending upon whether or not there is a tradition for eating crayfish. Consequently, harmonisation of national and regional regulations for ICS and NICS in Europe may not be possible in the short term. In many cases legislation has not prevented further destruction of populations of ICS and the spread of NICS. However, without such legislation the situation could have been a lot worse and some ICS could already have become critically endangered. The continued efforts by the crayfish community and national authorities have resulted in a scenario where there are still some countries without NICS, and in most European countries there are specific areas with numerous, viable populations of ICS that are considered valuable and are protected by the authorities as well as by local people. The situation has recently been improved by providing protection for Austropotamobius torrentium under Annex II of the EU Habitats Directive. A major objective must be to develop methods for eradicating nuisance populations of NICS before they spread any further.
first_indexed 2024-12-20T05:34:21Z
format Article
id doaj.art-21edf8c1359d4149b392a255f9b12e6a
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1961-9502
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-20T05:34:21Z
publishDate 2005-07-01
publisher EDP Sciences
record_format Article
series Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems
spelling doaj.art-21edf8c1359d4149b392a255f9b12e6a2022-12-21T19:51:39ZengEDP SciencesKnowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems1961-95022005-07-010376-37780982710.1051/kmae:2005034kmae2005376p809ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?HOLDICH D. M.PÖCKL M.As a result of discussions held at the Innsbruck CRAYNET meeting and the answers given to a subsequent questionnaire sent out to the National Co-ordinators of the 11 countries/regions, it is clear that most European countries aim at trying to protect their indigenous crayfish species (ICS) from overexploitation, habitat modification, pollution, and spread of non-indigenous crayfish species (NICS) and crayfish plague. Two detailed case studies are given for Austria and England plus a summary of the questionnaires. These clearly illustrate the different attitudes of countries to protecting and managing their ICS and NICS. The situation is highly complex and differs depending upon whether or not there is a tradition for eating crayfish. Consequently, harmonisation of national and regional regulations for ICS and NICS in Europe may not be possible in the short term. In many cases legislation has not prevented further destruction of populations of ICS and the spread of NICS. However, without such legislation the situation could have been a lot worse and some ICS could already have become critically endangered. The continued efforts by the crayfish community and national authorities have resulted in a scenario where there are still some countries without NICS, and in most European countries there are specific areas with numerous, viable populations of ICS that are considered valuable and are protected by the authorities as well as by local people. The situation has recently been improved by providing protection for Austropotamobius torrentium under Annex II of the EU Habitats Directive. A major objective must be to develop methods for eradicating nuisance populations of NICS before they spread any further.http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/kmae:2005034Europelegislationcrayfishindigenousnon-indigenousEU Habitats Directive
spellingShingle HOLDICH D. M.
PÖCKL M.
ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?
Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems
Europe
legislation
crayfish
indigenous
non-indigenous
EU Habitats Directive
title ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?
title_full ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?
title_fullStr ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?
title_full_unstemmed ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?
title_short ROUNDTABLE SESSION 2: DOES LEGISLATION WORK IN PROTECTING VULNERABLE SPECIES?
title_sort roundtable session 2 does legislation work in protecting vulnerable species
topic Europe
legislation
crayfish
indigenous
non-indigenous
EU Habitats Directive
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/kmae:2005034
work_keys_str_mv AT holdichdm roundtablesession2doeslegislationworkinprotectingvulnerablespecies
AT pocklm roundtablesession2doeslegislationworkinprotectingvulnerablespecies