Management of Natura 2000 habitats coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. 2250 : Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.
Date: 2010-05-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment
Subjects: biotope, coastal region, environmental protection, protection of plant life, wildlife

Technical Report 2008 06/24

MANAGEMENT of Natura 2000 habitats
* Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp.
2250

Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and 
of wild fauna and flora

  
The European Commission (DG ENV B2) commissioned the Management of Natura 2000 habitats. 2250 
*Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. 

This document was completed in March 2008 by Stefano Picchi, Comunità Ambiente 

Comments, data or general information were generously provided by: 

Barbara Calaciura, Comunità Ambiente, Italy 
Daniela Zaghi, Comunità Ambiente, Italy 
Oliviero Spinelli, Comunità Ambiente, Italy 
Roberto Fiorentin, Veneto Agricoltura, Italy 
José Carlos Muñoz-Reinoso, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain 
John Houston, Liverpool Hope University, United Kingdom 
Antonio Perfetti, Parco della Maremma, Italy 
Antonio Sánchez Codoñer, Ayuntamiento de Valencia, Spain 
Ana Guimarães, (ATECMA, Portugal) 
Mats O.G. Eriksson (MK NATUR- OCH MILJÖKONSULT HB, Sweden) 
Marc Thauront (Ecosphéré, France) 

Coordination: Concha Olmeda, ATECMA & Daniela Zaghi, Comunità Ambiente 

©2008 European Communities 

ISBN 978-92-79-08321-1 

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged 

Picchi  S.  2008.  Management  of  Natura  2000  habitats.  2250  *Coastal  dunes  with  Juniperus  spp.  European 
Commission 

This  document,  which  has  been  prepared 
contract 
(7030302/2006/453813/MAR/B2 "Natura 2000 preparatory actions: Management Models for Natura 2000 
Sites”), is not legally binding. 

framework  of  a 

service 

the 

in 

Contract  realized  by:  ATECMA  (Spain),  COMUNITÀ  AMBIENTE  (Italy),  DAPHNE  (Slovakia),  ECOSYSTEMS 
(Belgium), ECOSPHÈRE (France) and MK NATUR- OCH MILJÖKONSULT HB (Sweden). 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Contents 

Summary ......................................................................................................................................................1 

1. Description of habitat and related species ...........................................................................................2 

Distribution ................................................................................................................................................................................2 
Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. in Natura 2000 sites ........................................................................................2 

Main habitat features, ecology and variability ...............................................................................................................3 
Ecological requirements ..................................................................................................................................................3 
Main subtypes identified .................................................................................................................................................4 

Species that depend on the habitat ..................................................................................................................................4 

Related habitats........................................................................................................................................................................4 

Ecological services and benefits of the habitat..............................................................................................................5 

Trends...........................................................................................................................................................................................5 

Threats .........................................................................................................................................................................................5 
Urban development ..........................................................................................................................................................5 
Tourist pressure...................................................................................................................................................................6 
Forest fires.............................................................................................................................................................................6 
Alien plant species .............................................................................................................................................................6 
Coastal erosion....................................................................................................................................................................7 
Grazing and browsing.......................................................................................................................................................7 
Habitat fragmentation......................................................................................................................................................7 
Polluted sea spray and nutrient deposition ..............................................................................................................7 

Climate change effects...........................................................................................................................................................8 

2. Conservation management ....................................................................................................................9 

General recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................9 

Active management................................................................................................................................................................9 
Eradication or control of invasive plants ....................................................................................................................9 
Fire prevention................................................................................................................................................................. 10 
Shrub clearance and controlled grazing ................................................................................................................. 11 

Other relevant measures .................................................................................................................................................... 11 
Recovery interventions.................................................................................................................................................. 11 
Plant production.............................................................................................................................................................. 13 
Raising the awareness of local people and tourists about the importance of the habitat..................... 14 
Monitoring and limiting coastal erosion ................................................................................................................. 14 

Special requirements driven by relevant species....................................................................................................... 15 

Cost estimates and potential sources of EU financing ............................................................................................. 15 
Cost estimates .................................................................................................................................................................. 15 
Potential sources of EU financing .............................................................................................................................. 16 

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................. 20 

3. References ..............................................................................................................................................21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2250 | *Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. 

22 - Sea dunes of the 
Mediterranean coast  

Eunis Classification:  

B1.63 Dune [Juniperus] thickets 

* Priority habitat 

Coastal dunes with Juniperus oxycedrus macrocarpa in Policoro, Italy. 
Photo: S.Picchi 

Summary 

Coastal dunes with junipers occur on the coasts of Southern and Western Europe. This rare and beautiful 
habitat  features  sparse  junipers  that  are  prostrate  or  erect  depending  on  wind  action  and  the  adverse 
conditions typical of sand dunes. 

Nowadays this habitat is under threat from factors such as urban development, tourism, forest fires, alien 
species,  coastal  erosion,  grazing  and  browsing,  habitat  fragmentation,  polluted  sea  spray  and  nutrient 
deposition. When in good condition, the habitat is part of a succession of other habitats situated seaward. 
The good ecological quality of juniper dunes therefore depends on the presence of habitats of embryonic 
shifting dunes and so-called white dunes, which help to stabilise the sand, thereby creating a more stable 
substratum inland that is suitable for juniper formations. From a management point of view, therefore, 
this habitat should be regarded as one part of dune systems that need to be managed as a whole.  

Where  habitat  status  is  good  and  not  under  any  threat,  non  intervention  is  the  best  choice.    However, 
recurring  management  is  often  necessary  owing  to  its  unfavourable  conservation  status  in  many  sites. 
The main recurring management measures consist of eradication of invasive plants, fire prevention, shrub 
clearance and controlled grazing. Alien trees or shrubs should only be removed if they are damaging the 
habitat.  Removing  plant  roots  can  have  negative  impacts  on  the  habitat.  The  vegetation  should  be 
removed from the site as soon as possible after felling/cutting or be left in piles in order to minimise the 
fertilisation effect. Fire prevention is a response to one of the most damaging threats to habitat, and costs 
less  than  extinguishing  fires  and  recovering  habitat.  It  should  include  surveillance,  making  and 
maintaining firebreaks and preventive actions in neighbouring areas, as well as public awareness actions. 

In  Central  and  Northern  Europe  shrub  clearance  and  controlled  grazing  are  crucial  since  the  habitat’s 
natural  successional  trend  is  always  towards  climax  woodland.  Recovery  interventions  on  degraded 
dunes  with  junipers  take  time  since  juniper  cultivation  is  difficult  due  to  its  low  germination  rates  and 
slow  sapling  growth.  When  rapid  re-colonisation  is  needed,  it  is  better  to  use  other  species  associated 
with  juniper  habitat  so  as  to  create  better  conditions  for  natural  propagation.  Only  where  natural 
regeneration  is  not  possible  should  planting  be  considered.  As  failure  to  take  into  consideration  the 
importance  and  rarity  of  coastal  juniper  dunes  jeopardises  the  habitat,  it  is  also  important  to  raise 
awareness among local people.

1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1. Description of habitat and related species 

This  habitat  type  comprises  juniper  scrub  on  coastal  sand  dunes  in  a  variety  of  situations.  Junipers  are 
coniferous plants, shrubs or small trees, native to Mediterranean coasts, growing into a pyramid shape, 
with  branches  growing  from  its  base.  There  are  both  prostrate  and  erect  forms  of  juniper,  but  neither 
usually grows over 6 metres high. 

Distribution 

Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. (juniper) are widespread on the coasts of Europe, but not very common. 
The habitat is distributed along the sandy coasts of Southern and Western Europe, on Mediterranean and 
Atlantic  coasts.  Italy  hosts  the  main  area  of  this  habitat  at  EU  level  followed  by  Spain  and  France.  This 
habitat  is  rare  in  the  United  Kingdom,  where  it  is  present  only  in  Scotland.  The  distribution  is  very 
discontinuous, with large portions of habitat surviving mainly in protected areas. 

Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. in Natura 2000 sites 

Percentage distribution of the total surface of costal dunes with Juniperus spp.  in Natura 2000 

The  following  data  have  been  extracted  from  the  Natura  2000  Network  database,  elaborated  by  the 
European Commission with data updated on December 2006. The surface was estimated on the basis of 
the  habitat  cover  indicated  for  each  protected  site  and  should  be  considered  only  as  indicative  of  the 
habitat surface included in Natura 2000. 

2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Biogeographical region 

Nº of sites  

Estimated surface  
in Natura 2000 (ha) 

Mediterranean 
Continental 
Atlantic 
Countries 

Italy 
Portugal 
Spain 
Denmark 
France 
Greece 
United Kingdom 

TOTAL 

148 
22 
4 

22,413 
2,740 
143 

Nº of sites  

Estimated surface  
in Natura 2000 (ha) 

87 
8 
26 
15 
21 
15 
2 

9,769 
4,874 
4,884 
2,459 
2,213 
1,077 
20 

174 

25,296 

% of total surface  
In Natura 2000 

88.61 
10.83 
0.56 
% of total surface  
In Natura 2000 

38.61 
19.27 
19.31 
9.72 
8.75 
4.26 
0.08 

100 

Main habitat features, ecology and variability  

Juniper  stands  usually  cover  small  areas  and  are  closely  associated  with  other  Annex  I  habitat  types, 
including  dune  grasslands  and  coastal  heaths.  They  range  from  discrete  stands  to  more  scattered  and 
occasional specimens, which occur within the fixed dune habitat type. 

- 

The characteristic species of the habitat is mainly Juniperus communis in thermo-Atlantic coastal dunes of 
Central/Northern Europe (Britain, Denmark), while in Southern Europe other juniper species predominate: 
Juniperus oxycedrus ssp. macrocarpa and Juniperus phoenicea in Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Greece, 
Albania and Bulgaria.  
Juniperus phoenicea ssp. turbinata (=J. lycia, J. phoenicea ssp. lycia) and J. navicularis (=J. transtagana, J. 
oxycedrus ssp. transtagana) in Portugal and Spain (ICN 2007, EEA 2007, JNCC 2007a).   

- 

Other species normally found in the habitat include: Ammophila arenaria (marram), Asparagus acutifolius 
(wild asparagus), Pistacia lentiscus (mastic tree), Myrtus communis (myrtle), Smilax aspera (common smilax) 
and Phillyrea angustifolia. 

Sand dune systems are very rich in invertebrates, especially Coleoptera, butterflies, moths and burrowing 
bees and wasps. The beetle Icosium tomentosum is strictly dependent on the juniper for its lifecycle. Also, 
the  sandhill  rustic  moth  (Luperina  nickerlii)  is  reliant  on  these  habitats.  In  Northern  Europe,  especially 
Denmark,  rabbits  (Oryctolagus  cuniculus)  are  important  in  the  habitat,  with  moderate  rabbit  burrowing 
and grazing guaranteeing open and diverse vegetation. 

Juniper  seeds  are  normally  dispersed  by  birds  although  mammals,  such  as  foxes,  badgers,  rabbits  and 
wild  boars,  can  also  play  a  significant  role  in  some  southern  areas  (Muñoz-Reinoso  2003).  Germination 
rate is generally low. 

Ecological requirements 

Juniper  formations  on  dune  systems  are  subject  to  factors  such  as  salt  spray,  sand  mobility,  relatively 
infertile soils and lower water availability. The ecological conditions influence the formation of the habitat 
substrate, sand dunes, and the formation of juniper vegetation. The formation of sand dunes depends on 
active  factors  (winds,  waves,  tides,  fluvial  deposits)  and  passive  ones  (topography,  geology).  Normally 
sand dunes develop where coasts are surrounded by plains or small hills, and are formed by sediments of 
marine or fluvial origin and with granule sizes ranging from 0.03 to 2 mm diameter. The onshore winds 
blow dry sand from the beach landwards and deposit it above the high water mark, where it is trapped by 
specialized  dune-building  grasses  which  grow  through  successive  layers  of  deposited  sand.  Plants  are 
also important in coastal dune formation as they act as a partial obstacle holding back the sand. 

3

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Embryonic and mobile dunes occur mainly on the seaward side of a dune system (UK Biodiversity Group 
1999).  Semi-fixed  dunes  with  juniper  formations  usually  occur  further  inland  where  the  rate  of  sand 
deposition is less, but the surface is still mostly bare sand. Fixed dune systems occur further inland where 
sand  deposition  is  no  longer  significant.  Many  plant  species  grow  there,  helping  to  stabilise  the  dune 
surface and creating a thin layer of soil. Sand grain dimension decreases gradually from the beach to the 
dunes  where,  in  2250  habitat,  it  is  usually  about  0,02  mm  in  diameter.  As  this  community  grows  on 
shifting  sand,  the  ecosystem  is,  as  for  all  near-shore  areas,  relatively  young.  Various  studies  of  the  soil 
characteristics of fixed coastal dune heathland indicate that, in general, the soil is less than 300 years old. 
This should be taken into consideration when assessing stability conditions (Pihl et al. 2001). 

Coastal juniper dunes on the Mediterranean coast are subject to strong seasonality, with warm and wet 
winters  and  hot  and  dry  summers.  Vegetation  is exposed  to  high  stress  in  summer  caused  by  drought, 
high evaporation and high irradiance (amount of radiant flux per unit area falling on a surface) at high 
temperature (Castillo et al. 2002). In the Atlantic and the Continental biogeographical regions, conditions 
are less extreme since winters are mild and summers cool. 

Main subtypes identified 

According  to  the  Interpretation  Manual  of  European  Habitats,  the  subtype  Juniperus  communis 
formations of calcareous dunes includes J. communis communities from the calcareous dunes of Jutland 
(Denmark) and J. phoenicea ssp. lycia communities in Rièges woods, in the Camargue (France). 

On  the  Mediterranean  and  Atlantic  coasts  of  the  Iberian  peninsula,  this  habitat  type  is  associated  with 
dune  scrub  of  Corema  album  (Rubio-Coremion  albi)  and  substitution  Halimium  halimifolium  dune  scrub 
(Stauracantha-Halimietalia) (EC 2007, ICN 2007). 

In  Denmark,  the  habitat  is  associated  with  fixed  dune  heaths  involving  predominant  vegetation 
consisting of Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum and Deschampsia flexuosa. It has also been found on grey 
dunes (type 2130) and green dunes. At a few localities, species associated with acidic fens and calcareous 
fens are present (Pihl et al. 2001). 

Species that depend on the habitat 

Even  if  not  exclusive  to  this  habitat,  the  rare  and  declining  bird  Lanius  collurio  (red-backed  shrike), 
included on Annex I of the Birds Directive, is found in dune scrub. It depends on easy availability of larger 
insects and small invertebrates in the habitat that is in good condition. This makes the red-backed shrike 
a good indicator of wildlife diversity (Esselink et al. 2003). 

Related habitats 

When in good condition, this habitat is part of a succession of other habitats situated seaward. The good 
ecological quality of juniper dunes therefore depends on the presence of the habitats of  2110 embryonic 
shifting  dunes  and  2120  shifting  dunes  along  the  shoreline,  with  Ammophila  arenaria,  which  helps  to 
stabilise the sand, thereby creating inland a more stable substratum suitable for juniper formations. The 
two  habitats  mentioned  constitute  the  initial  stages  of  dune  construction,  comprising  ripples  or  raised 
sand surfaces on the upper beach or by a seaward fringe at the foot of the tall dunes where Habitat 2250 
is normally located. Management of these habitats affects the development of the juniper dune habitat 
behind (e.g. mechanical clearance of beach debris). 

In several situations, the habitat includes small areas not covered by shrubs which host vegetation typical 
of priority Habitat 2130 *Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (grey dunes) (Fiorentin 2006). 

According to the French “Cahier d’habitats”, coastal dunes with juniper are in contact with  Habitat 2230 
Malcolmietalia  dune  grasslands  and  with  priority  *2270  Wooded  dunes  with  Pinus  pinea  and/or  Pinus 
pinaster (Bensetti et al. 2004) as understorey. 

4

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  habitat  is  sometimes  associated  with  Habitat  2160  Dunes  with  Hippophae  rhamnoides,  except  for 
Portugal  and  Spain,  where  this  habitat  is  not  present.  On  the  Adriatic  coast,  in  northern  Italy,  junipers 
form  an  endemic  association  Junipero-Hippophaetum  fluviatilis  Gehu  et  Scopp.  In  Portugal,  this  habitat 
frequently  occurs  in  mosaic with  sclerophyllous*  (Cistaceae)  dune  scrub  (2260)  rich  in  endemic  species, 
dominated by Stauracanthus sp. pl. (Stauracantho-Halimietalia commutati) (ICN 2007). 

Ecological services and benefits of the habitat 

Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. are highly valuable in landscape terms and are often recreational areas. 
The habitat is important for retaining sand and stabilizing the sand dunes, for soil formation and creating 
biodiversity areas (ICN 2007). Juniper dunes are also recreational areas and wildlife refuges since fruiting 
individuals  are  an  important  food  source for  vertebrates  such  as  badgers,  foxes, wild  boars  and rabbits 
(Muñoz-Reinoso 2003). 

Natural coastal ecosystems have proved to be crucial to increasing coastal resilience and protecting the 
coast  during hurricanes.  Coastal  habitats  are  the  most effective  defence  in  this  kind  of  natural  disaster. 
However,  coastal  ecosystems  and  habitats  need  space  and  time  to  recover  fully  in  order  to  be  able 
efficiently to protect settlements inland (EEA 2006). 

Trends 

Over the last hundred years, coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. woodland have been seriously disturbed by 
logging, urban development, pine plantations and farming. Coastal juniper woodland is also a vulnerable 
ecosystem due to its ecological position withstanding the effects of wind, drought, salt, erosion and pH. 
Nowadays, junipers appear in isolated stands of different sizes. Large populations still survive in natural or 
semi-natural situations within protected or military areas (Muñoz-Reinoso, 2003). The habitat can also be 
found as understory associated with pine plantations, the result of past land management practices (ICN 
2007, Muñoz-Reinoso 2003, 2004). 

Many large reforestations (e.g. with Pinus spp. and Eucalyptus spp.) have reduced the area of natural dune 
landscapes.  Since  the  eighteenth  century,  on  the  Atlantic  coast,  e.g.  in  France  and  in  Denmark, 
governments  implemented  large-scale  projects  to  stabilise  dunes  by  planting  conifers  to  halt  the 
landward  movement  of  shifting  dunes  (Wilkie  2002).  While  successful  in  stabilizing  the  sands,  this 
treatment resulted in a decline in the maritime juniper population. 

Pine plantations were also carried out in Mediterranean countries such as Italy and Spain, being one of 
the  main  causes  of  coastal  juniper  woodland  regression  (Muñoz-Reinoso  2004,  Fiorentin  2006).  The 
development  of  infrastructure  associated  with  the  growth  of  the  tourist  industry  has  also  devastated 
many  areas  and  has  had  a  major  impact  on  much  of  the  coastal  landscape.  According  to  recent  data, 
coastal habitats in Europe have continued to shrink, with a 10% increase since 1990 in the area covered 
by concrete or asphalt (EEA 2006). 

In  the  United Kingdom, where  this  habitat  is  present only  in  northern  Scotland,  it is  regarded  as  stable 
over the last 50 years (JNCC 2007b). 

Threats 

Urban development 

The  main  cause  of  habitat  disappearance  and  fragmentation  has  been  urban  development  in  coastal 
areas over the last forty years, in particular where increasing tourism has induced local communities to 
take advantage of the sea to generate a new source of income. Large natural areas have been built over, 
the  dunes  and  their  habitats  have  been  removed  or  natural  dune  habitats  have  been  “squeezed”  into 
restricted areas (EEA 2006) where dune landward mobility is impossible, causing the habitat to disappear. 

In 1997, Corsica’s regional agency for coastal protection estimated that 28% of the juniper population had 
been  lost  due  to  urban  development.  Furthermore,  although  not  common,  quarrying  sand  for  the 

5

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
building  industry  poses  a  severe  threat  to  juniper  dunes,  as  in  Corsica  (Paradis  et  al.  1997)  and  Sicily, 
where a LIFE project was carried out to restore the Vendicari dunes (Pisano 2006). 

Tourist pressure 

Today,  the  existing  portions  of  dune  habitat  are  subjected,  in  particular  in  the  Mediterranean  region 
during summer, to intense trampling and habitat degradation due to uncontrolled access of tourists on 
foot and in cars, including four-wheel-drive vehicles and motorcycles. Moderate pressure by pedestrians 
may  cause  little  damage  and  may  even  help  to  counteract  the  effects  of  ceasing  grazing.  However, 
excessive  pedestrian  use,  as  on  routes  between  car  parks  and  beaches,  and  vehicular  use  in  particular, 
have  caused  unacceptable  erosion  at  many  dune  sites,  aggravating  wind  erosion  (ICN  2007,  UK 
Biodiversity  Group  1999).  Furthermore,  excessive  and  ongoing  trampling  prevents  typical  dune 
vegetation from regenerating. 

Moreover, allowing tourists to camp on juniper dunes often leads to junipers being cut and trampled, as 
well as an increasing the risk of forest fires, as documented for Corsica (Paradis et al. 1997, Bensettiti et al. 
2004). 

Mechanized beach cleaning to eliminate the piles of dead leaves of Posidonia oceanica can damage the 
juniper roots and eventually kill them (Paradis & Piazza 1996) and the vegetation that stabilises the sand 
on shifting dunes (Fiorentin 2006, MATT 2004). 

Forest fires 

Forest  fires  in  the  Mediterranean  region  are  often  an  important  threat  to  this  habitat  (MATT  2004, 
Bensettiti et al. 2004) since juniper adaptation and resistance to fire is very low. Moreover, a relatively long 
germination  period  and  poor  germination  rates  contribute  to  slow  post-fire  re-establishment,  based 
principally  on  seed  propagation.  With  an  average  of  50,000  fires  and  600,000  ha  burnt  annually,  forest 
fires in the Mediterranean basin account for a significant part of all fires globally. 

Despite the efforts made, particularly in the Southern European countries, the phenomenon is far from 
being under control and even appears to be increasing significantly, with a general trend towards larger 
areas being burnt, more severe fires and longer fire seasons (MMAMRM in prep., Alexandrian et al. 1998). 
This increase is due to several factors, including land being abandoned, with resulting larger amounts of 
biomass  in  woodlands.  The  human  population  is  concentrated  in  urban  areas,  which  accentuates  the 
countryside/urban  interface  and,  as  a  consequence,  fire  risks  (Pinaudeau  2005).  Also,  climatic  change 
leads to more extreme droughts in most regions (MMAMRM in prep.). 

Alien plant species 

Another  important  threat  is  the  spread  of  alien  species,  partly  due  to  past  conifer  plantations  on  the 
dunes.  Coastal  Pinus  pinea  plantations  tend  to  mitigate  the  effect  of  harsh  maritime  physical 
environmental factors, causing the disappearance of endemic juniper woodland vegetation, promoting 
the  establishment  of  landward  species,  which  change  the  structure  and  composition  of  the  plant 
communities. 

Pine  plantations  involve  important  changes  in  plant  composition  due  to  sand  stabilization  and  the 
reduction  in  salt  spray  deposition  under  the  pine  tree  canopy.  Thus,  species  adapted  to  a  moving 
substrate  disappear,  and  the  community  is  invaded  by  species  less  tolerant  of  coastal  stress,  creating 
conditions  in  which  the  junipers  are  less  competitive.  Moreover,  deposition  of  pine  needles  prevents 
seedlings from getting established and kills mature junipers. Juniper populations surviving as understory 
show  a  lack  of  natural  regeneration  (Muñoz-Reinoso  2003,  2004).  In  Denmark,  the  habitat  has  been 
damaged by artificial plantations of Pinus mugo (mountain pine). 

The presence of exotic species is also due to the natural spread of the following non-native plants: Yucca 
gloriosa (moundlily yucca), Robinia pseudacacia (black locust), Elaeagnus angustifolia, Pyracantha coccinea 

6

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(Scarlet  firethorn),  Pinus  pinea  (Italian  stone  pine),  Tamarix  gallica  (French  tamarisk),  Amorpha  fructicosa 
(desert false indigo) (Fiorentin 2006). 

Coastal erosion 

Coastal  erosion  is  another  important  threat  that  reduces  the  distance  between  the  coastal  dunes  with 
Juniperus spp. and the sea, causing them to degrade and disappear (Paradis et al. 1997) in particular on 
the  Mediterranean  coast.  Erosion  of  frontal  dunes  often  manifests  itself  as  a  distinct  scarp  line  that  is 
easily identified if the dune/beach system is examined in cross-section. 

Coastal erosion is a natural process that is nowadays aggravated by several manmade factors, including a 
reduced  supply  of  sediments  from  rivers,  with  a  consequent  decrease  in  sand  deposition  rate  on  the 
coasts due to the barriers along their courses (EEA 2006). 

Sand deposition can also be altered by the installation of harbour groynes (a rigid structure built out from 
the shore which interrrupts the flow of water and sediment), breakwaters or a revetment along the coast, 
which changes coastal sea-flows and sediment deposition. Also, subsidence due to water/gas abstraction 
from underground leads to coastal erosion and loss of habitat.   

Grazing and browsing 

In  the  absence  of  human  interference,  most  stable  dunes,  with  the  exception  of  those  experiencing 
severe exposure, as in the Mediterranean region, develop into scrub and woodland. As evidenced in the 
second report by the United Kingdom under Article 17 on the implementation of the Habitats Directive 
(2007), the preponderance of grassland and heath vegetation on British dunes is due to a long history of 
grazing  by  livestock.  Continued  grazing  is  normally  necessary  to  maintain  the  typical  fixed  dune 
communities,  but  over-grazing,  particularly  when  combined  with  provision  of  imported  feedstuffs,  can 
have damaging effects. 

A  more  widespread  problem  is  undergrazing,  leading  to  invasion  by  coarse  grasses  and  scrub,  though 
rabbits are locally effective in maintaining a short turf (JNCC 2007a and b). 

Habitat fragmentation 

Fragmentation  and  isolation  of  juniper  populations  due  to  urban  development  could  reduce  seed 
dispersal  since  access  to  dispersing  mammal  species  (foxes,  badgers  and  wild  boars)  is  restricted  by 
infrastructures such as roads. 

Since maritime juniper (Juniperus oxycedrus subsp. macrocarpa) is a dioic plant, habitat fragmentation in 
small  populations  with  scattered  individuals  can  cause  deficient  pollination  and,  together  with  other 
factors, may be responsible for a lack of seed regeneration, as pointed out in a study conducted on the 
south-western coast of Spain (Muñoz-Reinoso 2003, Muñoz-Reinoso et al. 2005). 

Polluted sea spray and nutrient deposition 

The presence of detergents or silt in sea spray can cause “crusting” of the beach and a decrease in sand 
deposition on the dunes, with a consequent increase in erosion and habitat loss (Ruffo 2002). 

Another indirect effect of eutrophication (over-enrichment with nutrients) is the increase in atmospheric 
nutrient  deposition,  which  can  threaten  the  habitat’s  typical  plant  species.  This  aspect  is  still  poorly 
studied;  however,  in  Denmark,  the  National  Environmental  Research  Institute  puts  the  critical  load  for 
decalcified fixed dunes with Empetrum nigrum (habitat type 2140) at between 10 and 15 kg nitrogen ha-1 
year-1 (Tybirk & Jørgensen 1999). As the present annual deposition in coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. is 
likely  to  be  at  approximately  the  same  level,  there  is  a  risk  that  the  long-term  stability  of  this  natural 
habitat  type  may  be  threatened  by  this  source  of  environmental  change.  The  growing  nutrient  load  is 

7

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
presumed to inhibit juniper regeneration, as this species can only sprout in mineral soil and is sensitive to 
competition from dense vegetation when in the early phases of growth (Pihl et al. 2001). 

Climate change effects  

Global  changes  in  climate  may  affect  coastal  juniper  dunes  through  changes  in  minimum  winter 
temperatures, modifying the distribution of several plant species and frequent storms, with the resulting 
damage  to  the  seaward  side  of  the  dune  slacks.  Changes  in  dune  structure  and  ecosystems  are  often 
cyclical, with periods of loss (erosion) balanced by periods of gain (sand deposition) so these tendencies 
will be obvious only in the long term (Corre 1991). 

Changes  in  storm  frequency  and  intensity  and  the  expected  increase  in  sea  level  attributed  to  climate 
change could increase  dune  erosion  due  to  more  extensive  coastal  inundation  and higher  storm-surge 
flooding (EEA 2006). 

Warmer and sunnier weather will probably lead to an increase in domestic tourism (Viner & Agnew 1999). 
If  the  issue  of  higher  visitor  numbers  to  sea  dunes  is  not  properly  addressed  in  advance,  increasing 
pressure might have an adverse affect on them. 

An increase in temperature would probably affect species composition, but there are not enough studies 
on  this  subject.  Also,  the  predicted  higher  rates  of  evaporation  would  have  negative  effects  on  juniper 
vegetation.  Young  juniper  seedlings  are  vulnerable  to  summer  drought  and  this  climatic  factor  might 
have implications for juniper as regards any future global warming (Ward 2004). 

However, defining future climate threats on habitats and species is very unreliable due to the uncertainty 
associated  with:  future  greenhouse  gas  emissions,  the  consequent  changes  in  climatic  features  (e.g. 
temperature,  precipitation  CO2  concentrations),  habitat  and  species  responses  to  these  changes  (for 
instance,  location,  phenology,  community  structure)  and  the  role  of  other  socio-economic  drivers  of 
environmental change (JNCC 2007b). 

8

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2. Conservation management  

General recommendations  

From  a  management  point  of  view,  coastal  dunes  with  Juniperus  spp.  should  be  considered  as  part  of 
dune systems that need to be managed as a whole following a holistic approach (Fiorentin 2006). This is 
due  to  the  interdependence  of  the  dune  succession  stages  from  the  sea  inland.  For  instance,  coastal 
erosion  that  may  affect/destroy  embryonic  dunes  or  shifting  dunes  located  before  dunes  with  juniper 
thickets can have a deleterious effect on habitat. Sand and salt spray transported by the wind settles at 
the  foot  of  the  dunes  and  on  the  juniper  formations  and  may  jeopardise  plant  survival  or  the  entire 
habitat. In most of cases, therefore, to manage the habitat, direct intervention is also needed in the other 
habitats situated seaward (Bensettiti et al. 2004). 

Restoring the dune with juniper formations should be preceded by field surveys to study habitat status, 
location  and  coverage  inside  the  dune  ecological  system,  as  well  as  floristic  and  phytosociological1 
characteristics. The study should also examine the general status of the dune system and, therefore, the 
status  of  related  habitats  seaward  and  the  presence  of  possible  threats  such  as  erosion,  uncontrolled 
access  on  the  dunes,  etc.  If  habitat  status  is  good,  with  no  threats,  non-intervention  is  the  best  choice 
(Bensettiti et al. 2004). 

Public understanding of dune processes, coastal changes and the need for management is still generally 
poor. As habitat restoration schemes often require a dramatic landscape change (e.g. felling pines) and 
sometimes the use of large heavy machinery, care should be taken to avoid conflict between members of 
local  communities  and  dune  managers.  Conflict  resolution  diverts  scarce  resources  away  from 
conservation management (Rooney 2003). 

Active management  

The main measures for active recurring habitat management are: 

-  Eradication or control of invasive plants 
-  Fire prevention 
-  Shrub clearance and controlled grazing  

Eradication or control of invasive plants 

One of the main threats to the habitat is the natural and artificial spread of alien plants or plants that are 
not part of the habitat. Active recurring management should include their removal. Habitat proximity to 
built-up areas or artificial pine forest leads to constant invasion by garden plants, such as the moundlily 
yucca, scarlet firethorn and Italian stone pine, which have to be controlled. 

The  general  criterion  to  be  followed  is  that  alien  trees  or  shrubs  on  dune  juniper  thickets  should  be 
removed only if they are damaging the habitat and if they are invasive because the removal of plants and 
their roots can have negative impacts on substrate and surrounding natural vegetation (Fiorentin 2006). 

As evidenced for dune heaths, when removing trees and other vegetation from dunes, it is important to 
minimise  the  level  of  nutrients  left  behind  by  the  vegetation  that  has  been  removed.  It  is  advisable  to 
move  it  away  from  the  site  as  soon  as  possible  after  felling/cutting.  If  this  is  not  possible,  vegetation 
should  be  stored  in  piles  to  minimise  the  fertilisation  effect  of  dead  leaves  and  needles  (Skov-og 
Naturstyrelsen 2003).  

Removing  pines  may  allow  the  original  environmental  conditions  to  be  restored,  e.g.  moderate  sand 
mobility, salt spray deposition and wind flow. That may favour stress-tolerant species such as juniper, and 

1 Phytosociology: study of the organization, association and development of plant communities. 

9

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
although negative effects on junipers are not likely, their acclimatization to ‘new’ conditions needs to be 
monitored.  Appropriate  management  of  pine  plantations  would  also  allow  juniper  populations  within 
them to survive, as at La Breña Natural Park in Spain. There, the management of pine trees and understory 
for pine-seed production has allowed the junipers to regenerate through seeds, with sound recruitment 
(Muñoz-Reinoso 2003). Pines can be removed by cutting at the base since regrowth is rare. 

In Enebrales de Punta Umbría Natural Landscape (Huelva, Spain) some pine tree (Pinus pinea) clearance 
were done in 2004 using two different treatments: 1) removing the pines closest to the maritime junipers 
–Junyperus  oxycedrus  macrocarpa  (intermediate)  and  2)  removing  all  pine  trees,  as  well  as  the  largest 
Phoenician  junipers  (clearings).  Salt  spray  deposition  and  Juniper  cones  and  seeds  production  were 
estimated in the treated areas, and were compared to those in areas that had not been cleared (under 
pine  dense  canopy).  Juniper  growth  and  cone  and  seed  production  increased  in  the  treated  areas 
(intermediate and clearings). Cone production, number of seeds/cone, pollen density and twigs growth 
were significantly higher within the clearings (Muñoz-Reinoso 2007). 

Manual  removal  of  self-sown  young  conifers  is  necessary  every  year  for  at  least  3  years  after  the  initial 
clearance of plantations and dense overgrowth. Subsequently, clearance should be done manually every 
3 years until the seed bank in the soil is exhausted (Skov-og Naturstyrelsen 2003). 

Removing other species may be necessary, in particular as regards invasive species. Most invasive trees 
and  shrubs  have  a  great  reproductive  capacity  after  cutting.  Cutting  invasive  alien  shrubs  and  trees 
should be carried out only if strictly needed in order to avoid encouraging the growth of strong suckers. 
This option should be followed only if conditions in subsequent years are right for the regular removal of 
suckers. 

Cuttings should be done before fruiting. Just after cutting, it might be necessary to use an appropriate 
herbicide  swabbed  on  the  remaining  section  of  the  trunk  to  prevent  sucker  growth  between  the 
cambium and the sapwood where holes have been drilled to aid penetration. When the plant is too near 
protected  species,  it  is  better  to  place  the  herbicide  in  small  holes  drilled  in  the  trunk,  which  are  then 
closed with mastic. 

As herbicide use is a controversial issue, it is advisable to check beforehand whether it is legally permitted 
in  the  working  area  and  whether  its  use  is  acceptable  to  local  stakeholders.  Trees  or  shrubs  of  local 
species  should  be  placed  where  non-native  trees  have  been  removed.  Well  documented  experiments 
have been carried out at dune sites in the Venetian Lagoon within the framework of a LIFE Nature project 
(Fiorentin 2006). 

Fire prevention 

Fire  prevention  is  very  important  as  fire  is  one  of  the  most  damaging  threats  to  coastal  dunes  with 
Juniperus spp (MATT 2004). Fire prevention includes all activities and measures directed at reducing the 
occurrence of fires. The main aim of prevention is to eliminate the causes of forest fires. Prevention not 
only  allows  safeguarding  the  habitat  but  it  is  also  less  expensive  than  fire  extinction  (Ioannou  & 
Papageorgiou 2007). Fire prevention should include the actions set out below. 

Surveillance:  The  main  objectives  of  surveillance  are  fire  detection,  warning  and  intervention,  public 
information, law enforcement and fire suppression. In some countries most fire services use light vehicles 
equipped with lightweight fighting equipment, but some employ small rapid- intervention fire engines. 
Surveillance should be carried out using observation points covering large areas so as to minimize costs. 
They should focus on the most sensitive areas and where fire risk is highest. Fire breaks can be used by 
wardens’ vehicles to cover large areas. Recently, satellite-based systems are permitting early warning of 
fire ignition over extensive areas. Plane-based systems are more common to cover specific areas in critical 
periods. 

Making  and  maintaining  firebreaks.  Firebreaks  are  useful  to  isolate  fire-prone  areas  in  compartments, 
which stop fires from spreading. Considering the rarity and limited size of the  coastal dunes with juniper, 
firebreaks  should  be  made  outside  those  areas,  where  cutting  shrubs  and  trees  does  not  damage  rare 
habitats, but where fire risk is significant (e.g. unmanaged pine plantations rich in combustible material). 
One suggestion is to construct fire breaks along gentle ridges where heavy vehicles and fire engines can 

10

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
move when there is a fire. Well designed breaks also permit effective firefighting operations if they can be 
used as roads by fire brigades. Regular maintenance of firebreaks is important to prevent the regrowth of 
shrubs  and  deposition  of  dead  biomass  and  should  be  carried  out  in  spring  and  early  summer  to 
eliminate as much new vegetation as possible. This can be done mechanically or by grazing sheep and 
cattle  (Etienne  &  Rigolot  2005).  However,  it  is  important  to  bear  in  mind  that  making  and  maintaining 
firebreaks  is  expensive  since  usually  it  can  only  be  done  using  manual  methods  (Arrigo  &  Quesada-
Fernandez 2005). 

Preventive  actions  on  neighbouring  areas:  vegetation  should  be  treated  regularly  in  the  areas  bordering 
coastal  dunes  with  juniper  so  as  to  reduce  the  risk  of  ignition  and  the  spread  of  forest  fires  to  juniper 
thickets. Treatments include: pruning, clearance and removal of both herbaceous and woody vegetation 
along roadsides, planting of fire-resistant species, prescribed burnings and controlled grazing. 

Public  awareness  to  prevent  accidental  fires:  the  great  majority  of  fires  are  due  to  negligence  and  arson. 
Almost all Mediterranean countries have adopted measures to increase public awareness of forest fires. 
All mass media channels are engaged to reach the general public through television campaigns, posters 
and radio advertisements. 

Shrub clearance and controlled grazing 

In  Central  and  Northern  Europe,  the  habitat  is  difficult  to  maintain  in  the  long  term  since  the  natural 
successional trend will always be towards climax woodland. Clearing scrub may therefore be essential to 
halt succession, and in order to support juniper regeneration, it is crucial to maintain grazing (Pihl et al. 
2001; UK Biodiversity Group 1999). 

In some dune heath areas, extensive grazing (particularly by sheep and possibly cattle) is recommended 
as a means of maintaining the open vegetation type dominated by herbaceous plants after the self-sown 
conifers have been removed. Grazing has a long tradition in dunes and other (semi-) natural habitats and 
is seen as one of the most promising management tools to remove biomass and create a heterogeneous 
vegetation. However, using it as a tool to manage nature requires a different approach to that of the past. 

Grazing used to be carried out in flocks during the day, the animals being kept in stables or pens at night. 
A shepherd could channel the flock to grazing areas and many nutrients were removed from the area in 
the faeces left in the stables. Nowadays, livestock often spend night and day inside a fenced area with no 
regulation, and fewer nutrients are removed as a result. Although the effects of this kind of grazing might 
be more ‘natural’ compared to grazing with a shepherd, it is questionable whether nature management 
goals can be achieved in this way. Although the effects on vegetation are well known and in many cases 
positive, little is known about the effects of grazing on wildlife species (Skov-og Naturstyrelsen 2003). 

Other relevant measures 

Recovery interventions 

Recovery interventions on degraded dunes with juniper thickets may involve planting relevant species. 

Cultivating junipers in plant nurseries is not easy because of their low germination rates and slow growth 
during the early stages. When rapid recolonisation is needed, it is better to use species associated with 
juniper  in  the  habitat  of  EU  interest,  such  as  Pistacia  lentiscus  (mastic  tree)  and  Phyllirea  sp.  Other  well 
known  techniques  involve  the  use  of  psammophilous  (sand-loving)  plant  species  in  order  to  favour 
natural re-colonisation of juniper formations (MATT 2004). 

All plants used in dune restoration must be native species. The best way to guarantee the origin of the 
plants and a successful reintroduction is to collect the propagation materials from residual habitats in the 
area and cultivate them in a nursery for reintroduction to the wild. 

The juniper seeds should be planted in deep pots so as to permit sound root growth and to facilitate the 
placement of saplings in the dunes. Seeds should be collected from local plants on site, but it a sufficient 
amount of seed should be left on the site (at least 50%) so as to permit natural in situ reproduction. 

11

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The juniper must be at least 30 cm high before being planted, and can be protected with plastic shelters. 
In Andalusia, where a programme to recover this habitat is underway (see below) the best results to get 
the  plants  established  are  achieved  when  about  1/3  of  the  aerial  part  of  the  plant  is  buried  (Muñoz-
Reinoso, pers. comm.). 

An Italian Life Nature project (LIFE03NAT/IT/000141) has created a juniper arboretum using local seeds so 
as to collect propagation material rapidly and economically. Young junipers should be planted in rows at 
a distance of 2.5 meters, with row spacing of 4 meters (Fiorentin 2006). 

Aftercare is important in order to guarantee complete planting success. It generally involves: 

- annual inspection of shelters and fences to check maintenance needs. 
- weed clearance from within shelters. 
- removing and replacing dead plants (beating up). 
- after the first three years it should be possible to reduce annual beating to biennial inspections 
- removing shelters after five years and, if appropriate, reusing rather than disposing of them (McBride, 

2005). 

In Corsica, several projects carried out since 1987 have involved the planting on dunes of about 15,000 
Juniperus oxycedrus macrocarpa and Juniperus phoenicea and the drafting of a management plan for the 
habitat, including suggestions based on ten years’ planting experience (Paradis et al. 1997). For a higher 
success rate, young junipers should be planted in autumn, after the first rains. Small young plants should 
be planted in the most exposed areas since they are better able to survive (e.g. seafront of dunes), but 
they need to be protected with shelters: The biggest and oldest specimens (1 meter/5 years) should be 
planted  more  landward,  where  protection  from  other  species  is  greater.  Plants  of  Juniperus  oxycedrus 
macrocarpa should be placed more seaward in relation to Juniperus phoenicea, which is less resistant to 
the harsher conditions. 

The Regional Ministry of the Environment of Andalusia is developing a conservation programme whose 
main  purpose  is  to  revert  the  current  regression  of  maritime  juniper  (Juniperus  oxycedrus  subsp. 
macrocarpa) as it is considered an endangered species in Andalusia (Redondo & Saavedra, unpublished). 
Several preparatory actions were implemented between 1999 and 2001, which included an inventory of 
maritime  juniper  populations,  assessment  of  the  ecological  and  biological  status  of  the  species  in 
Andalusia, identification of the main factors threatening maritime juniper conservation, development of a 
new methodology for plant production and identification of proper sites for species reintroduction. The 
main  factors  controlling  species  distribution  were  identified  as  being  high  risk  of  forest  fire,  genetic 
isolation of small existing populations, habitat transformation due to urban development and pine tree 
plantations  and the spread of invasive species such as Carpobrotus edulis. 

The risk of genetic isolation in the current Andalusian population is being addressed through the planting 
of  Juniperus  trees  using  seedlings  produced  in  regional  nurseries.  Plantations  are  made  both  in  small 
populations  and  in  potential  habitats  where  the  maritime  juniper  does  not  currently  occur.  Different 
planting conditions, such as polygons vs. random irregular distribution, planting depth, use of cylindrical 
protectors of plastic grid and the need for irrigation are considered. 

This programme also includes pine trees clearance, including pruning and removal of individuals selected 
according  to  proximity  to  juniper  trees,  and  the  removal  of  Carpobrotus  edulis  by  hand  to  reduce  their 
competitive  predominance  and  the  environmental  changes  caused  by  them.  Finally,  different  in  situ 
experiments  are being  carried  out  in  order  to  select  the  optimum  conditions  for  juniper reintroduction 
and  management.  An  optimum  method,  based  on  green-house  plant  production  from  seeds  collected 
from wild populations has been achieved. 

An interesting experience on habitat recreation has been implemented on the coast near Valencia within 
a  LIFE  project  (LIFE04NAT/ES/000044,  Sanchez  et  al.  2007).  As  the  dune  ecosystem  had  been  totally 
destroyed, the potential vegetation at the site was studied with a predictive system based on GIS tools 
and photo-interpretation, which made it possible to generate models that are can be used to regenerate 
habitats that have disappeared. The habitat restoration included planting about one thousand maritime 
juniper produced in a local plant nursery. 

12

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
There  is  also  a  project  aimed  at  restoring  an  ancient  dune  system  in  El  Partido  (Doñana  National  Park, 
south-western  Spain),  where  a  few  remnants  of  native  juniper  woodland  (Juniperus  oxycedrus  ssp. 
macrocarpa and J. phoenicea ssp. turbinata) survive in dunes close to the coastal fringe (García-Novo et al. 
2007).  Given  that  the  distance  (almost  10  km)  of  the  national  park  from  the  sources  of  seeds  of  dune 
shrub  species  and  the  scarcity  of  remnants  of  mature  vegetation  meant  there  was  no  adequate  seed 
supply to the area, making succession to more mature stages of dune vegetation virtually impossible, it 
was decided to undertake ecological restoration of dune vegetation by planting a series of species typical 
of this habitat (see table 1).  

The species were planted in a way that enhances the visual perception of the dune and its constituent 
parts.  The  plantation  was  done  also  taking  into  the  various  parts  of  the  dune  (dry,  intermediate  and 
humid)  by  placing  drier  species  in  the  upper  parts  (Juniperus  phoenicea  ssp.  turbinata)  and  Juniperus 
oxycedrus ssp. macrocarpa and the rest along the dune slopes and delineating its perimeter. Small patches 
of  Lavandula  stoechas,  Halimium  halimifolium  and  Rosmarinus  officinalis  were  placed  along  the 
intermediate  part  of  the  dune.  Besides  the  difference  in  species  shape,  their  flowering  colour  helps 
visitors to interpret the parts of the dune during the various flowering seasons. 

Table 1: List of dune species used in the restoration project in El Partido (Doñana, Spain). 

Dune species    

Distance to water table 

Juniperus oxycedrus ssp. macrocarpa  
Juniperus phoenicea ssp. turbinata  
Halimium halimifolium    
Cistus libanotis   
Lavandula stoechas  
Rosmarinus officinalis  
Thymus mastichina ssp. donyanae  
Retama monosperma  

Low 
High 
Intermediate 
High 
Intermediate 
Intermediate 
High-intermediate 
Intermediate 

Plant production 

Active  recurring  management  of  juniper  dune  habitat  should  include  reproduction  of  the  main 
representative species to replace the alien plants removed and for recovery interventions in general. The 
creation  of  a  plant  nursery  for  this  purpose  is  a  long-term  action  also  aimed  at  conserving  ex  situ  the 
species’ genetic characteristics. 

Planting should only be considered where natural regeneration is impossible. Sowing is generally slower 
in  comparison  with  vegetative  propagation,  taking  up  to  three  or  four  years,  whilst  plants  grown  from 
cuttings can be ready within two years. However, recent experiences in Northern Italy on common juniper 
indicate that seeds treated so as to break their dormancy can germinate from the first spring and grow to 
25 cm by the end of the first year (Fiorentin et al. 2006). 

Sowing  provides  greater  genetic  diversity.  Conversely,  the  genetic  diversity  of  cuttings  is  dependent 
upon the number and range of donor bushes and, although quicker, root development may be poorer. 
This  kind  of  replication  is  necessary  when  the  genetic  characteristics  of  a  local  population  have  to  be 
replicated  exactly.  In  general,  the  genetic  and  health  advantages  of  sowing  means  it  ought  to  be  the 
preferred  propagation  method.  For  larger  projects,  a  combination  of  plants  from  cuttings  and  seeds  is 
probably the best strategy as this enables early planting and tangible results, whilst improving the future 
genetic diversity of the plants (McBride 2005). The low germination rate of juniper seeds is a constraint, 
and  suitable  seed  treatment  is  required  to  obtain  as  many  plants  as  possible  from  the  seeds  collected. 
One of the possible procedures consists of two periods of cold stratification at 90 days for 3.5°C separated 
by 60-90 days at 20°C diurnally. This results in successful germination of 70-75% of the seeds over 20-30 
days.  Some  authors  (Piotto  and  Di  Noi  2001,  Fiorentin  et  al.  2006)  recommend  that  seeds  be  removed 
from  the  fruit  and  soaked  in  1%  citric  acid  solution  for  4  days  before  being  stored  in  well  aerated 
conditions at 4°C for 30 weeks to break their dormancy. If seeds are in the open air in compost and kept 
free of rodents, a few will germinate in the first year, most in the second year and several more over the 
next two to three years (Ward 2004). 

13

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Raising the awareness of local people and tourists about the importance of the habitat 

A lack of consideration of the importance and rarity of coastal juniper dunes is not good for the habitat so 
it is important to raise awareness amongst local people and visitors, particularly by: 

raising public awareness of coastal threats and values 
involving the public in promotion and management activities 

- 
- 
-  providing  targeted  awareness-raising  opportunities,  including  guided  walks,  talks,  seminars  and 

educational events, linking with existing initiatives 

-  providing education opportunities with schools and higher education establishments 
-  providing  appropriate  signposting, 

interpretation, 

leaflets,  etc., 

in  consultation  with 

local 

communities. 

-  educational  displays  at  backshore  car  parks  or  along  footpaths  should  be  used  to  explain 
management schemes and encourage public interest and support for management objectives (SNH 
2000). 

Monitoring and limiting coastal erosion 

Coastal  erosion  and  the  consequent  risk  of  habitat  degradation  should  be  constantly  monitored,  in 
particular  on  the  Mediterranean  coast,  where  this  phenomenon  is  increasing  and  is  damaging  coastal 
habitats. 

Monitoring  must  be  driven  by  the  need  to  provide  appropriate  data  for  shoreline  management.  It  is 
important  to understand  local  coastal  dynamics,  short-term fluctuations  and  long-term  trends  in  dune-
beach  system  in  order  to  understand  the  present  and  predict  future  developments.  Monitoring  allows 
significant change to be identified so that a reasoned response can be devised and implemented, e.g. if 
dune erosion may lead to damage to an important backshore asset such as juniper priority habitats. 

In terms of evaluating dune evolution a combination of techniques is necessary to locate the erosion or 
accretion  areas,  quantify  the  extent  of  damage,  determine  the  likely  causes  and  evaluate  the  rate  of 
change. The survey methods can be in the field (with topographic/GPS systems), by plane (using aerial 
photography)  or  involve  detailed  and  regularly  available  satellite  images.  In  any  case,  measurements 
should  give  the  bearing  and  distance  to  identifiable  features  from  each  datum.  These  features  will  be 
some or all of the following: 

seaward limit of yellow dunes 
seaward limit of foredunes 
scarp slope or any identifiable part of the seaward face of the dune system 

- 
- 
- 
-  boundary between different types of dune/beach system (i.e. the transition between dune, shingle 

upper beach, sand lower foreshore, muddy offshore zone, etc.) 
signs of dune retreat or areas of wind blown erosion (blow-outs) 
signs of trampling by livestock or people 

- 
- 

Having  identified  the  various  geomorphological  zones,  any  change  to  their  extent  between  successive 
surveys should be mapped. The horizontal rates of change of the various boundaries can be calculated 
and put into context. Simple spreadsheet software or survey analysis packages will allow changes to be 
stored  and  presented  effectively.  Initially  surveys  should  be  undertaken  bi-monthly,  with  additional 
surveys following severe storms.  

Regular  surveys  should  be completed  at  the  same  point  in  the  tidal  cycle,  e.g.  during  spring  tides,  and 
post-storm surveys should be completed as close to the event as possible. After the first year (say, six to 
ten surveys) the frequency can drop to quarterly, plus post storm (say, four to eight surveys).  

After  several  years  the  surveys  will  have  revealed  the  potential  extent  of  short-term  change,  and  the 
frequency can drop once more to early spring and early autumn, plus extreme storms. The timing of these 
ongoing  surveys  should  be  consistent  in  terms  of  the  month  and  the  tidal  state,  perhaps  ideally  the 
March equinox tide (erosion expected) and the first Spring tide in September (accretion expected). At this 
frequency the long-term trends can be monitored, and can be analysed with a well founded knowledge 
of short-term variation. 

14

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Having  mapped  out  the  erosion  areas,  some  preliminary  evaluation  should  be  made  as  to  the  likely 
causes of erosion. Wind data can be purchased from the nearest anemometer station and any periods of 
high winds from the main onshore wave generating directions highlighted. Records from the nearest tide 
gauge station should be examined for any periods of higher than normal water levels. This simple data 
review should reveal the recent periods of likely dune erosion. 

If  the  records  fail  to  identify  any  such  events,  other  reasons  for  erosion  should  be  considered.  Natural 
reasons for dune toe erosion should be obvious from the site inspection. For example, the undercutting 
of the dune foot by meandering tidal channels within an estuary should be evident. 

If erosion has been caused by man, and is of a short-term nature, this too should be obvious from the site 
inspection. Longer term erosional trends may be caused by structures interfering with the natural supply 
of  sand  to  the  dune  area.  Such  structures  could  be  groynes  located  some  distance  from  the  site  or 
possible  underwater  obstructions  to  sand  movement.  Evaluating  the  causes  of  erosion  may  therefore 
entail discussions with adjacent landowners, local authorities, harbour authorities, etc. (SNH 2000). 

Special requirements driven by relevant species  

The reasons for the decline of Lanius collurio (red-backed shrike) are poorly understood and details of the 
species habitat requirements are not yet known. At the moment there are no clear guidelines on how to 
conserve this bird. Red-backed shrike needs a variety of habitats and that the habitat is maintained with 
open and species-rich vegetation stages.  

In  the  Netherlands  and  other  parts  of  north  western  Europe,  acidification  and  eutrophication  (due  to 
increased  nitrogen  deposition),  drainage  and  changes  in  land  use  cause  accelerated  vegetation 
succession in coastal dunes. This results in encroachment by tall grasses and bushes. 

The  lack  of  plants  variety  has  negative  consequences  for  the  resident  fauna.  Many  insect  species, 
especially larger ones, decrease in numbers. As a consequence, bird species that depend on these insects 
as a food source, such as red-backed shrike, have disappeared from the Dutch coastal dunes (Esselink et 
al.  2003).  Particular  attention  should  therefore  be  paid  to  removing  non-native  trees  and  shrubs  as 
suggested above. 

Cost estimates and potential sources of EU financing 

Cost estimates 

Costs may vary a lot depending on the type of action to be undertaken and surface areas to cover. Some 
particular  examples  from  previous  experiences  (mainly  LIFE-Nature  projects)  are  provided  below  for 
different actions. 

Clearing planted pine trees and eradication or control of invasive plants 

•  During  the  LIFE  project  “Coastal  habitats  conservation  in  Cadiz”  (LIFE03  NAT/ES/000054)  some 
eradication actions were developed at Pinar de Roche, such as pine tree clearance (4.8 ha, €12,109), 
and eucalyptus cutting and stump removal (6.73 ha, €1,875). 

•  Within the same LIFE project (LIFE03 NAT/ES/000054), Carpobrotus edulis was removed manually at 

• 

Punta de Trafalgar (1.74 ha, €2,397). 
In  addition  to  mechanical  and  manual  removal  of  invasive  plants,  some  herbicides  could  also  be 
applied directly on the invasive plants when the surface affected is large, in order to totally remove 
the  invasive  plants  and  avoid  resprouting (Ley et  al.  2007).  The  most used herbicides,  due  to  their 
low toxicity, are those made of “Glifosato” and the recommended dose is 160 ml per 100 m2. 

Fire prevention 

•  The  LIFE  project  “Coastal  habitats  conservation  in  Cadiz”  (LIFE03  NAT/ES/000054)  also  created 

perimetral firebreaks to protect the areas under regeneration from fire (3,200 m, €2,015). 

15

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Shrub clearance and controlled grazing 

•  Shrub removal at Pinar de Roche (LIFE03 NAT/ES/000054): 4,48 ha, €1,764. 

Recovery interventions – plant production 

•  The  LIFE  project  “Recovery  of  coastal  sand  dunes  with  Juniperus  spp.  in  Valencia”  (LIFE04 
NAT/ES/000044) involved the cultivation and planting of about 1,000 junipers on a surface area of 55 
ha. The action, which lasted about 30 months and required 12 workers, included seed collection and 
cultivation (Juniperus oxycedrus subsp. macrocarpa) in a local nursery, preparation of the area to be 
restored and planting. Total estimated cost for the action was €674,305 (€12.260/ha). 

•  As part of the LIFE project “Coastal habitats conservation in Cadiz” (LIFE03 NAT/ES/000054), land was 
prepared for juniper cultivation in two areas. At Pinar de Roche, 85 ha were prepared (€25,190) for 
subsequent  planting  of  maritime  juniper  and  a  few  other  different  species  (€39,916),  whereas  at 
Punta de Trafalgar 11,9 ha were prepared (€5,035) for the planting (€15,640). 

Potential sources of EU financing 

The  majority  of  the  marine  and  coastal  habitats  are  not  explicitly  included  in  the  major  grant  schemes 
operating in Europe (UK Biodiversity Group 2000). However, in the past, several restoration actions and 
active  management  of  juniper  dunes  have  been  carried  out  with  co-financing  of  the  LIFE  Nature 
instrument (Picchi et al. 2006; Houston 2005) and the community initiative Interreg (Regione Lazio 2005).  

The majority of the Community’s co-financing for Natura 2000 in the period 2007-2013 will be delivered 
through different existing Community funds aiming to enhance rural, regional, and marine development 
in the EU. The integrated use of these resources will make it possible to finance various active recurring 
management actions for areas with habitats in the Habitats Directive that are included in the Natura 2000 
network. 

The programming of EU funds envisages that each Member State and/or region identifies the issues that 
are  of  most  concern  locally,  and  prioritizes  EU  funds  in  order  to  address  those  issues.  This  means  that 
specific funding opportunities for Natura 2000 in 2007-2013 are determined by the national and regional 
programmes that have been prepared by the Member States on the basis of the EU Regulations that set 
out  the  main  characteristics  of  each  fund.  The  reference  authority  to  be  contacted  for  additional 
information is the European Commission in the case of LIFE+ and FP7 funds, or the national and the local 
authorities for the other funds mentioned. 

The  analysis  of  opportunities  presented  in  the  tables  below  is  based  on  the  guidance  handbook 
“Financing Natura 2000”, issued by the European Commission (Torkler 2007), which is based on the text of 
the EU Regulations for each individual fund. The activities have been selected from the 25 on the list in 
Annex 3 to the Commission’s Communication on Financing Natura 2000 (COM(2004)431 final), excluding 
the ones not relevant for this study and the activities not covered by European funds (e.g. surveillance). 

It should be noted that the activities mentioned often need to be integrated into a broader development 
context (projects, programmes) and refer to specific areas. 

The funds taken into consideration are: 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 

The Structural Funds (European Social Fund -ESF and European Regional Development Fund -ERDF)  
The Cohesion Fund (CF) 
The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) 
The European Fisheries Fund (EFF) 
The Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE+) 
The 7th Research Framework Programme (FP7)  

16

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Types of activities  

EU Funding opportunities with references to EU Regulations 

Management planning 

1. Preparation of management 
plans, strategies and schemes 
(Elaboration and/or update of 
management and action 
plans, land use plans etc. ) 

2. Establishment of 
management bodies (Start-up 
funding, feasibility studies, 
management plans etc.) 

3. Consultation – public 
meetings, liaison with 
landowners (Including costs 
incurred for the organisation 
of meetings and workshops, 
the publication of 
consultation outcomes, 
financial support of 
stakeholders, etc. ) 

4. Review of management 
plans, strategies and schemes  

5.  Maintenance  of  facilities  for 
public access to and use of the 
sites, 
interpretation  works, 
observatories  and  kiosks  etc. 
to 
(Including  costs 
guides, 
related 
maps, 
personnel.) 

related 

strategy 

EAFRD  art.  52  (b)(iii):  it  could  finance  Natura  2000  management  plans  of  coastal 
sites  associated  to  rural  areas,  and  high  nature  value  areas  in  the  context  of 
conservation  and  upgrading  of  the  rural  heritage.  The  art.  63,  Leader,  could 
local 
finance  development  of  site  management  plans  as  an  objective  of 
development 
sustainable  management  of 
environmentally sensitive habitats such as coastal dunes. 
LIFE+  art.  3  and  Annex  I,  LIFE+  Nature  and  Biodiversity  component:  it  could 
including  the 
finance  site  and  species  management  and  site  planning, 
improvement  of  the  ecological  coherence  of  the  Natura  2000  network,  in 
particular in marine and coastal areas. 
ERDF  art.  4-6  could  finance  development  of  management  plans,  but  only  where 
management of the Natura 2000 site is crucial for risk management. 

encouraging 

the 

ERDF  art.  4-6,  could 
regional/trans-boundary 
finance  establishment  of 
management  bodies  to  promote  sustainable  use  of  biodiversity  and  nature 
protection in coastal areas. 

EAFRD  art.  52  (b)(iii):  could  support  regional  networking,  sharing  of  positive 
experiences  to  communicate  economic  benefits  of  Natura  2000  sites  in  the 
context  of  initiatives  to    conserve  and  upgrade  the  rural  heritage,  and  within, 
private-public partnership for sustainable rural development (Leader, art.63). 
FP7  art.  2(2)f:  Transnational  Cooperation,  theme  Environment,  could  finance 
consultation and networking  as part of a research projects including stakeholders 
involvement. 
ERDF  art.  4-6:  could  finance  networking  and  consultations  on  various  socio-
economic aspects of Natura 2000 sites on local/regional/ transnational level. 
ESF  art.3  (2).  Could  finance  networking  between  public  and  private  bodies, 
departments,  public  administrations  and  public  services  etc.  in  relation  to 
management of coastal Natura 2000 sites, in objective Convergence regions. 

EAFRD art. 63: Leader, could finance revision of present management schemes to 
achieve a more sustainable rural development. 
LIFE+  art.  3  and  Annex  I:  Nature  and  biodiversity  component  could  finance  site 
planning,  including  the  improvement  of  the  ecological  coherence  of  the  Natura 
2000  network,  the  development  and  implementation  of  species  and  habitats 
conservation action plans. 
FP7 art. 2(2)f: Transnational Cooperation, theme Environment, could finance plans 
review as part of a research projects aimed at determining plans efficacy. 
ERDF  art.  4-6:  could  finance  revision  of  management  plans,  in  the  framework  of 
risk management, and in transnational cooperation initiatives to favor ecotourism 
in areas needing socio-economic diversification. 

EAFRD  art.  52,  Art.  63,  Leader  could  finance  maintenance,  restoration  and 
upgrading of facilities for public access to Natura 2000 sites in the context of the 
conservation  and  upgrading  of  rural  heritage  and  private-public  partnership  for 
sustainable rural development strategies. 
EFF,  art.  41(1)  could  finance  maintenance  or  improvement  of  public  access 
facilities for use at coastal sites, to facilitate development of eco-tourism with the 
objective of restructuring and redirecting economic activities.  
ERDF  art.  4-6,  could  finance  development  of  infrastructure  to  improve  access 
linked  to  biodiversity  and  Natura  2000  contributing  to  sustainable  economic 
development and diversification of rural areas. 

17

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Types of activities  

EU Funding opportunities with references to EU Regulations 

Ongoing habitat management and monitoring 

6. Conservation management 
measures – maintenance and 
improvement of habitats’ 
favourable conservation status 
(Including restoration work, 
provision of wildlife passages, 
management of specific 
habitats, preparation of 
management plans.) 

EAFRD  art.  63:  Leader  could  finance  management  of  local  habitats  to  facilitate 
objectives of the local rural development plan. 
Art. 36 (b)(i) could finance first afforestation of agricultural land to finance habitat 
recovering on dunes transformed in cultivations in the past. 
EFF  art  41(1)(f)  could  finance  restoration  of  coastal  habitats  so  as  to  protect  the 
environment in fisheries areas to maintain its attractiveness.  
LIFE+ art. 3 and Annex I, Nature and biodiversity component, could finance pilot 
conservations  projects  for  site  and  species  management,  implementation  of 
species and habitats conservation action plans, in particular in coastal areas. 
FP7  art.  2(2)f,  Transnational  Cooperation,  theme  Environment,  could  finance 
coasts  conservation  management  measures  as  part  of  a  research  projects  on 
management options of natural habitats. 
ERDF  art.  4-6,  could 
transportation 
infrastructure to mitigate effect to Natura 2000 coastal sites e.g. to reduce habitat 
fragmentation, and the protection of coastal areas from erosion, pollutants. 

finance  adaptation/improvement  of 

7. Conservation management 
measures in relation to 
invasive alien species (IAS) 
(Including restoration work, 
infrastructure, management of 
specific species, preparation of 
management plans). 

8. Implementation of 
management schemes and 
agreements with owners and 
managers of land or water for 
following certain prescriptions  

9. Monitoring and surveying 
(Refers mainly to one-off costs 
related to monitoring and 
surveying activities, eg 
development of monitoring 
plans, methods and 
equipment; training of 
personnel.) 

EAFRD art. 36 (b)(v) could finance removal of invasive plant species that degrade 
native plants and forest structure in the context of forest-environment payments. 
EFF  art.  26(1)(c)  could  finance  retraining  of  fishermen  as  rangers  in  habitat 
restoration  to  work  on  Natura  2000  coastal  sites,  including  invasive  species 
management. 
EFF  art  41(1)(f)  could  finance  restoration  of  coastal  habitats  e.g.  restoration  of 
coastal  matorrals  through  removal  of  invasive  plants  within  initiatives  to  protect 
the environment in fisheries areas to maintain its attractiveness. 
LIFE+  art.  3  and  Annex  I,  Nature  and  biodiversity  component,  could  finance 
removal of invasive alien species or elaboration of demonstrative methodologies 
as part of larger nature conservation projects. 
ERDF art. 4-6: various opportunities could be used to fund a one-off eradication or 
control 
negative 
economic/social/environmental effects. 
FP7  art.  2(2)f:  Transnational  Cooperation,  theme  Environment,  could  finance 
control of alien species as part of a research projects on biodiversity threats. 

programme 

significant 

with 

IAS 

for 

an 

See activity 6 above.  

EAFRD  art.  52  (d)  could  finance  base  studies  aimed  at  elaborating  the  local 
development strategies. Art. 63, Leader, could finance monitoring activities in the 
framework of rural development projects. 
LIFE+  art.  3  and  Annex  I,  Nature  and  biodiversity  component,  could  finance 
projects  aimed  at  designing  and 
implementing  policy  approaches  and 
instruments for monitoring and assessing nature and biodiversity and the factors, 
pressures and responses that impact on them in natural areas. 
FP7  art.  2(2)f,  Transnational  Cooperation,  theme  Environment,  could  finance 
biodiversity  surveying  as  part  of  research  projects  on  new  methods  to  monitor 
biodiversity. 
ERDF  art.  4-6:  could  finance  habitat  monitoring  plans  or  infrastructures,  in  the 
framework of environmental risk management programmes, or in a transnational 
cooperation initiatives to monitor coastal zones.  
CF art. 2(2): could finance monitoring plans on Natura 2000 coastal sites as part of 
larger projects on regional sustainable development in “Convergence” regions. 

18

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
10. Risk management (fire 
prevention and control, 
flooding etc) . Includes the 
preparation of wardening and 
fire-control plans, 
development of relevant 
infrastructures, and the 
acquisition of equipment. 

11. Provision of information 
and publicity material 
(Includes establishing 
communication networks, 
production of newsletters and 
awareness and information 
materials, setting-up and 
maintenance of internet 
pages, etc.) 

12. Training and education 
Including production of 
handbooks, seminars, 
workshops, communication 
materials. 

FP7  art.  2(2)f:  Transnational  Cooperation,  theme  Environment,  could  finance 
research projects on new methods to manage risks in Natura 2000 sites. 
ERDF  art.  4-6:  could  finance  plans  or  infrastructures  to  avoid  risks  such  as  fires, 
invasive  species, 
risk  management 
programmes, at local/regional/transnational level. 
LIFE+  art.  3  and  Annex  I:  Nature  and  Biodiversity  component:  see  point  above. 
Information  and  Communication  component:  could  finance  training  activities  of 
agents involved in forest fire prevention initiatives. 

framework  of  environmental 

in  the 

EAFRD  art.  52.:  could  finance  promotion  of  coastal  Natura  2000  sites  within 
environmental  awareness  actions  on  rural  heritage  associated  with  the 
development of high natural value sites. 
art. 63: Leader, could finance information material on the environmental values of 
the rural areas e.g. on neighboring coastal Natura 2000 sites within private-public 
partnership for sustainable rural development. 
EFF, art. 41(1): could finance production of informative material on coastal Natura 
2000  sites 
in  the  framework  of  redirecting  fishing  activities,  facilitating 
development of coastal eco-tourism. 
LIFE+ art. 3 and Annex I: Nature and biodiversity component, could finance public 
awareness  activities  e.g.  in  the  context  of  projects  for  coastal  site  and  species 
management. 
ERDF art. 4-6: could finance elaboration and spread of informative material, in the 
framework of programmes to enhance ecotourism, at local/regional/transnational 
level. 
ESF art 3(2): could finance elaboration of information for training programmes to 
strengthen institutional capacity and the efficiency of public administrations.  

EAFRD art. 20, 52.: could finance training and networking necessary for realisation 
of  the  local  development  strategy  (e.g.  regional  promotion  in  relation  to  Natura 
2000), to enhance ecotourism e.g. through promotion of coastal Natura 2000 sites. 
EFF, art. 41(1): could finance training to fishermen to develop coastal eco-tourism 
on  coastal  Natura  2000  sites  in  the  framework  of  projects  to  redirect  fishing 
activities. 
LIFE+  art.  3  and  Annex  I:  Information  and  Communication  component  could 
finance training activities of agents involved in forest fire prevention initiatives. 
ESF art 3(2): could finance training activities on good management of Natura 2000 
coastal  sites  in  the  context  of  training  programmes  for  public  administrations  to 
strengthen institutional capacity and the efficiency. 

13. Facilities to encourage 
visitor use and appreciation of 
Natura 2000 sites  

See activity 5 above. 

For further information on EU financial possibilities and synergies between funding programs during this 
period,  a  Guidance  Handbook  on  the  funding  of  the  Natura  2000  network  has  been  produced  (Torkler 
2007).  A  web  tool  (based  on  that  handbook)  to  easily  determine  the  possible  funding  for  Natura  2000 
sites is available in: http://financing-natura2000.moccu.com/pub/index.html. There is also a more general 
handbook  on  the  EU  financing  of  Environmental  projects  (Lang  et  al.  2005),  which  is  available  at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/funding/intro_en.htm. 

Furthermore an IT-tool is available on the EC web site: 
(http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/financing/index_en.htm). 

19

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Acknowledgements 

This document was elaborated by Stefano Picchi (Comunità Ambiente, Italy). 

The following people have contributed to this document with comments, suggestions and information:  
Barbara Calaciura, Daniela Zaghi and Oliviero Spinelli (Comunità Ambiente, Italy), Concha Olmeda, David 
García  Calvo  and  Ana  Guimarães  (ATECMA,  Spain),  Mats  O.G.  Eriksson  (MK  Natur-  Och  Miljökonsult  HB, 
Sweden),  Marc  Thauront  (Ecosphéré,  France),  Roberto  Fiorentin  (Veneto  Agricoltura,  Italy),  José  Carlos 
Muñoz-Reinoso  (Universidad  de  Sevilla,  Spain),  Antonio  Sánchez  Codoñer  (Ayuntamiento  de  Valencia, 
Spain),  John  Houston  (Liverpool  Hope  University,  United  Kingdom)  and  Antonio  Perfetti  (Parco  della 
Maremma, Italy). 

Lesley Ashcroft (ATECMA, Spain) revised the final draft. 

20

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. References 

Case studies and practical examples 

García-Novo  F.,  Fernandez  R.  and  García  D.  2007.  Restoration  of  an  ancient  dune  system  enhancing 
landscape  perception.  In:  M.  Isermann  &  K.  Kiehl  (eds.):  Restoration  of  Coastal  Ecosystems.  Coastline 
Reports 7 (2007), pp. 61-67. 

Fiorentin R. 2006. Habitat dunali del litorale Veneto. In: AA.VV Progetto LIFE Natura Azioni concertate per 
la  salvaguardia  del  litorale  veneto  –  Gestione  degli  habitat  nei  siti  Natura  2000.  Veneto  Agricoltura; 
Servizio  Forestale  Regionale  per  le  province  di  Padova  e  Rovigo;  Servizio  Forestale  regionale  per  le 
province di Treviso e Venezia. http://www.lifedune.it/documenti.html (visited in September 2007). 

Fiorentin R., Rossetto M. and Pignatti G. 2006. Propagazione di specie arbustive del litorale veneto per la 
costituzione  di  collezioni  ex  situ.  Paper  presented  during  the  congress  “La  conservazione  delle  risorse 
genetiche delle specie spontanee” held in Rome on September 1st 2006. 

Munoz-Reinoso J.C. 2007. Restoration of Andalusian coastal Juniper woodlands: a field experiment. ICCD 
–  International  Conference  on  Management  and  Restoration  of  Coastal  Dunes.  Santander  (Spain),  3-5 
October 2007. 

Pisano  A.  2006.  A  management  and  conservation  project  of  coastal  dunes  and  wetlands  in  Vendicari. 
Azienda Foreste Demaniali della Regione Siciliana. 
Available 
vendicari_uk.pdf (visited in September 2007) 

http://www.regione.sicilia.it/Agricolturaeforeste/Azforeste/fondi/allegati/brochure-

on: 

Redondo I. and Saavedra C.  Unpublished. Regional Conservation Program of Juniperus oxycedrus subsp. 
macrocarpa in Andalucía (SW Spain). Summary. Oficina Técnica TRAGSA, Sevilla. 

Regione  Lazio  2005.  Beachmed-E.  Framework  Regional  Operation  -  Strategic  management  of  beach 
protection  measures  for  the  sustainable  development  of  Mediterranean  coastal  areas.  Available  on: 
http://www.beachmed.it/Beachmede/tabid/65/Default.aspx (visited on June 2007) 

Rooney P. 2003. The Sefton Coast LIFE Project: A conservation strategy for the sand dunes of the Sefton 
coast, north west England. In: Skov-og Naturstyrelsen 2003. Report International Workshop restoration of 
dune habitats along the Danish west coast. 15-20. 
Available on: 
http://www.skovognatur.dk/Emne/Naturbeskyttelse/Naturpleje/LIFE/Afsluttede/Klithede/Restorationdun
e.htm (visited in June 2007) 

Sánchez  A.,  Ortega  M.,  Collado  F.J.,  Vizcaino  A.,  H.  Boira.  2007.  Predictive  model  to  reforest  the  devesa 
dunes (Valencia). Paper presented during the “International conference on management and restoration 
of coastal dunes ICCD 2007” held in Santander, Spain, on October 3-5, 2007. 

Skov-og  Naturstyrelsen  2003.  Report  International  Workshop  restoration  of  dune  habitats  along  the 
Danish west coast. Available on: 
http://www.skovognatur.dk/Emne/Naturbeskyttelse/Naturpleje/LIFE/Afsluttede/Klithede/Restorationdun
e.htm (visited in July 2007) 

European and national guidelines 

Bensettiti  F.,  Bioret  F  and  Roland  J.  (coord.),  2004  .  «Cahiers  d’habitats»  Natura  2000.  Connaissance  et 
gestion des habitats et des espèces d’intérêt communautaire. Tome 2 - Habitats côtiers. MEDD/MAAPAR/ 
MNHN. Éd. La Documentation française, Paris, 399 p. + CD. 
http://natura2000.environnement.gouv.fr/habitats/cahiers.html 

EC 2007. Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats, EUR 27. European Commission. 

21

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ICN 2007. Plano Sectorial da Rede Natura 2000 – habitats naturais – 2250 *Dunas litorais com Juniperus 
spp. Instituto da Conservação da Natureza, Portugal. 

JNCC  2007a.  Habitat  account.  Coastal  sand  dunes  and  continental  dunes,  2250  Coastal  dunes  with 
Juniperus spp. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, UK. Available on: 
http://www.jncc.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/habitat.asp?FeatureIntCode=H2250  (visited  in  June 
2007). 

JNCC  2007b.  Second  Report  by  the  United  Kingdom  under  Article  17  on  the  implementation  of  the 
Directive  from  January  2001  to  December  2006.  Conservation  status  assessment  for  Habitat:  H2250: 
Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, UK. 
http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-4060 (visited on August 2007) 

Lang  S.,  Beckmann  A.,  Torkler  P.  (Eds).  2005.  EU  Funding  for  Environment:  a  handbook for  the 2007–13 
programming period. WWF, Poland. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/funding/intro_en.htm 

Ley  C.,  Gallego  J.B.  &  Vidal  C.  2007.  Manual  de  restauración  de  dunas  costeras.  Ministerio  de  Medio 
Ambiente. Dirección General de Costas. 

MATT  2004.  Manuale  per  la  Gestione  dei  siti  Natura  2000.  Ministero  dell'Ambiente  e  della  Tutela  del 
Territorio. Italy. Available on: 
http://www2.minambiente.it/scn/records/sections/download/files/manuale.pdf (visited in June 2007) 

MMA  2007.  Conference  Statement  of  the  IV  International  Conference  on  Wildfires.  Ministerio  de  Medio 
Ambiente. Spain. Available on: 
http://www.wildfire07.es/doc/docFinales/CONFERENCE_STATEMENT.pdf (visited in September 2007) 

MMAMRM  (in  preparation).  Bases  ecológicas  para  la  conservación  de  los  tipos  de  hábitat  de  interés 
comunitario en España. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Medio Rural y Marino. 

Piotto  B.  and  Di  Noi  2001  (eds).  Propagazione  per  seme  di  alberi  e  arbusti  della  flora  mediterranea. 
Manuale ANPA. ANPA. Roma.  

SNH  –  Scottish  Natural  Heritage  2000.  A  Guide  to  Managing  Coastal  Erosion  in  Beach/Dune  Systems. 
on: 
Appendix 
http://www.snh.org.uk/publications/on-line/heritagemanagement/erosion/appendix_1.shtml 
(visited on June 2007) 

Scottish  Natural  Heritage.  Available 

Erosion  management 

options. 

1 

Torkler  P.  (Ed.)  2007.  Financing  Natura  2000  Guidance  Handbook.  European  Commission.  Available  at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/financing/index_en.htm. 

UK Biodiversity Group 1999. Habitat Action Plan Coastal sand dunes. In Tranche 2 Action Plans - Volume V: 
Maritime species and habitats: 105. English Nature. Available on: 
http://www.ukbap.org.uk/Library/Tranche2_Vol5.pdf  
(visited on June 2007) 

UK  Biodiversity  Group  2000.  Tranche  2  Action  Plans:  Cost  Estimates  -  Maritime  Habitats.English  Nature. 
Available on: http://www.ukbap.org.uk/Library/Costingsreptmaritimehabs.pdf 
(visited on June 2007) 

Ward L. 2004. UK Biodiversity action plan (BAP) – Juniperus Communis L., Plantlife International, Volume 1. 

Articles and other documents 

Alexandrian D., Esnault F. and Calabri G. 1998. Forest fires in the Mediterranean area.  
Fao Corporate document repository. 
Available on http://www.fao.org/docrep/x1880e/x1880e07.htm (visited on August 2007) 

22

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Arrigo M. Quesada-Fernandez C. 2005. La prevención de incendios forestales en el plan antiincendios de 
la región siciliana (Italia). Proceedings of the II international conference on prevention strategies of fires in 
Southern Europe. Barcelona may 9-11, 2005. Available on: 
http://www.ctfc.es/confeinfor/articles/PAPER%20PINAUDEAU_english.pdf (visited on September 2007) 

Castillo J.M., Rubio Casal A.E., Luque C.J., Luque T. & Figueroa M.E. 2002. Comparative field summer stress 
of three tree species co-occurring in Mediterranean coastal dunes. Photosynthetica 40(1):49-56, 2002. 

Corre J.J. 1991.The sand dunes and their vegetation along the Mediterranean coast of France. Their likely 
response to climatic change. Landscape Ecology,  Springer Netherlands, Volume 6, Numbers 1-2 , 1991 

EEA – European Environment Agency 2006. Progress towards halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010. EEA 
Report No 5/2006. 

Esselink  H.,  Nijssen  M.  and  Beusink  P.  2003.  Searching  for  key-factors  to  restore  characteristic  flora  and 
fauna  communities  in  coastal  dunes.  In  Skov-og  Naturstyrelsen  2003.  Report  International  Workshop 
restoration of dune habitats along the Danish west coast. 
Available on: 
http://www.skovognatur.dk/Emne/Naturbeskyttelse/Naturpleje/LIFE/Afsluttede/Klithede/Restorationdun
e.htm (visited on August 2007) 

Etienne  M.  and  Ricolot  E.  2005.  Fuel  management  for  fire  prevention  in  France.  Proceedings  of  the  II 
international conference on prevention strategies of fires in Southern Europe. Barcelona may 9-11, 2005 
Available on http://www.ctfc.es/confeinfor/articles/PRES%20ETIENNE.pdf (visited on September 2007) 

EUCC 2007 - The Coastal Union. Available on: http://www.coastalguide.org/index.htm 
(visited on June 2007) 

EEA - European Environment Agency 2006. The changing faces of Europe's coastal areas. EEA Report No 
6/2006. Available on: 
 http://reports.eea.europa.eu/eea_report_2006_6/en/eea_report_6_2006.pdf (visited on July 2007) 

-  European  Environment  Agency.  2007.  EUNIS  Biodiversity  Database.  Available  on: 

EEA 
http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/index.jsp (visited on May 2007) 

Ioannou  A.  P.,  Papageorgiou  K.  A.  2007.  Forest  Fire  Management  in  Cyprus.  From  Prevention  to 
Restoration. Procceedings of the IV International Conference on Wildfire. 
http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/sevilla-
2007/contributions/doc/SESIONES_TEMATICAS/ST2/Ioannou_Papageorgiou_CHIPRE.pdf 
September 2007) 

(visited 

on 

2005.  Managing  uplands 

McBride  A., 
http://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/assets/saving-species/saving-species-publications/Management-
Managing-uplands-for-juniper.pdf  
(visited on June 2007) 

Juniper.  Plantlife 

for 

Scotland.  Available  on: 

Muñoz-Reinoso  J.  C.  2003.  Juniperus  oxycedrus  spp.  macrocarpa  in  Spain:  Ecology  and  conservation 
problems. Journal of Coastal Conservation 9; 113-122. 

Muñoz-Reinoso J. C. 2004. Diversity of maritime juniper woodlands. Forest Ecology and Management 192 
- No. 2/3: 267-276. 

Muñoz-Reinoso J. C., Braulio Asensio Romero, Francisco Rodríguez Infante, 2005. Territorial integration of 
populations of threatened species and ecological connectivity in the Southwest coast of Spain. ICCCM’05 
Proceedings, pp. 341-345. 

23

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Paradis G. and Piazza C., 1996. Élément pour une gestion des habitats littoraux sableux et graveleux de la 
Corse. Programme LIFE Conservation des habitats naturels et des espèces vegetales d’intérêt prioritaire 
de la Corse. Office de l’Environment de la Corse. 

Paradis  G.,  Muracciole  M.  and  Piazza  C.,  1997.  Plan  de  gestion  conservatoire  des  dunes  à  genevriérs  de 
Corse. Programme LIFE Conservation des habitats naturels et des espèces vegetales d’intérêt prioritaire 
de la Corse. Office de l’Environment de la Corse. 

Picchi S., Zaghi D., Scalera R. 2006. Il bilancio di LIFE Natura in Italia – indicazioni e prospettive per il futuro. 
Ministero dell’ambiente e della tutela del territorio. Available on: 
http://www2.minambiente.it/Sito/settori_azione/scn/life_natura/docs/BilancioLIFENaturaWeb.pdf 
(visited on July 2007) 

Pihl S., Ejrnæs R., Søgaard B., Aude E., Nielsen K.E., Dahl K., & Laursen J.S. 2001. Habitat and species covered 
by  the  EEC  Habitats  Directive  –  A  Preliminary  assessment  of  distribution  and  conservation  status  in 
Denmark. National Environmental Research Institute, Denmark. 121 pp. - NERI Technical Report No 365. 
Available on: http://faglige-rapporter.dmu.dk (visited on July 2007) 

Pinaudeau C. 2005. To win without battle or the defense against forest fires as a strategic option for the 
European  Union.  Proceedings  of  the  II  international  conference  on  prevention  strategies  of  fires  in 
Southern Europe. Barcelona may 9-11, 2005 
Available on: http://www.ctfc.es/confeinfor/articles/PAPER%20PINAUDEAU_english.pdf  
(visited on August 2007) 

Ruffo  S.  (Ed.)  2002.  Dune  e  spiagge  sabbiose  –  Ambienti  fra  terra  e  mare,  Quaderni  Habitat,  Museo 
Friulano di Storia Naturale – Ministero dell’Ambiente e della tutela del territorio. 

Tybirk  K.  and  Jørgensen  V.  1999.  Ammoniak  i  landbrug  og  natur.  Danmarks  Jordbrugsforskning  og 
Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Silkeborg. 

Wartena L., van Boxel J. H.  & D. Veenhuysen 1991. Macroclimate, microclimate and dune formation along 
the West European coast. Journal  Landscape  Ecology.  Volume  6,  Numbers  1-2  /  October.  15-27.Springer 
Netherlands.  

Wilkie  M.L.  2002.  From  dune  to  forest:  biological  diversity  in  plantations  established  to  control  drifting 
sand. Unasylva vol. 53, 209 2002/2.64-69. 
Available on: http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/y3582e/y3582e15.htm#o (visited on August 2007) 

Viner  D.  and  Agnew  M.  1999.  Climate  Change  and  Its  Impacts  on  Tourism.  Climatic  Research  Unit. 
University of East Anglia. Norwich. 

Projects 

LIFE  Nature  project    1994/NAT/F/000845.  Conservation  des  habitats  naturels  et  des  espèces  vegetales 
d’intérêt prioritaire de la Corse. Office de l’Environment de la Corse.1994-1997. 

LIFE  Nature  project  2002/NAT/IT/8533    Conservazione  e  gestione  degli  habitat  della  Z.P.S.  Vendicari. 
Azienda Foreste Demaniali della Regione Sicilia. 2002-2005. 
http://www.lifevendicari.it 

LIFE  Nature  project  LIFE03NAT/IT/000141.  Azioni  concertate  per  la  salvaguardia  del  litorale  Veneto. 
Veneto Agricoltura. 2004-2006.  
http://www.lifedune.it  

LIFE  Nature  project  LIFE04  NAT/ES/000044.  Recovery  of  the  littoral  sand  dunes  with  Juniperus  spp  in 
Valencia. Ayuntamiento de Valencia. Concejalia de Dehesa-Albufera. 2004-2007. http://www.lifeduna.com  

24