natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Farmland bird populations have not fallen as much in the New-10 and CC-3 as in the EU-15, largely because of the lower intensity of farming in central and eastern Europe.
Nazadovanje populacij e ptic na podeželju v 10 novih državah članicah in v 3 državah kandidatkah ni bilo tako izrazito kot v EU-15 predvsem zaradi manj intenzivnega kmetovanja v srednji in vzhodni Evropi.
Wetland birds are migratory: their numbers o�en fluctuate in line with temperature, with fewer arriving in cold years.
Močvirske ptice so ptice selivke: njihovo število se pogosto spreminja glede na temperaturo, v hladnih letih se jih vrne manj.
Wetland birds are also affected by hunting and eutrophication of wetlands.
Močvirske ptice prizadeneta tudi lov in evtrofi kacij a mokrišč.
Organic farming area
Površina ekološkega kmetovanja
Organic farming does not use chemical fertilisers and pesticides.
Pri ekološkem kmetovanju se ne uporabljajo kemična gnojila in pesticidi.
It relies instead on animal manure, crop rotation and appropriate soil cultivation practices for building up soil fertility and combating pests and plant diseases.
Kmetovanje temelji na živalskem gnoju, kolobarjenju in takšnem obdelovanju zemlje, da se ohranja njena hranilnost, ter na boju s škodljivimi organizmi in rastlinskimi boleznimi.
Organic agriculture has lower yields than conventional farming systems but reduces the risk of nitrate pollution of water and generally promotes more wildlife.
Pridelki pri ekološkem kmetovanju so nižji kot pri običajnem načinu kmetovanja, vendar pa se zmanjša nevarnost onesnaževanja vode z nitrati in na splošno poveča število prostoživečih živali.
The share of organic land remains far below 1 % in most of the New-10 and the CC-3 due to li�le or no state support and low consumer demand for organic products.
Delež ekoloških zemljišč v večini 10 novih držav in v 3 državah kandidatkah je precej manjši od 1 % zaradi pomanjkanja podpore države ter majhnega povpraševanja potrošnikov po ekoloških pridelkih.
Across the EEA-31 as a whole, however, organic farming area increased by around four fi�hs between 1997 and 2000, to 4.4 million hectares from 2.4 million.
Vendar pa se je v celotnem EEA-31 območje ekološke pridelave povečalo za okrog štiri petine med 1997 in 2000, in sicer z 2.4 milijona na 4.4 milijona hektarjev.
Water pollution: Managing nitrate
Onesnaževanje voda: obvladovanje nitratov
Diffuse pollution from agricultural land is still the main source of nitrate in water.
Onesnaževanje s škropivi s kmetijskih zemljišč je še zmeraj poglavitni izvor nitratov v vodah.
Nitrates continue to damage the environment, contributing to eutrophication in coastal and marine waters and pollution of drinking water, especially where groundwaters have become contaminated.
Nitrati še vedno uničujejo okolje, pripomorejo k evtrofi kacij i obalnih in morskih voda in onesnaževanju pitne vode še posebej tam, kjer je prišlo do onesnaženja talne vode.
Member States' success in tackling nitrate pollution has been mixed.
Države članice so bile različno uspešne pri reševanju tega problema.
Nitrate pollution is caused mainly by agriculture.
Onesnaževanje z nitrati v glavnem povzroča kmetijstvo.
Unless fertiliser and manure are absorbed by crops or removed during harvesting, excess nitrate can be washed into groundwater as well as surface water bodies (13).
Če pridelki ne absorbirajo (13) umetnih gnojil in hlevskega gnoja ali se jih ne odstrani med spravljanjem pridelkov, lahko presežek nitratov pronica tako v talno vodo kot tudi v površinske vode.
Measures to reduce nitrate pollution can be effective however.
Vendar so ukrepi za zmanjšanje onesnaženosti z nitrati lahko učinkoviti.
The greatest improvements have occurred in Denmark, which began a national nitrogen management programme in the late 1980s.
Najbolj se je izboljšalo na Danskem, kjer so konec osemdesetih uvedli nacionalni program za obvladovanje dušika, v katerem se povezujeta svetovanje kmetom in dodelitev letne 'zaloge' dušika za vsako kmetijo. Uveljavlja pa se ga z rednimi terenskimi pregledi.
The cost of nitrate reduction lies in the range of EUR 50-150 per hectare per year (15), but this is estimated to be 5 to 10 times cheaper than removing
Stroški za zmanjšanje nitratov se gibljejo med 50 in 150 evrov na hektar na leto (15), kar je ocenjeno kot pet- do desetkrat ceneje od postopkov
16) estimates that denitrification of nitrate from polluted water.
16 odstranjevanja nitratov iz onesnaženih voda.
A 2002 study (
Iz raziskave iz leta 2002 (
UK drinking water costs £19 million a year and projects the total UK cost of achieving the European Union nitrate standard for potable water (17) at £199 million over the next 20 years (18).
17) 199 za dosego norm Evropske unije glede vsebnosti nitratov v pitni vodi ( milijonov funtov v prihodnjih 20 letih (18).
Consumers, rather than the polluters (i.e. farmers), pay almost all of the bill.
Namesto onesnaževalcev (to je kmetov) skoraj vse stroške plačajo porabniki.
Agricultural practices are currently less intensive in the ten new EU Member States than in the 15 older ones.
Kmetijske prakse so trenutno manj intenzivne v 10 novih članicah Evropske unije kot v stari petnajsterici.
However, if farming becomes more intensive in the new Member States, as predicted, nitrate concentrations in surface and ground waters could increase.
Če bo kmetovanje v novih članicah postalo intenzivnejše, kot je predvideno, se lahko koncentracij e nitratov v površinskih vodah in v talni vodi povečajo.
Good implementation of the European Union nitrates directive, supported by additional measures as necessary, will be essential to avoid creating an extensive, long-lived and costly pollution problem in these countries over the coming years.
Uspešno izvajanje direktive Evropske unije o nitratih skupaj z dodatnimi potrebnimi ukrepi bo ključnega pomena, da se prepreči nastanek obsežnega, dolgoročnega in dragega problema onesnaževanja v teh državah v prihodnjih letih.
Arable land in upstream catchments
Obdelovalna zemljišča ob zgornjih rečnih tokovih
Arable land cover (% of total upstream catchment)
Površina obdelovalnih zemljišč(% skupne površine ob zgornjih rečnih tokovih)
Upward trend Downward trend
Trend naraščanja Trend upadanja
Hungary
Nemčija Danska L
Germ anD en ak R
M ad se države
Upward trend
Trend naraščanja
Nitrate concentrations in groundwater
Koncentracija nitratov v talnih vodah
Hungary S
Bolgarija
All countries
Vse drž
Nature: Maximising the value of protected areas
Narava: čim bolj povečati vrednost zavarovanih območij
Designating sites to protect threatened species and habitats has long been a core element of biological diversity policy but conflicting pressures on available land are now making it more difficult to establish new sites.
Določanje območij za zavarovanje ogroženih vrst in habitatov je bilo vrsto let glavni element politike biotske raznovrstnosti, vendar pa je sedaj zaradi nasprotujočih pritiskov na razpoložljiva zemljišča določanje novih območij oteženo.
The future of nature protection lies in integrating biodiversity considerations into sectoral and environmental policies and maximising the utility of existing protected sites.
V prihodnosti je treba varstvo narave usmeriti v ohranjanje biotske raznovrstnosti, v sektorske in okoljske politike ter čim bolj povečati koristnost obstoječih zavarovanih območij.
More needs to be done to protect marine biodiversity.
Več skrbi je treba posvetiti tudi zaščiti morske biotske raznovrstnosti.
Since the 1970s, the number of national sites has increased substantially as countries have progressively implemented national laws on nature protection.
Od leta 1970 je zaradi postopnega uvajanja nacionalne zakonodaje o varstvu narave močno naraslo število nacionalnih parkov.
International and European Union instruments have also made it compulsory for countries to designate sites for protection (19).
Države so morale določiti območja za zavarovanje tudi na podlagi mednarodnih listin in listin Evropske unije (19).
As a result there are now nearly 600 different categories of protection and more than 42 000 individual protected sites in the European Environment Agency's 31 member countries.
Tako obstaja sedaj v 31 državah članicah Evropske agencije za okolje skoraj 600 različnih kategorij zavarovanja in več kot 42 000 posameznih zavarovanih območij .
By the end of 2003, sites designated as special protection areas under the birds directive or proposed as sites of Community interest under the habitats directive covered around 15 % of the territory of the European Union.
Konec leta 2003 so območja, ki so bila po Direktivi o pticah določena kot posebna zavarovana območja ali predlagana kot območja v interesu Skupnosti po Direktivi o habitatih, pokrivala okrog 15 % ozemlja Evropske unije. e.
Additionally, marine protected areas have been created in all of the regional seas and on the coasts of many European countries.
Poleg tega so bila v vseh lokalnih morjih in na obalah mnogih evropskih držav oblikovana morska zavarovana območja.
However, there remain substantial gaps in the protection of marine and coastal areas.
Vendar pa ostaja velik prepad med zaščito morskih in obalnih območij .
Marine areas should be protected according to the richness of their biodiversity, but this protection may conflict with other uses including shipping or fishing.
Morska območja je treba zavarovati glede na bogastvo njihove biotske raznovrstnosti, kar pa je lahko v navzkrižju z drugimi uporabami, vključno z ladijskim prometom in ribolovom.
Agreeing on an appropriate level of protection and then enforcing it is therefore o�en difficult.
Zato je dogovarjanje o ustrezni stopnji zavarovanja in njegovem izvajanju pogosto težavno.
Protected areas cannot be sustained in isolation from the communities and economic activities in and around them (20).
Zavarovana območja ne smejo biti izolirana od skupnosti in ekonomskih dejavnosti znotraj in zunaj njih (20).
To maximise their value, protected areas need to be integrated into wider landscape uses and be connected to other areas of similar qualities.
Da bi se kar najbolj povečala njihova vrednost, je treba zavarovana območja vključiti v širšo rabo krajine ter jih povezati z drugimi podobnimi območji.
Connecting sites ensures that species have the possibility to survive by moving in response to disturbances and climate change.
Povezana območja zagotavljajo vrstam možnost preživetja, tako da se lahko ob motenjah in podnebnih spremembah selijo.
The Natura 2000 network can play a role in achieving such integration.
Takšno povezovanje lahko omogoči tudi omrežje Natura 2000.
There is now less scope for designating new sites as protecting biodiversity competes with growing and conflicting pressures on available land.
Sedaj je manj prostora za določanje novih varovanih območij , ker se varovanje biotske raznovrstnosti spopada z naraščajočimi in navzkrižnimi pritiski na razpoložljiva zemljišča.
Policies will increasingly have to deal with this by maximising the value of areas already protected and by integrating biodiversity concerns into sectoral policies (e.g. agri-environmental measures or sustainable forestry policies) as well as into other environmental policies.
Politike bodo morale temu posvetiti več pozornosti, tako da bodo čim bolj povečale vrednost že zavarovanih območij ter z vključevanjem zadev v zvezi z biotsko raznovrstnostjo v sektorske politike (npr. kmetijsko-okoljski ukrepi ali trajnostne gozdarske politike) ter v druge okoljske politike.
Implementation of the habitats directive
Izvajanje direktive o habitatih
Generally progress is now good: the Netherlands, for example, has reached 100 % sufficiency.
Splošen napredek je dober: Nizozemska je na primer dosegla 100-odstotno ustreznost.
Germany reached only 27 % sufficiency by November 2003, but dra� proposals have since been received which, if officially confirmed, are expected to double the number of sites and increase the sufficiency level.
Novembra 2003 je Nemčija dosegla le 27-odstotno ustreznost, vendar pa naj bi se na podlagi predlogov, če bodo uradno potrjeni, število območijpodvojilo in obseg ustreznosti povečal.
The indicator charts progress in proposing terrestrial sites for the protection of the targeted habitats and species of the directive.
Kazalec prikazuje napredek v predlaganih kopenskih območjih za zavarovanje ciljnih habitatov in vrst iz direktive.
Fish catches above safe limits
Ulov rib nad varno mejo
Catches outside safe limits Catches within safe limits
Ulov nad varno mejo Ulov znotraj varne meje
0 Overall 60 % of European fish catches exceed safe limits, i.e. levels above which the biomass removed by fishing is no longer replaced by population growth.
0 Več kot 60 % ulova rib v Evropi presega varne meje, to je obseg, nad katerim se biomasa, ki se odstrani z ribolovom, ne nadomešča več z rastjo populacije.
Catches of open sea fish account for almost two thirds of all catches; about half of these catches are outside safe limits.
Ribolov na odprtem morju znaša skoraj dve tretjini vsega ulova; približno polovica tega ulova pa je zunaj varnih meja.
Industrial fishing catches account for another 20 % of the total.
Delež ulova za industrijsko predelavo znaša nadaljnjih 20 % od skupnega obsega.
Fish play an integral role within the wider marine environment, which is experiencing pressures from shipping, pollution, coastal eutrophication and climate change.
Ribe so pomembne za širše morsko okolje, ki je izpostavljeno obremenitvam zaradi ladijskih prevozov, onesnaževanja, obalne evtrofi kacij e in sprememb podnebja.
The continuation of present trends of over-fishing will therefore probably lead to substantial changes across the entire marine ecosystem.
Zato bo nadaljevanje prekomernega ribolova verjetno povzročilo bistvene spremembe v celotnem morskem ekosistemu.
Sprat, sand eel(industrial fish)
Slanik, peščena jegulja (ribe za industrijsko predelavo)
Zooplankton abundance
Gostota živalskega planktona
20 la ti ve abundance of plan k to n (% ) eR
20 el at iv na gostota planktona (% ) R
Cold water species
Mrzlovodne vrste
The past decade has seen a marked change in the relative abundance of zooplankton in the North Sea.
V zadnjih desetletjih se je relativna gostota živalskega planktona v Severnem morju povečala.
The warm-water copepod Calanus helgolandicus has become more than twice as abundant as the cold-water species Calanus finmarchicus.
Gostota toplovodne vrste ceponožca Calanus helgolandicus se je povečala dvakrat bolj kot mrzlovodna vrsta Calanus finmarchicus.
These data are illustrative of a general trend for zooplankton populations to shi� northwards in response to changing climatic conditions.
Ti podatki prikazujejo splošno premeščanje populacij živalskega planktona proti severu zaradi spremenjenih podnebnih razmer.
The composition of the marine ecosystem has been changing since the mid 1980s in the North Sea, a trend that directly affects fish populations and consequently fisheries.
Sestava morskega ekosistema v Severnem morju se je spreminjala od sredine leta 1980, kar je neposredno vplivalo na populacij e rib in na ribolov.
Projections show that global warming will increasingly change the composition of the ecosystems in the oceans and cause a shi� by warm-water species towards higher latitudes.
Po napovedih se bo zaradi splošnega segrevanja sestava ekosistemov v oceanih pospešeno spreminjala, zaradi česar se bodo toplovodne vrste premikale proti območjem na višjih zemljepisnih širinah.
Data on two species of Copepod found in the Central North Sea warm water: Calanus helgolandicus and cold water: Calanus finmarchicus
Podatki o dveh vrstah ceponožcev, najdenih v osrednjem Severnem morju V toplih vodah: Calanus helgolandicus in v mrzlih vodah: Calanus finmarchicus finmarchicus
Packaging waste: Still increasing
Odpadna embalaža: količina še vedno narašča
Prevention has long been the highest priority of European Union waste policy: only where the production of waste is unavoidable should recycling and reuse of waste be encouraged.
Preprečevanje nastajanja je že dolgo najvažnejša prednostna naloga politike ravnanja z odpadki v Evropski uniji: recikliranje in ponovno uporabo odpadkov je treba spodbujati samo takrat, kadar se ni mogoče izogniti ustvarjanju odpadkov.
Yet Europe has made li�le progress in preventing packaging waste.
Kljub temu pa je Evropa malo napredovala pri preprečevanju nastajanja odpadne embalaže.
While many countries have met the targets for recycling set under the 1994 packaging waste directive, the amount of packaging waste is still increasing.
Čeprav je veliko držav izpolnilo cilje glede recikliranja, ki so bili zastavljeni z Direktivo o odpadni embalaži iz leta 1994, se količina odpadne embalaže še vedno povečuje.
Data suggest overall volumes of waste are continuing to grow in Europe.
Podatki kažejo, da v Evropi celotna količina odpadkov še vedno narašča.
Total waste is made up of several waste streams.
Celotno količino odpadkov sestavlja več tokov odpadkov.
The largest is construction and demolition waste, but packaging waste is the best documented in terms of quantities produced and treated.
Največ jih nastane v gradbeništvu in pri rušenju, toda odpadna embalaža je najbolje dokumentirana kar zadeva nastale in obdelane količine.
The generation of packaging waste is closely coupled to economic growth and consumption pa�erns.
Proizvodnja odpadne embalaže je tesno povezana z gospodarsko rastjo in vzorci porabe.
From 1997 to 2001 the amount of packaging waste increased in 10 of the 15 older EU Member States, and by 7 % in the then European Union as a whole.
Od leta 1997 do 2001 se je količina odpadne embalaže povečala v desetih od petnajstih starejših državah članicah EU, v Evropski uniji skupaj pa za 7 %.
Preliminary projections suggest that volumes of packaging waste are likely to continue rising substantially in the future (22).
Po napovedih se bodo količine odpadne embalaže v prihodnosti verjetno še naprej znatno povečevale (22).
Some of this increase is a�ributable to the proportionately higher generation of packaging waste from small households, but also to the growth of the internal market and the consequently greater need to transport packaged goods.
Delno lahko to povečanje pripišemo sorazmerno večji količini odpadne embalaže v manjših gospodinjstvih pa tudi povečanju notranjega trga in torej večji potrebi po prevažanju embaliranega blaga.
With rising emphasis on health and food safety, the amount of food packaging has also been increasing.
Zaradi vse večjega poudarka na varovanju zdravja in varnosti živil se je povečala tudi količina embalaže za hrano.
The European Union Packaging Waste Directive (94/62/EC) addresses the elements of packaging waste management in a general way while placing emphasis on recycling and recovery by se�ing quantitative targets for both.
Direktiva Evropske unije o odpadni embalaži (94/62/ES) obravnava ravnanje z odpadno embalažo na splošno, pri tem pa poudarja recikliranje in predelavo
For certain countries with high recycling and recovery rates (e.g. Denmark and Austria) (24), however, the legislation has had li�le influence since their waste management systems were in place before it entered into force.
V nekaterih državah z visokimi stopnjami recikliranja in predelave (na primer na Danskem in v Avstriji) (24) pa je imela pravna ureditev le malo vpliva, saj so bili tam sistemi ravnanja z odpadki uvedeni, še preden je direktiva začela veljati.
In general, countries that have implemented a mix of instruments have been most effective in meeting their objectives and targets.
Na splošno so bile države, ki so uvedle kombinacijo instrumentov, najbolj učinkovite pri doseganju svojih ciljev.
The directive was amended in January 2004 but as it contains no waste prevention targets it can have only an indirect effect on the prevention of packaging waste.
Direktiva je bila spremenjena in dopolnjena januarja 2004. Ker pa ne vsebuje nobenih ciljev za preprečevanje odpadkov, ima lahko le posreden učinek.
The soundness of recycling as a strategy for smarter resource use has recently been questioned (25), but recycling is in most cases be�er for the environment than either energy recovery or disposal.
V zadnjem času se sprašujemo, ali je recikliranje kot strategij a za bolj smotrno uporabo virov (25) ustrezna. Kljub temu pa je recikliranje v večini primerov boljše za okolje kot energetska predelava ali odlaganje odpadkov.
As the cost of recycling rises with the percentage of material recycled however, a comparison of the costs (including external costs) of alternative options is likely to limit the scope for raising recycling targets continually.
Ker se cena recikliranja povečuje z odstotkom recikliranega materiala, bo primerjava stroškov (vključno z eksternimi stroški) alternativnih možnosti verjetno omejila možnosti za stalno povečevanje recikliranja.
Generating less waste in the first place must remain the foremost objective.
Pridelava manjših količin odpadkov mora še naprej ostati glavni cilj.
Between 1997 and 2001 total packaging waste increased by 7 % in the EU-15.
Od leta 1997 do 2001 se je celotna odpadna embalaža v EU-15 povečala za 7 %.
Over the year 2000–2001 the overall amount dipped slightly, mainly due to a 12 % decrease in Spain, but it is too early to tell whether this signals a change in the upward trend.
Med letoma 2000 in 2001 je celotna količina nekoliko upadla predvsem zaradi 12-odstotnega znižanja v Španiji, vendar je prezgodaj, da bi povedali, ali to pomeni trajno spremembo.
Packaging waste quantities vary substantially between countries, most likely due to different calculation methodologies.
Količine odpadne embalaže se od države do države zelo razlikujejo, verjetno zaradi različnih metodologij izračunavanja.
In particular some countries report only on the four key materials for which Member States are required to provide data — plastic, glass, metal and paper.
Poleg tega nekatere države poročajo le o štirih ključnih materialih, za katere morajo države članice zagotoviti podatke — plastiko, steklo, kovino in papir.
Others report on all packaging including wood, which substantially increases the total weight recorded.
Druge poročajo o vseh embalažah vključno z lesom, zaradi česar se celotna teža znatno poveča.
Packaging waste treatment
Ravnanje z odpadno embalažo
Energy recovery t m en re a
Energetska predelava
0 An increasing proportion of packaging waste is recovered.
0 Vse večji delež odpadne embalaže se predeluje.
The main forms of recovery are recycling and incineration to produce energy.
Glavni obliki predelave sta recikliranje in sežiganje za pridobivanje energije.
The use of incineration is high in some countries e.g. Denmark and the Netherlands, while in others, e.g. Germany and Austria, more recycling is used.
Sežiganje je v nekaterih državah pogosto, na primer na Danskem in Nizozemskem, v drugih, na primer v Nemčiji in Avstriji, pa se bolj uporablja recikliranje.
The revised directive, adopted in January 2004, will effectively restrict the scope for incineration and other recovery methods except recycling.
Spremenjena in dopolnjena direktiva, ki je bila sprejeta januarja 2004, bo učinkovito omejila obseg za sežiganja in drugih metod predelave razen recikliranja.
In some countries this will require substantial changes to the collection and sorting of wastes.
V nekaterih državah bo zato treba precej spremeniti zbiranje in razvrščanje odpadkov.
The directive's targets are to be met by the end of 2008.
Cilji iz direktive naj bi bili doseženi do konca leta 2008.
1999Time (years)
1999Čas (leta)
Proportion of packaging waste recycled
Cilj za 2001 najmanj25 % a ne odpadne
All Member States met the target of recycling at least 25 % of all packaging waste by 2001 (Greece, Ireland and Portugal were given lower targets and longer timeframes).
Vse države članice so dosegle cilj, tj. recikliranje vsaj 25 % vse odpadne embalaže do leta 2001 (za Grčijo, Irsko in Portugalsko so bili določeni nižji cilji in daljši časovni okvir).
The revised directive raises the target for recycling to at least 55 % of all packaging wastes.
V spremenjeni in dopolnjeni direktivi je cilj za recikliranje povišan na vsaj 55 % vse odpadne embalaže.
Several countries, in particular the New-10, are still a long way from meeting this.
Več držav, zlasti 10 novih članic, je še daleč od izpolnitve tega cilja.