Guide on the development of green infrastructure in the Carpathians

increased development pressure to natural and semi-natural ecosystems and, in addition, the spatial planning policy of municipalities, not always commensurate with the actual demand for construction sites (planning “ahead”), does not prevent the dispersion of developments. Oversupply of investment land and permitting development without taking into account the natural conditions result in the degradation of green infrastructure and have a negative impact on the space. As mentioned above, the results of the analysis are available on the Project geoportal. Topical maps make it possible to visualize the results of the analysis, along with the key and the attributes table containing basic data and indicators. The obtained results give an idea as to the state and functioning of green infrastructure in the Carpathians. However, it should be noted that not all available data are up-to-date – forests areas or development areas may be underestimated due to dynamic changes and processes that are taking place in the space. Also, data on individual trees or rows or hedges may be out of date, owing to the recently intensified felling. There is no database containing detailed and up-to-date information on green infrastructure elements. Without a field inventory on a local scale and detailed mapping of green (and blue) infrastructure objects and monitoring of the directions of change, it is very difficult to make a clear, credible and up-to-date assessment of the space. 49

Photo: Krzysztof Haase II.1.2 Threats to the natural space of the Carpathians In recent decades, unfavourable changes could be observed, affecting the greatest poten- tial of the Carpathians (apart from the inhabitants themselves), namely natural and cultural values. The Carpathian natural space – and the unique landscape of the Carpathians – are affected by numerous threats causing: ◆ degradation – i.e. deterioration of the natural values, the condition of ecosystems, as well as the reduction or even destruction of landscape features of a particular area; ◆ fragmentation – i.e. reducing areas of high nature value, “breaking down” ecosystems into smaller, separate, isolated „islands” – causing a disruption of ecological connectivity and natural connections threatening diversity, which aggravates the condition of ecosystems, and thus affects their potential to provide us with numerous benefits. Both of these adverse phenomena have several common causes, listed below. 1. Changes in the type of land management / use: ◆ abandonment of land (disappearance of non-forest areas, field margins, etc.). ◆ devastation of green infrastructure through, for example, excessive felling of mid-field, waterside and roadside woodlots, or a change of terrain (which, for example, can „start” landslides); too intensive forest, agricultural and water management, unprotected, unauthorised landfill sites; contamination of soil and water by waste and chemicalisation of agriculture, etc. 50

2. Intensive, mass tourism, including the location of holiday resorts of a scale and charac- ter not in line with the traditions of the region; the location of ski stations disrupting the continuity of green structures, often also located in scenic areas; the location of tourist and para-tourist infrastructure without analysing its impact on the surroundings and the natural environment (e.g. rope parks, pump tracks, skate parks, etc.). 3. Buildings – both dense (compact) and loose (dispersed) housing, with the accompanying municipal and service infrastructure. The introduction of built-up areas into areas previ- ously used for farming and forestry management not only changes the landscape of the Carpathians, but also generates many impacts that may adversely affect animal species, including their free migration, inter alia, through placement of a physical barrier (building and fence), change of terrain during construction, passenger car traffic, as well as through human activity for a significant part of the day. In addition, buildings located by the boundary of a forest may contribute to increased contact with wild animals, and thus give rise to fear of attacks on people or domestic animals. 4. Infrastructure development (investments) – in particular linear/transport infrastructure. As a result, interruption of ecological connections (fragmentation of habitats), growth of impermeable surfaces (in increasingly higher altitude areas) and uncontrolled development of tourist infrastructure (including skiing) can be observed. Industrial infrastructure – despite relatively moderate industrialization of the region – also “swallows” increasingly larger pieces of land. 5. Climate change – causing, for example, perturbations in the development cycles of plants and animals, adverse water regime changes (water crisis, droughts), expansion of alien species, or an increase in the frequency and intensity of violent weather events, e.g. strong summer storms. Those threats are based on factors of various kind: ◆ legal and administrative (planning procedures, decisions of local authorities); ◆ economic (the need for taxes, jobs, pressure from investors, willingness to support local entrepreneurship); ◆ public awareness, social attitudes: lack of knowledge about the role and function of green infrastructure, lack of understanding of the needs and protection of nature and the landscape; ◆ demographic and cultural changes (migration to cities, land abandonment, summer resorts for city dwellers). 51

We will take a closer look at the threats and phenomena detrimental to the Carpathian nature and landscape in the next chapter of the guide: II.2. Human activity, as part of the descriptions of respective forms of economic activity in the Carpathians. Development is obviously useful and natural on all accounts, however (harmonious, lasting, sustainable) development must be differentiated from uncontrolled, intensive, purely economic, infrastructural growth, which in the long run causes a permanent degradation of values and a reduction in the quality of life perceived more broadly than just in purely material terms. Fig. 1. South Małopolska Protected Landscape Area. Photo: from the resources of the Regional Directorate for Environmental Protection in Cracow 52

Photo: Krzysztof Haase II.2 Human activity GREEN AND BLUE INFRASTRUCTURE IS SHAPED BY TWO FORCES: NATURE AND MAN. The forces of nature are natural processes taking place in ecosystems and continuous, they are often very dynamic changes triggered by the conditions prevailing in a given area. The power of humans is expressed through their very presence, as well as through various forms of economic activity, which not only– directly or indirectly – affect space but are also embedded in that space and dependent on the resources present in it, including the resources and services provided by the elements of green infrastructure. Activities directly drawing on the resources of green infrastructure and directly (physically) affecting it are, for example: agriculture, forestry, water management, tourism, active nature protection, or even landscaping by residents on their own properties. Activities indirectly affecting space include, first of all, spatial planning, as well as other decision-making processes, including legislation, whose task is to regulate the direct measures. The following subchapters present an overview of the most important forms and domains of human activity affecting the Carpathian space, including green and blue infrastructure. In each case, the nature of mutual interactions with the natural environment was demonstrated, as well as potential threats and expedient measures to minimize the negative impact on the Carpathian nature and landscape, and thus also on the welfare of the region’s inhabitants. 53

Photo: Krzysztof Haase II.2.1 Agriculture Agriculture is one of the main forms of the land use, which has shaped the space and significantly impacted its condition for centuries. It is difficult to imagine an area of human activity as crucial for our existence as the production of safe food, and at the same time so largely and directly drawing on natural resources and dependent on them. Agriculture also has an impact on biodiversity. Usually, it is a destructive activity – further areas are converted into agricultural land, which results in the transformation, and most often the destruction of natural ecosystems, loss of habitat and reduction of species’ ranges. Paradoxical- ly, however, agriculture can be a factor giving rise to new types of ecosystems, whose creation is only made possible by traditional, extensive agricultural use. Suspended human impact in our climate zone would lead – by natural primary or secondary succession – to the return of forest communities with prevailing deciduous forests. Concurrently, it means that in such a situation there would be a dramatic decrease in non-forest areas, and thus in the population of many species that are associated with them. Rich natural semi-natural ecosystems of meadows and grasslands, or majestic thermophilous oak forests, whose existence depends on maintaining proper, traditional methods of growing crops and rearing animals may serve as an example. HISTORICAL LAND USE TRANSFORMATIONS How did it come about that at an early stage traditional agriculture significantly contributed to enhancing the diversity of ecosystems? Going back to the Middle Ages, it is possible to recreate, in a nutshell, the process of development of agricultural economy. The early Middle Ages was a period when the population in the then entire Poland was very low, and the land was cultivated under two-field rotation, i.e. an intermittent fallowing system, under which a barren 54

field after a few years of cultivation was fallowed for many years (at that time it was used as a pasture or became overgrown) to gain fertility. Along with colonization under German law (12th to 14th century), new villages were created, in which farms were much larger than those existing under Polish law – a large share of land on the one hand was an incentive to settle, and on the other hand, the three-field rotation introduced by settlers required the cultivation of a larger area of land, and concurrently it also resulted in a rapid growth in productivity. The number of villages was growing, the area of cultivated land was increasing manifold. In mountainous areas, farming was always arduous and gave rise to numerous challenges related to the terrain, harsh climate, poor soil. That is why pastoral activity was so important in the Carpathians. The key in its development was the Wallachian migration, which took place in the 14th and 16th century in Polish territories. Wandering pastoral groups, looking for areas to graze their herds of goats, oxen and sheep, economically occupied mountain areas that had not yet been inhabited (the so-called settlements in cruda radice) or had been abandoned by previous settlers – where typical agricultural colonization proved to be ineffective. The towns under the Wallachian law were small, relatively scattered in the area. Animals were initially mainly grazed in forests. Later, silvopasture was largely banned from them as it began to increasingly interfere with the modernizing forest management. The gradual clearing of the forest and regular felling resulted in the creation of mountain pastures. In the Carpathians, transhumant pastoralism came to the fore, consisting in the seasonal migration of herds. In the spring, sheep were led to summer pastures and stayed there until the end of September. During the season, the enclosure (“sheep corral”) was systematically moved, thanks to which within a few years the entire clearing was covered by fertilization. Animals spent the winter period on lower winter pastures, located in the valleys and on the foothill plains. Along with the development of settlement and the increase in the number of herds for grazing, more and more new areas became occupied. The way in which montane pastures were used also changed, which change occurred in a slightly different manner in each region. The system of land management introduced by the Wallachs resulted in permanent transformations of the landscape and nature. The mountain landscape was enriched with montane pastures overgrown with grassy meadows and grasslands on which pastoral infrastructure was created – huts and sheds were erected as a shelter for shepherds and sheep, as well as a place for milk processing and cheese production – as well as road infrastructure, as forest trails led to the glades. The realities of that time, i.e. the inability to artificially fertilize crops, use plant protection products or import feed, meant that farms had to be self-sufficient and multifunctional, and their operation was based on a strong relationship between human communities and the areas inhabited by them, whose features, i.e. the terrain, hydrological network or soil produc- tivity, set natural boundaries of their use. The pure practice of farming also dictated the daily logistics and methods of cultivation and breeding. For example, more intensive fertilization (clearly natural) was not possible in higher areas – transporting a heavy load of fertilizer was 55

too burdensome. Considerable horizontal and vertical distances (from valley to ridge) meant that in many areas grazing animals was seasonal: they were taken to higher pastures in the spring and brought to the valleys in the autumn. The agro-forest-pasture management is a manifestation of the multifunctionality of the rural economy of that period. Apart from the impact of grazing on forest stands, from a nature- based point of view, the migration of animals or natural fertilization were associated with the transfer of seeds, spores, invertebrate eggs, etc. across longer distances. With such transpor- tation, a network of active and strong ecological links connecting different natural habitats was maintained, resulting in their diversity. The time when the model of a multifunctional, integrated agro-forest-pasture holding was replaced by a model based on the separation of farming and productive forest management was a breakthrough and the reason for fundamental remodelling of agricultural holdings. Graz- ing animals in forests was banned, as mentioned above, as a factor hindering the restoration of trees. Transitional habitats no longer existed and the intensity of pasture use increased. As a result, loosened, „park” stands were replaced by compact stands of trees, and a fluid boundary between forest and agricultural areas, easily penetrated by grazing animals – disap- peared. Searching for new grazing areas meant that gradually more pressure was exerted on higher areas, including the areas at the subalpine level, i.e. at the dwarf pine level. At the same time, a change in the use of many mountain pastures, where more numerous herds grazed without being “corralled”, meant that the effects of overgrazing were more pronounced on pastures, their fertility decreased, and at the same time acidification increased. As a result, in many mountain glades, Nardus grasslands of low economic value (but of high nature value from the current perspective) began to increase their size in place of meadows providing valuable hay. The second half of the 19th century was a period of socio-economic, cultural and institutional changes, which in terms of agricultural history include, above all, the enfranchisement of peasants in 1848. The rural population gained greater freedom of movement, and many mountain residents emigrated in search of work. As a consequence, the demand for agricultural land decreased. Looking at the landscape of the Polish part of the Carpathians, it can be said that it was high time, since the forest area is estimated to have decreased to 27% of the Polish Carpathians, and they were limited to difficult access areas, e.g. higher areas, steep slopes or places distant from human settlements. Deforestation for agricultural or other purposes was ceased, at least in the southern part of the Carpathian region, because in the north, in the foothills, the decrease in the forest area still outweighed its growth. Nevertheless, it may be assumed that from that moment – the mid-nineteenth century – the area of forests in the Polish part of the Carpathians began to increase again, first in marginal areas, near the border or at a short distance from the forest border. 56

Rapid changes in land use occurred after World War II. Displacement of the population as PhPothoo:tKo:rzKyrszzytsozftoHfaHasaease part of the „Vistula” action in late 1940s, which took place in the eastern part of the Polish Carpathians and with afforestation of the land acquired by the State Forests as a result of ownership transformations after World War II entailed an increase in the forest area. Since then, the share of forests in the Polish part of the Carpathians has been steadily growing and currently stands at roughly 47%. It is estimated that by 1989 the agricultural area had reduced by up to 5% per year. Also after 1990, many grasslands were abandoned and reforested. Other major land changes in the Carpathians include a significant loss of wetlands and an increase in the area of cities. Drainage of wetlands peaked during the socialist period. After 1990, the development of cities significantly accelerated, and the tourist attractiveness of the region and the development of holiday homes resulted in the abandonment of fields in the vicinity of urban settlements, which were permanently excluded from agricultural production. General trends of changes in agricultural economy in the Polish part of the Carpathians since the 18th century can therefore be described as a growth of agricultural areas until World War I and in the interwar period, however following World War II and extensive agricultural reforms, that process subsided and land was abandoned. 57

Photo: Krzysztof Haase CONTEMPORARY AGRICULTURAL LAND USE At the moment, the abandonment of agricultural land is observed throughout Europe. In the first place, it occurs in less-favoured areas, such as mountain areas. It primarily results from low profitability of agricultural production, if only due to natural and climatic conditions, and at the same time, the avail- ability of alternative sources of income and employ- ment outside agriculture, especially near larger urban centres. This is exactly the case in the Polish part of the Carpathians. The abandonment of agricultural land there intensified after the collapse of the socialist bloc in 1989 and the introduction of an open market economy. Abandonment rates decreased around 2000. A typical Carpathians landscape is a mosaic of forests and small, fragmented fields. That frag- mentation makes farming inefficient and not very profitable, which promotes abandonment. It has been calculated that abandoned areas account for an average of 14% of agricultural land in the Carpathians. Land abandonment mainly affects grassland (78%) and, to a lesser extent, arable land (22%). A smaller cattle and sheep population directly results from a lower demand for meadow and pasture areas. It is not only the use of grassland on steep slopes, which are not very accessible due to topography and the lack of access for agricultural equipment, that is abandoned, but also in less sloping areas with more favourable conditions of use. Agricultural land is more often abandoned in municipalities closer to large cities. This involves taking up paid employment outside of agriculture. Residents of municipalities adjacent to a large urban centre more often opt for commuting to the city. This is especially true for young people who are looking for other ways of earning money than demanding and hard, and at the same time unprofitable work on the land, which they give up completely or partially. In lower areas, agricultural activity can be continued, as it is sufficiently profitable. However, intensification of agricultural production is a threat there: the use of excessive doses of artificial fertilizers or plant protection products, as well as the introduction of crops, e.g. corn, which – by increasing the availability of the food base – can significantly affect biodiversity, changing the lifestyle and behaviour of animals, for example by extending the breeding period and the number of litters in wild boar (up to 2 or even 3 a year!). An excessive population of those animals means not only damage to crops, but also potential conflicts with residents and a direct threat. Returning to the abandonment of land in the context of transformation of green infrastructure, it is often the first stage on the way to initiating the forest’s secondary succession and sponta- 58

neous afforestation of agricultural land. The currently observed secondary succession in forests reflects relatively recent changes, resulting from the extinction of traditional agriculture and the abandonment of agricultural land after the transformation in the 1990s. At the current rate of change, it is estimated that within 20-30 years on abandoned agricultural land, if measures are not taken to prevent secondary succession, trees will cover an additional area of approx. 1000 km2. This means an increase in forest cover in the Polish part of the Carpathians from the current 47% to 52%. This pace is much faster than in the past. To sum up: spatial changes in the Carpathian landscape, so far characterized by a mosaic of forest areas, agricultural areas, including meadow and built-up areas with rich cultural traditions, are most often associated with the abandonment of land and the departure from traditional agricultural management and land use. It results in the cessation of traditional farming, and thus causes overgrowing of open areas, scenic routes, impoverishment of the landscape, as well as sale of agricultural land to people from large urban centres, not related to the Carpathian region, and thus not always aware of the need to care for the common good of tradition or surrounding space. It leads to the degradation of the mosaic-like, traditional agricultural landscape and the disappearance of areas traditionally used by farmers – meadows, pastures, cultivated fields along with enhancing small elements of green infrastructure. Therefore, the Polish Carpathians are facing an important dilemma related to the current directions of land use changes: whether in a few dozen years they will be dominated by heavily forested areas and devoid of a characteristic landscape with an agricultural-forest mosaic, or whether the valuable cultural heritage of hundreds of years of agricultural activity in the area will be preserved. NATURAL VALUE OF AREAS RELATED TO AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES It is estimated that ecosystems related to agricultural economy currently occupy approximately 37% of the area in the Polish part of the Carpathians, of which approximately a little over 30% are ecosystems of cultivated fields and other agricultural land, and approximately 6% are grass and herbaceous ecosystems. In this picturesque region, we are still dealing with a rich, in terms of nature and landscape, mosaic-like arrangement of crop areas and a very varied green infrastructure of agricultural areas with accompanying woodlots, field margins and uncultivated land. This is a result of both geographical and social, cultural and even political conditions: after World War II, no mass collectivization ensued and a strong fragmentation of land was preserved. Consequently, the biodiversity related to the traditional cultural landscape (described earlier in Chapter I.3) is still very high. Open areas – both still extensively used and fallowed agricultural land – are not only important habitats of directly related heliotropic, thermophilic species, spending their entire lives in open areas. They are also very important for many species inhabiting forest areas, using open areas adjacent to forests as, for example, feeding or mating sites. Many species also require areas where there are environmental “islands” providing hiding or nesting sites, such as field 59

margins, clumps or rows of trees and shrubs: the so-called mid-field refuges. It is not without reason that open areas of high nature value shaped by traditional agriculture occupy an important place among the habitats protected by the EU „Habitats” Directive within the Natura 2000 network. Such habitats include, among others, lowland hay meadows (habitat code 6510) or mountain hay meadows (habitat 6520). Xerothermic grasslands (habitat *6210) and floristically rich mountain Nardus grasslands (*6230) shaped by extensive traditional grazing are also valuable, even marked as a priority. Valuable plant species protected by the said directive associated with semi-natural open (non-forest) habitats include the serrated bellflower (Campanula serrata), the Siberian ground- sel (Ligularia sibirica), the monkshood (Aconitum firmum ssp. moravicum), the Carpathian tozzia (Tozzia carpatica) or the wallflower (Erysinum pieninicum). The animal world is represented by such species as the Apollo butterfly (Parnassius apollo) and the Jersey tiger (Callimorpha quadripunctata), the ground beetle (Carabus variolosus), moss chrysalis snails: the Geyer’s whorl snail (Vertigo geyeri) and the narrow-mouthed whorl snail (Vertigo angustior), the smooth snake (Coronella austriaca). Birds include, for example, the corn crake (Crex crex), the black stork (Ciconia nigra), the lesser spotted eagle (Clanga pomarina) or the rare golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), as well as many other species associated with the agricultural landscape, which are endangered throughout the country or even Europe. As for mammals, in addition to small species, e.g. rodents, which are an important food base for birds of prey, open areas are visited by ungulates, followed by wolves (Canis lupus) hunting them, which like the varied structure of their large territory.. TOOLS FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE NATURAL HERITAGE OF THE CARPATHIANS RELATED TO AGRICULTURAL AREAS In the light of the rich history of the region and the knowledge of natural resources that char- acterize the Polish part of the Carpathians, the question arises how to support agricultural activity that will enable the shaping of green infrastructure, preservation of the natural and scenic values of the Polish Carpathians. In the edition of the Rural Development Programme for 2014-2020, farmers were able to benefit from various forms of financing, which included: ◆ agri-environment-climate measure intended to promote agricultural practices conducive to environmental protection. The measure consists of the use of payments to compensate for additional costs incurred and lost income to farmers who voluntarily use production methods conducive to conservation of biodiversity, landscape and environmental resources, 60

in particular soil and water; Photo: Krzysztof Haase ◆ investments in farms located in Natura 2000 sites – intended to support farmers managing Natura 2000 sites, aimed at facilitating practicing farming by agricultural producers in accordance with environmental standards applicable in those valuable natural areas. The aid is intended for the implementation of investments related to agricultural use of meadows and pastures and animal production, i.e. grass-eating animals; ◆ less-favoured area (LFA) payments – this measure is an instrument of financial support for farmers who practice farming in areas where agricultural production is difficult due to natural conditions, but also excessive depopulation is possible (LFA). The implementation of this measure is intended to make it easier for farmers to continue their agricultural use of the land, as well as to preserve the scenic values of rural areas and to maintain and promote sustainable agricultural activity systems in those areas. The expected effect of that measure is to maintain the vitality of rural areas and to preserve biodiversity. Support under that measure includes a sub-measure of payments for mountain areas (LFA mountain type). The Carpathians undoubtedly require support mechanisms for various forms of extensive agri- culture – e.g. open grazing of cattle, continued mowing management or support for small rural farms, adapted to the specificity of mountain areas. Considering the specificities of mountain farming in the distribution of subsidies, so that greater account is taken of environmental issues and not only those related to agricultural production is certainly key in achieving it. Currently (the end of 2021) work is underway on the next edition of the RDP, which is developed under the provisions of the new Common Agricultural Policy. Those include greater freedom as to how Member States use their allocations, in order to allow tailor-made programmes to be developed to respond to the problems of farmers and wider rural communities as effectively as possible; small and medium-sized farms are to receive greater support per hectare. Income support for farmers is also to be conditional on the use of environmentally and climate-friendly 61

Photo: Monika Ankudowicz farming practices, and the new CAP will require farmers to increase their ambition through both mandatory and incentive-based measures. The following publications were used in preparing this chapter: ◆ Eko-historyczna amnezja przyczyną słabości ochrony przyrody. Andrzej Bobiec. In: Zaczęło się od Tatr. Historia i współczesność ochrony przyrody w Polsce. Ed. Piotr Dąbrowski Oficyna Wydawnicza “Wierchy”, Cracow, 2020 ◆ FORECOM. Podręcznik użytkowania. Jacek Kozak, Dominik Kaim (ed.). Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie, Instytut Geografii i Gospodarki Przestrzennej – Jagiellonian University in Cracow, Institute of Geography and Spatial Development. Cracow, 2016 ◆ Land Change in the Carpathian Region Before and After Major Institutional Changes. Catalina Munteanu et al. In: G. Gutman and V. Radeloff (ed.) Land-Cover and Land-Use Changes in Eastern Europe after the Collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2017 62

Photo: Krzysztof Haase II.2.2 Forestry The biodiversity and landscape diversity of the Carpathians is primarily determined by the terrain, geological structure and climatic conditions. Taking into account the terrain, as well as historical, political, economic and social conditions, the forest coverage in the Carpathi- ans is much higher than average in Poland and amounts to slightly above 47% compared to approximately 30% of the country’s forest coverage. The Polish Carpathians host types of vertically changing vegetation typical for mountainous areas and associated mainly with climate variability as the altitude increases. These altitudinal vegetation zones feature their own characteristic plants and distinguishing, or dominant species. The foothill zone (up to approx. 700 m above sea level) is the lowest vegetation belt, covered by fertile mixed forests, with a large proportion of oak, fir and beech, however, the vegetation of that zone in the Carpathians is sometimes strongly transformed by man. It is followed by the lower montane zone (approx. 700-1250 m above sea level), in which the dominant forest habitat hosts beech forests, with a mixture of spruce, fir, larch and sycamore, elm and other deciduous species, while the greater the height, the greater the share of coniferous tree species, where – in the upper montane zone (approx. 1250-1600 m above sea level) – fir-spruce forests prevail. In the valleys of rivers, streams, springs and wetlands, willow, poplar, alder and ash riparian forests occur. So much for the theory that worked well in historical times, when the Carpathian areas were indeed largely covered by the mixed beech-fir primeval forest. Even in the 18th century, beeches, sycamores, firs, larches prevailed in the forests, they also included pines, wild cherries, ashes and elms. In the early 19th century, intensive industrialization quickly changed that image. For economic purposes, more and more raw material resources, including wood, were required. Carpathian beeches, larches and sycamores were the best type of wood. The habitats of natu- 63

rally occurring beech trees, deserted after felling, were artificially planted with fast-growing spruce, previously a species that was in the minority in the Beskids (as already mentioned, spruce is a natural, dominant component of the upper montane zone). In the forest landscape of the lower montane zone, in the areas of the former Austrian partition, spruce monocultures were created from artificial plantings from the early 19th century – still with a significant share in the vegetation of the Polish Carpathians. When the plantings commenced, no one analysed the fact that tree seeds were often imported from different habitats and random places in Europe and perhaps they were not suited to the Carpathian conditions. In combination with other factors, such as high air pollution by industry, deterioration of the water regime or lack of sanitary pruning in private forests – it resulted in the weakening (and greater susceptibility to insect gradations) and finally the dying of spruce in the lower montane zone. Fig. 1. Babia Góra National Park, 2011. Photo: Monika Sadowska In order to correct the mistakes of the past, in many regions of the Carpathians, the recon- struction of the stands is currently underway, mainly by supporting natural restoration in line with habitat conditions. Spruce forests, on the other hand, remain a characteristic community of a slightly harsher climate, typical of the upper montane zone. In the montane zones of the Carpathians, there are also glades created as a result of logging of forests and used extensively, e.g. as grazing sites, with high nature value, semi-natural communities of Carpathian meadows and grasslands. 64

Fig. 2. Babia Mountain. Photo: Monika Sadowska Above the montane zone, the subalpine mountain dwarf pine zone develops (approx. 1600- 1800 m above sea level). It is formed by a collection of that shrubby pine found in the Polish Carpathians in the Tatra Mountains and a few massifs of the Beskids (Pilsko and Babia Mountain). The Bieszczady Mountains are unique in that respect, as there is no upper montane zone, and the upper treeline – partly natural, and partly a result of centuries-old, traditional, extensive agricultural use of those areas – is formed by a typically lower montane zone beech, above which stretches the subalpine zone formed by grassland communities and high-mountain meadows, as well as thickets of green alder. Carpathian forests (in the present Polish part) were most intensively economically used in the 19th century. In 1860, forest coverage amounted to 27%, and forests were only dominant in areas that were difficult to access or far from human habitation. In the second half of the 19th century, socio-economic, cultural and institutional changes began to take place (inter alia, enfranchisement of peasants in 1848, development of industry and construction of railway lines), which was associated with increased migration of people from rural areas to larger urban centres. As a consequence, agricultural use decreased in the southern part of the Polish Carpathians, while in the northern part, as more favourable to carrying out a paid activity due to its terrain, it only occurred in the interwar period. Undoubtedly, a rapid increase in the forest coverage in the Bieszczady Mountains and Low Beskid was associated with the cessation of agricultural use following the forced displacement of the population, mainly the Lemkos, to the Western Lands, as part of the „Vistula” action carried out in 1947-1950, and in connection 65

with the afforestation of land by the State Forests as a result of ownership transformations after World War II. Since 1970, the share of forests in the Polish part of the Carpathians has been steadily growing and currently amounts to approx. 47%. Unfortunately, such an increase in forest coverage carries a threat to valuable semi-natural open habitats (including meadows), the creation and existence of which is related to traditional, extensive land use. Fig. 3. A church in Bieliczna amidst the forest, along with the nearby cemetery is the only trace of the former settlement, Low Beskid. Photo: Monika Sadowska Fig. 4. Carpathian meadow, Low Beskid. Photo: Monika Sadowska 66

Currently, natural forest areas primarily remain in areas covered by one of the categories of protected areas, or in areas particularly difficult to access due to their topography, thanks to which many endemic habitats and species have been preserved, i.e. those naturally occurring only in a specific location or region, as well as rare and endangered species. The most valuable species of animals and plants are in particular associated with habitats characteristic of the lower and upper montane forest zones, as well as with open areas, such as mountain pastures, crags, rocks. They are conducive to the occurrence of many species requiring specific conditions, characteristic of natural forests. Those include, for example, the eagle owl (Bubo bubo): a bird that prefers old coniferous and deciduous trees located on steep slopes, with protruding rocks, in the vicinity of open areas – or numerous invertebrates, such as the endemic Carpathian longhorn beetle (Pseudogaurotina excellens), which inhabits spruce and fir forests along with thickets with a large proportion of old honeysuckle specimens. Among plants, a bryophyte – the green shield-moss, inhabiting live or rotting wood and humus, mainly fir, is worth noting. Also due to the high forest coverage, the Carpathians are the largest natural ecological corridor in Central Europe, especially for large predators – wolf, lynx and bear with requirements of very large living and migration areas. On the other hand, in more accessible areas, with smaller slopes of land, where extensive farming is practiced, many valuable semi-natural open habitats with extensive ecotones have developed, and agricultural land is rich in green infrastructure – field margins and mid-field woodlots, with small ponds or bog-springs in natural depressions. This creates a picturesque landscape and valuable mosaic-like cultural landscape, described in other parts (chapters I.3 and II.1.1) of this publication. Fig. 5. Little Pieniny, view of Sądecki Beskid. Photo: Monika Sadowska 67

Due to the topography, as well as geological structure, most forests in the Carpathians, in addition to economic functions, also perform protective functions, such as, among others, regulating the water cycle by slowing down the surface run-off of water, its retention in mulch and root systems, and at the same time supplying water to seepage springs and streams, also preventing water erosion, landslides or avalanches. They also perform other important social functions by shaping favourable health, recreational, educational or scientific conditions. They are one of the most dominant elements of the Carpathian landscape, emphasizing its values and thus enhancing attractiveness and, consequently, the economic potential of the region. The method of managing forest areas in the part covering the state-owned land is determined by the provisions of forest management plans, which are drawn up for forest districts for a period of 10 years. Preparation of the plan is preceded by an inventory and assessment of the forest. Foresters determine such features of the forest as structure, age, species composition, health status or the prevailing habitat and soil conditions. The measures to be implemented take into account the objectives of forest management and other functions of forests, including those of protection, education and tourism. Preparation of the Natura 2000 management plan or taking it into consideration if the management plan is in place is a very important component of the forest management plan. Such a plan should contain, among others, a description of forests and land intended for afforestation, an analysis of forest management in the period preceding the plan’s preparation, a nature conservation programme and a specification of tasks related to timber harvesting, afforestation and restoration, care and protection of the forest, hunting management and the creation of forest infrastructure, e.g. construction of roads. Guidelines for stands excluded from economic use, areas which require production functions to be limited or abandoned, conserving biocenotic trees, unused wooded strips along streams, or provisions regarding minimizing possible adverse impacts of forest management on the environment are also of paramount importance in the context of nature conservation in the forest management plan, in addition to typical management-related provisions such as types of stands, rotation age for individual forest-forming tree species, recommended restoration periods, etc. It is crucial to promote natural characteristics of forest stands, such as the presence of old-growth trees, decaying trees, or generally particularly prudent management in the area of still existing forests with low anthropogenic impact. A nature conservation programme, containing a comprehensive description of the state of nature in a particular forest district for which the plan is drawn up, as well as the tasks related to its conservation and methods by which they should be carried out – is a special component of the forest management plan for the preservation of biodiversity. Such a plan may, among others, contain indications to conserve unused biogroups, i.e. compact groups of trees occu- pying a small space and other fragments of tree stands, indications to conserve trees with special individual features, e.g. hollow trees or trees distinguished by size, naturally occurring or introduced trees, melliferous trees, those diversifying the landscape or improving the feeding base of game, such as apple, pear, cherry trees, indications of the most suitable dates for the performance of work (e.g. in the vicinity of nesting places of a rare species of birds) or the dates and areas where the indicated work should not be carried out, guidelines for the protection 68

of non-forest ecosystems (e.g. meadows, bog-springs, peatlands) in forests and conservation of inanimate nature such as springs, streams, rocks, etc., as well as recommendations for leaving decayed trees or their fragments during forestry work. The forest management plan for the State Forests covering the area of a forest district can be consulted in the relevant forest districts and at the regional directorates of the State Forests. On private or municipal land, on which the so-called non-state forests are located, the so-called simplified forest management plans apply. They are drawn up at the request of the locally competent district authority (“starost” – middle level of administrative division, between the commune and the province or voivodship) and are also prepared every 10 years. It is a basic document presenting the assumptions of reasonable forest management in non-state forests and is the basis for calculating the forest tax. Simplified forest management plans contain a description of forest land and management guidelines, which, upon approval by the starosts, form the basis for carrying out procedures for forest owners and supervisory authorities, i.e. a forest district, to which the starost may entrust, by agreement, conducting, on his behalf, matters related to the supervision of forest management in forests not owned by the state. The starost is responsible for drawing up a simplified plan for the management of forests owned by legal persons. Fig. 6. Dead tree in a state of decay, Pieniny National Park. Photo: Monika Sadowska The reason why the resources of decayed and dying trees are one of the main indicators determining the condition of the forest is that they not only promote soil-forming processes, 69

retain water or shape the processes of natural forest restoration, but above all, they increase biodiversity, hosting many species of fungi, bryophytes, lichens, as well as invertebrates, amphibians, mammals and birds. It is estimated that approx. 60% of forest dwelling organisms use decayed and dying trees to varying degrees, for example as breeding sites, feeding grounds or wintering sites, and as many as 25% of forest-related species are directly dependent on them, since decaying trees serve them during their entire life cycle, to name the flat bark beetle (Cucujus cinnaberinusas) an example. Fig. 7. Natural restoration of the forest, Beskid Mały. Photo: Monika Sadowska Therefore, in order to achieve sustainable forest management in the Carpathians, in addition to forest management, care for the health and sanitary condition of forests, natural forest restoration consistent with the habitat should also be supported, actions carried out to restore the resources of decaying wood and dead and dying trees by leaving them to decompose naturally (in Natura 2000 sites, 10-20 m3/ha is preferred), the water regime should be protected and retention in a particular area increased, e.g. by preserving mid-forest wetlands, creating semi-natural, small reservoirs and water stands, or finally by planning forest roads in manner that minimizes surface water run-off („gutters” on slopes). In many areas, due to intensified forest management, the number of paved roads crossing forests is increasing, which on the one hand may increase water erosion and start landslides, and on the other hand increases the traffic of motor vehicles not related to forest management (passenger cars, quads, motocross). It is dangerous not only for forest users, e.g. tourists, but also for species showing great fear of humans, such as the eagle owl or the black stork. Thus, it is advisable to preserve as many dense 70

forest areas as possible, without a network of paved roads, not only in view of the water regime, but also as refuges and migration corridors, diversified by a mosaic of open areas with a large number of elements of green infrastructure serving, for example, as feeding grounds. Fig. 8. Natura 2000, Poprad Refuge. Photo: Monika Sadowska 71

Photo: Krzysztof Haase II.2.3 Water management Water courses are the main element of blue infrastructure in mountainous areas, including the Polish Carpathians. They drain rainwater, surface and underground water through gravity run-off, feeding their basins and eventually one of the catchment areas (sea, lake or another large body of water). In Poland, the European Watershed runs along the main ridge of the Carpathians, between the catchment areas of the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea. In addition to the catchment area of the Black Orava (Danube basin) and Strwiąż (Dniester basin), forming part of the Black Sea catchment area, the drainage basins of other rivers having their sources in the Polish part of the Carpathians are part of the Baltic Sea catchment area, primarily by feeding the upper Vistula and its tributaries, and only a small part of the water is within the Odra basin. The Carpathians represent a mountain area with a high degree of diversity in geological struc- ture, terrain, climatic conditions and vegetation, which shapes their character. In most of the Carpathian area there are flysch formations built of alternating layers of fine and coarse rocks; the basic rocks of the Carpathian flysch are sandstones and conglomerates, as well as shales and mudstones of various structures and textures. Their water absorption depends on the degree of fragmentation and porosity and on the operation of the fissure system, which are often filled with impermeable material. Thus, both the relief and the geological structure of the Carpathians do not create favourable conditions for water infiltration and retention, and thus for the development of groundwater; they are responsible for rapid and extensive run-off of surface water. Due to a greater volume of cooler air, which is associated with a greater number of cooler climate zones, there is more precipitation and a prolonged period of snow cover in the Carpathians in relation to the rest of Poland. In addition, due to lower temperatures, the evaporation process is relatively less intensified. Therefore, in the mountains, high water level usually 72

occurs twice a year: after the melting of snow and ice in the spring and after the summer highest rainfall, while periods of lows (low water levels) are most prevalent in autumn. Carpathian rivers, like all mountain rivers, are characterized by significant gradients and low development, i.e. low sinuosity of the water course, which greatly affects the size and speed of runoff, and thus large fluctuations in the amount of water they transport. Those factors affect the dynamic processes accompanying violent flooding after rainfall, i.e. erosion and transportation as well as accumulation of river material. The initial course of water in the Carpathians is characterized by high gradients, where most often deep erosion occurs (successive deepening of a river channel), in the middle course the gradients decrease, but not to a degree to stop erosion, then the banks are degraded by being undercut (so-called lateral erosion), while there is accumulation, i.e. collection of rock material in the final course. Usually, the coarsest stone-gravel-sand material is deposited in the upper course, with the amount of such material being small, since during the overflows that material migrates downstream. It results is a continuous transformation of mountain river channels, which promotes the forma- tion of gravel banks, and over time, pioneer plant species, but following each bankfull stage and after biological material is leached, rock rubble migrates and the process of gravel banks being settled by pioneer vegetation occurs anew. Therefore, there often exist neighbouring sections in a river channel that are at different stages of succession – pioneer vegetation, and farther away from the flowing waters, willow thickets appear, turning into riparian forests. Riparian forests are a particularly important community due to their flood control as well as drought prevention functions. In addition, the deposition of sand, gravel and stones in the so-called sandbanks promotes spawning, and the shallows facilitates the feeding of fry. Such habitats provide for the abundance of fish and lampreys. It is also important to have places with a variable water current as well as pools and shallows, and in such coves riverside trees, by shading the river bed and lowering the water temperature, promote the river and riverside fauna. The presence of deposited sand, gravel and stones, both in riverbank zones and in the middle of the river channel, is important for such habitat conditions to be maintained. Carpathian rivers and their surroundings are thus a refuge for many valuable species of animals: (Ukrainian brook and brook) lampreys, fish (barb, European bullhead, asp, white-finned gudg- eon), insects (Carabus variolosus beetle), amphibians (yellow-bellied toad, great crested newt), mussels (thick shelled river mussel), mammals (otter, European beaver) and birds (black stork, goosander, kingfisher, grey wagtail, white-throated dipper), as well as a location of natural habitats valuable not only from the perspective of the European Union and protected as part of the Natura 2000 network habitats: pioneer vegetation on stony banks and gravel areas, riverside herbaceous communities (Petasites fringes of montane brooks), river gravel banks with Myricaria germanica, willow scrubs, willow riparian forests, poplar riparian forests, alder, ash, riparian oak-elm-ash forests, oxbow lakes and naturally eutrophic water reservoirs with communities of Nympheion, Potamion. 73

Fig. 1. Białka River. Photo: Monika Sadowska Fig. 2. Białka River (braided type). Photo: Monika Sadowska As mentioned, mountain rivers are characterized by variable flows. Rising water levels in the river, overflowing called a “bankfull stage”, is a natural phenomenon and occurs as a result of intense rainfall. It can also be a result of snow melting, but in recent years the snow cover has been very scant in the Carpathians, which in turn entails an increase in water intake for the purpose of snowing the ski slopes. It is particularly dangerous during the period of the 74

so-called lows, i.e. periods of low water levels in a river and can lead to the depletion of water resources of the basin. It affects species living in rivers, as well as the natural processes of self-purification of waters. Self-purification is the sum of complex physical and biochemical processes, the intensity of which is contingent on many factors, including, among others, the amount of pollutants introduced, their type, size of the river, its flow velocity, meteorological conditions (access to light, temperature, precipitation), the composition of the substrate and the species of microorganisms (primarily bacteria) present in it. Water pollution from agricultural sources, household wastewater and recreation areas makes it impossible to use them, also for leisure, and significantly increases the cost of treating water intended for consumption. Not every bankfull discharge is a flood, but only one that causes economic losses and a threat to residents and their property, when the rushing water destroys riverside areas, as well as banks fortifications and bridges. Since the mid-twentieth century, attempts have been made to subjugate nature and adapt it to human activity, both by draining wetlands and regulating rivers by hydrotechnical facilities, which was particularly intensified in the 1970s. In many regions, it has led to a change in the course of river channels, and above all to straightening their channels and enclosing them in concrete canals or constructing embankments. As of today it is clear that such activity has not produced the intended results. Straightened channels of water courses, with artificial hardening of the bed and banks, act as smooth gutters, significantly increasing the flow’s velocity. Bankfull flow floods much more violently and destructively in another place, so the problem does not disappear but is „moved” to the lower sections of rivers. In addition, such rapid drainage of water does not allow for the restoration of groundwater resources, and during regulatory works, oxbow lakes and flood- plains, which not only naturally captured swollen waters but also acted as natural retention reservoirs discharging retained water during dry periods, are eliminated. Transverse structures in Carpathian watercourses such as debris flow barriers, thresholds or poorly designed or constructed culverts (including in forest areas) also have an adverse effect on the ichthyofauna of Carpathian rivers by preventing migration to their upper sections. On the other hand, the foundations of hydrotechnical structures (e.g. thresholds), bank fortifications by engineering structures (e.g. bridges) are exposed to the destructive effects of water within a river channel. It generates additional costs incurred not only on the construction of further fortifications or partitions, but also on their maintenance and renovation. Also, excessive use of gravel banks (including gravel collection) from river channels exposes the beds of mountain watercourses to increased erosion. Lowering the level of a river channel has negative consequences, as it leads to a decrease in the level of groundwater in neighbouring areas, a decrease in a river’s water table, while an increase in the gradient and acceleration of run-off further deepens the bed of a watercourse and not only causes more violent and longer floods, but also results in prolonged periods of drought 75

Fig. 3. An example of an illegal, destructive gravel collection. Photo: Monika Sadowska Larger structures should be rebuilt as far as possible (as part of river restoration, e.g. https:// biala-tarnowska.org/), forming riffles and restoring both migration routes and habitats suit- able for aquatic organisms, while small structures (culverts) should be reinforced by natural elements, thanks to which concrete fortifications would not be scoured. It is also worth arrang- ing larger stones or logs below such a culvert, which, by raising the water level at the culvert, prevent the bed of a watercourse from being scoured. In the 20th century, in order to prevent both droughts and floods (as well as to obtain energy, as water intakes, and also for tourist purposes), the construction of dam reservoirs in river valleys began. The largest in terms of water capacity, artificial retention reservoirs in the Carpathians include: the most capacious reservoir „Solina” on the San River with a maximum capacity of 472 million m3 (maximum area of 21.1 km2), followed by „Czorsztyn-Niedzica” on the Dunajec River with a capacity of 231.9 million m3 and a maximum area of 12.3 km2, „Świnna – Poręba” on the Skawa River with a maximum capacity of 161 million m3 and a maximum area of 10.35 km2, Rożnów on the Dunajec River with a capacity of 160.7 million m3 and a maximum area of 16 km2. When locating further dammed reservoirs in the Carpathians, however, it should be considered whether such extensive interference will provide the intended benefits and whether the costs will not exceed the losses. First of all, such structures require dislodging residents in 76

higher areas and cause flooding of large previously agricultural areas, which were also habitats of many species of plants and animals. Natural processes in rivers are also interrupted by stopping debris and depleting it below the dam, where a river, deprived of protection in the form of compact stones and gravel, causes the bed to deepen, which in turn leads to a decrease in the level of groundwater in the valley. In addition, over several decades, those reservoirs become silted, which significantly reduces their water storage potential. Retaining wash loads (aggregate mud) in the reservoir additionally deprives the areas below the dam of soil fertilizing substances, which in turn requires more intensive artificial fertilization of agricultural areas. Also without expertly made fish passes, the migration of fish to the upper, more suitable habitats for spawning is prevented, while the temperature of water discharged from reservoirs fluctuates more than the natural temperature in a river, which is not advantageous for many species naturally occurring in Carpathian watercourses. By creating dammed reservoirs, the evaporation area of water above the dam increases, which means that less water reaches the river below. Evaporation is also facilitated by a higher temperature of the water in a reservoir compared to a river, which is of great importance if the reservoir acts as a water intake, and below such a dam a significant water shortage is often generated. Ryc. 4. Biała Tarnowska. Photo: Monika Sadowska 77

As it was mentioned, human activity, in addition to water pollution or construction of hydro- technical facilities, often causes deterioration of inherently unfavourable retention conditions in the Carpathians. It is due to the fact that increasingly more land is occupied for develop- ment and roads, which increases the area of paved (impermeable) areas. On the one hand, it contributes to increasing surface run-off into rivers, and on the other, it significantly reduces the level of groundwater, which is not systematically supplied. Moreover, the construction industry occupies floodplains – not only inducing the construction of hydrotechnical facili- ties (including flood embankments), but also failing to maintain the areas where a river, by flooding, would reduce the velocity and volume of flow, thus limiting damage in lower areas of compact buildings. It is worth mentioning that embankments create only an illusory sense of security and, like all hydrotechnical facilities, require expensive maintenance. In addition, between the embankments, a river channel is artificially formed, among others by removing riverside vegetation, which prevents the occurrence of natural processes, including retention, self-purification of rivers and contributes to the spread of invasive plant species. Green infrastructure along watercourses (buffer zones) is also of great importance for the func- tioning of aquatic environments in the Carpathians, and extensive felling of trees and destruction of natural plant complexes within river valleys intensifies adverse impacts. A complete removal of trees and shrubs from river banks not only fails to prevent flooding, but also increases it by accelerating water run-off and loss of stability of banks previously protected by root systems. Waterfront trees, stopping the flowing water, reducing the volume of flow, allow feeding and raising the level of groundwater, which prevents drought. Tree-lined watercourses, with clumps of trees inside the stream, also effectively capture fallen trees and branches, preventing their migration to lower sections, while in regulated and straightened river channels logs carried by the flood most often stop at hydrotechnical and engineering facilities, creating dangerous blockages and increasing flood damage. Riverside vegetation also acts as a buffer stopping the flow of pollutants (including fertilizers from the fields) into a river, and root systems improve the water’s self-purification processes. Therefore, a natural river brings not only numerous benefits to humans, but also to nature, creating favourable habitats of the migration route for rare species of birds, amphibians, fish, thus contributing to the maintenance of high biodiversity (and incidentally the landscape) of the Carpathians. Taking into account the specific features of Carpathian rivers and the dynamic processes taking place in them, in order to achieve the greatest possible safety, it is advisable to inter- fere with their systems as little as possible. It is of vital importance to preserve the natural processes taking place in those rivers, i.e. to leave them a corridor of free migration, so that they can naturally change the course of their channels and create bends, point and central bars. As a result, river valleys will retain more water in their area, and rivers will flow more slowly and rise less rapidly. . 78

Fig. 5. Piekielnik Stream. Photo: Monika Sadowska Natural retention reservoirs, i.e. areas of oxbow lakes, wetlands, ponds, peat bogs, also play a very important double role: flood protection and drought prevention. In addition, wetlands very often host species of plants and microorganisms that retain nitrogen and phos- phorus compounds, which contributes to water purification. A natural and positive effect on the wetlands is the presence of the European beaver, which by building a system of dams increases water retention in river valleys. In contrast to lowland, flat areas, where water piled up by beavers may flood a large portion of land, in the mountains they often settle in depressions that are not used for agriculture anyway and do not exert such a significant impact on the entire area. Such wetlands can also be used as a tourist attraction, e.g. the Beaver’s Lodge Nature Enclave in Stary Sącz, where post-excavation areas were left to nature. The State Water Holding Polish Waters – an entity responsible for national water management is of great importance in sustainable water management. Taking into account the necessity to stop or slow down water run-off and care for the development of the natural environment, they implement projects in the field of small-scale retention, including such activities as: channel storage improving the water balance of a given area by retaining water in watercourses, canals and drainage ditches, flower meadows (benefits of replacing lawns requiring large amounts of water with flower meadows that tolerate both high temperatures, as well as water deficit well), a retention programme for agriculture related to channel storage and a programme related to the development of blue-green infrastructure: https://wody.gov.pl/mala-retencja/ na-czym-polega-mala-retencja – access November 2021). 79

Fig. 6. Beaver’s lodge near Stary Sącz. Photo: Monika Sadowska 80

II.2.4 Nature conservation The outstanding natural values of the Carpathians may be proven by the fact that more than half of the region is covered by at least one territorial form of nature protection. In the Act on the Protection of Nature, there is a catalogue of forms of nature protection, as well as principles and rules regarding the ways of managing them. Thus, we have territorial forms of nature protection, such as national parks, nature reserves, landscape parks, areas of protected landscape, natural monuments (most often these are single trees, but they may also be alleys of trees, as well as springs, caves, rocks, etc.) and documentary sites, ecological grounds, landscape and natural complexes. Both environmental protection activities and specific prohibitions established for these individual forms of nature protection are binding within their borders. For example, in landscape parks and areas of protected landscape in the Carpathians, there are prohibitions concerning e.g. liquidation and destruction of mid-field, roadside and waterside tree plantings (with exceptions), performing earthworks permanently deforming relief (with the mentioned exceptions), making changes to water relations (with exceptions) and liquidation, filling in and transforming water reservoirs, oxbow lakes and wetlands. Such prohibitions support the maintenance and protection of the green and blue infrastructure elements. At present, various territorial forms of nature protection cover almost 70% of the Polish Carpathians. They include 6 national parks, 13 landscape parks, 7 areas of protected landscape and about 130 nature reserves. All national and landscape parks belong to the Carpathian Network of Protected Areas (CNPA). Nearly 50% of the area of the Polish Carpathians, along with their foothills, belongs to the European Ecological Network Natura 2000 (see more details below). In order to protect the natural habitats and species, considered valuable and endangered on the European scale, 48 81

Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), 7 Special Protection Areas for Birds (SPAs) and 3 areas of double status have been created. Within their borders there are also areas of national parks, reserves and landscape parks. For example, the Gorce National Park is part of the Gorce Refuge (Ostoja Gorczańska SPA – code PLH120018). Fig. 1. South Malopolska Area of Protected Landscape. Photo from the resources of the Regional Directorate for Environmental Protection in Cracow Carpathian Natura 2000 Special Protection Areas for Birds (SPAs) are usually vast areas, which are of great importance for the conservation of species associated with forests, including those of forest nature, as well as mountain and alpine species. Habitat areas of the Natura 2000 network (special areas of habitat conservation – SACs), designated for the protection of selected plant and animal species (other than birds) and/or natural habitat types, are of particular importance for the protection of forest ecosystems and non-forest habitats, such as specific types of habitats associated with mountains, e.g. screes and limestone runs, as well as for semi-natural habitats resulting from human activities (e.g. meadows). Almost half (48%) of the area of the Polish part of the Carpathians is covered by ecological corridors, including two of international importance, i.e. the Southern Corridor (KPd) and the Carpathian Corridor (KK). Almost 60% of them run within the borders of various forms of nature protection, 56% of them within the limits of Natura 2000 sites. The species protection of animals, plants and fungi refers to a particular species, which may be covered by strict and partial protection. The list of such species, prohibitions and grounds for 82

exceptions from them, as well as ways of protecting the species, including possible indications and sizes of designation of protection zones, are presented in the regulations on the species protection of animals, plants and fungi set forth by the minister in charge of environmental matters. The list of prohibitions, apart from destroying, killing or disturbing a particular species (and all its forms), also specifies the prohibition to destroy habitats or refuges which are the areas of breeding, rearing, resting, migration or feeding of the protected species, destruc- tion, removal or damaging of nests, anthills, burrows, lairs, lodges, dams, spawning grounds, wintering grounds or other shelters of the protected species, which is of great importance as the above elements most often co-create the green and blue infrastructure network. EUROPEAN ECOLOGICAL NETWORK NATURA 2000 It is the youngest form of nature protection in Poland, introduced in 2004 with the accession of our country to the European Union. Natura 2000 areas are created in all Member States, forming the European Ecological Network Natura 2000, and their aim is to protect approximately 200 of the most valuable and endangered natural habitats and over 1000 species, which are rare and endangered from the perspective of the entire continent. All decisions related to the establishment, changes of borders or objects of protection, as well as liquidation, are taken by the structures of the European Community. The uniqueness of this form of nature protection lies, among others, in the fact that the Member States create the network on the basis of identical assumptions defined in the law and guidelines of the European Union, i.e. only on the basis of scientific research, without the obligation to consult or agree, they manage it using similar instruments, i.e. strategies or plans, and the protection of such an area may go beyond its borders (the idea of preserving the cohesion of the network). Thus, we have three types of Natura 2000 areas: ◆ Natura 2000 areas – marked in Poland with the symbol PLC – where the subjects of protection are both birds and habitats and other plant and animal species; ◆ bird areas – marked in Poland with the symbol PLB – where only bird species and all habitats fulfilling important functions for them are protected. Protection is also possible outside the boundaries of the refuge. For example, lesser spotted eagles nest in forests, but they feed in non-forest areas, i.e. in meadows rich in green infra- structure elements, i.e. field margins, bushes, isolated trees. If this bird is protected in a Natura 2000 area and the area includes only forest areas where it nests, then feeding grounds located outside the borders of the refuge will also be protected. This means that any changes in the use of such feeding grounds will be subject to examination for possible negative impact on the Natura 2000 area through depletion of the lesser spotted eagle’s feeding grounds.◆ 83

◆ habitat areas – marked in Poland with the symbol PLH – where both natural habitats as well as plant and animal species (all except birds) together with the habitats of these plant and animal species may be protected. Contrary to the bird areas, in the case of a habitat area when a natural habitat is the object of conservation, the protection will most often be limited to the boundaries of the area where the habitat occurs (not necessarily in the entire Natura 2000 area) – BUT depending on the type of habitat, the management in the surrounding areas should also be taken into account. While for forests it may be of secondary importance, for example for wetlands the lowering of groundwater table, also in the neighbourhood of a Natura 2000 site (i.e. the area where the habitat occurs) may lead to the drying out and subsequent degradation (destruction) of the wetland. The situation is similar when plant species are the object of protection (here it also depends on whether the habitat of such a plant is sensitive to changes) or animals spending their whole life in one location, such as snails, some insects, or amphibians. However, some of the animals which are the subject of protection are characterized by very high mobility between habitats, such as bats, which, in order to fulfil their basic life functions, need be able to move between the place of swarming, wintering and breeding colonies and feeding grounds, and most often all those habitats are not included within the boundaries of the same Natura 2000 area. In such cases, linear elements of green infrastructure, e.g. uninterrupted strings of mid-field, roadside or riverside trees, afforested areas or hedgerows which ensure safe movement of those animal species between habitats, will play a very important role. In the Carpathians, some bat species use the attics of churches as breeding colonies, so it is very important to maintain trees around religious buildings, as they are the only way for bats to leave their shelters without being attacked by predators. It is not possible to establish one common list of acceptable and unacceptable activities for all Natura 2000 areas, as it is the specific object of conservation that is important, i.e. the species or habitat that is protected in a specific area and the objective of conservation activities that we want to achieve in the area. This is why a management plan or a protection plan is drawn up for each Natura 2000 site, which contains, among others, the following information: ◆ description of the objects of conservation, ◆ their conservation status at the time of preparation of the plan, ◆ identified threats, existing and potential, individually for each object of conservation, 84

◆ specific conservation objectives to be achieved while the plan is in force, ◆ a list (including the location) of the conservation measures that aim to achieve a favour- able or preferential (site-specific) conservation status, i.e. a list of measures to be taken to ensure the best possible conservation status of the habitat and/or species concerned. Fig. 2. Little Pieniny PLH120025 Natura 2000 area with pastoral and hay harvesting land use, preserving elements of green infra- structure. Photo: Monika Sadowska It is worth stressing that at the stage of drawing up the plan of conservation measures the representatives of self-governments, institutions, entrepreneurs and, above all, inhabitants are informed about the possibility of their involvement and all willing persons become members of the so-called Team of Local Cooperation and are informed about all steps taken both at the stage of drawing up the plan and possible later actions (e.g. within the scope of supplementing the state of knowledge about some object of conservation). This is the stage when local communities and other local stakeholders can co-determine the way the areas are managed. Management Plans are valid for 10 years and are drawn up mainly by the Regional Director for Environmental Protection, who is also responsible for the management of the Natura 2000 areas. However, if a Natura 2000 site overlaps with another form of nature protection, then these competencies are transferred and so, for example, in the area of a landscape park, the conservation plan of the park should include the scope of the Natura 2000 management plan (for the part/area overlapping with the park). Within the boundaries of a national park, due to the stability of the structure and a high conservation regime, a protection plan valid for 20 years is prepared also for the Natura 2000 area, and the director of the national park takes over the functions of the area manager. It may also happen that as part of preparation of a forest management plan; the scope of the management plan may be included in the area managed by the forest authority where the Natura 2000 site is located. 85

Due to the complicated nature of managing Natura 2000 areas, as well as the variety of documents concerning detailed information on this form of nature protection, all invest- ment activities which may potentially affect a Natura 2000 site, both within the framework of obtaining a decision on environmental conditions and, if it is not required by law, before obtaining various administrative decisions (e.g. development conditions, tree felling permits, building permits), should be addressed to the appropriate Regional Director for Environmental Protection. Also the procedure of the Natura 2000 environmental impact assessment itself is always the responsibility of the Regional Director for Environmental Protection and it is carried out also within the limits of a national park. Natura 2000 sites were established both on the existing forms of nature protection subject to high protection regime (national parks, nature reserves) and on the forms of protection where human economic activity is carried out (landscape parks, protected landscape areas), as well as on the areas not covered by any other form of protection. It should be emphasised that although the Carpathians are characterised by low levels of urbanisation and industrial- isation, high forest cover and relatively traditional farming, areas of natural character (with the exception of forests) have been preserved mainly in protected areas or in areas that are difficult to access due to their topography – while in more accessible areas, where extensive farming is carried out, many valuable semi-natural habitats have developed, including meadow habitats. Therefore, in order to preserve both the natural value of the region, Natura 2000 sites, as well as landscape values, which consist of many elements of green infrastructure, such as field margins, mid-field and riverside woods, it is important to maintain the current way of farming and extensive land use. The fact of introducing the Natura 2000 sites is rewarded by the European Community with the possibility of obtaining EU funds not only from operational programmes, including regional ones, but also from subsidies within the agricultural-environmental-climate scheme (more information: chapter II.2.1), or the LIFE Programme. The Carpathians are the largest natural ecological corridor in Central Europe, enabling free movement of animals, including large carnivores, over long distances. However, when talking about ecological corridors, it is important to remember that corridors of European importance, such as the Carpathian Ecological Corridor, as well as national, regional and even local or micro-local corridors, such as field margins, which also provide habitats for wild pollinating insects, such as wild bees and bumblebees, are equally important. In recent years in particular, we have intensified our efforts to support the honeybee, but we must remember that it is only one of the pollinator species. However, in order to maintain a large number of these beneficial pollinators, essential for human life, as many measures as possible should be taken to maintain a maximum diversity of species of these insects. This will ensure the supplying function of the pollinators also in a situation where there is a threat to the honeybee (pathogens, diseases, etc.). 86

Animals (and through them also many plants and Photo: Patrycja Adamska fungi) migrate to fulfill several of their life needs. Based on their timing and nature, three basic types of migration can be distinguished: ◆ daily – in a specific area, on a very regular basis, to satisfy various life and behavioural needs, e.g. foraging, territory marking, ensuring the safety of offspring; ◆ seasonal – usually in a known area at a specific time of year, e.g. for foraging in winter, moving between habitats e.g. to wintering grounds or breeding sites; ◆ at the dispersal stage – the most „chaotic” migrations of single, mainly adolescent, individuals, over long distances, in a random direction, in order to search for a new area to live – the most important to ensure genetic exchange between populations of the same species, and therefore crucial for species conservation. Thus, in order to preserve biodiversity, it is not enough to protect it within the legal system of protected areas (spatially designated „islands of nature conservation”). It is also necessary to create and preserve opportunities for movement between these areas, both for protected animals and for other species that play important roles, whether in the food chain (roe deer, deer and wild boar as a food base for large predatory mammals), or herds of sheep moving between mountain pastures (carrying plant seeds „on themselves” as well as in their faeces). Otherwise, habitat degradation may occur through impoverishment of its species composition, as well as genetic degradation of animal species through inbreeding. It is therefore worth taking action to respect and care for the common space of the Carpathian region, for the sake of preserving not only its natural, but also its landscape, historical and cultural heritage. This can be done on many levels: ◆ looking at protected areas, especially Natura 2000, as an opportunity rather than a hindrance. As mentioned before, it is very often sufficient to maintain or restore the current way of farming in these areas, which anyway, due to their geological structure, relief and other environmental conditions, prevent intensive investment; ◆ taking up cooperation with nature protection authorities, especially on 87

the territory and in the neighbourhood of national parks, in order to activate and make tourist use of areas with average natural values, with simultaneous careful preservation of the most valuable natural areas; ◆ taking care of local, small enclaves of valuable areas by establishing (via resolutions of municipality councils) local forms of nature protection, e.g. ecological grounds or natural and landscape complexes; ◆ keeping open spaces, routes and viewpoints free from development (including advertising); ◆ taking care of the space by favouring or promoting (e.g. by lower- ing taxes) regionally characteristic architectural forms or preserving (or introducing new) elements of green infrastructure; ◆ preserving unoccupied spaces (without investment in housing, ski infrastructure or fences) for the movement of animals; in such areas it is worth preserving or introducing elements of green infrastructure, which will allow safe movement of animals, will be resting sites, but isolated from people. Preservation and thus use of cultural and natural values is not synonymous with „backwardness”, which can be clearly demonstrated in many highly developed countries (Switzerland, Scandinavian countries). However, it is worth taking some responsibility for the future and therefore it is in the interest of the inhabitants to actively partici- pate in the preparation (the municipality informs by means of a notice on the commencement of the preparation of such a document), assessment and then effective use of local planning documents, as it may have an impact on the quality of life as well as the possibility of diversification, i.e. diversification and/or expansion of the sources of income of the inhabitants of the Carpathians. A great example of this is the region of Low Beskid (https://www. facebook.com/TowarzystwoZBeskiduNiskiego/), where the inhabitants still practise agriculture, Fig. 3. Example of preserving green infrastructure including largely grazing (mainly cattle) and hay (here: trees) during the construction of a detached house, farming. Even if buildings are introduced, they are Jeleśnia commune, Żywiecki Beskid. Photo: Monika Sadowska 88

typical habitat buildings, without fences over large areas, with a lot of trees as buffer zones between farmlands and buildings. In addition, the inhabitants of the region engage in joint local activities based on the tradition of the region (workshops, concerts, promotion of local products) thanks to which more and more tourists visit the area and return. This benefits both the inhabitants of this region of the Carpathians, tourists who prefer resting in nature, as well as nature itself and landscape. From the point of view of protection of the Carpathian nature and landscape, also very important are the provisions contained in the Protocol on the conservation and sustainable use of biological and landscape diversity to the Framework Convention on the Protection and Sustainable Development of the Carpathians (Journal of Laws of 2010, No. 90, item 591 – in short „Biodiversity Protocol” – see also Chapter III.3). The Protocol assumes that the objectives of conservation and sustainable use of biological and landscape diversity of the Carpathians should be integrated into many sectoral policies, including, inter alia, spatial planning and resource management, agriculture, forestry, transport and infrastructure, and tourism. The document also devotes much attention to the issue of cooperation between all stakeholders in sustainable management of natural resources in order to strengthen the conservation of biological and landscape diversity. 89

Photo: Krzysztof Haase II.2.5 Spatial planning Nature is a natural capital generating a raft of benefits that cannot be bought or artificially created with available technologies. In order for it to provide us with these benefits, i.e. ecosys- tem services, it requires stable conditions to maintain the sustainability of natural processes. Such conditions – through rational land management and the shaping and protection of green and blue infrastructure – should be provided by spatial planning as the basic instrument of space management around us. SPATIAL PLANNING ON THE LOCAL SCALE Spatial planning at the local level may be defined as a deliberate activity of local authorities to formulate the principles and conditions of land development. Indicating the directions for development and land management should take into account local conditions: the natural, cultural and landscape values of the area, the needs of local residents, as well as other social or economic factors. According to the Act of 27 March 2003 on spatial planning and land development (Journal of Laws 2003, no. 80 item 717, as amended), the basis for the activities of the administration bodies in this respect should be creating spatial order and ensuring sustainable development. At the local level, the actions and decisions taken by municipalities shape not only the anthro- pogenic elements of space (such as buildings or infrastructure), but also significantly affect the natural elements. Caring for the environment and landscape is one of the priorities in spatial planning. Although the Act on spatial planning and land development does not refer directly to the term „green infrastructure”, but only to the determination of „principles of protection of the environment, nature and landscape” (Article 15), spatial planning plays a key role in ensuring 90

that the ecological continuity of natural structures is maintained and that fragmentation and degradation of habitats is reduced. The current spatial planning system does not provide for rational and effective management of the space resource at the local level. There is a lack of effective legal instruments and systemic tools to shape the space. The implementation of the spatial policy in municipalities should be based on good quality local plans prepared on the basis of the study of conditions and directions for spatial development and the ecophysiographic study, as well as on a reliable strategic environmental impact assessment. Planning documents prepared in such a way, supported by multifaceted analyses, in their detailed provisions may define appropriate conditions for land development and construction and indicate the location of public purpose investments, taking into account the principles of sustainable development, especially the needs of nature protection. In reality, however, local plans cover a small area of municipalities. At the national level, it is estimated that about 1/3 of the area is covered by local plans, and in the case of areas with special natural and landscape values, such as mountain areas, this proportion is even lower. The content and validity of the current plans is often insufficient to strategically shape the space of municipalities with future generations in mind, especially as regards provisions on the protection of open areas and natural sites. Instead of protecting these elements of space as the municipality’s natural capital and building its brand on them, local authorities allocate vast areas for development at the expense of reducing the area of natural or semi-natural ecosystems and increasing the negative impact of humans on the environment. The lack of control over the purposefulness (and plausibility) of allocating excessively large areas for development and the feasibility of these plans contributes to the creation of an oversupply of investment land, often disproportionate to the actual needs and development potential of the municipality. In addition, the size structure of local plans in Poland is unfavourable. Local plans usually cover small areas, are often drawn up for selected plots of land and in response to specific investment needs, with insufficient consideration for the surrounding area and its spatial linkages. In this way, local plans do not create a coherent and comprehensive strategy of spatial development in the borough. One of the reasons for this state of affairs is the optionality of drawing up local plans under the current spatial planning system, but the difficult procedure of adopting a plan, the multitude of legal regulations and financial aspects also have an impact. Due to the lack of local plans in the majority of municipalities, many local governments pursue their spatial policy mainly on the basis of “decisions on development conditions” (mentioned earlier in chapter II.1.1). Administrative procedures related to the issuance of these decisions were intended by legislators to have only a supplementary function for local plans, but in the meantime they have become the basic tool for spatial management in municipalities. The popular development conditions decisions often do not take into account local conditions related to the protection of nature and landscape, flood hazards or (important in mountain areas) landslides, or economic issues. They are also sometimes contradictory to the provisions of the study or separate regulations (compatibility between them is not mandatory as of now!). They are an expression of the short sighted perspective of municipalities focused on fast development and investments, not paying attention to consequences in a broader perspective 91

of time and space. The result of such spotty and ad hoc actions is the progressing chaos and degradation of space, additionally aggravated by legal loopholes in the scope of the possibility to introduce homestead development in rural areas and construction offences resulting from the lack of effective instruments to enforce the construction law. In the Carpathian space – unique on a national scale due to its terrain as well as natural and cultural wealth – the lack of a coherent spatial development strategy for municipalities based on these conditions contributes to: ◆ dispersal of development and location of new investments on slopes away from main roads and villages, ◆ degradation of scenic and landscape values, ◆ increased costs related to the need for appropriate infrastructure or incurred as a result of extreme natural events - in particular, landslides and floods, ◆ increased pressure and degradation of the environment, ◆ the disappearance of green and blue infrastructure elements, ◆ disturbed water regimes. As part of an analysis of the conditions for shaping green infrastructure in the Carpathians, carried out under the LIFE project Green-Go! Local initiatives for the deployment of green infra- structure in Natura 2000 sites in the Carpathians, an analysis of the planning documents of 175 (out of 200) Carpathian municipalities was also carried out in terms of provisions relating to shaping green infrastructure. The description of this work can be found in Chapter II.1.1 of this publication. The preservation of natural and landscape values and their potential to provide ecosystem services with a simultaneous economic and social growth is only possible when adhering to the principles of sustainable development. A condition for effective implementation of these principles in the context of spatial planning is a strategic approach to spatial management in the municipality or region, which assumes the creation of a comprehensive vision of the municipality’s space and its development based on local conditions. Its foundation is the creation of coherent local plans developed on the basis of a number of analyses, e.g. the balance of needs for land for development, risks of natural disasters, or natural connections. Well prepared local plans, taking into account not only natural and landscape aspects but also social and economic aspects, make it possible to shape and protect the green infrastructure, and at the same time guarantee that these valuable resources will be preserved for future generations. Appropriate arrangements of local plans are the only way to limit threats to nature resulting from expansive human management. They are also an opportunity to improve the 92

quality of life of the local populations, to meet the challenges of climate change and to limit losses resulting from increasingly frequent natural disasters. In the context of green and blue infrastructure, planning documents have two basic tasks: to maintain ecological connectivity on a local scale by preserving the landscape with its mosaic arrangement of fields, meadows, trees, bushes, ponds and watercourses etc., and to prevent fragmentation and isolation of environmentally valuable areas by avoiding the creation of barriers and the implementation of investments that pose a threat or have a negative impact on the environment. Such actions allow for proper functioning of the natural system and thus guarantee stable growth based on local resources and deriving maximum benefits from them. Local plans, being local laws, can effectively limit the spread of development into open areas and slopes and minimise the location of new investments in protected areas or in their imme- diate vicinity. Where possible, municipalities should strive to concentrate development within existing settlements equipped with technical infrastructure and road networks, thus reducing the number of new buildings in areas away from compact development or hardened access roads. Densification of development of settlements along existing public roads not only contrib- utes to the protection of agricultural and forest areas against dispersed development, but also reduces the costs of investment implementation. In areas with unique values, local plans may introduce higher urban standards, e.g. an obligation to maintain a high ratio of biologically active area and low building intensity on building plots, or allow only for the introduction of 93

non-burdensome functions whose impact does not extend beyond the boundaries of the property. In the detailed arrangements of the plans, the municipalities may also determine acceptable forms of development referring to local traditions. Areas earmarked for development should be delimited rationally, taking into account the real demand for new development, but also on the basis of reliable analyses as to whether the introduced development will not significantly affect the functioning of the natural system. In open and forest areas, which perform the functions of ecological corridors, planning docu- ments should promote pro-environmental forms of land use to maintain ecological connectivity, protect land from change of use and shape and protect green and blue infrastructure facilities. Maintaining local environmental links may be achieved through provisions concerning, for example: preservation of the natural course of watercourses with their biological envelope and protection of wetlands and meadows, preservation and replenishment of existing mid-field, roadside and waterside tree planting, street green belts or hedgerows, introduction of domestic greenery in residential areas or isolating greenery on the boundaries of service and production development areas. Findings of the local plans may also concern the restriction of the possi- bility of tight fencing of properties, e.g. by specifying the maximum height of fences, an order to maintain an appropriate openwork structure or a ban on the use of solid fences made of prefabricated concrete elements. In places crucial for the functioning of the natural system it is important to avoid creating 94

barriers in the form of new construction or infrastructural investments, e.g. through building restrictions. Such restrictions may be imposed on areas adjacent to the most valuable protected areas or areas stretching along watercourses, which should have designated buffer zones with specific possibilities of development. The location of investments is also important, as they should not disturb the functioning of the natural systems, which in the Carpathians concerns especially the development of tourist infrastructure (particularly skiing resorts). Wise develop- ment is based on integrating the use of natural capital with the economic and social potential. It is also important to plan and execute the investment properly and in accordance with appro- priate standards. Road investments should be equipped with passages for animals, located appropriately to local conditions. Modernisation or construction of roads should include preservation or introduction of new tree plantings, and on embankments or ramparts – main- tenance of their open character. As part of the implementation of local municipal investments and development of public spaces, care for green infrastructure may be expressed through the introduction or maintenance of various forms of green areas and aquatic elements, planting native plant species suitable for habitat conditions and avoiding concreting and other reduction of land permeability. All these measures not only protect the natural elements of the space, but also make a real difference to the quality of life of the inhabitants and their safety. For many municipalities, the protection of nature and landscape necessary for the proper functioning of most ecosystems is a huge challenge. The support of the inhabitants and their ecological awareness, active involvement of local communities in the issues of protection and preservation of the most valuable values and participation in planning procedures resulting in working out good solutions compatible with the idea of sustainable development are certainly supportive for the activities of municipalities in this respect. SPATIAL PLANNING ON THE SUPRA-LOCAL SCALE Spatial planning on the local scale is an element of the entire system of state spatial policy. At each level there is a reference to the natural environment, its resources, protection and development. At present (November 2021), conceptual work is underway in the Spatial Planning Department of the Ministry of Development and Technology to draft a new law on the reform of the national spatial planning system. The supra-local development strategy aims at integration in social, economic and spatial dimensions. The above draft is planned to be made public in late 2021/ early 2022 and enacted no later than mid-2023. However, regardless of the legislative work, the task of spatial planning is: ◆ defining the directions of spatial policy aiming to identify exceptional areas (e.g. landscape, nature) through their inventory, protection and indication of actions 95

enabling the use of potential and resources for the economic development of the area; ◆ preventing conflicts between the interests of communities, the interests of individuals and the common good, which is the environment; ◆ balancing the social, economic and environmental costs with the benefits associated with the development of the area. ◆ social, economic and environmental benefits associated with the development of the area. SPATIAL PLANNING SYSTEM IN POLAND STATE ? Mid-term country development strategy currently in legislative work VOIVODSHIP PZPW Voivodship spatial development plan DISTRICT none MUNICIPALITY SUIKZP Study of conditions and directions of spatial development of municipalities MPZP Local spatial development plan UWZ/ULICP Decision on laying down the land development conditions / Decision on laying down the location of public purpose investments Fig. 1. Hierarchical system of spatial planning in Poland (as of November 2021). Source: Hanna Hrehorowicz-Gaber, own study In the supra-local dimension, the spatial policy is shaped and carried out by the voivodship self-governments, and the tools serving to implement this policy are the voivodship spatial development plans. Properly developed planning documents, combined with effective and reliable implementation of their provisions, prevent degradation of the natural environment and shape the mechanisms of its protection on a supra-local scale. Depending on the needs, voivodship plans are updated so as to favour development. They take into account the findings of the development strategy, the findings of the national spatial development concept, as well as other legal acts and programmes containing governmental tasks for the implementation of public purpose investments of national importance. They are accompanied by forecasts of the impact of the plan’s provisions on the natural environment. They also contain spatial policy objectives established at the ministerial level, which link the Polish policy with the EU guidelines. They refer to regional development conditions and strat- 96

egies. The purpose of these studies is to indicate directions for shaping the voivodship space in its spatial, environmental, cultural, social and economic dimensions. They fulfil promotional, coordinating and controlling and protective functions. Each voivodship plan has features of regional planning, spatial planning and integrated planning. This refers to the problems within individual voivodships, as well as the need for cooperation in the case of problem areas or areas with exceptional spatial (landscape and architectural) values. Voivodship boundaries Voivodship boundaries Voivodship boundaries Mountain functional boundaries Voivodship area Carpathian boundaries by J. Kondracki Mountain functional area Sub-mountain functional area Mountain functional area boundaries Mountain functional area Mountain functional area Fig. 2. Summary of the area of the mountain functional area in the provisions of the voivodship spatial development plans (as at 2021). Source: Hanna Hrehorowicz-Gaber, own study The spatial development plan created by the public administration of the voivodships should be in line with the tasks established in the process of preparing the voivodship development policy. These are: ◆ carrying out analyses and studies, developing concepts and programmes relating to areas and problems of spatial management, including management of natural and cultural resources; ◆ carrying out periodical reviews of changes in spatial development and drawing up periodical reports on the state of the voivodship’s spatial development. At least once in a term, the voivodship assembly is obliged to carry out an evaluation of the state of the voivodship’s spatial development; ◆ drawing up a voivodship development strategy which aims, inter alia, at: preserving the values of the cultural and natural environment 97

while taking into account the needs of future generations (the need for sustainable development); shaping and maintaining spatial order. The most recent landscape protection instrument, which at the same time has direct conse- quences and influence on the rules of shaping green infrastructure, provided for in Article 38a of the aforementioned Act on spatial planning and land development, is the landscape audit, which is drawn up for the area of voivodship specifying the characteristic features and assessing their value. This document distinguishes: ◆ landscapes occurring in the area of the given voivodship, ◆ location of priority landscapes; ◆ indicates the location and boundaries of: ◆ cultural parks ◆ national parks, nature reserves, landscape parks, areas of protected landscape; presents: ◆ threats to the values preserved in the cultural landscape, ◆ recommendations and conclusions regarding landscape management and protection, by indicating areas as landscape parks, protected landscape areas and natural landscape complexes, ◆ local architectural forms of buildings with a view to maintaining local landscape identity by harmonising new buildings with the existing ones. Indications, recommendations and conclusions contained in this document are taken into account in the plans of voivodships, but also on the local scale: in the study of conditions and directions of spatial development of municipalities, and consequently also in local spatial development plans. Landscape protection is also indicated as one of the basic concepts in the Act of 16 April 2004 on Nature Conservation (Dz. U. 2004 No. 92, item 880). Landscape is mentioned therein as a resource requiring protection consisting of „(...) conservation and sustainable use”. One of the objectives of nature protection is precisely „protection of landscape values (...)”. Despite clear protective provisions, the landscape is changing and degrading. Lack of detailed guidelines 98