Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Freshwater Habitats and Freshwater-Dependent Habitats in Poland

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Polish River Basins and Lakes – Part II

Part of the book series: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry ((HEC,volume 87))

  • 389 Accesses

Abstract

This paper briefly discusses the resources of habitats of importance to the European Community in Poland shaped by water relations. The types of habitat surveyed include water courses and waterbodies, wetlands and riparian vegetation (meadows, forest) and streams and bogs. The study covered 23 habitat types in freshwater habitats and freshwater-dependent habitats occurring in all 849 Special Areas of Conservation in Poland in both biogeographic regions: alpine and continental. The overall conservation value for current habitats is presented, including threats, pressures and activities, as well as their possibilities for restoration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Rodrigues ASL, Andelman SJ, Bakarr MI, Boitani L, Brooks TM, Cowling RM, Fishpool LDC, da Fonseca GAB, Gaston KJ, Hoffmann M, Long JS, Marquet PA, Pilgrim JD, Pressey RL, Schipper J, Sechrest W, Stuart SN, Underhill LG, Waller RW, Watts MEJ, Yan X (2004) Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428:640–643

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Deguignet M, Juffe-Bignoli D, Harrison J, MacSharry B, Burgess N, Kingston N (2014) 2014 United Nations list of protected areas. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, p 44

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blicharska M, Orlikowska EH, Roberge JM, Grodzińska-Jurczak M (2016) What can social science tell us about conservation? Review of the Natura 2000 research. Biol Conserv 199:110–122

    Google Scholar 

  4. EC (2013) The economic benefits of the Natura 2000 network. Synthesis report. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, p 76. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/financing/docs/ENV-12-018_LR_Final1.pdf. Accessed June 2018

  5. Maes J, Paracchini ML, Zulian G, Dunbar MB, Alkemade R (2012) Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem service supply, biodiversity, and habitat conservation status in Europe. Biol Conserv 155:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  6. Orlikowska EH, Roberge JM, Blicharska M, Mikusiński G (2016) Gaps in ecological research on the world’s largest internationally coordinated network of protected areas: a review of Natura 2000. Biol Conserv 200:216–227

    Google Scholar 

  7. EU (2011) Biodiversity strategy to 2020. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pullin AS, Knight TM, Stone DA, Charman K (2004) Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Biol Conserv 119:245–252

    Google Scholar 

  9. Maiorano L, Falcucci A, Garton EO, Boitani L (2007) Contribution of the Natura 2000 network to biodiversity conservation in Italy. Conserv Biol 21:1433–1444

    Google Scholar 

  10. D’Amen M, Bombi P, Campanaro A, Zapponi L, Bologna MA, Mason F (2013) Protected areas and insect conservation: questioning the effectiveness of Natura 2000 network for saproxylic beetles in Italy. Anim Conserv 16:370–378

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kati V, Hovardas T, Dieterich M, Ibisch PL, Mihok B, Selva N (2014) The challenge of implementing the European network of protected areas Natura 2000. Conserv Biol 29:260–270

    Google Scholar 

  12. Popescu VD, Rozylowicz L, Niculae IM, Cucu AL, Hartel T (2014) Species, habitats, society: an evaluation of research supporting EU’s Natura 2000 network. PLoS One 9:13–22

    Google Scholar 

  13. Vörösmarty CJ, McIntyre P, Gessner MO, Dudgeon D, Prusevich A, Green P, Glidden S, Bunn SE, Sullivan CA, Liermann CR (2010) Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467:555–561

    Google Scholar 

  14. Malcolm JR, Liu C, Neilson RP, Hansen L, Hannah LEE (2006) Global warming and extinctions of endemic species from biodiversity hotspots. Conserv Biol 20:538–548

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ortmann-Ajkai A, Csicsek G, Hollós R, Magyaros V, Wágner L, Lóczy D (2018) Twenty-years’ changes of wetland vegetation: effects of floodplain-level threats. Wetlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-018-1002-0

  16. Romanowski J, Matuszkiewiecz J, Franz KW, Kowalska A, Kozłowska A (2005) Evaluation of ecological consequences of development scenarios for the Vistula River. Vistula Econet Development and Implementation (VEDI). Institute of Biology CBE/PAN-IGiPZ/DLG/ALTERRA, Warsaw

    Google Scholar 

  17. Scholz M, Mehl D, Schulz-Zunkel C (2012) Okosystemfunktionen von Flussauen. Analyse und Bewertung von Hochwasserretention, Nahrstoffruckhalt, Kohlenstoffvorrat, Treibhausgasemissionen und Habitatfunktion. Naturschutz Biol Vielfalt 124:2

    Google Scholar 

  18. Johnson WC, Dixon MD, Scott ML, Raabe L, Larson G, Volke M, Werner B (2012) Forty years of vegetation change on the Missouri River floodplain. Bioscience 62:123–135

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pataki B, Zsuffa I, Hunyady A (2013) Vulnerability assessment for supporting the revitalization of river floodplains. Environ Sci 34:69–78

    Google Scholar 

  20. Peršić V, Horvatić J, Has-Schön E, Bogut I (2009) Changes in N and P limitation induced by water level fluctuations in Nature Park Kopacki Rit (Croatia): nutrient enrichment bioassay. Aquat Ecol 43:27–36

    Google Scholar 

  21. Grzybowski M (2013) Factors affecting the pattern of macrophyte distribution in natural lakes. Fresenius Environ Bull 22(11):3199–3209

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Grzybowski M (2014a) Determinants of the diversity of macrophytes in natural lakes affected by land use in the catchment, water chemistry and morphometry lakes. J Elem 19(2):401–422

    Google Scholar 

  23. Grzybowski M (2014b) Natural dimictic and polymictic lakes: similarities and differences in relationships among chlorophyll, nutrients, Secchi depth, and aquatic macrophytes. J Freshw Ecol 29(1):53–69

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Davis M, Naumann S, McFarland K, Graf A, Evans D (2014) Literature review: the ecological effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network. ETC/BD report to the EEA, p 30

    Google Scholar 

  25. Angelstam P, Roberge J-M, Lõhmus A, Bergmanis M, Brazaitis G, Dönz-Breuss M, Edenius L, Kosiński Z, Kurlavičius P, Lārmanis V, Lūkins V, Mikusiński G, Račinskis E, Strazds M, Tryjanowski P (2004) Habitat modelling as a tool for landscape-scale conservation – a review of parameters for focal forest birds. Ecol Bull 51:427–453

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gustafsson L, Felton A, Felton AM, Brunet J, Caruso A, Hjältén J, Lindbladh M, Ranius T, Roberge J-M, Weslien J (2015) Natural versus national boundaries: the importance of considering biogeographical patterns in forest conservation policy. Conserv Lett 8:50–57

    Google Scholar 

  27. Whittaker RJ, Araújo MB, Jepson P, Ladle RJ, Watson JEM, Willis KJ (2005) Conservation biogeography: assessment and prospect. Divers Distrib 11:3–23

    Google Scholar 

  28. Guerrero AM, Mcallister RR, Wilson KA (2015) Achieving cross-scale collaboration for large scale conservation initiatives. Conserv Lett 8:107–117

    Google Scholar 

  29. Arlettaz R, Schaub M, Fournier J, Reichlin TS, Sierro A, Watson JEM, Braunisch V (2010) From publications to public actions: when conservation biologists bridge the gap between research and implementation. Bioscience 60:835–842

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hermoso V, Clavero M, Villero D, Brotons L (2016) EU’s conservation efforts need more strategic investment to meet continental commitments. Conserv Lett 10:231–237

    Google Scholar 

  31. SDF Standard data form Natura 2000 (2018.) https://danepubliczne.gov.pl/dataset/baza-danych-obszarow-natura-2000/. Accessed June 2018

  32. GDEP General Directorate for Environmental Protection in Poland (2018) Information and communication platform. http://pzo.gdos.gov.pl/. Accessed June 2018

  33. GIEP General Inspectorate for Environmental Protection in Poland (2018) Monitoring of species and natural habitats. State Environmental Monitoring. http://siedliska.gios.gov.pl/pl/projekt-raportow-do-ke/projekt-raportow. Accessed June 2018

  34. INC Institute of Nature Conservation of the Polish Academy of Sciences (2018) Monitoring of species and natural habitats with special regard to special areas of Natura 2000 habitat protection. http://www.iop.krakow.pl/cn2000/monitoring/ZestawienieWynikow.aspx. Accessed June 2018

  35. Eionet (2018) European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity. https://bd.eionet.europa.eu/. Accessed June 2018

  36. Biodiversity Information System for Europe (BISE) (2018.) https://biodiversity.europa.eu/info. Accessed June 2018

  37. Brooks TM, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GAB, Rylands AB, Konstant WR, Flick P, Pilgrim J (2002) Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conserv Biol 16:909–923

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hanski I (2011) Habitat loss, the dynamics of biodiversity, and a perspective on conservation. Ambio 40:248–255

    Google Scholar 

  39. Groom MJ, Meffe GK, Carroll CR (2006) Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  40. Costanza R, Sutton P, van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Farber S, Turner EK (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Chang 26:152–158

    Google Scholar 

  41. Vaughn C (2010) Biodiversity losses and ecosystem function in freshwaters: emerging conclusions and research directions. Bioscience 60:25–35

    Google Scholar 

  42. Grodzińska-Jurczak M (2008) Rethinking of nature conservation policy in Poland: the need of human dimensions approach. Hum Dimens Wildl 13:380–381

    Google Scholar 

  43. EC (2000) Council Directive 2000/60/EC of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/En/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060. Accessed June 2018

  44. EC (2016) Natura 2000. Nature and Biodiversity Newsletter No. 40, July 2016. European Commission, Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/info/pubs/docs/nat2000newsl/nat40_en.pdf. Accessed June 2018

  45. CBD-UNEP (2010) Strategic plan for biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi targets “living in harmony with nature”. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  46. CBD-UNEP (2013) Quick guides to the Aichi biodiversity targets. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  47. EEA (2015) State of the environment report 2015. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen. http://www.eea.europa.eu/soer. Accessed June 2018

  48. CIS (2013) Strengthening consistency, coordination and cooperation between nature, biodiversity, water and marine policy. In: Joint meeting of the Nature, Marine and Water Directors meeting of 4 December 2013, Vilnius. Outcome of the 1st joint directors’ meeting (final version)

    Google Scholar 

  49. CIS (2013) Informal meeting of water and marine directors of the European Union, candidate and EFTA countries. Vilnius, 4th and 5th of May 2013. Final synthesis

    Google Scholar 

  50. CIS (2015) Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC): Work Programme 2016–2018

    Google Scholar 

  51. Tockner K, Stanford JA (2002) Riverine floodplains: present state and future trends. Environ Conserv 29:308–330

    Google Scholar 

  52. Čížková H, Květ J, Comín FA, Laiho R, Pokorný J, Pitchart D (2013) Actual state of European wetlands and their possible future in the context of global climate change. Aquat Sci 75:3–26

    Google Scholar 

  53. Zorilla-Miras P, Palomo I, Gomes-Baggenthun E, Martin-Lopez B, Lomas PL, Montes P (2014) Effects of land-use change on wetland ecosystem services: a case study in the Doñana marshes (SW Spain). Landsc Urban Plan 122:160–174

    Google Scholar 

  54. Hein T, Schwarz U, Habersack H, Nichersu J, Preiner S, Willby N, Weigelhofer G (2016) Current status and restoration options for floodplains along the Danube River. Sci Total Environ 543:778–790

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Harrison PA, Vandewalle M, Sykes MT, Berry PM, Bugter R, de Bello F, Feld CK, Grandin U, Harrington R, Haslett JR, Jongman RHG, Luck GW, da Silva PM, Moora M, Settele J, Sousa JP, Zobel M (2010) Identifying and prioritizing services in European terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. Biodivers Conserv 19:2791–2821

    Google Scholar 

  56. Blackwell MSA, Pilgrim ES (2011) Ecosystem services delivered by small-scale wetlands. Hydrobiol Sci J 56:1467–1484

    Google Scholar 

  57. Mölder A, Schneider E (2011) On the beautiful diverse Danube? Danubian floodplain forest vegetation and flora under the influence of river eutrophication. River Res Appl 27:881–894

    Google Scholar 

  58. Janssen JAM, Rodwell JS, Garcia Criado M, Gubbay S, Haynes T, Nieto A, Sanders N, Landucci F, Loidi J, Ssymank A, Tahvanainen T, Valderrabano M, Acosta A, Aronsson M, Arts G, Attorre F, Bergmeier E, Bijlsma R-J, Bioret F, Bita-Nicole C, Biurrun I, Calix M, Capelo J, Carni M, Chytry M, Dengler J, Dimopoulos P, Essl F, Gardjfell H, Gigante D, Giusso del Galdo G, Hajek M, Jansen F, Kapfer J, Mickolajczak A, Molina JA, Molnár Z, Paternoster D, Piernik A, Poulin B, Renaux B, Schaminee JHJ, Sumberova K, Toivonen H, Tonteri T, Tsiripidis I, Tzonev R, Valachovic M (2016) European red list of habitats, part 2: terrestrial and freshwater habitats. EU, p 44

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ward JV, Stanford JA (1995) Ecological connectivity in alluvial river ecosystems and its disruption by flow regulation. Regul Rivers Res Manag 11:105–119

    Google Scholar 

  60. Schindler S, O’Neill FH, Biró M, Damm C, Gasso V, Kanka R, van der Sluis T, Krug A, Lauwaars S, Sebesvari Z, Pusch M, Baranovsky B, Ehlert T, Neukirchen B, Martin JR, Euller K, Mauerhofer V, Wrbka T (2016) Multifunctional floodplain management and biodiversity effects: a knowledge synthesis for six European countries. Biodivers Conserv 25:1349–1382

    Google Scholar 

  61. Geilen N, Jochems H, Krebs L (2004) Integration of ecological aspects in flood protection strategies: defining an ecological minimum. River Res Appl 20:269–283

    Google Scholar 

  62. Klimo E, Hager H, Matic S, Anic I, Kulhavy J (2008) Floodplain forests of the temperate zone of Europe. Lesnicka Prace, Kostelec nad Cernymi lesy

    Google Scholar 

  63. Nijland HJ, Cals MJR (eds) (2001) River restoration in Europe: practical approaches. In: Proceedings of the conference. RIZA report nr 2001.023, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

  64. Leyer I (2005) Predicting plant species responses to river regulation: the role of water level fluctuations. J Appl Ecol 42(2):239–250

    Google Scholar 

  65. Rinaldi M, Wyzga B, Dufour S, Bertoldi W, Gurnell A (2013) River processes and implications for fluvial ecogeomorphology: a European perspective. In: Shroder J, Butler DR, Hupp CR (eds) Treatise on geomorphology. Ecogeomorphology, vol 12. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 37–52

    Google Scholar 

  66. Moreno-Mateos D, Power ME, Comin FA, Yockteng R (2012) Structural and functional loss in restored wetland ecosystems. PLoS Biol 10:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  67. Toth L (2010) Unrealized expectations for restoration of a floodplain community. Restor Ecol 18:810–819

    Google Scholar 

  68. van Geest GJ, Wolters H, Roozen FCJM, Coops H, Roijackers RMM, Buijse AD, Scheffer M (2005) Water-level fluctuations affect macrophyte richness in floodplain lakes. Hydrobiologia 539:239–248

    Google Scholar 

  69. Brooker R, Young JC, Watt AD (2007) Climate change and biodiversity: impacts and policy development challenges – a European case study. Int J Biodivers Sci Manag 3:12–30

    Google Scholar 

  70. Pallemearts M, Parker CN, Shukla PR, Van Schaik LG (2005) The Greenland dialogue on climate change: a policy discussion paper

    Google Scholar 

  71. EU (2013) Framework for adaptation to climate change, leading to a comprehensive EU adaptation strategy by 2013. https://ec.europa.eu/clima/sites/clima/files/docs/eu_strategy_en.pdf. Accessed June 2018

  72. Hefting MM, van den Heuvel RN, Verhoeven JTA (2013) Wetlands in agricultural landscapes for nitrogen attenuation and biodiversity enhancement: opportunities and limitations. Ecol Eng 56:5–13

    Google Scholar 

  73. Schnitzler AE, Hale BW, Alsum E (2005) Biodiversity of floodplain forests in Europe and eastern North America: a comparative study of the Rhine and Mississippi Valleys. Biodivers Conserv 14:97–117

    Google Scholar 

  74. Beltman B, Omtzigt NQA, Vermaat JE (2011) Turbary restoration meets variable success: does landscape structure force colonization success of wetland plants? Restor Ecol 19:185–193

    Google Scholar 

  75. Mitsch WJ, Zhang L, Stefanik KC, Nahlik AM, Anderson CJ, Bernal B, Hernandez M, Song K (2012) Creating wetlands: primary succession, water quality changes, and self-design over 15 years. Bioscience 62:237–250

    Google Scholar 

  76. Schindler S, Kropik M, Euller K, Bunting SW, Schulz-Zunkel C, Hermann A, Hainz-Renetzeder C, Kanka R, Mauerhofer V, Gasso V, Krug A, Lauwaars S, Zulka KP, Henle K, Hoffmann M, Biró M, Essl F, Jaquier S, Balázs L, Borics G, Hudin S, Damm C, Pusch M, van der Sluis T, Sebesvári Z, Wrbka T (2013) Floodplain management in temperate regions: is multifunctionality enhancing biodiversity? Environ Evid 2:10

    Google Scholar 

  77. Jantke K, Schleupner C, Schneider UA (2011) Gap analysis of European wetland species: priority regions for expanding the Natura 2000 network. Biodivers Conserv 20:581–605

    Google Scholar 

  78. Forest Europe (2017) Forest Europe home page. http://foresteurope.org/. Accessed June 2018

  79. EC (2017) EU forests and forest related policies. European Commission, DG Environment. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/forests/index_en.htm/. Accessed June 2018

  80. Winter S (2012) Forest naturalness assessment as a component of biodiversity monitoring and conservation management. Forestry 85:293–304

    Google Scholar 

  81. Winter S, Vrska T, Begehold H (2013) Forest Naturalness as a key to forest biodiversity preservation. In: Kraus D, Krumm F (eds) Integrative approaches as an opportunity for the conservation of forest biodiversity. European Forest Institute, Joensuu, pp 52–63

    Google Scholar 

  82. Winter S, Fischer HS, Fischer A (2010) Relative quantitative reference approach for naturalness assessments of forests. For Ecol Manag 259:1624–1632

    Google Scholar 

  83. Peterken GF (1996) Natural woodland: ecology and conservation in northern temperate regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  84. Remmert H (2013) Ökologie: Ein Lehrbuch. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  85. Gibson L, Lee TM, Koh LP, Brook BW, Gardner TA, Barlow J, Carlos A, Peres A, Corey JA, Bradshaw WF, Laurance T, Lovejoy E, Sodhi NJ (2011) Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity. Nature 478:378–381

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Götmark F (2013) Habitat management alternatives for conservation forests in the temperate zone: review, synthesis, and implications. For Ecol Manag 306:292–307

    Google Scholar 

  87. Paillet Y, Bergès L, Hjältén J, Ódor P, Avon C, Bernhardt-Römermann M, Bijlsma RJ, De Bruyn L, Fuhr M, Grandin U, Kanka R, Lundin L, Luque S, Magura T, Matesanz S, Mészáros I, Sebastià MT, Schmidt W, Standovár T, Tóthmérész B, Uotila A, Valladares F, Vellak K, Virtanen R (2010) Biodiversity differences between managed and unmanaged forests: meta-analysis of species richness in Europe. Conserv Biol 24:101–112

    Google Scholar 

  88. Tsiafouli MA, Apostolopoulou E, Mazaris AD, Kallimanis AS, Drakou EG, Pantis JD (2013) Human activities in Natura 2000 sites: a highly diversified conservation network. Environ Manag 51:1025–1033

    Google Scholar 

  89. Boitani L, Sutherland WJ (2015) Special section: conservation in Europe as a model for emerging conservation issues globally. Conserv Biol 29:975–977

    Google Scholar 

  90. Poschlod P, Wallis DeVries MF (2002) The historical and socioeconomic perspective of calcareous grasslands – lessons from the distant and recent past. Biol Conserv 104:361–376

    Google Scholar 

  91. Meilleur B (2010) The structure and role of folk ecological knowledge in Les Allues, Savoie (France). In: Johnson LM, Hunn ES (eds) Landscape ethnoecology. Concepts of biotic and physical space. Berghahn, New York, pp 159–174

    Google Scholar 

  92. Merunkova K, Preislerova Z, Chytry M (2012) White Carpathian grasslands: can local ecological factors explain their extraordinary species richness? Preslia 84:311–325

    Google Scholar 

  93. Wilson JB, Peet RK, Dengler J, Partel M (2012) Plant species richness: the world records. J Veg Sci 23:796–802

    Google Scholar 

  94. Babai D, Molnar A, Molnar Z (2014) Traditional ecological knowledge and land use in Gyimes (Eastern Carpathians). MTA Centre for the Humanities and MTA Centre for Ecological Research, Budapest and Vacratot

    Google Scholar 

  95. Young J, Watt A, Nowicki P, Alard D, Clitherow J, Henle K, Johnson R, Laczko E, McCracken D, Matouch S, Niemela J, Richards C (2005) Towards sustainable land use: identifying and managing the conflicts between human activities and biodiversity conservation in Europe. Biodivers Conserv 14:1641–1661

    Google Scholar 

  96. Henle K, Alard D, Clitherow J, Cobb P, Firbank L, Kull T, McCracken D, Moritz RFA, Niemelä J, Rebane M, Wascher D, Watt A, Young J (2008) Identifying and managing the conflicts between agriculture and biodiversity conservation in Europe – a review. Agric Ecosyst Environ 124:60–71

    Google Scholar 

  97. Halada L, Evans D, Romão C, Petersen JE (2011) Which habitats of European importance depend on agricultural practices? Biodivers Conserv 20:2365–2378

    Google Scholar 

  98. Papanikolaou AD, Fyllas NM, Mazaris AD, Dimitrakopoulos PG, Kallimanis AS, Pantis JD (2011) Grazing effects on plant functional group diversity in Mediterranean shrublands. Biodivers Conserv 20:2831–2843

    Google Scholar 

  99. Faria N, Rabaça JE, Morales MB (2012) The importance of grazing regime in the provision of breeding habitat for grassland birds: the case of the endangered little bustard (Tetrax tetrax). J Nat Conserv 20:211–218

    Google Scholar 

  100. Arponen A, Heikkinen RK, Paloniemi R, Pöyry J, Similä J, Kuussaari M (2013) Improving conservation planning for semi-natural grasslands: integrating connectivity into agri-environment schemes. Biol Conserv 160:234–241

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Tourism and Recreation, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Olsztyn, Poland

    Mirosław Grzybowski

Authors
  1. Mirosław Grzybowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mirosław Grzybowski .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland

    Ewa Korzeniewska

  2. The Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland

    Monika Harnisz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Grzybowski, M. (2020). Freshwater Habitats and Freshwater-Dependent Habitats in Poland. In: Korzeniewska, E., Harnisz, M. (eds) Polish River Basins and Lakes – Part II. The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, vol 87. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12139-6_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation