This paper has shown the main issues concerning nature reserves in England using the county of Lincolnshire as an example. A brief history of nature conservation in Britain has been presented with the special emphasis on nature reserves. The categories of nature reserves include the statutory National Nature Reserves (NNRs) and Local Nature Reserves (LNRs); and reserves managed by non-governmental organisations. The main management issues of maintenance, restoration and creation of habitats have been described. Most of the conservation techniques are based on traditional practices such as grazing, cutting for hay, controlling water levels and, in woodlands, coppicing and selective thinning. Management plans are prepared for reserves combining survey and monitoring data gathered by reserve wardens and volunteers, with specialist input from habitat teams, plus the management prescriptions that are specific for sites entered into agri-environment agreements. A major factor influencing management is the funding required for equipment, specialist staff (mostly regional wardens) and contractors. Much of the conservation management is supported by volunteers. Overall there is a general shortage of funding to support conservation activities. In general NNRs are financed by central governmental agencies while LNRs are principally funded by local authorities. Reserves managed by voluntary bodies gain income from agri-environment agreements, membership, legacies and donations plus special projects supported by the Heritage Lottery Fund and private funding charities. The main problems affecting nature reserve management are: disturbance (dog walking, inappropriate recreation, etc.), invasive and alien species, under- or overgrazing, theft and vandalism, natural processes (scrub succession, drought, etc.), using inappropriate agricultural techniques and equipment, small fragmented sites, restrictive tenancy agreements, damaging impacts from adjacent intensive land management and unnecessary bureaucracy.
This review of the literature regarding the Promotional Forest Complex “Lasy Bieszczadzkie” („Bieszczady Forest”) showed that the earlier research results are out of date and do not show the true phytosociological diversity of the studied area. These apply mainly to lower montane coniferous forests dominated by spruce and fir. Most of the authors of the phytogeographic papers recognize their uniqueness and state the need for further research. However, there is also the general assumption that the spruce and fir stands are artificial within meso- and eutrophic beech woodland habitats, as a result of them being favoured by the forestry management. Based on historical data, the authors challenge these findings and suggest intensifying research into the provenance of East Carpathian spruce and fir, and plant communities created by them. There is a methodological requirement to link forest typology with phytosociology but this brings purely academic problems onto a practical level in forest management planning. The point is to establish what types of forest are natural and which should be restored to match the habitat conditions. In the Bieszczady circumstances there is also a serious problem with the restoration objectives relating to the seral forest communities on former farmland. These are mostly made up of grey alder and spruce, and also pine at lower altitudes, and cover more than 30% of the total forest area.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.