Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 49

Report

Landscape management plan compilation methodology and sample plan of Vormsi pilot area

NGO Geoguide Baltoscandia January 2012

Imprint
This report was compiled within the Balltic Green Belt project. The Baltic Green Belt project wants to conserve, use and develop the common natural and cultural heritage of the coastal border areas formerly dividing east and west by establishing a platform for transnational cooperation between stakeholders working in nature conservation and sustainable development of the southern and eastern Baltic Sea coast.

The project Baltic Green Belt is part-financed by the European Union (ERDF) within the Baltic Sea Region Programme. The Programme supports transnational projects working together to make the Baltic Sea region an attractive place to invest, work and live in (http://eu.baltic.net)

The reports are published as part of the European Green Belt initiative which has the vision to create the backbone of an ecological network, running from the Barents to the Black Sea that is a global symbol for transboundary cooperation in nature conservation and sustainable development. www.europeangreenbelt.org Project Lead Partner Christian-Albrechts-Universitt zu Kiel Department of Geography Coastal Geography & Natural Hazards Research Scientific Advisor: Prof. Dr. Horst Sterr Coordination: Michael Schultz (schultz@geographie.uni-kiel.de) Communication: Stefanie Maack (s.maack@geographie.uni-kiel.de)

This report can be downloaded from www.balticgreenbelt.net


The responsibility for al contents lies with the author(s) of this report.

NGO Geoguide Baltoscandia Kalev Sepp Henri Jrv

Estonian University of Life Sciences Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences Kreutzwaldi 5 51014 Tartu, Estonia

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................3 ABOUT LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT IN ESTONIA ..............................................................................................4 NATURE OF LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................................................................7 EXPERIENCE OF ORGANIZING LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT.........................................................................8 PRINCIPLES OF CREATING A LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT PLAN ...............................................................10 GENERAL DATA .......................................................................................................................................................12 LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................................13 PLANS AND DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS ...............................................................................................................14 DEVELOPMENT VISION ............................................................................................................................................14 MANAGEMENT GOALS .............................................................................................................................................15 ASSETS AND ACTIVITIES..........................................................................................................................................15 TIMETABLE OF ACTIVITIES .......................................................................................................................................18 CALCULATIONS AND FINANCING OPTIONS FOR ACTIVITIES .....................................................................................19 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES ..................................................................................................................20 APPENDICES ...........................................................................................................................................................20 SAMPLE LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................................................................................................21 GENERAL DATA .......................................................................................................................................................21 LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................................25 PLANS AND DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS ...............................................................................................................27 DEVELOPMENT VISION ............................................................................................................................................32 MANAGEMENT GOALS .............................................................................................................................................32 ASSETS ...................................................................................................................................................................32 TIMETABLE OF ACTIVITIES .......................................................................................................................................34 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES ..................................................................................................................37 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................................................41 APPENDIX 1. PHOTOGRAPHS .................................................................................................................................44 FIGURE. DRAINAGE DITCH THAT CAN BE EASILY MANAGED, SINCE THE BRUSH TO BE REMOVED IS STILL
YOUNG.....................................................................................................................................................................44

APPENDIX 2. MANAGEMENT SCHEME ....................................................................................................................48

INTRODUCTION
The aim of this project is to develop the general principles and policies of landscape management plans and prepare a sample landscape management plan of Vormsi island in the pilot area of the project Baltic Green Belt. Vormsi island as a whole has been defined as a valuable landscape in the subproject Valuable cultural landscapes of the Lne county planning agencys thematic plan Environmental conditions directing settlement and land use, for which there is a landscape management programme prepared.

A landscape management programme is a support material for the organization of systematic activities, which takes into consideration the peculiarity and conditions of the area and, among other things, provides an overview of the values of the area and describes the measures required to manage the values. The activities prescribed with a landscape management programme are designed for a larger territory (valuable landscape) and require specification for smaller areas for custodians of the land. A landscape management programme is also too general to be the basis of entry into contracts with custodians of land and payment of support payments.

The first part of this project describes the present practice of organization of landscape management in Estonia and elsewhere in Europe. The second part is focused on the development of the principles of a more detailed landscape management plan than the landscape management programme and the development of general principles. The third part introduces the sample landscape management plan prepared for Andruse farm located on Vormsi island, which is prepared on the basis of the developed principles. The process of preparing this report consisted of the following parts: Development of the principles of the landscape management plan and general principles: July August 2011 Preparation of the sample landscape management plan: August-December 2011 o o o o Collection of data: August - October 2011 Inventory, including photographing of the area: August 2011 Analysis of data: November 2011 Preparation of the folder and materials for the plan: December 2011

ABOUT LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT IN ESTONIA

Within the European Landscape Convention, landscape management means action, from a perspective of sustainable development, to ensure the regular upkeep of a landscape, so as to guide and harmonize changes which are brought about by social, economic and environmental processes. Landscape management ensures harmonious balanced development, but also the fulfillment of social and economic needs taking the environment and the peoples expectations and needs into consideration, and improves the quality of landscapes. Jaan Eilart (1973), one of the creators of the landscape management conception in Estonia, has phrased the goal of landscape management as aesthetic, from the perspective of use, functional, and economical shaping of cultural landscape. In landscape management, on one hand, it is necessary to know landscape ecology and the connections which determine the natural balance in the environment, on the other hand, to use various methods for planning and shaping landscapes. It is also important to consider the expectations and needs of the people who are using the landscape daily.

Alongside conservation area-based landscape management, organization of the protection of cultural landscapes has also been paid attention to in Estonia one way or another. In the sixties when, due to the extensive land improvement, the issues of studying and shaping agricultural landscapes were first dealt with more consistently, the aesthetics of landscape and the planting of vegetation on monotonous landscape improvement objects were prioritized. In the eighties it was concluded that agricultural landscape was not just a part of human environment and an ecosystem with complex relations, but also a valuable cultural heritage.

The period before acceding to the European Union facilitated to the agriculture becoming more economical and considering with the preservation of biological diversity, because the negative pressure on the environment which was accompanying the common agricultural policy and the need to reform it became topical in Europe in the end of the 20th century. The reform affected Estonia through the agricultural-environmental regulation which entered into force in 1992 (the Council Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92, which was drawn together into a single regulation of rural development in the end of the 1990s), which required member states to implement agricultural environment programmes and support farmers in the implementation of green agriculture on the basis thereof. In order to achieve the goals of the

programme, measures such as organic production, breeding of animals of Estonian breed, environment-friendly management, restoration and maintenance of stone walls, maintenance of scrub agricultural land, planting of hedgerows of multiple species, creation of ponds and wetlands, employment of the techniques of good plant production practice were developed and implemented in various regions in Estonia.

In order to ensure a more reasonable spatial structure from the perspective of nature and environmental protection, counties were tasked with preparing thematic county plans Environmental conditions directing settlement and land use (the Government of the Republic of Estonia order No. 763-k of 8 July 1999). The goals of thematic plans were specified in the letter No. 14-1/2077 of the Ministry of Environment of 25 August 1999 to the county governors. The initial date for submitting the thematic plans to be monitored by the Ministry of Environment (01.11.2001) was later extended with the Government of the Republic order No. 239-k of 11 April 2001, and the date for submitting approved plans was set as 1 December 2002.

"Green network" and "Valuable landscapes" were agreed as two of the most important subthemes of county plans. Local governments were tasked with determining valuable landscapes and organizing the protection, preservation, maintenance and, in some cases, restoration of valuable landscapes on the local level. Valuable landscapes are landscapes of diverse land use and vegetation, which include historical elements which create local identity as well as suitable habitats for various plants, animal and other living beings.

The thematic plans of counties mostly determine the conditions of use of valuable landscapes which land use must be based on and recommendations that should be kept in mind in the preparation of plans and planning of development and economic activities. A county thematic plan itself is a strategic document with no independent mechanisms for the implementation of goals and it functions through the means employed on other levels. The most important means of implementation are:

general plans (general conditions of use of land and water areas), building regulation of the local government, local planning-related norms and recommendations; detailed plans; thematic plans; landscape management programmes; forest management plans; land readjustment plans;

catchment area management plans; agricultural environment programme; support payments for custodians of land; protection rules and management plans of conservation areas.

Other means of implementation:

landscape managament-related training and informing; departmental plans; good building practice; good agricultural practice.

Landscape management programmes have so far been the most important means of implementation of thematic plans. Landscape management programmes support the organization of systematic activities, which take into consideration the peculiarity and conditions of the area and, among other things, provide an overview of the values of the area and describe the measures required to manage the values. There have been landscape management programmes prepared for valuable landscapes in Plva, Viljandi, Hiiu, Rapla and Valga counties. In protected territories, landscape maintenance plans are replaced with management programmes prepared on the basis of protection rules. A landscape management programme can be complemented by establishing the required measures with the general plan or with a thematic plan prepared for the general plan in force. For example, Viimsi, Harku, Keila and other parishes of Harju county are processing adjustments to the county thematic plans as a part of the general plan of the parish. A landscape management programme itself may be used as a basis in the preparation of detailed plans and entry into contracts with custodians of land as well as applying for support payments (Hellstm et al 2001).

There was a valuable landscapes action/measure developed in 2004 as a part of agrienvironment payments. The areas planned for the implementation of the action were the areas defined as valuable landscapes in the county plans. There had to be a landscape management plan prepared for the area as a condition for applying for the support payment and an applicant of the support (an agricultural enterprise) would have been required to perform maintenance works according to the management plan prepared for the enterprise by an accredited specialist. The support payments would have been project-based, with the amounts of support calculated on the basis of the volume of performed works.

The supported works would have included: maintenance of the surroundings of primeval trees or groups of trees of landscape value; planting of single trees and maintenance of the surroundings thereof; opening of views; creation of alleys; maintenance of alleys; maintenance of ancient monuments; maintenance of coppices and forest skirts; creation and maintenance of wooden paths.

However, due to the lack of financial means, the planned measure was left out of both programming periods (2004-2006; 2007-2013) of the Rural Development Plan.

The current situation of the implementation of landscape management programmes is that the publicly used objects of public importance are maintained by citizens initiative (for example in the joint work of village societies and unions), but the fate of private land and the landscape elements located there depends on the awareness, interest and possibilities of each individual landowner. Thus there are several practical reasons for preparing landscape management plans which are more specific than landscape management programmes. First, the maintenance activities prescribed for a larger territory (determined valuable landscape) in the landscape management programme may not be the same for the whole area and may require separate specification by smaller areas for the custodians of landscape. Second, landscape management programmes are too general to be the basis of entry into contracts with custodians of land and payment of support payments.

Nature of landscape management plan

A landscape management plan helps to plan and organize landscape management on the level of a farm proceeding from the decisions taken on a higher level (settlement unit, local government). A landscape management plan, which specifies the landscape management programme, is prepared for a specific enterprise or household (natural person) in a rural region, and draws the landowners attention to the values of the area in question and the maintenance activities required to preserve the values, and offers solutions for problematic areas. A landscape management plan is generally prepared for the land units in the ownership or possession of one single enterprise or household. The Postitee management

plan (Merila & Nutt, 2005) prepared for the maintenance of the road landscape in Plva county however covers land units belonging to different landowners which are adjoining the road.

A landscape management plan is prepared in cooperation between a specialist and the landowner. The implementation of the plans made in the landscape management plan depends on the landowners attitude, possibilities and ability to use various programmes, support payments, measures and other means to implement certain activities.

EXPERIENCE OF ORGANIZING LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT


The methodology of landscape management plans was developed on the example of the agri-environmental measures promoting landscape management prepared and implemented in Europe, management plans, appropriate methods and scientific articles on the values and functions of landscape. The author selected the material with the aim to ensure the experience of different countries (Finland, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Holland), applicability of plans and measures at the level of an economic unit, and representation of different approaches to the management of agricultural land.

Analysis of the bibliography and the experience of different countries revealed that management plans and measures concentrate most on biological diversity, landscape diversity and cultural heritage (table 1). Achievement of environmental protection goals lies in the introduction and implementation of economical agricultural practices, including subjects such as soil protection, collection of agricultural waste, wastewater treatment, plant protection, storage and handling of plant protection products and fertilizers, noise and smell pollution, manure management and cultivation methods.
Table 1. Subjects covered in management plans

Economical agricultural practices

Biological diversity

Land scape diver sity

Envi ron ment

Cu ltu ral .he rita

Acce ss

Management plan name Farm-Nature Plan Farm Wildlife Plan

Country Holland United Kingdom

ge

Scheme Farm Map Suunnitelmakartta Maatilan luonnon monimuotoisuuskart oitus Mar Lodge Estate Management Plan Farm Environmental Plan

Northern Ireland Finland Finland

United Kingdom (Scotland) United Kingdom

Different approaches can be used depending on the purpose of the preparation and implementation of the landscape management plan. If the aim is to increase the ecological value of the farm, the two-level approach (the levels of landscape and the farm) based on landscape ecology should be used. According to Smeding and Joenje (1999), the two-level approach has been employed in Holland, mainly in case of organic farms in the implementation of the Farm-Nature Plan. The Farm Wildlife Plan developed in the United Kingdom, the preparation of which is organized by the internationally acknowledged bird protection organization, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, also promotes the protection of natural species through the creation of new habitats in agriculture as well as through the implementation of nature-friendly agricultural practices. The guidelines (Andrews and Rebane, 1994) provide a good overview of the management of various elements and communities of agricultural landscapes in daily agricultural work and the implementation of special measures to increase biological diversity. The possibility to implement the principles described in the guidelines in Estonia must be approached critically for now, because there have not been enough experiments and studies conducted to be convinced of the efficiency and rationality of the measures and economical agricultural practices implemented in the United Kingdom in Estonia.

A good example of the development and standardization of general requirements of maintenance activities is the element of environmental measure of agriculture implemented in the United Kingdom, the Higher Level Scheme (HLS). An applicant must prepare a Farm Environment Plan (FEP). There are complete guidelines, electronic forms with multiplechoice questions, criteria for the assessment of elements, maps with information concerning environmental condition, sample plans, defined areas of character of the landscape with descriptions, exhaustive list of environmental elements with descriptions, etc. prepared to facilitate administration and decrease the subjectivity arising from assessment. Standardization of landscape management of farms is rational if it is required by the financing scheme, sufficient groundwork has been done and detailed guidelines have been prepared.

The most similar to the conception proposed in Estonia is the agri-environmental measure of the Finlands Rural Development Strategy 2007-2013 the Diversity of nature and landscape management (Luonnon monimuotoisuuden ja maiseman yllpito) one part of which is the mapping of the diversity of the nature of a farm (maatilan luonnon monimuotoisuuskartoitus) and preparation of a document which regulates landscape management (maisemanhoitosuunnitelmia)(Antman ja Wallenius, 2007).

The method of planning and shaping landscapes examined in close detail consists of the principles of visual shaping used in the preparation of forest landscape plans (Bell, 1998). The implementation of the methodology has provided a positive experience in Estonian conditions (Jgi, 2007) and the principles of visual shaping can also be applied to open landscapes which are structured with trees and coppices. Visual analysis of a landscape means proceeding from key principles (shape, visual power of the relief, scalarity, confinement, connectivity, neighborhood, diversity, spirit of the place), through which it is possible to describe the visual quality and based on which it is possible to change the appearance of landscape.

PRINCIPLES OF CREATING A LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT PLAN


The goal for creating a landscape management plan method is to create a recommended basis for planning and performing landscape management according to decisions made on a higher level (village, parish). This methodology can be looked upon as a pilot project, which can be improved and adjusted if necessary, as more experience is obtained. The methodology is supplemented by a sample landscape management plan.

A landscape management plan addresses the management of arable land, undeveloped land (plant-covered meadow strips, field clumps, rocky parts etc.), yards and the objects on them. The landscape management plan also handles the management of ecologically imposing groves and forest strips, forest skirts and young, species-rich and non-uniform forests that have grown on former fields, pastures, grasslands or clearings, or the heritage culture objects in these forests. Forest management should be conducted via a forest management plan, which would be complemented by the landscape plan of the forest, created to help manage landscape assets in commercial forests (Muru, 2004) and stipulatin general principles and conditions for the conservation and development of landscape assets. Forest

10

and agricultural landscapes are dependent on each other and existing plans should be taken into account when planning landscapes. Eilart (1963), too, has placed forest and agricultural landscapes under one landscape category: landscapes with very different usage but still intertwining as massifs, and therefore the main management requirements have to be considered as an integral set of means. An overview of the structure of a landscape development plan and the stages of its preparation are given in Figure 1.

11

Figure 1. The structure and preparation stages of a landscape management plan The structure and preparation stages of a landscape management plan

General data
Supplying general data is necessary in order to put together or understand the subsequent parts of the work. General data consist of the name of the farm, administrative location, description of geographic location, the amount of owned and rented land, lines of activity,

12

historical development, animals bred, soil description, existing buildings, protected natural objects and objects under heritage protection, other definitions (valuable landscape, green network, valuable milieu etc.). The data for creating a landscape management plan are gathered over the course of an interview with the owner, an inventory, literary analysis, source material analysis, map analysis and development document analysis. A good source for data is the map service of the Land Board at www.maaamet.ee: Natura 2000 map, soil map, plans, cultural heritage, nature conservation, historical maps, application of heritage culture.

Landscape analysis
Considering the regional landscape structure (land use, ecological features and anthropogenic objects) and processes helps to make decisions suitable for the region. As the landscape of a particular farm cannot be observed separately from the local landscape, it is necessary to analyse landscapes on two levels landscape (1001000 ha) and farm level (10100 ha), as has also been recommended by Smedinga and Joenje (1999). Landscape management plans give a good overview of the nature of the regional landscape and assets. Descriptions should be based on the clearly differentiating and noticeable characteristics of the surrounding landscape. Knowing the nature of the surrounding landscape makes it possible to judge whether the character of the area's landscape is similar to the general area or differs as a non-typical area, which might have management requirements that differ from general rules (Landscape Character, 2002).

Historical analysis
Historical map analysis is based on comparing historical land use and preserved field patterns according to historical and modern maps. Changes in settlement, road connectivity and the contours and locations of well-preserved fields are observed. The objective of the analysis is to describe the changes that have occurred, to find well-preserved landscape structures and elements from earlier historical periods, and to identify locations of historical and cultural importance. The most common historical maps are maps from the manor period (large-scale hand-drawn colour maps from the 19th century, which give information on land use, flora, settlement and road connectivity), Russian one-verst map (1:42 000) depicting the end of the Tsarist era (18951917), Estonian topographic map (1:50 000) printed during the period of

13

independence (193539), the topographic map of the Soviet Union (1:2550 000) made in the 1940s and, among contemporary maps, Estonian base map, Estonian cadastral map from the 1990s and aerial photographs. Historical data can also be found in various studies concerning local history, which might be available in local libraries and museums or in the community centre. The photo archives of state as well as county museums may hold old landscape photos, where the location is clearly identifiable and therefore comparable to the view today. Valuable old photographs can be found in family photo albums. When analysing the situation today, the primary sources of information are the landscape itself and the people who live there, have lived there or influence the land use local residents, municipal officials, the parish planning department, environmental services, heritage protection. Local residents are often aware of details that have never appeared in print, remember place names, and stories and legends connected with some places.

Plans and development documents


Analysing plans and development documents regarding the area is important, because in creating a landscape management plan, higher-level landscaping decisions have to be taken into account and elaborated on, if necessary. The plans concerning the area, future plans and other future documents with citations (author, status), which have to be considered when planning landscape management activities, are pointed out. Among documents, the most important management recommendations, limitations, conditions, development targets etc. concerning the farm are specified. Local landscape assets (cultural-historical, aesthetic, ecological, recreational and identity-related) specified in the landscape management plan are also highlighted.

Development vision
Factors inhibiting and promoting development are highlighted. Factors inhibiting development could be the lack of workforce and resources, restrictions established by law etc. In the vision, the area must be considered as a whole with its natural, social and economic aspects and the vision and plans of the land owner have to be taken into account. The vision and long-term goals are formulated for a longer period after the end of the period specified in the landscape management plan.

14

Management goals
According to the long-term goal, short-term goals for the period specified in the landscape management plan are formulated that is, the outcome which is expected to be achieved through acting on the landscape management plan. It is recommended to formulate these goals as outcomes. Management goals stem from the landscape assets of the area, the owner's economic goals, landscaping decisions made on a higher level, laws or goals established by international treaties.

Assets and activities


The planning of management activities is preceded by mapping the farm's assets. Assets can be preserved or their value can be increaased by managing certain objects or areas. What follows is a list of major managed objects or areas on farm landscapes and the managing activities connected to them. Fields with a historical and visual value Activities: brush-cutting if necessary, collecting, transporting or burning branches, ploughing, mowing and removing the mow, grazing, burning dead grass if necessary. Permanent grasslands Activities: brush-cutting if necessary, collecting, transporting or burning branches, mowing and removing the mow, grazing Semi-natural grasslands (wooded meadows, junipers, meadowlands and grasslands, coastal meadows and wooden pastures) Activities: brush-cutting or burning dead grass if necessary; pruning tree and bush layers, collecting, transporting or burning branches; mowing and removing the mow; grazing. Canebrake Activities: burning; mowing and removing the mow; cultivation; harrowing; grazing. Stone walls Activities: building or restoring stone walls; repairing holes in stone walls and putting stones that have fallen out back in; pruning the tree and bush layer if necessary; collecting and removing branches; mowing and removing the mow; grazing. Wooden fences or other barriers

15

Activities: creating or restoring a fence; replacing destroyed or damaged elements with new ones. Immovable monuments Activities: brush-cutting if necessary; pruning the tree and bush layer; collecting and transporting branches; mowing and removing the mow; grazing (preferably sheep) Tourist attractions (swimming areas, swing sets, picnic sites, camping sites, campfire sites, garbage collection sites, walking trails, parking areas, toilets, campfires surrounded by stones, simple benches, shelter for wood, changing rooms etc.) Activities: choosing the location and material; brush-cutting; pruning the tree and bush layer; collecting, transporting or burning branches; mowing and removing the mow; establishing a hiking or educational trail; installing informational displays, signs and labels; cleaning; grazing. Buildings and their vicinity Activities: pruning the tree and bush layer; planting trees and bushes; restoration, renovation, conservation, demolition, choice of location, choice of building materials. Old trees, single trees Activities: conservation; brush-cutting; collecting, transporting or burning branches; mowing and removing the mow; grazing; planting; watering; designing; supporting young trees; replacing dead plants, erecting a fence, if necessary. Belts of trees, groups of trees, alleys, hedges Activities: planting woods and trees, watering, rejuvenation, design, supporting young trees, replacing dead plants, erecting a fence if necessary, brush-cutting, pruning the tree and bush layer, collecting, transporting or burning branches, mowing and removing the mow, grazing, removing dead branches from parkway trees. Multi-layered protective belts/hedges Activities: planting trees or bushes, watering, rejuvenation, design, supporting young trees, replacing dead plants, erecting a fence if necessary, mowing and removing the mow. Flower meadows Activities: Soil preparation and removal of weeds, sowing a mixture of seeds, mowing and removing the mow.

16

Meadow strips, buffer areas Activities: mowing and removing the mow. Grasslands/brushes near water bodies, roadside strips of brushes, excessively thick hardwood underbrush, overgrown former farmland; forest border Activities: brush-cutting; design via cutting; pruning the tree and bush layer, collecting, transporting or burning branches; mowing and removing the mow. Forest borders and patches, field clumps Activities: pruning the tree and bush layer; preferential cutting; transport or burning of branches; raising tree crowns; mowing and removing the mow; grazing. Artificial watercourses (ditches, ponds, drainage ditches) Activities: brush-cutting; pruning the tree and bush layer, collecting, transporting or burning branches, raking away algae and aquatic plants. Ponds or wetlands Activities: digging; planting, raking away algae and aquatic plants, removing sediment, planting trees and bushes, transporting or burning branches, mowing and removing the mow, pruning the tree and bush layer Habitats of introduced species Activities: cutting off flower heads, cutting through plant roots, ploughing, mowing and removing the mow, grazing Agricultural buildings Activities: demolition of decaying production facilities or silos; organising places where agricultural and other equipment is stored, planting trees and bushes, trimming the vicinity of production facilities Unused areas Activities: afforestation, design through cutting, collecting, transporting or burning branches, mowing and removing the mow Other landscape elements Activities: preservation, brush-cutting if necessary, pruning the tree and bush layer, collecting and transporting branches, mowing and removing the mow, grazing, establishing a hiking or educational trail; installing informational displays, signs and labels; cleaning.

17

Timetable of activities
The aforementioned objects and areas in possible need of management can themselves be assets (e.g. fields, wetlands, bands of trees etc.). At the same time fields, roadside brush strips etc. may help preserve a beautiful view to the asset. Some assets are not in need of management or are not managed in relation to this management plan, e.g. grove forests, lakes that are connected with many folktales, which should also be denoted. The conservation of certain assets does not presume the management of a certain area, but the following of general management principles. The managed areas are specified in the management scheme. Preparing a timetable helps to plan management activities better. It should contain the following columns: The asset. The managed area or object. Code. The code consists of a combination of a letter and a sequential number, where the letter is either M forest, P arable land, yard. Contributing factors and hazard rating. Factors that pose a hazard to the preservation of the asset and the achievement of targets, including both active and potential hazards. Hazards and contributing factors can both be connected with human activities or stem from natural processes. Hazards can be fertilisers and poisonous chemicals accessing water bodies, damage to shorelines, beaver damage, disturbance during nesting, growing over after the end of mowing/grazing, ploughing into agricultural land, overgrazing, unattended old drainage systems, unsuitable lines, roads, communications etc. Hazards are rated according to a 3-point system: 3 slight danger (hazard does not have a large importance in the preservation of the asset); 2 average danger (hazard is important in the preservation of the asset); 1 grave danger (hazard has a great impact on the asset).

Activities for preventing and removing hazards. Activities proceed from general goals and factors endangering the assets. Every hazard is associated with a specific activity in the landscape management plan. The landscape management plan can also contain general principles and suggestions what to follow when taking measures, but they are featured near the description of the activity.

18

Priority class. Activities are divided into three groups according to the importance of the hazard: I most important assets that must be managed as a priority, II assets of average importance that have to be managed after the first priority activities, III less important assets that nevertheless increase the value of the land unit as a whole when managed. When prioritising activities, the following is taken into account: assets and goals of the area; hazards, their duration and importance; productivity of the activity and the rationality/price of the costs needed to preserve the asset. The prioritisation of activities makes it possible to plan the activities over the years (usually a five-year period) and calculate the volume of activities to draw up a budget.

Calculations and financing options for activities


Planning activities over the years and estimating volumes gives an opportunity to draw up approximate budgets by activities and years. The costs connected with the same activity can greatly vary depending on the nature, location and situation of the managed area and whether future management can be connected with some activity that will result in economic gain. Depending on the planned time, an increase in prices is added. The following ways can be used for determining the expenses: Asking for offers in writing or by phone, searching for prices in catalogues and the Internet. This is suitable in case of specific, clear-cut activities. It is recommended to ask price offers from companies located in the same general location as the managed area.

Calculating cost by the cost of materials and their transport, labour, machinery and tools. Suitable in case of specific, easily accessible and measurable smaller activities. Labour and fuel costs related to landscape management, for example, are featured in "Developing the methodology for landscape management services" (2005, ordered by O Hiiumaa Erametskond in Hiiu County). Calculating cost by unit value and amount. This is suitable if specific tariffs exist in case of work of a larger volume.

19

Assessing cost by similar work. This is suitable in case of work that one has previous experience with. Using expert assessments. This is suitable if the cost of activities is difficult to calculate strictly or where the amount of work needed is not definite enough at the moment of planning.

It is recommended to attach an overview of different financing sources to the budget.

Detailed description of activities


More detailed descriptions of activities can be structured according to assets or combined by categories (e.g. brush-cutting, mowing, informing, requirements for buildings, conserving forest ecosystems, activities for tourism etc.). At the same time it is necessary to make sure that all activities that could possibly lead to questions are described. Planned activities should be elaborated on as clearly as possible the location of the managed area or object, the time the work took place, removed/conserved tree and bush species, processing debris from cutting, the technology and materials used, mowing equipment and type of mowing, time of mowing, processing the mow, period of grazing, method of grazing, animals that grazed and the intensity of grazing, type of fences, placing the soil when creating a pond/wet area, planted flora, materials used when renovating, proportions of the building, division of windows and other activities have to be described with sufficient accuracy so that the activities could also be performed by a person who has not participated in creating the landscape management plan.

Appendices
The appendices for a landscape management plan can be excerpts from the landscape management plan in case of valuable landscapes, the opinion of relevant institutions (Environmental Board, Heritage Protection Agency), if the managed area or object is under protection, photos describing the area, drafts etc. The map portion of the landscape management plan is the management scheme. It is reasonable to use copies of aerial photographs (available from the Land Board) from the beginning of this century as base maps for the management scheme. Due to their large scale (1:10 000), aerial photographs are excellent for identifying different landscape elements and for analysing the flora and land use.

20

SAMPLE LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT PLAN General data


Name of farm. Andruse Farm Administrative location. Hullo Village, Vormsi Parish, Lne County Description of geographic location. The farm is situated in Vormsi on a bank running from northeast to northwest in the north-western part of Hullo Village in the immediate vicinity of Hullo Road (Figure 2).

Figure 2. The location of Andruse Farm in Hullo Village

Owned land and rented land. The size of Andruse Farm with rental land is 210 ha in 2011. The land owned by the farm is situated in Hullo Village (5301 m, of which 2976 m is natural grassland). The residential building with outbuildings (barn and granary) and sheep pastures are also located there. The fields are rental land and are scattered all over the island (see Appendix 2, Management Scheme): Saxby: field 1 Frby: field 23 Suuremisa: fields 48 Hullo: fields 912 Sviby: fields 1317 Hosby: fields 1819 Norrby: field 20 Rlby: fields 2124 Borrby: fields 2528 An usufruct has been set for some fields. Many landowners live in Sweden, which complicates communication with the landowners.

21

Lines of activity: Andruse Farm is one of the few farms on the island that deal with animal husbandry. The farm has been active in animal husbandry since 2002. Fields are used as grasslands. The animals of the farm manage heritage landscapes (coastal meadows, juniper thickets, meadowlands) on Rumpo Peninsula (see Appendix 2, Management Scheme). Animals bred. 75 cattle, 100 sheep, 1 horse. Soil. Higher areas in the western part of the island are dominated by calcareous grit and hoggin soils (Saxby, Kersleti, Frby, Borrby, Rumpo). In the east and south of the island, moister and sandier soils are more common, but there are also soils rich in scree (Diby, Sviby). There are gley and coastal soils on lower areas. Historic development. Hullo Village is somewhat exceptional and consists of two parts: new and old. In the southern part, on a hillside between the road and a wooded meadow, 11 old farms are located. During the period of the Republic of Estonia, tourists discovered the islands and about ten summer houses and boarding houses were built north of the village, into a healthy pine forest. Andruse Farm is not a part of Hullo's newer or older part, but is a part of the former small village Hkabackan (Hokabakani). Hkabackan Village and the five farms located there could be found even on maps from the early 20th century. A map created by the German 8th Army marks the sexton's household (Ksterat).

Figure 3. The previous village of Hokabakan on a Russian one-verst map from the beginning of the 20 century (left) and on the topographic map of USSR from the 1940s (right). www.maaamet.ee
th

22

Figure 4. The former village of Hokabakan on a map created by the German 8th Army (left) and on a Swedish-language map from the first half of the 20th century (right). Nature conservation. The location of Andruse Farm and the fields is not part of a nature conservation area. The habitats of Rumpo Hook, where the animals graze, are situated on the Vormsi Landscape Preservation Area, Rumpo target preservation area. The purpose of the Vormsi Landscape Preservation Area is to preserve the unique and easily harmed natural landscape and endangered species characteristic to the region, their growth areas and habitats according to EU directives. Documents, according to which protection is organised, are the Vormsi Landscape Preservation Area plan for organising protection 20042008 (2004) and the protection guidelines for the Vormsi Landscape Preservation Area (2007). The landscape preservation area is governed by the Environmental Board. Heritage protection. There are no objects subject to heritage protection in Andruse Farm or on the fields. Other definitions. In the thematic plan "Environmental conditions directing settlement and

land use" (2005) by the Lne Country planning committee, Vormsi Island as a whole is entitled as a part of the county's green network and a valuable recreational and cultural landscape. Cultural-historical background (former coastal Swedish settlement) and pure, relatively little damaged nature (beautiful and varied coastline, many natural monuments) have been given as reasons. The thematic planning emphasises that as much of the traditional landscape and as many landscape elements as possible have to be preserved on Vormsi Island. Existing fields and grasslands must stay in use. Semi-natural habitats such as coastal meadows, meadowlands or wooded meadows that are located on valuable landscape areas are preserved and the intended purpose of use is not changed.

23

There are several heritage culture objects on the rented farmland: the farms of Vaksami and Smenes (field 8), the locations of two windmills (field 22), Borby forest guard cordon (field 10), stone wall that served as the state forest border (field 5 and 4).

24

Landscape analysis
The eskers, which run from southeast to northwest and shape the surface of Vormsi Island, continue on the coast as capes forming long land hooks. Vormsi fields were initially created on higher areas with better soil fertility. Later, along with the increase in population and the spread of drainage systems, lower and sandier areas were also taken into use. Agricultural fields bound by gardens were quite large and compact, and the edges usually included mowable grassland plots. Plots on the fields that had many stones or were otherwise infertile constituted field clumps. In case of Vormsi, it is noticeable that the size and shape of fields has remained roughly the same from the 19th century to the present day. Land improvement usually consisted only of rectifying the jagged field edges ("massivising"), moderate drainage and stone removal. At the moment, there is almost no ploughed land and fields are generally used for hay, which is partially mowed and used for feeding animals. The settlement of Vormsi is special for its archaic cluster villages, which in some places have lasted until this day. Farmyards were centred near village streets which, widening in some places, constituted small squares. Village streets were bordered by outbuildings, wooden fences and trees planted near fences (in yards). A village street was an isolated system, which was used to bring animals to pastures. The average size of farms was about 3040 ha in the 1930s. Additionally, almost every village had small farms, where artisans, farmhands, seamen and those who went to work on mainland or abroad used to live. Small farms usually appeared at the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century during the division of farm plots. Small farm yards were often located on the outskirts of villages, sometimes also somewhat farther on pastures or near forests. The residential buildings of farms were quite large one-layered rectangle-shaped gableroofed blockhouses, usually with yellow or dark red clapboarding. The house had two doors (one on the lengthwise side, the other on the far side) with front halls, 35 windows on the lengthwise side, 12 windows on the far side. The roof was usually made of chaff, because thatch was rather rare on coasts. Roof poles almost reached the eaves. Small farms and manor workers' homes were similar, but smaller in size. The building had one door and 23 windows on the lengthwise side. The outbuildings that were present in every yard were a barn, a granary and a threshing barn; most also had a sauna and a few had a smithy, which could also be situated

25

separately, on the outskirts of the village. Thrashing barns were present in all farms, except small ones (Hellstrm, 2008). Andruse Farm is at a higher altitude; it is situated on an esker running from southeast to northwest and continuing on the shore as Rumpo Peninsula. As typical of Vormsi, the fields the farm uses are situated on large compact field massifs and usually have field clumps and mowable grassland plots nearby. Hay is grown on the fields and there is no ploughing. Andruse Farm has historically been a part of the Hkabackan Village somewhat north of Hullo. Hkabackan is a typical village of small farms, which appeared in 1928 when the lands of the church manor were divided. The village consisted of 5 small farms for artisans and the sexton's homestead, which was later built into a hospital. Unlike the older part of Hullo, which can be classified as a linear village, Hokabakan is an undeveloped cluster village. Due to that, Andruse Farm has been significantly smaller than the farms of the other village, and the residential building is also smaller. Otherwise, it is a residential building typical of Vormsi a one-layered rectangle-shaped gable-roofed blockhouse with clapboarding. The house has one door with a front hall, 3 windows on the lengthwise side, 12 windows on the far side. Roof poles almost reach the eaves. The boarding is light-coloured and wooden lace has been used.

Historical analysis
Historical map analysis is based on comparing historical land use and preserved field patterns according to historical and modern maps. Changes in settlement, road connectivity and the contours and locations of well-preserved fields are observed. The objective of the analysis is to describe the changes that have occurred, to find well-preserved landscape structures and elements from earlier historical periods, and to identify locations of historical and cultural importance. A map analysis is used to compare historical maps from the beginning of the 20th century (see Figure 3 and 4) to the current situation (Figure 4). Andruse Farm is at least 100 years old, since the farm is shown even on the earliest maps analysed. The shape and size of rented arable land has been about the same to this day.

26

Figure 5. The former village of Hokabakan (now Hullo) on a modern map. www.maaamet.ee

Plans and development documents


The following documents are directly or indirectly related to the development of Vormsi:

Lne County planning agency's thematic plan Environmental conditions directing settlement and land use (2005). General plan of Vormsi Island (2003), compiled by Eduard Pukkonen, Andres Levald and Toomas Puurmann. Vormsi landscape management plan (2008), compiled by Kristiina Hellstrm. Good practices in protecting and preserving coastal areas in spatial planning (2010), compiled by Tuuli Veersalu.

Landscape management plan

The assets on the landscape of Vormsi according to the landscape management plan: Cultural-historical assets (the similarity of landscape patterns and settlement to the traditional way; historically and culturally important sites). The heritage of coastal Swedes preserved settlement pattern in old cluster villages, traditional road network, preserved agricultural fields, habitats (especially coastal meadows), authentic and wellpreserved examples of coastal Swedish farm architecture, Vormsi church and a graveyard with ring crosses, Saxby lighthouse with the lighthouse keeper's house and outbuildings, Norrby target lighthouses, the ruins of Suuremisa and Sderby manors, and a Russian Orthodox church with a graveyard. Aesthetic assets (beauty of landscape, views). Older pine trees near Hullo, alvar forests of Diby, Rlby bog, diverse forests and junipers of Misaholm, Rumpo Hook as a whole with islets, the slated beaches with pebble walls of Saxby, the diverse northern beach from Saxby Peninsula to Borrby Peninsula, the beaches of Diby to Norrby Peninsula with islets, larger

27

managed coastal meadows near Krrslt Village, on Obholmen, Gjusgrunne, Misanina and near Hullo Bay, Hullo Village with the church and the graveyard, Rumpo, Rlby and Norrby villages, Hosby village road until the tip of Obholmen, the maintained wooden meadows of Saxby ja Norrby, juniper thickets near villages. Natural assets (semi-natural meadows, forests, wetlands etc.). Differentiated coast with its pebble walls, boulder fields and coastal meadows, the fauna of the shallow coastal sea with small islands, lake Prstviig with its springs, Trsk and Krrslt lakes, old forests, Rlby bog, species-rich alvar forests, maintained wooden meadows, some juniper thickets and preserved alvars and meadowlands. Recreational and tourism potential (existing and possible recreational value, sightseeing). Vacationer-friendly landscape, accommodation and both famous and as yet unknown sights. As neither the parish thematic plan nor the landscape management plan gives ratings to different assets (1 low, 2 average or inconsistent, 3 high value), then all the defined assets are treated with equal attention. According to the landscape management plan, the goals for the management of the landscape of Vormsi are: to preserve the openness and views of agricultural landscapes to preserve and restore habitats (wooded meadows, juniper thickets, coastal and other meadows) to preserve historical landscape elements, buildings and structures and display them with better management to match new buildings, structures and land use with old ones so that there would be no disharmony to improve recreational opportunities for residents and tourists

In the landscape management plan of Vormsi, Andruse Farm and rental lands are connected with preserving valuable agricultural fields, managing habitats, landscape elements (field clumps, stone walls, stone piles from land improvement, large single trees), the preservation and renovation of old farm buildings. According to the landscape management plan, the fields of Vormsi have historical value, as their shape and size has remained roughly the same from the 19th century onwards, and

28

aesthetic value, because most villages have been situated in quite open landscapes in the middle of fields. Juniper thickets and alvars of Rumpo Peninsula that can be grazed have been marked as valuable meadows in the landscape development plan (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Valuable meadows on Rumpo Peninsula. (Hellstrm, 2008) coastal grasslands

swamp grassland grassland on mineral soil meadowland wooded meadow juniper thicket wooded pasture (incl. former wooded meadow) On usable agricultural land or in its immediate vicinity, there are many landscape elements that are valued in the landscape management plan field clumps, stone walls, stone piles from land improvement, large single trees, the location of 2 windmills (Brinkbackan, 11.3 m over sea level; field 22) in Rlby Village, and valuable elements related to Sderby Manor (Sderby Manor ruins, fruit garden, tavern ruins, barn location; field 18) in Hosby Village. According to the landscape management plan, Sderby Manor is older than Suuremisa, so it had to appear in the 16th century. The first known owner was a Swedish general. In 1759, the manor was called Bistrmshof on a Swedish navy map. At the end of the 18th century, Sderby Manor with its coastal meadows and pastures became the herding estate for Suuremisa. On a map from 1902 (Figure 7), a large rectangular fruit garden can be seen, with vegetable beds in the middle. Ploughed land and two smaller buildingscan be seen to the south of the barn. On the quite high and narrow mound next to the field, there are two

29

larger buildings (one of them was the granary), whose ruins are preserved (Figure 8). From the mound, a beautiful view to the Lngaurn Peninsula and the sea unravels. A tavern building with a small fruit garden is situated next to the road; a pile of stones and a small band of trees has remained of it. The barn was a pile of stones already in the 1950s, even the ruins are now gone due to land improvement activities. Trees and lilac brushes remain of the fruit garden. The Sderby Manor ruins and the park are not subject to heritage protection.

Figure 7. Sderby Manor in 1902 (EAA 3724-4-821, detail).

Figure 8. 16 and 17 Sderby Manor ruins, 18 Sderby Manor fruit garden, 19 Sderby Manor tavern ruins, ice road stop, former manor stable, 20 location of the Sderby Manor barn, 22 location of Hosby cordon? (Hellstrm, 2008)

General plan
This part highlights the points in the general plan of the parish that are relevant to the landscape management plan.

30

The first principle of the general plan is to preserve Vormsi Island as a unique natural and cultural-environmental system as authentically as possible, and to create conditions for developing it in an eco-friendly way. According to the general plan, the development model, which is closely related to tourism, established that Vormsi is a small island fostering environment-friendly agriculture. Products obtained in an eco-friendly way would be one opportunity for a farmer from Vormsi to reach the European market. Measures for developing sustainable land use include: the development of economic techniques and lines of development that favour natural environment; preserving rare and typical species, ecosystems and traditional landscapes. In the areas of infrastructure, environmental status, and nature and land use planning, there are many tasks which also directly concern landscape conservation and management: afforestation of less valuable arable land; creating demonstration areas for landscape management to protect heritage culture landscapes and systems (coastal grasslands, wooded meadows). The general plan supports the restoration of the traditional cluster and linear village structure. A detailed plan is required for building on the island as a whole (apart from village centres) and in the central settlement of Hullo. Other more detailed conditions for building (height of the buildings, appearance, number on the plot, minimum size of the plot etc.) are not specified in the general plan. Laws and the building regulation of Vormsi Parish must be observed when building. A document analysing coastal regions' best practices for spatial planning (Veersalu, 2010) highlights the general plan for Vormsi as a successful solution (method) for developing and applying best practices in coastal areas. The best local practice is valued and defined in the plan:

One of the main sources for best land use and building practices is the right to continue traditional settlement practices that comes with legal property. Tradition in the case of Vormsi farms means the right to purchase a residential building and outbuildings in the core village and land use rights with servicing buildings on fields, grasslands and forests, which are located outside the village core and which were mostly in communal use.

31

Development vision
Economic limitations arise from the fact that the whole agricultural land is rented (different owners, some of them living abroad) and therefore there is no motivation on the owners' part to increase the fields' landscape value. Both the landowner and the tenant should be interested in activities that increase the landscape value of agricultural fields. The application of these activities is a part of eco-friendly management, as it greatly increases the diversity of flora and fauna that the farmer benefits from. From the viewpoint of farm development, fields for which usufruct has been set are of great importance, as they can be obtained. Therefore the owners' plan to renew those grasslands is understandable. A precondition for development is the existence of a herd (cattle and sheep) and the possibility of increasing it, since Vormsi has many valuable meadow systems in need of management. To intensify animal husbandry, it is possible to repair the former animal raising facilities near Suuremisa and widen grazing areas on coastal meadows in the south-western part of Vormsi (see Appendix 2, Management Scheme). In this area, coastal grasslands that can be grazed are mainly coastal meadows, but on Misaholm Peninsula, they are alvars and juniper thickets. A long-term maintenance goal: valuable habitats are maintained in a way that is most suitable for the ecosystem, the value of agricultural land has grown and the necessary conditions for the operation of eco-friendly agriculture are ensured.

Management goals

Coastal meadows are managed (exemplary areas for landscape management have been created). Important views to the neighbouring landscape have been preserved. Landscape elements introducing local history have been displayed better. The value of arable landscape has been preserved and/or increased.

Assets
Residential building 01. The residential building is a typical small dwelling common for a village in Vormsi. It is in good condition (not renovated).

Outbuildings 02. The farm's outbuildings consist of a barn and a granary (blockhouses in original state).

32

Arable land. The fields have historical and aesthetic value. The historical value comes for the similarities in land use patterns during the past hundred years. The aesthetic value comes from open views. Natural grassland P01. According to the data layer of the Environmental Register (EEELIS), species-rich grasslands on mineral soil has a high value from a nature conservation viewpoint. Rumpo grasslands P02. Meadowlands and juniper thickets are very well preserved species-wise, but junipers are intensively trying to gain the upper hand. Young pine trees grow in groups. Therefore there is an urgent need for pruning. There is also a young alvar forest, where the meadow flora has been replaced by forest grass. It is possible to leave the area as a forest, but it can also be designed into a wooden pasture. Ruins of Sderby Manor P03. Ruins are located on a mound bordered by a field. The ruins of the Sderby Manor and the park are not subject to heritage protection, but they have a historical-cultural value. Sderby junipers P04. The Sderby Manor located on a mound has historically been surrounded by open fields. Nowadays the agricultural land east from the mound has fallen out of use. The landscape management plan has defined this area as a juniper thicket and by that definition it is a valuable meadow. In addition to a possible natural value, the thicket also has a cultural-historical value, as the open structure of historical fields has been preserved quite well. Stone wall P05. A heritage culture object is located in Suuremisa Village between a field and the road following the forest border a stone wall that marked the border with the states forest. The stone wall has a cultural-historical and natural value as a habitat for many species. By its location and building manner, it can be categorised as a berm wall. Berm walls consist of a random pile of stones of varying widths and heights. They are located near fields, grasslands, forests and pastures; large iron stones are used as building material. Drainage ditches P06. Drainage ditches offer habitats for species that use agricultural landscapes. Drainage ditches may overgrow with high brush, leading to moisture problems (Rlby fields). At the same time, there are fields where brush is rather easily removable from ditch banks (Norrby fields). Field clumps. Field clumps, which diversify landscape and structure fields, can be found on all used agricultural land. They are often piles of stone carried together during land improvement, sometimes the remains of former farm plots, windmills or other buildings.

33

Visual material is presented in the appendix of the landscape management plan (Appendix 1). Assets are marked on the Management Scheme and assigned a code (Appendix 2)

Timetable of activities
To determine the areas and objects in need of urgent action, the importance of hazards (1 high, 2 average, 3 low) and the importance of activities reducing hazards (1 most important, 2 important, 3 least important) are assessed. Activities are ranked into three groups according to the importance of the hazard and the importance of the activities (I most important activities that should be given priority, II activities with average importance that have to be performed after the first priority activities, III less important activities, which increase the value of the land unit as a whole when performed). To facilitate planning and performing management activities, a summary table of assets and activities (Table 2) and a table of activities by years (Table 3) have been prepared.

34

Table 2. Summary table of assets and activities


Code E01 E02 P01 P02 Asset Residential building Outbuildings Arable land Natural grassland Rumpo grasslands Early mowing Continued brushing with junipers and pine trees P03 Ruins of Sderby Manor P04 P05 P06 Sderby junipers Stone wall Drainage ditches Field clumps Brushing and continued degrading Overgrowth Decay Brushing Brushing Removal of stones, ploughing Decrease in diversity 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 Brush removal Juniper pruning Restoration Removing the brush Removing the brush Preservation Maintaining a buffer zone 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 I I I I II II I Hazard Using unsuitable materials and building practices Removal 1 3 1 2 Hazard rating 3 Restoration according to recommendations given in the landscape management plan Rearrangement Cultivation or mowing Mowing as late as possible Widening pastures 3 1 2 1 II II I I Activity Importance Prioritisation of of activity 3 activities III

35

Table 3. Activities by years


Asset
st nd

Activities
rd th th

1 year

year

3 year

4 year

5 year

Residential building Oubuildings Arable land Natural grassland Rumpo grasslands Ruins of Sderby Manor Sderby junipers Stone wall Drainage ditches Field clumps Brush removal Juniper pruning Removing brushes and debris Mowing Preservation, maintaining a buffer zone Mowing Juniper pruning Restoration Brush removal Rearrangement Ploughing/mowing Mowing Grazing

Renovation

Juniper pruning

36

Detailed description of activities


Residential building and outbuildings Large alterations to the residential building should be avoided and in case of renovation, one should seek to maintain the current appearance. Outbuildings should be preserved. It is better to build a new building next to an old one and find a new purpose for the old one. When renovating buildings and building new ones, it is wise to follow older building traditions with regard to materials, paint types and proportions. That does not necessarily mean imitating older building types, but rather using traditional building materials and paint types, harmonising proportions, heights, roofs, window types etc. with existing older buildings. For example, the residential building's front door might be restored, taking an old door type as a model. Profiled sheet roofs should be avoided. Old building details (windows, doors, chimneys etc.) should be renovated rather than replaced (Hellstrm, 2008). If possible, repair the existing windows as the wood that older windows are made of is generally very sturdy and of good quality. If repairs appear to be impossible, it would be best to order a new framed window made of high-quality wood, taking the old windows as a model. The disadvantages of plastic windows are their non-durability when compared to wooden windows, extra-smooth glass that is often tinted, which on an old house looks like an unwanted oddity, the absence of repair options, and accompanying condensation and moisture issues. Arable land To maintain the openness and distinctiveness of landscape, fields should be held in agricultural use, usually as grasslands or pastures. Planting forest on fields should be avoided. Afforestation may be considered, if the soil is not fertile enough and the field is not important as regards the view. Natural grassland Natural grasslands should not be ploughed or fertilised as this would violate the established species-rich ecosystem that is characteristic of grasslands. To preserve this asset, either mowing or grazing is necessary. Mowing should not take place before July because of bird conservation. Many plants will produce seeds thanks to late mowing.

Alvars and junipers On Rumpo Peninsula, the management of alvars and junipers through grazing should certainly be continued. As a result of grazing, reed will move back and junipers will not gain the upper hand. When managing an alvar, the grazing rate should be 0.21.0 lu/ha, keeping bushes scarce (integrability of 00.4) and grass low. It is already possible to evaluate the results of managing coastal grasslands on Rumpo Peninsula as grazing has been continuous. Farming animals, especially sheep, have been a traditional part of farm life in Vormsi and animals are an interesting sight for campers visiting the peninsula. Rumpo Peninsula with its maintained and not yet maintained coastal grasslands could be an appropriate demonstration area for landscape management. The Sderby juniper thicket is still rather sparse. The most fitting managing activity for Sderby junipers is the thinning of the shrub layer and mowing areas where the growth is scarcer. To achieve nature conservation compensation, it is necessary to cut down trees and thin the shrub layer when restoring meadows (integrability can be 00.4). No requirements have been established for juniper areas, but the Sderby junipers are in need of pruning. When restoring the juniper area, it makes sense to start by mowing and expanding better-preserved parts of the meadow. Groups of bushes should alternate with treeless areas it is not a good idea to design a uniformly treeless area. An orderly or uniform distribution of trees and bushes should be avoided. All the cutdown wooden material has to be collected and, if necessary, removed from the meadow or burnt on site. If there are many hardwood bushes in the juniper thicket, strong pruning (or so-called clear-cutting) should be done only if the area is grazed. Otherwise the result will be a thicket even worse than before. The ruins of Sderby Manor Shrubs or young trees growing on the ruins and in their vicinity should be removed. Single bushes can be retained, especially if they are domestic plants (e.g. lilacs). If they have turned into shrubs (lilacs, wild jasmines, Spiraea, snow berries etc.), their spread can be limited, but not destroyed entirely. If possible, mow and clean the vicinity of domestic garbage. But take caution when cleaning up there could be valuable building elements and materials in the ruins near the buildings, which should remain where they are. The vicinity of ruins should be mowed and the mowed grass removed on a regular basis. The park/garden of Sderby Manor should be thoroughly studied before its potential rearrangement (Hellstrm, 2008).

Stone wall Stone walls are not noticeable anywhere on Vormsi and most old stone walls have been surrounded by shrubs. The stone wall that marked the dividing line with state forest in Suuremisa Village can still be found rather well. Mowing the vicinity of a stone wall and cutting down shrubs is very labour-consuming. Therefore, the management of stone walls should be limited to removing trees and bushes from the side of fields, as a stone wall with trees and bushes also makes for a nice forest border. Stones that have become scattered should be put back where they belong. Beginning from 2005, PRIA has subsidised the building and restoration of stone walls. Applying for the subsidy has to be coordinated with a heritage protection inspector. Drainage ditches Drainage ditches should be kept open by mowing or continuous brush removal. Ditch banks should be managed by mowing every other year after July 15. The priority should be cleaning the drainage ditches where the brush is still young. When removing brushes from drainage ditches overgrown with large trees and bushes, a lot of nutrients are released, so it has to be done over the course of several years. Drainage ditches will remain open longer if there is a strip with natural flora between the ditch and the fields which is not fertilised or sprayed with chemicals. Field clumps Field clumps with trees and bushes diversify large empty fields. Older trees and bushes growing on field clumps should be preserved. If the trees and bushes grow too close together, they can be pruned. Stone piles collected during melioration do not usually have an aesthetic value. They still have some value as habitats for animals, birds and insects. Stone piles should not become a place for discarding of litter. It is recommended to leave a 5 metre wide buffer zone for field clumps which are not ploughed, where fertilisers and plant protective chemicals are not used and which are not mowed before July 15. Mowing In order to mow ditch banks, the surroundings of ruins, field clumps etc., a handheld sickle bar mower or the grass blade of a brush cutter should be used on smaller areas

to maintain biodiversity, whereas a sickle bar mower should be used on larger areas. On the other hand, both a rotor mower and a trimmer with a plastic cord break and tear plants and quickly decrease the biological diversity of the meadow ecosystem. The meadow ecosystem recovers faster, if at first it is moved twice a year, later once a year, preferably after June 1. If the hay is mowed, it can be left on the ground for a few days, so that the meadow flora could improve thanks to the seeds from the hay. Chopping hay after mowing reduces the negative effect of not cleaning up after mowing, but does not quite compensate for it. As long as hay does not find use as fodder for animals, it is very important to collect it and transport it away from the meadow, so as to avoid the formation of a thick layer of dead plants. Brush-cutting Brush-cutting means the removal of young wooden flora from unsuitable locations. The best time to cut brush is early spring after the snow has melted, or in late autumn when it weakens the strength of trees and bushes the most. Snowless winters are also suitable, but with thick snow high stumps may result. In order to reduce bothersome root and stump offshoots, it is useful to band (remove bark from the trunk in a 1015 cm strip) bigger trees (e.g. aspen, alder, hazel) a year before cutting. Young brush can be mowed with a smith scythe, brush cutter or rotor mower, chopped with a fly and an axe; twig or garden scissors can also be used. Trees and bushes should be sawn off as low as possible, since high and sharp branches and tree stumps obstruct mowing and may damage cattle. Stumps decay over time. To minimise the danger of rebrushing, it is necessary to chop the stumps or root them out. Smaller stumps, younger brush and bushes should be pulled up by hand or with a tractor. Larger holes left by stumps should be flattened with sand or soil from the same system or nearby. It is better to pull up bushes in early spring, as roots break more easily when the land is frozen.

Bibliography
Aken. Ajalugu. Puitaken ja selle remontimine. Leaflet of the National Heritage Board. Andrews, J., Rebane, M. 1994. Farming and Wildlife. A practical handbook for the management, restoration and creation of wildlife habitats on farmland. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Pages 215. Antman, A., Wallenius, S. 2007. Maartilan luonton monimuotoisuuskartois. Maa- ja metstalousministeri. Available at: http://www.mavi.fi/attachments/5oby3ix7b/5nnKIeX45/Files/CurrentFile/maatilan _luonnon_monimuotoisuuskartoitus.pdf Bell, S. 1998. Forest design planning: a guide to good practice. Edinburgh, UK: Forestry Commission. Available:

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fdp.pdf/$FILE/fdp.pdf
Council of Europe, 2000. Official text of the European Landscape Convention and its Explanatory report. Available at:

http://www.coe.int/t/e/cultural_co%2Doperation/environment/landscape/r eference_texts/Convention_UnitedKingdom.asp#TopOfPage
Eilart, J. 1973. Maastikuhooldus. Rmt-s: Kumari, E. (editor). Looduskaitse. Tallinn. Pp. 471508. Hellstrm, A. (ed.) 2008. Vormsi maastikuhoolduskava. Manuscript in the Vormsi office of the Environmental Board. Hellstrm, K. 20052006. Maastikuhooldusteenuse metoodika vljaarendamine. O Hiiumaa Erametskond. Hiiu County. Manuscript in the Eametskonna office of O Hiiumaa. Hellstrm, K. 2002. Maastikuhoolduskavad ja maastikuhooldus. Tallinn. Ministry of the Environment. Hellstrm, K., Alume, H., Palo, A., Palang, H., Sepp, K., Koppelmaa, A. 2001. Vrtuslike maastike mratlemine. Metoodika ja kogemused Viljandi maakonnas. Ministry of the Environment. Tallinn. Available at: http://www.viljandimaa.ee/metoodika Jgi, M. 2006. Metsa maastikuplaani rakendamise metoodilisi aspekte Otep maastikukaitseala Kriku testala nitel. A Masters thesis in landscape architecture. 81 pages. Manuscript in the library of the Institute of Agriculture and Environmental Protection of the Estonian University of Life Sciences.

Kukk, T. (ed.) 2004. Prandkooslused. pik-ksiraamat. Prandkoosluste Kaitse hing. Landscape Character Assessment 2002. Guidance for England and Scotland. The Countryside Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage. Available:

http://www.countryside.gov.uk/lar/landscape/cc/landscape/publication/.
Lukas, D., Rennu, M. 2005. Kiviaia rajamine, taastamine ja hooldamine. Ministry of Agriculture. Merila, A., Nutt, N. 2005. Postitee maastikuhooldusplaan ja jalgrattatee eelprojekt. Artes Terrae O. Tartu. 35 pages. Muru, T. 2004. Maastikuplaneerimise phimtted metsakasutuse planeerimises. Metsamaastiku visuaalse kvaliteedi ja kultuuriprandi hoiu kavandamine. Institute of Agriculture and Environmental Protection of the Estonian University of Life Sciences. 81 pages. Manuscript in the library of the Institute of Agriculture and Environmental Protection of the Estonian University of Life Sciences. Semm, M., Mikk, M., Elts, J., Lohtaja, S. 2003. Pllumajandusmaastike loodushoid. Soovitusi talunikele igapevasteks tdeks. Eesti Ornitoloogiahing. Available at:

http://www.ceet.ee/pdf//pollumajandusmaastike_loodushoid.pdf.
Smeding, F.W, Joenje, W. 1999. Farm-Nature Plan: landscape ecology based farm planning. Landscape and Urban Planning. Volume 46, Issues 13, December 1999. Pages 108115. Veersalu, T. 2010. Rannikualade kaitse ja silitamise head tavad ruumilises planeerimises. Vormsi valla ldplaneering (General Plan for Vormsi Parish). 2003. Available at:

http://www.ekonsult.ee/uploads/t88d/Vormsi/index_vormsi_yp.htm
Maps used Orms: Swedish-language map, from the 1st half of the 20th century (original scale 1:50 000?) Baltische Inseln: Dago, Worms, Moon, 1918 (a map compiled by the German 6th Army, S1:100 000) Russian one-verst map, 18951917 (S1:42 000) Topographic map of the Soviet Union, 1945 (S1:25 000) Aerial colour photos (www.maaamet.ee)

Databases used PLK data layer of the Estonian Seminatural Community Conservation Association PLK data layer of the Environmental Register (EELIS)

Appendix 1. Photographs

Figure. Drainage ditch that can be easily managed, since the brush to be removed is still young.

Figure. Brush has not been removed from drainage ditches (on the left side of the picture) in time.

44

Figure. The ruins of Sberby Manor are beginning to grow over with brush.

Figure. The ruins are located on a species-rich meadow strip.

45

Figure. The granary of Andruse Farm from the yard side.

Figure. The residential building of Andruse Farm from the yard side.

46

Figure. The junipers thickets with an open view to Rumpo Hook.

Figure. A juniper thicket that has taken shape on former arable land near the ruins of Sberby Manor.

47

Appendix 2. Management Scheme

48

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi