Feedback from MS on HABIDES Portable Tool

1. Feedback from MS on HABIDES Portable Tool as of June 15th 2009

2. HABIDES Portable Tool • Sent out on 19th of May 2008 on Circa. MS notified by mail. • General presentation on HABIDES and the Portable Tool on Circa. • Reportnet-based version for HABIDES soon for testing: most MS have already received login/passwords (24 on 27: ES, LT, SI remain) • Objective today: • Summary of feedback received over the last weeks by MS and discussion • get an agreement on the fields and the functionality to be used, so we can finalize the Portable Tool, the XML Schema and the Reportnet-based system.

3. Limitations of Portable Tool • built on MS Access 2000. Has advantages and disadvantages: • (+) easy to use, many people are familiar with it. • (-) technical limitations; added functionality should be kept to a minimum; • Initial objective of Portable Tool: support to Reportnet-based system: • Simple and flexible tool for decentralized use • should not require too many resources to develop or maintain. • Focus on quick fixes instead of signification re-writes. If proven necessary however, we could envisage a version 2 at some later point. Please note that the final product is the XML document. MS are free to build their own tools as to produce a XML document compliant to our XML Schema.

4. Overview feedback from MS • Reactions from 11 MS (RO, AT, BG, BE, NL, UK, HU, SE, FI, PT, MT, PL) • Partly content related and partly technical issues (bugs, feature requests) • For bugs that could not be reproduced we’ll contact MS for more details

5. 1° Problems of MS Access • The Portable Tool was built with MS Access 2000, incompatibility with Access 97 • Unavailability of MS Access • Solution: • Upgrade MS Access • Use Web-based, Reportnet-based Habides • Generate by your own means the XML Document compliant with the HABIDES XML Schema

6. 2° “Import” or “Merge” feature • As it is possible to export XML documents from the Portable Tool, it could be interesting to import XML documents in a single Access Database. • Difficulty: • see limitations on previous slide; would require significant changes to the datamodel; • Proposal: • Provide users with a script (JAVA) that will merge all generated XML in one single XML document so one single file can be uploaded on Reportnet. • Reminder: the generated XML documents can be opened directly in Internet Explorer and read in a human-friendly format.

7. 3° Possibility for multiple species derogations • Request to specify two or more species in one derogation. • Proposal: • Possibility to specify in the free-text field a higher taxonomic level than species, in Latin • In the free-text field, possibility to add colon-separated (“;”) species names in Latin (field will be enlarged to allow more characters) • Multi-species derogation should be the exception

8. 4° Misc Questions • Will Habides be the reporting system that MS will report in 2009? • Yes, this is planned. However reporting deadline should be delayed to end 2009. • Are all fields mandatory? • Most are, depending on the derogation. Though none left open will block a submission. • Is it necessary to report the conservation status for each species derogated? • No. But if the species is in unfavourable status, a justification is required. • Which population size will be reported? • To be clarified in guidance to be produced. (National) • What is meant with “alternatives assessed”? • Alternatives in the sense of “No satisfactory alternative” as stated in Article 16(1) of the Habitats Directive and Article 9(1) of the Birds Directive

9. 5° Misc Remarks (next) • There is no legal basis for the Commission to require MS to report electronically. • The system is intended to help and facilitate both national and European authorities and to allow standardized and more efficient reporting. Approval of the system will be sought from the Habitats Committee • Give possibility to use vernaculars • Strongly discouraged; makes analysis difficult/impossible • It should be allowed for regional authorities to directly report to the Commission (comment from DE) • The MS has the responsibility for the correct application of the directives and only official submissions from the national authorities can be accepted from the Commission.

10. 6° Misc Remarks (next) • Will the Reportnet-based web-forms reflect the Portable Tool? • Yes, fully. The Reportnet-based system, the user guide and updated XML scheme and Portable Tool will be sent out in the coming weeks. • Several persons in a MS should be allowed to introduce data via Reportnet. • This is already possible. However, only national data coordinators are expected to officially submit reports to the Commission. (Confirmation via Perm Rep will be needed, like for the submission of Natura 2000 data) • A user guide would have been helpful at this stage. • DG ENV is working on this and it will be provided with the next update of the tool and the Reportnet-based version.

11. 7° Provisional Time Plan • Latest comments by 18/06 • Last requests will be sent to consultant. • Mid July: new version of the XML Schema, Portable Tool, the Reportnet-based forms and the user manual will be sent out to Expert Group and Habitats Committee • Feedback till 7 September. • Final Portable Tool, Reportnet-based forms and XML Schema version 1.0 by end September. • Use for Derogation Reporting 2007/2008