These case studies all provide examples of non-intervention management in certified PAN Parks where a non-intervention approach is combined entirely with the main objective of the protected area, that of protecting intact native ecosystems.

A good example of non-intervention management and conceptual approach in Scandinavia

Fulufjället NP, Sweden

Photo: Vitantonio Dell'Orto/exuviaphoto.comNon-intervention is a fundamental management tool in Fulufjället NP (38,483ha) established in 2002 and in the same year verified as a PAN Park.
The non-intervention approach is an integral part of conservation strategy, management plan or visitor management. Implementation is supported by clear zoning, appropriate monitoring and research activities. Zoning clearly separates traditional activities like lake fishing or snowmobiling from the non-intervention Zone 1 (PAN Parks wilderness area, 22 140 ha) which constitutes a true wilderness. The recent international PAN Parks audit (2007) recommended only a small improvement and temporarily excluded 860 ha, with small-scale traditional hunting of elk and small game to be phased out in 10 years. This is dependent on the agreement of the purchase of the two forested valleys when the park was created in 2002.

Other examples of comprehensive and concise non-intervention management:

• measures taken to remove the snowmobile track from the PAN Parks Wilderness zone (Zone I)
• utilisation of natural disturbance event (centennial flood) in Goljadalen Valley as a unique interpretation site - currently the second major attraction of the park

The role model of Fulufjället NP for non-intervention management has been even better highlighted by the commitment of the local government when Dalarna County Governor expressed full support of the park during an international audit in 2007.

Non-intervention management and EU agriculture subsidy

Central Balkan NP, Bulgaria

Photo: CBNP ArchiveNon-intervention management in Central Balkan NP, has been implemented in a complex of 9 separate forest reserves making up the park’s wilderness core zone (total 20 019.6 ha), surrounded by areas of “human impact limitation zone” where grazing and non-commercial gathering is allowed.

The park’s core zone was designated as a PAN Parks Wilderness area in 2003, and an international audit focused on the integrity of the core zone and the connection between the reserves. Concern was expressed regarding how to manage the mountain pastures now and in the coming years – whether to leave them to natural succession or to maintain grazing.

Initially, it seemed that this problem would disappear over time with the abandonment of grazing in high mountain pastures. But after the entry of Bulgaria in the EU, the number of livestock on alpine meadows is growing due to an EU subsidy system. This causes a conceptual problem for the park administration in designating at least a small part of the high mountain grassland areas connecting the forest reserves, and creates less fragmented PAN Parks Wilderness Area.

Management plans, currently under development, should provide an answer to this challenge. However, without political support and the possibility of redesigning the European subsidy system it will be not easy.

Experience with non-intervention management on privately owned land

Majella NP, Italy

Photo: MNP ArchiveThe non intervention management in Majella NP has been implemented in “A” zone (integral reserve) since the park’s declaration in 1995. Part of this zone was designated in 2003 as a PAN Parks Wilderness area in an area of 25 500 ha. A PAN Parks international audit in 2003 focused on activities incompatible with the PAN Parks wilderness concept, for example to eliminate a few small patches of grazing (partly achieved in 2008) and reduce all park roads in Wilderness Zone (achieved in 2007).

Inside the wilderness area, many activities that before the establishment of the protected area were common practice, have been forbidden or restricted; lumbering, hunting, fishing, use of motorised vehicles, modifying watercourses, quarrying and any extractive activities. To increase the control over the territory and implementation of non-intervention measures for the preservation of ecological processes, the park has rented over 17 000 ha of land from the municipalities, most of it inside the wilderness zone.

Thanks to this strategy, the management implemented non-intervention management which in practice means that they allow natural perturbations such as pest, forest damage or avalanches. Example of undisturbed avalanches can be experienced along the public tourist trails at the edge of PAN Parks Wilderness area. A wilderness restoration project focused on removal of non-native species of pine was completed in 2006 and entire area was suggested for adding to the PAN Parks Wilderness area.

The park has experience in giving good compensation due to damage by wild animals (wolf, brown bear, even small population of wild cat, etc.) to fields and domestic livestock. Therefore it is not a surprise that acceptance of consequences of non-intervention management, such as an occurrence of pack of wolves is much better than anywhere else.

Challenge of non-intervention management “in country without wilderness”

Peneda-Gerês NP, Portugal

The 70 000 ha Peneda-Gerês National Park, the only national park in Portugal, established in 1971, is acknowledged as the wildest area of Portugal. The park has a cultural history from prehistoric times through Roman occupation to the present day. The cultural influences represented a challenge to create a wilderness zone devoid of extractive use.

After several attempts to identify a potential PAN Park in Portugal an agreement with the administration of Peneda-Gerês NP was achieved in 2007. In spite of hesitation regarding how the strict PAN Parks wilderness concept could be implemented in a landscape intensively used by humans for millennium, the international audit in 2008 confirmed that this protected area fulfils the minimum verifiable threshold to become a PAN Park.

However, to achieve this conclusion a specific tailor-made verification calendar was developed and a specific contract between the PAN Parks Foundation and Peneda Gerês NP was signed with the agreement that the protected area will provide 5000 ha of PAN Parks Wilderness area in 2008 and an additional 5000 ha in the coming 10 years. The philosophy behind this agreement is that natural wilderness can be achieved in a long standing cultural landscape if there is a commitment to stop extractive use and a clear long-term vision to return an area to a condition as close as possible to the state by which natural processes prevail.

Already visible consequence of non intervention management is the re-naturalization of the forest. Oak trees are re-sprouting in many areas where grazing was already completely or partially removed and the general surface area of the forest is increasing.

Non-intervention management has also obvious consequences on population of feral horses Equus caballus belonging to the local garrano breed and a local pack of wolves. The horses roam wild in the wilderness zone and their behaviour, population structure and dynamic, are completely wild. This represents an exceptional case of wild horses on the Iberian Peninsula, and possibly in Europe. 

Non-intervention management and marine environment

Archipelago NP, Finland

Photo: Jouko HögmanderNon-intervention management is an innovative and challenging approach in terrestrial ecosystems but almost unknown for a marine protected area. The very first marine protected area Archipelago NP with a non-intervention wilderness zone of 10 000 ha was certified as a PAN Park in 2007.

The Archipelago area is subdivided into a puzzle of units belonging to thousands of private owners and state authorities (Metsähallitus and Ministry of Defence). The national park was established in 1982 and includes only state-owned land that is managed by Metsähallitus (50 400 ha). The entire area of some 300 000 ha, comprised of private land and sea water, is called a “Co-habitation Area”.

A wilderness restricted zone of 10 600 ha with non-intervention management was established in the co-habitation area to protect breeding birds and the threatened Baltic Ringed Seal resting sites. The wilderness restricted zone is located on the southern limits of the park at the wind-exposed Storskär islands and neighbouring skerries. Access by boat was always difficult and is no longer allowed.

In order to offer visitors the opportunity to experience the Archipelago wilderness it is suggested that a new area is added to the wilderness zone, for example in the Brunskär-Bunssö area. This would present examples of middle Archipelago habitats and provide public access to ‘wilderness areas’, without extractive use such as sport fishing. Assessing opportunities and acting pro-actively can support this process to extend the Archipelago NP wilderness zones to sensitive habitats and species, in areas notably related to the Natura 2000 sites that are currently privately owned.