1. Fishes in Lakes Prespa and Ohrid Threats and Conservation needs Spase Shumka Agricultural University of Tirana sprespa@gmail.com

2. Based on field surveys and observations on fishery and plankton, monitoring data available, examining the extensive published record, conducting interviews, we aim to: 1. assess threats to Lakes Ohrid and Prespa (endemic) biodiversity, in terms of fishes. 2. summarize existing conservation activities and strategies, and 3. outline future conservation needs for Lakes Ohrid and Prespa in light of national commitments to EU and other international binding documents and species conservation.

3. In case of lakes Ohrid and Prespa, the species conservation cannot be achieved without an integrated approach! To that fact the fish ’ s conservation is an ecosystem approach rather than a species oriented plan.

4. The threat assessment carried for this presenation is based on the guidelines provided by both the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Global International Waters Assessment (GIWA). IUCN threat classes were used, which 5 are primarily designed to assess key threats to species. They involve past, ongoing and future threats, using a time frame of three generations or ten years, whichever is the longer (not exceeding 100 years in the future) as required by the Red List Criteria (IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee, 2010). Environmental impacts were assessed using the scoring scheme provided by GIWA, which is more 10 ecosystem oriented. Four impact scores ranging from 0 (no known impact) through 1 (slight impact), 2 (moderate impact) to 3 (severe impact) were used to quantify the importance of each key issue. Details on determining impact scores can be found in the GIWA Methodology handbook for scaling and scoping (GIWA, 2001).

5. Conservation areas in the transboundary Ohrid Prespa lakes region

6. Threat classKey threatImpact OhridMean impactImpact PrespaMean impact 1. Households/Commercial 1.1. Housing and urban araes33 (2.66)22 1.2. Commersial/industry2 0 1.3. Tourism/recreation3 1 2. Agriculture/aquaculture 2.1. Annual perrenials22 (1.75)22 2.2. Wood / pulp planrtaions1 1 2.3. Livestock/Framing1 3 2.4. Aquaculture3 0 3. Energy production/mining 3.1.Oils/Gass0302 3.2. Mining/Quarrying3 2 3.3. Renewable energy0 0 4. Transport/service corridors 4.1. Roads/railwayas3302 4.2.Utility/services0 2 4.3.Shiping lines0 0 4.4. Flight paths0 0 5.Biological resources use 5.1. Hunting/trapping tererstrial animals33 (2.75)22 (2.25) 5.2.Gathering terestrial plants2 1 5.3. Logging/wood harvesting3 3 5.4.Fishing/harvesting aquaric resources3 3 6. Human intrusion/disturbance6.1. Recreational activities3222 6.2. War, civil unrest/military excersises0 0 6.3. Work and other activities1 1 7. Natural system modifications 7.1. Dams/water management/use02.51 7.2.Fire/fire supression2 2 7.3. Other ecosystem modifications3 2 8. Invasive/other problematic species, genes 8.1. Non native species 022 8.2. Problematic native species0 0 Introduced genetical material2 2 9. Pollution 9.1. Domestic and urban pollution33 (2.6)33 9.2. Industrial/military effluents3 0 9.3.Grabage/solid waste3 3 9.4. Air-borne pollutants1 0 9.5. Agriculture forestry effluents3 3 9.6. Exces energy0 0 10. Geological events 10.1. Volcanous0000 10.2.earthquarks/tsunamis0000 10.3. Avallanches/lanslides0000 11. Climate changes/severe weather 11.1. Habitat shifting/alteration32 (2.25)22 (2.33) 11.2. Droughts3 3 11.3. Temperature extreme2 2 11.4. Storms/flooding1 0 11.4. Other impacts 0

7. The common general threats to environment of the project area are as follows: Unsustainable use of natural resources, including all resources; Unsustainable management of forests and illegal logging; Practices of tree lopping, overgrazing; Inadequate river basin management affecting aquatic ecosystems, Loss, degradation and fragmentation of habitats due to urbanization and land development, Loss of native plant and animal species, both wild species and traditional breeds, Introduction of alien invasive species of flora and fauna into ecological system, Pressure of tourism on biodiversity of the mountain, coastal and marine ecosystems, Pollution of the environment by industrial and agricultural pollutants, and municipal waste, Insufficient law enforcement, in particular in physical planning and preventing illegal activities threatening the state of environment and integrity of nature. The common general threats to environment of the project area are as follows: Unsustainable use of natural resources, including all resources; Unsustainable management of forests and illegal logging; Practices of tree lopping, overgrazing; Inadequate river basin management affecting aquatic ecosystems, Loss, degradation and fragmentation of habitats due to urbanization and land development, Loss of native plant and animal species, both wild species and traditional breeds, Introduction of alien invasive species of flora and fauna into ecological system, Pressure of tourism on biodiversity of the mountain, coastal and marine ecosystems, Pollution of the environment by industrial and agricultural pollutants, and municipal waste, Insufficient law enforcement, in particular in physical planning and preventing illegal activities threatening the state of environment and integrity of nature.

8. No.Species Ohrid Lake Origin Prespa Lake Origin IUCN red List Berne Convention Annex Albanian Red List 2007 Observed in Albanian part of Lakes first time 1Anguilla anguilla* Native CR Last 1996 2Alburnoides prespensisNativeVU 3Alburnoides ohridanus Native VU 4Alburnus belvicaNativeCR 5Alburnus scoranza Native LC 6Barbus prespensisNativeVU LRcd 7Barbus rebeli Native LC 8Carassius gibelioNonantive 1973 9Chondrostoma prspenseNativeVU 10Chondrostoma ohridanus Native LC 11Cobitis meridionalisNativeVU&LRlc 12Cobitis ohridana Native LC 13Barbatula sturany Native LC 14Cyprinus carpio Nonnative DD 15Gobio ohridanus Native VU 16Ctenopharyngodon idellaNonnative 1979 17Pachychilon pictum Native LC 18Gambusia holbrookiNonnative LRlc2006 19Hypophthalmichthys militrixNonnative 1979 20Lepomis gibbousNonnative 1996 21Pelasgus prespensisNativeEN 22Pelasgus minutus Native DD 23Phoxinus limarieus Native LC 24Pseudorasbora parvaNonnative 1998 25Rhodeus amarusNonnative VU 1992 26Rutilus prespensisNativeLC 27Rutilus ohridanusNativeLC 28Salmo afeliosNativeEN 29Salmo balkanicusNativeDD 30Salmo letnicaNativeNonnativeDD VU1982 31Salmo lumiNativeDD 32Salmo ohridanus Native VU 33Salmo peristericusNativeEN 34Scardinus knezeviciVU 35Silurus glanisNonnativeLC& 1996 36Squalius prespensisNativeLC 37Squalius squalius Native LC 38Tinca tincaNonnativeLC Last 1996 39Telestes montenegrinus Native 40Prabramis pekinensisNonnative 1973 41Onchorynchus mykissNonnative 1979

9. The species categories in Micro Prespa lake

10. Species composition in the stock catched

11. The differences among catches in Albania and Greece

12. The % fishes in catch at Macro Prespa

13. The mean CPUE for Macro Prespa lake

14. Prespa lake: The fish stock/h/m2/net

15. Matrix demand for Macro Prespa Lake to fulfill the EU WFD (S.Shumka, 2010)

16. What is needed in the current state? (i)Additional elements ‘remediation’s’ in all lakes of concern; (ii) Reduction of fertilizers/manures in all sides of littoral countries; (iii) Small scale facility of water treatment in case of rural areas and high cost when comes to apply the commercial treatments; (iv) Habitat restoration; (v) Cooperating with neighbors in Water Management practices and vi) Respect ESPO convention in case of transboundary water bodies. What is needed in the current state? (i)Additional elements ‘remediation’s’ in all lakes of concern; (ii) Reduction of fertilizers/manures in all sides of littoral countries; (iii) Small scale facility of water treatment in case of rural areas and high cost when comes to apply the commercial treatments; (iv) Habitat restoration; (v) Cooperating with neighbors in Water Management practices and vi) Respect ESPO convention in case of transboundary water bodies.