English - Convention on Biological Diversity

Country Study for Biodiversity 

of the Republic of Macedonia 

(First National Report) 

Skopje, July, 2003

Skopje, 2003 

Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning 

Publisher: 


<strong>English</strong> editors: 

R. Darrell Smith, Ph.D., and Katherine A. Smith 

Technical preparation: 

Zoran Spasovski 

<strong>English</strong> translation: 

Olgica Mitevska 

Printed by: 

Printing run: 

copies 

CIP – Cataloguing-in-Publication Data 

National and University Library “St. Clement of Ohrid” 

Skopje 

Country Study for Biodiversity of the Republic of Macedonia (First National Report) - 

Skopje: Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning, 2003 - pp.: Tables 

Bibliography: pp. 

ISBN: 

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or 

transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, 

without the prior written permission of the publisher.

This study was based upon scientific data used in the preparation of the National Strategy 

for Biological Diversity with an Action Plan. It also represents the First National Report to the 

<strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity. The preparation of this study and its publication were 

financed by the World Bank under the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). 

President: 

Steering Committee: 

• Menka Spirovska, State advisor - Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning 

Members: 

• Slavko Damevski, Pelister National Park 

• Boris Gelevski, Macedonian Movement of Ecologists 

• Kristina Gorgievska, Ministry of Finance 

• Stefanka Hadzipecova, National Committee on Biodiversity 

• Todor Ivanovski, Macedonian Museum of Natural History, Skopje 

• Pance Nikolov, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management 

• Danica Pavlovska, Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning 

• Zoran Popovski, Faculty of Agriculture, Skopje 

• Krste Ristevski, Faculty of Law, Skopje 

• Konstantin Siderovski, Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning 

• Zoran Stojcevski, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 

• Snezana Tasevska, Ministry of Economy 

• Stojmirka Tasevska, Economic Chamber of the Republic of Macedonia 

Project Manager: 

• Vesela Lambevska Domazetova

Members of the Working Groups Involved in the Preparation of the Country Study 

I. Biodiversity assessment group 

Coordinator for flora: 

• Vlado Matevski, Ph.D., Professor - Institute of Biology, Faculty of Natural Sciences 

and Mathematics, Skopje 

Members: 

• Pance Stojanovski, Ph.D., Professor - Institute of Biology, Faculty of Natural 

Sciences and Mathematics, Skopje 

Other Participants: 

• Ljubica Petrovska, Ph.D., Professor, ret. - Institute of Biology, Faculty 

of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Skopje 

• Magdalena Cekova, Ph.D., Professor, ret. - Institute of Biology, Faculty 


• Radoslav Rizovski, Ph.D., Professor, ret. - Faculty of Forestry, Skopje 

• Zivko Sekovski, Ph.D., Professor - Institute of Biology, Faculty of 

Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Skopje 

• Mitko Karadelev, Ph.D., Assoc. Professor - Institute of Biology, Faculty 


• Mitko Kostadinovski, Ph.D., Assoc. Professor - Institute of Biology, 

Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Skopje 

• Zlatko Levkov, M.Sc., Assistant - Institute of Biology, Faculty of 


Coordinator for fauna: 

• Svetozar Petkovski, Ph.D., Museum advisor - Macedonian Museum of Natural 

History, Skopje 

Members: 

• Branko Micevski, Ph.D., Professor - Institute of Biology, Faculty for Natural 



• Trajan Petkovski, Ph.D., Museum advisor, ret. - Macedonian Museum 

of Natural History, Skopje 

• Vesna Sidorovska, Ph.D., Vice-president - Society for the Investigation 

and Conservation of Biodiversity and the Sustainable Development of 

Natural Ecosystems (BIOECO), Skopje 

• Jonce Sapkarev, Ph.D., Professor, ret. - Institute of Biology, Faculty of 


• Snezana Stankovic, M.Sc., Museum advisor - Macedonian Museum of 

Natural History, Skopje 

• Vladimir Krpac, M.Sc., Senior museum custodian - Macedonian 

Museum of Natural History, Skopje

• Branislava Mihajlova, M.Sc., Museum advisor - Macedonian Museum 

of Natural History, Skopje 

• Slavco Hristovski, Assistant - Institute of Biology, Faculty of Natural 


II. Use and valuation of biodiversity group 

Coordinator: 

• Sreten Andonov, Ph.D., Professor - Faculty of Agriculture, Skopje 

Members: 

• Vladimir Dzabirski, Ph.D., Professor - Faculty of Agriculture, Skopje 

• Sonja Ivanovska, Ph.D., Assoc. Professor - Faculty of Agriculture, Skopje 

• Vladimir Andonovski, Ph.D., Assoc. Professor – Faculty of Forestry, Skopje 

• Dana Kolevska, Ph.D., Professor - Faculty of Forestry, Skopje 

• Vasil Kostov, M.Sc. - Institute of Stockbreeding, Skopje 

• Gose Stefkov, M.Sc., Assistant - Faculty of Pharmacology, Skopje 

• Slavica Hristovska, Museum custodian/ethnologist - Museum of the City of Skopje 


• Vladimir Maletic, Ph.D., Professor - Faculty of Forestry, Skopje 

• Nikola Nikolov, Ph.D., Asst. Professor - Faculty of Forestry, Skopje 

• Mirce Naumovski, Ph.D., Professor - Faculty of Agriculture, Skopje 

III. Socioeconomic context and sectoral analysis group 

Coordinator: 

• Ljupco Melovski, Ph.D., Asst. Professor - Institute of Biology, Faculty of Natural 


Members: 

• Jorde Jakimovski, Ph.D., Professor - Institute for Sociological, Political and 

Juridical Research, Skopje 

• Nikola Panov, Ph.D., Professor - Institute of Geography, Faculty of Natural Sciences 

and Mathematics, Skopje 

• Pece Nedanovski, M.Sc., Assistant - Faculty of Economy, Skopje 

• Goran Arsov, M.Sc. 

• Pene Penev - Public Enterprise for Spatial and Urban Planning, Skopje 


• Dragan Kolcakovski, Ph.D., Asst. Professor - Institute of Geography, 

Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Skopje 

• Milto Mulev, Ph.D., Professor, ret. - Institute of Biology, Faculty of 


• Zivka Meloska, Ph.D., Assoc. Professor - Faculty of Forestry, Skopje

IV. Institutions, legislation and existing conservation programs group 

Coordinator: 

• Svetislav Krstic, Ph.D., Asst. Professor - Institute of Biology, Faculty of Natural 


Members: 

• Jovan Ristov, Ph.D., Director - Institute of Protection of Cultural Monuments of the 

Republic of Macedonia 


• Daniela Stefkova - Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning 

• Sasko Jordanov, M.Sc. - Ministry of Environment and Physical 

Planning

FOREWORD.................................................................................................................................................... 13 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................. 15 

1. COUNTRY CONTEXT.............................................................................................................................. 17 

1.1. Geographical location, borders and land area................................................................................. 17 

1.2. Physical geography and topography.................................................................................................. 18 

1.3. Water resources .................................................................................................................................... 20 

1.4. Climate.................................................................................................................................................... 22 

2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT ............................................................................................................ 24 

2.1. History of the human settlements and archaeology........................................................................ 24 

2.2. Current human population and demography.................................................................................. 25 

2.3. Social and economic situation............................................................................................................. 27 

2.4. Political situation................................................................................................................................... 29 

2.5. Infrastructure and development......................................................................................................... 30 

2.6. Property rights and tenure .................................................................................................................. 32 

2.7. Land use ................................................................................................................................................. 33 

2.8. Human pressure on the environment ................................................................................................ 34 

3. STATUS OF BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS .......................................................................... 37 

3.1. Status and quality of research on ecosystems and species ............................................................. 37 

3.2. Biogeography ......................................................................................................................................... 38 

3.3. Status review of ecosystems................................................................................................................. 40 

3.3.1. Description of key ecosystems ...................................................................................................... 40 

3.3.2. Assessment of status of key ecosystems....................................................................................... 43 

3.3.2.1. Forest ecosystems ...................................................................................................................... 43 

3.3.2.2. Dryland/grassland ecosystems.................................................................................................. 44 

3.3.2.3. Mountain ecosystems ................................................................................................................ 44 

3.3.2.4. Wetland ecosystems .................................................................................................................. 45 

3.4. Status review of plant assemblages.................................................................................................... 47 

3.4.1. Description of key plant assemblages.......................................................................................... 47 

3.4.2. Rare, endemic or threatened plant assemblages....................................................................... 48 

3.5. Status review of species........................................................................................................................ 49 

3.5.1. Micro-organisms............................................................................................................................. 49 

3.5.1.1. Diversity of known micro-organisms....................................................................................... 49 

3.5.1.2. Endemism among micro-organisms ......................................................................................... 50 

3.5.1.3. Conservation status of micro-organisms.................................................................................. 50 

3.5.2. Fungi................................................................................................................................................. 50 

3.5.2.1. Diversity of Fungi and centres of diversity.............................................................................. 50 

3.5.2.2. Endemism among Fungi ........................................................................................................... 50 

3.5.2.3. Conservation status of Fungi .................................................................................................... 50

3.5.3. Flora ................................................................................................................................................. 51 

3.5.3.1. Diversity of known lower and higher plant groups and key centres of plant diversity......... 51 

3.5.3.2. Endemism among lower and higher plant groups ................................................................... 53 

3.5.3.3. Conservation status of plants .................................................................................................... 54 

3.5.4. Fauna................................................................................................................................................ 57 

3.5.4.1. Diversity of animals by group and identified key areas/sites for faunal diversity................ 57 

3.5.4.2. Endemism among each invertebrate and vertebrate group..................................................... 60 

3.5.4.3. Conservation status of animals ................................................................................................. 62 

3.5.5. Summary of species in Macedonia............................................................................................... 63 

3.5.5.1. Summary of diversity and endemism of species ..................................................................... 63 

3.5.5.2. Summary of the conservation status across all species ........................................................... 64 

3.6. Key threats to biodiversity .................................................................................................................. 66 

3.6.1. Habitat loss, modification and fragmentation........................................................................... 66 

3.6.1.1. Land conversion......................................................................................................................... 66 

3.6.1.2. Land degradation....................................................................................................................... 67 

3.6.1.3. Fragmentation of habitats.......................................................................................................... 67 

3.6.2. Overuse of biological resources.................................................................................................... 67 

3.6.2.1. Overgrazing of grasslands and pastures................................................................................... 67 

3.6.2.2. Over hunting/fishing.................................................................................................................. 68 

3.6.2.3. Trade in wildlife ........................................................................................................................ 68 

3.6.2.4. Water extraction......................................................................................................................... 68 

3.6.3. Pollution........................................................................................................................................... 69 

3.6.3.1. Water pollution.......................................................................................................................... 69 

3.6.3.2. Terrestrial and soil pollution..................................................................................................... 70 

3.6.3.3. Air pollution............................................................................................................................... 70 

3.6.4. Introduced and invasive species................................................................................................... 71 

3.6.5. Natural Pathogens.......................................................................................................................... 72 

3.6.6. Climate change................................................................................................................................ 73 

3.6.7. Natural Disasters ............................................................................................................................ 73 

3.6.8. Knock-on effects (chain of extinction) and other factors ......................................................... 74 

4. USE AND VALUES OF BIODIVERSITY.............................................................................................. 75 

4.1. Agrobiodiversity.................................................................................................................................... 75 

4.1.1. Crops ................................................................................................................................................ 75 

4.1.2. Wild relatives of crops ................................................................................................................... 76 

4.1.3. Native breeds of livestock.............................................................................................................. 76 

4.2. Wild species of economic importance................................................................................................ 77 

4.2.1. Use of wild plants............................................................................................................................ 77 

4.2.1.1. Food............................................................................................................................................ 77 

4.2.1.2. Timber/fuelwood....................................................................................................................... 78 

4.2.1.3. Horticulture................................................................................................................................ 79

4.2.1.4. Medicinal use ............................................................................................................................. 79 

4.2.1.5. Other uses, including species used in foreign trade ................................................................ 80 

4.2.2. Use of wild animals......................................................................................................................... 80 

4.2.2.1. Hunting....................................................................................................................................... 80 

4.2.2.2. Fishing........................................................................................................................................ 81 

4.2.2.3. Collection for medicinal use ..................................................................................................... 82 

4.2.2.4. Other uses, including species used in foreign trade ................................................................ 82 

4.2.3. Assessments of Sustainability....................................................................................................... 83 

4.3. Use of biodiversity for bio-technology and genetic extraction....................................................... 83 

4.4. Access to genetic resources.................................................................................................................. 84 

4.5. Indirect uses of biodiversity................................................................................................................ 84 

4.6. Economic values of biological resources........................................................................................... 85 

4.7. Cultural or traditional values of biodiversity................................................................................... 86 

4.7.1. Wildlife and national cuisine ........................................................................................................ 86 

4.7.2. Arts, folklore and music ................................................................................................................ 86 

4.7.3. Spiritual values of biodiversity..................................................................................................... 87 

4.7.3.1. The animal world....................................................................................................................... 87 

4.7.3.2. The plant world.......................................................................................................................... 88 

4.7.4. Recreation and biodiversity.......................................................................................................... 89 

4.7.5. Other values .................................................................................................................................... 89 

5. KEY ECONOMIC SECTORS AFFECTING BIODIVERSITY......................................................... 90 

5.1. Agriculture ............................................................................................................................................. 90 

5.1.1. Current status and economic importance of the sector ........................................................... 90 

5.1.2. Changes in the sector over time ................................................................................................... 91 

5.1.3 Impact on biodiversity.................................................................................................................... 91 

5.2. Forestry and lumber industry............................................................................................................. 92 



5.2.3. Impact on biodiversity................................................................................................................... 94 

5.3. Fisheries.................................................................................................................................................. 94 




5.4. Industry .................................................................................................................................................. 96 




5.5. Construction .......................................................................................................................................... 98 

5.5.1. and 5.5.2. Current status and economic importance of the sector and changes in the sector 

over time..................................................................................................................................................... 98 


5.6. Mining..................................................................................................................................................... 99


over time..................................................................................................................................................... 99 


5.7. Energy..................................................................................................................................................... 99 


over time..................................................................................................................................................... 99 

5.7.3. Impact on biodiversity:................................................................................................................ 100 

5.8. Transport (traffic) .............................................................................................................................. 100 

5.8.1. Current status and economic importance of the sector ......................................................... 100 

5.8.2. Changes in the sector over time ................................................................................................. 101 

5.8.3. Impact on biodiversity................................................................................................................. 101 

5.9. Tourism and recreation ..................................................................................................................... 102 

5.9.1. Current status and economic importance of the sector ......................................................... 102 

5.9.2. Changes in the sector over time ................................................................................................. 102 

5.9.3. Impact on biodiversity................................................................................................................. 102 

5.10. Other key sectors affecting biodiversity........................................................................................ 103 

5.10.1. Defence......................................................................................................................................... 103 

5.10.2. Education and research............................................................................................................. 103 

5.10.3. Trade ............................................................................................................................................ 104 

5.11. Sectoral analysis ................................................................................................................................ 104 

6. EXISTING MEASURES AND PROGRAMMES FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ... 105 

6.1. Legislation and policy for biodiversity use and conservation...................................................... 105 

6.1.1. Constitutional framework ........................................................................................................... 105 

6.1.2. Environmental protection and regulation laws....................................................................... 105 

6.1.3. Protected areas laws..................................................................................................................... 105 

6.1.4. Laws on flora and fauna.............................................................................................................. 106 

6.1.5. Legislation on land use and development................................................................................. 107 

6.1.6. Legislation on pollution............................................................................................................... 107 

6.1.7. Other relevant sectoral legislation affecting biodiversity ...................................................... 108 

6.1.8. International agreements and conventions .............................................................................. 109 

6.2. Protected areas system....................................................................................................................... 110 

6.2.1. Description of extent, location and coverage of protected areas.......................................... 110 

6.2.2. Legal and management status of protected areas................................................................... 111 

6.2.3. Assessment of gaps in current protected areas system........................................................... 112 

6.3. Conservation outside protected areas.............................................................................................. 113 

6.3.1. In-situ conservation measures in broader landscape ............................................................. 113 

6.3.2. Ex-situ conservation measures................................................................................................... 113 

6.3.2.1. Plant propagation in botanic gardens and nurseries .............................................................. 113 

6.3.2.2. Captive breeding in zoological parks ..................................................................................... 114 

6.3.2.3. Materials held in genetic collections and gene-banks ........................................................... 115 

6.4. Other existing projects and programmes for biodiversity conservation ................................... 115

6.4.1. Biodiversity inventory and monitoring and research............................................................. 115 

6.4.2. Educational programmes and training..................................................................................... 115 

6.4.3. Public Awareness.......................................................................................................................... 116 

6.4.4. Conservation planning................................................................................................................. 116 

6.4.5. Domestic projects ......................................................................................................................... 117 

6.4.6. International projects.................................................................................................................. 118 

6.5. Existing financial resources and mechanisms for biodiversity conservation............................ 121 

6.6. Organisations involved in biodiversity conservation and management..................................... 123 

6.6.1. Government structures and agencies for biodiversity management.................................... 123 

6.6.2. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) ................................................................................ 125 

6.6.3. Academic/Research Institutions................................................................................................. 125 

6.6.4. Business and private sector......................................................................................................... 125 

6.6.5. Community groups....................................................................................................................... 126 

6.7. Summary of existing measures, capacity and experience for biodiversity management ........ 127 

7. PROBLEM ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................... 129 

7.1. Current loss of, or effects on, biodiversity...................................................................................... 129 

7.2. Direct causes of biodiversity loss ...................................................................................................... 130 

7.3. Underlying causes of biodiversity loss ............................................................................................ 130 

7.4. Key sectors affecting biodiversity..................................................................................................... 131 

7.6. Opportunities for conservation......................................................................................................... 133 

ANNEX 1: Endemic species of flora in Macedonia............................................................................... 136 

ANNEX 2: Endemic species of fauna in Macedonia ............................................................................ 141 

ANNEX 3: Rare and threatened species of flora in Macedonia.......................................................... 159 

ANNEX 4: Threatened species of fauna in Macedonia................. ...................................................... 167 

ANNEX 5: Gene fund of Angiosperm plants in the flora of the Republic of Macedonia.................. 171 

ANNEX 6: Agrobiodiversity .................................................................................................................. 182 

ANNEX 7: List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................ ..... 193 

References ...... ..... ................................................................................................................................... 195

FOREWORD 

COUNTRY STUDY FOR BIODIVERSITY OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA 

Over the period since achieving its independence, the Republic of Macedonia has 

been striving to build a stable political and economic community, with a legal system 

able to facilitate rapid integration into the European Union and the wider international 

community. This primary strategic goal has given rise to sectoral targets, one of which is 

the establishment of efficient environmental protection measures in order to provide a 

basis for an improved quality of life. 

One component of this strategic goal is the conservation of biodiversity and habitats. 

In the process toward accomplishing this goal, the Republic of Macedonia has ratified: 

the <strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity (Rio, 1992), <strong>Convention</strong> on Wetlands of 

International Importance Particularly as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar, 1971), 

<strong>Convention</strong> on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn, 1979), 

<strong>Convention</strong> on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern, 

1982), <strong>Convention</strong> on Protection of the World’s Cultural and Natural Heritage (Paris, 

1972), <strong>Convention</strong> on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 

Flora (Washington, 1973) and the European <strong>Convention</strong> on the Protection of Vertebrate 

Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes (Strasbourg, 1986), which 

together with the international agreements taken over from the former Socialist Federal 

Republic of Yugoslavia by means of succession, constitute part of the national 

legislation and represent a basis for biodiversity conservation. 

In spite of the existence of legal bases for the regulation of biodiversity conservation 

(Law on the Protection of Natural Rarities [1973] and other sectoral laws), for a long 

period there has been a felt need to develop a national strategy for biodiversity 

conservation in order to establish a direction and identify priorities in this area, but also 

as an obligation arising from the <strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity. The action begun 

in 1998, before the involvement of the Global Environmental Facility, was initiated with 

the signing of the agreement for funding the project, “Activities Related to Biodiversity 

and Capacity Assessment,” which will result in a National Biodiversity Study, Strategy 

and Action Plan. 

The study is the first step in this procedure and represents an overview of the 

situation in the State related to species distribution, dominance and level of 

endangerment, uses of biodiversity for commercial purposes and the impacts driving its 

alteration in both positive and negative senses. Supported by the scientific sphere and 

watched with vigilance by non-governmental organisations and the wider public, we 

have prepared a document which will not only be the first national report submitted to 

the Conference of the Parties to the <strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity, but also a 

quality foundation for building the National Strategy and the Action Plan. 

Minister of Environment and Physical Planning, 

Ljubomir Janev 

13

14 

COUNTRY STUDY FOR BIODIVERSITY OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 


The Republic of Macedonia is situated in the central part of the Balkan Peninsula. 

Today, as in the past, it is at the crossroads of important transport corridors in Europe. It 

occupies an area of 25,713 km 2 and has a population of 1,945,932 inhabitants (according 

to the census of 1994). 

The territory of the Republic of Macedonia is hilly and mountainous, cut by river 

valleys. The climate is modified sub-Mediterranean, continental, and mountainous. It 

possesses some moderately significant water resources (a well developed hydrologic 

network and three major natural lakes). 

Macedonia has been continuously settled since prehistory. From a demographic 

standpoint, the population was slowly increasing prior to World War II, and has been 

increasing more rapidly since then. A substantial migration from villages to towns has 

been occurring over the last 60 years. 

For the past ten years the Republic of Macedonia has been undergoing a period of 

transition characterised by a significant economic recession, an increase in 

unemployment and a decrease in the standard of living. The State is politically unstable 

and there have been interethnic conflicts which resulted in a civil uprising in 2001. 

In the areas of transportation, water management and energy infrastructure, the State 

has failed to keep pace with the developed European countries. Of the total land area, 

40% is forested, 51% is in agriculture and 9% is non-productive. 

The most impressive finding of the recent biodiversity study was Macedonia’s 

heterogeneity and high level of relict and endemic species. In support of this, analyses 

of biodiversity richness for individual countries within the European continent rank the 

Republic of Macedonia at the very top of the list of countries considered to be 

“European Hot Spots.” 

The diversity of higher plant species and habitats is represented by a large variety of 

taxa and phytocoenoses (approximately 30 vegetative classes, 60 orders, 90 alliances 

and over 260 associations). Higher plant groups are represented by 3,700 species (most 

of them within flowering plants [Angiospermae] – 3,200 species, with 114 endemics). 

Mosses (Bryopsida) are represented by 350 species, with 2 endemics; ferns (Filicinae) – 

42 species, with 1 endemic; Gymnospermae – 15 species; Sphenopsida – 7 species and 

Lycopsida – 6 species. According to available data, in the Republic of Macedonia lower 

plants are represented by 1,580 species of Algae (the best studied being diatoms 

[Bacillariophyta] – 512 species, with 62 endemics; Green algae [Chlorophyta] – 398 

species, with 10 endemics and Blue-green algae [Cyanophyta] – 204 species, with 10 

endemics). There are at least 1,250 species of Fungi and some 340 species of Lichens. 

Regarding threats to lower plant groups, most of the available information concerns 

diatoms. Of this group, nine are considered to be extinct, whereas 107 species are 

threatened. Among the Fungi, the most threatened are 67 species of Basidiomycota, as 

well as 12 species of Lichens. As for the higher plant groups, Angiosperms are the most 

endangered group (280-300 endangered species, of which 5 are extinct), ferns (15), 

mosses (20) and Gymnosperms (7). 

The diversity of fauna in the Republic of Macedonia is represented by 9,339 species 

and 228 subspecies, or a total of 9,567 taxa. Of these, 602 species and 72 subspecies, or 

a total of 674 taxa, are Macedonian endemics representing 7 % of the entire fauna. 

Threatened status is defined only for vertebrates and is based upon the European 

Vertebrate Red List. Out of 506 vertebrate species, 113 are included on the list of 

15

16 


threatened species, which is 22.3% of the entire vertebrate fauna in the Republic of 

Macedonia. The most threatened group is fishes, with 30 out of 58 indigenous species 

included on the list, which is 51.7% of the entire ichthyofauna. 

Biological resources in the Republic of Macedonia are utilised continuously. Usage 

includes agriculture, forestry, hunting, fishing and collection of wild plants. For some of 

these activities there are legal regulations, but they are not as effective as intended and 

do not ensure a high level of protection. Such a situation is particularly evident in the 

protection of autochthonous genetic material and the conservation of wild species and 

varieties. In everyday life, the economic benefits of the utilisation of biological resources 

often outweigh the protection measures for their maintenance. 

The main economic factors affecting biodiversity show the same trends as the rest of 

the economy of the Republic of Macedonia during this period of transition. A significant 

decrease in production has been recorded in mining, civil engineering, tourism and 

fishing. In contrast, the agriculture, industry, forestry, energy and transport sectors, 

which suffered a significant decline in the beginning of the 1990s, are now stable. With 

regard to the significance of their individual impacts on biodiversity, the different 

sectors can be ranked from greatest to least as follows: agriculture, transport, energy, 

industry and mining, tourism, forestry, fishing and civil engineering. 

Despite the existence of factors which provide limited protection to biological 

diversity within the Republic of Macedonia, experience with biological diversity 

management shows that there is a pressing need to prepare a strategy for biodiversity 

conservation, initiate reorganisation at the government level, harmonise legislation with 

that of the European Union, and apply the provisions of the international agreements 

related to biodiversity and the European and world methodologies and criteria in this 

field. 

With this in mind, the following activities for biological diversity conservation are 

considered to be priorities: clarify and allocate responsibilities to relevant ministries, 

introduce continuous monitoring of biodiversity and those factors leading to its loss, 

establish relevant scientific data banks, intensify publishing activities in this field, 

intensify education at all levels, introduce efficient supervisory and penal policies, 

increase scientific accomplishments in practical conservation, strengthen and support 

non-governmental organisations in their activities to raise public awareness and promote 

the relationship “citizen-natural property.”

1. COUNTRY CONTEXT 


1.1. Geographical location, borders and land area 

The Republic of Macedonia is situated in the central part of the Balkan Peninsula and 

has a very favourable geographic position. It extends between 40°50’ and 42°20’ North 

Latitude, and between 20°27’30” and 23°05’ East Longitude. Very important 

transportation routes pass through the country, which serve to connect central and 

eastern Europe with the southern and south-eastern parts of the continent, continuing 

towards the countries of the Near East and beyond. The most important among them is 

the main E-75 motorway, which connects the Morava and Vardar Valleys to 

neighbouring Greece. It also intersects with the western Macedonian motorway E-65, 

which connects the capital, Skopye, with parts of western Macedonia and on through the 

border crossing Kyafa-San to Albania. The main motorway is also connected with other 

major roads, such as the M-5, which starts at Skopye, passes through Veles, Shtip and 

Kochani, and ends at the Bulgarian border crossing Arnautski Grob near Delchevo. 

From Shtip, the road M-6 turns towards Strumitsa, connecting Macedonia again with 

Bulgaria through the border crossing at Novo Selo. The road M-2 begins at Kumanovo 

and passes through Kriva Palanka to the Bulgarian border crossing at Deve Bair. 

Figure 1. General overview map of the Republic of Macedonia. 

Macedonia borders Albania on the west, Greece on the south, Bulgaria on the east 

and Serbia and Montenegro on the north. The total length of the border is 849 km, of 

which the western border is 191 km, the southern, 262 km, the eastern, 165 km and the 

17

18 


northern, 231 km in length. The northern and southern borders are roughly parallel, 

while the western and eastern borders form opposing convex arcs. The total area of the 

country is 25,713 km 2 . 

1.2. Physical geography and topography 

The landform of Macedonia, as part of the Balkan Peninsula, is characterised by 

complex geotectonic features, which produce developed relief, complex geology and, 

hence, a diversity of soil types. This is an important factor in explaining the rich 

biodiversity of the country. 

The chief reason for the complex geotectonic evolution of the internal part of the 

Balkan Peninsula (Macedonia) is the large number of orogenic cycles, from the oldest 

yet known, to the youngest alpine orogenesis. These cycles led to multiple 

metamorphoses of the surface relief; there were rhythmic patterns of advancement and 

regression of the seas, allowing for the creation of a series of various sediments. 

Whenever the regime changed, the sediments were tectonically transformed by faulting, 

fissuring and metamorphosis. 

The Rhodope massif is the oldest on the Balkan Peninsula and is part of the ancient 

foundation. Part of it extends within Macedonia, not as a solid formation, but broken 

into several blocks of differing forms and dimensions. The Pelagonian and Serbian- 

Macedonian massifs are products of the Grenville phase of the Baikal orogenesis. They 

were formed in the Precambrian Era during the strongest magmatic movements. At that 

time, there were intrusions (over large areas) of granite and granodiorite magma 

accompanied by regional and contact metamorphism. The separation of the two masses 

(Pelagonian and Serbian-Macedonian) from the mother Rhodope massif and from each 

other, which was connected with the creation of the Vardar zone, was made in 

conjunction with the Caledonian orogenesis during the early Paleozoic Era. The 

Hercynian orogenesis had an extreme influence in the western parts of Macedonia, 

where the sediment complex is folded and metamorphosed. The lateral pressure from the 

east transmitted by the Pelagonides created positive and negative structures with axes 

generally oriented in a northwest-southeast direction. The alpine orogenic cycle, which 

has been occurring from the Triassic Period to the present, has left fresh traces in the 

geotectonic structure of Macedonia. The youngest neotectonic phase, having started 

during the middle Miocene Epoch (Torton Stage) and continuing to the present, is 

characterised by block tectonics. 

The territory of the Republic of Macedonia possesses a complex mosaic of various 

metamorphic, sedimentary and igneous rocks in all tectonic units. In general, the 

metamorphic complex is dominant in the western zone of Macedonia and Pelagonia, 

reduced in the Serbian-Macedonian massif and least likely to occur in the Vardar zone. 

In the Vardar zone, sedimentary rocks are dominant, while in the Serbian-Macedonian 

massif, igneous rocks are characteristic (but they are also present in the Vardar zone). 

Both types of rocks are lacking in the other tectonic units. Stratigraphically, 

metamorphic rocks belong to the Grenville, Baikal and Caledonian complexes and 

sedimentary rocks to the alpine complex, while igneous rocks are present in almost all 

periods, from the oldest to the Quaternary.


Relief 

The relief structure of the Republic of Macedonia is very interesting and diverse, and 

is represented by mountains, valleys, ravines, narrow gorges, saddles and other forms. 

Further, the present relief structure is morphogenically diverse as well, with both older 

and younger relief forms. 

“Mountains” are the most important among the large relief forms, and cover 

approximately two-thirds of the territory. They fall into two groups depending upon 

their time of formation, geological composition and size of extension; these are the 

Rhodope and Dinaric groups. The Rhodope group is considered to be older and was 

formed during the so-called Hercynian orogenesis phase. The mountains Osogovo (Ruen 

peak – 2,252 m), Plachkovitsa (Lisets – 1,754 m), Belasitsa (Tumba – 1,881 m) and 

Ograzhden (Ograzhden – 1,745 m), situated primarily in the eastern part of the country, 

are characteristic representatives. The Dinaric group extends through the western, southwestern, 

southern and central portions of the country. These mountains were formed 

during the alpine orogenesis and are considered to be young mountains. These include 

the Shar Planina mountain group, Vardar zone and Pelagonian horst anticline. The Shar 

Planina mountain group includes Shar Planina Mountain (Titov Vrv peak – 2,748 m), 

Korab (Golem Korab, the highest peak in Macedonia – 2,764 m), Bistra (Medenica – 

2,163 m), Stogovo (Golem Rid – 2,268 m), Yablanitsa (Strizhak – 2,233 m) and 

Galichitsa (Livada – 2,253 m). This is the highest group of mountains and extends into 

the western part of the country. The Vardar zone includes the mountains distributed 

along both banks of the Vardar river: Zheden, Vodno, Kitka, Mariovo, Nidze and 

Kozhuf on the right descending bank and Serta and Plavush on the left descending bank. 

The Pelagonian horst anticline includes the following mountains: Baba (Pelister – 2,601 

m), Yakupitsa, Karadzitsa, Babuna, Goleshnitsa, Selechka Planina and others. With the 

exception of Baba Mountain, which is situated in the southwest, these mountains are 

located in the central portion of the country. 

“Valleys and larger plains” are the second distinct morphological feature of the relief 

structure. They are distributed over approximately one-third of the country. Most distinct 

are the ones extending along the Vardar River. From the northwest to the southeast, they 

are situated as follows: Polog (373 km 2 ), Skopye (1,840 km 2 ), Tikvesh (604 km 2 ) and 

the Gevgeliya-Valandovo Valley (620 km 2 ). They are intersected by the respective 

gorges Zheden (Derven), Taor and Demir Kapiya. The Ciganska Klisura extends from 

the Gevgeliya-Valandovo Valley towards neighbouring Greece. The largest valley in the 

Republic of Macedonia is the Pelagonia Valley, which is situated in the south-western 

part of the country and occupies an area of 4,000 km 2 . A portion of this valley extends 

into Greece, where it is called the Lerin (Florina) Plain. In western Macedonia, the 

following valleys and plains are most characteristic: Ohrid-Struga Valley (226 km 2 ) 

Prespa Valley (94 km 2 ) and Debarsko Pole Plain (73 km 2 ). In eastern Macedonia, the 

following valleys and plains extend along the course of the Bregalnitsa River: Berovo 

Valley (192 km 2 ), Piyanets, Kochani Valley (345 km 2 ) and Ovche Pole Plain (317 km 2 ). 

The most fertile valley in the country is the Strumitsa-Radovish Valley, situated in the 

south-eastern part of the country and occupying an area of 658 km 2 . In the north, the 

Kumanovo Valley (628 km 2 ) and the Slavishko Pole Plain (320 km 2 ) extend along the 

watershed of the rivers Pchinya and Kriva, respectively. 

Old, so-called “paleo-relief” is characterised by saddles, which are traces of former 

fluvial erosion. Today, they are the most common features through which neighbouring 

valleys are connected. The best known saddles are: Pletvar (990 m msl) and Prisad 

19

20 


(1,140 m) between the Pelagonia and Povardarje Valleys, Bukovo (1,180 m) between 

the Ohrid and Prespa Valleys, Gyavato (1,168 m) between the Prespa and Pelagonia 

Valleys, Strazha (1,212 m) between the Kichevo and Polog Valleys and Preseka (1,102 

m) between the Kichevo and Ohrid Valleys. 

Traces of “glacial relief” can also be found in Macedonia. There are remnants of both 

glaciers and cirques on some of the mountains, and of only cirques on others due to the 

small size of the glaciers. Such relief is characteristic mainly of the high mountains in 

western Macedonia, such as Yakupitsa, Bistra, Korab, Pelister, Shar Planina, Galichitsa 

and Stogovo; however, most of these traces occur on Shar Planina Mountain. So far, 50 

are known, some of which are filled with water and represent glacial lakes. 

“Karstic relief” is present on Paleozoic, Mesozoic, Palaeogenic and Neogenic 

limestones. Limestone is found mostly on the Suva Gora, Zheden, Yakupitsa, Galichitsa, 

Bistra, and higher parts of Shar Planina, mountains. All types of karstic forms are 

present, both on the surface and underground. The former includes depressions, crevices, 

fissures and karstic plains, while the latter includes caves as well as pits and sinkholes. 

The most distinctive karstic relief form is karstic plains, of which Tonivoda on Bistra 

Mountain is most representative. Underground karstic relief forms include about 164 

caves and 12 pits and sinkholes. The most characteristic sinkhole is located on Solunska 

Glava, with a depth in excess of 500 m. One of the most beautiful caves is Ubavitsa (the 

Beauty), or Gyonovitsa, on Bukovik Mountain, whereas the longest is Bela Voda (White 

Water) near Demir Kapiya (996 m). 

Other relief forms include “gypsum and younger fluvial relief” which also have 

economic relevance. 

Soils 

The Republic of Macedonia, although a small country, abounds in various soil types: 

Automorphous (undeveloped – rocky soil, serozem on loose substratum, aeolian sand 

and colluvial soil; humus-accumulative – limestone-dolomitic mould, rendzina, humicsilicate 

soil, chernozem, and smolnica (vertisol); cambic – eutric brown soil, acid brown 

soil, brown soil over limestone and dolomite, and red soil; eluvial-illuvial – luvic soil 

and brown podzolic soil; anthropogenic – regolithic soil, garden soil and landfill soil); 

Hydromorphic (undeveloped – alluvial soil; pseudogley – pseudogley; meadow – 

meadow soil; gley – pseudogley-gley, black wetland soil, gley soil and peat-gley soil; 

peat – high peat, intermediate peat and low peat; anthropogenic – regolithic peat soil, 

rice soil and irrigated soil); Halomorphic (acute saline soils – solonchak; solonetz – 

solonetz); Subaquatic (undeveloped – protopedon; developed – “gitja,” “daj” and 

sapropel). 

1.3. Water resources 

The Republic of Macedonia contains a considerable number of water resources, both 

underground and surface. Underground waters include: phreatic, artesian, subartesian 

and well waters. They have great importance for the country, because it is estimated that 

nearly 60% of rural and 50% of urban drinking water supplies come from wells. A 

portion of these waters are used for industrial purposes, which is unpopular in light of 

the current situation with global water shortages. Artesian waters are common in the 

Pelagonian and Strumitsa-Radovish Valleys and can be found at depths of 60-80 m. 

Reserves in the Pelagonian Valley are estimated to be 170 million m 3 , with about half


this amount in the Strumitsa-Radovish Valley. In some places, there are also high 

mineral constituents. 

With respect to surface waters, 4,414 springs have been recorded, with a total 

capacity of 31.43 m 3 /s or 991.90 × 10 6 m 3 /year. A great number have not yet been 

measured, but are included on hydrologic maps. The capacity of about 800 of the springs 

ranges from 1-5 l/s, while the remaining springs exceed 5 l/s, totalling a considerable 

quantity of water. There are also 90 springs with capacity of more than 30 l/s, with 58 

yielding 100 l/s. A great number of them are located in the various tributary watersheds 

of the Vardar River (80%), Crni Drim River (15%) and Strumitsa River (5%), especially 

in the mountainous areas of Yakupitsa, Pelister, Plachkovitsa, Osogovo, Shar Planina 

and others. Of the springs occurring only in karstic areas, the most characteristic are: 

Rasche, in the foothills of Zheden Mountain (4 m 3 /s capacity); Ostrovo, near the 

monastery of St. Naum by Ohrid Lake and Bilyana Springs, near the town of Ohrid. The 

mineral springs most used for bathing and drinking are: Katlanovo Spa near Skopye (41- 

50°C); Kumanovo Spa near the village of Proevo, municipality of Kumanovo (30-35°C); 

Kezhovitsa near Shtip (57°C), also one of the most radioactive in the Balkans; Negortsi 

Spa near the village of Negortsi, municipality of Gevgeliya (36-40°C); Debar Spa in the 

village of Banjiste near Debar (36°C); Kosovrasti near Debar (48°C) and Bansko Spa 

near the village of Bansko, municipality of Strumitsa (72°C), which is one of the hottest 

in Europe and in the world. 

The rivers of Macedonia are divided into three primary watersheds: one flowing to 

the Adriatic Sea and two to the Aegean Sea. Another very small watershed flows to the 

Black Sea. The Vardar River (Aegean watershed) is the largest river, containing 80% of 

the water flow leaving the Republic of Macedonia. Of the remaining 20%, 13% flows 

through the Crni Drim River (Adriatic watershed), with only 7% through the Strumitsa 

River, a tributary of the Bulgarian Struma River (Aegean watershed). The total length of 

the Vardar River is 388 km, of which 300 km are present in Macedonia and the 

remainder in neighbouring Greece. Its headwaters are the springs near the village of 

Vrutok, and it flows into the Aegean Sea near the Thessaloniki Gulf. At the point where 

it exits Macedonia near Gevgeliya, its flow is 174 m 3 /s. Its major western tributaries are 

the Crna River (207 km in length with a 37 m 3 /s flow at its mouth) and the Treska River 

(138 km and 30 m 3 /s average flow at its mouth). The longest eastern tributary of the 

Vardar River is the Bregalnitsa River (225 km and 28 m 3 /s average flow at its mouth). 

The second largest eastern tributary is the Pchinya River (135 km and 16 m 3 /s average 

flow). The Crni Drim River flows only 48 km within the territory of Macedonia and, 

together with its tributary, the Radika River, one of Macedonia’s most attractive rivers, 

encompasses 1,772 km 2 of watershed area. The flow rate at its entry point into Ohrid 

Lake is 21 m 3 /s. The Strumitsa River’s watershed is 1,465 km 2 . 

There are several natural and artificial lakes in the Republic of Macedonia. Of the 

natural ones, the most attractive are the tectonic lakes: Ohrid, Prespa and Doyran. 

Ohrid Lake is the largest, occupying an area of 348.8 km 2 , of which 229.9 are in the 

Republic of Macedonia and the remainder in Albania. It is 30.5 km long, 15 km wide 

and 287 m deep at its deepest point. The average depth is 144.8 m and the total length of 

the shore is 83.8 km. The temperature of the surface water in the summer period reaches 

25°C. The lake is situated at 699 m msl. In addition to flow from the Crni Drim River, 

the lake receives water from 80 surface and underground springs and from Prespa Lake, 

which is located at a higher altitude. 

21

22 


Prespa Lake, with an area of 274 km 2 , is the second largest in the country, 176.8 km 2 

of which belong to Macedonia, 47.8 km 2 to Greece and 49.4 km 2 to Albania. Its length is 

28.6 km and its width is 16.9 km. Its greatest depth is 54 m, its average depth is 18.8 m 

and the length of the shoreline is 100.1 km. Prespa Lake is situated at 853 m msl. 

Because the lake has no major tributaries and because a portion of the water migrates 

downward through the limestone into Ohrid Lake near the locality of Vragodupka, the 

level of the water fluctuates considerably. The highest summer temperature reaches 

more than 25°C. 

Doyran Lake, unlike the other two lakes which are located in western Macedonia, is 

situated in the south of the country, occupying an area of 42.74 km 2 ; 27.1 km 2 of the 

area belong to the Republic of Macedonia and the rest to neighbouring Greece. Prior to 

the recent hydrologic perturbations caused by both climatic and human factors, the 

lake’s maximum depth was 10 m and the average, 6.7 m. At that time, the maximum 

water volume of its basin was 202 × 10 6 m 3 . The mean annual temperature of the water 

is 14.8°C, which contributes to its high level of fish production in comparison with other 

lakes of the world. 

Among the other Macedonian water resources, discounting the glacial lakes which 

have limited hydrologic capacity, there are 110 major and minor artificial lakes, but only 

20 with volumes larger than 1,000,000 m 3 . They are used for irrigation, water supply and 

production of hydroelectric power. The largest is Shpilje on the Crni Drim and Radika 

Rivers, with a volume of 520 × 10 6 m 3 , followed by Tikvesh Lake on the Crna River, 

with 475 × 10 6 m 3 and Mavrovo Lake on the Mavrovo River, with 357 × 10 6 m 3 . 

Mavrovo Lake produces the most hydroelectric power, as much as 415 × 10 6 KWh. 

Other lakes important for their water capacity or ambient characteristics include 

Kalimantsi (Makedonska Kamenitsa), Gratche (Kochani), Mladost (Veles), Strezhevo 

(Bitola), Matka (Skopye), Globochitsa (Struga), Vodocha (Strumitsa), Ratevo (Berovo), 

Turiya (Strumitsa) etc. 

1.4. Climate 

Due to specific natural and geographic characteristics, there are two main types of 

climate in the Republic of Macedonia: Mediterranean and continental. Thus, two 

prominant seasons occur: cold, wet winters and dry, hot summers. In addition to these, in 

the high, mountainous areas there is also a mountainous climate characterised by short, 

cool summers and considerably cold and moderately wet winters, where precipitation is 

mainly in the form of snow. In spite of the fact that Macedonia lies relatively close to the 

Aegean and Adriatic Seas, the influence of the Mediterranean climate does not reach 

very deeply into the country, except within a few valleys. This is a result of the high 

mountains which rise up in the west and south of the country. The influence of the 

Aegean Sea can be felt along the valley of the Vardar River northward to Demir Kapiya, 

and slightly less so in the Skopye Valley. Some slight effect also reaches the valleys of 

the Strumitsa and Bregalnitsa Rivers, as well as the proximity of Doyran Lake. The 

influence of the Adriatic Sea on portions of western Macedonia extends primarily along 

the Crni Drim valley. The continental influence enters from the north and continues 

towards the south; therefore, the characteristics of this climate are felt deep within the 

country, especially in the northeast and eastern regions. 

The average annual temperature is 11.3°C. The hottest towns are Valandovo and 

Gevgeliya, with temperatures of 14.5°C and 14.3°C, respectively. In the mountainous 

climatic areas, the mean annual temperatures are: on Popova Shapka, 4.7°C, in


Lazaropole, 6.8°C and in Krushevo, 8.2°C. The average precipitation within Macedonia 

is 683.7 mm/year. The areas of highest precipitation occur in Mavrovi Anovi and Resen, 

with 1,197 mm and 757.9 mm, respectively, and the least in Ovche Pole Plain with only 

490.3 mm. Hail falls most often in the period from April to October, with the highest 

incidence in April and May. It is most frequent in the Ovche Pole, Tikvesh and 

Pelagonian areas and in the valleys of Gevgeliya-Valandovo and Skopye. Winds blow 

mainly from the northern quadrant but, in specific areas, their direction can changes 

according to the relief structure. Although the best known winds are the Vardarec and 

Jug, sometimes in valleys or ravines local winds occur, such as in Denik and Noknik. 

Annually, the quantity of sunlight present is about 2,100-2,450 hours, while the mean 

annual cloudiness is between 4.3 and 5.7 on a 10-point scale. The average number of 

clear days is 130 in the south and 73 days in the Skopye Valley. The average number of 

foggy days ranges from 4-72, mostly occurring in autumn and winter months. Fog is 

mainly present in the Skopye Valley (72 days) and in Polog (33 days), and occurs least 

often in the Strumitsa-Radovish Valley and in Malesheviya, where the average annual 

number of foggy days is 3-5. 

23

24 


2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT 

2.1. History of the human settlements and archaeology 

The territory of the Republic of Macedonia has been continuously inhabited since 

ancient times due to its favourable geographic location and climatic conditions (Section 

1.4.). There are archaeological findings that indicate intensive human activity (settlements 

and other objects) dating from the Palaeolithic and Neolithic periods, Bronze Age, Iron Age, 

and from the Classical period (Archaeological Map of the Republic of Macedonia – 

Macedonian Academy of Science and Arts, 1994). The findings are most numerous in the 

areas of the Vardar River and Pelagonia, and in the valleys of some of the Vardar’s 

tributaries. The current appearance and characteristics of many of the landscapes in 

Macedonia are the result of the distribution of settlements from prehistoric times to the 

present (e.g., degradation of the natural zonal vegetation in some regions, strong cultural 

characteristics within certain areas etc.). 

Modern settlements within the Republic of Macedonia differ from each other in size, 

spatial organisation and social and cultural characteristics. Rural and urban social 

organisation varies mainly with demographic and economic indicators. The principal 

differences between villages and towns can be seen in the orientation of their communities. 

Villages are oriented towards agriculture, in contrast to towns’ professional/industrial 

orientation in the secondary and tertiary sectors. There are also other rural-urban differences, 

such as the size of the community, level of dispersal of structures, social differentiation and 

stratification, mobility, ambient surroundings and systems of interaction. 

The shape and spatial distribution of settlements have always been under the influence of 

demographic factors, but certain influences also come from socioeconomic, natural, 

geographic (e.g., relief, geological composition of the soil, climate and vegetation) and 

historical factors. These elements have been of major or minor significance in various time 

periods. 

Unlike the current processes – urbanisation, industrialisation and modernisation – where 

people are fully separated from nature, in former times people cared for every centimetre of 

arable land and forest. Now, no care is taken in deciding which type of land is to be 

converted for urban use. These poor decisions manifest themselves by inhibiting the 

functioning of ecosystems, and lead towards degradation of the environment. 

High population concentrations in the larger cities (Skopye – 444,760 inhabitants, Bitola 

– 86,174, Kumanovo – 94,589, Prilep – 71,899 and Tetovo – 65,318), the inappropriate 

siting of industrial capacities and an inadequate communal infrastructure create serious 

problems in ensuring a quality environment. Demographic, economic, social and 

environmental characteristics within the population demonstrate significant rural-urban 

differences. 

The number of abandoned villages, as well as the number of small settlements, indicate 

both an absolute and a relative increase in migration. According to the census of 1994, 121 

rural settlements have been completely abandoned. While the processes of industrialisation 

and urbanisation have had a positive influence on the development of towns and their nearby 

villages, they have negatively impacted distant hill and mountain villages. Those persons 

who are able to find jobs in urban or suburban settings are usually forced to migrate 

permanently to be near their workplace because poor transportation systems prevent them 

from commuting from the village to town each day. In many cases, a shortage of funds for 

the purchase of housing in town forces them to stay in unauthorised (illegal) settlements. In 

these illegally inhabited areas, even though the residents do not generally have the ability to 

raise cattle, they are usually forced to abandon their arable land in the village. Such a trend 

of migration can be seen on Table 1.


Table 1. Inhabited areas – Dynamics of population, number of settlements and structure. 

1948 1994 

Population 

Number 

Structure 

(% of Total ) 

Number 

Structure 

(% of Total ) 

Up to 99 117 6.7 573 35.1 

100-299 566 32.5 387 23.7 

300-499 411 23.6 184 11.3 

500-799 356 20.4 149 9.1 

800-991 102 5.9 84 5.1 

1000-4999 176 10.1 217 13.3 

5000-19999 9 0.5 25 1.5 

20000-49999 3 0.2 8 0.5 

50000-99999 - - 4 0.2 

over 100000 1 0.1 1 0.1 

Total 1,741 100.0 1632 100.0 

Source: “Spatial Distribution of the Population as a Factor of Change in the Network of 

Inhabited Places in the Republic of Macedonia,” Prikaz i Studii (Review and Studies), No. 86, 

Skopje, 1997 

The official territorial limits of Macedonian villages encompass 86.7% of the 

nation’s land area and include 40.2% of the total population (records from 1994). 

Villages having less than 50 inhabitants represent a specific problem (360 villages – 

20.6% of the total number of villages). It is expected that the villages of this subgroup, 

especially the ones having 10 or less inhabitants, will eventually be totally abandoned 

(104 villages). The situation is especially serious in the regions of Prilep, Kavadartsi, 

Shtip, Veles, Ohrid, Demir Hisar and Bitola. 

Of 1,715 rural settlements, 508 (29.6%) are located in hilly or mountainous areas 

(over 800 m msl) (According to the Law on Support for the Development of Less 

Developed Areas, Official Gazette of Socialist Republic of Macedonia 39/89). 

2.2. Current human population and demography 

The population of Macedonia and its dynamics over the past 50 years are presented 

in Table 2. 

Table 2. Population dynamics in the Republic of Macedonia (according to census data). 

Population 

Census Total 

Number 

Number 

Number 

of Males (%) of Females (%) 

1948 1,152,986 584,002 (50.7) 568,984 (49.3) 

1953 1,304,514 659,861 (50.6) 644,653 (49.4) 

1961 1,406,003 710,074 (50.5) 605,929 (49.5) 

1971 1,647,308 834,692 (50.7) 812,616 (49.3) 

1981 1,909,136 968,143 (50.7) 940,993 (49.3) 

1994 1,945,932 974,255 (50.1) 971,677 (49.1) 

Source: Calculations using data from the Statistic Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia 2001, 

p.48, Skopje 2001 

25

26 


The demographic development of the Republic of Macedonia deserves special 

attention, especially with respect to the natural population growth. From 1948 to 1994, a 

period of 46 years, the total population grew by 729,946 inhabitants or 69%. 

Table 3. Dynamics of the birth rate and population growth, 1953-1994. 

Census 

Live births 

(Per 1000 Inhabitants) 

Deaths Population Growth 

1953 37.9 14.8 23.1 

1961 29.9 9.3 20.6 

1971 22.9 7.5 15.4 

1981 20.6 7.0 13.6 

1994 16.1 7.6 8.5 

Source: Calculations using data from the Statistic Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia 2001, 

p.48, Skopje 2001 

Table 3 shows a continuous tendency for a decrease in birth rate, death rate and 

general natural growth rate. Such trends unfavourably transform the age structure of the 

population (the continual aging process). The process of demographic aging (i.e., that 

the average age of the population is tending to increase), is subject to both the natural 

and mechanical components of population growth. The level of spatial mobility within 

the country conforms, to a great extent, with the size and distribution of ethnic and 

migrant populations. The number of migrants included within the total population 

figures increased from 12% to 36% during the period 1948-1994. According to the 

census of 1994, 46% of the migration was of local origin, 42% was between 

municipalities and 12% was from abroad. “Village to town” migration recorded the 

greatest growth during the period, 1961-1971. These migratory movements contributed 

greatly to the enlarging of regional differences in the age and educational structure of the 

population, primarily in the villages. 

Table 4. Structure and characteristics of the population by location and education level (1994). 

Age Structure Macedonia City of Skopye Other Towns Villages 

0-19 33.2 30.2 32.2 36.0 

20-30 30.8 30.5 30.3 30.5 

40-59 22.8 26.7 34.5 18.9 

60 and older 13.0 12.6 12.0 14.1 

Unknown 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 

Educational Structure 

Illiterate* 5.4 2.9 3.6 8.6 

Without school education † 6.6 3.5 4.4 10.5 

Not completed primary school † 18.4 9.2 14.8 27.4 

Primary school † 33.4 25.2 30.6 41.1 

Secondary school † 32.3 46.7 38.4 17.7 

Advanced and university † 8.7 15.1 11.3 2.5 

Unknown † 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.8 

* age 10 and older; † age 15 and older 

Source: Calculations using data from the Census of 1994, Population, housing and agricultural 

businesses, Book V, Skopje 1996


In relation to the national average, the age structure of cities and towns is more 

diverse than that of rural areas (Table 4). Also of particular significance is the fact that, 

based upon the national average, villages possess a much higher percentage of the 

uneducated and a much lower percentage of people with advanced and university 

education. General conclusions which can be drawn from these data are: (a) A larger 

percentage of the older and uneducated population lives in the villages, (b) they are 

being exposed to a greater extent to the consequences of transition and (c) they have few 

opportunities to improve their material situation and social status. 

The large differences between individuals and social groups, unemployed versus 

employed, poor versus rich, uneducated versus educated, old versus young and rural 

population versus urban population increase the disparity in opportunities for acquiring 

the rights to use space. 

The greatest proportion of the population of low economic status is concentrated in 

undeveloped areas and rural municipalities. Unless basic conditions are changed, their 

numbers might increase. The people in these communities possess and use few modern 

conveniences, do not have access to common social services and are insufficiently 

integrated into society. 

2.3. Social and economic situation 

The most noticeable characteristics of the past few years are the significant changes 

in societal structure (i.e., economic stratification of the population) and an increase in the 

number of impoverished citizens of the Republic of Macedonia. The level of poverty has 

increased from 19.0% in 1997 to 22.3% in 2000 (Table 5). 

Table 5. Dynamics of poverty by location. 

Index 

1997 1998 1999 2000 

Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural 

Index per Capita (%) 20.3 23.3 21.6 25.8 18.7 28.1 17.7 29.4 

Index of Poverty Gap 4.3 6.2 4.8 6.6 3.7 6.9 4.0 6.2 

Source: State Statistical Institute 

Those living in poverty include people with a low level of education, the elderly, 

families with small children, the unemployed and the portion of the population living in 

hill or mountain settlements. A high proportion of poor households are in rural areas. 

The gap between the rich and the poor is increasing. More than one third of the 

population of the Republic of Macedonia lives in poverty, and many are hungry every 

day (23% have no money to buy food) (Report of the project on “Social Exclusion and 

Insecurity of the Citizens of Macedonia,” Institute of Sociological and Political-Legal 

Research, Skopje, 2000). Research shows that 43% of the population living in hill and 

mountain villages within Macedonia do not have enough money to buy food, while 47% 

have difficulty in buying clothes and shoes. Due to low and/or unreliable income from 

agriculture and few employment opportunities, the population of hilly and mountainous 

areas satisfies some of their basic social needs by collecting forest fruits, mushrooms and 

medicinal herbs. In 2001, around 77,000 households (or 15% of the total number) 

received social assistance, which amounts to 57% of the poverty level. Most of the poor 

have restricted access to income, education, health care and food, especially the 

populations in hilly, mountainous and undeveloped areas. They face poverty due to their 

limited access to arable land and because of migration, which seriously reduces the 

27

28 


portion of the population capable of working. One of the factors that keeps people in 

poverty is the lack of adequate infrastructure, which strongly affects the population in 

undeveloped areas. This limits their access to those institutions providing public benefits 

– health, educational and cultural services; public administration etc. 

Little progress has been made in the area of disposable income. Funds available for 

personal consumptive use in the Republic of Macedonia decreased by 30% per 

household during the period 1998-2000. This has brought about changes in the structure 

and manner of consumption. Food, housing, fuel, lighting, health and hygiene costs have 

increased while, at the same time, funds available to purchase clothes, shoes and 

household items or to place in savings have decreased. This is indicative of a low living 

standard and quality of life. 

In the Republic of Macedonia, many segments of the population are marginalised, 

especially economically and socially, as a result of unemployment and low or irregular 

salaries, which make them unable to obtain enough food or to receive health care, 

education services, social assistance etc. The reasons are numerous, but can be reduced 

to the two most important: poverty (one-fourth of the population is virtually excluded 

from the economy) and massive unemployment (many people, particularly the young 

and insufficiently educated, are deprived of participating in the labour market). The 

various sources of unemployment are not uniformly present in all regions of Macedonia, 

and the level of unemployment differs significantly among the individual regions. 

Difficult and chronic changes are also occurring in the domain of regional development. 

Regional differences in the level of development are great and, during the course of the 

past few years, there has been a tendency toward their further divergence. 

Macedonia is now facing extreme exploitation of the labour force, increased social 

divisions, and the illegal acquisition of wealth by a small segment of the population. One 

the one hand, this has led to privileged social positions and luxurious lifestyles for some, 

while on the other hand, to extreme and increasing levels of unemployment. In 

comparison to the beginning of the period of transition, unemployment has doubled. In 

2000, according to official statistics, the unemployment rate was 32.1%, which indicates 

the breadth and severity of the problem. Along with several others, Macedonia has been 

placed on a list of countries having an “extremely high” rate of unemployment due to 

this increasing trend. An important characteristic of the unemployed in the Republic is 

that every second individual has a secondary school education. The time spent waiting to 

find a job, namely, over four years for 59.4% of unemployed persons (1999 data), is also 

a relevant indicator of the state of a labour force that is not active. 

Another characteristic of the unemployed in Macedonia is the unusual age structure. 

The number of unemployed persons aged 20-24 (59.6%) is very high in comparison to 

the common average of 32.2 % (in 2000). As a result of such tendencies, the labour 

market is unbalanced and is tending toward further deterioration. 

After 1996, a relatively positive growth rate for the gross domestic product (GDP) 

was achieved within the Republic of Macedonia. Thus, in 2000, the economy had a GDP 

growth rate of 5.1% (per capita) and an average inflation rate of 5.8 %. The GDP per 

capita was $5,086. The crisis in 2001, however, caused and continues to cause great 

hardships for the economy. GDP at the end of 2001 recorded a negative rate of growth. 

The largest impact to the GDP growth rate resulted from a decline in industry, trade, 

agriculture, construction and tourism. 

The right to primary education in the Republic of Macedonia is guaranteed by the 

Constitution of 1991, and it is obligatory and free of charge. The Constitutional


provisions were implemented through the laws on primary, secondary and university 

education. Ninety-six point two percent of children are enrolled in primary education, in 

the urban areas almost fully, but somewhat less in rural areas (88.5% in 1997) 

(According to the study, “Strategy for Poverty Eradication” [provisional version], 2000). 

The Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia allows the opening of private secondary 

schools and colleges as defined by law. 

The health care system is financed by obligatory health insurance deductions, which 

creates the possibility of insurance for all people including those employed in the public 

and private sectors, retirees, self-employed persons, farmers, the temporarily 

unemployed, beneficiaries of social assistance and the members of their families. For 

those citizens not included under any of these categories, costs for health care services 

are borne by the State. The deduction for health insurance amounts to 9.2% of a person’s 

gross salary. For health care services provided in specialised-consultative clinics or 

hospital centres, the insured must also use personal funds for payment. 

2.4. Political situation 

The 1991 Constitution defines the Republic of Macedonia as a sovereign, 

independent, democratic and social State with its civil government based upon the 

democratic election of representatives. It is a government which also allows the citizens 

to express themselves directly through referenda and in other manners and forms. 

Political pluralism has its main pillars in the form of political parties, a market 

economy allowing private ownership, and local self-government by municipalities. The 

Constitution guarantees the basic personal and political freedoms specified under 

international law: the right to live, the right to liberty, the right to express one’s ethnic 

affiliation, the protection of one’s physical and moral integrity, the prohibition of 

discrimination and equality before the law. Citizens enjoy equal rights to candidacy in 

elections and other functions, both at the local and national levels, without any fear of 

discrimination. 

The Constitution guarantees economic and social freedom and other citizens’ rights 

including: the right of property ownership, the right to work, the right to strike, the right 

to inherit, the right to social insurance and social care, the right to health care, the right 

to a healthy environment, the right to education etc. The principles of market freedom 

and entrepreneurship, fundamental values of the Constitutional order of the Republic of 

Macedonia, allow for broad opportunities to strengthen the economy and to increase the 

productivity of labour and private initiatives in all areas of the economic system. After 

independence, a multiparty system was established, political rights and democratic 

elections were constitutionally affirmed and legally guaranteed, national and ethnic 

rights were defined and guaranteed etc. Still, there is a need for interethnic cooperation 

instead of the current conflicts. 

Although the principle of the rule of law is ensured by the Constitution, in practice 

there are serious weaknesses in its implementation. A basic problem in the sphere of 

rights and freedoms is how to put them into practice within society. There are major and 

minor differences between the Constitutional provisions and the actuality of their legal 

enforcement. The Republic of Macedonia is facing many social problems, situations and 

circumstances (Section 2.3.). On occasion, during the procedure of privatising 

enterprises, personal interests become more important than society’s. The model of paid 

privatisation employed in Macedonia excluded participation by the citizens in favour of 

buy-outs by the management, a reduction in the value of the equity and the coerced 

29

30 


purchase of shares by pressure and blackmail. To conclude, although privatisation is in 

its final phase, the model used did not deliver the expected result of an efficient 

economic operation. 

In the area of human resources legislation, incomplete regulations have brought 

about numerous cases of the exploitation of employees, particularly low or irregular 

salaries and a failure to pay health, old age and disability insurance. 

Bureaucracy is an additional impediment to complete participation in society. There 

have been cases of long and difficult administrative procedures in order to acquire 

certain rights, unreasonable requirements for obtaining documents and difficult 

procedures for opening a private business or company. 

The internal ethnic crisis in the Republic of Macedonia in 1991 altered people’s 

abilities to earn a living, created a climate of insecurity and caused an increase in 

poverty. In addition, to the detrement of the economy, military actions increased the 

number of temporarily displaced people, ruined or destroyed residential houses and 

cultural-historical monuments, set fire to crops and forests and destroyed livestock (in 

the vicinities of Tetovo, Skopye and Kumanovo). Military actions also incurred a social 

price. 

The process of accession to the European Union (EU) began with the signing of the 

Agreement for Stabilisation and Association in Luxembourg on 9 April 2002. This 

process is conditional upon internal reforms of the economic and legal systems (a 

prerequisite for the successful implementation of legislation revised according to EU 

standards). 

By becoming affiliated with such international organisations as the United Nations 

(UN), the International Labour Organisation, the Council of Europe, the World Trade 

Organisation and the EU, the Republic of Macedonia took upon itself certain 

accompanying obligations, such as the requirement for approximation of its regulations 

with international documents and standards. As an applicant, the State has to meet 

certain political criteria such as democracy, the rule of law and human rights, as well as 

economic criteria, or the existence of a market economy and market forces. 

2.5. Infrastructure and development 

Transportation Infrastructure 

The Republic of Macedonia contains 9,573 km of roads in a categorised road 

network (1995 data), of which 909 km are motorways, 3,058 km are regional roads and 

the remaining 5,606 km are local roads. Most of the motorways (584 km) are included in 

the European road network system of “E” roads. Of this amount, only 138 km of 

motorway can be considered to be a part of the TEM (Trans–Europe Motorway) system: 

Kumanovo-Petrovec-Veles-Gradsko, Skopye-Petrovec, Hipodrom-Miladinovci and 

Tetovo-Gostivar. Of the total length of the categorised road network, 5,400 km (56.4%) 

are of modern construction (asphalt, concrete, stone blocks etc), 1,182 km (12.4%) are of 

macadam construction and the remaining 2,991 km (31.2%) are unimproved (either soil 

base or no improvement whatsoever). 

Railroad transportation in Macedonia is poorly developed. It is managed over a 

network of 699 km of open railway lines, 226 km of rail yards and 102 km of industrial 

tracks. The Tabanovtse-Skopye-Gevgeliya (213.5 km), General Jankovic-Skopye (31.7 

km) and Veles-Bitola-Kremenica (145.6 km) lines are international. The remainder are 

regional. Out of the total railway network, 231 km are electrified (the Tabanovtse-


Skopye-Gevgeliya line), or approximately 33% of the open lines, and 83 km of rail 

yards. 

Figure 2. Transportation infrastructure of the Republic of Macedonia. 

The air transport of passengers and goods is managed through the airports in Skopye 

and Ohrid. They have runways for full take-offs and landings which can accommodate, 

under certain conditions, all types of airplanes, including the heaviest. 

Small State-owned airports exist in Skopye, Kumanovo, Bitola, Shtip and Prilep, a 

sufficient number for the needs of the population. Eight airports are registered for agrobusiness 

use. Lake traffic mainly encompasses the transportation of passengers on Ohrid 

Lake during the tourist season. At the end of 1995, approximately 2,200 motor boats 

were registered, with an average capacity of 8-10 passengers each. Of these, 150 are 

used for passenger transport activities (i.e., as taxis), and 150 are fishing boats. 

Water economy infrastructure 

In the Republic of Macedonia, all municipal centres have constructed public water 

supply systems, but these can not supply a sufficient amount of water. The current 

quantity of water extracted from springs, wells, watercourses and reservoirs is 

approximately 317,284 × 10 3 m 3 /year. 

Irrigation systems, covering 126,617 ha, require 899,335 × 10 3 m 3 /year of water. 

Currently, only 50,000-60,000 ha are irrigated. The protective coating on most of the 

main/major pipes, as well as the rest of the pipes in the irrigation network, is in bad 

31

32 


condition. In addition, the installed hydro-mechanical equipment does not function properly. 

This causes a 20 to 40% water loss due to leakage. 

Of all the available hydroelectric potential (6,436 GWh), only 30.5% has actually been 

utilised, mainly by the hydroelectric power plants in the watersheds of the Vardar (23.6%) 

and Crni Drim Rivers (6.9%). 

Sewerage systems which are more than 80% complete have been built in 12 inhabited 

areas, from 60-80% complete in eight places and less than 60% complete in five locations. 

The remaining settlements do not have any sewerage systems. 

Three wastewater treatment plants have been built so far: in Ohrid/Struga, including a 

few nearby tourist areas, in Doyran and in Resen. A small portion of industrial wastewater is 

subject to chiefly mechanical treatment. 

Of the total length of watercourses (559.6 km), only 180.0 km have been improved. 

Protective embankments totalling 359 km have been built to protect 152 settlements, 122 km 

of railroads, 555 km of roads and 137,000 ha of land. 

Energy infrastructure 

Electric power is produced at existing thermal power plants in Negotino (Bitola 1, 2 and 

3 and Oslomej), with a total installed generator power threshold of 1,010 MW and potential 

production of 6,312 GWh of electric power annually (at 6,250 average annual hours of 

operation). There are 13 large and medium-sized hydroelectric power plants with a total 

generating capacity of 458.7 MW, several other small hydroelectric power plants (total 

capacity of 37 MW), and five industrial heating plants, which participate with 1-5%. The 

total electrical power production of 2,011 GWh in 1980 increased to 6,181 GWh in 1995. 

The main elements of the system for transmitting electric power are transmission lines 

and transformers, with voltage thresholds of 110, 220 and 400 kV. As of 1998, the electrical 

energy system of the Republic of Macedonia included 77 transformers, with a transfer ratio 

of 110/x kV/kV and total installed power of 2,011 MVA, four transformers of 220/110 

kV/kV and power of 600 MVA and six transformers of 400/110 kV/kV and power of 1,800 

MVA, as well as 372.2 km of 400 kV transmission lines, 166.5 km of 200 kV lines, 22.5 km 

of 150 kV lines and a total of 1,562.4 km of 110 kV lines. 

The greatest portion of the country’s needs for petroleum derivatives is supplied by the 

OKTA Crude Oil Refinery in Skopye, whose projected capacity is 2,500,000 tonnes/year; 

however, it has never operated at full capacity. 

In the Republic of Macedonia, there is a branch of the international transit gas pipeline 

system extending from the village of Zhidilovo (Deve Bair) to Skopye (around 120 km). In 

the future, there is a plan to extend the gas pipeline network across the Republic and connect 

it with Greece and Serbia (through Kosovo). 

In addition, the oil pipeline from Thessaloniki to the refinery in Skopye has now been 

completed, and there is presently an oil pipeline from Skopye to Kosovo being built. In the 

future, the construction of a Balkan oil pipeline (Burgas-Drac) which would pass through the 

Macedonian towns of Kriva Palanka, Kumanovo, Skopye, Veles, Prilep, Bitola, Resen, 

Ohrid and Struga is anticipated. 

2.6. Property rights and tenure 

The right of property ownership can be exercised by all domestic and foreign physical 

and legal entities, including the State and local self-government units, under conditions 

stipulated in the Law on Property and Other Real Rights (Official Gazette of the Republic of 

Macedonia 18/2001). The right to own property can be restricted or denied when it is a 

matter of public interest, as defined by the law. Any asset which can belong to a legal or 

physical entity is subject to the right of property ownership, except for ones that, due to their


nature or by virtue of the law, can not be subject to this right. Property refers to movable 

objects and real estate. 

Assets considered to be of “common interest” in the Republic of Macedonia include: 

natural properties, plant and animal life, properties of common usage, construction sites, 

forests and forest lands, pastures and water resources, as well as objects of special cultural or 

historical importance. Objects defined by the Constitution or by other special laws as assets 

of common interest for the State can be subject to the right of property ownership by 

physical and legal entities. 

The forms of ownership over building sites, agricultural and forest lands, pastures and 

water resources are governed by special regulations. Properties of common usage are objects 

of State ownership used by all physical and legal entities. The management and care of them 

lies with the Republic, unless agreed otherwise. The manner and conditions under which 

certain properties of common interest owned by the State can be released for use 

(concession) to physical and legal entities is regulated by law. 

The right to own property can also be exercised under the auspices of the Law on 

Denationalisation (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia 20/98), for properties 

expropriated after 2 August 1944. 

In Macedonia, 677,886 ha of the total 2,571,300-ha land surface are considered to be 

private property; 1,865,330 ha are State property. Of the arable lands, 498,051 ha of the total 

633,233 ha are private property and 135,182 ha are owned by the State. With regard to 

pastures, 469,061 ha out of the total 649,092 ha are State-owned; of forests and forest lands, 

87% or 827,450 ha of the total 953,322 ha are owned by the State. 

Of the total available housing in Macedonia, there are 580,314 flats. According to the 

census of 1994, 96% or 557,101 flats are privately owned and only 4% or 23,213 flats are 

State-owned. 

2.7. Land use 

Land use within the Republic of Macedonia has been categorised on the basis of 

productive purposes (agriculture and forestry) and nonproductive purposes (water and 

watercourses, infrastructure, settlements and non-arable land), in accordance with data from 

the year 2000 State Survey Administration (Table. 6). Productive land has been exhibiting a 

slight decrease over the past twenty years. 

Table 6. Balance of land by category and use. 

Type of Surface '000 ha % 

Total land 2,543 100.0 

Nonproductive land 231 9.0 

Productive land 2,312 91.0 100.0 

Forests and forest land 1,021 40.1 44.2 

Agricultural land 1,291 50.8 55.8 100.0 

Pastures 632 24.9 27.3 49.0 

Wetlands and fish ponds 2 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Arable land 657 25.8 28.4 50.9 100.0 

Ploughed land and fields 554 21.8 24.0 42.9 84.3 

Orchards 20 0.8 0.9 1.5 3.0 

Vineyards 29 1.1 1.2 2.3 4.4 

Meadows 54 2.1 2.3 4.2 8.2 

Source: Spatial Plan of the Republic of Macedonia – Proposal, Public Enterprise for Spatial and 

Urban Planning, Skopje 1999 

33

34 


Forest land includes 22,000 ha of nonproductive areas (rocky terrain). As a result of 

the measures taken for forest maintenance and artificial reforestation, today the forests in 

Macedonia have been rehabilitated, with a large part of the shrublands converted into 

low forests (woodlands), and low forests into high forests. Unfortunately, seedlings of 

White and Black pine have been used in the reforestation process rather than naturally 

occurring species. Of special note is the fact that 250,000 ha of forests and forest lands 

are currently almost devoid of vegetative cover (both inside and outside the main forest 

canopy). Of these, 0.4% are under sparse cover. These are areas suitable for replanting 

or for allowing natural recolonisation to occur. 

Agricultural land includes pastures, temporary pools, drained wetlands still 

containing reeds and arable land. High quality pastures (192,000 ha) are located in 

almost all high mountain areas, but the best ones are located in the western mountains 

(Shar Planina, Bistra, Stogovo, Korab, Deshat and others). Arable land includes 

ploughed land and gardens, meadows, and a small amount of vineyards and orchards. 

Cereals dominate within this area (62%), which does not correspond to the favourable 

soil moisture and temperature conditions. 

In general, approximately one-third of farm fields and gardens remain unplanted 

each year, that is, fallow or untilled (total of 193,000 ha). These are mainly areas of low 

cadastral class (VI, VII and VIII) located on hilly or mountainous terrain, having 

unfavourable relief or climatic conditions. 

The nature of nonproductive land is shown in Table 7. Water resources comprise 

most of the total balance of nonproductive land. Watercourses, natural lakes and 

artificial reservoirs cover an area of 87,493 ha or 3.4% of Macedonia’s total land area. A 

great portion of nonproductive land, however, is covered by settlements and 

infrastructure (totalling 69,207 ha), mainly in the plains and the most fertile areas. Of 

particular note has been the expansion of towns and plain settlements within the Skopye 

Valley, Polog Valley, Kichevsko Pole Plain, Ohrid Valley, Kumanovsko Pole Plain, 

Slavishko Pole Plain, Strumichko Pole Plain etc. 

Table 7. Nature of unproductive surfaces. 

Type of Surface ha % 

Water and waterways 44,083 19.1 

Natural lakes 43,410 18.7 

Religious objects 1,300 0.6 

Roads and railroads 34,094 14.8 

Settlements 35,113 15.2 

Other barren land 73,000 31.6 

Total 231,000 100 % 

Source: Spatial Plan of the Republic of Macedonia – Proposal, Public Enterprise for Spatial and 

Urban Planning, Skopje 1999 

The category of “other barren lands” (Table 7) includes rocky terrain, high rocky 

peaks of young mountain ranges, extremely eroded areas, very steep and uncultivated 

areas, sides of canyons and valleys and the like. The abandoned arable land of cadastral 

class VII and VIII included in this category suffers from extreme erosion. 

2.8. Human pressure on the environment 

General historical processes, socioeconomic parameters, the current political 

situation, infrastructure characteristics and land use in the Republic of Macedonia are


only some of the primary reasons for the unfavourable state of the environment in all of 

its spheres, hence in the state of biodiversity. The current unfavourable situation is 

especially influenced by (in no particular order): 

• Uncontrolled urbanisation, deagrarianisation and industrialisation, which disturb the 

environmental balance and contribute to the loss of biological diversity; 

• Tourism and construction of infrastructure systems, as well as the expansion of 

agricultural lands in the plains areas are also important factors; 

• The low level of education, especially in rural areas, which means a lack of 

awareness of the interaction of anthropogenic activities and the environment, 

sustainable use of biological resources and sustainable transfer of biotechnology; 

• Poverty, which has a negative impact on sustainable development and leads toward a 

disturbance of biological diversity (illegal exploitation of forests, non-sustainable 

development of agriculture and rural areas, insufficient and inappropriate 

health/rehabilitation measures for protection of human and environmental health); 

• Lack of enforcement of the law, economic instability and military actions 

considerably contribute to the disturbance of biological diversity; 

• Over hunting/fishing, uncontrolled exploitation of forests, and the increasing level of 

pollution through cumulative effects act toward the disturbance of ecosystem 

stability and loss of biodiversity. 

The conflicts in the environment stem from: 

• The continuous migration of people from villages to towns. The increasing 

concentration of the population in the town centres represents a serious problem not 

only from a global socioeconomic aspect, but from a spatial aspect as well; 

• The use of agricultural land for production of food in areas with reduced 

environmental quality due to anthropogenic activities, natural contamination and 

lack of soil quality monitoring; 

• Change in use of high quality agricultural land to nonproductive purposes, especially 

near the larger inhabited places and towns. Also included is the abandonment of 

arable land, with the overall result being a loss of productive land; 

• Degradation of forests near inhabited places, clearing of trees in national parks for 

use as fuel, destruction of trees by insect pests, physiological damage to forests as a 

result of reduced air quality and occurrences of acid rain; 

• The stagnation of the economy and the use of out-of-date technologies, the use of 

energy sources of poor quality, as well as the lack of treatment of wastewater and 

waste gases, which reduces the quality of surface waters, groundwater, soil and air. 

The following towns and their closely surrounding areas exhibit the highest and most 

constant threats to the environment and human health: Skopye, Veles, Bitola, Tetovo 

and Kavadartsi. Occasional problems with air quality and permanently poor quality of 

watercourses occur in the following towns and their surrounding areas: Shtip, 

Kumanovo, Prilep, Gostivar, Strumitsa, Kichevo, Resen, Radovish and Kochani. 

There has been a permanent decrease in the quality of some of the watercourses 

belonging to the watersheds of the rivers Vardar, Crna, Bregalnitsa, Strumitsa, Pchinya, 

Crni Drim and Treska. This has also occurred downstream from major settlements, 

mines, industrial centres and thermal power plants. The quality of the groundwater has 

35

36 


not been thoroughly explored; however, during incidental measurements it was noted 

that the quality of the groundwater was poor in the Skopye region, near the ferro-alloy 

plant, Yugochrom Chemical Energetic Company, and in the wells used for the water 

supply of Veles. 

Large areas of the country with potentially low environmental quality (due to the use 

of fertilisers, exploitation of mineral raw materials, presence of airborne pollutants, 

wastewater from settlements etc.), are the Skopye Valley, Veles region, and the regions 

of Pelagonia, Polog, Kumanovo, Strumitsa-Radovish, Kichevo, Gevgeliya-Valandovo, 

Prespa, Tikvesh, Kochani, Demir Hisar, Ohrid-Struga and Ovche Pole Plain.


3. STATUS OF BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS 

3.1. Status and quality of research on ecosystems and species 

The biological diversity (biodiversity) of the Republic of Macedonia is relatively 

well studied, both in terms of the quality of the studies and the scope of the taxonomic 

groups and species studied. 

From the first research in flora and fauna made by Frivaldszky (1835, 1836) and 

Grisebach (1843, 1844) until today, more than 3,000 scientific works have been 

published. Unlike the first publications which presented fragmented studies, more 

thorough and more significant research appeared in the period between World War I and 

II. The most important data from that period in the field of flora occurred in the 

publications by Kosanin, Bornmüller and Hayek, whereas in the field of fauna Doflein, 

Karaman and Stankovic are considered the most important. 

In the period from World War II to the present, the studies of ecosystems and 

species, both from floristic and faunal aspects, were detailed and of high quality. Of 

special note in the fields of floristic and faunal research are the works by H. Em, K. 

Micevski, J. Shapkarev and T. Petkovski. 

The scope of the research and the study of individual floristic groups is as follows: 

• Data on the qualitative and quantitative structure of bacteria exist for Ohrid Lake, as 

compared to riverine ecosystems and reservoirs, where there are data on the structure 

of only some physiological groups of bacteria. 

• Of the lower plant groups, the best studied are diatoms (Bacillariophyta), but there is 

a need to restudy and revise the endemic species described in Ohrid and Prespa 

Lakes. The group of partially studied Algae includes the Blue-green and Green 

algae. The other groups (Chrysophyta, Euglenophyta, Pyrrophyta, Xanthophyta) are 

rarely studied and, therefore, it is necessary to initiate basic research on their 

structure, distribution and ecology. With regard to the key areas researched from the 

aspect of algology, Ohrid and Doyran Lakes, the Vardar River and its watershed, as 

well as some marsh ecosystems (Katlanovo, Klimetishko, Monospitovo, Strushko 

and Stensko Marshes) should be mentioned. Less studied are Prespa Lake and the 

mountainous aquatic ecosystems, except for those found on Shar Planina Mountain, 

Pelister, Yakupitsa and Bistra. Data on the other mountainous aquatic biotopes are 

either incomplete or missing. 

• Fungi are relatively well studied on only a small number of sites (Pelister, Galichitsa, 

Kozhuf, Shar Planina Mountain, the watershed of the Tetovska River and the area 

around Mavrovo), whereas data for other areas in Macedonia are poor. 

• With regard to higher plant groups, complete studies exist on peat mosses, horsetails, 

gymnosperms and 78 families of angiosperms (Dicotyledonae: Choripetalae). There 

are 24 families of the group (Dicotyledonae: Sympetalae), as well as 16 families of 

the class Monocotyledonae that still need to be studied. The floristic research 

covered the entirety of the Republic of Macedonia, whereas more comprehensive 

research on vegetative assemblages was done on some mountain massifs and gorges 

(Bistra, Malesh and Piyanets, Yakupitsa, Skopska Crna Gora, Dobra Voda, Taor 

Gorge and the other gorges in the watershed of the Vardar River). 

• The long tradition of caryological research on higher plants in the Republic of 

Macedonia began with the identification of the number of chromosomes of some 

37

38 


Angiosperms (Shopova 1966). This research has gradually become more intensive 

and comprehensive, involving a larger number of domestic and foreign researchers. 

• The vegetation diversity of higher plant groups is represented by 30 vegetation 

classes, 60 orders, 90 alliances and over 260 associations. The aquatic macrophytes 

(class Lemnetea and class Potametea), which are found in the three natural lakes of 

the country, are very well studied. Also well studied is the lowland marsh vegetation 

(class Isoeto-Nanojuncetea and class Phragmitetea), whereas there is little data 

about wetland vegetation located in mountain marshes. Lowland meadows (class 

Molinio-Arrhenatheretea) are relatively well studied; however, meadows from the 

mountain to the subalpine belt are insufficiently studied. Halophytic vegetation 

(class Thero-Salicornietea) can be found on small areas and is completely studied, 

while the vegetation of hilly pastures (class Festuco-Brometea) is in a phase of 

intensive research. Plant communities present on silicate soils are better studied than 

those found on carbonate soils. The forest and shrub vegetation is quite rich and 

diverse, and is represented by 100 associations. Some of them should be revised and 

harmonised with the International Code on Phytocenological Nomenclature. The 

mountain and high mountain vegetation is not sufficiently studied and the existing 

data is out of date. Because of this, some revisions and new research are necessary. 

With regard to the extent of study of individual faunal groups, from a taxonomic 

standpoint the well-studied phyla include: Porifera (sponges), Plathelminthes 

(flatworms), Mollusca (Molluscs), Annelida (segmented worms) and Chordata 

(Chordates). The study of the Chordates is complete. Concerning the phylum Protozoa 

(Protozoans), the free living Protozoans are well studied; however, only representatives 

of the subphylum Ciliophora (Ciliated protozoans) have been studied from the parasitic 

Protozoan forms. As for the phylum Nemathelminthes (roundworms), the class Rotifera 

(Rotifers) is well studied, while of the class Nematoda, the aquatic free-living 

Nematodes and parasitic Nematodes are more completely studied. Terrestrial Nematodes 

have been studied only fragmentarily. 

Within the phylum Arthropoda (Arthropods), which has numerous species, the 

subphyla Branchiata (Branchiate arthropods) and Chelicerata (Chelicerates) are fully 

studied. The class Myriapoda (Myriapods) of the subphylum Tracheata (Tracheates) is 

well studied, unlike the class Insecta (Insects), where complete data exist only for the 

orders Ephemeroptera (Mayflies), Lepidoptera (butterflies), Odonata (dragonflies), 

Orthoptera (grasshoppers) and Plecoptera (stoneflies). The other orders of this class, 

with their numerous families, genera and species, are only fragmentarily studied or have 

never been subject to any systematic study. 

Currently, as in the past, the primary areas of research into Macedonian faunal 

biodiversity are the ecosystems of the three natural lakes, which abound in limnofauna, 

as well as the other fauna inhabiting the lake basins. In addition, the fauna of hilly 

pastures and lowlands, and that of mountain ecosystems, has been well explored, while 

the fauna of forest ecosystems has rarely been studied. 

3.2. Biogeography 

The great floristic and faunal diversity of the Republic of Macedonia can be 

explained due to its central geographical position in the Balkan Peninsula and the 

various influences to which its territory has been exposed. The fluctuations of 

temperatures before, during and after the Ice Age caused multiple, dramatic migrations


of the inhabiting species, which also greatly affected this region. Such mass movements 

left indications on the recent flora and fauna, especially in the western Palaearctic where 

Macedonia is located. 

According to fossil findings, the composition of the present flora and fauna in this 

part of the Palaearctic was definitely formed in the postglacial period, when a 

heterogeneous assemblage of cryophilic and thermophilic settlers was created from 

various close and distant refugial centres, as well as from local species (inhabitants of 

the Balkan area that survived). In that period, subtropical and tropical elements and most 

of the Upper Pliocene flora and fauna were almost completely destroyed. 

With reference to the structure of the living organisms inhabiting the Republic of 

Macedonia, several biogeographical regions can be distinguished: 

• The sub-Mediterranean area of the Mediterranean biogeographical region which 

includes the southern part of the Vardar Valley and the area near Doyran Lake, for 

which the climate-zonal community Querco cocciferae-Carpinetum orientalis is 

characteristic. Many Mediterranean and sub-Mediterranean species (from different 

parts of the Mediterranean region) including Arbutus andrachne, Phyllirea media, 

Platanus orientalis, Punica granatum and Quercus coccifera, are associated with 

this community. The fauna of this area is most frequently represented by Pontus 

(east)-Mediterranean and Syrian arboreal elements, which extend far into the 

lowlands of Macedonia (Eryx jaculus, Pelobates syriacus, Telescopus fallax, Testudo 

graeca, Typhlops vermicularis and Vipera ammodytes). 

• The middle-European biogeographical region, which includes a major part of 

Macedonia and dominates various climate-zonal broadleaf (primarily Oak) forests. 

In the western sectors, the most significant azonal phytocenoses of Aesculus 

hippocastanum, Quercus trojana etc. can be found. Regarding fauna, these forested 

areas are mainly inhabited by east-Mediterranean elements (Algyroides 

nigropunctatus, Capreolus capreolus, Cervus elaphus, Coluber gemonensis, 

Dendrocopus medius, Felis silvestris, Martes martes, Picus viridis, Salamandra 

salamandra etc.). 

• The central part of Macedonia is characterised by steppe-like vegetation, which is 

represented by typical steppe floral elements (Artemisia maritima, Astragalus 

onobrychis, Festuca valesiaca, Kochia prostrata, Koeleria macrantha, Morina 

persica, Onobrychis hypargyrea, Stipa pennata etc). Steppe-like and other dry areas 

of the country are inhabited partly by Caucasus arboreal and partly by Aral-Caspian 

eremial (i.e., grassland or desert) elements, such as Ablepharus kitaibelii, Apodemus 

agrarius, A. flavicolis, Coluber caspius, Lacerta trilineata, Nannospalax leucodon, 

Otis tarda, Perdix perdix, Spermophillus citellus citellus and Tetrax tetrax. 

• The boreal biogeographical region includes the biome of the European primarily 

coniferous forests of the boreal type. Sub-forest and forest continental mountainous 

areas are distinguished by climate-zonal communities of Beech, while subalpine 

mountainous areas are inhabited by typical boreal floral elements (Picea abies, Pinus 

mugo, Populus tremula etc.). In the areas of boreal forest complexes, characteristic 

animal species are Siberian arboreal elements of the Ussurian refugial subcentre 

(Bombicilla garrulus, Lynx lynx, Picoides tridactylus, Ursus arctos and Vipera 

berus). The occurrence of noncontiguous areas of boreal-alpine species is 

characteristic. 

39

40 


• The middle-south European mountainous biogeographical region includes the alpine 

and partly subalpine zone of the highest mountains. It is characterised by the biome 

of the arctic-alpine rocky terrains, pastures, snow banks and screes. The region is 

distinguished by many endemic and relict oreo-tundral (i.e., high-mountain tundral) 

representatives formed in the process of arctic-alpine disjunction. Representatives of 

arctic-alpine plants are Dryas octopetala and Silene acaulis. 

• Typical oreo-tundral faunal representatives include Turdus torquata and many 

species of butterflies (genus Erebia). Species which are not present in tundra but can 

be observed in other boreal areas of Macedonia are Gentiana lutea, a plant, 

Dinaromys bogdanovi and Rupicapra rupicapra, which are mammals, as well as 

many butterflies. 

• With respect to large organisms (fishes, crabs and shellfish), the limnofauna of 

flowing waters is dominated by Pontus-Caspian invaders, which in most cases have 

evolved due to their isolation. In the older lakes, the flora and fauna are directly 

dependent on their location, morphometry and hydrography. 

3.3. Status review of ecosystems 

3.3.1. Description of key ecosystems 

Forest ecosystems cover a large portion of the Republic of Macedonia and are 

included in several regions. 

The “Oak region” is distributed within the lowlands and highlands up to 1,100 m and 

covers 73% of the total forested area. Climate-zonal, mostly thermophilic Oak and 

Chestnut forests, as well as orographic-edaphic and hydrologically conditioned forest 

and shrub communities (including Willow, White poplar, Plane tree, Common ash etc.), 

are located in these areas. Regarding vertebrate fauna, typical inhabitants of this region 

are: Ablepharus kitaibelii, Algyroides nigropunctatus, Coluber caspius, C. gemonensis, 

C. najadum, Crocidura suaveolens, Dama dama, Dendrocopus medius, Elaphe 

quatuorlineata, Erinaceus concolor, Felis silvestris, Lacerta trilineata, Malpolon 

monspessulanus, Mus macedonicus, Mustela nivalis, M. putorius, Myotis blythi, M. 

capaccinii, Picus viridis, Pipistrellus savii, Podarcis erhardii, Rhinolophus blasii, R. 

euryale, R. ferrumequinum, Salamandra salamandra, Telescopus fallax, Testudo graeca, 

T. hermanni, Typhlops vermicularis, Vipera ammodytes and Vormella peregusna. 

The “Beech region” covers the mountainous areas between 1,100-1,700 m (about 

22% of the total forested area). It may be differentiated into a sub-mountain and a 

mountain belt. The sub-mountain Beech region is present between 1,100-1,300 m (an 

area of the climate-zonal community, assn. Festuco heterophyllae-Fagetum), where 

refugial types of Beech forests as well as Pine forest communities (Black pine) can be 

found. The mountain belt spreads between 1,300 and 1,700 m (the area of the 

climatogenic assn. Calamintho grandiflorae-Fagetum) and is formed by various types of 

Beech, Beech-Fir forests and, in the secondary habitats, forests of White pine, Aspen 

and Birch are present. 

The “pre-mountain (subalpine) region” is located between 1,700 m and 

approximately 2,100 m. In these areas, the forests are almost destroyed. Forests of 

Spruce (Picea abies), Mountain pine (Pinus mugo) and Molika (P. peuce), however, as 

well as heath of Bruckenthalia spiculifolia, Vaccinium myrtillus etc., can be found. 

Typical inhabitants of the fauna in this region are: Anguis fragilis, Apodemus 

sylvaticus, Bombicilla garrulus, Canis lupus, Capreolus capreolus, Caprimulgus 

europaeus, Cervus elaphus, Clethrionomys glareolus, Coronella austriaca, Dryomis


nitedula, Elaphe longissima, Lacerta viridis, Lynx lynx, Martes foina, M. martes, Meles 

meles, Microtus felteni, Muscardinus avellanarius, Myotis nattereri, Myoxis glis, 

Picoides tridactylus, Podarcis muralis, Sciurus vulgaris, Sorex araneus, S. minutus, Sus 

scrofa, Talpa caeca, Ursus arctos and Vulpes vulpes. 

Dry land/grassland ecosystems occupy a large part of the Republic of Macedonia. 

They occur in the lowland and highland belt (in the highland pastures), and often in 

secondary habitats primarily because of permanent degradation of forest phytocenoses 

(mainly Oak), but also due to recolonisation of abandoned farmland by grassland 

species. The soils on which they develop are geologically diverse over the entire 

territory (silicate, limestone, dolomite, serpentine, arsenic, Palaeogenic and Neogenic 

marls and saline soils) and the ecosystems themselves are present at altitudes of from 60 

m to approximately 1,200 m msl. Among the best studied are the communities of the 

highland pastures which develop on silicate soils (the alliances Armerio-Potentillion and 

Trifolion cherleri), steppe-like vegetation (the alliances Artemision maritimae and 

Saturejo-Thymion) and halophytes (the alliances Cypero-Spergularion, Puccinellion 

convolutae and Thero-Salicornion). Slightly less studied are those communities 

developing on limestone (alliance Saturejo-Thymion), serpentine, antimony and arsenic 

soils. Representative fauna include: Apodemus agrarius, A. flavicollis, Burhinus 

oedicnemus, Coturnix coturnix, Eryx jaculus, Microtus guentheri, M. 

rossiaemeridionalis, Myotis emarginatus, M. mystacinus, Nannospalax leucodon, Otis 

tarda, Perdix perdix, Podarcis taurica, Spermophilus citellus citellus, Talpa europaea 

and Tetrax tetrax. 

Mountain ecosystems are found within a large portion of the Republic of Macedonia, 

especially on mountains over 2,000 m in elevation – Belasitsa, Bistra, Deshat, Duditsa, 

Galichitsa, Yablanitsa, Yakupitsa, Korab, Kozhuf, Nidze, Osogovo, Pelister, Shar 

Planina, Stogovo etc. – where there are optimal conditions for their development. 

Mountain and high-mountain vegetation which develops above the upper forest 

boundary (over 1,800 m) is very rich and diverse. Contemporary phytocenological 

research on these ecosystems has been done on the mountains Bistra and Osogovo, 

whereas data for the other mountains (Belasitsa, Galichitsa, Yablanitsa, Yakupitsa, 

Korab, Nidze, Pelister, Shar Planina etc.) are older, and will probably need to be revised. 

Data on some of the mountains are missing (Duditsa, Kozhuf etc.). The communities in 

the mountain pastures which are located on silicate (class Caricetea curvulae) and 

carbonate soils (class Elyno-Seslerietea) are represented by approximately 15 

associations. The communities that develop on limestone and silicate rocks (class 

Asplenietea rupestris), limestone screes (class Drypetea spinosae), under snow banks 

(class Salicetea herbaceae), near mountain streams (tall grassy plants of the class 

Betulo-Adenostyletea), in high-mountain marshes (classes Montio-Cardaminetea and 

Scheuchzerio-Caricetea fuscae) etc. are also located here. 

Typical faunal representatives of the mountain ecosystems are: Chionomys nivalis, 

Corvus corax, Dinaromys bogdanovi, Eremophila alpestris, Lacerta agilis, L. vivipara, 

Monticola saxatilis, M. solitarius, Phoenicurus phoenicurus, Prunella collaris, 

Pyrrhocorax graculus, P. pyrrhocorax, Rupicapra rupicapra, Spermophilus citellus 

karamani, Talpa stankovici, Vipera berus and V. ursinii. 

Wetland ecosystems in the Republic of Macedonia are present in various forms (relic 

lakes, glacial lakes, reservoirs, rivers, streams, springs and temporary waters). The group 

of key aquatic systems includes the three natural lakes and the developed river network, 

especially the watershed of the Vardar River. 

41

42 


Ohrid Lake, with its relict and endemic organisms, represents the most significant 

lake ecosystem in Europe (under the protection of the United Nations Educational, 

Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]). It is the largest lake in the Republic of 

Macedonia and is situated in a tectonic valley in the far southwest of the country. It is a 

typical oligotrophic lake with outstanding transparency, low nutrient content and low 

production. 

The diversity of phytoplankton and zooplankton in Ohrid Lake is relatively poor. The 

phytoplankton is dominated by Bacillariophyta, Chlorophyta and Cyanophyta while the 

zooplankton by Rotifers (Rotatoria), Copepods (Copepoda) and Water fleas 

(Cladocera). The benthos at shallow depths is represented by abundant macrophytic 

vegetation (representatives of Charophyta), and at deeper depths by the dominant 

diatoms. Zoobenthos consists primarily of sponges (Porifera), segmented worms 

(Annelida), flatworms (Plathelmintes), snails (Gastropoda) and Ostracods (Ostracoda). 

Among the nektonic organisms, the most important are the relict and endemic species of 

salmonid fishes. 

Prespa Lake is the second largest natural lake, located at the juncture of the three 

countries, Macedonia, Greece and Albania. Rich encrusted layers of Green and Bluegreen 

algae and diatoms can be found on the rocky submerged substrate in the southern 

portion of the lake. Zooplankton is represented primarily by species of Rotifers 

(Rotatoria), Copepods (Copepoda) and Water fleas (Cladocera); the zoobenthos is 

dominated by representatives of sponges (Porifera), segmented worms (Annelida), flat 

worms (Plathelmintes), snails (Gastropoda) and Ostracods (Ostracoda). Among the 

nektonic organisms, the relict species of fishes which are distinguished by a level of high 

endemism are also dominant in this lake. 

Doyran Lake is the smallest tectonic lake in the Republic of Macedonia. It is located 

in the south-eastern area of the country and is a typical eutrophic lake of the Aegean lake 

group. It is characterised by high floristic and faunal diversity and low endemism. 

Diatoms are dominant among the phytoplankton and periphyton. Among the 

zooplankton, Protozoans (Protozoa), Rotifers (Rotatoria), Water fleas (Cladocera) and 

Copepods (Copepoda) are dominant while, within the zoobenthos, sponges (Porifera), 

segmented worms (Annelida), flat worms (Plathelminthes), Molluscs (Mollusca) and 

Ostracods (Ostracoda) are dominant. Cyprinid species of fishes are dominant among 

nektonic organisms. 

The three natural lakes provide favourable conditions for the development of aquatic 

macrophytic (floating and submersed) vegetation, as well as the development of 

shoreline marsh species. In the past, plant communities of these vegetation types used to 

develop in the numerous swamps and marshes present in most of the valleys of 

Macedonia (Katlanovo Marsh, Prespa Marsh, Ohrid Marsh, Struga Marsh, Pelagonia 

Marsh, the marsh near Negortsi Spa, the marsh near the village of Bansko, Monospitovo 

Marsh, the marsh in Upper Polog [near Gostivar] etc.), of which today only fragments 

remain. 

The Republic of Macedonia has a very rich network of rivers divided among three 

watersheds: the Vardar, Crni Drim and Strumitsa. The watershed of the Vardar River is 

the largest. In its upper reaches, thick accumulations of the water mosses Fontinalis 

antypiretica and Rhynostegium riparoides are present, as well as the Algae, Cladophora 

glomerata and Vaucheria sp. In winter and early spring months, microfloral rock 

encrusting communities occur, formed mainly by Blue-green algae and diatoms. The 

substrate is covered with a large quantity of organic sediment, which also covers these


encrusting species and simultaneously facilitates the development of rich communities, 

represented by the genus Nitzschia, on the mud bottom. Within the riverine ecosystems, 

zooplankton is poorly represented, and the benthos which does occur has very reduced 

populations. Nekton is characterised by rich relict and endemic fauna, especially fishes. 

3.3.2. Assessment of status of key ecosystems 

The current status of the key ecosystems in the Republic of Macedonia reflect both 

the local environmental conditions in which they develop and global climate changes. 

The extent of anthropogenic impacts over individual ecosystems is not uniform. 

Therefore, the main criterion used in this assessment was an ecosystem’s biological 

vigor. 

3.3.2.1. Forest ecosystems 

Very rare and consequently threatened forest communities include: assn. Aceri 

heldreichii-Fagetum (Yakupitsa and Shar Planina Mountains), assn. Alnetum viridis 

(Belasitsa), assn. Carici elongatae-Alnetum glutinosae (Polog and Debarca, due to the 

mining of sand, which lowers the levels of both substrate and groundwater and causes 

desiccation of the habitat where the assemblage is present), assn. Daphno-Cytisanthetum 

radiati calcicolum (Galichitsa and Yablanitsa Mountains), assn. Ephedro-Prunetum 

tenellae (Kavadartsi-Lyubash, due to reforestation), assn. Juglando-Aesculetum 

hippocastani (Suv Dol near Izvor and Yablanitsa), assn. Periploco-Alnetum glutinosae 

(Monospitovo Marsh), assn. Periploco-Fraxinetum angustifoliae-pallisae (Negortsi Spa, 

due to land drainage), and assn. Tilio cordatae-Fagetum (Drevenicka Mountain-Demir 

Hisar, due to water capture/extraction). Direct reasons for the reduction of forest 

communities include: 

• Forest desiccation (assn. Abieti-Piceetum scardicum - Tetovska River; assn. Fago- 

Abietetum meridionale - Bistra-Senechka Mountain and Pelister-Brajchinska River; 

assn. Castanetum sativae macedonicum); 

• Forest fires (assn. Pinetum mugo macedonicum – Yakupitsa, assn. Phillyreo- 

Juniperetum excelsae - Demir Kapiya Gorge, assn. Pulsatillo macedonicae-Pinetum 

nigrae – Karadzitsa and assn. Querco-Carpinetum orientalis macedonicum); 

• Forest destruction due to construction activities such as buildings, expansion of 

tourist settlements, roads, railroads and artificial lakes (e.g., with the construction of 

Mavrovo Lake, the assn. Salicetum cinereae-pentandrae was destroyed); 

• Land drainage; 

• Mining excavation and fill for slag storage; 

• Construction of ski-lifts, transmission lines, television transmitters; 

• Forest clearing etc. 

Many of these factors also affect the status of faunal groups. The reduction of the 

populations of individual species can be best seen in the Oak region. With respect to 

vertebrates, the following species are considered extinct in Macedonia: Golden jackal 

(Canis aureus), Red deer (Cervus elaphus) and Fallow deer (Dama dama) (although the 

last two have been reintroduced). The species, Black vulture (Aegypius monachus), 

Bearded vulture (Gypaetus barbatus), Pine marten (Martes martes) and Marbled polecat 

(Vormela peregusna), exhibit the most reduced populations. 

43

44 


3.3.2.2. Dryland/grassland ecosystems 

The dryland/grassland ecosystems are vegetation types which are permanently 

expanding. Restricted distribution is characteristic for the halophytic communities (on 

salty soils) which develop on a small area in Ovche Pole Plain and in the steppe-like area 

between Negotino, Shtip and Veles. They are under intense anthropogenic influences 

due to cultivation. Among the halophytic communities, the most threatened is assn. 

Camphorosmetum monspeliacae (which develops on solonchak soils), but there is a 

great probability that other associations (e.g., assn. Crypsidetum aculeatae balcanicum 

and assn. Pholiureto-Plantaginetum balcanicum), which develop in small, shallow 

depressions, will also disappear. The plant communities developing on soils containing 

arsenic and antimony (including Viola allchariensis and V. arsenica) at Alshar near 

Kavadartsi are also restricted to very small areas. They are in potential danger of 

destruction because they are present on only a small area, where mining and other 

activities were performed in the past and are likely to be continued in the future. 

The communities developing on limestone and dolomite are not completely studied. 

At many locations in Macedonia where these communities develop, marble is extracted 

(Cer, Pletvar-Kozyak and Sivets), which has a negative effect on their biological 

viability, both survival and maintenance. 

Within these various ecosystems, reductions in the populations of the following 

species have been recorded: Stone-curlew (Burhinus oedicnemus), Common quail 

(Coturnix coturnix), Sand boa (Eryx jaculus), Geoffrey’s bat (Myotis emarginatus), 

Whiskered bat (Myotis mystacinus), Lesser mole rat (Nannospalax leucodon), Great 

bustard (Otis tarda), Common partridge (Perdix perdix), European souslik 

(Spermophilus citellus karamani), Common mole (Talpa europaea) and Little bustard 

(Tetrax tetrax). 

3.3.2.3. Mountain ecosystems 

Floral and faunal components of the mountain ecosystems are not generally 

endangered and their distribution and preservation correspond to the specific 

environmental conditions of each mountain massif. Mountain ecosystems within the 

three national parks of the Republic of Macedonia (Galichitsa, Mavrovo and Pelister) are 

protected by specific legal regulations. 

The factors affecting the state of mountain ecosystems are varied. These include 

overgrazing and the uncontrolled removal of certain plant species for sale or personal 

use (Althaea officinalis, Anacamptis pyramidalis, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Centaurium 

erythraea, Dactylorhiza maculata, D. sambucina, Gentiana lutea subsp. symphyandra, 

G. punctata, Hypericum perforatum, Juniperus communis, Origanum vulgare, Primula 

veris, Pulmonaria officinalis, Sideritis raeseri, S. scardica, Thymus tosevii var. degenii 

etc.). The construction of ski-lifts, mountaineers’ towers, television transmitters and 

other aerial systems usually installed on mountain peaks often causes degradation of 

some of those plant communities which have restricted distributions on the summits of 

the mountains (because of the configuration of the terrain, strong winds etc). Such is the 

case with the communities of the alliance Edriantho-Seslerion (Bistra, Shar Planina and 

Yakupitsa Mountains) and alliance Seslerion comosae (Nidze and Pelister Mountains), 

which develop on the peaks of these mountain massifs. 

With regard to the faunal component of the mountain ecosystems, indirect 

anthropogenic impacts do not threaten the stability of these populations. The Alpine


chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra) never reaches an optimal number within its populations 

due to uncontrolled hunting, a direct impact. 

3.3.2.4. Wetland ecosystems 

The status of Ohrid Lake is slightly better than that of the other two natural lakes, 

Prespa and Doyran. Nevertheless, the proper functioning of the existing integrated 

collection/treatment system for communal and industrial wastewater along the shoreline 

of the entire lake is necessary. Today, macrophytic floating vegetation can be found only 

in a fragmentary state. From a faunal aspect, the representatives of the superclass Pisces 

are the most threatened. According to the International Union for Conservation of 

Nature (IUCN), six out of seven endemic Ohrid fish species are included within the 

category, Vu (Vulnerable), while one species is considered to be Ex (Extinct). The two 

species of trout (Salmo balcanicus and S. letnica) are particularly caught for food, so 

their populations are constantly being reduced. 

The continuous reduction of the water level of Prespa Lake over the years has 

adversely affected the state of the floating vegetation and faunal communities in the 

littoral zone of the lake. The presence of large quantities of organic silt on the lake 

bottom accelerates the process of eutrophication, which manifests itself with the 

appearance of phytoplankton blooms during the summer period. Of the floating 

macrophytic vegetation, the most significant is the assn. Lemno-Spirodelletum 

polyrhizae subassn. aldrovandetosum, which develops only within the inshore areas of 

Prespa Lake (near Dolno Perovo village) and is directly endangered by the lowering of 

the water level. Among the six endemic species of fishes, the Prespa bleak (Alburnus 

belvica) is the most caught, nevertheless its population is remaining stable. Due to 

uncontrolled fishing, the Carp (Cyprinus carpio) is the most endangered species in 

Prespa Lake and, according to IUCN, it is included on the list of species being at critical 

risk (CR). 

The establishment of the strictly protected “Ezerani” reserve and the initiative 

currently underway for proclaiming Prespa Park as a trans-boundary park will surely 

contribute to the improvement of the state of this lake ecosystem. 

The status of Doyran Lake is the most alarming. Since 1988, the level of the water 

has drastically fallen, contributing to a decrease in water depth and receding of the 

shoreline, accompanied by a complete loss of the littoral zone and its related biological 

communities. The accelerated eutrophication has led to intensive sedimentation and a 

dramatic reduction in the epibenthic communities, as well as serious changes in the 

structure of the Algal microflora. These changes have particularly affected the reed zone 

and other aquatic macrophytic vegetation (assn. Myriophyllo-Nupharetum is completely 

extinct). 

The zooplankton community, under the influence of these changes, has lost its 

limnetic character. Until 1988, 94 zooplankton taxa were present in the open waters of 

the littoral and pelagic zones, whereas the recent status of this community shows a 

reduction to only 28 taxa. Comparative population density analyses show that the 

abundance of the zooplankton community within the pelagic complex is one-seventh of 

its former level, and that of the littoral complex one-tenth of its previous numbers. The 

current status of the benthic community, although severely disturbed, likely still has 

enough genetic potential to completely restore itself. The status of the benthos can be 

inferred from the amount of the annual fish catch, which in optimal conditions used to be 

45

46 


as much as 500 tonnes. In the past few years it has been reduced to 70 tonnes, dropping 

to only 25 tonnes in 2002. 

The accelerated succession of this lake ecosystem is evidenced by the appearance of 

the Calanoid copepod (Eudiaptomus gracilis), a typical representative of marsh 

ecosystems, which was recorded in Doyran Lake for the first time in 1995. In order to 

restore the disturbed environmental balance, efforts have been made to bring additional 

quantities of water to the lake, which is expected to improve the state of the biological 

communities within the lake ecosystem. 

The status of riverine ecosystems in the Republic of Macedonia is also alarming. 

Almost all of the rivers are under great direct and/or indirect anthropogenic pressures. 

The situation with the Vardar River, which is the major recipient of all types of 

wastewater (communal, industrial and agricultural), is the worst. The situation with the 

other river ecosystems (Bregalnitsa, Crna, Lepenets, Pchinya, Zletovitsa etc.) is similar. 

Reservoirs have been built on some rivers, and these represent a sink for persistent 

substances (e.g., Kalimanci and Tikvesh Lakes). The reservoirs which provide drinking 

or industrial water (Mavrovitsa, Strezhevo, Turiya), although experiencing slight effects 

from natural eutrophication, have experienced a deterioration in quality in past years due 

to inappropriate fish stocking and exploitation. Benthic communities in the riverine 

ecosystems are showing reduced abundance, which will ultimately lead to a decline in 

fish populations. Six out of the 20 endemic fish species within the Republic of 

Macedonia (Chondrostoma vardarense, Cobitis vardarensis, Gobio banarescui, 

Pachychilon macedonicum, Salmo pelagonicus and S. peristericus) are found in riverine 

ecosystems. Three of these are considered to be globally threatened species. 

Wetland vegetation, which used to develop over large areas of swamps and marshes 

within all the valleys of Macedonia, experienced great changes under past drainage 

regimes which converted most of these ecosystems into arable land. In some of them, 

(e.g., Monospitovo Marsh), numerous rare and endangered Algal taxa were formerly 

found. 

The relict wetland communities, which today appear mainly in a fragmentary state, 

are the most endangered. They develop on organic soils which are very suitable for 

growing early vegetable plants (Bansko) after drainage. Some which were present near 

natural lakes have been destroyed simply because they represent unwelcome marsh 

vegetation. The most important wetland communities still extant are: assn. Caricetum 

elatae subassn. lysimachietosum (today only small fragments remain at Ohrid Lake near 

Studenchishte) assn. Cypero-Caricetum acutiformis (Gostivar), assn. Glycerietum 

maximae (Pelagonia - village Chepigovo), assn. Mariscetum (Negortsi Spa), assn. 

Osmundo-Thelipteretum (Bansko), assn. Scirpo-Alopecuretum cretici (Monospitovo 

Marsh) etc. Some of the wetlands which are still preserved are important in serving to 

explain the genesis of wetland vegetation in the Republic of Macedonia. 

Impacts to most of the swamps and marshes have caused a reduction in the 

populations of all Amphibians, as well as individual species of other invertebrate and 

vertebrate groups. The most affected are: Water vole (Arvicola terrestris), Eurasian 

bittern (Botaurus stellaris), European pond terrapin (Emys orbicularis), Otter (Lutra 

lutra), Balkan terrapin (Mauremys rivulata), Coypu (Myocastor coypus), Dice snake 

(Natrix tessellata), Miller’s water shrew (Neomys anomalus), Water shrew (N. fodiens), 

Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), Balkan spadefoot toad (Pelobates syriacus balcanicus), 

Eurasian Spoonbill (Platalea leucorodia), Greek marsh frog (Rana balcanica), Balkan 

stream frog (R. graeca), Marsh frog (R. ridibunda), Alpine newt (Triturus alpestris),


Italian crested newt (T. carnifex), Balkan crested newt (T. karelinii) and Common newt 

(T. vulgaris). Only Belchishta Marsh still exists in its original state, where the population 

of Otters (Lutra lutra), a globally threatened species, is the largest. 

Water capture/extraction from mountain springs and streams often causes the 

desiccation of mountain marshes and bogs, and thus the degradation of wetland 

communities of the classes Montio-Cardaminetea and Scheuchzerio-Caricetea fuscae. 

Communities with assn. Caricetum macedonicae, assn. Carici-Narthecietum scardici, 

Saxifraga aizoides, Saxifraga stellaris alpigena, representatives of the families 

Cyperaceae and Juncaceae, as well as the bog species Drosera rotundifolia, Sphagnum 

sp. etc. are particularly threatened. Such situations also lead to a reduction in Algal 

diversity, especially Silicate and Green algae. These effects have been recorded on the 

mountains Yakupitsa, Nidze, Pelister and Shar Planina and in the vicinity of the 

Pehchevo-Judovi meadows. 

3.4. Status review of plant assemblages 

3.4.1. Description of key plant assemblages 

The vegetation of the Republic of Macedonia represents a mosaic of diverse plant 

communities with representatives of various vegetation types, of which the most 

important are as follows: 

• Aquatic communities: Aquatic vegetation consists of floating (i.e., present on the 

water surface) and submersed (underwater) forms. It develops in the natural lakes of 

the Republic, is well studied and is represented by six associations, two alliances, 

two orders and two classes (Potametea and Lemnetea). In the past, aquatic plant 

communities also used to develop within marshes but, as a result of drainage 

activities, they were completely destroyed. 

• Wetland communities: Lowland marsh vegetation is well studied and represented by 

13 associations, five alliances, three orders and two classes (Phragmitetea and 

Isoeto-Nanojuncetea). In the past, these communities were widely distributed within 

numerous marshes and swamps, but drainage activities in the major valleys 

(Pelagonia, Strumitsa, Skopye, Ohrid-Struga, Polog etc) and the Ovche Pole Plain 

destroyed large portions of these communities, and the areas they occupied were 

converted into arable land. 

• Meadow communities: Lowland meadows extend from 80 to 1,000 m in almost all 

valleys. They belong to the class Molinio-Arrhenatheretea (alliance Trifolion 

resupinati). The areas on which they develop are now considerably reduced, 

especially on moist soils. The meadows of the mountain belt (1,000-1,400 m) belong 

to the alliance Rumicion thyrsiflori. 

• Halophytic and steppe-like communities: These develop in the central portion of 

Macedonia, in the region between Negotino, Shtip and Veles. Halophytic 

communities are present on small areas within the Ovche Pole Plain and in the 

steppe-like zone (between Negotino and Veles). Taxonomically, they belong to the 

vegetative class Thero-Salicornietea, in which the halophytes Camphorosma annua, 

C. monspeliaca, Salicornia herbacea, Suaeda maritima etc. dominate. Steppe-like 

vegetation develops on Palaeogenic and Neogenic marls and has a high 

concentration of steppic species, such as: Astragalus parnassi, Hedysarum 

macedonicum, Morina persica, Onobrychis hypargyrea etc. 

47

48 


• Highland pasture communities: These communities develop at a elevations of from 

80 to approximately 1,100 m, on soils of heterogeneous geological origin – 

andesites, arsenics, dolomites, limestones, serpentines, silicates etc. These 

communities are often of secondary origin and are formed primarily by the 

destruction of lowland forests. They are represented by over 10 associations 

belonging to the vegetative class Festuco-Brometea. 

• Forest communities: Such communities cover a large portion of the land area of the 

Republic of Macedonia at elevations of 150-2,200 m. Broadleaf forests dominate 

(Oak, Hornbeam, Hop-hornbeam, Chestnut and Beech), while evergreen forests 

(Pine, Fir and Spruce) as well as mixed forests (Fir-Beech) are distributed in small 

areas. Due to over-harvesting, they have been degraded in the lowland areas and 

completely destroyed in some places. They are represented by over 80 pure forest 

stands and include species from seven classes. 

• Subalpine and alpine communities: These are distributed at the upper boundary of 

the forested areas, at 1,600-2,700 m, where climatic conditions are the most 

unfavourable (long winters, short summers and short growing seasons). Here the 

various communities develop on heterogeneous substrates (acid soils, carbonate 

substrates, eroded cliffs, mountain peats, mountain streams, rocks etc.). 

Additional communities of other vegetation types are also present, such as those 

found at forest margins, weeds in crops (on cereals and other crops), ruderal 

communities (growing on waste or in waste places), communities in trampled places, 

bush and shrub communities etc. 

3.4.2. Rare, endemic or threatened plant assemblages 

Within the Republic of Macedonia, many rare, relict and endemic communities occur 

in almost all vegetation types. Of special importance are those with restricted 

distribution among the aquatic, wetland, meadow, halophytic, steppe-like, forest, 

subalpine and alpine vegetation communities, as well as those present in the vegetation 

of highland pastures. Nevertheless, some of them are seriously endangered and 

threatened with extinction, while others are considerably reduced in their populations 

and biological viability (Table 8). 

Table 8. Rare and threatened plant assemblages in the Republic of Macedonia. 

Assemblage Location Type of threat 

assn. Myriophyllo-Nupharetum Doyran Lake: Nikolich Water receding 

assn. Lemno-Spirodelletum polyrhizae 

subassn. aldrovandetosum 

Prespa: Ezerani 

Limited distribution, 

water receding 

assn. Caricetum elatae subassn. Ohrid Lake: Limited distribution, 

lysimachietosum 

Studenchishte desiccation 

assn. Osmundo-Thelipteretum Bansko 

Limited distribution, land 

usurpation 

assn. Mariscetum Negortsi Spa 


fragmentation 

assn. Cypero-Caricetum acutiformis Gostivar 


drainage 

assn. Scirpo-Alopecuretum cretici Monospitovo Marsh 


drainage

assn. Glycerietum maximae 


assn. Hordeo-Caricetum distantis 

Pelagonia: village 

Chepigovo 

Gevgeliya, Skopye 

areas 

assn. Camphorosmetum monspeliacae Ovche Pole Plain 

assn. Pholiureto-Plantaginetum 

balcanicum 

Ovche Pole Plain 

assn. Crypsidetum aculeatae balcanicum Ovche Pole Plain 

Drainage 


lowering of the 

groundwater table 


direct destruction 





assn. Ephedro-Prunetum tenellae Kavadartsi-Lyubash Reforestation 

assn. Aesculo hippocastani-Fagetum Village Izvor: Suvi Dol Relict, rare 

assn. Periploco-Alnetum glutinosae Monospitovo Marsh Drainage 

assn. Abieti-Piceetum scardicum Tetovska River Forest desiccation 

assn. Castanetum sativae macedonicum Forest desiccation 

assn. Pinetum mugo macedonicum Yakupitsa Forest fires 

assn. Pulsatillo macedonicae-Pinetum 

nigrae 

Karadzitsa Forest fires 

assn. Querco-Carpinetum orientalis 

macedonicum 

Forest fires 

assn. Phillyreo-Juniperetum excelsae Demir Kapiya Forest fires 

assn. Caricetum macedonicae Bistra, Pelister Water capture/extraction 

Mariovo: Gorge of 

assn. Sclerantho-Biserruletum pelecinae 

Crna River 

Construction of artificial 

reservoir 

assn. Edrayantho-Oxytropetum Bistra Limited area 

assn. Seslerietum korabensis Korab, Bistra Limited area 

assn. Rindero-Acantholimonetum Galichitsa Limited area 

assn. Diantho kaimakczalanicensis- 

Festucetum 

Kaymakchalan Limited area 

assn. Diantho scardici-Festucetum Shar Planina Limited area 

assn. Diantho jakupicensis-Elynetum Yakupitsa Limited area 

assn. Micromerio-Violetum kosaninii Yakupitsa, Kozyak Limited area 

3.5. Status review of species 

3.5.1. Micro-organisms 

3.5.1.1. Diversity of known micro-organisms 

Bacteria, from a taxonomic aspect, are poorly studied. The main studies deal with the 

quantitative structure of individual physiological groups of bacteria. The available data 

show that there are 100 determined taxa (this figure also includes pathogenic bacteria). 

Previous microbiological studies dealt mainly with industrial and agricultural 

microbiology. They included some data on the presence of bacteria in thermal springs 

(Beggiatoa alba, B. leptomitiformis, B. minima, and Thiotrix tenuissima), as well as 

faecal indicators (Clostridium perfrigens and Escherichia coli). Spaerotiulus natans can 

be found in river ecosystems containing increased quantities of organic substances. In 

waters containing great quantities of iron compounds, the species Leptotrix ochracea is 

present. There are also some data on the bacteria which cause diseases in agricultural 

plants. 

49

50 


3.5.1.2. Endemism among micro-organisms 

According to the studies to date, endemic species of bacteria have not been 

discovered. 

3.5.1.3. Conservation status of micro-organisms 

Due to an insufficient taxonomic study, it is not possible to make an assessment on 

the degree of threat to certain species or taxa of bacteria. 

3.5.2. Fungi 

3.5.2.1. Diversity of Fungi and centres of diversity 

Fungi represent a very heterogeneous group of organisms; however, studies to date 

have dealt mainly with Ascomycota and Basidiomycota. The other orders of Fungi are 

poorly studied. 

There are approximately 1,250 recorded species of Fungi. Most belong to the orders 

Ascomycota (130), Basidiomycota (1050), Myxomycota (10), Oomycota (20) and 

Zygomycota (35). 

Sites containing the highest mycodiversity, according to current studies, are: Pelister 

Mountain (location of the Mountain Lodge “Kopanki” and watershed of Braychinska 

River), Shar Planina Mountain (watershed of Tetovska River), near Mavrovo Lake, 

Kozhuf-Momina Chuka etc. 

Lichens (lichenoid Fungi) (Lichenes) number approximately 340 species. 

Table 9. Number of Fungi and Lichens by families, genera and species in the Republic of 

Macedonia. 

Types of Fungi Families Genera Species 

Acrasiomycota - - - 

Ascomycota (without Lichens) 35 60 130 

Basidiomycota 49 284 1,050 

Chytridiomycota 5 6 10 

Dictiosteliomycota - - - 

Hyphochytridiomycota - - - 

Labyrinthulomycota - - - 

Myxomycota 7 7 10 

Oomycota 5 9 20 

Plasmodiophoromycota - - - 

Zygomycota 9 12 35 

Total Fungi 110 378 1,250 

Lichenes 11 73 340 

Total with Lichens 121 451 1,590 

3.5.2.2. Endemism among Fungi 

There are no known endemic species of Fungi in the Republic of Macedonia. 

3.5.2.3. Conservation status of Fungi 

The Preliminary Red List of Fungi in the Republic of Macedonia has been prepared 

and includes 67 species in Basidiomycota (Annex 3).


3.5.3. Flora 

3.5.3.1. Diversity of known lower and higher plant groups and key centres of plant 

diversity 

With regard to the lower plant groups, Algae represent an especially diverse group of 

organisms. The Green, Silicate and Blue-green algae are dominant, with other groups 

found in smaller numbers. 

To date, 1,580 species of Algae have been identified, of which Silicate (40.1%) and 

Green (35.3%) algae form a majority. The most important centres of Algal diversity are 

Ohrid and Doyran Lakes, while on Prespa Lake there are no current systematic studies. 

In addition to the relic lakes, mountain aquatic ecosystems appear to be equally 

important centres of Algal diversity. 

Table 10. Number of individual Algal taxonomic groups in the Republic of Macedonia (all types) 

Taxonomic group Families Genera Species Varieties Forms Total Taxa 

Cyanophyta 16 48 204 10 58 273 

Pyrrophyta 5 8 12 3 1 16 

Chrysophyta 4 7 10 4 - 14 

Bacillariophyta 13 69 512 109 12 633 

Phaeophyta - - - - - - 

Xanthophyta 2 2 9 - - 9 

Euglenophyta 3 5 23 3 1 27 

Chlorophyta 29 90 398 124 35 557 

Charophyta 2 2 18 - 3 21 

Rhodophyta 6 7 7 - - 7 

Glaucophyta 1 1 1 - - 1 

Eustigmatophyta 1 1 1 - - 1 

Total 82 240 1,195 256 128 1,580 

Table 11. Centres of high Algal diversity in the Republic of Macedonia. 

Location Number of species 

Ohrid Lake c. 400 

Prespa Lake c. 350 

Doyran Lake c. 250 

The flora of higher plant groups is quite rich, with a mosaic of diverse floral 

elements (Tertiary relicts, Mediterranean, Greek-Anatolian, Ilyric, Caucasian, Middle- 

European, Eurasian, arctic-alpine and cosmopolitan) and large number of endemic 

species (Macedonian, south Balkan, Balkan etc.). It is represented by 210 families, 920 

genera and approximately 3,700 species. The most numerous group is flowering 

(Angiosperm) plants, with about 3,200 species, followed by mosses (350) and ferns (42). 

• Mosses. Mosses are represented by 67 families, 167 genera and 349 species. The 

class Hepaticae includes 25 families, 36 genera and 52 species; the class 

Anthocerotae includes one family, one genus and one species, while the class Musci 

includes 41 families, 130 genera and 296 species. In the class Hepaticae, the most 

numerous family is Lophoziaceae with eight species, whereas the most numerous 

families in the class Musci are Bryaceae (23 species), Amblystegiaceae (23) and 

Brachytheciaceae (23). The most polymorphic genera are Brachythecium (23 

51

52 


species), Bryum (14) and Orthotrichum (11). Two species are Macedonian endemics 

(Melichoferia paradoxa and Orthotrichum insidiosum). 

• Peat mosses. This group is represented by six species which mainly inhabit moist 

areas and bogs in mountain and high mountain areas. They are only rarely found in 

lowlands (most often on silicate soils). The species Diphasium alpinum, Huperzia 

sellago, Isoetes phrygia and Lycopodium clavatum have very restricted distributions. 

• Horsetails. Horsetails are represented by seven species which may be found in very 

moist places, from lowlands to high mountain areas (by rivers, mountain streams, 

valleys, gorges, marshes and moist meadows). The most frequent species are 

Equisetum arvense and E. palustre, with the rarest being the species E. fluviatile and 

E. sylvaticum. 

• Ferns. In the Republic of Macedonia, 42 species of ferns in 15 families can be 

observed. The most polymorphic genera are Asplenium (11 species) and Dryopteris 

(6). The following species are characterised by a restricted distribution: Adiantum 

capillus-veneris, Blechnum spicant, Crytogramma crispa, Ophioglossum vulgatum, 

Osmunda regalis, Phyllitis scolopendrium, Thelipteris palustris, as well as the 

endemic species Asplenium macedonicum (in the vicinity of Prilep). This group also 

includes the two species of aquatic ferns (Marsilea quadrifolia and Salvinia natans). 

• Gymnosperms. These are represented by four families, six genera and 15 indigenous 

species (the most polymorphic are the genera Juniperus and Pinus, each with five 

species). Some species have been introduced (exotic), mainly from the genera Abies, 

Juniperus, Picea, Pinus, Sequoia, Taxodium etc. 

• Angiosperms. Angiosperms are represented by 120 families, 720 genera and 

approximately 3,200 species (5,000 taxa). The most polymorphic families of the 

class Dicotyledonae are the families Caryophyllaceae (345 species), Compositae (c. 

470), Cruciferae (264), Labiatae (c. 260), and Leguminosae (457), whereas of the 

class Monocotyledonae, the families Gramineae (c. 280) and Liliaceae (c.130) are 

most polymorphic. 

Table 12. Number of families, genera, species and lower taxa of higher plants in the Republic of 


Group Families Genera Species 

Subspecies, 

Varieties, Forms 

Total 

Taxa 

Total mosses (Bryopsida) 67 167 349 

- Hepaticae 

- Anthocerotae 

25 

1 

36 

1 

52 

1 

- - 

- Musci 

41 130 296 

Peat mosses (Lycopsida) 3 5 6 - 6 

Horsetails (Sphenopsida) 1 1 7 13 20 

Ferns (Filicinae) 15 21 42 18 60 

Gymnosperms 

(Gymnospermae) 

4 6 15 7 22 

Total Angiosperms 

(Angiospermae) 

c. 120 c. 720 c. 3,200 c. 1,700 c. 4,900 

- Dicotyledonae c. 102 c. 565 c. 2,600 c. 1,500 c. 4,100 

- Monocotyledonae c. 18 c. 155 c. 600 c. 200 c. 800 

Total Higher Plants c. 210 c. 920 c. 3,700 c. 1,740 c. 5,350


Formerly, special attention was paid to cytotaxonomic research in Angiosperm 

plants. To date, 548 species and subspecies have been reviewed, belonging to 171 genera 

from 30 families (Annex 5). This review of the chromosome numbers forms a good 

basis for the preparation of an electronic database using modern information technology. 

Table. 13. Centres of high floristic higher plant group diversity in the Republic of Macedonia. 

I. Mountain and high-mountain region (forests and pastures) 

Yakupitsa, Shar Planina, Korab, Deshat, Bistra, Stogovo, Yablanitsa, Galichitsa, Pelister, 

Nidze, Kozhuf, Duditsa, Belasitsa, Osogovo 

II. River gorges 

Vardar, Treska, Radika, Crni Drim, Pchinya, Raets, Babuna, Topolka, Crna, Boshava, 

Doshnitsa, Konyska 

III. Natural lakes 

Ohrid, Prespa, Doyran lakes 

IV. Lowland swamps and marshes 

Katlanovo Marsh (remnant), Prespa Marsh-Ezerani, Ohrid Marsh (remnant), Struga Marsh 

(remnant), Pelagonia Marsh (remnant), the marsh near Negortsi Spa, the marsh near the village 

of Bansko, Monospitovo Marsh (remnant), the marsh near Gostivar (remnant) 

V. Mountain marshes, peats and glacial lakes 

Shar Planina Mountain, Yakupitsa, Korab-Lukovo Pole Plain, Deshat, Bistra (Toni Voda), 

Yablanitsa, Pelister, Pehchevo (Yudovi Livadi meadows) 

VI. Lowland (upland) region 

Zheden, Pletvar-Kozyak-Sivets, Treskavets, Mukos, Selechka Mountain, Drenska Mountain, 

Barbaras, Ilinitsa, Bukovik, Mariovo, Alshar, Vitachevo, Klepa, Dab, Churchulum, Palyurtsi, 

Doyran, Plavush 

VII. Steppe-like areas and saline soils 

Veles-Bogoslovets-Shtip-Krivolak-Serta Mountain-Negotino, Ovche Pole Plain 

3.5.3.2. Endemism among lower and higher plant groups 

Among the lower plant groups, Algae are represented by the greatest endemism, with 

135 endemic taxa, or 8.5% of the total Algal flora. Most have been recorded in Ohrid 

and Prespa Lakes, with lesser numbers in Doyran Lake, on Pelister Mountain and the 

Babuna River. 

Table 14. Number of endemic Algal taxa in the Republic of Macedonia by Algal types. 

Taxonomic group Species Varieties Forms Total 

Cyanophyta 10 2 11 23 

Pyrrophyta 1 - - 1 

Chrysophyta 2 - - 2 

Bacillariophyta 62 16 7 85 

Phaeophyta - - - - 

Xanthophyta - - - - 

Euglenophyta 1 - - 1 

Chlorophyta 10 5 1 16 

Charophyta 1 1 5 7 

Rhodophyta - - - - 

Glaucophyta - - - - 

Eustigmatophyta - - - - 

Total 87 24 24 135 

53

54 


In addition to the numerous Balkan and south-Balkan endemic lower plant species, 

there are also many endemics in the flora of higher plant groups, with most recorded 

among the Angiosperms (114). The most important centres of endemism are on the high 

mountains (Galichitsa and Shar Planina), in river gorges (Babuna, Treska and Vardar) 

and in portions of the lowland belt (Mariovo, vicinity of Prilep). 

Table 15. Number of endemic higher plant species within various taxonomic groups in the 

Republic of Macedonia. 

Taxonomic group Number of Endemic Species 

Mosses (Bryoposida) 2 

Peat mosses (Lycopsida) - 

Horsetails (Sphenopsida) - 

Ferns (Filicinae) 1 

Gymnosperms (Gymnospermae) - 

Angiosperms (Angiospermae) 

- Dicotyledonae 109 

- Monocotyledonae 5 

TOTAL 

Table 16. Centres of endemism of higher plant groups in the Republic of Macedonia. 

Centres of Endemism Number of Endemic Higher Plants 

I. Mountain Endemics 

Galichitsa 15 

Shar Planina 10 

Yakupitsa-Karadzitsa 6 

Pelister 4 

Nidze 4 

Kozhuf 2 

II. River Gorge Endemics 

Treska 7 

Vardar (Taor and Demir Kapiya gorges) 7 

Babuna 5 

Raets 2 

Crna 2 

III. Lowland Endemics 

Mrezichko-Alshar 10 

Mariovo (vicinity of Prilep and of Bitola) 8 

Prilep (Markovi Kuli-Treskavets) 6 

Kozyak-Pletvar-Sivets 6 

Skopye (Vodno-Kitka) 5 

Krivolak-Orlovo Brdo 4 

3.5.3.3. Conservation status of plants 

There are many endemic, rare and threatened Algal taxa within the Republic of 

Macedonia, but so far none has been placed under any sort of protection regime. The 

risks threatening the Algal species (especially periphyton) arise from habitat loss due to 

declining water levels (in natural lakes), as well as the accumulation of organic 

sediments which cover macrophytes and rock-encrusting communities (this situation is 

particularly serious in Doyran Lake). The numbers of the populations of oligotrophic 

117


and oligosaprobic indicator species within the aquatic ecosystems are constantly 

decreasing as a result of intensive anthropogenic impacts. 

Data concerning the degree of threat to Algal taxa exist only for diatoms. According 

to the research to date, many imperiled species are found in Ohrid and Prespa Lakes 

(Achnanthes inflata, A. minuscula, Diploneis domblitensis, Eucocconeis quadratarea 

and Hippodonta rostrata), Doyran Lake (Navicula oblonga, Nitzschia elegantula and N. 

reversa), and the glacial lakes on Shar Planina and Pelister Mountains (Decussata 

hexagona, Navicula amphibola, N. concentrica, N. tridentula, Pinnularia alpina, P. 

infirma, Planothidium peragallii, Stauroneis obtusa etc). 

Table 17. Number of diatoms species according to their degree of threat in the Republic of 


Category Number of Species 

Extinct or probably extinct species 9 

Threatened species 107 

Rare species 107 

Endemic species 85 

The Red List of threatened plant species within the Republic of Macedonia has not 

yet been prepared, although there is sufficient data to do so. Great numbers of higher 

plant species exist within Macedonia, representing a portion of the globally threatened 

species included in many international documents – international Red Lists, conventions 

and directives (IUCN Global Red List, Bern <strong>Convention</strong>, CORINE species), species of 

national importance (local endemic and relict species), endangered species and, 

unfortunately, a certain number of extinct species (EX). 

The IUCN Global Red List 1997 (Walter and Gillet, 1998) contains 70 taxa from the 

Republic of Macedonia (of which 18 are local endemics). Of these, one species has the 

world status EX (Extinct) – Thymus oehmianus Ronninger & Soska. It is our belief that 

this information is incorrect since vital populations of this species still exist within the 

Republic of Macedonia; a more suitable category would be “EN” (Endangered). Two 

species have world status “EX/EN” (Extinct/Endangered) – Astragalus physocalyx 

Fisch. and Ranunculus degenii Kummerle & Jav., while one species has world status 

“V” (Vulnerable) – Ranunculus cacuminis Strid & Papan. Of the remaining 66 taxa, 61 

have world status “R” (Rare) and five have status “I” (Indeterminate). 

Appendix 1 of the Bern <strong>Convention</strong> * includes 12 species (11 vascular species and 

one species of moss) with portions of their ranges located within Macedonia – 

Aldrovanda vesiculosa, Astragalus physocalyx, Buxbaumia viridis, Campanula abietina, 

Fritillaria graeca, F. gussichiae, Galium rhodopeum, Lindernia procumbens, Marsilea 

quadrifolia, Ramonda serbica, Salvinia natans and Trapa natans. 

Of the species listed in EU Habitat Directive † Annex II, two species of vascular 

plants and one species of moss are present within Macedonia. Three species (F. 

gussichiae, L. procumbens and R. serbica ) are also present from Annex IV. 

From the European CORINE list, nine species are present in Macedonia: 

Coeloglossum viride, Jurinea taygetea, Narthecium scardicum, Orchis coriophora, 

* Bern <strong>Convention</strong>, Appendix 1 – Strictly protected species 

† EU Habitats Directive 

Annex II – Animal and plant species of Community interest whose conservation requires the 

designation of special areas of conservation 

Annex IV – Animal and plant species of Community interest in need of strict protection 

55

56 


Ramonda nathaliae, R. serbica, Ranunculus cacuminis, R. fontanus and Silene vulgaris, 

whereas from the national CORINE list, 19 are present – Aldrovanda vesiculosa, 

Asplenium macedonicum, Astragalus cernjavskii, A. physocalyx, Colchicum 

macedonicum, Crocus cvijici, C. pelistericus, Drosera rotundifolia, Isoetes phrygia, 

Osmunda regalis, Potentilla doerfleri, Ranunculus degeni, Salvia jurisicii, Sambucus 

deborensis, Silene paeoniensis, Thymus oehmianus, Tulipa mariannae, Viola arsenica 

and V. kosaninii. 

The existing legal regulations addressing the protection of plants include portions of 

the important floristic areas of the Republic of Macedonia and, within this framework, a 

certain level of protection has been achieved. Explicitly protected populations of species 

covered under these acts consist of: Abies borisii-regis (Braychino), Aesculus 

hippocastanum (Garska River, Drenachka River and Suvi Dol), Arbutus andrachne 

(Gevgeliya), Betula pendula (Neprtka), Fagus sylvatica (Kaloyzana), Juniperus excelsa 

(village of Kozhle), Osmunda regalis (Bansko), Picea abies (Shar Planina Mountain - 

Popova Shapka), Pinus mugo (Yakupitsa), the Pinus nigra forest (Mariovo), the 

Platanus orientalis forest (Iberliska River and Mokrino), Quercus trojana (Trpeytsa) etc. 

All of the important floristic sites have not been completely protected, however 

(although some are in the process of being added to the protected list). 

The key threats to the most important elements of floristic diversity are: 

• Drainage of marshes – Species endangered by these activities are: Alopecurus 

creticus (Monospitovo Marsh); Carex elata, Ranunculus lingua, Rumex 

hydrolapathus and Senecio paludosus (Ohrid and Struga Marshes); Carex 

pseudocyperus, Scirpus sylvaticus and Thelipteris palustris (marsh near Gostivar); 

Cladium mariscus, Juncus maritimus, Molinia coerulea, Ophioglossum vulgatum, 

Shoenus nigricans etc. (Negortsi Spa); Glyceria maxima (Pelagonia Marsh); Isoetes 

phrygia and Osmunda regalis (Bansko) and Merendera sobolifera (Petrovets). The 

following species are considered to be extinct: Acorus calamus (Crni Drim River) 

and Sagittaria sagittifolia (Pelagonia Marsh - Novatsi). 

• Construction of artificial hydropower reservoirs in river gorges – By inundating 

large areas of river gorges, the existing phytocenoses present in the lower vertical 

profiles of the rivers suffer degradation and partial destruction, and the cover of 

relict, endemic and rare plant species is reduced. In the Treska River gorge, where 

the Kozyak hydropower reservoir is being constructed, the holotypes of 13 species 

were collected (Locus classicus). Among them, the relict endemic species Thymus 

oehmianus and Viola kosaninii are particularly endangered. With the planned 

construction of the Cebren hydropower reservoir in the gorge of the Crna River near 

Mariovo, many habitats of the endemic species Silene paeoniensis will be covered 

with water. The construction of Mavrovo Lake caused two species, Gentiana 

pneumonanthe and Lysimachia thyrsiflora, which originated on the Mavrovsko Pole 

Plain, to become extinct. 

• Destruction of areas with halophytic vegetation – The cultivation of the salty soils of 

the Ovche Pole Plain has endangered some halophytic species and communities. 

This especially refers to the species Camphorosma monspeliaca, but also to other 

halophytes such as: Crypsis aculeatus, Puccinelia convoluta, Suaeda maritima etc. 

The species Allium obtusiflorum is now considered to be extinct. 

• Collection of medicinal herbs – This activity endangers the following species: 

Aconitum divergens, Adonis vernalis, Althaea officinalis, Anacamptis pyramidalis,


Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Centaurium erythraea, Colchicum bivonae, C. 

macedonicum, C. pieperianum, Convallaria majalis, Dactylorhiza maculata, Daphne 

blagayana, Digitalis feruginea, D. grandiflora, Gentiana lutea subsp. symphiandra, 

G. punctata, Glycyrrhiza glabra, Helychrysum zivojinii, Hepatica nobilis, 

Hypericum perforatum, Hyssopus officinalis, Juniperus communis, Leucojum 

aestivum, Lycopodium clavatum, Menyanthes trifoliata, Orchis laxiflora, O. 

militaris, Origanum vulgare, Paeonia mascula, P. peregrina, Paris quadrifolia, 

Primula veris, Pulmonaria officinalis, Ruta graveolens, Salvia officinalis, Sambucus 

nigra, Sideritis raeseri, S. scardica, Thymus oehmianus, Tulipa mariannae, T. 

scardica etc. 

• Uncontrolled collection of rare plants by professional collectors – The result of this 

activity is the endangerment of many local endemic plants with restricted 

distributions: Astragalus cernjavskii, A. physocalyx, Crocus cvijici, Sambucus 

deborensis, Thymus oehmianus, Tulipa mariannae, T. scardica etc. 

• Mining and geological works – Alshar (Knautia caroli-rechingeri, Onobrychis 

degeni, Thymus alsarensis, Viola allchariensis and V. arsenica) and Sivets 

(Centaurea marmorea). 

• Construction of ski-lifts, transmission lines, television transmitters and other aerial 

systems – These endanger rare species occurring in mountainous areas, especially on 

mountain peaks: Colchicum pieperianum (Bistra), Gentianella ciliata and Picea 

abies (Shar Planina - Popova Shapka), Rhododendron myrtifolium (Yakupitsa - 

Solunska Glava), Viola slavikii (Krushevo) etc. 

• Uncontrolled harvesting of forests, forest fires and land clearing – These activities 

endanger many forest plant species, as well as species from neighbouring vegetation 

types. 

3.5.4. Fauna 

3.5.4.1. Diversity of animals by group and identified key areas/sites for faunal 

diversity 

With regard to the status of some faunal groups, the situation is as follows: 

Protozoa (Protozoans) – The diversity of this group of organisms is mainly 

concentrated in the waters of the three natural lakes (Ohrid, Prespa and Doyran). A total 

of 113 species has been recorded, of which 79 belong to the group of free-living 

Protozoans. Of the parasitic Protozoans, there are five subphyla; however, only the 

subphylum Ciliophora has been studied (34 species). 

Porifera (Sponges) – To date, nine species and one subspecies have been recorded, 

all inhabiting the three natural lakes. 

Plathelminthes (Flatworms) – Of this group, 85 species have been recorded. From 

the class of Turbellarian worms (Turbellaria), 65 species have been recorded, with the 

dominant representatives from the order Tricladida, with a total of 40 species. The other 

two orders include 25 species (Rhabdocoela – 24; Allocoela – one). Two classes of this 

phylum, Trematoda and Cestoda, are represented by 10 species each. The largest centre 

of biodiversity of this group of organisms is Ohrid Lake, with 48 recorded species. 

Cnidaria (Cnidarians) – These are represented by the class of Hydroid zoophytes 

(Hydrozoa) in freshwater ecosystems, of which two species have been recorded. 

Nemertea (Nemertine worms) – Found in the in the sublittoral zone of Ohrid Lake, 

Stichostemma graecense is the only recorded species. 

57

58 


Nemathelminthes (Roundworms) – Of the roundworms, studies have found only two 

classes, Rotifera (Rotifers) and Nematoda (Nematodes), represented by 613 species. The 

data on Rotifera originate from the analyses of the plankton communities of the three 

lakes, recognising 60 species. As planktonic organisms, they are characterised by a wide 

area of distribution and have no endemic species. Research to date has identified a total 

of 553 species of Nematodes in Macedonia, which is likely to be much less than the 

actual number of species. In the first study of roundworms in Ohrid Lake, 23 aquatic, 

free-living Nematodes were found. Later, greater stress was given to the study of 

terrestrial Nematodes, mainly in forest ecosystems (450 species), as well as Nematodes 

which parasitise early vegetables, animals and humans (80 species). 

Mollusca (Molluscs) – Molluscs are well studied, with a total of 282 known taxa 

(276 species and six subspecies). The class of Snails (Gastropoda) is represented by 267 

taxa (262 species and five subspecies), with 102 (97 species and 5 subspecies) belonging 

to the Aquatic Gastropods. The Terrestrial Gastropods, although incompletely studied, 

show a great diversity of species, with 165 recorded to date. From the class of Bivalves 

(Bivalvia), 15 species have been recorded. The most important centre of diversity of this 

group is Ohrid Lake. 

Annelida (Segmented worms) – This is a relatively well studied group, with a total of 

182 recorded taxa, (160 species and 22 subspecies). With regard to the class Oligochaeta 

(Oligochaetes), 139 taxa have been recorded (123 species and 16 subspecies), while the 

class Hirudinea (Leeches) is represented by 35 taxa (29 species and six subspecies). 

Centres of their diversity are natural lakes and other aquatic biotopes. 

Arthropoda (Arthropods) – This group has numerous representatives in the animal 

world and is also well represented within the Republic of Macedonia with a large 

number of taxa (7,743), including 7,574 species and 169 subspecies. 

With regard to the subphylum Chelicerata (Chelicerates), representatives of the class 

Arachnida (Arachnids) total of 825 taxa (819 species and six subspecies). Among the six 

orders in this class, the order Aranea (Spiders) is dominant with 558 species. The order 

Pseudoscorpiones (Pseudo-scorpions) is represented by 37 taxa (36 species and one 

subspecies) and the order Opiliones (Daddy longlegs) by 40 taxa (38 species and two 

subspecies). The order Scorpiones (Scorpions) is represented by three species, and the 

order Solpugida (Sun spiders) by one species only. The order Acarina (Ticks and mites) 

is represented by 196 taxa (193 species and three subspecies), most of which belong to 

the group of Terrestrial mites (123 species), with the remainder being Aquatic mites (70 

species and three subspecies). The western portion of Macedonia is an important centre 

of biodiversity for this group, which is present in various types of habitats. 

The subphylum Branchiata (Branchiate arthropods), with its unique class Crustacea 

(Crustaceans), represents one of the most thoroughly studied groups of organisms, with a 

total of 513 taxa (486 species and 27 subspecies). The subclass Copepoda (Copepods) is 

represented by 140 taxa (136 species and four subspecies), separated into three orders. 

The order Cyclopoida is represented by 60 taxa (57 species and three subspecies), the 

order Harpacticoida by 50 taxa (49 species and one subspecies) and the order Calanoida 

by a small number of species (30). From the subclass Branchiura (Branchiurans), only 

one species has been recorded to date – the Carp louse (Argulus foliaceus) in Doyran 

Lake. The subclass Ostracoda (Ostracods) is represented by 172 species, the subclass 

Branchiopoda by 105 species, the order Anostraca by seven species, the order 

Notostraca by two species, the order Conchostraca by three species and the order 

Cladocera by 93 species. The subclass of Malacostracans (Malacostraca) is represented


by 95 taxa (72 species and 23 subspecies), separated into three orders. The order Isopoda 

is represented by 47 taxa (34 species and 13 subspecies), the order Amphipoda by 43 

taxa (33 species and 10 subspecies) and the order Decapoda by five species. Since the 

Branchiate arthropods (Branchiata) in Macedonia are linked with freshwater 

ecosystems, the largest centres of biodiversity occur in the three natural lakes, especially 

Ohrid Lake. 

The subphylum Tracheata (Tracheates) is represented by a total of 6,405 taxa (6,269 

species and 136 subspecies). The class Myriapoda (Myriapods) includes 72 taxa (71 

species and one subspecies), separated into two orders: the order Diplopoda (Millipedes) 

with 59 taxa (58 species and one subspecies) and the order Chilopoda (Centipedes) with 

13 species. The class Insecta (Insects) has a total of 6,333 taxa (6,198 species and 135 

subspecies), separated into two subclasses. The subclass Apterygota (true wingless 

insects) has a small number of recorded species (18) belonging to three orders: 

Collembola (6), Protura (2) and Diplura (10). The subclass Pterygota (Winged insects) 

has 6,315 taxa recorded within Macedonia (6,180 species and 135 subspecies). One of 

the best studied groups of the class Insecta is the order Lepidoptera (Butterflies), with a 

total of 2,295 taxa recorded (2,261 species and 34 subspecies). The other orders have the 

following number of recorded taxa: Ephemeroptera (Mayflies) – 63 taxa, Odonata 

(Dragonflies) – 52 taxa, Plecoptera (Stoneflies) – 93 taxa, Orthoptera (Grasshoppers) – 

178 taxa, Isoptera (Termites) – two taxa, Psocoptera (Book-lice) – 48 taxa, 

Thysanoptera (Thrips) – 4 taxa, Heteroptera (True bugs) – 778 taxa, Homoptera 

(Homopterans) – 332 taxa, Trichoptera (Caddisflies) – 73 taxa, Diptera (Flies and 

mosquitoes) – 606 taxa, Hymenoptera (Ants and bees) – 264 taxa, and Coleoptera 

(Beetles) – 1527 taxa. The most important biodiversity centres of Tracheates 

(Tracheata) are the mountain massifs of Shar Planina, Galichitsa, Yakupitsa, and the 

refugial centres in the gorges of the Treska, Babuna, Topolka and Vardar Rivers. 

Phylum Chordata (Chordates) – The fauna of Macedonia is represented by the 

subphylum Vertebrata (Vertebrates), separated into four classes and one superclass. 

The superclass Pisces (Fishes) is represented by 58 indigenous species, with centres 

of biodiversity in the three natural lakes, as well as in the Vardar River and its 

watershed. 

The class Amphibia (Amphibians) is represented by 15 species and two subspecies, 

while the class Reptilia (Reptiles) by 32 species and eight subspecies. The most 

important centres of biodiversity for Amphibians are the marsh ecosystems and the 

temporal aquatic biotopes. With regard to Reptiles, the most important biodiversity 

centres for the Mediterranean and Aral-Caspian faunal elements are the lowland areas of 

the lower course of the Vardar River and Doyran region; For the central-European, 

boreal and oreo-tundral herpetofauna – the mountain massifs of Galichitsa, Pelister, Shar 

Planina and Yakupitsa are important centres. 

The class Aves (Birds) is also well studied, with 338 recorded taxa (319 species and 

19 subspecies). Of the total number of recorded taxa, 213 species breed locally, while 

the others appear during the winter or in periods of migration. The most important 

centres of biodiversity for ornithofauna are the three natural lakes (for waterbirds) and 

the gorges of the Babuna, Topolka, Treska and Vardar Rivers (for birds of prey). The 

mountain massifs in western Macedonia are the most important centres of biodiversity 

for the boreal and arcto-alpine complex of ornithofaunal elements. 

The class Mammalia (Mammals) is represented by 82 species and one subspecies, 

belonging to six orders, 18 families and 51 genera. Eight species have been introduced 

59

60 


by humans, either deliberately or accidentally. Three species are extinct in Macedonia, 

of which two have been reintroduced into the wild. The largest centres of biodiversity 

for the Mediterranean elements of this class are the lowland areas in south-eastern 

Macedonia and, for the central-European faunal and boreal elements, the mountain 

massifs of western Macedonia. 

Table 18. Diversity of animals by groups. 

Taxonomic category 

Taxonomic group 

Phylum Protozoa (Protozoans) 113 - 113 

Phylum Porifera (Sponges) 9 1 10 

Phylum Plathelminthes (Flatworms) 85 - 85 

Phylum Cnidaria (Cnidarians) 2 - 2 

Phylum Nemertea (Nemertine worms) 1 - 1 

Phylum Nemathelminthes (Roundworms) 613 - 613 

Phylum Mollusca (Molluscs) 276 6 282 

Phylum Annelida (Segmented worms) 160 22 182 

Phylum Arthropoda (Arthropods) 7,574 169 7,743 

Phylum Chordata (Chordates) 506 30 536 

Total Number 9,339 228 9,567 

3.5.4.2. Endemism among each invertebrate and vertebrate group 

With a total of 674 endemic taxa (602 species and 72 subspecies), the Republic of 

Macedonia represents one of the most important centres of endemism in Europe, in spite 

of its small land area. The endemic taxa are distributed in the different faunal groups: 

Two endemic species of free living Protozoans are found in Ohrid Lake. Of the 

parasitic Protozoans (subphylum Ciliophora), there are 30 endemic species which, 

together with their hosts (Oligochaeta), represent relict species. The degree of endemism 

in Ciliophora is as high as 88%. Comparative analyses between parasitic Ciliates from 

Ohrid Lake and from Baikal Lake point to great similarity. 

Out of 10 taxa (nine species and one subspecies) of sponges (Porifera), five species 

and one subspecies are endemic; the degree of endemism is 60%. The species 

Ochridospongia rotunda is the best known of the four endemic sponges found in Ohrid 

Lake, and it represents a relict genus and species, with its spherical shape closely 

resembling the endemic sponges of the Sea of Galilee and Baikal Lake. 

With regard to the phylum Plathelminthes (Flatworms), the highest degree of 

endemism is found in the class Turbelaria (order Tricladida – 25 and order Rhabdocoela 

– 10). There are only three endemic Nemathelminthes species (Roundworms); all are 

Nematodes restricted to Ohrid Lake. 

The phylum Mollusca (Molluscs) shows the greatest degree of endemism in the 

aquatic Gastropods, with a total of 76 endemic taxa consisting of 71 species and five 

subspecies (degree of endemism, 74.5%). In contrast, terrestrial snails, which are still 

insufficiently studied, have a limited number of endemic forms – 21. Of the 15 recorded 

bivalve taxa, four are endemic (three species and one subspecies), all of the genus 

Pisidium. 

Number of Species 

Number of Subspecies 

Total Number of Taxa


Segmented worms, the phylum Annelida, includes 54 recorded endemic taxa, the 

dominant among them being the class Oligochaeta (Oligochaetes), with 39 endemics. It 

is followed by the class Hirudinea (Leeches), with 11 endemics, and the taxonomically 

non-differentiated group of Branchiobdellidae, with four endemic taxa. 

The most numerous animal phylum, Arthropoda, has 419 recorded endemic taxa 

(367 species and 52 subspecies). The subphylum Chelicerata (Chelicerates) has 71 

endemic forms (65 species and six subspecies), subphylum Branchiata (Branchiate 

arthropods) – 137 endemics (113 species and 24 subspecies) and subphylum Tracheata 

(Tracheates) – the most endemic forms – 211 (189 species and 22 subspecies). The 

highest degree of endemism among the Chelicerates is seen in the orders 

Pseudoscorpiones (73%) and Opiliones (47.5%). Among Branchiata, the highest degree 

of endemism is shown by the subclass Malacostraca (orders Isopoda [85%] and 

Amphipoda [81.4%]), but is also seen in the subclass Ostracoda (26%). Within 

Tracheates (Tracheata), class Myriapoda (order Diplopoda) shows the highest degree of 

endemism (37%) and within class Insecta, the order Lepidoptera has the largest number 

of endemics (90). 

In regard to Vertebrata, the class Pisces (Fishes) has the highest degree of endemism 

(34.5%). Among the other classes, only four endemic mammals are known (Mammalia). 

Of the major centres of faunal endemism, the three relict lakes are especially 

noteworthy. The largest, Ohrid Lake, with 216 endemic taxa, has been described as the 

most important centre for endemism in Macedonia and nearby areas. No less important 

are Prespa and Doyran lakes which, due to their shallower depths, have fewer numbers 

of endemic and relict species. Of particular interest is the presence of six endemic taxa 

(four species and two subspecies) common to both Ohrid and Prespa lakes, which 

confirms the common origin of these lakes from the former Pliocene Desaret Lake. 

The groundwater, springs and caves of Macedonia are second in importance as 

centres of endemism. They are characterised by the presence of thalassophreatic (i.e., 

from saline waters), limnophreatic (i.e., from fresh waters) and terrestrial relict fauna 

which date from the Upper Tertiary. 

Table 19. Number of endemic taxa of various faunal groups in the Republic of Macedonia. 

Restricted to: 

Taxonomic category 


Ohrid Lake. 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 

Other localities in 

Macedonia 

Phylum Protozoa (Protozoans) 32 - - - 32 

Phylum Porifera (Sponges) 4 1 1 6 

Phylum Plathelminthes (Flatworms) 32 2 - 1 35 

Phylum Nemathelminthes (Roundworms) 3 - - - 3 

Phylum Mollusca (Molluscs) 61 8 1 31 101 

Phylum Annelida (Segmented worms) 26 3 5 20 54 

Phylum Arthropoda (Arthropods) 51 4 4 360 419 

Phylum Chordata (Chordates) 7 6 1 10 24 

Total Number of Endemic Taxa 216 24 12 422 674 

Total number 

61

62 


3.5.4.3. Conservation status of animals 

The European Red List includes 113 of the vertebrate species present within the 

Republic of Macedonia (30 fishes, 66 birds, 16 Mammals and one species of Reptile). 

Seventeen of the 20 endemic fishes are included within the category of globally 

threatened species. Seven are restricted to Ohrid Lake (Acantholingua ohridana, 

Phoxinellus epiroticus, Rutilus ohridanus, Salmo aphelios, S. balcanicus, S. letnica and 

S. lumi), six to Prespa Lake (Alburnus belvica, Barbus prespensis, Chondrostoma 

prespense, Cobitis meridionalis and Rutilus prespensis), one to Doyran Lake 

(Sabanejewia doiranica) and three endemic species occur within other aquatic 

ecosystems (Gobio banarescui, Salmo pelagonicus and S. peristericus). 

Table 20. Threatened vertebrate species in the Republic of Macedonia. 

Threatened Species of Fishes 30 

Threatened Species of Reptiles 1 

Threatened Species of Birds 66 

Threatened Species of Mammals 16 

Total Number of Threatened Species 113 

Because the National Red List has yet to be prepared, the most important species to be 

protected at the national level are considered to be the endemic fish species. The remaining 

endemic vertebrate species should also be included, as well as some other specific vertebrate 

species whose ranges end in or pass through Macedonia (Algyroides nigropunctatus, 

Coluber gemonensis, Cyrtopodion kotschyi, Lacerta agilis, Pelobates syriacus, Rana 

balcanica, R. graeca, R. temporaria, Testudo graeca, Triturus alpestris, Vipera berus etc.) 

The reason for the disappearance of species and/or the reduction of their populations is 

primarily due to human activity, but there are also global causes which have not been 

completely identified. If global factors endangering biodiversity, including changes in 

climate, are excluded, then all remaining essential factors having direct or indirect impacts 

on faunal diversity, the observed changes within ecosystems (especially aquatic and forest 

types), changes in the ozone layer, some fungal pandemics etc., are of anthropogenic origin. 

Regarding the conservation of aquatic systems and their environs, where the greatest 

faunal diversity is recorded, it is necessary to notice some key factors which cause 

disturbances to natural conditions in biotopes and thus the reduction of biodiversity as a 

whole. These include: 

• Usage of various pesticides and other chemical agents in agriculture and forestry; 

• Inappropriate disposal of household waste; 

• Unplanned or inappropriate use of water for irrigation; 

• Changes made in localised or wider areas through habitat destruction, fragmentation and 

isolation; 

• Tourism; 

• Road traffic; 

• Hunting for commercial purposes and collection for scientific, hobby and other nonscientific 

uses; 

• Colonisation by invader species; 

• Insufficient knowledge regarding basic population parameters and the distribution of 

individual faunal groups.


3.5.5. Summary of species in Macedonia 

3.5.5.1. Summary of diversity and endemism of species 

Based on an analysis of the abundance of biodiversity of the countries on the 

European continent, the Republic of Macedonia holds the top position in the “European 

Hotspot” list. Despite the fact that the biodiversity of the flora and fauna has not been 

fully studied, the findings to date indicate its huge wealth. As an example, the diversity 

of invertebrate species on a relatively limited surface at some sites (Ohrid Lake, marsh 

ecosystems and others) can be directly compared to the diversity of coral reefs; in some 

cases, the biodiversity in Macedonia is higher. 

Table 21. Diversity and endemism of species in the Republic of Macedonia. 


Number of Species in 


Endemics 

Fungi (Fungi) 1,250 - 

Lichens (Lichenes) 340 - 

Total Fungi and Lichenes 1,590 - 

Algae (Algae) 1,580 135 

Mosses (Bryoposida) 349 2 

Peat mosses (Lycopsida) 6 - 

Horsetails (Sphenopsida) 7 - 

Ferns (Filicinae) 42 1 

Gymnosperms (Gymnospermae) 15 - 

Angiosperms (Angiospermae) c. 3,200 114 

Total of Cormophyta c. 3,700 117 

Protozoans (Protozoa) 113 32 

Sponges (Porifera) 9 5 

Flatworms (Plathelminthes) 85 35 

Cnidarians (Cnidaria) 2 - 

Nemertine worms (Nemertea) 1 - 

Roundworms (Nemathelminthes) 613 3 

Molluscs (Mollusca) 276 95 

Segmented worms (Annelida) 160 42 

Arthropods (Arthropoda) 7,574 367 

Chordates (Chordata) 506 23 

Total Fauna 9,339 602 

Diatoms (Bacillariophyta) have the highest diversity, represented by 512 species and 

62 endemics; Green algae (Chlorophyta) by 398 species and 10 endemics and Bluegreen 

algae (Cyanophyta), by 204 species and 10 endemics. 

Fungi are represented by approximately 1,250 species, however there are no endemic 

species. Most belong to Basidiomycota (1,050), which is currently under intensive study. 

Lichenes are represented by 340 species. 

Higher plant groups are represented by 3,700 species, including 30 vegetation 

classes, 60 orders, 90 alliances and over 260 associations. Of the species which are 

completely studied, five are peat mosses, seven are horsetails, 42 are ferns and 15 are 

Gymnosperms. 

63

64 


The richest diversity is found in Angiospermae, with 3,200 species (i.e., about 1.5% 

of the total number of Angiosperms present on Earth). The group Choripetalae is almost 

completely known, while the Sympetalae and Monocotyledonae are currently under 

intensive study. The next most diverse species is the mosses, with approximately 350 

species with two endemics. Among the mosses, the class Musci is the most studied, and 

the class Hepaticae the least studied. Additional research is expected to increase the 

number of known moss species by 120-130. 

Of the 117 known endemic higher plant species, 114 belong to the Angiosperms. The 

class Dicotyledonae is represented by 109 endemic species and the class 

Monocotyledonae by five. The families with the most endemic species are: Compositae 

(18), Caryophyllaceae (17), Labiatae (12), Violaceae (10), Scrophulariaceae (9), 

Rosaceae (9) etc. 

A general characteristic of the fauna of Macedonia is its high degree of taxonomic 

diversity, represented by 9,339 species and 228 subspecies, for a total of 9,567 taxa. In 

addition, the complex zoogeographical structure, with faunal elements of various origins 

and zoogeographical affiliations (resulting not only from the geographical location 

within the country, but also from the complex historical development of the organisms 

[i.e., from the Tertiary through the Ice Age to the present]), is manifested by a high 

degree of relict and endemic forms. 

Macedonian endemic faunal elements are represented by 674 taxa, including 602 

species and 72 subspecies (7% of the total current number of recorded taxa). 

Representatives of Arthropoda, the largest phylum in the animal world, also occur in 

large numbers in Macedonia (7,743 taxa). The degree of endemism at the phylum level, 

in descending order, is as follows: Porifera – 60%, Plathelmintes – 41%, Mollusca – 

35.8%, Annelida – 29.6% and Protozoa – 28.3%. Lower taxonomic groups (subphyla, 

classes, orders, families) show higher degrees of endemism. The level of endemism 

within the subphylum Ciliophora is 88%, the order Isopoda – 85%, the order 

Amphipoda – 81.4% and within aquatic Gastropods – 74.5%. Among the Vertebrates 

(Vertebrata), the highest degree of endemism appears within the superclass Pisces – 

34.5%, a real curiosity even within Europe. 

3.5.5.2. Summary of the conservation status across all species 

The most threatened species among the lower plant groups are diatoms (74), 

especially the species: Achnanthes brevipes, A. inflata, Actinocyclus normanii, Caloneis 

amphisbaena f. subsalina, Cyclotella iris, Cymbella hauckii, Eunotia arculus, 

Gomphonema hebridense, Hippodonta rostrata, Naviculadicta pseudosilicula, Nitzschia 

sinuata var. tabellaria, Placoneis gastrum var. signata, Stauroneis borrichii etc. 

There are 67 potentially threatened species of Fungi (Basidiomycota), especially 

among the following: Antrodia juniperina, Battarea phalloides, Boletus regius, 

Chroogomphus helveticus, Inonotus tamaricis, Myriostoma coliforme, Peniophora 

tamaricicola, Pleurocybella porigens, Poronia punctata, Pyrofomes demidoffii and 

Suillus sibiricus. 

Lichens have 12 threatened species: Evernia divaricata, Parmelina exasperatula, P. 

omphaloides, P. pastillifera, P. sorediata, Peltigera venosa, Pertusaria coccodes, 

Ramalia carpatica, R. polymorpha, Staurothele clopimoides, Usnia carpatica and U. 

causasica. 

The most threatened groups of the higher plants are the Angiosperms (with 

approximately 280-300 species), Ferns (15), Mosses (20) and Gymnosperms (7).


Especially threatened are the aquatic and wetland plants, such as: Aldrovanda 

vesiculosa, Alopecurus creticus, Beckmannia eruciformis, Carex elata, Cladium 

mariscus, Drosera rotundifolia, Glyceria maxima, Isoetes phrygia, Merendera 

sobolifera, Nymphaea alba, Osmunda regalis, Ranunculus lingua, Rumex 

hydrolapathum, Salvinia natans, Senecio paludosus etc. The following group includes 

relict species, as well as some of the Macedonian endemics which have a restricted 

distribution and whose habitats have been impacted by certain anthropogenic activities 

such as the construction of roads, hydropower reservoirs, agricultural conversion etc. 

These are: Anthoceros punctatus, Astragalus cernjavskii, A. physocalyx, Buxbaumia 

indusiata, Camphorosma monspeliaca, Crypsis aculeatus, Knautia caroli-rechingeri, 

Onobrychis degeni, Puccinelia convoluta, Rhodobryum roseum, Salvia jurisicii, 

Sambucus debarensis, Sideritis scardica, Silene paeoniensis, Suaeda maritima, Thymus 

alsarensis, T. oehmianus, Tulipa mariannae, Viola allchariensis, V. arsenica, V. 

kosaninii etc. 

Table 22. Threatened species of Fungi, flora and fauna in the Republic of Macedonia. 

Taxonomic group Number of Threatened Species 

Fungi (Fungi) 67 

Lichens (Lichenes) 12 

Total Fungi and Lichens 79 

Algae (Algae) – Bacillariophyta 74 

Mosses (Bryoposida) 20 

Peat mosses (Lycopsida) 6 

Horsetails (Sphenopsida) 2 

Ferns (Filicinae) 16 

Gymnosperms (Gymnospermae) 8 

Angiosperms (Angiospermae) 

- Dicotyledonae 

- Monocotyledonae 

283 

57 

Total Higher Plants 392 

Fishes (Pisces) 30 

Reptiles (Reptilia) 1 

Birds (Aves) 66 

Mammals (Mammalia) 16 

Total Fauna 113 

Because the National Red List of Fauna in the Republic of Macedonia has not yet 

been prepared, the numbers of threatened species listed are in accordance with the 

European Red List of Vertebrates. According to this list, in absolute numbers, birds have 

the highest number of threatened species (66), followed by Fishes (30), Mammals (16) 

and then Reptiles (1). 

The most threatened group of organisms in the Republic of Macedonia are fishes, 

with 51.7% of the total recorded species. In this group, Salmo lumi is considered an 

extinct species (EX), whereas populations of Carp (Cyprinus carpio) are at a level of 

critically endangered (CR). Of birds, 20.7% of the total recorded number of species are 

65

66 


threatened. Among them, the most threatened species are the Bearded vulture (Gypaetus 

barbatus) and the Black vulture (Aegypius monachus). Mammals have 19.5% of their 

species listed as threatened; however, the formerly locally extinct species Cervus 

elaphus (Red deer) and Dama dama (Fallow deer) have been successfully reintroduced 

and now have steadily increasing populations. 

Amphibians and Reptiles, according to the European Red List of Vertebrates, are 

regarded as the least threatened. However, on a national level, a considerable reduction 

in the populations of most of the species has been recorded, with the most noteworthy 

cases being the Balkan spadefoot toad - Pelobates syriacus balcanicus (due to draining 

of marsh ecosystems) and the Yellow-bellied toad - Bombina variegata (due to water 

capture/extraction from natural springs). 

Major portions of the endemic invertebrate fauna in Macedonia are intrinsically 

linked to the aquatic ecosystems. The high threat level to this fauna results from the 

decline in the water levels of certain lakes, eutrophication of these lakes and the 

pollution of riverine ecosystems. 

3.6. Key threats to biodiversity 

3.6.1. Habitat loss, modification and fragmentation 

In the Republic of Macedonia, habitat loss, modification and fragmentation have 

been occurring from prehistoric times to the present; however, these processes have 

intensified over the past few decades. 

The terms “loss” and “modification” of habitats are interwoven and often cannot be 

separated because the loss of a habitat is always connected with its modification. 

3.6.1.1. Land conversion 

The loss of natural habitats due to conversion is most evident within aquatic habitats, 

particularly swamps and marshes. During the decades following World War II, almost 

all of the major swamps and marshes were drained, mainly for two reasons: to acquire 

new agricultural areas and to combat malaria. Because of this, marsh biocenoses became 

seriously endangered, fragmented or threatened with extinction (Sections 3.3.2.4. and 

3.5.3.3.). This process is still continuing (the Ohrid marsh, Studenchishte, has been 

converted into a landfill for construction waste). 

One method of habitat modification is through its transformation. In Macedonia, this 

is particularly seen as a result of artificial reservoir construction. There are many 

examples of plant species becoming endangered or extinct due to the transformation of 

terrestrial habitats into aquatic ones (Sections 3.3.2.4. and 3.5.3.3.). In the past, during 

the construction of more than 20 major reservoirs, no regard was given as to whether 

valuable habitats would be destroyed. 

Currently, the conversion of natural habitats into agricultural uses does not represent 

a serious threat to biodiversity. On the contrary, the most striking losses have been of the 

extensive number of meadows (in the foothills and mountain areas) and of the pastures 

in the lowlands. The diversity and mosaic-like distribution of habitats characteristic of 

traditional agriculture are seriously threatened. As a result, it is expected that, in two or 

three decades, this portion of the landscape will disappear, having been modified into 

shrubs and low forests.


3.6.1.2. Land degradation 

One of the most serious reasons for the loss of habitats (or their parts) is the 

inadequate planning for the expansion of urban centres, weekend homes and touristrecreation 

zones. The desire for more tourist-recreational centres at the expense of 

habitat conservation (particularly mountain springs and streams, tall grass communities 

etc) is constantly growing. 

The situation is similar with the major and minor industrial complexes which, due to 

lack of adequate controls, are constructed in various natural or semi-natural habitats (for 

example, the quarry near Demir Kapiya, Damyan Mine, coal mine near Novatsi etc.). 

(Sections 3.3.2. and 3.5.3.3.). 

3.6.1.3. Fragmentation of habitats 

The main cause of habitat fragmentation is traffic infrastructure (Section 5.8.). 

Although the quantity of traffic using highways and main roads could be considered a 

problem by some, since these roads were constructed within long-used transportation 

corridors in Macedonia, they have not contributed to the additional partition of habitats. 

Some main roads, however, do intersect habitats that serve as biocorridors for 

vertebrates, especially large mammals. One such example is the saddle, Gyavato, which 

is the only connection between the mountain Pelister (and hence, of Gramos and Pindus 

in Greece) and the mountain range containing the peaks Bigla, Plakenska and Ilinska 

(and through them, Stogovo and Bistra). An increase in traffic or the construction of a 

limited access highway would completely disrupt this corridor. The situation is similar 

in Mavrovo National Park. Railways are very underdeveloped compared with roads and 

do not represent a threat to natural habitats. 

Fragmentation of aquatic habitats (e.g., the upper and middle courses of rivers and 

streams) is a frequent occurrence within the country. Additionally, recommendations for 

biological minimums for watercourses and for the construction of fish passages are not 

observed. This has led, for example, to the disruption of the natural migration/spawning 

path of the eel in Ohrid Lake. 

Another example of habitat fragmentation concerns aerial transmission lines, some of 

which pass through national parks. 

It is obvious that the loss, modification and fragmentation of habitats have negative 

impacts and lead toward the endangerment of biodiversity. 

3.6.2. Overuse of biological resources 

3.6.2.1. Overgrazing of grasslands and pastures 

The Republic of Macedonia has approximately 650,000 ha for use as summer and 

winter pastures (hilly and high-mountain pastures). Pasture degradation is chiefly due to 

the expansion of shrubby vegetation (e.g., Juniper and wild blueberry) resulting from a 

lack of grazing rather than from overgrazing. The dominance of shrub vegetation 

reduces biodiversity because grass communities are more heterogeneous and richer in 

species. 

The average carrying capacity (number of head of livestock/ha) is 3/ha. This allows 

for the grazing of two million sheep and goats on the available pastureland, without any 

measures to improve the grass composition. According to official statistical data, current 

numbers of ruminants do not exceed one million; therefore, the threat of pasture 

overgrazing is not of concern. 

67

68 


3.6.2.2. Over hunting/fishing 

Even though hunting management plans exist and there is also Public Enterprise for 

Game Wardens and Hunting Inspections, poaching is still at a high level. In addition, 

occurrences of illegal fishing and the use of prohibited fishing gear (including certain 

types of nets, chemicals and explosives) cause grave concern. 

There is insufficient data to allow a determination of the state of biological resource 

exploitation resulting from hunting. 

3.6.2.3. Trade in wildlife 

Unfortunately, current data on the commerce of natural products do not exist; 

therefore, it is not possible to make an assessment of its affect on the loss of biodiversity. 

Prior to 2002, there was no information on the export of wild species, nor any sanctions 

for its prevention. That year, the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning 

(MoEPP) began to prepare lists of endangered wild species of Fungi and plants (such 

lists are also planned for animal species). In order to initiate the keeping of records on 

the export of wild species from the Republic of Macedonia, these lists were submitted to 

the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management and to the Administration 

for Plant Protection, in order to be included on the list of products that are inspected for 

health safety at border crossings. The system for monitoring the export of wild species 

of flora and fauna has now commenced. Unfortunately, however, internal trade remains 

unregulated. This is a pressing problem that should be dealt with as soon as possible. 

Implementation of the <strong>Convention</strong> on International Trade in Endangered Species of 

Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which regulates the control of international trade in 

wild species, faces many difficulties in the Republic of Macedonia. These are due 

primarily to an overlap of administrative responsibilities, especially within the Ministry 

of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management, but also due to a lack of personnel in 

the departments responsible for the inspection and control of trade. 

3.6.2.4. Water extraction 

Extraction of water from the upper and middle courses of rivers and streams is 

conducted for the purposes of supplying drinking water to inhabited areas and/or 

irrigation water to agricultural lands. As a result of the arid climate and the hydrological 

regime within the Republic of Macedonia, such activities are very common. 

Unfortunately, the priority of providing safe drinking water seldom takes protection of 

natural watercourses into consideration (Section 3.3.2.4.). 

Water extraction (i.e., water supply systems) is under the purview of the Ministry of 

Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management (Administration for Water Management). 

In cases of major water withdrawals, new construction projects have to provide for the 

continuance of an ecological minimum water flow, which is often calculated as the flow 

of the smallest recorded watercourse in the watershed. With such projects, several 

serious problems can occur: 

• accurate flow measurements are unknown for most of the small waterways in 

Macedonia; 

• inadequate ecological minimums may be chosen; 

• control (or compliance) mechanisms and methods for sanctioning are lacking.


A lack of monitoring for water extraction operations is also widespread. Notable 

examples are the Petruska, Kovanska and Sermeninska Rivers, which are dry in their 

lower courses during most of year due to water withdrawal for irrigation purposes. In 

addition, the inhabitants of the village of Podgortsi (Yablanitsa) dug a channel to the 

Podgortsi glacial lake, which is another demonstration of how a rare habitat type can be 

destroyed. 

A further drastic example is the proposal to withdraw water from the Boshava River 

in order to irrigate the Kavadarechko Pole Plain. This plan endangers the existence of 

this significant aquatic ecosystem (i.e., its middle and lower courses) and would cause 

significant changes in the hydrology of the wider area, since the waters of the Boshava 

River flow into another watershed (that of the Luda Mara River). 

The problem of water extraction is serious enough to be ranked among the basic 

threats to biodiversity in Macedonia. 

3.6.3. Pollution 

3.6.3.1. Water pollution 

Surface waters in the Republic of Macedonia are seriously endangered by various 

sources of physical, chemical and biological pollution. The trend toward the dramatic 

deterioration of water quality in riverine ecosystems was first noted in the mid-1970s. It 

resulted from the development of heavy industry and an increase in urban populations on 

the one hand, and a complete disregard for the problem of communal and industrial 

wastewaters, on the other. The irresponsible discharge of high concentrations of organic 

and inorganic pollutants over a period of years has led to the deterioration of riverine 

ecosystems (Table 23). 

Table 23. Major river systems in the Republic of Macedonia, types of pollution, sources of 

pollution, legal category and observed category. 

River System (and 

Location) 

Vardar: 

Pollution Source of Pollution 

Regulated 

Category 

Observed 

Category 

- Vrutok 

- Jegunovse 

- Skopye-Saray 

- Skopye-Yurumleri 

- Veles 

- Fertiliser factory - Veles 

- Demir Kapiya 

- Gevgeliya 

Organic 

Inorganic 

Organic-inorganic 



Inorganic 



Solid waste 

Chromium 

Agriculture, wastewater 

Industry, wastewater 

Industry, wastewater 

Chemical industry 

Wastewater, tributaries 

Wastewater, industry, agriculture 

I 

II 

II 

II 

III 

III 

II 

II 

I-II 

III-IV 

III-IV 

>IV 

>IV 

>IV 

IV- >IV 

IV- >IV 

Lepenets Inorganic Asphalt plant, industry II IV-III 

Treska Organic Wastewater II II-III 

Pchinya Organic-inorganic Industry, wastewater II IV- >IV 

Bregalnitsa Organic-inorganic Wastewater, mines II-III IV- >IV 

Crna Organic-inorganic Wastewater, industry III-II IV- >IV 

Dragor Organic-inorganic Wastewater, industry III >IV 

The state of eutrophic aquatic ecosystems is also alarming in terms of pollution. This 

is of particular concern in Doyran Lake, which is rapidly losing its identity as a lake 

ecosystem, instead being reduced to the status of a marsh. Although direct efforts have 

been undertaken for the protection of Ohrid Lake, little has been done to protect Prespa 

Lake, the main source of water in this relic system. In addition, the major reservoirs 

Strezhevo, Tikvesh Lake and Turiya are also under great pressure. 

69

70 


In general, there is no continuous monitoring of the state of the groundwater, with 

analyses being made only on an as-needed basis. One of the analyses made in the area of 

Skopye recorded the presence of trichloroethylene and zinc in the vicinity of the 

industrial complex, “OHIS,” as well as increased levels of radioactivity (about 13 Bq/l) 

near Petrovets airport. 

Such a state of degraded water quality strongly affects biodiversity and the stability 

of all aquatic ecosystems. Only those aquatic systems located high in the mountains are 

relatively unspoiled, but past military operations which took place on Shar Planina 

Mountain are likely to have had some adverse impacts on even these. 

The main polluters of water in Macedonia consist of the following industries: 

chemical, leather, food processing, metal refining and other industries, as well as swine 

production facilities and communal wastewaters. 

3.6.3.2. Terrestrial and soil pollution 

Soil pollution in Macedonia is extensive and represents a serious threat to 

biodiversity. There are several distinct sources of pollution, characteristic of the 

conditions in Macedonia: 

• industry and mining (through atmospheric emissions and wastewater – primarily 

from heavy metals); 

• periodic irrigation with polluted water in some regions (heavy metals and nitrates); 

• use of pesticides and fertilisers (persistent organic compounds); 

• improper disposal of wastes (toxic organic substances); 

• transportation, especially exhaust gases from vehicles (heavy metals – lead [Pb]); 

• trans-border pollution etc. 

Regardless of the source for the pollution, there are several heavily polluted regions 

in Macedonia: 

• the regions in and around major urban centres (mainly due to traffic); 

• industrial regions (due to emission of pollutants into the environment), such as 

Veles, Skopye and Bitola; 

• agricultural regions under intense use (Strumichko Pole Plain, Polog, Pelagonia, 

Kochansko Pole Plain etc); 

• smaller areas surrounding landfills, dumps etc; 

The most endangered ecosystems and habitats in terms of soil pollution are the 

agricultural habitats located in the Oak forest belt. Because this belt covers a large part 

of the Republic of Macedonia, certain rare habitats are not directly endangered; 

however, the pollution of the soil still represents a threat to the habitats which exist in atrisk 

locations through their reduction and/or destruction. 

3.6.3.3. Air pollution 

Air and soil pollution (Section 3.6.3.2.) are closely related. The regions of the 

country with the highest amounts of soil pollution are also the same as those 

characterised by high amounts of air pollution (this also includes agricultural regions, 

with air pollution primarily coming from ammonia, nitrates, phosphorus etc).


The most frequent pollutants in the air of urban or industrial centres are SOx, NOx, COx, 

chloro-fluorocarbons (CFCs), smoke and breathable dust (< 10 µm) and high concentrations 

of heavy metals. 

According to the indicators from Sections 5.4-5.8, industrial production in the Republic 

of Macedonia experienced a steady decrease over the past ten years, resulting in a reduction 

of air pollution (except in the region of Veles). The reverse is true regarding traffic, which 

has seen a steady increase in passenger vehicles and a corresponding increase in the total 

amount of air pollution. This continues to be a problem, especially in urban centres, 

primarily Skopye. Additionally, the age and poor maintenance of the vehicles and the low 

quality of fuel increasingly burden the air with pollutants. 

The impact of air pollution on biodiversity is apparent in the major urban areas and the 

nearby valleys. Pollution threatens the natural environment in these areas as a direct result of 

the anthropogenic factor. Although occurrences of acid rain in the Republic of Macedonia 

are not frequent, they do occur near the large urban and industrial centres of Skopye and 

Veles, and even occasionally in rural areas (Prespa 1988-1990, Melovski, 1996). They are 

usually the result of the trans-border arrival of pollutants. Additionally, changes have been 

noted in the composition of the diatoms in some glacial lakes (Pelister). For example, 

powerful acidophilic and acid tolerant species (Aulacoseira distans var. nivalis) have been 

recorded, which were not initially characteristic for those habitats. 

Currently in Macedonia, large-scale projects are being implemented to reduce pollution 

from substances damaging to the ozone layer (the project is in an advanced phase and is 

delivering excellent results), as well as pollution from persistent organic substances 

(polychlorinated biphenyls and furans). The situation in the Republic of Macedonia is 

expected to be adequately regulated in the future. 

It can be concluded that air pollution is not a key threat to the biodiversity of the 

Republic of Macedonia. 

3.6.4. Introduced and invasive species 

The introduction of floristic and faunal species into a country increases its total 

biodiversity (e.g., new crops for use in agriculture, industry and horticulture, pure breeds of 

domestic animals etc). Due to inherently high reproductive rates, however, many of them 

may become invasive, especially if their expansion is not controlled. Additionally, they 

occupy the habitats of indigenous species and displace them. 

In Macedonia, most of the invasive plant species are found on ruderal sites and in some 

aquatic ecosystems. An example is the species Elodea canadensis (Elodea), which was first 

introduced into Ohrid Lake through the channel Studenchishte in 1957. It is an invasive 

weedy species which rapidly reproduces and expands, out-competing the indigenous 

submersed macrophytic species and occupying their habitat. The expansion of this species, 

which can also be found near the springs of St. Naum (Ohrid Lake), the Shum spawning area 

and in the Crni Drim River, is under constant monitoring. Another invasive species is the 

Asian Ailanthus altissima, which has spread throughout large areas of lowlands and is 

characterised by a high reproduction capability. Over the past few years, a large number of 

new American species have also been recorded – species of the genera Conyza, Juncus, 

Solanum etc. With regard to forestry and reforestation, careful consideration must be taken 

concerning the excessive planting of only one species, Pseudotsuga douglasii, which has 

aggressively spread into Beech areas, as well as into lowland areas with indigenous conifers. 

Most of the introduced and invasive species of fauna belong to the superclass Pisces (11) 

and class Mammalia (8). Invasive species from the other vertebrate classes (Amphibia, 

Reptilia and Aves) have not yet been found among the introduced species which are 

periodically recorded. 

71

72 


Concerning the fish fauna of natural aquatic ecosystems, the following introduced 

species are now considered to be invasive: Acerina cernula, Ameiurus nebulosus, Carassius 

auratus, C. carassius, Lepomis gibbosus, Oncorchynchus mykiss and Pseudorasbora parva. 

The abundance of the populations of these fish species is continuously increasing due to the 

competitively inferior indigenous species. These invasive species are found primarily in the 

key ecosystems of Ohrid and Prespa Lakes, as well as in the watershed of the Vardar River. 

Among Mammals (Mammalia), the group of exotic species includes the Muskrat 

(Ondatra zibethicus), whose population has spread in a north-south direction along the 

Vardar River and into the eastern part of its watershed, and the Coypu (Myocastor coypus), 

which is currently restricted to Prespa Lake and the upper course of the Vardar River. 

Fortunately, these two species have not yet had a direct negative impact on the indigenous 

fauna of mammals. 

3.6.5. Natural Pathogens 

Based on an analysis of the current status of plant diseases and pests among the forests, 

crops and seedling production facilities of the Republic of Macedonia, the following pests 

and pathogens are frequently noted: 

Table 24. Common plant diseases and pests. 

Agent Disease Affected Species 

Chryphonectria parasitica Desiccation Castanea sativa 

Melampsorella caryophylacearum Tumor of Fir Abies borissi-regis 

Microsphaera alphitoides Rust disease of Oak Quercus spp. 

Ophiostroma novo-ulmi Desiccation of Elm Ulmus spp. 

Ophiostroma ulmi Desiccation of Elm Ulmus spp. 

Ungulina annosa 

Desiccation of White and 

Black pine stands 

Pinus nigra, P. sylvestris 

Ungulina fomentaria Tree rot 

Mostly Fagus sylvatica and 

other species 

Cuscuta spp. Parasite (Flax dodder) 

Various types of floral plants, 

alfalfa 

Viscum album Parasite (immela) Abies, Pinus 

Table 25. Harmful insects. 

Agent Affected Species or Ecosystems 

Aphididae Floral plants 

Coleophora laricella Plants of Larix europaea 

Euproctis chrysorrhoea Oak forests 

Geometridae Oak forests 

Malacosoma neustria Broadleaf forests 

Nediprion sertifer Pinus nigra plants 

Orchestes fagi Beech forests 

Pissodes notatus Pinus spp. 

Porthetria dispar Oak forests 

Rhyacionia buoliana Forest stands of Pinus spp. 

Scolytidae Pinus spp. 

Thaumatopoea pityocampa Pine stands 

Tortricideae Oak forests


3.6.6. Climate change 

On the basis of an evaluation of the impacts of climatic changes on biodiversity, the 

future horizontal and vertical distribution of plant and animal species are expected to 

change, (i.e., migration toward the north and/or migration to higher elevations). Such 

changes will particularly affect the relict plant and animal species living in high 

mountain zones. 

According to the results presented by the MoEPP in the First National Report on 

Climate Changes, the areas most sensitive to climatic changes are the refugial zones: 

Taor Gorge; Treska River gorge; Crna River, including the gorges of the Raets and 

Blashnitsa Rivers; Jama; Mavrovo-Radika; Pelister; Ohrid-Prespa and Nidze-Kozhuf. 

Within these zones, many refugial phytocenoses are present which would be endangered 

by temperature increases and by the accompanying decreases or distributional changes 

in precipitation. 

With an increase in temperature of 3.2ºC (IS92a model) over the next 100 years, 

even the highest peaks would suffer higher mean annual temperatures on a par with the 

current temperatures in the higher subalpine zones (i.e., the zones of species distribution 

would migrate upward by 500 m), so that alpine pastures would be expected to disappear 

completely on some mountains. 

In contrast to the alpine pastures, the thermophilic communities, such as the 

pseudomaquis (a type of Mediterranian shrubland), would expand their ranges into 

northern regions and higher altitudes. New thermophilic communities would be expected 

to appear, such as Mediterranean grass communities. Other climate-zonal communities 

would experience changes in their areal and elevational distributions, depending on the 

rate of advancement of the climatic changes. 

3.6.7. Natural Disasters 

Natural disasters do occur, but only infrequently and of minor intensity. Macedonia 

is a seismic area, however, and a large part of its territory is arid and semiarid and there 

are frequent landslides, avalanches etc. 

Droughts are frequent natural disasters. In addition to the droughts of short duration 

which are characteristic for a major portion of the country, there are also extended 

periodic droughts, which cause great economic hardships for agriculture, as well as 

serious damage to the natural inland mesophilic ecosystems. Examples of this include 

reduction in the growth rates of forests, defoliation and increased susceptibility to 

parasites and other pests, the desiccation of marsh ecosystems, disturbances to the 

hydrology of aquatic ecosystems (Doyran and Prespa lakes) etc. 

Forest fires are usually caused by human activities; however, due to their 

dramatically increased frequency during periods of drought, they can be listed as natural 

disasters. They are frequent in the sub-Mediterranean and hot continental areas, where 

communities of scrub forests and Hornbeam important from the aspect of biodiversity 

develop. 

Landslides are frequent occurrances, but take place in a much more localised area 

than drought or fire. These are phenomena where millions of cubic metres of soil begin 

to suddenly move, destroying large agricultural areas (Kavadartsi) and forests (Dolna 

River near the village of Bitushe). In the area of Kavadartsi (near the village of Vatasha), 

a large landslide thirty years ago closed the gorge of the Luda Mara River, forming a 

reservoir which is currently being used for irrigation. 

73

74 


Floods are not a frequent phenomenon in the Republic of Macedonia, usually occurring 

only during certain times of the year, but they can cause serious economic damage when 

they do happen. They are restricted to plains areas, where natural ecosystems are rare due to 

the presence of agriculture, or are represented by riparian habitats accustomed to periodic 

flooding. 

Avalanches frequently occur on various mountains in Macedonia. They cause damage to 

Beech, Fir and mixed Beech-Fir forests on Bistra Mountain (Trebishka Rupa, near the 

village of Sentse); Beech-Fir forests on Galichitsa (Volkolegalo) and Spruce and Beech 

forests on Shar Planina Mountain (Leshnitsa) – as well as on other mountains, although to a 

lesser extent. 

Earthquakes of minor and major intensity are regular phenomena. To date, there are no 

data on any serious damage to biodiversity as a consequence of earthquakes. 

Due to the low intensity, low frequency or narrow scope of avalanches, floods and 

landslides; the ecosystems’ ability to adapt to arid conditions and the limited extent of fires, 

natural disasters are not considered to be serious threats to biodiversity in the Republic of 


3.6.8. Knock-on effects (chain of extinction) and other factors 

Other factors that can have negative impacts on biodiversity or cause a chain of effects 

are: 

• Lack of, or inappropriate, legal regulations on the conservation of biodiversity, lack of 

clarity in institutional authority and overlap of responsibilities and authorities. Further, 

there is a lack of enforcement of the legal regulations which do exist; 

• Low public and institutional awareness of the importance of biodiversity and 

insufficiently developed awareness among non-governmental organisations (NGOs); 

• Economic instability, low standard of living and unemployment strongly affect the 

threats of the type discussed in Section 3.6.2; 

• Inappropriate implementation of spatial planning guidelines; 

• Armed conflicts in certain regions and within the country pose serious and direct threats 

to natural resources. The government of the Republic of Macedonia does not yet have 

full control over some areas of the country; 

• Erosion is a serious problem, and it develops as a result of previous and current 

agricultural practices in Macedonia; 

• Incomplete research on various aspects of biodiversity in Macedonia: there are no Red 

Lists or books, vegetation maps, pedologic maps, maps of ecosystems and habitat 

distribution, lists of characteristic and endangered species, information systems nor 

databases, and there is a low number of professional, scientific and institutional 

personnel working in the field of biodiversity; 

• Insufficient personnel in the institutions of the governmental system: MoEPP, inspection 

services, customs, Fund for the Environment etc and poor interagency cooperation; 

• No monitoring system for biodiversity (except for partial monitoring in the three 

national parks). 

There are other less important factors which can also cause a chain of effects negatively 

impacting biodiversity, including various forms of non-sustainable uses of natural resources 

in all economic sectors. In addition, indirect negative environmental impacts may occur as a 

consequence of the threats to biodiversity described previously in Sections 3.6.1-3.6.7.


4. USE AND VALUES OF BIODIVERSITY 

4.1. Agrobiodiversity 

Biological diversity in agriculture is one of the most critical areas of the overall 

biodiversity on the globe, with 75% of all food production based upon only about 100 

plant species and domestic animals. As civilisations developed, humans strove to create 

plant varieties and domestic animals with more useful traits, which contributed to an 

increase in the diversity of the genetic resources of the various species. By crossing 

various genetic materials, humans began the practical creation of varieties and breeds. 

This process has been occurring for at least the past 50-100 years and continues even 

now. Today, however, under the pressure of increased profitability, far more specialised 

genotypes characterised by the term, “high input – high output,” are being promoted. At 

the same time, traditional breeding using natural species is often neglected, although it 

often offers the best solutions for the existing conditions in a given environment. As a 

result of this tendency, many varieties and breeds have not been able to endure under 

this modern capitalistic onslaught and have been lost as genetic resources. This trend is 

still continuing, and there are estimates which show that, worldwide, about 30% of 

domestic animal breeds have permanently disappeared. 

In the Republic of Macedonia, biological resources represented by indigenous 

varieties, breeds and species should be preserved for the sake of economic, scientific, 

cultural, socioeconomic and environmental interests. 

4.1.1. Crops 

Macedonia possesses significant agrobiological plant diversity due to its favourable 

geographic location and climatic conditions. The diversity of a large portion of the local 

species has not been adversely affected because agricultural production is not intensive 

in many regions. In such areas, indigenous species and locally-bred varieties are grown, 

representing an important source of genetic material no longer appearing within the 

genotype of commercial species. 

The major portion of the total arable land is used for field and garden production 

(84.2%), with the greatest percentage consisting of wheat, tomatoes and peppers. Fruit 

and grape production comprises 7.1 %, mostly consisting of native and introduced 

grapes (4.4 %), apples and plums. Meadows cover 8.5%, and are most often planted with 

alfalfa. The breakdown of grain crops, vegetables and fodder crops is presented in 

Annex 6, Table1, whereas that of fruit production in Annex 6, Table 2. 

The trends in the production of individual crops vary by year, as evidenced by the 

disappearance of some crops (e.g., poppy, flax, hemp and cotton), reducing the diversity 

of species cultivated. On the contrary, cucurbit crops, which appear in great diversity but 

are not considered an important part of agricultural production, are expected to cover 

about 2,000 ha in 2005. 

The bulk of the crops produced consist of commercial varieties, the major portion of 

which are imported from abroad, with a minor number of locally-developed varieties, 

mainly created by the Institute of Agriculture in Skopye. Small producers still grow local 

varieties and indigenous species, especially in garden plant production. The number of 

varieties/species used in agricultural production within Macedonia is evidence of great 

biological diversity. There are 129 recognised domestic varieties and 2,205 imported 

varieties used domestically. A detailed review of the number of varieties by crop is 

presented in Annex 6, Table 3. 

75

76 


4.1.2. Wild relatives of crops 

Most of the crops in Macedonia have wild relatives in close proximity to cultivated 

varieties. Such wild relatives are sometimes seen in the cereal grains (Avena spp., 

Hordeum spp. and Triticum spp.), and in some industrial crops (Cannabis sativa and 

Papaver spp.). In fruit production, wild relatives are used most often, both for food and 

as rootstocks. Some of them have been domesticated or cultivated. The diversity of these 

crops is large because small growers primarily use indigenous species. They continue to 

persist because they are actively collected and used directly for food or are processed 

into other products. 

Fodder crops grown in Macedonia, mainly distributed within ploughed fields and 

meadows (natural or sown), were created by selection and cultivation of wild species. 

Some have been cultivated since long ago, and others began to be cultivated only 

recently. Because fruit and fodder crops appear far more often as wild or indigenous 

types, they are presented separately (Annex 6, Tables 4 and 5). 

During the period 1968-1971, indigenous and wild relatives were collected in 

Macedonia under an international project with the United States. The collected samples 

are still stored in the Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) database, 

where they are available for exchange and reintroduction whenever Macedonia will be 

able to provide the proper conditions for their maintenance. 

4.1.3. Native breeds of livestock 

Domesticated animals contribute 30-40% of the world’s food production. Moreover, 

they are able to transform large quantities of coarse plant material and by-products from 

the agricultural and food processing industries into proteins and other highly valuable 

substances intended for human consumption. Many of the breeds developed for specific 

climatic regimes or breeding zones appear not to be able to survive in the wake of 

modern management techniques. 

As is the case in other countries, there are indigenous breeds and varieties of 

domesticated animals in Macedonia which are fully accommodated to local breeding 

conditions. During the past 50 years, however, new, more productive breeds have been 

imported. Both the original imported breeds and crosses with local varieties are still 

present today. Crosses between indigenous breeds/strains and imported breeds are 

known in several species: 

Busha is a local breed of cattle found in highland and mountain areas. During the last 

30-40 years, it was crossed with many imported breeds. According to official statistical 

data (Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia, 2000), Bushas comprise 50% 

of the total number of cattle raised. 

Pramenka (sheep) is represented by three strains: Karakachanska, Ovchepolska and 

Sharplaninska. While the Karakachanska strain is considered to be endangered, as 

classified by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2000), the other two strains 

are widely used in sheep production. 

Domestic (Balkan) goat. Although its numbers are on the increase, it is difficult to 

make a clear distinction concerning this breed. The goats come in different colours 

(white, grey and multicoloured), with outstanding long hair and sword-like horns. 

Local primitive pig is raised on ranges in the regions of Makedonska Kamenitsa, 

Strumitsa and Sveti Nikole (St. Nicholas). Although it is a very primitive breed, more 

field and laboratory research is needed in order to clearly define its status.


Table 26. Indigenous breeds and species. 

Species Breed Strain Status of Population 

Cattle (Bos Taurus) Busha Stable 

Sheep (Ovis aries) Pramenka 

Karakachanska 

Ovchepolska 

Sharplaninska 

Critical 

Stable 

Stable 

Goat (Capra hircus) Domestic (Balkan) goat Stable 

Pig (Sus scrofa) Local primitive pig Unknown (critical) 

Dog (Canis familiaris) Sheep dog – Sharplaninets Stable 

Sheep dog - Sharplaninets. This indigenous breed developed in an independent, 

natural and authentic manner without any significant participation by humans, which is 

its great advantage. Its name derives from its place of origin (the mountain massifs of 

Shar Planina, Bistra, Korab and Kozhuf), where the configuration of the relief and other 

natural and geographical conditions have all contributed to its genetic stabilisation. Upon 

the request of the Kinological Association of Macedonia (KAM), the Federation 

Cynologique International (FCI) registered this animal under the name Sheep Dog – 

Sharplaninets. It is listed as having a dual country of origin, the Republic of Macedonia 

and Serbia and Montenegro. Today it is used both as a highly rated sheepdog for the 

protection of herds of sheep and goats from predators and as a pet animal in urban 

settings. 

4.2. Wild species of economic importance 

4.2.1. Use of wild plants 

Although pastures are used in livestock production and represent the most important 

economic non-cultivated plant resource, their total productivity, which is directly 

influenced by seasonal climatic conditions, has not been calculated to date. Most 

pastures are not utilised, being present in the high mountains. They are managed by the 

Public Enterprise for Pastures at the national level. The lack of significant grazing in 

these pastures has contributed to a change in the composition of herbaceous vegetation, 

the invasion of woody shrubs and the degradation of the humic layer. 

Other species - There are legal regulations (Regulations on the Manner of Use of 

Other Forest Products, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia 13/00), but they 

do not provide a mechanism for obtaining a precise assessment of the current status of 

wild plant species. Moreover, the concessionaire with the right to use the particular 

resource has no legal responsibility for its management. Thus, one of the priorities is to 

prepare legal regulations defining the sustainable use of these species, in order to prevent 

their disappearance. The implementation of an organic system of controlled usage of 

biological resources, with adequate certification and labelling of the local products, will 

increase their availability in international markets and, at the same time, the obligation 

for permanent supervision and control. 

4.2.1.1. Food 

Species of plants intended for human consumption yield both fresh, whole, semiprocessed 

products (frozen, dried or dehydrated) and fully processed products (salted, 

pickled or preserved). Without respect to processing technique, the following groups of 

wild plants are of greatest economic importance: 

77

78 


Mushrooms: There are about 2,800 species of mushrooms, 800 of which are edible, 

with about 50 being commonly collected in Macedonia. They appear to possess an 

enormous economic value for the local population; however, there is no published data 

on the number of collectors or the quantity of fresh wild mushrooms purchased 

domestically. The most purchased species are reported to be: Boletus pinicola, B. edulus, 

B. aereus, Cantharellus cibarius, Marasmius oreades, Amanita caesarea, Lactarius 

deliciosus, Morchella spp., Agaricus campestris, Macrolepiota procera, Calvatia spp., 

Bovista spp. and Lycoperdon spp. They represent an important export product (328,693 

kg/year; estimated value $2,000,000) for the companies registered to purchase wildcollected 

mushrooms. These firms have annual contracts for a specific quantity with the 

concessionaire which is, in general, either the public enterprise “Makedonski Shumi” 

(Macedonian Forests) or the national parks themselves, but the real quantity collected 

per year is never known. Although a permit for the export of commercial species (i.e., 

not on the list of endangered species) can be obtained from the MoEPP, no regional or 

local productivity data exists on which to base sustainable use restrictions or regulate the 

quantities available for purchase. 

Tea: A large spectrum of wild plants is used for the preparation of tea or as spices. In 

the Republic of Macedonia, there is virtually no cultivated tea production. What exists is 

insignificant in relation to the wild collection performed by various companies (e.g., 

Alkaloid Bilka, Jaka, Koro etc) and by the local population for personal use. The amount 

of tea exported in 2001 was 1,127,825 kg, with a value of $1,453,052. In other years, as 

much as $4.5 to 5 million were realised from tea exports. 

Wild fruit and nuts: These consist mainly of high mountain fruits, the most important 

of which is the blueberry (Vaccinium myrtillus), a product used chiefly for export (in 

2001, 83,284 kg worth $86,196). Blueberries are found in almost all high pastures (over 

1,300 m msl). Following in importance are dog rose, raspberries, blackberries, Cornelian 

cherry and plums, used by the local population for making juice and jam. In recent years, 

there has been an increase in the collection of wild apples, pears and cherries, which are 

used as ingredients in the fruit teas very much in demand for export. They are found 

throughout Macedonia. In addition, the collection of Chestnuts (Castanea sativa) is very 

significant, with approximately 250,000 kg collected per year, intended mostly for the 

home market. 

4.2.1.2. Timber/fuelwood 

According to the data obtained from Macedonian Forests in 2001, the legal timber 

harvest in the Republic of Macedonia was 520,915 m 3 (of which 463,840 m 3 were cut by 

local Macedonian Forests branches and 57,075 m 3 by private individuals in public 

forests). The total quantities of timber harvested included 417,355 m 3 of fuelwood and 

97,837 m 3 commercial timber. Data concerning the forest reserves of the Republic of 

Macedonia and the ownership structure by species are presented in Annex 6, Tables 7 

and 8. 

The tree species primarily harvested are: Beech (fuelwood and commercial timber), 

Oak (fuelwood and commercial timber) and Pine (commercial timber). Other species 

(Chestnut, Fir, Poplar and Walnut) are of significantly lesser importance.

36% 

2% 


2% 

1% 

1% 

2% 

Oak Beech Other hardwoods Other softwoods Fir and Spruce Pine Other coniferous 

Figure 3. Composition of the timber harvest. 

The deterioration of the security situation during the course of 2001 and 2002 

contributed to a significant increase in illegal timber cutting, which had been a large 

scale problem for quite some time before then. This refers particularly to the region of 

the Shar Planina mountain group, but the situation is little better in other regions (e.g., 

Kumanovo, Skopye, Struga, Resen, Bitola and others). At the present time, it would be 

difficult to make an accurate assessment of the actual magnitude of illegal harvesting, 

but it is assumed to be ongoing at the same intensity. According to informal worst-case 

assessments, it is possible that illegal cutting is greater than the legal timber harvest, to 

the point that the overall situation with forest reserves could qualify as alarming. 

4.2.1.3. Horticulture 

Traditionally, wild species of flowers, as well as decorative plants, are grown in 

home gardens. A small percentage are collected and sold in local markets, such as: 

Buxus sempervirens, Colhicum autumnale, Crocus spp., Cyclamen hederifolium, 

Galanthus nivalis, Geranium spp., Helleborus odorus, Narcisus poeticus, Primula spp., 

Syringa vulgaris, Viola spp. etc. 

4.2.1.4. Medicinal use 

There are approximately 3,500 vascular plant species in Macedonia, of which 700 

have medicinal properties, but only 120 species are utilised. Most of these plants are 

herbaceous, a small portion are shrubby and the fewest, woody. Their qualitative and 

quantitative distributions within the Republic have not been fully determined (i.e., a 

chorographic atlas of the medicinal plants has yet to be published). Available data do not 

reflect the current situation with medicinal plants, due to a lack of legal regulations on 

their collection, use, care, conservation, trade and export. The data, although insufficient, 

56% 

79

80 


do indicate an alarming situation, demonstrated in the maximum annual quantities of 

medicinal plant material exported in the last decade: Altahea officinalis (80 tonnes), 

Chamomilla recutita (75 tonnes), Gentina lutea and G. punctata (3-4 tonnes), Hypericum 

perforatum (5,000 tonnes), Lichenes (1,200 tonnes) and Tilia cordata (60 tonnes). 

Annex 6, Table 6 lists the medicinal plant species used in Macedonia. The collection 

and use of medicinal plants can be divided into three categories: personal use, 

retail/wholesale trade and other economic purposes. A mechanism for regulation and 

classification is necessary before it can be determined how much dry plant material an 

individual can collect from an area and before a permit for this collection can be issued. 

The collection of medicinal plants for economic purposes in Macedonia varies 

widely with the species collected, the collectors themselves and the seasonal quantity of 

the collected material. Most serious is the large seasonal demand by foreign buyers for 

specific plant species, facilitated by certain local trade companies which have no 

previous experience in this field. According to the nature of the plant material used (e.g., 

root, fruit, leaf, flower or stem), the greatest risks and threats are for those plants which 

are used whole, followed by those whose roots are collected and then those with useful 

bark. Species with a restricted area of distribution are most threatened (e.g., Acorus 

calamus, Salvia officinalis and Sideritis scardica). Based on data from the past ten years, 

the most troubling situations are with the species: Adonis vernalis, Colchicum 

autumnale, Herniaria glabra, H. hirsuta, Gentiana lutea, G. punctata, Hypericum 

perforatum, Lichenes, various species within the genera of the family Orchidaceae, 

whose parts are used in the production of salep, Sideritis scardica, S. raeserii and 

Thymus spp. 

4.2.1.5. Other uses, including species used in foreign trade 

Wild species are sometimes used in the cosmetics, alcohol and construction 

industries. Lichens and mosses, used in the cosmetics industry, are collected in the 

eastern and western mountains of Macedonia and then exported (the annual purchase 

reaches 600-800 tonnes dry weight; the exported amount in 2001 was 83,334 kg, valued 

at $79,624). Essential oils are extracted from cones, needles or seeds of Pine and other 

plant species. For the production of gin, the alcohol industry uses the berries (mainly the 

blue ones) of the juniper bush. The exported amount in 2001 was 991,067 kg, valued at 

$758,463. The annual purchase of juniper berries by various organisations is 3-4,000 

tonnes. Reeds, Cattails and Willows are used in construction, either dried, woven, as 

thatch or in handicraft products. They are mainly collected on the lakes (Ohrid, Prespa, 

Doyran), however this activity is on the decline. 

4.2.2. Use of wild animals 

4.2.2.1. Hunting 

Hunting is conducted through hunting associations combined under the Hunting 

Union of Macedonia. The largest portion of the land licensed for hunting consists of 

forests and forested areas. Protective measures for the care of forests and of game often 

do not agree. There is a need to coordinate these measures within the two sectors.


With the Law on Hunting, 127 species of game were given special consideration: 

Table 27. Species of game given special consideration under the Law on Hunting. 

Level of Protection Number of Species Fur-bearing Animals Birds 

Permanently protected 79 9 70 

With a closed season 31 6 25 

Without protection 17 9 8 

Total 127 24 103 

Macedonia is divided into 11 areas managed for hunting, with 107 hunting sites for 

large game (47% of the total area, excluding lakes) and 145 hunting sites for small game 

(49% of the area). The hunting sites are managed by hunting associations and 

organisations working in the field of forestry. The total number of organised hunters is 

about 30,000. 

In addition, five enclosed areas totalling 4,041 ha have been established for the 

breeding of large game and one pheasant farm with a yearly production capacity of 

40,000 two-month old pheasants. 

Table 28. Optimal and current numbers of game species in Macedonia (excluding national 

parks). 

Species of Game 

Optimal 

Number 

Current Status 

Number % 

Difference 

(+/-) 

Mammals 

Alpine chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra) 4,309 700 16.2 -3,609 

Brown bear (Ursus arctos) 250 60 24.1 - 190 

Brown hare (Lepus europaeus) 189,000 38,000 20.1 - 151,000 

Red deer (Cervus elaphus) 3,018 200 6.6 -2,818 

Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) 43,484 5,400 12.4 -38,084 

Wild boar (Sus scrofa) 

Birds 

14,032 3,600 25.6 -10,432 

Common partridge (Perdix perdix) 239,200 34,000 14.2 - 205,000 

Common pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) 42,000 10,000 25.4 - 32,000 

Rock partridge (Alectoris graeca) 58,800 9,000 15.3 - 49,800 

4.2.2.2. Fishing 

Fishing is allowed on all natural lakes, reservoirs and rivers, and includes both 

commercial and sport fishing. Fish species that are important in commercial fishing are: 

Ohrid Lake: Anguilla anguilla, Alburnus alburnus, Salmo letnica. The greatest 

percentage of the total annual catch is from these three species. In the past, the annual 

catch in Ohrid Lake was 220-240 tonnes of fish, 50% of which was trout. At present, 

this quantity is considerably less (under 100 tonnes). The trout catch has declined 

markedly from the periods when over 140 tonnes of trout were caught annually to the 

present catch of only 35 tonnes. 

Prespa Lake: Alburnus belvica and Cyprinus carpio. The annual catch of fish in 

Prespa Lake is 100 tonnes. 

Doyran Lake: Alburnus alburnus, Cyprinus carpio, Perca fluviatilis, Rutilus rutilus, 

and Scardinius erithrophthalmus. Traditionally, these species amount to 98% of the total 

fish catch. While the annual catch in Doyran Lake was formerly over 500 tonnes, it 

81

82 


currently ranges from 70-90 tonnes/year. The major component of the catch today is 

Carassius carassius, with P. fluviatilis and C. carpio representing minor constituents. 

Concerning the fish catch in reservoirs, there are no valid statistical data. There are 

estimates that over 200 tonnes/year of fish are caught from Tikvesh Lake only, mostly R. 

rutilus, followed by, in decreasing order, Carp, Catfish, Bleak, Perch and Nase. 

With respect to sport fishing, in addition to those species listed previously under 

commercial fishing, important species also include: Barbus barbus (Barbel), B. 

meridionalis (Mediterranean barbel), Chondrostoma nasus (Nase), Gobio gobio 

(Gudgeon), Leuciscus cephalus (Chub), L. delineatus (Moderlieschen), Silurus glanis 

(European catfish), Salmo trutta (Brown trout), and Vimba melanops (Balkan vimba). 

Again, there are no relevant data on the total fish catch by sports anglers. 

Occurrences of illegal fishing and the use of prohibited fishing gear (including certain 

types of nets, chemicals and explosives) cause grave concern. 

Using the basic data on the number of water bodies (natural lakes, reservoirs and 

rivers) and their areas, estimates are that the annual fish catch in the Republic of 

Macedonia ranges from 800 to 1,200 tonnes; however, a major portion of the catch is not 

recorded. 

4.2.2.3. Collection for medicinal use 

In comparison with plants, the collection of animals for medicinal uses is rather 

inconsiderable. 

Until 1990, there was organised collection of the Medical leech (Hirudo medicinalis) 

and the Nose-horned Viper (Vipera ammodytes), whose venom was used in the 

preparation of the serum, antiviperinum. Today, such activities have been discontinued. 

In traditional folk medicine, the Spur-thighed tortoise (Testudo graeca), Hermann’s 

tortoise (T. hermanni) and the 23 species of bats (Chiroptera) are still used. The 

collection of these species does not appear to have reduced their populations, however. 

On the mountain Yakupitsa (central Macedonia) at the site, “Begovo Pole Plain,” the 

restricted population of the Macedonian endemic subspecies of the European souslik 

(Spermophilus citellus karamani) may be found. The Macedonian common name of this 

subspecies (Stobolka) is related to its use in traditional medicine, that is, it was believed 

to be able to cure 100 aches (sto bolki). Although the collection of European souslik has 

declined in recent decades, it does still occur, directly threatening the survival of this 

Macedonian endemic subspecies. 

4.2.2.4. Other uses, including species used in foreign trade 

Other animals used primarily as foreign trade items consist of several snails. Two of 

these are particularly important: 

• The Edible (French) snail, Helix pomatia, the collection of which is forbidden 

according to the international Bern <strong>Convention</strong>. In addition, in compliance with 

IUCN, it belongs to the category of “vulnerable species.” In Macedonia, this snail 

lives in fragmented areas of small populations. It can be found in eastern Macedonia 

(Osogovo, Maleshevo mountains and Kozyak), and also on the Kozhuf and Shar 

Planina Mountains in the west. The fact that this species is listed as a purchasable 

species but has a reduced population makes it very likely that its future collection 

and purchase will be prohibited in order to rebuild the populations.


• The Roman (Turk) snail (Helix lucorum), for which there was no purchase limit until 

recently, is present throughout Macedonia in valleys and low mountain regions (up 

to 1,200 m msl). Approximately 200 tonnes used to be purchased annually, but its 

numbers have declined due to the uncontrolled collection. This species has been 

recommended for protection and its collection, purchase and export regulated due to 

the drastic reduction of its populations. It is also planned that a temporary ban on its 

collection, purchase and export will be imposed every two years. During the 

alternate years when collection, purchase and export (1 June - 1 October) are 

allowed, a quota of 40,000 kg of whole live specimens, that is, 8,000 kg of 

processed meat, will be introduced. In 2001, 1,323,795 kg of whole snails (valued at 

$3,063,991) were exported from Macedonia. 

• In addition to the Edible (French) snail, permanent protection will be provided to the 

following: the Common snail (Helix vulgaris), a south-Balkan endemic species 

present in a limited area south of Demir Kapiya; the Striped snail (Cepaea 

vindobonensis), a south- and east-European species found in the Skopye Valley, 

Ohrid-Prespa area, Shtip and Doyran region and the valley of the Vardar and Treska 

Rivers and the species Helix figulina, a south-Balkan endemic found in the region of 

Gevgeliya and Doyran. 

4.2.3. Assessments of Sustainability 

As previously discussed, brcause of excessive and uncontrolled exploitation of wild 

plant and animal species, there is a serious danger that many will disappear. Due to the 

importance of maintaining biological resources, there is a pressing need to adopt 

regulations concerning these species and to specify annual collection quotas. It is also 

necessary to introduce a register of trained collectors and a controlled on-site purchase 

point in order to keep daily records and to regulate purchased quantities. The concession 

for harvesting should be issued on a yearly basis and, as a condition of that issuance, a 

professional opinion by a scientific institution should be submitted attesting to the 

current status and reproductive capability of each species to be collected, an essential 

requirement to prevent any further reduction of populations in the area. 

In addition, it is necessary to introduce a system of organic certification for the 

collected species, which will not only establish the real value of the product, but will 

also oblige users to exercise self-control, thus guaranteeing sustainable management of 

this activity. 

4.3. Use of biodiversity for bio-technology and genetic extraction 

Plant biotechnology is still in its infancy; therefore, Macedonian plant resources are 

not used in this manner. 

The possibilities for using molecular biology and genetic engineering in the 

characterisation of biological diversity (of both domestic and wild animals) and in the 

selection process for producing new genetic varieties are continuously increasing. The 

use of sophisticated equipment during these analyses facilitates quick and accurate 

results. 

In the Republic of Macedonia, biological diversity is not used in biotechnology or for 

genetic potential extraction, except in a few limited applications in livestock breeding. 

83

84 


4.4. Access to genetic resources 

With regard to agricultural production, FAO, as an international organisation 

protecting the interests of the agriculture profession (among other areas), pays 

considerable attention to genetic diversity. Within the structure of the organisation, 

independent bodies exist which deal with plant and animal biological diversity (IPGRI – 

International Plant Genetic Resources Institute and DAD – Domestic Animal Diversity), 

an important factor for agricultural production. The Republic of Macedonia is a member 

of these organisations, which operate through working groups that form an information 

system under which each of the member countries is obliged to submit reports and 

provide: 

• a basic characterisation of varieties and breeds; 

• support for planning, identification, collection and use of biological diversity; 

• suggestions, exchanges of experiences and facilitation of the interactive participation 

of all interested members in the process of genetic diversity maintenance; 

• for the creation, maintenance and updating of genetic resource databases. 

All relevant information is available through the publications of FAO via the internet 

(www.cegiar.org/ipgri and www.fao.org/dad-is). 

The access to plant genetic resources stored in gene-banks is not legally regulated in 

the Republic of Macedonia. The collections in the gene-banks are freely available for 

exchanges with any other gene-bank. All one must do is make a request by ordinary 

letter, since such cases are generally arranged through personal contacts. Macedonian 

collections can not be found on the internet, nor are any portions of the databases present 

on other plant networks existing around the world. Consequently, they are unknown to 

the worldwide community unless someone has personal contact with some of the 

breeders in Macedonia. Since collections in gene-banks are free for exchange anywhere 

in the world, it is necessary to immediately prepare methodologies and documents in 

order to achieve that purpose. Furthermore, data in existing collections should be 

updated and placed in appropriate information systems, allowing them to become part of 

the international databases of specific plants. This will help increase the interest in the 

biological diversity found within Macedonia and eventually provide economic benefits 

arising from the profits generated by any commercial breeding company which uses 

Macedonian materials in the production of commercial varieties. 

4.5. Indirect uses of biodiversity 

Nature’s great diversity has its own intrinsic value, which imposes a moral 

requirement upon humanity to evaluate biodiversity. This tenet gave rise to the 

movement at the end of the twentieth century (especially in the United States) called 

“deep ecology” (Tobias, M. ed. 1985. Deep Ecology. Avant Books: San Diego, CA, 285 

pp.). Essentially, it means “all organisms are entitled to live.” 

The prevention, or at least reduction, of the continual loss of biodiversity, however, 

is linked to its exploitation and to political decisions. In order to help politicians in their 

decision-making, it is necessary to assign appropriate values to biodiversity, which is the 

objective of this section. In addition to direct, easily measurable values, biodiversity also 

has indirect values, without which the human community could not survive. Most of 

these values are not specific to Macedonia, but are universal.


Human society derives great benefits from the use of species in natural ecosystems. 

Nevertheless, the desire for these benefits must not be allowed to impact the 

sustainability and dynamic balance of these systems. The rational utilisation of natural 

resources (Sections 4.1. through 4.4.) directly depends on the stability of said 

ecosystems: forests, meadows, pastures, rivers, lakes etc. Each species in an ecosystem 

has its own place in the food web. 

Plant communities (particularly forests) have a great influence on the modification of 

climate in the area where they develop. Living conditions for humans in the severely 

degraded habitats by the Vardar River are quite different by comparison to those in the 

surrounding forested areas. 

The role of biodiversity in the maintenance of watersheds and in the protection 

against erosion is evident in Macedonia. Extremely degraded areas around the Vardar 

River and some of its tributaries suffer serious damage from erosion. The presence of 

forest cover in the watersheds of western Macedonia, among other factors, contributes to 

the greater capacities of the local springs in comparison to most of those in eastern 


On a global level, photosynthesis by vegetation (especially forests) is the main 

process by which carbon from atmospheric CO2 is encorporated into the living plant 

biomass. In this way, biodiversity represents a principal regulator of the level of CO2 in 

the atmosphere and the cycle of carbon in the biosphere. 

One of the most important unmeasurable indirect values of biodiversity is the 

relation of animals (particularly insects) to plants made possible through the process of 

pollination and dissemination of fruits (fishes, birds and mammals). In this way, the 

continuance of life for many plants is ensured, not only for wild species, but also for 

cultivated ones. 

Beekeeping, to a large extent, is likewise indirectly affected by biodiversity, but 

these effects are also difficult to measure. Under conditions in Macedonia, the 

production of honey is a branch of the food industry and is directly dependant upon the 

biodiversity of nectar-producing plants. Keeping bees requires that bees collect nectar in 

natural habitats, with a complete dependence upon wild nectar-bearing plants. 

The quality of the water used for water supplys and other everyday purposes depends 

directly upon microorganisms, Fungi, plants and animals. Many sectors of human 

activity (e.g., industry, mining, energy and traffic) depend upon biodiversity in some 

fashion. Many of life’s pleasures (e.g., aesthetics, recreation etc) are an indirect, but 

solid, reflection of biodiversity. 

4.6. Economic values of biological resources 

Biological resources have great economic value, chiefly due to their wide use as food 

for humans, but also in the production of fuel and as raw materials in industry. In 

Macedonia, however, the quantification of the economic values of biological resources 

is practically impossible due to a lack of specificity in official statistic data. 

Nevertheless, some of the relevant Ministries do provide an official economic evaluation 

of some characteristic groups of biological resources. For example, the economic value 

for agricultural production (one of several large-scale industries) will be the subject of 

discussion in a subsequent section. 

85

86 


4.7. Cultural or traditional values of biodiversity 

Bio-resources hold an important place in the traditions and cultures of every country, 

which is inherently unchangeable in the local and lesser developed communities. It is 

essential to pay greater attention to biological diversity that is traditionally utilised, and 

to endeavour to create recognisable standards for quality, origin and certain other traits 

for specific products. 

4.7.1. Wildlife and national cuisine 

Wild animals have always been consumed by humans. In the past, the preparation of 

game for food was done strictly in accordance with the specific rituals of the time. Game 

was eaten mostly in areas with developed hunting. In specific periods and regions, eating 

the meat of both game and domesticated animals was forbidden because people believed 

that the souls of their dead ancestors resided in some animals. It was also believed that 

certain meats should not be eaten during days of fasting, that is, meat of taboo animals in 

the pre-Christian period. 

In Macedonia, the wild birds most often eaten were Partridge, Pheasant, Collared 

doves and Sparrows. As for Mammals, Wild boar, Roe deer, Alpine chamois, hares, 

bears etc. were consumed. 

4.7.2. Arts, folklore and music 

Ethnographic and folkloric materials point to numerous beliefs in the supernatural 

powers of animals and plants by the Macedonian people. These include beliefs and 

images concerning the origins of certain animals, the formation of animal cults, rituals 

performed, relating to the cult animals etc. Snakes, bears, wolves and other wild and 

domesticated animals were the subjects of cultic rituals. 

In Macedonian legends, one can encounter the motif of the bear originating from a 

human, that is, a girl. Animals were frequently the subjects of metaphors relating some 

positive or negative trait to the human character. Many songs, especially those related to 

feasts devoted to specific animals, attest to their good or bad traits. 

The use of animals as symbols was a theme frequently used by artists. The deer 

symbolised light and victory, and was considered a defender and leader of the dead. For 

example, a deer standing at a watering place was a Christian symbol related to 

christening. It is found throughout Christian art – in floor mosaics, church decorations 

etc. Bears were addressed with many different names: grandmother, aunt, she, and in 

some regions, Menda. As characters and on masks, bears can be seen at the carnivals in 

Prilep, where the so-called “mechkari” (bear-tamers) have a performance during the 

celebration of “Prochka” (Forgiveness-Asking Day). Christian symbolism sometimes 

emphasised the bad traits of the bear. In art from the Middle Ages, the bear is 

represented as the incarnation of the devil, and the wolf was considered to be the devil’s 

creature, a true conquerer of bad demons. In folk stories, the wolf is represented as a 

stupid animal, personifying negative traits. The theme of marriage between a wolf and a 

girl is also frequent. 

In folk art, costumes were decorated with stylised motifs of animals and plants, for 

example, snakes, wolves, birds, leaves, boughs etc. The snakelike “chiusteks” had 

apothropeic (intended to ward off evil) significance. 

Many plants (mostly trees) or parts of animals (horns, teeth, skin and fur) were used 

in the production of handicraft products of practical and artistic value. The production of 

many instruments in folklore was closely related to biodiversity.


4.7.3. Spiritual values of biodiversity 

4.7.3.1. The animal world 

A great amount of archaeological and ethnological evidence shows that animals had 

a central place in the beliefs of hunters, with some of these ideas continuing to exist in 

modern society. The folk beliefs and customs which pay respect to animals are 

heterogeneous, and sometimes contradictory. Some animals, such as wolves, bears, 

snakes, some birds etc., were drawn in connection with religious beliefs. Later, with the 

formation of more complex religious concepts, they were considered as homes for their 

ancestors’ spirits, the personification of demons, even later as incarnations or with 

attributes of pagan gods, that is, their successors – Christian saints. Due to the 

supernatural powers attributed to animals, people attached many prohibitions and taboos 

to them. A great number of the taboos and restrictions were mainly apothropeic. Only 

those animals living in the immediate proximity of humans were exempt, instead being 

considered as protectors of human, as was the case with the home snake. 

There were also many prohibitions and restrictions against killing certain animal 

species. Such beliefs were founded on a fear of revenge or of further consequences. For 

example, it was believed that whoever killed a taboo animal would have one of his own 

close relatives killed. Also, when hunters would kill a wolf, they had to appease the 

animal by throwing a gun over the body and reciting the appropriate incantation. By 

doing this, the guilt of the killing would be transferred to the gun, and the skinning of the 

animal could then be done by a ritually clean man. 

Some animals were not killed, not as a result of fear, but rather because they were 

considered to bring good luck, assistance and protection to the people and their 

surroundings. For example, the Fir tree was a symbol of happiness, the home snake a 

protector of the household and the family. It was believed that the protective function of 

some animals extended over a wide area, encompassing the whole village. Because of 

this, prohibitions against the killing of animals had to be observed by all inhabitants of 

the village. 

With the development of religious concepts and images of gods, animals were 

worshipped because of their link to a god’s power. Within Macedonia, the religious 

status of animals was related to certain persons and events from Christian mythology. 

Such animals were considered sacred, and killing them a sin which would bring certain 

sanctions, that is, God’s punishment. 

Another great monotheistic religion, Islam, has also influenced the prohibition 

against the killing of animals. For example, Muslem populations considered some 

animals to be sacred because they were related to characters from the Koran. Those 

animals were considered taboo. The Collared dove (gugutka) for example, which the 

Turks brought into Macedonia from the east, was not to be hurt or killed. 

Within the yearly cycle of folk customs, there was a link between cultic activities and 

certain animal sacrifices. Examples of this include: (a) feasts devoted to the wolf were 

observed twice per year (11-17 November and 1-3 March), (b) the feast day of St. 

Andrea (30 November) honoured the bear and (c) the feast day of St. Jeremiah, a day of 

protection against snakes, celebrated the medicinal properties of the snake twice per 

year, on 22 March (40 Martyrs) and on Blagovets (another religious holiday). 

Today, many traditions are still preserved. For example, when a house is built, a 

lamb is slaughtered and its head buried in the foundation, which is believed to bring 

peace and happiness to the house. 

87

88 


4.7.3.2. The plant world 

Living in a natural environment, many rituals relating to the plant world, especially 

to certain trees, were developed. These rituals held an important place in religion, 

celebrating the revival of nature and its cyclic repetition. To some, trees represented a 

theophany, an image of the cosmos, a symbol of life or the centre of the world. The most 

frequent trees mentioned in folklore are the Oak, the Hazelnut, the Linden and 

sometimes the Pear. Sweet basil is also referenced because it was considered to be God’s 

flower. In national tradition, the Maple is linked with ancestors and the cult of the dead. 

Because of this, churches are often built under these trees, believing that the boughs 

contain some beneficial properties. 

Christianity modified the tree cult to a great extent, but did not destroy it. In national 

tradition, many different images, from animistic to Christian, are linked with various 

species of trees. 

According to the beliefs of animism, any contact with a tree was considered to be 

contact with the anima (soul) which took up residence in it. For example, a tree with a 

specific size or shape might be the dwelling place of a soul or spirit. Such trees were 

therefore made taboo. Cutting a certain tree or bough meant that a spiritual force was 

injured and would seek revenge. It was also believed that various supernatural beings, 

for example, fairies etc., gathered around the larger trees. 

The ban placed on cutting trees also included trees growing in cemeteries, which had 

the same function as a tombstone, that is, to bind the soul of the deceased person and 

protect the living. Muslems planted a Plum tree on the grave of a young girl because 

some considered the Plum tree to be a match for the wedding tree. 

The belief in the Yule-tree, which was most often an Oak, was especially 

widespread, and was observed by collecting Yule-logs at the beginning of the calendar 

year and burning them on Christmas Eve. It was believed that this tree held a demon of 

the vegetation and, by burning it, one expected protection of the house and the people 

living in it, and happiness and fertility in the new year. Another tradition involved 

making a sacrifice to the tree whose branch was chopped for the wedding flag. Before 

the wedding of her son, a mother would address the tree and invite it to the wedding; the 

next day a chicken would be slaughtered near its roots. The Walnut tree symbolises a 

secret which is hidden, as is the kernel in its nutshell. It also represents fortune telling, 

fertility, strength and patience. During weddings, Walnuts were thrown when the bride 

entered into the new house. In Christianity, the Walnut is symbolic of man: the green 

husk is the human body, the hard shell – bones, and the kernel – the soul. 

In other traditions, the Hazelnut tree symbolises fertility and love, the Dogwood, 

durability, strength and health and, at Gyurgyovden (a religious holiday), the doors were 

decorated with boughs of Acacia. On St. Triphon’s Day (in February), vines are pruned. 

St. Triphon was thought to have started this custom, believing that it would make the 

coming year fertile. In some regions, this custom is still observed with great feasting and 

with numerous visitors. 

The basic objective of the customs related to plants was the provision of good health 

for family members, the house and livestock. On Letnik Day (a religious holiday), the 

entire house was decorated with various types of vegetation in order to transfer the 

magic power from the plants to the people. There was also a custom where people hit 

each other with green boughs in order to win the power of the greenery for themselves.


4.7.4. Recreation and biodiversity 

The relationship between recreation and biodiversity in ethnological terms is best 

represented through the outdoor walks of the young people (i.e., to specific places on 

certain holidays, performing certain rituals and having fun). This type of gathering 

usually takes place during the spring holidays of Letnik, Cvetnitsi and Gyurgyovden, 

when vegetation is reviving. Young people swing on tree swings, desiring to transmit the 

strength and rebirth of nature upon themselves. Swinging also has a prophylactic role, 

representing an efficient way of driving out evil spirits and diseases, as well as 

fertilisation and marriage functions for young girls. 

Another kind of recreation, which has an economic function as well, is the collection 

of plants used for the preparation of teas and medicines. In recent times, biological 

diversity and the traditional practices of growing plant and animal species and preparing 

food from them, are widely used for recreational purposes. People often go to unpolluted 

places where they can get healthy food for weekends and holidays and, in this way, 

contribute to the development of rural and monastic tourism. 

4.7.5. Other values 

Wild animals have also been used in folk medicine. It was believed that snakes had 

special healing power on 22 March. The sick, and especially childless couples, would 

throw pieces of their clothing in front of a snake’s burrow where it was expected to 

emerge. If the snake passed over the clothes three times, it could help them have 

children. Some parts of snakes’ bodies were also worn as amulets. The eagle was hunted 

for the medicinal power of its fat against rheumatism. Bears were used for therapeutic 

purposes. A sick person would lie down and allow a bear to step on him to drive out 

pain. Fumigation with the burnt hair of a bear would also ease pain, or could release the 

demons from pregnant women. 

There were many beliefs surrounding the healing power of certain trees. For 

example, a sick person was supposed to sleep under an Ash tree or Hawthorn, which 

both had therapeutic powers, and the fairies dwelling there at night would cure the 

person. It was also a practice to bathe people in water where Hawthorn boughs had 

previously been placed. In order to cure some diseases, people would leave towels, 

shirts, pieces of clothing, scarves or money under medicinal trees. 

89

90 


5. KEY ECONOMIC SECTORS AFFECTING BIODIVERSITY 

5.1. Agriculture 

5.1.1. Current status and economic importance of the sector 

Agriculture (together with hunting and forestry) has been providing a relatively 

stable contribution to the GDP (by method of production) of about 11% over the course 

of the last several years (or, more precisely, 10.9% in 1997, 11.4% in 1998 and 11.0% in 

1999). During this same period, capital expenditures have experienced relatively high 

fluctuations (excluding the private sector, and including social [worker-owned], cooperative, 

mixed and State-owned sectors). Thus, compared to 436,182,000 denars in 

1997, capital expenditures dropped to 251,899,000 denars in 1998, but increased to 

341,825,000 denars in 1999 (these amounts have not been adjusted for inflation; 

however, there was a low level of inflation during the subject period). 

The total area of agricultural production has noted a declining trend (which is the 

main indicator of non-sustainable and inefficient utilisation). Thus, from 1,291,000 ha in 

1996 (Table 6), the area of production fell to 1,236,000 ha in 2000. This same trend can 

be seen in arable land, which fell from 658,000 ha (1996) to 598,000 ha (2000). Arable 

land area typically completely covers valley relief. In the case of pastures, which 

comprise the remaining areas of agricultural production, an opposite or increasing trend 

has been observed, from 632,000 ha (1996) to 636,000 ha (2000). About one third of this 

area is of the mountain or high mountain-type, while the remaining two-thirds is situated 

in the hilly areas of the valleys. 

Soil types in Macedonia are divided into seven classes by their quality (although this 

process has not yet been finalised). About 290,000 ha have been classified under the 

most fertile classes I and II, about 450,000 ha belong to class III, 200,000 ha to class IV, 

and the remainder to classes V, VI and VII (these are mainly mountainous soils not 

suitable for cultivation). 

The current state of agriculture is burdened with many problems: agrarian 

overpopulation in the lowlands and the need for deagrarianisation, fragmentation of 

agricultural areas and the need for their more effective use, poor quality of equipment 

and the need for modernisation and the degradation of soils. 

Deagrarianisation in Macedonia has been conducted in a spontaneous, disorganised, 

premature and excessive manner. Because of this, the portion of the total population 

working in agriculture decreased from 22% (according to the 1981 census) to 14.7% in 

1991, and 11.8% in 1994. 

In addition to the decrease in agricultural workers, there are also problems with the 

increased numbers of private agricultural enterprises in combination with the 

fragmentation of agricultural lands and the need for their more effective utilisation. 

Specifically, in Macedonia there has been a steadily decreasing trend in the average 

quantity of land owned per household, from 2.04 ha in 1980, to 1.29 ha in 1994. 

Additionally, the properties are fragmented into relatively high numbers of lots per 

household (7.7 on average), with the average size of one being 0.14 ha. Current 

legislation (the Law on Inheritance) is attempting to solve this problem. 

From an economic viewpoint, the poor quality of equipment and infrasctucture is the 

next relevant problem in the field of agriculture. This is one of the main reasons for the 

increasing dependence on natural weather and land conditions. Due to an insufficient 

number of artificial reservoirs for irrigation use, droughts are causing serious problems 

which are preventing the full realisation of the country’s agricultural potential, and thus


leading to yearly fluctuations in production. Irrigation systems constructed so far cover 

around 126,600 ha, but only 50-70% of the area is actually irrigated. The inadequate use 

of agro-technical measures, as well as antiquated agricultural equipment, are additional 

problems. According to some estimates, the average age of tractors in Macedonia in 

2000 (a total of 61,063, according to the Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of 

Macedonia, p. 430) was about 15-20 years, and the extent of their utilisation was around 

80-90%. Combines are also generally outdated. Although their useful life is customarily 

considered to be six years, in Macedonia in 2000, only 25% of the total number of 

combines in use were under 6 years old; 45% had been in operation from six to 15 years, 

and 30% for longer than 15 years. 

5.1.2. Changes in the sector over time 

Over the course of the past decade of transition, the agricultural sector has faced 

many problems as a result of the inadequate policies which were applied by the former 

Yugoslavian economic system. In general, this sector entered the transition period 

already lagging behind, not only with regard to needs, but also with regard to 

possibilities. Thus, it was not even able to meet the demands of the food industry. 

The most significant progress over the course of the past decade has been made in 

privatisation of the socially owned and cooperative sector and the associated 

denationalisation of land, that is, the return of agricultural areas to their former owners. 

The land was taken during agrarian reforms in 1945 and nationalisation in 1953. One of 

the key measures included in the Law on Privatisation in Agriculture refers to the 

possibility of the further expansion of the private sector through the release of an 

additional 15% of agricultural land possessed by agricultural cooperatives. This land 

would be transferred to individual farmers to cultivate and use under lease, but for a long 

term (e.g., for perennial crops). 

Beginning with the reforms in 1988/89 and continuing to the present, under the 

framework of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the practice of State price 

controls has been abandoned. Prices are allowed to fluctuate freely, being driven by the 

market. At the end of 2000, for social reasons, the State did set the price of Type 500 

flour, as well as the price of bread produced from the flour, but the measure was 

subsequently abolished. Today, the State has control of only the prices of wheat and 

tobacco. 

The needs of the agricultural sector in the coming years can be summarised as 

follows: more astute and more efficient utilisation of agricultural lands, modernisation of 

production processes in agriculture, incentives to encourage investment in agriculture (in 

particular, identification of possibilities for increased credit for private farmers), 

incentives related to the export of agricultural products, more efficient operation of 

vocational services which support agriculture etc. 

5.1.3 Impact on biodiversity 

Agriculture is a sector posing a severe threat to the biological diversity of the 

Republic of Macedonia, especially due to the current unfavourable conditions and 

negative development trends. The impact of agriculture on biological diversity is 

described in more detail in Sections 3.5.3.3., 3.6.1. and 3.6.3. No assessment is available 

as to how the processes of denationalisation and privatisation might affect biological 

diversity in the Republic of Macedonia. 

91

92 


5.2. Forestry and lumber industry 


Forestry is a sector that has been neglected for a long period and inadequately treated 

by the economic policy makers. Such a poliy is based upon its limited contribution to the 

GDP. This may be further evidenced by the fact that, in the official statistical 

methodology, forestry is combined with agriculture, making it impossible to glean 

explicit information on its sole contribution to the GDP. It is possible, however, to draw 

certain conclusions regarding the capital expenditures made in this sector over the course 

of the last several years. An analysis of the magnitude of investments in the forestry 

sector confirms its low significance. More specifically, in 1997 the modest share forestry 

received out of the total sum of capital expenditures in the Macedonian economy was 

only 0.9%. It decreased in subsequent years to 0.4% in 1999 (Source: Statistical 

Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia 2001, State Statistical Office, Skopje, p.397). 

Forests in the Republic of Macedonia cover 950,594 ha, representing 37% of its land 

area. By growth form, high forests constitute less than 30% of the total forest cover, 

while low forests account for 70%. As a result, only one-third of the forests are 

considered to be suitable as a source for raw materials for the lumber industry. Some of 

the data indicate that wood reserves are quite insignificant (slightly above 82 m 3 /ha), and 

are characterised by an exceptionally low annual growth rate (slightly above 2 m 3 /ha). 

Deciduous species, both in pure and mixed tree stands, dominate the total reserves of 

wood. The ratio among reserves of deciduous to coniferous trees in pure stands is 94 to 

6, with the predominant constituents consisting of Beech and Oak versus Fir and Pine, 

respectively. Consequently, within the structure of Macedonian forests, wood reserves 

with low market and economic value predominate (in comparison with coniferous 

species, which yield high-value commercial timber). 

Over the course of the last 10 years, the average gross volume of timber harvested 

has totalled 1,033,000 m 3 , of which 76% (786,000 m 3 ) originated from State-owned 

forests and 24% (247,000 m 3 ) from private ones. Statistical data on the timber harvested 

from private forests are not available. At present, it is not possible to make a satisfactory 

estimate of the tree harvest, nor is it possible to estimate the level of utilisation of 

harvesting equipment. 

Usage, by category, of timber harvested from State-owned forests has been 

economically inefficient for a long period of time. Fuelwood is the predominant use, 

with a share of more than 75% of the total volume of harvested timber. Wood intended 

for industrial processing, that is, sawing for lumber, constitutes less than 20%. 

Inefficient economic utilisation is evidenced by the fact that the highest and best usage 

of logs, for veneer, either does not occur or exists only in negligible quantities. This 

inefficient usage of harvested timber by category is also seen in the trade sphere, where 

fuelwood possesses the highest share (an average of about 80% during a 10-year period), 

to the detriment of lumber and veneer production. It is characteristic that both the total 

quantity of harvested timber and the amounts represented by each individual category 

show a decreasing trend. 

Of approximately 7,300 km of forest roads (as of 1999), 84% are unimproved, with 

as few as 16% possessing hard surfaces. Construction of forest roads has noted an 

increasing trend. The quality of the mechanised equipment used for the sawing and 

transportation of lumber is good, but it can not keep up with the demand. 

Of the total available quantity of logs intended for the lumber industry, 

approximately two-thirds are sawn into lumber. Of these, on the average 75% originate


from deciduous species and 25% from evergreen species. It should be noted that the 

percentage of logs from deciduous trees is generally decreasing in comparison with logs 

from coniferous trees. 

Capital expenditures made in the general lumber industry and in the finished wood 

products sector are satisfactory in technical structure. The amount of investment in 

equipment is proportionally higher, but still needs to be increased within the areas of 

sawn timber and plywood (i.e., increasing investments in favour of equipment instead of 

constructed facilities). 

Foreign trade within the lumber industry has been experiencing an increasing trend. 

This industry has noted a much higher increase in imports compared with exports, which 

have also increased, but at a much lower rate. Finished goods constitute 67% of total 

lumber industry exports and 55% of imports. The total external trade balance within the 

lumber industry was positive until 1995 but, since 1996, has reversed (i.e., imports are 

now much higher than the exports). 

The lumber industry share of the GDP of the Republic of Macedonia is very low – 

0.3%. 


Usage of forests during the period of transition has not experienced any dramatic 

changes, although the manner of management has undergone a transformation (a public 

company for forest management was established). Although the name has been changed, 

the same former enterprises have essentially remained in place, controlling the same 

forest areas and using the same forest management planning. 

Following the trend of the general economy, the lumber industry in the Republic of 

Macedonia has passed through a phase of privatising State-owned enterprises. The trend 

toward the establishment of new enterprises, however, has been much more prominent. 

By 1998, there were a total of 1,263 registered enterprises within the lumber industry, 

compared to 72 in 1989 (a more than 17-fold increase). In 1998, the number of 

enterprises engaged in the sawing of timber and the production of plywood was 235 or 

18.6%, while the number producing finished wood products was 1,028, or 81.4%. 

Regarding production facilities, plants for the sawing of timber (i.e., sawmills) are 

predominant; establishments producing veneer and plywood are represented by only one 

or two facilities each. The majority of enterprises for finished wood products produce 

various types of furniture, with only a minor number being registered for the production 

of parquet, cardboard and paper wrapping material or houses and sheds. 

The average number of employees in the lumber industry has noted a decreasing 

trend in recent years. Such trends are also seen in specific areas, such as in the 

production of lumber and plywood and in the production of finished wood products. Of 

the total number of employees in the lumber industry, on the average employees 

engaged in lumber and plywood production account for 20%, while those involved in the 

manufacture of finished wood products comprise 80%. 

Based upon an analysis of the number of employees per individual enterprise, prior 

to 1992, the lumber industry consisted primarily of medium-sized enterprises (i.e., 

between 51 and 250 employees). From 1992 onward, they were transformed into small 

enterprises (up to and including 50 employees). Today, the so-called micro-enterprises 

(i.e., 10 or less employees) are becoming more and more dominant within the Republic 

of Macedonia. 

93

94 


All types of wood production, including sawn materials, furniture, veneer, parquet, 

cardboard, paper wrapping material etc., have experienced a decrease during the 

transitional period, despite the increasing trend in the actual number of enterprises. 

5.2.3. Impact on biodiversity 

The impact of forestry activities on biodiversity is manifested within forest 

ecosystems. Impacts from forest roads (erosion), over-harvesting, and ecosystem-wide 

changes in nutrient cycling resulting from the huge quantities of biomass (i.e., waste) left 

behind after harvesting differ in each different forest ecosystem. This can vary both with 

soil moisture and temperature factors, as well as with local relief and the manner of 

harvesting. Changes occurring in indigenous forest types which result from the 

introduction of alien tree species or the change in natural vegetation caused by the 

planting of inappropriate species (Black pine most frequently) are of particular 

relevance. Detailed descriptions of the impacts of forestry on biodiversity are contained 

in Sections 3.5.3.3., 3.6.1., 3.6.3. and 3.6.7. 

5.3. Fisheries 


There is no published data on the total income from the fishery industry in the 

Republic of Macedonia. According to official statistical data, the consumption of fish in 

the Republic of Macedonia amounts to around 7,500-8,000 tonnes/year, or consumption 

of 3.4-3.7 kg per capita. Officially, domestic production meets only 13.2-13.5% of the 

total annual demand; however, in practice, 25-30% is a more realistic value (according 

to findings by M. Naumovski). 

Multi-year development plans for fisheries envisaged a production of 2,500 tonnes in 

1995 and 3,000 tonnes in 2,000, that is, 5,000 tonnes by 2005. The current political and 

economic circumstances within the country and region have had an adverse impact on 

fisheries and on the implementation of adopted plans, however. Total fish production in 

1999 was about 420 tonnes (249.3 tonnes of trout, 138 tonnes of carp and 30.3 tonnes of 

other species). Unfortunately, this is less than half of the fish production recorded for 

1990, when total production amounted to 1,000 tonnes. 

Macedonia exports between 10 and 37 tonnes of fish annually, mainly eel and trout, 

generating a profit of several hundred thousand dollars per year. Many more fish are 

imported than exported, however, especially elvers (young eels) for stocking in Ohrid 

Lake. 


The general assessment of changes to fishing in open water bodies within Macedonia 

is negative. Drastic reductions in the annual fish catch in the three natural lakes have 

been noted, particularly in Doyran Lake due to degraded hydrological conditions. 

Doyran Lake, recorded in world scientific literature as one of the most productive 

lakes in Europe, used to have an average annual fish production of 180 kg/ha (regarding 

the annual catch, see Section 4.2.2.2.). In the past, it played an important role in 

supplying the population with fish, an integral part of the fishing economy of the 

country. Its average annual catch represented 50% of the total production of fish in 

Macedonia (prior to the beginning of more intensive construction of artificial fishponds). 

Today, the disastrous status of fish stocks can be seen in the statistical data on total


fishing within the lake (Section 4.2.2.2.). Again, the main reason for the drastic 

reduction in fish stocks is the catastrophic hydrological condition of the lake. 

Conversely, the intensive culture of fish in artificial fishponds is recording a steady 

increase. The captive raising of fish in systems of cages in several reservoirs throughout 

the country is also becoming more and more significant. 


Fishing, both commercially and for sport, is the main manner for utilising the fish 

stocks of aquatic ecosystems. Planned and organised fishing does not significantly 

adversely impact biodiversity. The current trend of intensive, uncontrolled fishing, 

however, does impact fish populations and leads to an unbalanced ecosystem by 

reducing the populations of one fish species while favouring others. 

A reduction in the numbers of Perch (Perca fluviatilis), which are sensitive to 

changes in the oxygen regime, and increases in the numbers of Crucian carp (Carassius 

carassius), which previously had never been a very important part of the lake’s 

ichthyofauna, have been observed in Doyran Lake. 

Despite protective measures, the overutilisation of fish resources in Ohrid Lake is 

increasing, which is also evident in the statistical data on fishing from the last several 

years. Ohrid trout (Salmo letnica – in the statistical data, all taxa are represented under 

this name) is under particular threat as its populations become scarcer and scarcer. As 

smaller size classes become more dominant within fishing areas, it is indicative that the 

fishing intensity has exceeded the optimum limit. It has been noted that the average 

catch weight has dropped from 700 g to 250-300 g, an alarming decrease. 

Struga trout (Salmo balcanicus) have also been experiencing a trend of steadily 

reduced catches, especially after the diversion of the Sateska River into Ohrid Lake and 

the completion of hydro-technical works on the Crni Drim River. It is obvious that the 

negative trend is not due to fishing alone. By 1993, the average catch of trout in the 

vicinity of Struga was 25-28 tonnes; however, the catch has decreased significantly since 

1994 (5.2 tonnes) and continues to decrease (1995 – 5.1 tonnes, 1996 – 4.2 tonnes, 1997 

– 1.0 tonne). 

The status of fish biodiversity in rivers is significant for several reasons. A drastic 

drop in the density of the populations of certain species has been recorded; other species 

that used to be integral parts of the ichthyofauna of some watercourses can no longer be 

found and there has been a change in the horizontal distribution of species. In addition, 

the unplanned and uncontrolled stocking of open water bodies with fish will lead to 

changes in fish populations. Through such methods, exotic species are now present in 

the open water resources of Macedonia, introduced without any justification, either by 

error or as a result of ignorance. Their presence is unwelcome and, to a certain degree, 

harmful. 

Intensive artificial fish culture can lead to other problems from an ecological point of 

view. Some of these problems are related to watercourses becoming burdened with 

substantial quantities of organic matter, creating a significant trend for the accelerated 

eutrophication of reservoirs where cage farms are located. Impacts of this kind lead to 

changes in the structure of the ichthyofauna of these water resources. 

The overstocking of artificial reservoirs can lead to drastic changes in the 

composition of the Algal flora. This situation can be seen in the reservoirs of 

Mavrovitsa, Strezhevo and Turiya, where Carp breeding (Ciprinus carpio) brought about 

95

96 


blooms of Blue-green algae (Anabaena planctonica, Aphanizomenon flos-aquae, 

Microcistis aeruginosa). 

5.4. Industry 


In terms of its contribution to the Macedonian GDP, industry still occupies the 

leading position in the Macedonian economy, despite the fact that, from the beginning of 

the process of transition, industry’s average share has been declining. According to the 

new classification system of activities and sectors, light manufacturing is particularly 

noteworthy in this context. It is interesting that, during the last years of the past decade, 

industry contributed about 18% to the Macedonian GDP (18.9% in 1997, 18.1% in 1998, 

and 17.6% in 1999 – according to the Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia 

2001, State Statistical Office, Skopje, p. 314-315.). Capital expenditures in industry also 

tend to maintain rather stable levels compared with total investments in the Macedonian 

economy as a whole. The percent share was 39.4% in 1997, 40.9% in 1998, and 35% in 

1999 (Ibid., p. 396 – refers to social [worker-owned], cooperative, mixed and Stateowned 

sectors). This provides evidence that, despite the problems faced by industry, its 

contribution to the Macedonian economy has remained relatively stable. Moreover, 

during last several years, modest signs of a gradual recovery from the transitional 

recession have been noted (e.g., the basic indices of production in industry). For 

example, in 1996, the basic index of production compared with 1990 (arbitrarily defined 

as 100) was only 49; however, in 2000 the index was 53 (Ibid., p. 485). 

Some of the current problems faced by industry in Macedonia include: a 

disproportionate share by certain industries (traditional and raw materials related 

branches, which are characterised by low productivity, low levels of capital reserves, 

low revenues and exports and inadequate domestic raw material resources), lagging 

technical knowledge and technologies, a low level of modernisation and a high 

incidence of age-related equipment failure. These factors result in low productivity and 

over-employment, insufficient utilisation of facilities and poor export capability. 

In reference to the existing industrial structure (i.e., the shares individual types of 

industries control among the industry as a whole - Figure 4), it can be concluded that 

several changes have occurred over the course of the last several years. In essence, 

production of raw materials and semi-finished products is still dominant (around onethird); 

however, over time, the shares of the tobacco industry; construction materials 

industry; chemical industry and the generation, transmission and distribution of energy 

have increased. The majority of other industrial sectors have declined, including 

nonferrous ore mining, the production of oil derivatives, the manufacture of metal 

products, the manufacture of transportation equipment, the electric and mechanical 

industries, production of finished wood products, textile and leather production, the food 

products industry etc. 


In the early 1990s, with the independence of the Republic of Macedonia, the process 

of industry ownership restructuring was initiated. Unfortunately, at the same time 

Macedonia encountered drastically different economic conditions than were previously 

the case. At the beginning of the period of restructuring, many traditional markets in 

former Yugoslavia were lost. This was followed by the problems of economic and 

political blockades against the country. Those unfavourable conditions were further


exacerbated by the initiation of the privatisation process, resulting in decreased industrial 

productivity. 

3 

5.3 

5.3 

5.4 

4.3 

8.6 

10.9 

50.4 

2.5 

2.4 

2.7 

50.4 

100.8 

2.7 

Percent of Current Production 

2.4 

Figure 4. Share of individual industrial branches in current production (%). 

2.5 

Iron and steel industry Non-ferrous metallurgy Non-ferrous metal industry 

The decline in the productivity of this sector reached -15%/year at the beginning of 

the last decade (or an average annual rate of decline of -13% during the period 1991- 

1995). More recently, the industry has experienced somewhat of a revitalising trend, that 

is, many years have seen positive growth (4.5% in 1996, 2.9% in 1997, 4.5% in 1998, - 

2.5% in 1999 and 5.0% in 2000). 


The industrial sector of Macedonia contributes both direct and indirect adverse 

impacts to the environment (air, water and soil) and, thus, on biodiversity as well. 

Industry also significantly adversely affects humans due to its geographical distribution, 

old technology, failure to apply technical and technological standards for the treatment 

of gaseous pollutants, poor management of effluents and wastes, use of toxic production 

materials and dirty energy resources, non-compliance with environmental codes etc. 

Impacts of industry on biodiversity may be observed through: 

• air pollution (full monitoring is under development). The highest emissions of air 

pollutants have been recorded in urban/industrial centres (Section 2.8.), 

supplemented by additional emissions from vehicular traffic. The most frequently 

10.9 

Metal processing industry Electro industry Chemical industry 

Textile industry Leather industry Paper and cellulose 

Non-metal industry Other 

8.6 

3.0 

4.3 

5.4 

5.3 

5.3 

97

98 


detected air pollutants include SOx, NOx, COx, CFCs, smoke and breathable dust 

(diameter of less than 10 µm) with high concentrations of heavy metals. Effects on 

biodiversity are directly noticeable through acidification and through changed 

relationships within animal food webs (Section 3.8.3.); 

• water contamination (Section 3.8.3.1.); 

• improper disposal of various types of solid waste (often toxic); 

• contamination of soil. 

5.5. Construction 

5.5.1. and 5.5.2. Current status and economic importance of the sector and changes 

in the sector over time 

Construction is a significant sector, holding a specific position in Macedonia. In 

terms of available capacity, it exceeds the market within the country. This situation was 

inherited from former Yugoslavia, where the construction sector served as an absorber 

of under-qualified labour (originating from rural areas) which were unable to find 

employment in industry. This was particularly seen in the early 1980s, with the outbreak 

of the economic crisis in other sectors. As a result, a large number of construction 

companies were established in Macedonia using low-paid labour, which enabled them to 

acquire a competitive advantage and receive significant tenders, especially in the 

markets of former socialist countries. Unfortunately, the initiation of the process of 

transition brought about the loss of these markets. 

The construction sector in Macedonia has undergone a great upheaval during the last 

several years. Its contribution to the generation of domestic macroeconomic aggregate 

variables has exhibited a decreasing trend, from 10.4% in 1980 to 4.6% in 1990. A 

minor improvement was recorded in 1995 (7.3%), when the first modest signals of a 

Macedonian economic recovery appeared; however, in the course of the next two to 

three years, its contribution to the GDP had stabilised at about 5% (5.3% in 1997, 5.8% 

in 1998 and 5.2% in 1999) (Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia 1999, p. 

209, and Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia 2001, p. 314-315, State 

Statistical Office, Skopje). 

Of interest is the trend in the number of firms engaged in construction activities. In 

the first half of the 1980s (corresponding to the commencement of the economic crisis in 

former Yugoslavia), the number of enterprises increased, accompanied by a slight 

reduction in the number of workers. These contradictory indicators provide evidence of 

the initial stages of the crisis faced by the construction sector. The trend toward a 

reduction in the labour force continued during the 1990s, actually accelerating, but 

stabilised by the end of the decade at about 35,000 employees. 

This by no means indicates that over-employment has been eliminated but, rather, 

reflects the state of the uncompleted process of privatisation in former worker-owned 

construction companies. On the other hand, the growth in the number of companies in 

this sector is rather indicative (from 253 in 1990 to as many as 1,999 in 1997) 

(Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Macedonia 1999, p. 436, State Statistical Office, 

Skopje). This is further supported by the registration records of the large number of 

small construction companies which were privately owned from the beginning, have a 

relatively low number of employees (i.e., they do not address the over-employment 

problem) and are extraordinary flexible.



The construction sector adversely affects biodiversity through: air pollution, new 

impacts to natural land areas, use of mechanisation, noise, pollution of aquatic 

ecosystems and soils (due to the disposal of waste materials from construction and 

demolition activities), destruction of habitats and their fragmentation and isolation. 

There are no specific data available on the extent of these impacts in the Republic of 


5.6. Mining 



There is no relevant economic information specific to the mining sector, because this 

sector is incorporated within the established category of metallurgy. In the Republic of 

Macedonia, this sector is represented by the extraction of both metals and non-metals. 

The mining of lead and zinc ore (eastern Macedonia), iron ore (central and western 

Macedonia), coal (south-western Macedonia) and non-metals, mainly marbles and 

travertines (central and north-eastern Macedonia), dolomites, lime, silicates, ceramic 

clay, feldspar, gypsum, diatomaceous earth etc. is of particular importance. 

In the past, the non-metal industry contributed 2.2% of the economic structure of the 

country; however, since the establishment of the value-added tax (VAT) for industry and 

metallurgy, it now represents 2.7% of total current production. 


The main activities causing negative impacts on biodiversity are excavation, the 

opening of new mines, and pollution caused by wastewater from the flotation process 

and from slag piles. 

Effluent from the flotation process contaminates many downstream natural systems. 

For example, effluent reaching the river Zletovitsa continues downstream to the river 

Bregalnitsa which, in turn, flows into the Vardar River, polluting them all with heavy 

metals (lead, zinc, cadmium, mercury, thallium and arsenic) and causing enormous 

damage to these aquatic ecosystems (Sections 3.5.3.3., 3.6.1. and 3.6.3.). 

In conjunction with the opening of a new mine, construction activities and new 

transportation infrastructure cause additional losses of biodiversity, most frequently by 

the fragmentation of un-relocatable communities. 

5.7. Energy 



The energy sector (together with gas and water supplies) participates with a modest 

4.5% in the GDP of Macedonia. This percentage participation has been maintained 

during the second half of the 1990s. The share of capital expenditures in electricity is 

relatively high compared with overall investments in the social, cooperative, mixed and 

State-owned sectors. They constitute about one-fourth of total capital expenditures, 

indicating high investment efforts under restrictive conditions (26.1% in 1997, 26.4% in 

1998 and 22.2% in 1999). 

With regard to energy consumption, it is clear that the beginning of the transition 

process has brought about a decrease in consumption, due to the transitional recession 

through which the Macedonian economy has been passing. This trend was particularly 

notable during the first half of the 1990s, that is, up to 1995/96. In contrast, if the issue is 

99

100 


observed from the perspective of the period that followed, it is obvious that the situation 

is extremely troubling. The expected exit from the transition period should be marked 

with increased energy consumption, not only in business and industry, but also by 

private household consumers. Instead, the current status is markedly unfavourable. Any 

comparison of Macedonia’s GDP with that of other countries, not to mention average 

salaries, the average price of electricity and specific consumption of individual types of 

energy, will confirm Macedonia’s disadvantageous position. 

Based upon these factors, fundamental changes (decreases) in consumption are 

necessary. Otherwise, non-sustainable exploitation of energy resources may take place, 

as well as degradation of the energy infrastructure. 

The most important domestic energy resources available for use in the future are coal 

reserves (for the next 10-15 years), fuelwood, hydropower and geothermal energy. It is 

necessary to decrease the consumption of fuelwood, accompanied by a gradual increase 

in the areas of solar energy, wind power, biomass etc. This is certainly related to the 

status of the payment balance that would either provide for or prevent the importation of 

adequate technologies for utilisation of these types of energy. 

5.7.3. Impact on biodiversity: 

This sector impacts biodiversity through electricity generation, transportation and 

distribution (the description of impacts to biodiversity is the same as the one presented 

for industry [Section 5.4.3.]). 

Energy generation leads to air, water and soil pollution. Air pollution is caused by 

the emissions of SOx, COx, NOx, smoke and dust and, according to production 

capacities, is highest at the coal-fired Bitola and Oslomey Mining Energy Companies. 

Electricity transportation requires construction activities (a detailed description is 

presented in Sections 3.7.3.3., 3.8.1. and 3.8.3.). Spatial distribution of long-distance 

aerial power lines (Section 2.5.) is the main reason for changes in the status of 

biodiversity. 

The effects from wastewater generated by production processes for energy 

generation are similar to those from the industry sector. However, the thermal impacts to 

those habitats receiving the heated effluent wastewater are specific to this sector. 

Slag piles occupy natural habitats, increase the concentration of dust in the 

atmosphere and impact the quality of groundwater resources through changes in pH and 

increases in the concentrations of heavy metals. 

The effects from the construction of hydropower reservoirs in river gorges are 

presented in more detail in Sections 3.7.3.3. and 3.8.1. 

5.8. Transport (traffic) 


The transportation sector of the Republic of Macedonia is undergoing changes 

similar to those present in the overall Macedonian economy, that is, lagging behind the 

current trends seen in other countries. In general, it can be stated that the existing 

transportation and communication systems (i.e., the so-called tracom system) in the 

Republic of Macedonia are not yet fully developed. One of this system’s most serious 

problems is its lack of modernisation. Excluding Albania, the Republic of Macedonia 

probably has the oldest transportation network in the Balkans (except for the road 

network), with a relatively low density of roads, railways and airports. This is due to a 

lack of investment in the development and maintenance of transportation facilities over


the past several years. It has resulted in the current insufficient level of development and 

a lack of modern technical knowledge and technologies. A comparison of data on the 

levels of railway development from 1937 and 1996 shows that progress was actually 

greater in 1937, indicating a 50-year period of stagnation. In 1937, Macedonian railways 

were in full compliance with the European regulations of that time concerning stability 

and speed of transportation, which is not currently case. The outdated technology used 

by the railways reduces, to a great extent, their stability and speed of the transport. 

Another major problem faced by the transportation sector is its configuration, that is, 

the routes of the main transportation lines. Due to Macedonia’s multi-decade existence 

within the confines of a wider community (the former Socialist Federal Republic of 

Yugoslavia [SFRY]), its overall transportation infrastructure is characterised by marked 

development of the main, north-south corridor (a part of European Corridor 10). In 

contrast, the east-west corridor (part of European Corridor 8) has been almost 

completely neglected. The period following the independence of Macedonia (with its 

accompanying problems) has shown that both of these corridors are equally important in 

the development of its transportation infrastructure. For example, the closure of the 

border with Serbia and Montenegro and the blockade by Greece during the early 1990s 

resulted in extremely adverse impacts to the Macedonian economy. 

Despite all of these problems, transportation as a sector has been gradually increasing 

its contribution to the GDP over the last several years. Thus, from a 6.1% GDP share in 

1997, its share increased to 7.3% in 1998 and to 8.2% in 1999. 


With reference to the structural changes undergone by the transportation sector, 

especially after the independence, the main trends seen internationally are also present 

within Macedonia. More specifically, in parallel with development, the transport of 

goods and passengers has been carried out less frequently by railways, and more often 

by road vehicle traffic. During the course of the last several years, air traffic has gained 

in importance, especially with regard to passenger transportation. The development of 

new oil and gas pipelines should also contribute to the development of the pipeline 

transportation sector. 

The current status of railway traffic is far from satisfactory. The length of the lines 

has been stagnating for the last 15-20 years. A comparison with some developed 

countries shows that Macedonia has a relatively low density of railway networks (27 km 

of railway lines per 1,000 km 2 , i.e., 339 km of lines per million inhabitants). 

The air traffic sector has experienced sudden growth in the Republic of Macedonia 

during the period after its independence and the beginning of its transition. The general 

assessment of this sector is not satisfactory, however, when taking into account the 

constant problems resulting from unsettled conditions. 

Telecommunications systems in Macedonia are poorly developed. Full digitalisation 

of the telecommunications network in the country has not been completed, mobile 

telephone service does not cover the entire country etc. 


The transportation sector impacts biodiversity through the fragmentation of habitats, 

as well as through air pollution and noise. Considering the current circumstances in the 

Republic of Macedonia, these impacts are low by comparison with those of developed 

101

102 


European countries. Nevertheless, this is one of the most severe threats to biodiversity in 


A more detailed presentation of the impacts from the transportation sector is 

contained in Section 3.6.1.3. 

5.9. Tourism and recreation 


The Department of Tourism within the Ministry of Economy plays the main role in 

creating the touristic policy of the Republic of Macedonia. It is responsible for all the 

legal means by which tourism is regulated, and the Law on Tourism, Catering and 

Hospitality provides the highest standard of management. Apart from the Ministry, 

numerous social and economic organisations function within the system, such as: the 

Tourist Union of the Republic of Macedonia, tourist unions of individual cities, 

numerous travel agencies (around 160), numerous touristic and catering facilities, the 

Faculty of Tourism and Catering in Ohrid, the Department of Tourism in the Institute of 

Geography (Faculty of Natural Science and Mathematics) in Skopye etc. Of the four 

main types of touristic destinations (City of Skopye, tourist health/spa resorts, tourist 

vacation resorts [mountains and lakes] and other, typically non-touristic areas), the City 

of Skopye exhibited the highest tourist turnover, followed by vacation and health/spa 

resorts. 

At present, touristic and catering activities employ around 10,000 people (2,895 of 

whom are female), or only 3.2% of the total number of employed persons in Macedonia. 

Total revenues generated by tourism and catering activities during 2001 amounted to 

€8.5 million or 2.0% of the total gross national product (GNP). 


In reference to the tourist, catering and hospitality trades, the number of 

establishments reached its highest level, 3,497, in 1990. Currently, the number of these 

businesses is approximately half, or 1,798. The number of seats in catering and other 

related service facilities in 1990 was 187,928; today, this number is as low as 73,759. 

The total number of beds, which amounted to 82,411 in 1990, is similar, dropping to 

78,913 in 1995 and to 73,759 at present. With regard to tourist turnover, the total 

number of tourists in the Republic of Macedonia in 1990 was 974,537, spending a total 

of 3,099,508 nights. Since this period, primarily due to social and political events in this 

region of the Balkans, tourist turnover appears to have experienced a permanent 

decrease, reaching its lowest value in 1997, when the country was visited by only 

476,025 tourists who spent a total of 1,587,146 nights (the absolute minimum since 

1978). During the three years since 2000, the number of visitors and nights spent have 

noted gradual average increases, or 632,523 and 2,434,639, respectively. It is 

noteworthy, however, that tourism has one of the best prospects for economic growth 

considering the extraordinary favourable conditions for its development in terms of 

natural, geographic and anthropogenic factors. 


Considering the scope of the term ‘biodiversity,’ it is absolutely undisputable that 

tourism and biodiversity are in an indivisible symbiosis, that is, in an uninterruptible 

interaction with each other. The development of tourism in some regions, for example, 

results in adverse impacts related to degradation of the quality of the land, which further


impacts the biodiversity within these areas. A specific example concerns the 

construction of more than 600 weekend houses in the vicinity of Skopye (residential 

tourism, which is also widespread in other areas), irreversibly taking the modest 

agricultural areas out of production (Section 3.6.1.). The primary protection measure in 

such situations would be a plan to control the urbanisation of touristic weekend 

settlements. 

Another notable case is the illegal construction of various touristic structures on the 

shores of Macedonian natural lakes. Adverse impacts are evident not only in the 

degradation of surrounding upland ecosystems, but also in the direct pollution of the 

lakes themselves. There are many specific examples of this (Lagadin on Ohrid Lake, 

1,200 weekend houses around Mavrovo Lake within Mavrovo National Park etc). 

5.10. Other key sectors affecting biodiversity 

We may say that there are no other known key sectors in the Republic of Macedonia 

that have major direct impacts on biodiversity. Nevertheless, the army, that is, the 

defence sector, education, research and trade are significant factors/sectors influencing 

biodiversity. 

5.10.1. Defence 

During the period of the dissolution of former Yugoslavia, the army’s installations 

and numerical status decreased drastically. Following 2000, the situation changed due to 

the internal conflict, at least with regard to activities and installations. Currently, there is 

no planned involvement of the army in the protection of the environment, especially of 

biodiversity. The activities of the army are perceived to be of high national interest and 

the possible consequences to biodiversity from any type of military activity are not 

questioned. 

There are examples of negative impacts to biodiversity from the activities of the 

defence sector: building of roads in various areas without any consultation with the 

MoEPP (the same is true for international forces - United Nations Protection Force 

[UNPROFOR], North Atlantic Treaty Organisation [NATO] and Kosovo Force [KFOR] 

– stationed in the Republic of Macedonia); development and extensions of military 

proving grounds; pollution etc. The largest military proving ground in the Republic of 

Macedonia, Krivolak, is situated in an area (Slan Dol) with abundant endemic and rare 

plants and invertebrates. 

In the coming period, the Ministry of Defence should prepare a sectoral action plan 

on biodiversity protection, as well as reports on the progress in this field. 

5.10.2. Education and research 

Within the education system of Macedonia, some efforts have been made to 

introduce educational topics in the area of environment under the compulsory 

curriculum. Such courses, however, are still optional and at the primary school level 

only. As far as biodiversity is concerned, there has been no evidence of its emphasis in 

teaching. Section 6. contains more detail on this issue. 

In the Ministry of Education and Science, research related to biodiversity is rather 

neglected in their financial allocations for scientific projects. 

103

104 


5.10.3. Trade 

Unless trade in biological resources is considered to be a direct cause of biodiversity 

loss (as is comprehensively discussed in Section 3.6.3.), this sector does not significantly 

impact biodiversity in Macedonia. Areas occupied by trade activities are usually placed 

in urban centres, while the remaining activities of trade are connected with other sectors 

already discussed (e.g., transport). 

5.11. Sectoral analysis 

A careful analysis of the previously presented data will show that not all sectors 

impact biodiversity equally. A preliminary ranking of the main economic sectors by 

their impact on biodiversity includes: 

• agriculture, which has had a particular impact on biodiversity in the decades 

following the Second World War. Serious threats to fish diversity in the Republic of 

Macedonia are caused by over-fishing (especially in Ohrid Lake); 

• transport sector, especially due to the fragmentation of habitats; 

• the energy sector represents a threat to biodiversity for several reasons, including 

pollution, construction of hydropower reservoirs and, especially, the transmission of 

energy; 

• industry and mining; 

• tourism also poses a serious threat to biodiversity. In this context, illegally 

constructed weekend settlements and incomplete communal infrastructure in the 

main tourist resorts are of particular concern; 

• national defence is a threat that can be easily overcome in the future; 

• construction poses a threat due to the use of agricultural land of high cadastral class 

for nonproductive purposes, habitat destruction, disturbance of animals, as well as 

pollution due to the construction of waste disposal sites. This sector would not be 

ranked very high, however; 

• the social, economic and political situation in the country, following periods of rapid 

and uncontrolled development of the economic sector (especially agriculture and 

industry), results in poor conditions for preservation of the existing biodiversity 

richness. At present, great efforts intended for biodiversity protection are being made 

by the MoEPP. Other ministries and the Macedonian government undertake almost 

no coordinated activities, however. 

The most important secondary benefit related to the protection of biodiversity in the 

Republic of Macedonia would be the adoption of an inter-sectoral approach. Such an 

approach towards problem solving is posed as a matter of urgency. The Strategy and the 

Action Plan for Biodiversity Protection can be considered a first step towards that goal.


6. EXISTING MEASURES AND PROGRAMMES FOR BIODIVERSITY 

CONSERVATION 

6.1. Legislation and policy for biodiversity use and conservation 

6.1.1. Constitutional framework 

The term biodiversity is not used in Macedonia’s highest legal framework – The 

Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia. The key elements of the constitutional 

method of protection can be recognised in most of its provisions, however. Thus, the 

nomenclature of the fundamental values of the constitutional system of the Republic, 

inter alia, includes environment and nature protection and promotion (Article 8, 

Paragraph 1, Item 10). In addition, the Constitution guarantees the right of all citizens to 

a healthy environment and the Republic provides appropriate conditions for exercising 

this right. At the same time, protection of the environment and nature is regulated as a 

constitutional obligation of all people (Article 43). Furthermore, the Constitution 

provides for the possibility of legal limitations on the freedom of the market and 

entrepreneurship (Article 55, Paragraph 3) on behalf of biological diversity. Finally, it 

provides equal constitutional status for all natural properties and plant and animal life 

as a whole (status of properties of common interest for the Republic). Such a status 

implies special protection for each individual property of common interest, as well as 

specific protection of the entity to which it belongs, as a group object of protection 

(Article 56, Paragraph 1). 

This constitutional framework provides a solid basis for establishing and developing 

a coherent system of environmental protection and, within it, designing a clear model 

for biodiversity conservation. 

6.1.2. Environmental protection and regulation laws 

Basic issues related to environmental protection are regulated under the 1996 Law on 

the Conservation and Promotion of the Environment and Nature. The original text has 

been modified and supplemented (Revision: 51/00; modification and supplementation: 

96/00 and 45/02). 

Officials are aware that the matter of nature conservation should be removed from 

the law and regulated separately. In other words, a new law should be adopted which 

address only environmental protection and promotion. In this regard, however, it should 

be stressed that the issue of normative policy, indeed the entire normative conception of 

environment protection, is still open. 

6.1.3. Protected areas laws 

Issues relating to protected areas are regulated by laws, regulations and decisions 

adopted by the local government. 

Laws pertaining to this consist of: 

• Law on the Protection of Natural Rarities (41/73, with its modifications and 

supplements, 42/76, 10/90 and 62/93); 

• Law on the Protection of National Parks (33/80, with its modifications and 

supplements, 10/90 and 62/93); 

• Law on Declaring a Portion of the Forested Areas on Pelister Mountain as a 

National Park (38/48, with its modification/supplement, 16/65); 

105

106 


• Law on Declaring a Portion of the Forested Areas around Mavrovo Lake as a 

National Park (10/49, with its modifications and supplements, 23/52 and 16/65); 

• Law on Declaring a Portion of the Forested Areas on Galichitsa Mountain as a 

National Park (31/58, with its modification/supplement, 16/65); 

• Law on the Protection of Ohrid, Prespa and Doyran Lakes (45/77); 

• Law on Declaring the Ornithological Reserve “Ezerani” as a Strict Natural Reserve 

(37/96); 

• Law on Declaring the Ornithological Reserve “Tikvesh” in the Gorge of the Crna 

River as a Strict Natural Reserve (35/97). 

In addition, the strict natural reserves are subject to the following regulations: 

• Regulations on the Implementation of Measures for the Protection of the Strict 

Natural Reserve “Ezerani” on Prespa Lake (29/97); 

• Regulations on the Implementation of Measures for the Protection of the Strict 

Natural Reserve “Tikvesh” in the Gorge of the Crna River (44/97). 

On the basis of the authority delegated by the Law on the Protection of Natural 

Rarities, municipal assemblies and the city of Skopye (i.e., local governments) have 

made a number of decisions by which certain natural properties have been declared as 

protected areas within a particular category. Such decisions include: 

• Decision of the Assembly of the City of Skopje on Declaring a Portion of Vodno 

Mountain as an Area with Specific Natural Characteristics (1970); 

• Decision of the Assembly of the City of Skopje on Declaring the Site of “Ostrovo” 

near the Village of Trubarevo as a Natural Monument (1976); 

• Decision of the Assembly of the City of Skopje on Declaring the Katlanovo Area as a 

Natural Monument (1991); 

• Decision of the Assembly of the City of Skopje on Declaring the Matka Gorge as a 

Natural Monument (1994); 

• Decision of the Assembly of the Municipality of Kavadarci on Declaring the Area of 

Relict Communities near the Drenachka Gorge as a Natural Monument (1991); 

• Decision of the Council of the Municipality of Prilep on Declaring the Site of “Zrze” 

as a Natural Monument (1996); 

• Decision of the Council of the Municipality of Bitola on Declaring the Gradeshka 

River Gorge as a Natural Monument (1996). 

In order to address the particular issue of the usage and conservation of protected 

areas, fundamental changes will be required. A clear normative conception will need to 

be built. 

6.1.4. Laws on flora and fauna 

The first group of special laws relating to flora and fauna includes: 

• Law on Fishing (62/93); 

• Law on Hunting (20/96, 26/96 and 34/47); 

• Law on Plant Protection (25/98, with its modification/supplement, 6/00);


• Law on Forests (47/97, with its modification/supplement, 7/00); 

• Law on Pastures (3/98, with its modification/supplement, 101/00); 

• Law on Seeds, Seedlings and Materials for Propagation, Recognition, Approval and 

Protection of Varieties (41/00); 

• Law on Cattle Breeding (61/97); 

• Law on Veterinary Health (28/98); 

• Regulations on the Use of Other Forest Species (13/00). 

The level of regulation of flora and fauna requires certain conceptions and other 

adjustments, especially starting from the need to create a harmonised system of nature 

protection. 

6.1.5. Legislation on land use and development 

The following laws pertain to this issue: 

• Law on Agricultural Land (25/98 and 18/99); 

• Law on Protection against Damage to Farm Fields (20/90 and 83/92); 

• Law on the Reorganisation of Land (18/76); 

• Law on the Redistribution of Land (7/90); 

• Law on Construction Sites (53/01 and 97/01); 

• Law on Spatial and Urban Planning (4/96, 28/97, 18/99 and 53/01). 

In addition to these laws, there are subsidiary acts: 

• Regulations on the Requirements, Methods and Procedures for Obtaining 

Permission for Construction (24/96 and 21/01); 

• Regulations on Standards and Norms for Spatial Development (2/02); 

• Regulations on the Contents and Graphical Design of Plans and the Procedure for 

Adopting Urban Plans (2/02). 

It is obvious that the regulations in this area need some updating, particularly with 

respect to spatial and urban planning. 

6.1.6. Legislation on pollution 

This group includes: 

• Law on Protection against Air Pollution (20/74); 

• Law on Water (4/98, with its modification/supplement, 19/00); 

• Law on Waste (37/18); 

• Law on Hazardous Waste Transport (27/90, with its modifications and supplements, 

45/90 and 12/93); 

• Law on Public Hygiene Maintenance and the Collection and Transport of Communal 

Solid and Technological Wastes (37/98); 

• Law on Public Utilities (45/97, with its modifications and supplements, 5/99, 23/99 and 

45/02); 

• Law on Protection against Ionising Radiation and on Radiation Safety (48/02); 

• Law on Noise (10/84, with its modifications and supplements, 21/84, 10/90 and 62/93). 

107

108 


In addition to the laws, there are also relevant regulations: 

• Regulations on Classification of Water Resources (18/99); 

• Regulations on Categorisation of Watercourses, Lakes, Reservoirs and Ground Waters 

(18/99 and 71/99); 

• Decision on Establishing the Boundaries of the Protected Zones of Rasche Spring and 

Defining Measures of Protection (36/90); 

• Regulations on the Method of Defining and Maintaining Protection Zones around 

Drinking Water Springs (17/83 and 15/89); 

• Regulations on the Health and Safety of Drinking Water (5/84); 

• Regulations on the Transport of Hazardous Waste by Road (82/90); 

• Regulations on the Macedonian Standards for and Quality of Liquid Fuels (32/99 and 

44/99); 

• Regulations on Monitoring and Identifying Harmful Substances in the Air (9/76); 

• Regulations on the Classification of Facilities Discharging Harmful Substances that 

Could Pollute the Air of Inhabited Places and the Establishment of Zones of Sanitary 

Protection (13/76); 

• Regulations on the Maximum Allowable Concentrations and Quantities of Other 

Harmful Substances that Could be Discharged into the Air by Certain Sources of 

Pollution (3/90); 

• Regulations on the Method and Terms for Submitting Reports on the Measurement, 

Control and Keeping of Records Concerning Emissions of Harmful Substances into the 

Air (9/76); 

• Regulations on the Method and Terms for Reporting to Competent Authorities 

Concerning the Systematic Monitoring and Examination of Air Pollution Carried out in 

the Republic (7/76); 

• Regulations on the Requirements for Siting, Construction, Operational Testing, Start-up 

and Use of Nuclear Facilities (52/88). 

6.1.7. Other relevant sectoral legislation affecting biodiversity 

This group of laws includes: 

• Criminal Code (37/96); 

• Law on Concessions (25/02); 

• Law on Energy (47/97, with its modifications and supplements, 40/99 and 98/00); 

• Law on Mineral Raw Materials (18/99, with its modifications and supplements, 48/99 

and 29/02); 

• Law on Public Roads (26/96); 

• Law on Investment (15/90, with its modifications and supplements, 11/91, 11/94 and 

18/99); 

• Law on Property and Other Material Rights (18/01); 

• Law on Local Self-Government (5/02); 

• Law on the Organisation and Operation of Public Administrative Bodies (58/2000); 

• Law on Protection against Natural Catastrophes (39/77, with its modifications and 

supplements, 47/89 and 27/90); 

• Law on Fire Fighting (43/86, with its modifications and supplements, 37/87, 51/88, 

36/90 and 12/93); 

• Law on Foreign Trade Operations (31/93).


6.1.8. International agreements and conventions 

With respect to biodiversity, the following international agreements and conventions 

(worldwide and regional) appear to apply to the Republic of Macedonia (RM): 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on Wetlands of International Importance Particularly as Waterfowl 

Habitat (Ramsar, 1971) - ratified by decree (Official Gazette of SFRY 9/77). The 

Republic of Macedonia acceded to this convention with an Act of Succession in 

1995; 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on the Protection of the World’s Cultural and Natural Heritage (Paris, 

1972) - ratified by law (Official Gazette of SFRY 56/74); 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 

(CITES) (Washington, 1973) - ratified by law (Official Gazette of RM 82/99). The 

Republic of Macedonia has been a member of this convention since 2 October 2000; 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn, 1979) 

- ratified by law (Official Gazette of RM 38/99) and implemented in November 

1999; 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern, 

1982) - ratified by law (Official Gazette of RM 49/97) and implemented in April 

1999; 

• Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe (London, 1991) - ratified by 

special law (May 1999) and implemented on 15 October 1999; 

• Amendment to the Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe - ratified in 

February 2002; 

• Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Water-Birds (Hague, 

1995) - ratified by special law (June 1999) and implemented 1 November 1999; 

• European <strong>Convention</strong> on the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for 

Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes (Strasbourg, 1986). Ratification of the 

convention is in Parliamentary procedure; 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity (Rio de Janeiro, 1992) - ratified by law (Official 

Gazette of RM 54/97) and implemented in 1998; 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and 

Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus, 1998) - ratified by law (Official 

Gazette of RM 40/99); 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context 

(Espoo, 1991) - ratified by law (Official Gazette of RM 44/99); 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (Geneva, 1979) - ratified 

by law (Official Gazette of RM 6/97) and implemented on 28 April 1998; 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (Geneva, 1979) - ratified 

by law (Official Gazette of SFRY 11/86), signed by the Republic of Macedonia on 

17 November 1991 and followed by eight protocols; 

• Protocol on Long-Term Financing of the Cooperative Programme for Monitoring 

and Evaluation of the Long-Range Transmission of Air Pollutants in Europe 

(Geneva, 1984) - ratified (Official Gazette of SFRY 2/87), implemented in 1988 and 

awaiting ratification through an Act of Succession; 

• <strong>Convention</strong> on the Protection of the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 1985) - ratified by law 

(Official Gazette of SFRY 1/90); 

109

110 


• Montreal Protocol on Ozone Layer Depleting Substances (Montreal, 1987) - ratified 

on 10 March 1994; 

• London Amendment to the Montreal Protocol (London, 29 June 1990) - ratified on 

27 May 1998 (Official Gazette of RM 25/98); 

• Copenhagen Amendment to the Montreal Protocol (Copenhagen, 25 November 

1992) - ratified on 27 May 1998 (Official Gazette of RM 25/98); 

• Montreal Amendment to the Montreal Protocol (Montreal, 17 September 1997) - 

ratified on 30 July 1999 (Official Gazette of RM 51/99); 

• Basel <strong>Convention</strong> on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes 

and their Disposal (Basel, 1995) - ratified by law (Official Gazette of RM 49/97); 

• United Nations <strong>Convention</strong> to Combat Desertification in Countries Experiencing 

Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa (UN, 2000) - ratified 

in February 2002 (Official Gazette of RM 13/02). 

These international acts define extensive obligations which must get their normative 

expression in the national legislation. As a matter of course, the harmonisation of the 

national legislation with both the ratified international agreements and those still under 

the ratification procedure should be a priority task in the normative policy of the sphere 

of biodiversity conservation. 

6.2. Protected areas system 

6.2.1. Description of extent, location and coverage of protected areas 

According to the official data, which was based on previous scientific research, there 

should be approximately 107 protected areas of differing categories covering about 18% 

of the land surface of the Republic of Macedonia. Despite five decades of organised 

conservation of natural rarities, however, the network of protected areas now includes 

only 68 sites covering an area of 170,235 ha or 6.62% of the land surface. 

The status of protected properties by category are as follows: 

• three national parks encompassing 108,338 ha or 4.21%; 

• three sites of special natural character covering 2,338 ha or 0.09%; 

• 14 areas outside nature reserves containing certain plant and animal species, 2,709 ha 

or 0.10%; 

• 48 natural monuments encompassing 56,850 ha or 2.22%. 

It is recommended that an additional 39 natural properties be included in the system 

of protected areas. These are: 

• two national parks; 

• nine strict nature reserves; 

• 14 scientific-research reserves; 

• 14 sites of special natural character. 

By geographic location, both the currently protected natural properties and those yet 

to be protected are distributed throughout Macedonia. Most of them are located in the 

western part of the country, with some also being present in regions with tourism.


The comparison of data on the numbers and types of currently protected natural 

properties with those deserving to be placed under protection might be problematic, as 

the existing system of classification and categorisation of natural rarities has not been 

harmonised with international standards. It should also be stressed that the subject data 

do not apply to those areas protected in accordance with the laws of other sectors closely 

related to natural heritage protection (e.g., laws on forests, water, hunting etc). 

6.2.2. Legal and management status of protected areas 

In compliance with the existing laws of the Republic of Macedonia, protected areas 

generally have the legal status of “natural rarities.” In some laws, however, such as the 

Law on the Conservation and Promotion of the Environment and Nature, the generic 

term for protected areas is “special natural wealth.” There is an obvious inconsistency of 

terms in the relevant national legislation, as well as a deviation from international 

nomenclatural standards for the identification of protected areas. 

According to the current overriding law, the legal status of “protected areas as 

natural rarities” is defined in detail in the Act for Proclamation within a law or decision, 

depending on the type of special character to be protected. Protected areas can have the 

legal status of: 

A. Nature Reserve 

1. Common Nature Reserve 

(a) National Park 

(b) Strict Nature Reserve 

(c) Scientific-Research Reserve 

(d) Site of Special Natural Character 

(e) Characteristic Landscape 

2. Special Nature Reserve 

B. Natural Monument 

C. Natural Sites of Historic Importance 

D. Areas Outside Nature Reserves Containing Certain Plant and Animal Species 

Undoubtedly, this classification system for considering protected properties as 

natural rarities does not correspond to the classification scheme developed by IUCN or 

the United Nations Environmental Programme's (UNEP) World Conservation 

Monitoring Centre (WCMC). In this regard, harmonisation of the national classification 

system for protected areas with international standards (number, name and definition of 

categories of protected areas) will be one of the priority tasks in developing new legal 

measures for nature conservation, specifically of biodiversity. 

Based upon existing regulations, management of protected areas is described in only 

a rudimentary way. Nevertheless, a key provision of the existing protection model 

requires that natural rarities (i.e., protected areas) be managed by their “holders” which, 

in most cases, appears to be the State. The State accomplishes the management of these 

protected areas, as both a right and an obligation, in ways such as: 

• establishing specialised institutions; 

• transferring the right of use to certain legal entities; 

• concessioning. 

111

112 


Within the existing system of natural rarities protection, only the specialised 

organisations for national park protection and management are currently functioning, 

under joint administration by the enterprise, National Parks and Hunting Sites. The 

status of the three existing organisations (Galichitsa National Park, Mavrovo National 

Park and Pelister National Park) and their umbrella enterprise has not yet been adjusted 

to the new constitutional system. In fact, there is a dilemma as to whether specialised 

legal entities should have the status of a public enterprise or a public institution. 

Alternatively, park management could be accomplished by establishing a separate 

administration for national parks (either as a constituent body with the status of a legal 

entity or as an independent administrative organisation) within the relevant Ministry or 

by creating a legal entity separate from the relevant ministry. At present, the question of 

the management of natural lakes, which are protected as natural monuments, is also 

considered to be unresolved. 

The issue of the management of certain protected properties was resolved with an Act 

for Proclamation. In other words, the right of use has been transferred to other 

individual legal entities such as local self-governments, trade companies and NGOs. 

This model of management is not fully developed, however. 

There is also the possibility of granting concessions for the management of protected 

properties; however, the new law concerning natural heritage protection has yet to be 

adopted, so the terms and methods for granting concessions have also not yet been 

established. This legal deficiency should be solved with the adoption of the new law, 

which will be a supplement to the existing Law on Concessions. 

To summarise, the legal status and management of protected areas is one of the key 

problems in the existing system of natural rarities conservation. 

6.2.3. Assessment of gaps in current protected areas system 

As a general recommendation, essential changes of various kinds are needed in the 

current system for regulating protected areas. The conservation of protected areas within 

the existing system of urban and spatial planning, both a constitutional and legal 

obligation, has demonstrated that, in practice, such plans are not the most suitable 

instruments for use as the main tool for the conservation of protected areas. In this 

instance, it will not be sufficient to merely close legal loopholes in an effort to upgrade 

the existing system; instead, considerable reforms are needed. That being the case, 

several questions are open, particularly: 

• Identification of protected areas: (a) official terminology for the key terms to be used 

in describing the protected areas and the individual categories of protected 

properties, (b) legal definitions of protected areas (general definition and specific 

definitions for each category of property) and (c) official classification of protected 

areas; 

• Protection objectives: (a) main objectives of protection and (b) specific objectives 

regarding each category of protected area; 

• Establishment of protection: (a) previous protection and (b) proclamation of 

protected areas (competences, acts, procedures, public participation and publication 

of the Act on Protection); 

• Protection regime: (a) degree (categorisation) of protection, (b) prohibitions and 

restrictions, (c) specific measures for protection and (d) damage liability; 

• Organisation and coordination of protection and management of protected areas;


• Instruments of protection: (a) national programme, (b) national register, (c) protected 

area management plans and (d) monitoring; 

• Rights and obligations of the owners and restrictions on ownership based on 

protection for public interests; 

• Financing of the conservation of protected areas; 

• Sanctions for violations of the law; 

• Transitional regime. 

6.3. Conservation outside protected areas 

6.3.1. In-situ conservation measures in broader landscape 

Within the Republic of Macedonia, no in-situ conservation measures in broader 

landscapes have been undertaken to date, with the exception of protected areas. 

6.3.2. Ex-situ conservation measures 

6.3.2.1. Plant propagation in botanic gardens and nurseries 

The botanic garden of the Institute of Botany at the Faculty of Natural Science and 

Mathematics in Skopye is the only institution within Macedonia which attempts to 

adhere to the ratified <strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity and is scientifically engaged in 

carrying out ex-situ conservation of wild flora. With the construction of the facilities for 

acclimatisation, reproduction and growth of endemic, relict and medicinal Macedonian 

flora, several endemic, relict and endangered species have been successfully 

transplanted, such as: Astragalus mayeri Micev., Cladium mariscus (L.) Pohl, 

Hedysarum macedonicum Bornm., Osmunda regalis L., Ramonda nathaliae Panc. & 

Petr., Sambucus deborensis Kosanin, Sempervivum octopodes Turrill, Thymus alsarensis 

Ronniger, T. oehmianus Ronniger & Soska, Tulipa mariannae Lindtner and Viola 

allchariensis G. Beck, as well as some portions of the aquatic, wetland, meadow and 

steppe vegetation. 

The Department of Microbiology at the Botanic Institute within the same faculty is 

developing a rich collection of active aerobic and anaerobic moulds and yeasts used in 

industry, whereas the Department of Mycology has about 1,000 species of macroscopic 

Fungi at its disposal. 

The Institute of Agriculture in Skopye is maintaining the following crop collection: 

Table 29: Ex-situ collections of crops at the Institute of Agriculture in Skopye. 

Crop 

Number of 

Varieties 

Crop 

Number of 

Varieties 

Triticum aestivum Soft wheat 150 Malus spp. Apple 77 

Triticum durum Hard wheat 273 Pyrus spp. Pear 49 

Triticale spp. Triticale 26 Prunus domestica Plum 36 

Hordeum vulgare Barley 243 Prunus persica Peach 33 

Zea mays Maize 196 Prunus armeniaca Apricot 30 

Oriza sativa Rice 175 Prunus avium Cherry 16 

Capsicum annuum Pepper 39 Prunus cerasus Sour cherry 14 

Allium cepa Onion 15 Amygdalus spp. Almond 42 

Lycopersicon 

lycopersicum 

Tomato 40 Juglans regia Walnut 7 

Dactylis glomerata Cocksfoot 1 Corylus avelana Hazelnut 9 

113

114 


Festuca 

arundinaceae 

Tall fescue 1 Rubus eubatus Blueberry 2 

Arrhenatherum 

elatius 

Tall 

oatgrass 

1 Rosa canina Dog rose 1 

Medicago sativa Alfalfa 2 Rosa rugosa 1 

Medicago falcata 

Yellow 

alfalfa 

2 Actinidia chinensis Actinidia 1 

Onobrychis sativa Sainfon 1 Ziziphus jujuba Jujube 6 

Vicia spp. Vetch 1 Vitis vinifera Grape 151 

Pisum arvense Cattle pea 1 

The Institute for Southern Crops in Strumitsa maintains the following collection exsitu: 

Table 30: Ex-situ collections of crops at the Institute for Southern Crops – Strumitsa. 

Capsicum 

annuum 

Lycopersicon 

esculentum 

Cucumis 

sativus 

Solanum 

melongena 

Citrulus 

vulgaris 

Crop 

Number of 

Varieties 

Crop 

Number of 

Varieties 

Pepper 169 Allium porrum Leek 1 

Tomato 27 Lactuca sativa Lettuce 3 

Cucumber 2 Cucumis melo Melon 13 

Eggplant 2 

Watermelon 4 

Cucurbita pepo Pumpkin 5 

Arachis 

hypogaea 

Gossypum 

hirsutum 

Sesamum 

indicum 

Peanuts 14 

Cotton 16 

Sesame 10 

At the Tobacco Institute in Prilep, a total of 117 varieties of tobacco are maintained 

ex-situ, of which 73 are of the Virginia type, 37 of the oriental and seven of the semioriental 

type. 

6.3.2.2. Captive breeding in zoological parks 

The Zoological Garden in Skopye continuously maintains populations of the species 

of animals shown below. The total number of individuals listed was as of the date of 

publication of this report. 

Roe deer 

(Capreolus capreolus), ? 1 

Fallow deer 

(Dama dama) ? 2, ? 7 

Donkey 

(Equus asinus) ? 1 

Domestic horse 

(Equus cabalis) ? 5 

Hybrid mule 

(Equus mulus) ? 3 

Wolf 

(Canis lupus) ? 2-9 

Domestic goat 

(Capra hircus) ? 6, ? 2-7 

Wild boar 

(Sus scrofa) ? 2-8, ? 2-8 

Brown bear 

(Ursus arctos) ? 9-21, ? 7 

Red fox 

(Vulpes vulpes) ? 7 

Golden eagle 

(Aquila chrysaetus) ? 10 

Imperial eagle 

(Aqila heliaca) ? 3-10 

Eagle owl 

(Bubo bubo) ? 1 

Common buzzard 

(Buteo buteo) ? 1 

Griffon vulture 

(Gyps fulvus) ? 2-13


6.3.2.3. Materials held in genetic collections and gene-banks 

In the case of crop agrobiodiversity, several separate and unrelated projects were 

supported by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management. As a result, cold 

chambers (4ºC) for the short-term storage of seeds were installed at the Agricultural 

Institute in Skopye, Institute for Southern Crops in Strumitsa and Tobacco Institute in 

Prilep. Subsequently, collections of local/imported commercial varieties and selected 

lines were established. Within these collections, no indigenous local crop varieties are 

held. The seeds are being stored in plastic boxes, but they were not adequately treated 

for long-term storage nor divided into basic and active collections. Certificates of Origin 

(passport data), descriptions and evaluations of varieties (e.g., germination percentages) 

were not completed and no data were entered into an electronic database. 

With regard to domesticated animals, concrete measures for conservation of the 

Pramenka sheep “Karakachanska” have already been undertaken. With the assistance 

provided by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management, a collection 

of 100 sheep and 12 rams has been established. The heads were placed in two 

independent locations for morphological characterisation. They are now undergoing 

biochemical analyses on DNA and proteins in order to determine polymorphism within 

the satellite bands and genetic markers. In the future, it is planned to cryogenically 

preserve a sufficient quantity of sperm and fertilised embryos, in order to facilitate the 

long-lasting conservation of genetic material. 

6.4. Other existing projects and programmes for biodiversity conservation 

6.4.1. Biodiversity inventory and monitoring and research 

Existing regulations within the Republic of Macedonia do not provide for a strict 

legal obligation to keep a unique or central inventory of biodiversity, nor for conducting 

special monitoring in that sphere. The existing Law on the Conservation and Promotion 

of the Environment and Nature only provides for an inventory of polluters and certain 

environmental monitoring. 

Some laws, especially the ones related to protected areas, require the keeping of 

records and documentation, registers and other public ledgers containing relevant data 

on the kinds of natural resources, their amounts and their values. Such non-specific 

solutions, however, could not be considered to be appropriate as regards biodiversity in 

general and as the subject of specific legal protection. 

Hence, the issue of biodiversity inventories, as well as the issue of special 

monitoring, deserve particular attention and adequate normative consideration in future 

regulations on biodiversity conservation. 

6.4.2. Educational programmes and training 

In compliance with the Law on the Conservation and Promotion of the Environment 

and Nature, public institutions in the field of education are obligated to include the 

acquisition of knowledge and the creation of an attitude of activism towards the 

conservation and promotion of the environment and nature in their work plans and 

programmes. This obligation applies to all public educational institutions, starting with 

primary school (Article 10). 

To date, no thematic survey has been conducted regarding the adequacy in which 

biodiversity conservation is addressed in the curriculum of public educational 

institutions, neither at the primary, secondary nor university level. Consequently, few 

conclusions can be drawn. Further, there are no comparative analyses of university 

115

116 


teaching plans and programmes in the fields of biology, forestry, agriculture, veterinary 

medicine, environmental protection, environmental law and other educational areas with 

regard to the subject of biodiversity conservation. 

6.4.3. Public Awareness 

Raising public awareness concerning protection of the environment and nature is 

defined as a strict legal obligation of public institutions in the education, health care, 

information, culture and science fields in the Law on the Conservation and Promotion of 

the Environment and Nature (Article 10). In addition, the relevant laws on the protection 

of natural rarities define the legal obligations of the responsible institutions, to wit: (a) to 

issue publications related to the protection of natural rarities and prepare publicity 

materials on the protected resource and (b) to encourage and develop interest in a 

positive attitude toward the preservation of natural rarities by means of regular and 

occasional exhibitions, the showing of films and other forms of cultural and educational 

activities. 

By all accounts, the pertinent public institutions can not be said to be executing these 

duties satisfactorily. The underlying reason for this is the fact that, so far, the 

government has made no official statements regarding the work of public institutions. 

Special programmes and projects for nurturing and developing an awareness regarding 

the conservation of biodiversity are rare and, in most of cases, have failed to get the 

necessary financial support from the budget or other public funds. 

A common characteristic of both the print and electronic media within the Republic 

of Macedonia (regardless of ownership) is that they do not give much attention to the 

issue of biodiversity conservation, especially in regard to its systematic monitoring. 

More recently, many NGOs, especially in the field of ecology, have shown great 

interest in efforts to raise public awareness about biodiversity conservation. In many 

cases, however, their projects and programmes have not been supported by the central 

government or by local authorities. Foreign grants and grants from foreign foundations 

registered in Macedonia are still relatively unavailable or are intended for other specific 

purposes. There has also been poor organisation on the part of domestic legal entities. 

6.4.4. Conservation planning 

In the Republic of Macedonia, a very complex model of biodiversity conservation 

planning exists and is implemented. In point of fact, the planning instruments are quite 

varied and differ in type, order of precedence, period of validity, type of holder, 

procedure for adoption etc. 

In accordance with the current system of laws, in order to assess the situation and 

identify the measures to be undertaken, the government of the Republic of Macedonia 

developed a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) for the purpose of conserving 

the environment in Macedonia. According to this plan, municipalities and the city of 

Skopye must adopt Local Environmental Action Plans (LEAPs) (Article 14). The law 

also specifies that those entities managing special natural heritage sites (i.e., protected 

areas) are obligated to prepare a programme on the protection of these resources and 

submit it to the MoEPP (Article 33). The Law on the Protection of National Parks 

specifies that those organisations managing these protected resources adopt annual and 

long-term programmes on national park protection. The special Law on the Protection of 

Ohrid, Prespa and Doyran Lakes provides for the adoption of a programme for the 

protection of these lakes by the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia (Article 5).


Similarly, the laws adopted in related fields also provide for separate planning 

instruments (e.g., Water Management Master Plan, General Plan on Forest 

Management etc). Environment and nature conservation is an obligatory component of 

spatial plans. Regarding national parks, the adoption of spatial plans for national parks is 

also provided for. 

Existing regulations do not mandate nor provide the possibility for the adoption of 

special planning instruments for biodiversity conservation. 

It is recommended that the Republic of Macedonia prepare: 

• National Biodiversity Conservation Strategy; 

• National Biodiversity Conservation Programme, as a mid-term plan (5 year); 

• Annual Biodiversity Conservation Programmes, at the national and local levels. 

6.4.5. Domestic projects 

No. Project Description Funding Source / Implementing Agency 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

Preparation of slide-documentation and a 

herbarium for endemic, relict, rare and 

threatened flora of the Republic of 


Preparation of a report on the natural values 

of the site “Ploche Rock Pools,” Stratsin 

Preparation of an report on the natural 

values of the site “Lokvi – Golemo Konjari” 

Strict Nature Reserve – Golem Grad 

Valuation for preparation of a report 

Strict Nature Reserve – Demir Kapiya 

Valuation for preparation of a report 

Atlas of the birds of prey of the Republic of 


Conservation of the Natural Monument, 

“Two Plane trees,” village of Smolare, 

Municipality of Novo Selo 

Doyran Lake Recovery Project (releasing an 

additional quantity of water into Doyran 

Lake taken from the alluvial aquifer 

Gyavato near Bogdantsi) 

Project for supply and installation of a 

wastewater treatment plant at the Lead and 

Zinc Smelting Company in Veles 

Industrial complex for the collection, 

recycling and destruction of hazardous 

waste 

MoEPP / Agency for the Environment 







Budget of the Republic of Macedonia, 

2002, Compensation funds / MoEPP 

MoEPP 

Govt. of the Republic of Macedonia / 

MoEPP 

117

118 


6.4.6. International projects 

No. Project Description Funding Source / Implementing Agency 

1. 

2. 

Protection of the Vardar River against 

pollution with chromium 

Solid waste management in south-western 


3. Wastewater treatment plants in Gevgeliya 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

Waste management in the region of 

Gevgeliya (project under negotiation) 

Regional strategy for hazardous waste 

management 

Project for development of national 

framework for biosafety 

Preparation of initial implementation of 

LEAPs for six municipalities 

Activities related to biological diversity and 

needs assessments 

Office for Ozone Layer Protection – 

Institutional support (Phase III) 

Enabling activities for facilitating actions 

toward the early implementation of the 

Stockholm <strong>Convention</strong> on Persistent 

Organic Polluters (POPs) in the Republic of 


PSO Programme/Netherlands 

assistance/PSO 01/MA/02/13 – 

Implementation of modernisation of the 

process of powdered enamelling in the 

production of boilers 

Phare Programme for trans-border 

cooperation with Greece – Automatic 

monitoring of water in the Vardar River 

Monitoring system for the rivers of 


Integrated management of the ecosystem in 

the transboundary region of Prespa Park 

European Agency for Reconstruction 

(EAR) / Agency for the Environment 

KfW Group 

Government of the Republic of Greece / 

Agency for the Environment 

Government of the Kingdom of Spain / 


Government of the Kingdom of the 

Netherlands / Agency for the Environment 

GEF/UNEP / Agency for the Environment 

German Society for Technical Cooperation 

– a quasi-governmental 

organisation (GTZ) 

GEF/World Bank 

Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol/ 

United Nations Industrial Development 

Organization (UNIDO) 

GEF/UNIDO 

Netherlands (PSO/2002) LEOV Company, 

Veles 

Phare ’97 / Hydro-Meteorological Affairs 

Administration 

Governments of Switzerland and the 

Republic of Macedonia 

GEF/KfW Group/other donors / MoEPP 

(for projects assigned to Macedonia)


15. Lake Ohrid Conservation Project GEF/World Bank 

16. 

17. 

18. 

Phare (SOP99) – Supply of three fixed 

automatic monitoring stations for air quality 

(Kochani, Kumanovo and Kichevo) 

European Environment Information and 

Observation Network (EIONET) 

Identification of areas of special 

conservation interest – Emerald Network 

EU/EAR 

19. Phare (COP97) EU/EAR 

20. 

21. 

22. 

23. 

24. 

25. 

26. 

27. 

REReP 1.12 (Regional Environmental 

Reconstruction Programme for South 

Eastern Europe) – Support for acceptance 

and implementation of multilateral 

environmental agreements in south-eastern 

Europe 

REReP 1.2 – Assistance in priority 

investment programmes – development and 

implementation 

REReP 1.3 – Assistance in the preparation 

of draft versions of legal acts related to the 

environment 

REReP 1.4 – Building capacities for 

Environmental Impact Assessments 

REReP 1.5.1 – Networking of financial and 

environmental experts in south-eastern 

Europe 

REReP 1.7 – Strengthening national 

environmental agencies and their offices for 

inspection in south-eastern Europe through 

creation of a regional “Balkan 

Environmental Regulatory Compliance and 

Enforcement Network “ (BERCEN) 

REReP 1.7.1 – Environmental compliance 

in south-eastern Europe - Environmental 

compliance inspections in south-eastern 

Europe for use in comparing their levels of 

compliance, education/training and 

equipment resources in order to strengthen 

the capacities of the national agencies 

REReP 1.8 – Development of National 

Environmental Information Systems 

Agency for the Environment / Macedonian 

Environmental Information Center (MEIC) 

Council of Europe / Agency for the 

Environment 

Government of the Netherlands 

EU 

EU 

EU/US Environmental Protection Agency 

(USEPA) 

EU 


EU/Phare – Renewal 


119

28. 

29. 

30. 

31. 

32. 

33. 

34. 

35. 

120 


REReP 1.9 - Building capacities within the 

countries of south-eastern Europe for their 

approximation to the EU 

REReP 1.10 – Regional strategy for 

hazardous waste in south-eastern Europe 

REReP 2.1 – Regional Environmental Press 

Center (REPC) – the project is run by an 

NGO from Macedonia and the 

Environmental Press Center (EPC) 

REReP 2.2 – Support for the development 

of strategies for use in implementing the 

Aarhus <strong>Convention</strong> 

REReP 2.2.1 – Building capacities for 

implementation of the Aarhus <strong>Convention</strong> 

REReP 2.3 – Electronic network of 

environmental NGOs in south-eastern 

Europe 

REReP 2.5.2 – Strengthening NGOs in 

south-eastern Europe 

REReP 2.6 – Support for the development 

of Environmental Legal/Consulting Centres 

GTZ 

EU 




Governments of Norway and the 

Netherlands 

USEPA 

36. Balkan Information Service USEPA 

37. 

38. 

39. 

South Eastern European Environmental 

NGOs Network (SEEENN) 

Enabling the Republic of Macedonia to 

prepare the First National Communication 

on Climate Changes as an obligation of the 

UN Framework <strong>Convention</strong> on Climate 

Changes 

Regional project involving 12 countries – 

Strengthening capacities for the 

development of national inventories of 

green house gases 


Regional Environmental Center for Central 

and Eastern Europe (Government of the 

Netherlands)/European Commission – 

Department of the Environment 

GEF/United Nations Development 

Programme (UNDP) 

GEF/UNDP


6.5. Existing financial resources and mechanisms for biodiversity conservation 

Mechanisms 

The mechanisms for biodiversity conservation are defined within the relevant legal 

acts. Those acts possessing the appropriate framework or special character regulate the 

measures and mechanisms for conservation, sustainable use, preservation and restoration 

of biodiversity by means of investigations, scientific research, proposals, in-situ and exsitu 

protection etc. Representative examples include: 

• Law on the Conservation and Promotion of the Environment and Nature: Article 38 

states that in order to provide financial resources and to encourage preventive and 

undertake restorative measures for protection of the environment and nature, the 

Fund for the Conservation and Promotion of the Environment and Nature was 

established within the MoEPP. Revenues from vehicle registration fees flow into this 

fund, which is then used to finance activities for implementing preventive and 

restorative measures in all environmental spheres, including biodiversity and habitat 

conservation, through the national programme corresponding to the NEAP. In 

addition, in compliance with Article 40 of this law, legal and physical entities 

registered as pollution generators must also pay an eco-tax to be used for the 

protection of the environment and nature; 

• Law on the Protection of Natural Rarities: In addition to regulating the protection of 

natural rarities, it creates favourable conditions for their maintenance, development 

and promotion; prevents negative impacts and provides a financial basis for these 

activities; 

• Law on the Protection of Ohrid, Prespa and Doyran Lakes: Defines the penalties for 

disturbing the water regime of the lakes, polluting the water with harmful or 

hazardous substances, discharging untreated wastewater etc; 

• Law on Hunting: Makes provisions for monetary penalties for pursuing protected 

game out of season and for temporary or permanent prohibitions on hunting 

particular species; 

• Law on Fishing: Establishes the fines to be paid for fishing in restricted areas (not 

allowed for use), polluting the water with harmful or hazardous substances which 

could change or affect the water quality and consequently endanger the fish stocks or 

other plants or animals and fishing during closed seasons or spawning periods; 

• Law on Forests: Establishes the fines to be paid for unauthorised timber harvesting, 

forest destruction, building objects in forests without obtaining the proper permit, 

polluting forests with household or chemical wastes and cutting rare tree species 

without permission; 

• Law on Seeds, Seedlings and Materials for Propagation, Recognition, Approval and 

Protection of Varieties; 

• Law on Pastures; 

• Law on Agricultural Land; 

• Criminal Code of the Republic of Macedonia: Contains a separate section on 

criminal activities against the environment which may result in prison sentences. 

121

122 


Resources 

Financial resources within the sphere of biological diversity are defined in: 

• Budget of the Republic of Macedonia: Using its own financing mechanisms, apart 

from the allocation of budget funds to the relevant ministries, it finances activities 

that are State priorities in the field of the environment. An example is the Doyran 

Lake Recovery Project; 

• Budget of the MoEPP: Includes the financing of activities in certain areas related to 

the annual work programme of the Ministry. These include the protection of 

biodiversity and habitats (wetland, terrestrial and forest), as well as spatial planning, 

among other activities. Funds from the Ministry’s budget are also used for research, 

preparation of feasibility studies, studies related to the implementation of direct 

protection measures for threatened species and habitats and activities for proclaiming 

general nature reserves (national parks, strictly protected reserves, scientific-research 

reserves, sites of special natural character and characteristic landscapes). The 

category, special nature reserve, includes enclosed areas where specific 

biocenological, floristic, faunal, geologic and/or hydrologic characteristics are 

protected. Special nature reserves afford a greater degree of protection for some 

plant and animal species within the system of nature reserves and natural monuments 

(based upon floristic and faunal properties and/or other natural phenomena); 

• Fund for the Environment: Adopts programmes for the financing of projects in 

environmental conservation, including financing activities for biodiversity and 

habitat conservation (e.g., conservation of threatened plant and animal species and 

protection of ecosystems, biotopes etc.). In addition, this fund finances campaigns 

for raising public awareness about the protection of nature, especially, biodiversity; 

• Budget of the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Culture: 

Allocate funds to facilitate the functioning of the institutes that belong to them and 

have an important role in the protection of biodiversity, monitoring and improvement 

of habitat quality; 

• Law on Customs: Provides tax exemptions for imported goods that are intended for 

environmental and nature protection; 

• Business sphere: Under the provisions of the laws which regulate disturbances to 

nature caused by certain types of capital expenditures (and the consequent direct 

effects to the survival of biodiversity), businesses are obligated to designate funds 

for prevention or restoration measures. 

In the period since 1995, foreign donors have been largely responsible for financing 

the protection of Macedonian biodiversity, mainly through large-scale projects of 

international character or through activities arising from obligations as a member State 

to certain international conventions. The main donors have been: GEF, via the World 

Bank, UNDP, EU, other bilateral donations and the <strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity 

through its small grants program. 

Positive examples of participation include: Preparation of the National 

Environmental Action Plan of the Republic of Macedonia, financed by the World Bank 

(1995-1997); Lake Ohrid Conservation Project (GEF/World Bank – 1999-2003); 

National Biodiversity Strategy (GEF/World Bank – 2001-2003) and Project for Capacity 

Building within the MoEPP (UNDP – 1999-2001). The EU, through the Phare/CARDS 

(Community Assistance for Reconstruction) programme, finances projects for the


institutional strengthening of the MoEPP and other bureaus involved in the conservation 

process and in the preparation of those laws and regulations which, when harmonised 

with the directives of EU, will give a good basis for the efficient protection of 

biodiversity. In addition, interest by the governments of Great Britain, Germany, Greece, 

France and Switzerland in financing projects in this field should be mentioned. 

Weaknesses observed 

• Insufficient financial allocations to the MoEPP from the budget of the Republic of 

Macedonia inhibit the ability to perform biodiversity conservation activities; 

• The overlap of responsibilities within the governmental structure, as defined by the 

Law on Organisation and Operation of Governmental Bodies in the Republic of 

Macedonia, results in the inadequate allocation of budget funds to institutions 

dealing with biodiversity conservation among the various ministries; 

• Ambiguous mechanisms in the existing structures and special laws allowing for the 

financing or self-financing of certain institutions involved in biodiversity 

conservation; 

• Lack of enforcement of existing legal/penal measures and lack of conformance with 

laws which are already part of the general legal framework regulating biodiversity 

conservation; 

• Inappropriate expenditures of funds earmarked for activities for biodiversity and 

natural resource conservation which, for various reasons, are instead placed in the 

general treasury of the Republic of Macedonia. 

6.6. Organisations involved in biodiversity conservation and management 

6.6.1. Government structures and agencies for biodiversity management 

Government of the Republic of Macedonia 

The National Committee for Biological Diversity, established by a decision of the 

government of the Republic of Macedonia as an obligation of the State arising from the 

<strong>Convention</strong> on Biological Diversity, is composed of twenty distinguished scientists and 

experts having made significant achievements in the field of biodiversity conservation. 

Its objectives are to monitor the implementation of the <strong>Convention</strong> at the national level, 

and to contribute to the making of quality decisions on biological diversity conservation 

issues by the MoEPP. 



• Performs professional tasks and supervises protected reserves and natural areas, 

as well as sources of soil, water and air pollution. 

• Proposes expert and technical/technological solutions for the reduction and 

prevention of pollution and degradation of the environment and nature. 

• Prepares professional documents, and measures and monitors the state of and 

changes to the environment and nature. 

• Prepares reports with an adequate interpretation of the results. 

• Conducts research at sites with rare, threatened and important tree species. 

• Prepares the documentation on the status of special natural heritage sites and 

makes proposals for new sites. 

• Monitors the state of phytocenological diversity. 

123

124 


• Works on projects for the biological conservation of threatened tree species. 

• Conducts research in areas of nature having geological values. 

• Determines the value of natural resources and prepares necessary documentation. 

• Proposes protection measures and the use of natural resources. 

State Inspectorate of the Environment 

• Supervises compliance with the Law on the Conservation and Promotion of the 

Environment and Nature. 

Local Unit of Ohrid Lake Conservation 

• Conducts affairs related to the management of the Ohrid Lake Conservation 

Project and implements regional protection programmes. 

Local Unit of Doyran Lake Recovery 

• Conducts affairs related to the management of the Doyran Lake Recovery Project 

and implements regional protection programmes. 

Ministry of Education and Science 

• The Botanical Institute and its Botanic Garden within the Faculty of Natural 

Science and Mathematics in Skopye. 

• The Hydro-Biological Institute - Ohrid, which performs scientific and related 

activities, is the competent authority for the monitoring of the status of lakes in 

the Republic of Macedonia, is responsible for the biological components of the 

lakes and their promotion and conservation, keeps evidence, and monitors water 

quality and any changes. 

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management 

• Hydro-Meteorological Administration 

• Veterinary Administration 

• Water Management Administration 

• Seed and Seedling Administration 

• Plant Protection Administration 

• State Inspectorate of Agriculture 

• State Inspectorate of Forestry and Hunting 

Ministry of Culture 

• Commission for UNESCO 

• Macedonian Museum of Natural History 

The Museum was established in 1926 and has several responsibilities, including the 

normal activities of a museum: collecting, publishing, research, education and pedagogy. 

It has exhibits related to the areas of mineralogy and petrography, palaeontology, 

botany, invertebrates, insects, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds. 

Ministry of Economy 

• Tourist Bureau


Other 

• Veterinary Institute 

• Institute of Fishing 

• Institute of Fishing in Shum/Struga 

• Institute of Orchardry 

6.6.2. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) 

There are 71 registered NGOs in the Republic of Macedonia with about 33,716 total 

members, or approximately 500 members per organisation on the average. They are 

mainly financed by domestic budgets and grants, membership fees and foreign grants. 

Their priority areas of activity are education in environmental issues, nature protection, 

public participation, publications and reforestation. 

6.6.3. Academic/Research Institutions 

• Macedonian Academy of Science and Arts (MANU) 

• Faculty of Natural Science and Mathematics - Institute of Biology with the 

Department of Botany (and the Botanic Garden), Department of Zoology, 

Department of Physiology and Biochemistry and Institute of Geography. 

• Faculty of Forestry 

• Faculty of Agriculture 

• Faculty of Pharmacology 

• Faculty of Veterinary Medicine 

• Economic and Social Research Institute 

6.6.4. Business and private sector 

• National Parks Administration 

• Galichitsa National Park Administration 

• Mavrovo National Park Administration 

• Pelister National Park Administration 

These administrations manage the issues related to: 

• Study, research and scientific reports on issues related to the protection of 

national parks; 

• Keeping professionally gathered data and documentation on natural and other 

values and aesthetics of the parks; 

• Providing conditions for the use of national parks for scientific, educational, 

cultural, health, sports and tourist-recreational purposes, without risking the basic 

characteristics of the parks; 

• Undertaking protection measures for certain zones or of specific species in the 

parks; 

• Issuing scientific and professional publications, information and other materials; 

• Running campaigns for raising public awareness of the importance of parks, their 

natural wealth and the ways that they can be preserved. 

125

126 


6.6.5. Community groups 

This segment includes: 

• Hunting associations and other for-profit organisations registered in the Republic 

of Macedonia, whose dual role is not only to organise hunting in specific areas 

but also to care for the game; 

• Plant collection centres, which function at a local level and are often profitable, 

though their role in the sustainable use of natural resources is suspicious. 

Structures assessment and efficiency 

From the previous sections, it is evident that biological diversity and habitats fall 

under the jurisdiction and interest of several State bodies, scientific institutes, other 

institutions and NGOs. Despite the impressive number of institutions involved in 

biological conservation and management with the Republic of Macedonia, there is a lack 

of strategic planning that would define a general and long-term biodiversity conservation 

policy. This lack results in short-term and inadequate solutions which contribute to the 

loss of the rich biodiversity characteristic for this region. This can be observed through 

the following: 

• Lack of a legal framework to respond to the need for the conservation of 

biological diversity and natural habitats and their sustainable use; 

• Overlap of responsibilities of State administrative bodies; 

• Institutes and other institutions with the responsibility for biological diversity 

monitoring and conservation are not properly situated within the central 

government hierarchy; 

• Inadequate technical equipment and personnel in existing institutes and 

laboratories dealing with biological diversity monitoring and conservation; 

• Insufficiently developed political and public awareness of the need for 

biodiversity conservation in the context of improving their quality of life; 

• A lack of political awareness and reduced economic power of the State resulting 

in a shortage of financial resources allocated for biodiversity and habitat 

conservation, reconstruction and development; 

• Poor coordination and cooperation between the central government, local 

governments, the scientific community and the non-governmental sphere towards 

united biodiversity protection. 

Possibilities for new roles 

The adoption of the National Biodiversity Conservation Strategy will initiate a 

reorganisation at a national, local, scientific and non-governmental level. The new legal 

framework on environmental protection will encourage the establishment of new 

organisational structures in the government of the Republic of Macedonia and 

consequently, the reorganisation of institutes and other institutions dealing with 

biodiversity conservation, as well as restructuring in the scientific sphere and in the 

private sector. New economic and financial instruments to regulate these issues are 

expected to be introduced, which will promote a new, more efficient system of 

protection and financing. NGOs, which are numerous but without significant influence, 

will be able to organise on a higher level and will draft their basic goals and objectives 

in compliance with the legal documents; thus, they will expect to be entitled to a 

stronger influence on decision-making concerning environmental issues.


6.7. Summary of existing measures, capacity and experience for biodiversity 

management 

The measures for biodiversity and habitat conservation are defined in the National 

Environmental Action Plan adopted in January 1997, the Law on the Conservation and 

Promotion of the Environment and Nature, the Law on the Protection of Natural 

Rarities, Law on the Protection of Ohrid, Prespa and Doyran Lakes, Law on Spatial and 

Urban Planning and in separate spatial plans, all representing legal acts implemented by 

the MoEPP. Laws implemented by other ministries but pertaining to the field of 

biodiversity and habitat protection include the Law on Water; Law on Hunting; Law on 

Fishing; Law on Forests; Law on Seeds, Seedlings and Materials for Propagation, 

Recognition, Approval and Protection of Varieties; Law on Pastures; Law on 

Agricultural Land; Law on Protection against Natural Catastrophes and the Criminal 

Code of the Republic of Macedonia. 

The main finding is that the basic capacities for biodiversity management have been 

established. The MoEPP is already well established to manage the implementation of the 

basic laws and strategies related to the protection of the environment and biodiversity, 

through the Agency for the Environment and the local units for Ohrid Lake 

Conservation and Doyran Lake Recovery. Within the Ministry there is a State 

Inspectorate of the Environment, which, among other things, deals with supervision of 

the measures implemented for protection of biodiversity, natural rarities, natural reserves 

(common and special), individual plant and animal species outside nature reserves and 

natural monuments. 

There are educational and scientific institutions dealing with the study and 

monitoring of biodiversity and which propose measures of protection, reproduction and 

selection: Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, University Departments, Hydro- 

Biological Institute - Ohrid, Macedonian Museum of Natural History, Zoological 

Garden, Veterinary Institute, Research Laboratory within the Faculty of Agriculture, 

Botanic Garden within the Faculty of Natural Science and Mathematics, City Museum - 

Struga etc. 

There is joint organisation of the national parks through National Parks and Hunting 

Sites, and separate Administrations for the three national parks – Galichitsa, Mavrovo 

and Pelister. 

The points enumerated above point to the fact that the foundation for biological 

diversity protection in the Republic of Macedonia actually exists, but problems are 

present in the realms of functional structure and organisation. That is, the evident 

overlap of responsibilities within the governmental bodies influences the implementation 

of biodiversity protection. 

The increasing influence of NGOs towards quality protection measures for 

biodiversity is a positive trend. The numerous NGOs equally participate in campaigns 

for strengthening public awareness on the importance of biodiversity and its protection 

and actually run certain projects for practical protection. 

Despite many campaigns conducted by the relevant Ministries and NGOs in order to 

raise public awareness about the importance of biodiversity protection, there is still a 

perceived lack of awareness at the desired levels. It appears that the perception of the 

connection between citizens and natural wealth, which is the necessary ingredient for 

quality primary conservation, is lacking. This has been particularly emphasised in the 

127

128 


sections of this document on the use of forests, pastures, fish stocks, hunting, medicinal 

plants, lack of care for protected or endangered areas, associations, species etc. 

Although the economic entities are obligated to pay taxes according to the applicable 

regulations, there is a compliance failure. The frequent cases of avoidance of legal 

obligations points to an inefficient judiciary. 

The experiences in biodiversity management point to the urgent need for new 

organisation at the governmental level, approximation of legislation with that of the EU, 

application of the provisions of international agreements in the domain of biological 

diversity and habitats and application of European and world methodologies and criteria 

in this realm. These conclusions were reached as a result of experiences gained in 

projects of international character and operated with foreign assistance.

7. PROBLEM ANALYSIS 


7.1. Current loss of, or effects on, biodiversity 

The present status of biodiversity in the Republic of Macedonia is a consequence of 

the environmental conditions in which its components (species and ecosystems) are 

developing, global changes and anthropogenic impacts. 

Aquatic and wetland ecosystems are the most endangered. The assn. Myriophyllo- 

Nupharetum (Doyran Lake) has almost disappeared, whereas assn. Lemno-Spirodelletum 

polyrhizae subassn. aldrovandetosum (Prespa Lake) is threatened with extinction. 

Relict lowland marsh communities can be found only in a generally fragmented state, 

with six of them particularly endangered (assn. Caricetum elatae subassn. 

lysimachietosum - Ohrid Lake, near Studenchishte; assn. Cypero-Caricetum acutiformis 

- Gostivar; assn. Glycerietum maximae - Pelagonia; assn. Mariscetum - Negortsi Spa; 

assn. Osmundo-Thelipteretum - Bansko and assn. Scirpo-Alopecuretum cretici - 

Monospitovo Marsh). 

With regard to meadows, the most endangered are those associations developing on 

very wet terrain (assn. Hordeo-Caricetum distantis - Gevgeliya and Skopye). 

Three communities among the halophytic vegetation are the most endangered, 

particularly assn. Camphorosmetum monspeliacae. 

Among forest vegetation, nine forest phytocenoses are endangered: assn. Aceri 

heldreichii-Fagetum - Yakupitsa and Shar Planina Mountains; assn. Alnetum viridis - 

Belasitsa; assn. Carici elongatae-Alnetum glutinosae - Polog, Debartsa; assn. Daphno- 

Cytisanthetum radiati calcicolum - Galichitsa and Yablanitsa; assn. Ephedro-Prunetum 

tenellae – Kavadartsi and Lubas; assn. Juglando-Aesculetum hippocastani - Suv Dol, 

near Izvor, and Yablanitsa; assn. Periploco-Alnetum glutinosae - Monospitovo Marsh, 

assn. Periploco-Fradzinetum angustifoliae-pallisae - Negortsi Spa and assn. Tilio 

cordatae-Fagetum - Drevenicka Mountain. 

Within the lower plant groups, the best available knowledge is on phylum 

Bacillariophyta. Nine species are considered to be extinct and 107 are endangered. As 

for the Fungi, a Preliminary Red List has been developed, including 67 endangered 

species from phylum Basidiomycota and 12 from Lichens. 

Among the higher plant groups, the most endangered group is that of Angiosperms 

(280-300 endangered species), ferns (15), mosses (20) and Gymnosperms (7). Five 

species of Gymnosperms are considered to be extinct. 

The current faunal diversity of the Republic of Macedonia is facing great pressure 

resulting from direct and indirect anthropogenic impacts. Thus, as many as 113 

vertebrate species are included in the category of threatened species, which is 22.3% of 

the entire vertebrate fauna (17 are Macedonian endemic species). 

Invertebrate faunal diversity suffers from even greater anthropogenic pressure, which 

leads to a reduction in the populations of large numbers of species and eventually to 

extinction. Special attention and care needs to be paid to 650 endemic invertebrate taxa, 

many of which are limited to the three natural lakes (Doyran Lake – 11, Prespa Lake – 

18 and Ohrid Lake – 209). The disappearance of these species will represent an 

immeasurable loss, not only at the national level, but also at a global level. 

Despite a large amount of research, there is still not enough information on a large 

portion of the endemic species concerning the current status of their populations and the 

direct threats to their survival. 

129

130 


7.2. Direct causes of biodiversity loss 

The direct causes of biodiversity loss are many and varied. Most of them are 

common to all types of biodiversity, while some are specific to either flora, fauna or 

ecosystems: 

• Inadequate management of the waters of aquatic ecosystems. 

• Drainage of marshes and swamps. 

• Construction of hydropower reservoirs in river gorges. 

• Lack of water treatment plants (for riverine and lake ecosystems). 

• Mine excavations and other geological works. 

• Construction of ski lifts, transmission lines, television transmitters and other antenna 

systems. 

• Loss of habitats (or their parts) during unplanned expansion of urban centres, 

weekend settlements and tourist-recreation zones. 

• Modification of habitats. 

• Fragmentation of habitats, due mainly to traffic infrastructure, where highways 

intersect habitats that are important as vertebrate corridors (particularly for large 

mammals). When aquatic habitats are artificially fragmented, recommendations for 

maintaining ecological minimum flows in watercourses are not followed. 

• Destruction of areas with natural vegetation (halophytes and meadows). 

• Uncontrolled destruction of forests through forest fires, through clearing, in order to 

provide building land, for the construction of roads and railroads, for the expansion 

of tourist settlements and through forest desiccation. 

• Uncontrolled collection of medicinal plants and wild animals. 

• Illegal collection of rare plants (especially endemic plants) by professional and 

commercial collectors, illegal collection of birds’ eggs, certain species of butterflies 

etc. 

7.3. Underlying causes of biodiversity loss 

The basic factors which have led to the current unfavourable state of the environment 

in the Republic of Macedonia in all of its spheres, including biodiversity, include general 

historical processes, a bad socioeconomic situation, an unstable political situation, 

inadequate spatial planning and inappropriate land use. 

In the desire to accomplish economic development at any cost, a general trend 

toward the erosion of moral and traditional societal values can be observed, neglecting 

the principle of sustainable development. Instead, natural resources are used beyond the 

limits of their sustainability, which produces a real threat of extinction for endangered 

plant and animal species and varieties, and thus impinges upon traditional rural 

landscapes. Aiding in this process is the poor awareness by the citizens of Macedonia of 

the issues surrounding the conservation of national biological resources and the 

possibilities for their sustainable use. This situation is especially felt within biological 

communities (wild plants and animals). On the one hand, the State has not developed 

legal regulations to facilitate the sustainability of populations. On the other, in a rush to 

achieve quick profits (often by people living at the bare subsistence level), wild species 

are collected uncontrollably and without any care for their normal reproduction or for 

environmental impacts resulting from their disappearance.


Several basic reasons for the permanent loss of biological diversity can be 

distinguished: 

• A low level of education and a lack of information, especially in rural areas, which 

has contributed to a low awareness in the general population of the relationship 

between human activities and the environment, the sustainable use of biological 

resources and the sustainable transfer of biotechnology; 

• Reduced and unstable economic power of the State, in addition to the military 

actions that have been rocking the region for a long period of time; 

• Growing poverty, which does not recognise the principles of sustainable 

development, is manifesting itself through illegal forest and other resource overuse, 

hunting and fishing overuse, non-sustainable development of agriculture etc.; 

• Inadequate and incomplete legislation which fails to clarify duties or avoid the 

overlap of responsibilities and competencies within the agencies responsible for 

enforcement; 

• Non-compliance with existing regulations; 

• Lack of spatial planning regulations for areas with special natural values; 

• Uncontrolled urbanisation, deagrarianisation (in the traditional sense) and 

industrialisation are the main processes that disturb the environmental balance 

(considering the cumulative effects of pollution); 

• The continual process of migration of the population from villages to towns. 

Increased concentrations of people in urban centres represent a growing problem not 

only from a global, socioeconomic aspect but also from a spatial aspect; 

• Stagnation of the economy and use of outdated technologies, poor quality of energy 

sources resulting from low economic power and lack of treatment of wastewater and 

waste gases, which leads to deterioration of the air, soil, surface water and 

groundwater quality; 

• Outdated spatial planning with insufficient continuity, improper land use changes, 

construction of infrastructure systems and previous agricultural conversion; 

• The process of earning a profit under highly competitive market conditions, the 

permanent trend toward globalisation and the favouring of newer, more profitable 

varieties which have fully supplanted the indigenous, low producing and/or less 

profitable genetic types. 

7.4. Key sectors affecting biodiversity 

On the basis of the analysis of data in Section 5., a preliminary ranking of the main 

economic sectors can be made in accordance with their effect on biodiversity: 

• Agriculture was particularly adversely affected in the decades after World War II. 

Most of the marshes and swamps were drained, and arable land was expanded into 

other natural habitats without regard for their importance. Another serious threat to 

biodiversity was the enlargement of agricultural land surfaces during the period of 

nationalisation, when the areas of natural vegetation at the edges of cultivated fields 

were destroyed. This, in turn, led to a loss of important biocorridors. In more recent 

times, the reduction of agricultural activities in rural (especially hilly) areas has 

contributed to the full degradation of the centuries-old appearance of the 

Macedonian landscape. 

131

132 


• The reduction of livestock and the gradual abandonment of traditional practices of 

cattle management (i.e., widespread grazing in favour of feedlots). This practice 

reduces the amount of carrion in the environment and may have already led to the 

extinction of two vulture species. 

• Fishing is a serious threat to fish diversity, especially in Ohrid Lake. 

• In the transport sector, habitat fragmentation is an important threat to many 

mammals, especially large ones. It has been the norm to use the cheapest proposed 

alternative and abandon the ones that are the most appropriate for the undisturbed 

existence of wild species. 

• Energy sector - from several aspects, such as environmental pollution, construction 

of hydropower reservoirs and transmission of energy. 

• Industry and mining rank high on this list. Environmental pollution caused by 

industry has declined over the past several years due to the reduction of the capacity 

of industrial plants; however, in individual cases, pollution is growing as a result of 

the use of low-quality fuels and non-functioning treatment systems - both a result of 

a lack of financial resources. This sector causes the degradation of soils over large 

areas through the activities of surface mining, slag deposits, technological waste 

from smelting and energy complexes, industrial landfills of harmful and dangerous 

wastes and failure to reclaim abandoned mining areas and landfills. Systems for the 

treatment of waste gases and communal and industrial water do not exist and, 

consequently, the quality of surface waters and groundwater worsens. 

• Tourism, especially through illegal weekend settlements and unsolved communal 

infrastructure in the main tourist lake and mountain centres. An important aspect is 

the inappropriate behaviour of tourists when outdoors due to their low awareness of 

natural sustainability. 

• Civil engineering, through the use of highly productive agricultural land for nonagriculture-related 

purposes, especially near cities and towns, and through the 

abandonment of cultivated lands, resulting in a loss of agricultural production. Even 

so, this sector can not be ranked highly. 

7.5. Constraints to conservation 

• A lack of a strategy for high quality conservation of biological diversity. 

• The National Environmental Action Plan is now outdated. 

• Legislation is not harmonised with that of the EU. 

• Insufficient implementation of the existing legislation on biological diversity. 

• Inefficient inspections. 

• Inefficient judicial system. 

• Implementation of the provisions of the signed and ratified conventions related to 

biodiversity is insufficient. 

• Implementation of the principle of sustainable development and sustainable use of 

natural resources is neglected. 

• Responsibilities overlap within the governmental Ministries of the Republic of 


• Long-term and short-term plans with defined priorities for activities leading to 

biodiversity conservation do not exist. 

• Continuous monitoring of biological diversity and habitats harmonised with 

European and world standards does not exist.


• Institutes and laboratories dealing with these issues are detached and lack 

appropriate technical equipment and personnel. 

• Unique data bank on the biological diversity of Macedonia, with an analysis of 

impacts leading to the increase or reduction of its availability does not exist. 

• Registers (Red Books) of endangered plant and animal species do not exist. 

• Literature on biological diversity is insufficiently available. 

• Transparency among the government sector, science, non-government sector and 

economy is low. 

• Efforts of NGOs in the field of biological diversity are insufficient, in spite of their 

increasing number. 

• Knowledge and education of the public is unsatisfactory. 

• Shortage of financial resources for developing activities for biodiversity 

conservation and promotion. 

• Lack of interest within the international community for investing in biological 

diversity conservation due to insufficient information and lack of engagement by the 

Macedonian government in these matters. 

• Insufficient implementation of science in practical conservation of biodiversity. 

• Failure to conduct strong supervision and law enforcement in the conservation of 

biodiversity. 

• Incomplete education and instruction of the younger generation or poor coverage of 

the principles of biodiversity in the educational process. 

• The relationship between citizens and natural wealth, which is the necessary 

ingredient for quality primary conservation, is not properly developed. 

• Daily political impacts and politicisation of environmental issues on the whole. 

7.6. Opportunities for conservation 

In the framework of the already established mechanisms, there are certain factors 

aimed at further extension of the scope and efficiency of biodiversity conservation in the 

Republic of Macedonia. Some of them are: 

• Development of legal and strategic documents on biodiversity; 

• Approximation of the national legislation to that of the EU and other international 

conventions; 

• Inclusion of biodiversity conservation within the spatial planning process; 

• Increase in the number of projects in the sphere of biodiversity study and 

conservation, financed by international and national sources; 

• Strengthening of the MoEPP, as well as the accompanying scientific and 

professional institutions; 

• Strengthening of the cooperation between the MoEPP, NGOs and scientific 

institutions; 

• Continuing the increase in scientific work in the field of taxonomy of plant and 

animal groups in the Republic of Macedonia; 

• Improving education about ecological concepts at all levels of instruction (primary, 

secondary and university) and increasing research in the understanding of ecological 

relationships between plants, animals and their habitats and ecosystems. 

Conservation of species is impossible without an understanding of their habitats. 

133

134 

COUNTRY STUDY FOR BIODIVERSITY OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA


ANNEXES

136 


ANNEX 1 

Endemic species of flora in the Republic of Macedonia 

Table 1. List of endemic Algae. 

No. Scientific Name 

CYANOPHYTA 

1. Anabaena hallensis Jancz var. campaniensis Petkov 

2. Anabaena polinis Stojanov 

3. Calothrix inaequabilis Cado 

4. Camptylonema umidum Cado 

5. Hydrocoleus stankovici Cado 

6. Lyngbia martensiana Meneghini fo. Macedonica Cado 

7. Lyngbia nigra Agardh fo. lichnida Cado 

8. Microcoleus ivlevii Cado 

9. Oscilatoria anguna (Bory) Gom. fo. tenuis Petrovska 

10. Oscillatoria animalis Agardh fo. violacea Petrovska 

11. Oscillatoria curviceps Agardh fo. tenuis Petrovska 

12. Oscillatoria ornata (Kützing) Gom. fo. tenuis Petrovska 

13. Oscillatoria tenuis Agardh var. valadovensis Petrovska 

14. Phormidium ercegovici Cado 

15. Phormidium gelatinosum Woronich. fo. ochridana Cado 

16. Phormidium macedonicum Cado 

17. Phormidium purpurascens (Kützing) Gom. fo. ochridiana Cado 

18. Phormidium undosum Cado 

19. Plectonema spelaeoides Cado 

20. Rhabdoderma sigmoidea N. Carter fo. macedonica Cado 

21. Rivularia lapidosa Cado 

22. Synechococcus elongatus Naegeli var. vestitus Corp. fo. maximus Petrovska 

23. Synechococcus vulcanus Naegeli var. bacillaroides Corp. fo. Incrustrans Petrovska 

PYRROPHYTA 

1. Cystodinium dominii Fott 

CHRYSOPHYTA 

1. Diceras ohridana Fott 

2. Stylopyxis Stankocicii Fott 

BACILLARIOPHYTA 

1. Achnanthes clevei Grunow var. balcanica Hustedt 

2. Amphora ovalis (Kützing) Kützing var. elongata Jurilj 

3. Amphora transsylvanica (Pantocsek) Jurilj 

4. Caloneis macedonica Hustedt 

5. Caloneis silicula (Ehrenberg) Cleve fo. recta Jurilj 

6. Caloneis silicula (Ehrenberg) Cleve var. paralella Jurilj 

7. Campylodiscus cadoi Jerkovic 

8. Campylodiscus echinatus Jurilj 

9. Campylodiscus hibernicus Ehrenberg var.transsylvanicus (Pantoscek) Jurilj 

10. Campylodiscus juriljii Jerkovic 

11. Campylodiscus marginatus Jurilj 

12. Campylodiscus marginatus Jurilj var. rudis Jurilj 

13. Campylodiscus marginatus Jurilj var. tenuis Jurilj 

14. Campylodiscus noricus Ehrenberg fo. quadratus Stojanov 

15. Campylodiscus pervusus Jurilj 

16. Campylodiscus spinosus Jurilj 

17. Campylodiscus striatus Jurilj


18. Cocconeis robusta Jurilj 

19. Cyclotella bifacialis Jurilj 

20. Cyclotella fottii Hustedt 

21. Cyclotella hustedtii Jurilj 

22. Cyclotella petrovskae (Jerkovic) Stojanov 

23. Cyclotella thiemanii Jurilj 

24. Cyclotella thinemanni Jurilj var. minuscula Jurilj 

25. Cyclotella verrucosa (Jerkovic) Cado 

26. Cymatopleura solea (Brébisson) W.Smith var. obtusata Jurilj 

27. Cymbella juriljii Stojanov 

28. Diploneis budayana (Pantocsek) Jurilj 

29. Diploneis budayana (Pantocsek) Jurilj var. punctata Jurilj 

30. Diploneis heisingeriae Jurilj 

31. Diploneis modica Hustedt 

32. Diploneis ostracodarum (Pantocsek) Jurilj 

33. Diploneis ostracodarum (Pantocsek) Jurilj var. elongata Jurilj 

34. Diploneis praeclara (Pantocsek) Jurilj 

35. Diploneis praeclara (Pantocsek) Jurilj var. densa (Pantocsek) Jurilj 

36. Diploneis tavcarii Jurilj 

37. Epithemia lunata Jurilj 

38. Epithemia lunata Jurilj var. obesa Jurilj 

39. Epithemia zebra (Ehrenberg) Kützing var. fracta Jurilj 

40. Gomphoneis transsilvanica (Pantocsek) Krammer 

41. Gomphonema angustatum (Kützing) Rabenhorst var. linearis (Hustedt) Jurilj 

42. Gomphonema augur Ehrenberg fo. obesum Stojanov 

43. Gomphonema irroratum Hustedt 

44. Gomphonema macedonicum Hustedt 

45. Gomphonema olivaceum (Hornemann) Brébisson var. capitata Jurilj 

46. Gomphonema olivaceum (Hornemann) Brébisson var. fonticola Hustedt 

47. Helissella glabra Jurilj [syn.: Surirella helisela Jurilj] 

48. Klinodiscus obliquus Jurilj 

49. Iconella variabilis Jurilj [syn. Surirella iconella Jurilj] 

50. Navicula acuta Stojanov 

51. Navicula arvensoides Hustedt 

52. Navicula gracilis Ehrenberg fo. parvulo-undosa Cado 

53. Navicula hastata Jurilj 

54. Navicula inclinata Hustedt 

55. Navicula jakovljevici Hustedt 

56. Navicula modica Hustedt 

57. Navicula mollicula Hustedt 

58. Navicula ochridana Hustedt 

59. Navicula perturbata Jurilj 

60. Navicula praeterita Hustedt 

61. Navicula rotunda Hustedt 

62. Navicula rotundata Hustedt 

63. Navicula scutelloides W. Smith ex Gregory var. tenuis Jurilj 

64. Navicula subgastriformis Hustedt 

65. Navicula submitis Hustedt 

66. Navicula submuralis Hustedt 

67. Navicula subrotunda Hustedt 

68. Navicula subrotundata Hustedt 

69. Neidium dubium (Ehrenberg) Cleve var. maius Jurilj 

70. Nitzschia gradifera Hustedt 

71. Nitzschia speciosa Hustedt 

72. Pinnularia nobilis Ehrenberg var. macedonica Stojanov 

137

138 


73. Pinnularia viridis (Nitzsch) Ehrenberg fo. areata Jurilj 

74. Pinnularia viridis (Nitzsch) Ehrenberg fo. brevis Jurilj 

75. Scoliodiscus costatus Jurilj [syn. Plagiodiscus costatus Jurilj] 

76. Scoliodiscus echinatus Jurilj [syn. Plagiodiscus echinatus Jurilj] 

77. Scoliodiscus glaber Jurilj [syn. Plagiodiscus glaber Jurilj] 

78. Spirodiscus obesus Jurilj 

79. Spirodiscus spiralis Jurilj 

80. Stauroneis lychnidis Jurilj 

81. Stauroneis smithii Grunow var. elliptica Hustedt 

82. Surirella biseriata Brébisson var. lineopunctata Jurilj 

83. Surirella costata Jurilj [syn. Surirella cincta Jurilj] 

84. Surirella imbuta Jurilj 

85. Surirella rotunda Jurilj 

EUGLENOPHYTA 

1. Leptocinclis plana Fott 

CHLOROPHYTA 

1. Closterium macedonicum Petkov 

2. Cosmarium planctonicum Petkov 

3. Cosmarium strugense Petkov 

4. Cosmarium subprotumidum Nordstedt var peristerii Petkov 

5. Didymogenes dubia Fott 

6. Dispora vilhelmii Fott 

7. Lagerheimia dofleinii Schröder 

8. Oocystis rhomboidea Fott 

9. Spirogyra drilonensis Petkov 

10. Staurastrum brevispina Brébisson var. prespanse Petkov 

11. Staurastrum hantzschii Reinsch var. major Petkov 

12. Staurastrum macedonicum Petkov 

13. Staurastrum ochridense Petkov 

14. Staurastrum paradoxum Mayer var. osceolense Wolle fo. biradiata Georgevitch 

15. Staurastrum pilealum Delp. var. ressenense Petkov 

16. Staurastrum unguiferum Turner var. prespanese Petkov 

CHAROPHYTA 

1. Chara ohridana Kostic 

Table 2. List of endemics of the higher plant groups. 

No. Scientific Name 

BRYOPSIDA 

MUSCI 

1. Melichopheria paradoxa Herzog 

2. Orthotrichum insiduosum Herzog 

FILICINAE 

1. Asplenium macedonicum Kumm. 

ANGIOSPERMAE 

DICOTYLEDONAE 

1. Alchemilla peristerica Pawl. 

2. Alkanna noneiformis Griseb. 

3. Alkanna pulmonaria Griseb. 

4. Allysum skopjensis Micev. 

5. Alyssum bargalense Micev.


6. Alyssum debarensis Micev. 

7. Alyssum gevgelicensis Micev. 

8. Alyssum kavadarensis Micev. 

9. Alyssum serpentinum Micev. 

10. Armeria vandasii Hayek 

11. Astragalus cernjavskii Stoj. 

12. Astragalus gracanini Micev. 

13. Astragalus mariovoensis Micev. 

14. Bupleurum mayeri Micev. 

15. Centaurea cylindrocephala Bornm. 

16. Centaurea demirkapiensis Micev. 

17. Centaurea formanekii Hal. 

18. Centaurea galicicae Micev. 

19. Centaurea grbavacensis (Rohl.) Stoj. et Stef. 

20. Centaurea kavadarensis Micev. 

21. Centaurea kozjakensis Micev. 

22. Centaurea leucomalla Bornm. 

23. Centaurea marmorea Bornm. et Soška 

24. Centaurea rufidula Bornm. 

25. Centaurea skopjensis Micev. 

26. Centaurea soskae Hayek ap. Koš. 

27. Centaurea tomorosii Micev. 

28. Centaurea trescana Micev. 

29. Centaurea wagenitzii Micev. 

30. Centaurea wetsteini Degen & Dörfl. 

31. Corydalis zetterlandii Lind. 

32. Crataegus incana Dzekov 

33. Crataegus sericea Dzekov 

34. Dianthus galicicae Micev. 

35. Dianthus jablanicensis Micev. 

36. Dianthus jacupicensis (Koš.) Mic. 

37. Dianthus jugoslavicus Micev. 

38. Dianthus kajmaktzalanicus Micev. 

39. Dianthus kapinensis Markg. et Lindtn. 

40. Dianthus macedonicus Micev. 

41. Dianthus ochridanus Micev. 

42. Dianthus prilepensis Micev. 

43. Dianthus skopjensis Micev. 

44. Dianthus vodnensis Micev. 

45. Edrayanthus horvatii Lakuš. 

46. Ferulago macedonica Mic. et Mayer 

47. Genista fukarekiana Micev. 

48. Hedysarum macedonicum Bornm. 

49. Helichrysum zivojinii Cernj. et Soška 

50. Heptaptera macedonica (Bornm.) Tutin 

51. Hesperis macedonica Adam. 

52. Hypericum dimoniei Vel. 

53. Knautia caroli-rechingeri Micev. 

54. Laserpitium ochridanum Micev. 

55. Micromeria kosaninii Šilic 

56. Moehringia minutiflora Bornm. 

57. Nepeta ernesti-mayeri Dikl. et Nikolic 

58. Nepeta macedonica Micev. 

59. Onobrychis degenii Dörfler 

60. Pedicularis ferdinandii Bornm. 

139

140 


61. Potentilla macedonica Micev. 

62. Potentilla pletvarensis Micev. 

63. Potentilla suskalovicii Adam. 

64. Potentilla topolkae Micev. 

65. Potentilla tridentula Vel. 

66. Potentilla velenovskyi Hayek 

67. Salvia jurisicii Košan. 

68. Sambucus deborensis Koš. 

69. Satureja adamovicii Šilic 

70. Satureja formanekiana Šilic 

71. Saxifraga grisebachii Degen et Dörfl. 

72. Saxifraga karadzicensis (Degen. et Koš.) Bornm. 

73. Scrophularia emi Penzes 

74. Sempervivum galicicum Micev. 

75. Sempervivum klepae Micev. 

76. Sempervivum octopodes Turr. 

77. Sempervivum thompsonianum Wale 

78. Seseli vandasii Hayek 

79. Silene horvatii Micev. 

80. Silene paeoniensis Bornm. 

81. Silene prilepensis Micev. 

82. Silene schmuckeri Wettst. 

83. Silene viscariopsis Bornm. 

84. Stachys babunensis Micev. 

85. Stachys macedonica Micev. 

86. Taraxacum apiculatoides Malecky 

87. Thesium macedonicum Hendr. 

88. Thymus alsarensis Ronn. 

89. Thymus karadzicensis Matev. et Micev. 

90. Thymus oehmianus Ronn. et Soška 

91. Thymus skopjensis Micev. et Matev. 

92. Tragopogon kindigeri Adam. 

93. Verbascum adenantum Bornm. 

94. Verbascum chrysanthum Murb. 

95. Verbascum herzogi Bornm. 

96. Verbascum lesnovoensis Micev. 

97. Verbascum macedonicum Koš. et Murbeck 

98. Verbascum pachyurum Bornm. 

99. Veronica kindlii Adam. 

100. Viola allchariensis Beck 

101. Viola arsenica Beck 

102. Viola babunensis Erben. 

103. Viola bornmulleri Erben 

104. Viola gostivarensis (W. Becker et Bornm.) Bornm. 

105. Viola halacsyana Deg. et Dorfl. (V. allchariensis x arsenica) 

106. Viola herzogi Bornm. 

107. Viola ivonis Erben 

108. Viola schariensis Erben 

109. Viola slavikii Form. 

MONOCOTYLEDONAE 

1. Aira scoparia Adam. 

2. Anthoxanthum pauciflorum Adam. 

3. Colchicum macedonicum Košanin 

4. Tulipa marianae Lindtn. 

5. Tulipa scardica Bornm.

Phylum Protozoa 


ANNEX 2 

Endemic species of fauna in the Republic of Macedonia 

No. Scientific name 

Sarcodina – Rhizopoda 

1. Centropyxis ohridensis Golemanski, 1967 + 

2. Psammonobiotus communis Golemanski, 1967 + 

Ciliophora 

1. Anoplophrya cavernosa Georgevic, 1941 + 

2. Anoplophrya longinuclea Georgevic, 1941 + 

3. Anoplophrya ochridensis Georgevic, 1941 + 

4. Anoplophrya pelmatoida Georgievic, 1941 + 

5. Anoplophrya pilosa Georgevic, 1941 + 

6. Anoplophrya stromboides Georgevic, 1941 + 

7. Anoplophrya tchadoi de Puytorac, 1957 + 

8. Butschliella longicollis Georgievic, 1941 + 

9. Butschliella subaculeata Georgevic, 1941 + 

10. Cotylothigma heidenreichi de Puytorac, 1957 + 

11. Cotylothigma limnodrili Meier, + 

12. Georgevitchiella aculeata Georgevic, 1941 + 

13. Hoplitophrya georgievitchi de Puytorac, 1957 + 

14. Intoshellina macrogongylos de Puytorac, 1957 + 

15. Intoshellina sapkarevi de Puytorac, 1957 + 

16. Juxtaradiophrya ocevskii de Puytorac, 1957 + 

17. Juxtaradiophrya ohridana de Puytorac, 1957 + 

18. Maupasella criodrili Heid, + 

19. Metalostomum ochridense Georgevic, 1941 + 

20. Metaradiophrya criodrili Georgevic, 1950 + 

21. Ochridanus kozarovi de Puytorac, 1957 + 

22. Ochridanus ocellatus Georgevic, 1950 + 

23. Protoradiophryopsis ochridensis Georgievic, 1941 + 

24. Ptychostomum jirilomi de Puytorac, 1957 + 

25. Ptychostomum meieri de Puytorac, 1957 + 

26. Ptychostomum ochridanus de Puytorac, 1957 + 

27. Ptychostomum stankovici de Puytorac, 1957 + 

28. Radiophrya ohridana de Puytorac, 1957 + 

29. Radiophrya pachycallima Georgevic, 1941 + 

30. Radiophrya pachycallima Georgievic, 1941 + 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Protozoa 32 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 

Other Localities 

141

Phylum Porifera 

142 



Poriphera 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Eunapius carteri dojranensis Hadzisce, 1953 + 

2. Ochridospongia interlithonis Gilbert & Hadzisce, 1982 + 

3. Ochridospongia rotunda Arndt, 1937 + 

4. Ochridospongilla stankovici Gilbert & Hadzisce, 1982 + 

5. Spongilla prespensis Hadzisce, 1953 + 

6. Spongilla stankovici Arndt, 1939 + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Porifera 6 

Phylum Plathelminthes 


Tricladida (Plathelminthes: Turbellaria) 

Ohrid Lake 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Dendrocoelum adenodactylosum (Stankovic & Komarek, 1927) + + 

2. Dendrocoelum albidum Kenk, 1978 + 

3. Dendrocoelum cruciferum (Stankovic, 1960) + 

4. Dendrocoelum decoratum Kenk, 1978 + 

5. Dendrocoelum dorsivittatum Kenk, 1978 + 

6. Dendrocoelum jablanicensis Stankovic & Komarek, 1927 + 

7. Dendrocoelum komareki (Stankovic, 1935) + 

8. Dendrocoelum lacustre (Stankovic, 1932) + 

9. Dendrocoelum lychnidicum (Stankovic, 1969) + 

10. Dendrocoelum maculatum (Stankovic & Komarek, 1927) + 

11. Dendrocoelum magnum (Stankovic, 1969) + 

12. Dendrocoelum minimum Kenk, 1978 + 

13. Dendrocoelum ochridense (Stankovic & Komarek, 1927) + 

14. Dendrocoelum porfirevi Krstanovski, 1994 + 

15. Dendrocoelum prespense (Stankovic, 1969) + 

16. Dendrocoelum sanctinaumi (Stankovic & Komarek, 1927) + 

17. Dendrocoelum sapkarevi Krstanovski, 1994 + 

18. Dendrocoelum sinisai Kenk, 1978 + 

19. Dendrocoelum tockoi Krstanovski, 1994 + 

20. Dendrocoelum translucidum (Stankovic, 1978) + 

21. Phagocata macedonica (Stankovic, 1938) + 

22. Phagocata maculata (Stankovic, 1938) + 

23. Phagocata ochridana (Stankovic & Komarek, 1927) + 

24. Phagocata stankovici (Reisinger, 1960) + 

25. Phagocata undulata (Stankovic, 1960) + 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 


Other Localities


Rhabdocoela (Plathelminthes: Turbellaria) 

1. Castrada ochridense An Der Lan, 1939 + 

2. Castradella unidentata An Der Lan, 1939 + 

3. Dalyellia minima An Der Lan, 1939 + 

4. Jovanella balcanica An Der Lan, 1939 + 

5. Macrostomum leptos An Der Lan, 1939 + 

6. Mesovortex stankovici An Der Lan, 1939 + 

7. Opistomum macedonicum An Der Lan, 1939 + 

8. Proamphibolella simplex An Der Lan, 1939 + 

9. Proamphibolella st.naumi An Der Lan, 1939 + 

10. Promacrostomum paradoxum An Der Lan, 1939 + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Plathelminthes 35 

Phylum Nemathelminthes 


Nematoda (Nemathelminthes) 

1. Neochromadora trilineata (Schneider, 1940) + 

2. Punctodora ochridensis (Schneider, 1940) + 

3. Theristus subsetosus (Schneider, 1940) + 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Nemathelminthes 3 

Phylum Mollusca 


Aquatic Gastropods (Mollusca: Gastropoda) 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Acroloxus improvisus Polinski, 1929 + 

2. Acroloxus macedonicus Hadžišce, 1956 + 

3. Ancylus lapicidus Hubendick, 1960 + 

4. Ancylus scalariformis Stankovic & Radoman, 1953 + 

5. Ancylus tapirulus Polinski, 1929 + 

6. Baglivia karamani Kušcer, 1937 + 

7. Bythinella drimica drimica Radoman, 1976 + 

8. Chilopyrgula sturanyi Brusina, 1896 + 

9. Dolapia ornata (Radoman, 1956 + 

10. Ginaia munda munda (Sturany, 1894) + 

11. Ginaia munda sublitoralis Radoman, 1978 + 

Ohrid Lake 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 



143

144 


12. Gocea ohridana Hadžišce, 1956 + 

13. Graecoanatolica macedonica Radoman & Stankovic, 1978 + 

14. Grossuana serbica macedonica Radoman, 1973 + 

15. Grossuana serbica scupica Radoman, 1973 + 

16. Gyraulus (Gyraulus) albidus Radoman, 1953 + 

17. Gyraulus (Gyraulus) crenophilus Hubendick & Radoman, 1959 + 

18. Gyraulus (Gyraulus) fontinalis Hubendick & Radoman, 1959 + 

19. Gyraulus (Gyraulus) lychnidicus Hesse, 1928 + 

20. Gyraulus (Gyraulus) paradoxus Sturany, 1928 + 

21. Gyraulus (Gyraulus) stankovici Hadžišce, 1953 + 

22. Gyraulus (Gyraulus) trapezoides Polinski, 1929 + 

23. Horatia macedonica (Kušcer, 1936) + 

24. Horatia novoselensis Radoman, 1966 + 

25. Iglica macedonica Karaman, 1935 + 

26. Limnaea (Radix) pinteri Schütt, 1974 + 

27. Lyhnidia gjorgjevici Hadžišce, 1956 + 

28. Lyhnidia hadzii Hadžišce, 1956 + 

29. Lyhnidia karamani Hadžišce, 1956 + 

30. Lyhnidia stankovici Hadžišce, 1956 + 

31. Lyhnidia sublitoralis (Radoman, 1967) + 

32. Lymnaea relicta Polinski, 1929 + 

33. Macedopyrgula pavlovici (Polinski, 1929) + 

34. Macedopyrgula wagneri (Polinski, 1929) + 

35. Micromelania relicta Kušcer, 1937 + 

36. Micropyrgula stankovici Polinski, 1929 + 

37. Neofossarulus stankovici Polinski, 1929 + 

38. Ohridohauffenia depressa (Radoman, 1965) + 

39. Ohridohauffenia drimica (Radoman, 1964) + 

40. Ohridohauffenia minuta (Radoman, 1955) + 

41. Ohridohauffenia rotonda (Radoman, 1964) + 

42. Ohridohauffenia sanctinaumi Radoman, 1964 + 

43. Ohridohauffenia sublitoralis (Radoman, 1962) + 

44. Ohridohoratia carinata (Radoman, 1956) + 

45. Ohridohoratia pygmaea (Westerlund, 1902) + 

46. Ohridopyrgula macedonica charensis Radoman, 1978 + 

47. Ohridopyrgula macedonica macedonica (Brusina, 1896) + 

48. Ohrigocea karevi Hadžišce, 1956 + 

49. Ohrigocea miladinovorum Hadžišce, 1956 + 

50. Ohrigocea samuili Hadžišce, 1956 + 

51. Ohrigocea stankovici Hadžišce, 1956 + 

52. Orientalina curta kicavica Radoman, 1973 + 

53. Parabythinella macedonica Hadžišce, 1958 + 

54. Planorbis (Crassiplanorbis) presbensis Sturany, 1894 + 

55. Planorbis (Planorbis) macedonicus Sturany, 1894 + 

56. Polinskiola polinskii (Radoman, 1960) + 

57. Polinskiola sturanyi (Westerlund, 1902) + 

58. Prespiana lacustris Radoman, 1973 + 

59. Prespolitorea valvataeformis Radoman, 1973 + 

60. Prespopyrgula prespaensis (Urbanski, 1939) + 

61. Pseudohoratia brusinae (Radoman, 1953) + 

62. Pseudohoratia lacustris (Radoman, 1964) + 

63. Pseudohoratia ohridana (Polinski, 1929) + 

64. Pyrgohydrobia grochmalickii (Polinski, 1929) + 

65. Pyrgohydrobia jablanicensis Radoman, 1955 + 

66. Pyrgohydrobia sanctinaumi Radoman, 1955 +


67. Stankovicia baicaliformis Polinski, 1939 + 

68. Strugia ohridana Radoman, 1973 + 

69. Trachyohridia filocincta Polinski, 1939 + 

70. Valvata (Cincinna) stenoterma Polinski, 1929 + 

71. Valvata (Costovalvata) hirsutecostata Polinski, 1929 + 

72. Valvata (Costovalvata) rhabdota Sturany, 1894 + 

73. Valvata (Ohridotropidina) relicta Polinski, 1929 + 

74. Xestopyrgula dybowskii Polinski, 1929 + 

75. Zaumia kusceri Hadžišce, 1956 + 

76. Zaumia sanctizaumi (Radoman, 1964) + 

Terrestrial Gastropods (Mollusca: Gastropoda) 

1. Delima dofleini Wagner, 1928 + 

2. Delima perstriata Wagner, 1919 + 

3. Delima platistoma (Kust., 1847) + 

4. Deroceras turcicum (Simroth, 1894) + 

5. Gyralina (Gyralina) mirabilis Pinter & Riedel, 1973 + 

6. Gyralina (Gyralina) rempei Guttenberger, 1975 + 

7. Gyralina (Gyralina) velkovrhi Riedel, 1984 + 

8. Gyralina (Spelaeopatula) gyralinaeformis (Riedel, 1976) + 

9. Gyralina (Spelaeopatula) korabensis (Riedel, 1973) + 

10. Laciniaria rebeli (Sturany, 1897) + 

11. Lehmania bruneri (Wagner, 1931) + 

12. Lehmania szigethyae Wiktor, 1975 + 

13. Limax (Limax) conemenosi Boottger, 1882 + 

14. Limax (Limax) graecus Simroth, 1889 + 

15. Limax (Limax) wohlberedti Simroth, 1900 + 

16. Limax (Limax) cephalonicus Simroth, 1886 + 

17. Malacolomax mrazeki (Simroth, 1904) + 

18. Tandonia albanica Soos, 1924 + 

19. Tandonia kusceri (Wagner, 1931) + 

20. Tandonia macedonica Rahle, 1974 + 

21. Tandonia serbica (Wagner, 1930) + 

Bivalvia (Mollusca: Bivalvia) 

1. Pisidium edlaueri Kuiper, 1960 + 

2. Pisidium maasseni Kuiper, 1987 + 

3. Pisidium subtruncatum recalvum Kuiper, 1960 + 

4. Sphaerium parenzani Gambetta, + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Mollusca: 101 

145

Phylum Annelida 

146 



Oligochaeta (Annelida) 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Allolobophora vardarensis Sapkarev, 1991 + 

2. Aporrectodea smaragdinoides Sapkarev, 1989 + 

3. Criodrilus ochridensis Gjorgjevic, 1949 + 

4. Dendrobaena alpina mavronensis Sapkarev, 1971 + 

5. Dendrobaena alpina popi Sapkarev, 1971 + 

6. Dendrobaena kozuvensis Sapkarev, 1971 + 

7. Dendrobaena macedonica Mrsic, 1991 + 

8. Dendrobaena olimpica pelisterica Sapkarev, 2001 + 

9. Dendrobaena sasensis Sapkarev, 1977 + 

10. Eiseniella ochridana ochridana (Cernosvitov, 1931) + 

11. Eiseniella ochridana profunda (Cernosvitov, 1931) + 

12. Haplotaxis gordioides dubius Hrabe, 1931 + 

13. Helodrilus balcanicus Cernosvitov, 1931 + 

14. Isochaeta dojranensis Hrabe, 1958 + 

15. Italobalkaniona demirkapiae (Karaman Sp., 1969) + 

16. Italobalkaniona macedonica (Sapkarev, 1973) + 

17. Italobalkaniona pyrenaicoides (Sapkarev, 1977) + 

18. Italobalkaniona stankovici (Sapkarev, 1971) + 

19. Italobalkaniona treskavensis Mrsic, 1991 + 

20. Lamprodrilus michaelseni Hrabe, 1929 + 

21. Lamprodrilus pygmaeus intermedia Hrabe, 1931 + 

22. Lamprodrilus pygmaeus ochridanus Hrabe, 1931 + 

23. Monopylephorus montanus Hrabe, 1962 + 

24. Peloscolex cernosvitovi Hrabe, 1953 + 

25. Peloscolex stankovici litoralis Sapkarev, 1953 + 

26. Peloscolex stankovici stankovici Hrabe, 1931 + 

27. Peloscolex stankovici sublitoralis Hrabe, 1931 + 

28. Peloscolex tenuis Hrabe, 1931 + + 

29. Potamothrix isochaetus Hrabe, 1931 + 

30. Potamothrix ochridanus Hrabe, 1931 + 

31. Potamothrix prespaensis Hrabe, 1931 + 

32. Psammoryctes ochridanus ochridanus Hrabe, 1931 + + 

33. Psammoryctes ochridanus variabilis Hrabe, 1931 + + 

34. Psammoryctes oligosetosus Hrabe, 1931 + 

35. Rhizodrilus montanus Hrabe, 1962 

36. Rhynchelmis komareki breviristra Hrabe, 1931 + 

37. Rhynchelmis komareki komareki Hrabe, 1927 + 

38. Serbiona dofleini udei Sapkarev, 1991 + 

39. Stylodrilus leucocephalus Hrabe, 1931 + 

Branchiobdellidae (Annelida incertae sedis) 

1. Branchiobdella capito Georgevitch, 1955 + 

2. Cambarincola dojranensis Georgevitch, 1955 + 

3. Pterodrilus prion Georgevitch, 1955 + 

4. Xironodrilus crassus Georgevitch, 1955 + 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 

Other Localities


Hirudinea (Annelida) 

1. Dina eturrshem Sket, 1988 + 

2. Dina krilata Sket, 1988 + 

3. Dina kuzmani Sapkarev, 1990 + 

4. Dina lepinja Sket & Sapkarev, 1986 + 

5. Dina lyhnida Sapkarev, 1990 + 

6. Dina ohridana Sket, 1968 + 

7. Dina profunda Sapkarev, 1990 + 

8. Dina svilesta Sket, 1988 + 

9. Glossiphonia complanata maculosa Sket, 1968 + 

10. Glossiphonia pulchella Sket, 1968 + 

11. Piscicola (Cystobranchus) pavlovskii (Sket, 1968) + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Annelida 54 

Phylum Arthropoda: Subphylum Chelicerata 


Pseudoscorpiones (Chelicerata: Arachnida) 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Allochernes balcanicus Hadži, 1937 + 

2. Atemnus balcanicus Hadži, 1937 + 

3. Chthonius (Chthonius) macedonicus Curcic, 1972 + 

4. Chthonius (Chthonius) ognjankae Curcic et al., 1997 + 

5. Chthonius (Chthonius) ohridanus Curcic et al., 1997 + 

6. Chthonius (Chthonius) radigost Curcic et al., 1997 + 

7. Chthonius (Chthonius) tenuichelatus Hadži, 1937 + 

8. Chthonius (Chthonius) troglobius Hadži, 1937 + 

9. Chthonius (Chthonius) vodan Curcic et al., 1997 + 

10. Chthonius (Chthonius) zmaj Curcic et al., 1997 + 

11. Chthonius (Ephippiochthonius) kupalo Curcic et al., 1997 + 

12. Chthonius (Ephippiochthonius) lychnidis Curcic et al., 1997 + 

13. Chthonius (Ephippiochthonius) microtuberculatus Hadži, 1937 + 

14. Chthonius (Ephippiochthonius) serbicus (Hadži, 1937) + 

15. Chthonius (Ephippiochthonius) tuberculatus Hadži, 1937 + 

16. Chthonius (Ephippiochthonius) vid Curcic et al., 1997 + 

17. Chthonius (Globochthonius) perun Curcic et al., 1997 + 

18. Chthonius (Neochthonius) karamanianus Hadži, 1937 + 

19. Neobisium (Blothrus) karamani (Hadži, 1929) + 

20. Neobisium (Blothrus) ohridanum Hadži, 1940 + 

21. Neobisium (Neobisium) meridieserbicum Hadži, 1937 + 

22. Neobisium (Neobisium) muscorum balcanicum Hadži, 1937 + 

23. Neobisium golemanskyi Curcic & Dimitrijevic, 2001 + 

24. Roncus (Parablothrus) parablothroides Hadži, 1937 + 

25. Roncus jaoreci Curcic, 1984 + 

26. Roncus rujevit Curcic & Legg, 1994 + 

27. Roncus stankokaramani Curcic & Dimitijevic, 2001 + 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 


147

148 


Opiliones (Chelicerata: Arachnida) 

1. Astrobunus macedonicus Hadži, 1973 + 

2. Bolea ephippiata Hadži, 1973 + 

3. Metadasylobus macedonicus Hadži, 1973 + 

4. Metaphalangium propinquum denticulatum Hadži, 1973 + 

5. Mitostoma (Mitostoma) macedonicum Hadži, 1973 + 

6. Mitostoma (Mitostoma) olgae zorae Hadži, 1973 + 

7. Mitostoma (Mitostoma) zmajevicae Hadži, 1973 + 

8. Nemastoma (Dromedostoma) bolei Hadži, 1973 + 

9. Nemastoma (Dromedostoma) carneluttii Hadži, 1973 + 

10. Nemastoma (Dromedostoma) multisignatum Hadži, 1973 + 

11. Nemastoma (Dromedostoma) nigrum Hadži, 1973 + 

12. Nemastoma (Lugubrostoma) sarae Hadži, 1973 + 

13. Nemastoma (Nemastoma) amuelleri Roewer, 1951 + 

14. Nemastoma (Nemastoma) gostivarense Hadži, 1973 + 

15. Nemastoma (Nemastoma) macedonicum Hadži, 1973 + 

16. Opilio macedonicus Hadži, 1973 + 

17. Siro gjorgjevici Hadži, 1933 + 

18. Siro ohridanus Hadži, 1973 + 

19. Stankiella montana Hadži, 1973 + 

Aranea (Chelicherata: Arachnida) 

1. Gnaphosa expilator Drensky, 1929 + 

2. Gonatium strugaense Drensky, 1929 + 

3. Hypomma brevitibiale (Wunderlich, 1980) + 

4. Lycosa macedonica (Giltay, 1932) + 

5. Macedoniella karamani Drensky, 1935 + 

6. Philodromus hadzii Silhavy, 1944 + 

7. Philodromus pelagonus Silhavy, 1944 + 

8. Poecilochroa ochridana Drensky, 1929 + 

9. Pterotricha extiabilis Drensky, 1929 + 

10. Theridion peristeri Drensky, 1929 + 

11. Troglohyphantes draconis Deeleman-Reinhold, 1978 + 

12. Troglohyphantes inermis Deeleman-Reinhold, 1978 + 

13. Troglohyphantes kratochvili Drensky, 1935 + 

14. Xysticus tenebrosus ochridensis Silhavy, 1944 + 

15. Zora affinis Drensky, 1936 + 

16. Zora prespaensis Drensky, 1929 + 

Acarina (Chelicerata: Arachnida) 

1. Acherontacarus halacaroides Viets, 1936 + 

2. Atractides graecus (Viets, 1936) + 

3. Atractides nodipalpis inflatipalpis Viets, 1936 + 

4. Atractides petkovskii Schwoerbel, 1963 + 

5. Copidognathus tectiporus profundus Viets, 1936 + 

6. Kongsbergia hansvietsi Viets, 1936 + 

7. Lebertia macedonica Viets, 1936 + 

8. Stygohalacarus scupiensis Viets, 1936 + 

9. Torrenticola dudichi cognata Viets, 1936 + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Subphylum Chelicerata 71


Phylum Arthropoda: Subphylum Branchiata 


Cyclopoida (Crustacea: Copepoda) 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Allocyclops kieferi Petkovski, 1971 + 

2. Allocyclops minutissimus (Kiefer, 1933) + 

3. Cyclops ochridanus Kiefer, 1932 + 

4. Diacyclops ichnusoides Petkovski & Karanovic, 1997 + 

5. Diacyclops pelagonicus Petkovski, 1971 + 

6. Diacyclops stygius macedonicus Petkovski, 1954 + 

7. Microcyclops varicans dojranensis Petkovski, 1954 + 

8. Ochridacyclops arndti Kiefer, 1937 + 

9. Ochridacyclops arndti prespensis Petkovski, 1959 + 

10. Reidcyclops trajani (Reid & Strayer, 1994) + 

Harpactioida (Crustacea : Copepoda) 

1. Bryocamptus mirus Petkovski & Karanovic, 1997 + 

2. Elaphoidella brevipes Chappuis, 1937 + 

3. Parastenocaris balcanica Petkovski, 1959 + 

4. Parastenocaris rascana Petkovski, 1959 + 

5. Parastenocaris similis macedonica Petkovski, 1959 + 

6. Speleocamptus incertus Petkovski, 1956 + 

Ostracoda (Branchiata: Crustacea) 

1. Candona alta Klie, 1939 + 

2. Candona dedelica Petkovski, 1969 + 

3. Candona depressa Klie, 1939 + 

4. Candona expansa Mikulic, 1961 + 

5. Candona formosa Mikulic, 1961 + 

6. Candona goricensis Mikulic, 1961 + 

7. Candona hadzistei Petkovski, Scharf & Keyser, 2002 + 

8. Candona hartmanni Petkovski, 1969 + 

9. Candona holmesi Petkovski, 1960 + 

10. Candona jordae Petkovski, Scharf & Keyser, 2002 + 

11. Candona litoralis Mikulic, 1961 + 

12. Candona lychnitis Petkovski, 1969 + 

13. Candona macedonica Mikulic, 1961 + 

14. Candona margaritana Mikulic, 1961 + 

15. Candona marginata Klie, 1942 + 

16. Candona marginatoides Petkovski, 1960 + + 

17. Candona media Klie, 1939 + 

18. Candona ohrida Holmes, 1937 + 

19. Candona ovalis Mikulic, 1961 + 

20. Candona trapeziformis Klie, 1939 + 

21. Candona triangulata (Klie, 1939) + 

22. Candona vidua Klie, 1942 + 

23. Cypria karamani Petkovski, 1976 + 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 


149

150 


24. Cypria obliqua Klie, 1939 + 

25. Eucandona krstici (Petkovski, 1969) + 

26. Eucipris bronsteini Petkovski, 1959 + 

27. Eucypris heinrichi Diebel & Pietrzeniuk, 1978 + 

28. Eucypris kurtdiebeli Petkovski & Keyser, 1997 + 

29. Heterocypris erikae Petkovski & Keyser, 1995 + 

30. Heterocypris gevgelica Petkovski, Scharf & Keyser, 2000 + 

31. Leptocythere angulata Klie, 1939 + 

32. Leptocythere prespensis Petkovski, 1959 + + 

33. Leptocythere proboscidea Klie, 1939 + 

34. Paralimnocythere alata (Klie, 1939) + 

35. Paralimnocythere diebeli (Petkovski, 1969) + 

36. Paralimnocythere georgevitschi (Petkovski, 1960) + 

37. Paralimnocythere karamani (Petkovski, 1960) + 

38. Paralimnocythere ochridense (Klie, 1934) + 

39. Paralimnocythere slavei (Petkovski, 1969) + 

40. Paralimnocythere umbonata (Klie, 1939) + 

41. Physocypria inversa (Klie, 1941) + 

42. Pseudocandona slavei (Petkovski, 1969) + 

43. Psychrodromus peristericus (Petkovski, 1959) + 

44. Stenocypris macedonica Petkovski & Meisch, 1996 + 

Anostraca (Crustacea: Branchiopoda) 

1. Chirocephalus pelagonicus Petkovski, 1986 + 

Cladocera (Crustacea: Branchiopoda) 

1. Alona smirnovi Petkovski & Flossner, 1972 + 

Isopoda (Crustacea: Malacostraca) 

1. Alpioniscus (Alpioniscus) vejdovskyi (Frankenberger, 1939) + 

2. Alpioniscus (Alpioniscus) boldorii macedonicus Buturovic, 1954 + 

3. Alpioniscus (Alpioniscus) karamani damjanicus Buturovic, 1954 + 

4. Alpioniscus (Alpioniscus) karamani karamani Buturovic, 1954 + 

5. Alpioniscus (Macedonethes) skopjensis Buturovic, 1955 + 

6. Alpioniscus slatinensis Buturovic, 1955 + 

7. Armadillidium obenbergeri Frankenberger, 1941 + 

8. Armadillidium storkani Frankenberger, 1941 + 

9. Asellus arnautovici arnautovici Remy, 1932 + 

10. Asellus arnautovici elongatus Karaman, 1953 + 

11. Asellus gjorgjevici gjorgevici Karaman, 1933 + 

12. Asellus gjorgjevici litoralis Karaman, 1933 + 

13. Asellus montenigrinus macedonicus Karaman, 1955 + 

14. Asellus remyi acutangulus Karaman, 1953 + 

15. Asellus remyi nudus Karaman, 1953 + 

16. Asellus remyi remyi Monod, 1932 + 

17. Epironiscellus multicostatus Karaman, 1961 + 

18. Hyloniscus pilifer Verhoeff, 1933 + 

19. Hyloniscus zorae Karaman & Cemerlic, 1999 + 

20. Macedoniscus vardarensis Buturovic, 1954 + 

21. Microcerberus stygius Karaman, 1933 + 

22. Microcharon latus latus Karaman, 1934 + 

23. Microcharon major Karaman, 1954 + 

24. Microcharon profundalis kumanovensis Karaman, 1940 +


25. Microcharon profundalis profundalis Karaman, 1940 + 

26. Microcharon stygius stygius (Karaman, 1933) + 

27. Microparasellus puteanus Karaman, 1933 + 

28. Monocyphoniscus loritzi Karaman, 1966 + 

29. Platiarthrus schobli stadleri Karaman, 1961 + 

30. Porcellio parenzani Arcangeli, 1931 + 

31. Porcellium productum pallidum Frankenberger, 1940 + 

32. Porcellium productum productum Frankenberger, 1940 + 

33. Porcellium productum storkani Frankenberger, 1940 + 

34. Protracheoniscus komareki Frankenberger, 1940 + 

35. Stenasellus skopljensis skopljensis Karaman, 1937 + 

36. Trachelipus dimorphus Frankenberger, 1940 + 

37. Trachelipus phaecorum (Verhoeff, 1901) + 

38. Trachelipus squamuliger (Verhoeff, 1907) + 

39. Trichoniscus semigranulatus Buturovic, 1954 + 

40. Vardaroniscus tetraceratus Buturovic, 1955 + 

Amphipoda (Crustacea: Malacostraca) 

1. Balcanella acherontis Karaman S. 1933 + 

2. Balcanella macedonica Karaman S. 1959 + 

3. Balcanella petkovskii (Karaman S. 1957) + 

4. Bogidiella glacialis (Karaman S.1959) + 

5. Bogidiella longiflagellum (Karaman S.1959) + 

6. Bogidiella skopljensis (Karaman S.1933) + 

7. Gammarus albimanus (Karaman G.1968) + 

8. Gammarus halilicae (Karaman G.1969) + 

9. Gammarus ochridensis abyssalis Karaman S.1931 + 

10. Gammarus ochridensis ochridensis (Schäferna, 1925) + 

11. Gammarus rambouseki (Karaman S.1931) + 

12. Gammarus triacanthus prespensis (Karaman S & G.1959) + 

13. Gammarus triacanthus semiarmatus (Karaman S. 1929) + 

14. Gammarus triacanthus strumicae (Karaman S. & G.1959) + 

15. Hadzia gjorgjevici gjorgjevici Karaman S.1932 + 

16. Niphargus bitoljensis Karaman S.1943 + 

17. Niphragus jovanovici jovanovici Karaman S.1931 + 

18. Niphragus macedonicus Karaman S.1929 + 

19. Niphragus maximus maximus Karaman S.1929 + 

20. Niphragus maximus petkovskii Karaman G.1963 + 

21. Niphragus ohridanus fontophilus Karaman S.1943 + 

22. Niphragus ohridanus ohridanus Karaman S.1929 + 

23. Niphragus pancici dojranensis Karaman G.1960 + 

24. Niphragus pancici pancici Karaman S.1929 + 

25. Niphragus parvus Karaman S.1943 + 

26. Niphragus pellagonicus Karaman S.1943 + 

27. Niphragus sanctinaumi Karaman S.1943 + 

28. Niphragus skopljensis Karaman S.1929 + 

29. Niphragus stankoi Karaman G. 1973 + 

30. Niphragus tauri osogovensis Karaman S. 1959 + 

31. Niphragus velesensis Karaman S. 1943 + 

32. Niphragus vodnensis banjanus Karaman S. 1943 + 

33. Niphragus vodnensis kosanini Karaman S. 1943 + 

34. Niphragus vodnensis vodnensis Karaman S. 1943 + 

35. Synurella longidactylus Karaman S. 1929 + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Subphylum Branchiata 137 

151

152 


Phylum Arthropoda: Subphylum Tracheata 


Tracheata: Myriapoda 

Diplopoda 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Acanthopetalum albanicum (Verhoeff, 1923) + 

2. Acanthopetalum macedonicum (Verhoeff, 1923) + 

3. Acanthopetalum thessalorum lychnitis (Verhoeff, 1932) + 

4. Albanoglomus ljubotensis Attems, 1929 + 

5. Brachydesmus (Brachydesmus) macedonicus Mrsic, 1988 + 

6. Brachydesmus henrikengoffi Mrsic, 1993 + 

7. Brachydesmus ljubotensis Attems, 1912 + 

8. Brachydesmus peristerensis Verhoeff, 1932 + 

9. Leptomastigoiulus hamuligerus (Verhoeff, 1932) + 

10. Macedoiulus storkani Verhoeff, 1932 + 

11. Megaphyllum crassum ( Attems, 1929) + 

12. Megaphyllum herculeus (Verhoeff, 1901) + 

13. Ochridaphe albanica (Verhoeff, 1932) + 

14. Paeonisoma faucium Verhoeff, 1932 + 

15. Polydesmus juergengruberi Mrsic, 1993 + 

16. Polydesmus wardaranus Verhoeff, 1937 + 

17. Polyxenus macedonicus Verohoeff, 1952 + 

18. Schizmohetera curcici Makarov, 2001 + 

19. Schizmohetera sketi Mrsic, 1987 + 

20. Typhloiulus (Typhloiulus) albanicus Attems, 1929 + 

21. Xestoiulus (Oroiulus) macedonicus (Attems, 1927) + 

22. Xestoiulus (Oroiulus) storkani (Verhoeff, 1932) + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Class Myriapoda 22 

Tracheata: Insecta 

Collembola 

1. Tomocerus skopjensis Curcic & Lucic, 2001 + 

Ephemeroptera 

1. Chorterpes balcanica Ikonomov, + 

2. Ephemerella ikonomovi Putz, 1972 + 

3. Ephemerella maculocaudata Ikonomov, + 

4. Habrophlebia konjarensis Ikonomov, 1963 + 

5. Paraleptophlebia lacustris Ikonomov, 1962 + 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 

Other Localities


Plecoptera 

1. Brachyptera macedonica Ikonomov, 1983 + 

2. Capnioneura balcanica macedonica Ikonomov, 1978 + 

3. Isoperla breviptera Ikonomov, 1980 + 

4. Isoperla vevcianensis Ikonomov, 1980 + 

5. Nemoura peristeri Aubert, 1963 + 

6. Nemoura zwiski Sivec, 1979 + 

7. Protonemura miacense Ikonomov, 1983 + 

8. Rhabdiopteryx doiranensis Ikonomov, 1983 + 

9. Taeniopteryx fusca Ikonomov, 1980 + 

10. Taeniopteryx stankovici Ikonomov, 1978 + 

Trychoptera 

1. Rhyacophila loxalis Schmid, 1979 + 

Hemiptera (Homoptera) 

1. Cicadetta montana macedonica Schedl, 1999 + 

2. Edwardsiana mirjanae Jankovic, 1978 + 

Orthoptera 

1. Ameles heldreichi Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1982 + 

2. Andreiniimon nuptialis (Karny, 1918) + 

3. Metrioptera knipperi (Ramme, 1951) + 

4. Oropodisma macedonica Ramme, 1951 + 

5. Pholidoptera aptera gjorgjevici Karaman, 1960 + 

6. Pholidoptera stankoi Karaman, 1960 + 

7. Platycleis macedonica (Berland et Chopard, 1922) + 

8. Poecilimon chopardi Ramme, 1933 + 

9. Poecilimon macedonicus Ramme, 1926 + 

10. Poecilimon mavrovi Karaman, 1958 + 

11. Poecilimon pancici Karaman, 1958 + 

12. Poecilimon vodnensis Karaman, 1958 + 

13. Troglophilus lazaropolensis Karaman, 1958 + 

Psocoptera 

1. Liposcelis macedonicus Günther, 1980 + 

Coleoptera (Coleoptera aquatica) 

1. Hydraena macedonica D'Orch, + 

2. Hydraena meschniggi Pretner, + 

3. Hydraena pulsata D'Orch, + 

4. Hydraena simonidea D'Orch, + 

5. Potamonectes macedonicus Gueorgiev, + 

Coleoptera (Carabidae) 

1. Calathus purkynei (Maran, 1935) + 

2. Duvalius gogalai Pretner, 1963 + 

3. Duvalius macedonicus(J. Müller, 1917) + 

4. Duvalius peristericus (J. Müller, 1914) + 

5. Duvalius vignai Casale, 1983 + 

6. Nebria macedonica (Maran, 1938) + 

153

154 


7. Pachycarus macedonicus Guèorguiev & Guèorguiev, 1997 + 

8. Tapinopterus comita Jedlicka, 1935 + 

9. Tapinopterus heyrovskii Jedlicka, 1939 + 

10. Tapinopterus monastirensis Reitter, 1913 + 

11. Tapinopterus purkynei Jedlicka, 1928 + 

12. Tapinopterus rambousekianus Maran, 1933 + 

13. Trechus goebli Breit, 1913 + 

14. Trechus hajeki Reitter, 1913 + 

15. Trechus midas Jeannel, 1927 + 

16. Trechus pachycerus Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

Coleoptera (Catopidae) 

1. Albaniola rambouseki Knirsch, 1931 + 

2. Attaephilus niger Z. Karaman, 1953 + 

3. Catops macedonicus Z. Karaman, 1953 + 

4. Catops mavrovi Z. Karaman, 1958/59 + 

5. Ceutophyes bukoviki Z. Karaman, 1968 + 

6. Ceutophyes karamani Jeannel, 1924 + 

7. Ceutophyes lazaropolensis Z. Karaman, 1954 + 

8. Choleva macedonica Z. Karaman, 1954 + 

9. Eocatops skopjensis Z. Karaman, 1957 + 

10. Hussonela ovata Z. Karaman, 1954 + 

11. Leptostagus babunae Z. Karaman, 1954 + 

12. Ochridiola marinae Sbordoni, 1971 + 

13. Petkovskiella stygia (Z. Karaman, 1954) + 

14. Purkynella rambouseki Knirsch, 1924 + 

Coleoptera (Curculionidae) 

1. Ohiorhynchus sorbivorus Reitter, 1913 + 

2. Otiorhynchus armipes Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

3. Otiorhynchus asper Solari, 1931 + 

4. Otiorhynchus cirrhocnemis Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

5. Otiorhynchus cirrogaster Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

6. Otiorhynchus kruperi regliae Reitter,1912 + 

7. Otiorhynchus latitarsis Apfelbeck, 1922 + 

8. Otiorhynchus liliputanus Apfelbeck, 1905 + 

9. Otiorhynchus macedonicu. novakianus Lona, 1943 + 

10. Otiorhynchus macedonicus conorhynchus Solari, 1931 + 

11. Otiorhynchus macedonicus Reitter, 1913 + 

12. Otiorhynchus marmota kajmakcelensis Lona, 1943 + 

13. Otiorhynchus marmota Stierlin, 1883 + 

14. Otiorhynchus midas Reitter, 1913 + 

15. Otiorhynchus oligolepis Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

16. Otiorhynchus pierinus Reitter, 1913 + 

17. Otiorhynchus plagiator, Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

18. Otiorhynchus rambuseki Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

19. Otiorhynchus relictus Apfelbeck, 1918 + 

20. Otiorhynchus shardagensis arammichnoides Lona, 1943 + 

21. Otiorhynchus vodonensis Formanek, + 

22. Otiorhynchus wernerianus Reitter, 1913 + 

Coleoptera (Pselaphidae) 

1. Arcopagus blacensis Z. Karaman, 1954 + 

2. Arcopagus comita Rambousek + 

3. Arcopagus karaormani Z. Karaman, 1954 + 

4. Arcopagus meridionalis Z. Karaman, 1954 +


5. Paramaurops mavrovi Z. Karaman, 1958 + 

6. Paramaurops vitolistensis Z. Karaman, 1954 + 

7. Pselaphus treskanus Z. Karaman + 

Coleoptera (Cerambycidae) 

1. Dorcadion heirovskyi Breuning, 1943 + 

2. Dorcadion kaimakcalanum Jurecek, 1929 + 

3. Dorcadion macedonicum Jurecek, 1929 + 

4. Dorcadion purkynei Heirovsky, 1925 + 

5. Leptorhabdium nitidum Holzschuh, 1974 + 

6. Purpuricenus renyvonae Slama, 2001 + 

7. Vadonia dojranensis Holzschuh, 1984 + 

Trichoptera 

1. Apatania plicatus Radovanovic, 1943 + 

2. Limnephilus petri Marinkovic, 1975 + 

Lepidoptera 

Noctuidae 

1. Agrochola thurneri Boursin, 1953 + 

2. Agrocola wolfschlageri Boursin, 1953 + 

3. Copiphana lunaki Boursin, 1959 + 

4. Cosmia rhomopsis Boursin, 1947 + 

5. Cryphia seladona burgeffi Draudt, + 

6. Euchalcia chlorocharis Dufay, 1961 + 

7. Hadena clara macedonica Boursin, 1959 + 

8. Porphyrinia thurneri Zerny, 1936 + 

Microlepidoptera 

9. Aciptilia ivae Kasy, 1960 + 

10. Acrolepia heringi Klimesch, 1956 + 

11. Acrolepia macedonica Klimesch, 1956 + 

12. Acrolepia wolfschlageri Klimesch, 1956 + 

13. Aethes kasyi Razowski, 1962 + 

14. Agnopteryx thurneri Rebel, 1941 + 

15. Argyresthia kasyi Friese, 1961 + 

16. Bucculatrix pseudosylvella Rebel, 1941 + 

17. Bucculatrix species Klimesch, 1968 + 

18. Caryocolum xuthellum Rebel, 1941 + 

19. Cnephasia klimeschi Razowski, 1958 + 

20. Coleophora coarctataephaga Toll, 1961 + 

21. Coleophora depunctella Toll, 1961 + 

22. Coleophora flavescentella Toll, 1961 + 

23. Coleophora gigantella Toll, 1961 + 

24. Coleophora kasyi Toll, 1961 + 

25. Coleophora latilineella Toll, 1961 + 

26. Coleophora macedonica Toll, 1959 + 

27. Coleophora medicagivora Toll, 1961 + 

28. Coleophora quadristraminella Toll, 1961 + 

29. Coleophora scabrida Toll, 1959 + 

30. Coleophora species Klimesch, 1968 + 

31. Douglasia species Klimesch, 1968 + 

32. Ephysteris treskensis Povolny, 1964 + 

33. Eremica kasyi Gozmany, 1961 + 

34. Incurvaria species Klimesch, 1968 + 

155

156 


35. Infurcitinea kasyi Petersen, 1962 + 

36. Infurcitinea ochridella Petersen 1962, + 

37. Infurcitinea olympica Petersen, 1958 + 

38. Kessleria macedonica Friese, 1963 + 

39. Neurothaumasia macedonica Petersen, 1962 + 

40. Obesoceras forsteri Petersen, 1964 + 

41. Obesoceras litochorella Petersen, 1964 + 

42. Pantacordis pantsa Gozmany, 1963 + 

43. Parachronistis lunaki Rebel, 1941 + 

44. Scirtopoda species Klimesch, 1968 + 

45. Scythris subschleischiella Hannemann, 1961 + 

46. Scythris albostriata Hannemann, 1961 + 

47. Scythris crypta Hannemann, 1961 + 

48. Scythris similis Hannemann, 1961 + 

49. Stagmatophora klimeschiella Riedl, 1966 + 

50. Stigmella globularia Klimesch, 1968 + 

51. Symmoca klimeschiella Gozmany, 1959 + 

52. Teleiopsis species Klimesch, 1968 + 

Geometridae 

53. Calostigia wolfschlagerae Pinker, 1938 + 

54. Chesias pinkeri Schawarda, 1939 + 

Bombyces & Sphinges 

55. Bankesia macedoniella Rebel, 1934 + 

56. Chamaespecia balcanica Zukowsky, 1929 + 

57. Dysauxes ancilla bipunctata Buresch, 1915 + 

58. Eriogaster lanestris macedonica Silbernagel, 1945 + 

59. Rebelia macedonica Pinker, 1956 + 

60. Synthomis marjana macedonica Daniel, 1934 + 

61. Zygaena achilleae macedonica Burgeff, 1926 + 

62. Zygaena achilleae winneguthi Holik, 1937 + 

63. Zygaena carniolica paeoniae Burgeff, 1926 + 

64. Zygaena carniolica scopjina Burgeff, 1926 + 

65. Zygaena ephialtes istoki Silbernagel, 1944 + 

66. Zygaena ephialtes vardarica Daniel, 1956 + 

67. Zygaena laeta orientalis Burgeff, 1926 + 

68. Zygaena purpuralis bukuwkyi Holik, 1936 + 

69. Zygaena purpuralis doiranica Burgeff, 1926 + 

Diptera 

Empididae 

1. Chelifera macedonica Wagner & Nikolovskai, 1987 + 

2. Chelifera wagneri Horvat, 1990 + 

3. Roederiodes macedonicus Wagner & Horvat, 1993 + 

4. Wiedemannia andreevi Joost, 1982 + 

5. Wiedemannia dinarica Engel, 1940 + 

6. Wiedemannia microstigma (Bezzi, 1904) + 

Syrphidae 

7. Cheilosia melanura Becker, 1894 rubra Vujic, 1996 + 

8. Chrysogaster mediterraneus Vujic, 1999 + 

9. Merodon albonigrum Vujic, Radenkovic & Simic, 1996 + 

10. Merodon recurvus Strobl, 1898 + 

11. Psarus abdominalis (Fabricius), 1794 + 

12. Sphegina sublatifrons Vujic, 1990 +


Hymenoptera 

1. Empria atrata Cingovski, 1958 + 

2. Tenthredopsis macedonica Cingovski, 1958 + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Class Insecta 189 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Subphylum Chelicerata 71 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Subphylum Branchiata 137 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Subphylum Tracheata 211 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Arthropoda 419 

Phylum Chordata 


Pisces (Chordata: Vertebrata) 

Ohrid Lake 

Restricted to 

1. Acantholingua ohridana (Steindachner, 1892) + 

2. Alburnus belvica Karaman,1924 + 

3. Barbus prespensis Karaman, 1924 + 

4. Chondrostoma prespense Karaman, 1924 + 

5. Chondrostoma vardarense Karaman, 1924 + 

6. Cobitis meridionalis Karaman, 1924 + 

7. Cobitis vardarensis Karaman, 1924 + 

8. Gobio banarescui Dimovski & Grupce, 1974 + 

9. Pachychilon macedon icum (Steindachner, 1892) + 

10. Phoxinellus epiroticus (Steindachner, 1896) + 

11. Phoxinellus prespensis (Karaman, 1924) + 

12. Rutilus ohridanus (Karaman, 1924) + 

13. Rutilus prespensis (Karaman, 1924) + 

14. Sabanejewia doiranica Economidis & Nalbant, 1996 + 

15. Salmo aphelios Kottelat, 1997 + 

16. Salmo balcanicus (Karaman, 1927) + 

17. Salmo letnica (Karaman, 1924) + 

18. Salmo lumi Poljakov, Filipi & Basho, 1958 + 

19. Salmo pelagonicus Karaman, 1938 + 

20. Salmo peristericus Karaman, 1938 + 

Mammalia (Chordata: Vertebrata) 

1. Microtus felteni Malec & Storch, 1963 + 

2. Mus macedonicus Petrov & Ruzic, 1983 + 

3. Spermophilus citellus karamani (Martino & Martino, 1940) + 

4. Talpa stankovici V. Martino & E. Martino, 1931 + 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Chordata 24 

Prespa Lake 

Doyran Lake 

Other Lcalities 

157

158 


Endemic taxa within the fauna of Macedonia 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Protozoa 32 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Porifera 6 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Plathelminthes 35 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Nemathelminthes 3 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Mollusca 101 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Annelida 54 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Arthropoda 419 

Total number of endemic taxa of the Phylum Chordata 24 

Total number of endemic taxa 674


ANNEX 3 

Rare and threatened species of flora in Macedonia 

Table 1. Rare and threatened species of diatoms, sites and type of threat. 

No. Taxon Site Activity 

1. Achnanthes brevipes Agardh Ohrid Eutrophication 

2. Achnanthes inflata (Kützing) Grunow Ohrid Eutrophication 

3. Achnanthidium kryophila (Petersen) Bukhtiyarova 1995 Pelister Acidification 

4. Actinocyclus normanii (Gregory ex Greville) Hustedt Selakovski lakes Eutrophication 

5. Anomoeneis serians (Brébisson) Cleve 1895 Selakovski lakes Pollution 

6. Caloneis alpestris (Grunow) Cleve 1894 St. Naum, Ohrid Eutrophication 

7. Caloneis amphisbaena (Bory) Cleve fo. subsalina 

Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

(Donkin) Van Der Werff & Huls 

8. Caloneis pulchra Messikommer 1927 Bukovik Pollution 

9. Cyclotella iris Brun et Héribaud Vardar Pollution 

10. Cymatopleura elliptica var. hibernica (W.Smith) V.H. 

1896 

Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

11. Cymbella alpina Grunow 1863 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

12. Cymbella balatonis Grunow in A. Schmidt et al. 1875 Ohrid Lake Pollution 

13. Cymbella hauckii Van Heurck Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

14. Denticula elegans Kützing 1844 Anska River Pollution 

15. Denticula thermalis Kützing 1844 Thermal springs Pollution 

16. Diatoma anceps (Ehrenberg) Grunow 1878 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

17. Diatomella balfouriana Greville 1855 Selakovski lakes Pollution 

18. Diploneis alpina Meister 1912 Ohrid Lake Pollution 

19. Eucocconeis alpestris (Brun) Lange-Bertalot in 1999 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

20. Eucocconeis flexella (Kützing) Cleve 1895 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

21. 

Eunotia arculus (Grunow) Lange-Bertalot & Nörpel 

Bukovik, 

Pehcevo 

Mining 

activities 

22. 

Frustulia crassinervia (Brébisson) L-B. & Krammer 1996 

Selakovski lakes 

Shar planina 

Pollution 

Eutrophication 

23. Gomphonema augur var. gauteri Van Heurck 1885 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

24. 

Gomphonema hebridense Gregory 

Bukovik, 

Pehcevo 

Mining 

activities 

25. Gyrosigma nodiferum (Grunow) Reimer 1966 Ohrid Lake Eutrophication 

26. Gyrosigma parkerii (Harrison) Elmore 1921 Ohrid Lake Pollution 

27. Hippodonta rostrata (Grunow) Lange-Bertalot Prespa Lake Eutrophication 

28. Luticola undulata (Hilse) D.G. Mann 1990 Pelister Acidification 

29. Luticola ventricosa (Kütz.) D.G. Mann Shar Planina Eutrophication 

30. Mastogoia smithii Thwaites 1856 Ohrid Lake Pollution 

31. Navicula protracta (Grunow) Cleve 1894 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

32. Navicula roteana (Rabenhorst) Grunow Pelister Acidification 

33. Navicula rotunda Hustedt 1945 Prespa Lake Eutrophication 

34. Naviculadicta pseudosilicula (Hustedt) Lange-Bertalot Big Lake Acidification 

35. Neidium alpinum Hustedt 1943 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

36. Neidium bisulcatum (Lagersted) Cleve 1894 Selakovski lakes Pollution 

37. Nitzschia sigma (Kützing) W. Smith 1853 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

38. Nitzschia sinuata (Thwaites) Grunow var. tabellaria 

(Grunow) Lange-Bertalot 

White Lake 

(Shar Planina) 


39. Nitzschia sinuata var. delognei (Grunow) L-Bertalot 1980 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

40. 

Pinnularia acrosphaeria Rabenhorst 1853 

Monospitovo 

Marsh 


41. Pinnularia angusta (Cleve) Krammer 1992 Selakovski lakes Pollution 

42. Pinnularia appendiculata (Agardh) Cleve 1895 Pelister Acidification 

43. Pinnularia gentilis (Donkin) Cleve 1895 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

159

160 


44. 

Pinnularia lata (Brébisson) Rabenhorst 1853 

Golema Reka 

(river) 

Pollution 

45. Pinnularia legumen (Ehrenberg) Ehrenberg 1843 Bukovik Pollution 

46. Pinnularia nobilis Ehrenberg 1843 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

47. Placoneis gastrum 

signata Hustedt 

(Ehrenberg) Mereshkowsky var. 

Ohrid Lake Eutrophication 

48. Sellaphora pupula fo. rostrata (Hustedt) Bukhtiyarova 

1995 

St. Naum – 

Ohrid 


49. 

Sellaphora seminulum (Grunow) D. G. Mann 1990 

St. Naum – 

Ohrid 


50. Stauroneis producta Grunow 1880 Shar Planina Eutrophication 

51. Stauroneis smithii var. incisa Pantocsek 1902 Ohrid Lake Eutrophication 

52. Surirella capronii Brébisson in Kitton 1869 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

53. Surirella elegans Ehrenberg 1843 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

54. Surirella peisonis Pantocsek 1901 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

55. Surirella turgida W. Smith 1853 Doyran Lake Eutrophication 

Table 2. List of extinct diatoms. 

No. Species Site Cause 

1. Cyclotella petrovskae (Jerkovic) Stojanov 

1976 

Doyran Lake 

Water level lowering 

(intensive eutrophication) 

2. Eunotia naegelii Migula in Thomé 1907 Stensko Swamp Desiccation 

3. Gyrosigma spenceri (W. Smith) Cleve Stensko Swamp Desiccation 

4. Hantzschia spectabilis (Ehrenberg) Hustedt 

1959 

Katlanovo Marsh Desiccation 

5. 

Neidium kozlowii Mereschkowsky 1906 Doyran Lake 



6. Nitzschia perminuta (Grunow) M. Pergallo 

1903 


7. 

Nitzschia reversa W.Smith 1853 Doyran Lake 



8. Sellaphora americana (Ehrenberg) D.G. 

Mann 

Doyran Lake 



9. Stauroneis tackei (Hustedt) Krammer & 

Lange-Bertalot 1985 


Table 3. List of Fungi proposed to be protected. 

No. Species MAK ERL 

1. Agaricus macrosporus (Moll. & J.Schaef.) Pil. EKSP 

2. Amanita caesarea (Scop.: Fr.) Pers. EKSP D 

3. Amanita vitadinii (Moretti) Vittad. RV 

4. Amylostereum areolatum (Chaill.in Fr.) Boid. RS 

5. Antrodia juniperina (Murril) Niemelä et Ryv. RS 

6. Apoxona nitida (Dur.et Mont.) Donk RS 

7. Armillariella tabescens (Scop.: Fr.) Sing. EKSP 

8. Basidiodendron caesiocinereum (v.Hohn.et Litsch.) Luck RV 

9. Battarea phalloides (Dicks.) Pers. RS D 

10. Boletus aereus Bull.: Fr. EKSP C 

11. Boletus fechtneri Velen. EKSP B 

12. Boletus pulverulentus Opat. RV 

13. Boletus regius Krombh. EKSP A 

14. Boletus rhodoxanthus (Krombh.) Kallenb. RV A 

15. Boletus satanas Lenz EKSP A 

16. Chroogomphus helveticus (Sing.) Mos. RS 

17. Clathrus ruber Mich.: Pers. RV


18. Craterellus cornucopioides (L.) Fr. EKSP 

19. Creolophus cirrhatus (Pers.: Fr.) P.Karst. RV 

20. Dichomitus albidofuscus (Domanski) Domanski RV 

21. Diplomitoporus flavescens (Bres.) Doman. RV 

22. Exidia pithya Fr. RS C 

23. Geastrum minimum Schw. RV 

24. Gloeocystidiellum ochraceum (Fr.: Fr.) Donk RV 

25. Gloeoporus dichrous (Fr.) Bres. RV D 

26. Hericium erinaceus (Bull.: Fr.) Pers. RV B 

27. Heterochaetella dubia (Bourd.et Galz.) Bourd. Et Galz. RV 

28. Hirneola auricula judae (Bul.: St.Am.) Berk RV 

29. Hygrocybe reai R.Mre. RV 

30. Hygrophorus marzuolus (Fr.) Bres. EKSP D 

31. Hyphoderma pallidum (Bres.) Donk RV 

32. Inonotus tamaricis (Pat.) Maire RS 

33. Lachnellula suecica (de Bary : Fuck.) Nannf. RV 

34. Langermania gigantea (Batsch.) Rostk RV 

35. Leptosporomyces galzinii (Bourd.) Julich RV 

36. Lindtneria chordulata Parm. RV 

37. Macrolepiota procera (Scop.: Fr.) Sing. EKSP 

38. Metulodontia nivea (Karst.) Parm. RV 

39. Mutinus caninus (Huds.: Pers.) Fr. RV 

40. Mycoacia nothofagi (Kun.) Donk RV 

41. Mycoaciella bispora (Stalpers) Erikss.et Ryv. RV 

42. Myriostoma coliforme (With.: Pers.) Corda RV 

43. Parmastomyces krawtzewianus (Bond.et Par.) Kotl.et Pouz. RV 

44. Paxilus atrotomentosus Schwalb. RV 

45. Peniophora junipericola J.Erikss. RS 

46. Peniophora tamaricicola Boidin RS 

47. Perenniporia narymica (Donk) Ryv. RV 

48. Phanerochaete martelliana (Bres.) Erikss.et Ryv RV 

49. Phellinus rimosus (Berk.) Pilat RV 

50. Phellinus robustus (P.Karst.) Bourd.et Galz. RS 

51. Phlebia griseo-flavescens (Litsch.) Erikss.et Hjortst. RV 

52. Pleurocybella porigens (Pers.: Fr.) Singer RS 

53. Pleurotus dryinus (Pers.) Kumn. RV 

54. Poronia punctata Fr. RV 

55. Porostereum spadiceum (Boidin) Ryv. RV 

56. Pyrofomes demidoffii (Lev.) Kotl.et Pouz. RS 

57. Rigidoporus undatus (Pers.) Donk RV 

58. Sarcodon imbricatus (L.: Fr.) Karst. RV 

59. Sarcoporia salmonicolor (Berk.et Kurt.) Doman. RV 

60. Steccherinum litschaueri (Bourd.et Galz.) Berk.& Kurt. RV 

61. Suillus sibiricus (Sing.) Sing. RS 

62. Trametes ljubarskii Pilàt RV 

63. Tremella folliacea Pers.: Fr. RV 

64. Tulostoma brumale Pers.: Pers. RV 

65. Tulostoma melanocyclum Bres. in Petri RV 

66. Utathobasidium ochraceum (Massee) Donk RV 

67. Volvariella bombycina (Sch.: Fr.) Singer RV 

RV – very rare or rare species in Macedonia 

RS – species existing only on endangered or rare habitats 

EKSP – very rare or rare species endangered due to over-exploitation 

ERL – species included in the European Red List 

161

162 


Table 4. Rare and severely endangered species of Fungi, sites and type of threat. 

No. 

Rare and severely endangered 

species 

Sites of endangered species Type of threat 

1. 

Antrodia juniperina (Murril) 

Niemelä et Ryv. 

Golem Grad, Katlanovo- 

Pchinya, Valandovo area 

Rare supstratus - 

Juniperus excelsa 

2. Battarea phalloides (Dicks.) Pers. 

Golem Grad, proximity of 

Doyran Lake 

Destruction of habitat 

3. Boletus regius Krombh. Pelister, Struga area Exploitation for food 

4. 

Chroogomphus helveticus (Sing.) 

Mos. 

Pelister 

Relict communities of 

molika 

5. Inonotus tamaricis (Pat.) Maire Gevgeliya area 

Anthropogenic impact on 

habitat 

6. 

Myriostoma coliforme (With.: 

Pers.) Corda 

Golem Grad, D. Kapiya 

Rare thermophilic 

species 

7. Peniophora tamaricicola Boidin Gevgeliya area 

Anthropogenic impact on 

habitat 

8. 

Pleurocybella porigens (Pers.: Fr.) 

Singer 

Shar Planina 

Rare supstratus - Picea 

abies 

9. Poronia punctata Fr. Kozuf, Berovo 

Rare species, growing on 

cattle excrements 

10. 

Pyrofomes demidoffii (Lev.) Kotl.et 

Pouz. 

Golem Grad, Katlanovo- 

Pchinya, D. Kapija, 

Valandovo area 

Rare supstratus - 

Juniperus excelsa 

11. Suillus sibiricus (Sing.) Sing. Pelister 

Relict communities of 

Molika 

Table 5. Rare and severely endangered species of Lichens, sites and type of threat. 

No. Rare and severely endangered species Sites of endangered species Type of threat 

1. Evernia divaricata (L.) Ach. Shar Planina Anthropogenic impact 

2. Parmelia exasperatula Nyl. Pelister, S.C.Gora Anthropogenic impact 

3. Parmelia omphalodes (L.) Ach. Karadzitsa Anthropogenic impact 

4. Parmelina pastillifera (Harm.) Hale Galichitsa Anthropogenic impact 

5. Parmelina sorediata (Ach.) Th. Pelister Anthropogenic impact 

6. Peltigera venosa (L.) Hoffm. Shar Planina, Galichitsa Anthropogenic impact 

7. Pertusaria coccodes (Ach.) Nyl. Karadzitsa Anthropogenic impact 

8. Ramalia carpatica Koerb. Pelister, Galichitsa Anthropogenic impact 

9. Ramalia polymorpha (Liljebl.) Ach. Galichitsa, Karadzitsa Anthropogenic impact 

10. Staurothele clopimoides (Anzi) Steiner Shar Planina Anthropogenic impact 

11. Usnea carpatica Mot. Shar Planina, Mavrovo Anthropogenic impact 

12. Usnea causasica Vain. Shar Planina, Mavrovo Anthropogenic impact


Table 6. List of higher plant groups of national importance – species included in the IUCN 1997 

Red List of Threatened Plants, Annex I of the Bern <strong>Convention</strong> (BERN), (CORINE species), endangered 

species in Macedonia or globally endangered species (En, of the flora of Macedonia. 

No. Species 

IUCN 1997 Red List of 

Threatened Plants - World status 

BERN 

(1992, 2000) 

CORYNE, E, M, Al 

Endangered species 

(En) 

1. 

Acer heldreichii Orph. ex Boiss. subsp. 

visiani H. Maly (I) 

I 

2. Adonis vernalis L. Kumanovo 

3. Ajuga piscoi Degen & Dald. R Corine/a. 

4. Aldrovanda vesiculosa L. + Corine/m Prespa Lake - Ezerani 

5. Alkanna pulmonaria Griseb. R 

6. Alkanna stribrnyi Velen. R 

7. Alopecurus creticus Trin. Monospitovo 

8. Alyssum doerfleri Degen R 

9. Anchusa serpentinicola Rech.f. R 

Shar Planina., Bistra, 

10. Andreaea rupestris Hedw. 

Rudoka, 

Yakupitsa 

Pelister, 

11. Anthemis meteorica Hausskn. R 

12. Anthoceros punctatus L. Bogdantsi 

13. Armeria vandasii Hayek R 

14. Asplenium macedonicum Kümm. Corine/m Markovi Kuli, 

15. Astragalus baldacii Degen R Corine/a. 

16. Astragalus cernjavskii Stoj. Corine/m Orlovo Brdo 

17. Astragalus physocalyx Fischer Ex/En + Corine/m Bogdantsi 

18. Aubrieta thessala Boissieu R 

19. Beckmannia eruciformis (L.) Host. Pelagonia, Skopsko 

20. Botrychium lunaria (l.) Swartz Corine/a 

21. 

Buxbaumia viridis (Moug. ex Lam. & 

DC.) Brid. ex Moug. & Nestl. 

+ Pelister, Shar Planina 

22. Campanula abietina Griseb. + 

23. Camporosma monspeliaca L. Ovche Pole 

24. Carex elata All. Studenchishte 

25. Catoscopium nigritum (Hedw.) Brid. Shar Planina. 

26. 

Centaurea grbavacensis (Rohl.) Stoj. & 

Acht. 

R 

27. Centaurea kosaninii Hayek R Corine/a 

28. Centaurea rufidula Bornm. R 

29. Centaurea soskae Hayek ex Kosanin R 

30. Centaurea wettsteinii Degen & Dörfl. R 

31. Cladium mariscus (L.) Pohl Negortsi Spa Basyi 

32. Coeloglossum viride (L.) Hartman Corine/e 

33. Colchicum macedonicum Košanin R Corine/m Yakupitsa 

34. Colchicum piepeianum Margraf R Corine/a 

163

164 


35. Crocus pelistericus Pulevic Corine/m Pelister 

36. Crocus cvijici Košanin Corine/m Galichitsa 

37. Crypsis aculeata (L.) Aiton Ovche Pole 

38. Dianthus myrtinervius Griseb. R 

39. Drosera rotundifolia L. Corine/m Pehchevo 

40. Erodium guicciardii Heldr. ex Boiss. R 

41. Eryngium serbicum Pancic R 

42. Fritillaria graeca Boiss. & Spruner + 

43. 

Fritillaria gussichiae (Deg. & Dorfl.) 

R + 

Rix 

44. Fritillaria macedonica Bornm. R 

45. Galium rhodopeum Vel. + 

46. Genista nissana Petrovic R 

47. 

Gentiana lutea L. subsp. Symphyandra 

(Murb.) Hayek 

Corine/a 

Shar Planina, 

Yablanitsa, Pelister 

48. Gentiana punctata L. Pelister, Nidze 

49. Gladiolus palustris Gaudin I 

50. Glyceria maxima (Hart.) Holm. Chepigovo 

51. Gypsophila macedonica Vandas R 

52. Hedysarum macedonicum Bornm. R 

53. Heptaptera macedonica (Bornm.) Tutin I Ljubash 

54. Isoetes phrygia (Boiss.) Hausskn. Corine/m Markovi Kuli, Bansko 

55. Jurinea taygetea Hal. R Corine/e 

56. Knautia caroli-rechingeri Micevski Alshar 

57. Leucobryum glaucum (Hedw.) Angstr. village Malino 

58. 

Lindernia procumbens(Krocker) 

Philocox 

+ 

59. Linum elegans Spruner ex Boiss. R 

60. Listera cordata (L.) R. Br. Shar Planina 

61. 

Malus florentina (Zuccagni) 

C.K.Schneid. 

R 

62. Marsilea quadrifolia L. + 

63. 

Melampyrum heracleoticum Boiss. & 

Orph. 

R 

64. Merendera sobolifera C.A.Meyer Petrovets 

65. Minuartia baldaccii (Halácsy) Mattf. R 

66. Moehringia minutiflora Bornm R 

67. Narthecium scardicum Košanin R Corine/e 

68. Nymphaea alba L. Doyran Lake 

69. Onobrychis degenii Dörfler I Alshar 

70. Ophioglossum vulgatum L. Bansko, Negortsi Spa 

71. Orchis coriophora L. Corine/e 

72. Osmunda regalis L. Corine/m Bansko 

73. 

Oxytropis purpurea (Baldacci) 

Markgraf 

R 

74. Pedicularis ferdinandi Bornm. R 

75. Pedicularis limnogena A. Kerner 

Pinus heldreichii H.Christ var. 

R 

76. leucodermis (Ant.) Markgraf ex 

Fitschen 

R 

77. Pinus peuce Griseb. R 

78. Potentilla doerfleri Wettst. R Corine/m Shar Planina 

79. Potentilla visianii Pancic R 

80. 

Puccinellia festuciformis (Host.) Parl 

subsp. convoluta (Hornem.) W.E.Hughes 

Ovche Pole 

81. Ramonda nathaliae Pancic & Petrovic R Corine/e


82. Ramonda serbica Panc. R + Corine/e 

83. Ranunculus cacuminis Strid & Pap. V Corine/e 

84. Ranunculus degeni Kümm. & Jav. Ex/En Corine/m Shar Planina 

85. Ranunculus fontanus C. Presl. Corine/e 

86. Ranunculus lingua L. Kalishte 

87. Ranunculus wettsteinii Dörfl. I 

88. Rhodobryum roseum (Hedw.) Limpr. Vodno, Modrich 

89. Rindera graeca (A.DC.) Boiss. & Heldr. R 

90. Rumex hydrolapathum Hudson Kalishte 

91. Salvia jurisicii Košanin R Corine/m Bogoslovets, 

Ovche Pole 

92. Salvia officinalis L. Lukovo 

93. Salvinia natans L. + Doyran Lake 

94. Sambucus deborensis Košanin Corine/m Debar 

95. Sempervivum kindingeri Adam. R 

96. Sempervivum kosaninii Praeger R 

97. Sempervivum macedonicum Prager R 

98. Sempervivum octopodes Turill R 

99. Sempervivum thompsonianum Wale R 

100. Senecio paludosus L. Kalishte 

101. Sideritis raeseri Boiss. & Heldr. Corine/a. 

102. Sideritis scardica Griseb. Shar Planina 

103. Silene paeoniensis Bornm. Corine/m Chebren 

104. Silene schmuckeri Boiss. R 

105. Silene viscariopsis Bornm. R 

106. Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke Corine/e 

107. Soldanella pindicola Hausskn. R 

108. Solenanthus scardicus Bornm. R 

109. Stipa rechingeri Martinovsky, - R R 

110. Suaeda maritima (L.) Dumort. Ovche Pole 

111. Thymus alsarensis Ronn. Alshar 

112. Thymus oehmianus Ronn. & Soška Ex Corine/m Kapina, Ocha 

113. Trapa natans L. + 

114. Tulipa mariannae Lindtner Corine/m Orlovo Brdo 

115. Verbascum herzogii Borm. R 

116. 

Verbascum macedonicum Košanin & 

R 

Murb. 

117. Vicia montenegrina Rohl R 

118. Viola allchariensis Beck Alshar 

119. Viola arsenica Beck Corine/m Alshar 

120. Viola brachphylla W. Becker. R 

121. Viola elegantula Schott R 

122. Viola eximia Form R 

123. Viola kosaninii (Degen) Hayek R Corine/m Kozyak 

124. Viola stojanovii W.Becker R 

ABREVIATIONS: 

Corine E- Corine species from the European list 

Corine M- Corine species in Macedonia 

Corine Al- Corine species in Albania 

IUCN World status: R-Rare 

I- Indeterminate 

V-Vulnerable 

Ex (Extinct) 

Ex/En (Extinct/Endangered) 

165

166 


Table 7. Extinct species of the higher plant groups. 

1. Alismataceae Sagittaria sagittifolia L. + Novatsi + 

2. Araceae Acorus calamus L. + Struga + 

3. Gentianaceae Gentiana pneumonanthe L. + Mavrovo + 

4. Liliaceae Allium obtusiflorum DC (Syn.: A. maritimum Rafin) + Ovce Pole + 

5. Primulaceae Lysimachia thyrsiflora L. + Mavrovo +


ANNEX 4 

Threatened species of fauna in the Republic of Macedonia 

List of threatened species of vertebrates 

EUROPEAN RED LIST OF VERTEBRATES, COUNCIL OF EUROPE & EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT AGENCY, OCTOBER, 2002. 

Threatened Species means species evaluated as Critically Endangered (CR); Endangered (EN) and Vulnerable (VU). 

Threatened Fish Species 

No. 

1. 

Scientific name 

Acantholingua ohridana 

(Steindachner, 1892) 

Macedonian Common 

Name 

Ohridska mekousna 

pastrmka; Ohridska 

belvica 

<strong>English</strong> Common 

Name 

European IUCN 

Threat Category 

Ohrid Salmon VU 

2. Acipenser sturio Linnaeus, 1758 Atlantska esetra Sturgeon CR 

3. Alburnus belvica Karaman, 1924 

Prespanska belvica; 

Nivichka 

Prespa Bleak VU 

4. Alosa falax (La Cepede, 1803) Lojka; Haringa; Sledj Twaite Shad VU 

5. 

Barbatula bureschi (Drensky, 

1928) 

Strumichka vretenushka Strumica Loach VU 

6. Barbus prespensis Karaman, 1924 Prespanska mrena Prespa Barbel VU 

7. 

Chondrostoma prespense Karaman, 

1924 

Prespanski bojnik; Skobust 

Prespa Nase; 

Undermouth 

VU 

8. 

Cobitis meridionalis Karaman, 

1924 

Prespanska shtipalka Prespa Loach VU 

9. Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus, 1758 Krap Carp CR 

10. 

Eudontomyzon hellenicus Vlad., 

Ren., Kott & Econ., 1982 

Vardarska zmiorka Vardar Lamprey EN 

11. 

Eudontomyzon stankokaramani 

Karaman, 1974 

Drimska zmiorka Drim Lamprey EN 

12. 

Gobio banarescui Dimovski & 

Grupce, 1974 

Vardarska krkushka; 

Govedarka 

Macedonian 

Gudgeon 

VU 

13. 

Phoxinellus epiroticus 

(Steindachner, 1896) 

Ohridsko grunche Ohrid Minnow VU 

14. 

Phoxinellus prespensis (Karaman, 

1924) 

Prespansko grunche Prespa Minnow VU 

15. Rutilus karamani Fowler, 1977 Drimski grunec Drim Roach VU 

16. Rutilus ohridanus (Karaman, 1924) Ohridski grunec Ohrid Roach VU 

17. Rutilus prespensis (Karaman, 1924) Prespanski grunec Prespa Roach VU 

18. 

Sabanejewia balcanica (Karaman, 

1922) 

Zlatna shtipalka Golden Loach VU 

19. 

Sabanejewia doiranica Economidis 

& Nalbant, 1996 

Doyranska shtipalka Doyran Loach VU 

20. Salaria fluviatilis (Asso 1801) 

Kamenjarche; Bapka; 

Mremka 

Freshwater 

Blenny 

VU 

21. Salmo aphelios Kottelat, 1997 Drimska pastrmka Drim Trout VU 

22. Salmo balcanicus (Karaman, 1927) Strushka pastrmka Struga Trout VU 

23. Salmo dentex Heckel, 1852 

Zapadno- balkanska 

pastrmka 

Westbalkan Trout EN 

167

168 


24. Salmo letnica (Karaman, 1924) Ohridska pastrmka Ohrid Trout VU 

25. 

Salmo lumi Poljakov, Filipi & 

Basho, 1958 

Ohridska potochna 

pastrmka 

Ohrid Stream 

Trout 

EX 

26. Salmo marmoratus Cuvier, 1829 Glavatica Marbled Trout EN 

27. Salmo pelagonicus Karaman, 1938 Pelagoniska pastrmka Pelagonian Trout VU 

28. Salmo peristericus Karaman, 1938 Pelisterska pastrmka Pelister Trout VU 

29. Vimba melanops (Heckel, 1837) Popadika Balkan Vimba VU 

30. Zingel balcanicus (Karaman, 1936) Vardarski vretenar 

Vardar Little 

Chop 

CR 

Total number of threatened fish species 30 

Threatened Reptile Species 

No. 



Name 


Name 

European IUCN 


1. Vipera ursinii Ostroglava sharka EN 

Total number of threatened reptiles species 1 

Threatened Bird Species 

For Breeding Birds, the species have been identified by Birdlife International as Species of European conservation 

concern (SPECs), defined as those having an unfavourable conservation status in Europe (assigned a European threat 

status as: E-Endangered; V-Vulnerable; R-Rare; D-Declining; L-Localized or Ins-Insufficiently Known. If the 

European Threat status is provisional, it is indicated between brackets. 

Threatened Species means species evaluated as: Endangered-E and Vulnerable-V. 

No. 



Name 


Name 

European IUCN 


1. Acrocephalus paludicola Voden trskar Aquatic Warbler E 

2. Aegypus monachus Crn mrshojadec Black Vulture V 

3. Alauda arvensis Polska chuchuliga Skylark V 

4. Alectoris graeca Erebica kamenjarka Rock-Partridge (V) 

5. Anas acuta Patka lastovicharka Pin tail V 

6. Anas querquedula Patka pupcharka Garganey V 

7. Anas strepera Siva patka Gadwall V 

8. Anser erythropus 

Mala belochelna 

guska 

Lesser White-fronted 

Goose 

V 

9. Anthus campestris Polska trepetlivka Tawny Pipit V 

10. Aquila clanga Golem kresliv orel Spotted Eagle E 

11. Aquila heliaca 

Carski orel; Orel 

krstash 

Imperial Eagle E


12. Ardea purpurea Purpurna chapja Purple Heron V 

13. Ardeola ralloides 

Grivesta chapja; 

Zholta chapja 

Squacco Heron V 

14. Asio flammeus 

Blatna kratkoushesta 

utka 

Short-eared Owl (V) 

15. Aythya nyroca 

Njorka; Kozhufar; 

Belooka potopnica 

Ferrugineous Duck V 

16. Botaurus stellaris Golem voden bik Bittern (V) 

17. Bubo bubo Golem buf Eagle Owl V 

18. Burhinus oedicnemus Churulin Stone Curlew V 

19. Buteo rufinus 

Lisest Yastreb 

gluvchar 

Long-legged Buzzard (E) 

20. Calandrella brachydactila 

Kratkoprsta 

chuchuliga 

Short-toed Lark V 

21. Calidris alpina Severen peskar Dunlin V 

22. Ciconia ciconia Bel shtrk White Stork V 

23. Circus cyaneus Polska eja Hen Harrier V 

24. Circus macrourus Stepska eja Pallid Harrier E 

25. Coturnix coturnix Potpoloshka Quail V 

26. Crex crex 

Livadska blatna 

kokoska 

Corncrake V 

27. Emberiza cia Planinska strnarka Rock Bunting V 

28. Emberiza hortulana Polska strnarka Ortolan Bunting (V) 

29. Emberiza melanocephala Crnoglava strnarka Black-headed Bunting (V) 

30. Falco biarmicus Yuzhen sokol Lanner (E) 

31. Falco cherrug Stepski sokol Saker Falcon E 

32. Falco naumanni Mala vetrushka Lesser Kestrel (V) 

33. Falco vespertinus Vecherna vetrushka Red-footed Falcon V 

34. Gallinago media Golema bekasina Great snipe (V) 

35. Gavia arctica 

Crnogusha severna 

potopnica 

Black-throated Diver V 

36. Gavia stellata 

Crvenogusha severna 

potopnica 

Debelokluna 

Red-throated Diver V 

37. Gelochelidon nilotica 

vrtimushka 

Debelokluna ribarka 

Gull-billed Tern (E) 

38. Glareola pratincola Blatna lastovica Collared Pranticole E 

39. Grus grus Siv zherav Crane V 

40. Gypaetus barbatus Bradest mrshojadec Lammergier E 

41. Hieraaetus fasciatus Yastreboviden orel Bonelli's Eagle E 

42. Hippolais pallida 

Sivo-maslinest 

Grmushar 

Olivaceous Warbler (V) 

43. Ixobrychus minutus Mal voden bik Little Bittern (V) 

44. Lanius nubicus Belochelno svrache Masked Shrike (V) 

45. Lanius senator Crvenoglavo svrache Woodchat Shrike V 

46. Limicola falcinellus Ploskokluna peskarka Broad-billed 

Sandpiper 

(V) 

47. Limosa limosa Crnoopashesta shljuka Black-tailed Godwit V 

48. Lullula arborea Shumska chuchuliga Woodlark V 

49. Marmaronetta angustirostris Mramorna patka Marbled Teal E 

50. Mergus albellus 

Mal potopnik; Mal 

ronec 

Smew V 

51. Milvus migrans Crna lunja Black Kite V 

52. Monticola solitarius Sin skalen drozd Blue Rock Thrush (V) 

53. Neophron percnopterus Egipetski mrshojadec Egyptian Vulture E 

54. Oenanthe hispanica Shpanska belogaska Black-eared Wheatear V 

169

170 


55. Oxyura leucocephala Beloglava patka White-headed Duck E 

56. Pelecanus crispus Kadroglav pelikan Dalmatian Pelican V 

57. Perdix perdix Erebica polka Grey Partridge V 

58. Phalacrocorax pygmeus Mal kormoran Pygmy Cormorant V 

59. Phoenicurus phoenicurus Crvenoopashka Redstart V 

60. Platalea leucorodia Chapja lazicharka Spoonbill E 

61. Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax Crvenokluna galka Chough V 

62. Scolopax rusticola Shumska shlyuka Woodcook V 

63. Sterna caspia Golema vrtimushka Caspian Tern (E) 

64. Sylvia hortensis Orfeevo koprivarche Orphean Warbler V 

65. Tetrao tetrix Mal tetreb Black Grouse V 

66. Tetrax tetrax Mala droplya; Prskach Little Bustard V 

Total number of Threatened Species of Birds 66 

Threatened Mammal Species 

No. 



Name 


Name 

European IUCN 


1. Barbastella barbastellus Shirokoushest lilyak Barbastelle VU 

2. Canis lupus Volk Wolf VU 

3. Felis silvestris Diva machka Wildcat VU 

4. Lutra lutra Vidra Otter VU 

5. Miniopterus schreibersii Dolgokrilest lilyak Schreibers' Bat VU 

6. Myotis capaccinii Dolgoprst noknik Long-fingered Bat VU 

7. Myotis emarginatus Troboen noknik Geoffroy's Bat VU 

8. Nannospalax leucodon Slepo kuche Lesser mole Rat VU 

9. Ovis ammon Muflon Mouflon VU 

10. Rhinolophus blasii Blasiev potkovichar Blasius' horseshoe Bat VU 

11. Rhinolophus euryale Yuzhen potkovichar 

Mediterranean 

horseshoe Bat 

VU 

12. Rhinolophus ferrumequinum Golem potkovichar Greater horseshoe Bat VU 

13. Rhinolophus hipposideros Mal potkovichar Lesser horseshoe Bat VU 

14. Rhinolophus mehelyi Meheliev potkovichar 

Mehely's horseshoe 

VU 

15. Spermophilus citellus Stobolka European Souslik VU 

16. Vormela peregusna Sharen tvor Marbled policat VU 

Total number of Threatened Species of Mammals 16 

Threatened Vertebrate Species 

Total number of Threatened Fish Species 30 

Total number of Threatened Reptile Species 1 

Total number of Threatened Bird Species 66 

Total number of Threatened Mammal Species 16 

Total number of Threatened Vertebrate Species 113 

Bat


ANNEX 5 

Gene fund of Angiosperm plants in the flora of the Republic of Macedonia 

No. Family Genus Species 2n 

1. Amaryllidaceae Galanthus G. graecus Orph. 24 

2. G. nivalis L. 24 

3. Leucojum L. aestivum L. 22 

4. Narcissus N. poeticus L. 14 

5. Sternbergia S. colchiciflora W.K. 22 

6. S. lutea L. Ker. 22 

7. Apiaceae Bupleurum B. commutatum B. & B. 16 

8. Daucus D. carota L. 18 

9. D. guttatus S.& S. 22 

10. Eryngium E. campestre L. 14 

11. Malabaila M. aurea (Sibth. & Sm.) Boiss. 20 

12. Orlaya O. grandiflora (L.) Hoffm. 14 

13. Tordylium T. maximum L. 20 

14. Torilis T. anthriscus (L.) Gmel. 12 

15. T. leptophylla (L.) Reichenb. 12 

16. T. nodosa (L.) Gaertn. 24 

17. Araceae Arum A. maculatum s.l. 30 

18. Biarum 

B. tenuifolium (L.) Schott var. 

abbreviatum (Schott) Engl. 

26 

19. Asparaginaceae Asparagus A. tenuifolius Lam. 20 

20. Asteraceae Achillea 

A. ageratifolia (Sibth. & Sui.) Boiss. 

subsp. arozon (Griseb.) Heim. 

18 

21. 

A. coarctata Poir. (Syn.: A. compacta 

18 

Willd.) 

22. A. fraasii Schultr. 18 

23. A. holosericea S.& S. 18 

24. A. nobilis L. ssp. nobilis 18 

25. A. setacea Waldst. & Kit. 18 

26. Anthemis A. arvensis L. 18 

27. 

A. carpatica Willd. var. macedonica 

36 

(Griseb.) Hay. 

28. A. ruthenica M.B. 18 

29. A. tinctoria L. 15; 18 

30. Arctium A. lappa L. 36 

31. Bellis B. perennis L. 18 

32. Carduus C. acanthoides L. 22 

33. C. armatus Boiss et Heldr. 22 

34. Carlina C. acanthifolia All. 20 

35. 

C. vulgaris L. subsp. intermedia (Schur) 

20 

Hayek 

36. Carthamus C. dentatus Vahl. 20 

37. C. lanatus L. 44 

38. Centaurea C. cyanus L. 24 

39. C. deusta Ten. 18 

40. C. grbavacensis (Rohlena) Stoj.& Acht. 20 

41. C. jacea L. 22 

42. C. napulifera Rochel. 20 

43. C. salonitana Vis. 40 

44. C. solstitialis L. 16 

45. C. stenolepis A. Kerner subsp. stenolepis 22 

171

172 


46. Chondrilla Ch. juncea L. 15 

47. Cichorium C. intybus L. 18 

48. Cirsium C. cannum (L.) All. 34 

49. C. lanceolatum (L.) Scop. 68 

50. C. ligulare Boiss. 34 

51. Crepis C. biennis L. 40 

52. C. foetida L. 10 

53. 

C. foetida L. subsp. rhoeadifolia (Bieb.) 

10 

Cel. 

54. C. sancta (L.) Babc. 10 

55. C. setosa Hall. 8 

56. C. viscidula Froel. 12 

57. Crupina C. crupinastrum (Moris) Vis. 28 

58. C. vulgaris Cass. 30 

59. Erigeron E. acer L. 18 

60. E. bonariensis L. 54 

61. Galinsoga G. ciliata (Rafin.) Blake 32 

62. G. parviflora Cav. 16 

63. Helichrysum H. plicatum DC 28 

64. Hypochoeris H. cretensis (L.) Ch. & B. 6 

65. H. glabra L. 10 

66. H. maculata L. 10; 20 

67. H. radicata L. 8 

68. Inula 

I. verbascifolia (Willd.) Hausskn. ssp. 

16 

aschersoniana (Janka) Tutin 

69. I. conyza DC 32 

70. I. ensifolia L. 16 

71. I. germanica L 16 

72. I. oculus-christi L. 32 

73. I. spiraeifolia L. 16 

74. Jurinea 

J. consanguinea DC subsp. arachnoidea 

32 

(Bunge) Kozuharov 

75. Lactuca L. quercina L. 18 

76. L. saligna L. 18 

77. L. serriola Torner. 18 

78. Lapsana L. communis L. 16 

79. Leontodon L. cichoraceus (Ten.) Sanguinetti 12 

80. L. crispus Vill. subsp. asper (W.K.) Rohl. 8 

81. L. hispidus L. 14 

82. L. hispidus L. subsp. hispidus 11 

83. Onopordon O. acanthium L. 34 

84. Picnomon P. acarna Cass. 32 

85. Picris P. echioides L. 10 

86. P. hieracioides L. 10 

87. P. pauciflora Willd. 10 

88. Pulicaria P. vulgaris Gaertn. 18 

89. Scorzonera S. austriaca Willd. 14 

90. S. hispanica L. var. strictiformis Domin 14 

91. S. laciniata L. 14 

92. S. lanata (L.) Hoffm 12 

93. S. mollis M. B. 28 

94. S. purpurea L. subsp. peristerica Form. 14 

95. S. rumelica Vel. 14; 15 

96. Senecio S. carpatica Herb. 40 

97. S. jacobaea L. 40 

98. S. vernalis W.K. 20


99. S. vulgaris L. 40 

100. Solidago 

S. virgaurea L. subsp.alpestris var.vestita 

Hall. 

18 

101. Tanacetum T. corymbosum (L.) Schultz Bip. 36+3B 

102. T. parthenium (L.) Schultz. 18 

103. T. vulgare L. 18 

104. Taraxacum T. officinale Veber. 24 

105. Tragopogon T. balcanicus Vel. 12 

106. 

T. dubius Scop. subsp.campestris (Bess.) 

Hayek 

12 

107. T. majus Jacq. 12 

108. T. porrifolius L 12 

109. T. pratensis L. 12 

110. T. pterodes Panc. 12 

111. Xeranthemum X. annuum L. 12 

112. X. cylindraceum Sibth. & Sm. 20 

113. Boraginaceae Anchusa A. officinalis L 16 

114. Echium E. italicum L. 16 

115. Onosma O. visiani G.C.Clem 18 

116. Pulmonaria P. officinalis L 14 

117. Symphytum S. officinale L. 48 

118. Campanulaceae Jasione J. heldreichii Boiss. & Orph. 12 

119. J. orbiculata Gris. 12 

120. Caryophyllaceae Agrostemma A. githago L. 48 

121. Dianthus D. gracilis Sibth. & Sm. 30 

122. D. haematocalyx Boiss.& Heldr. 30 

123. D. prilepensis Micev. 30 

124. Lychnis L. coronaria (L.) Desr. 24 

125. Petrorhagia P. velutina (Guss) P.W.Ball. & Heyw. 30 

126. Silene S. alba E.H.L. 24 

127. S. armeria L. 24 

128. 

S. bupleuroides L. subsp. staticifolia 

(Sibth. & Sm) Chowdhuri 

24 

129. 

S. conica L. subsp.subconica (Friv.) 

Gavioli 

20 

130. S. cretica L. 24 

131. S. dichotoma Ehrh. 24 

132. S. frivaldskyana Hampe 24 

133. S. italica (L.) Pers. 24 

134. S. nutans L. 24 

135. S. otites (L) Wibl. 24 

136. S. paeoniensis Bornm. 24 

137. S. venosa Aschers. et Graebn. 24 

138. S. viscariopsis Bornm. 24 

139. S. viridiflora L. 24 

140. 

S. vulgaris (Moench.) Garcke subsp. 

vulgaris 

24 

141. Cistaceae Fumana F. procumbens (Dunal) Gren. 32 

142. Helianthemum H. aegyptiacum (L.) Miller 20 

144. H. canum (L.) Baumg. subsp.canum 22 

145. H. hymettium Boiss. & Heldr. in Boiss. 22 

146. 

H. nummularium (L.) Mill. 

subsp.nummularium 

20 

147. H. salicifolium (L.) Mill. 20 

148. Tuberaria T. guttata (L.) Fourr. 24 

149. Cucurbitaceae Bryonia B. alba L. 20 

173

174 


150. Dipsacaceae Pterocephalus P. papposus (L.) Coulter 18 

151. Scabiosa S. rotata Bich. 18 

152. S. trinifolia Friv. 16 

153. Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia 

E. barrelieri Savi. subsp. thessala (Form.) 

18 

K. Maly 

154. E. cyparissias L. 40 

155. E. graeca L. 28 

156. E. niciciana Borbas ex Novak 19 

157. E. rupestris Friv. 18 

158. E. taurinensis All. 28 

159. Fabaceae Anthyllis A. aurea Welden. 14 

160. A. vulneraria L. 12 

161. Astragalus A. hamosus L. 48 

162. A. mariovensis Micev. 16 

163. 

A. onobrychis L. var. chlorocarpus 

32 

(Griseb.) Stoj. & Stef. 

164. A. parnasii Boiss. 16 

165. A. vesicarius L. 16 

166. Biserrula B. pelecinus L. 16 

167. Coronilla C. emeroides Boiss. & Sprun. 14 

168. C. scorpioides (L.) Koch. 12 

169. C. varia L. 24 

170. Cytisus C. nigricans L. 48 

171. Dorycnium D. herbaceum Vill. 14 

172. D. hirsutum (L.) Ser. 14 

173. Galega G. officinalis L. 16 

174. Genista G. sessilifolia DC. 22 

175. Hippocrepis H. ciliata Willd. 14 

176. H. comosa L. 28 

177. Lathyrus L. aphaca L. 14 

178. L. cicera L. 14 

179. L. digitatus (M.B.) Fiori 14 

180. L. grandiflorus Sibt. & Sm. 14 

181. L. hirsutus L. 14 

182. L. inconspicuus L. 14 

183. L. laxiflorus (Desf.) O.Kuntze 14 

184. L. niger (L.) Bernh. 14 

185. L. nissolia L. 14 

186. L. pratensis L. 14 

187. L. saxatilis (Vent.) Vis. 14 

188. L. setifolius L. 14 

189. L. sphaericus Retz. 14 

190. L. tuberosus L. 14 

191. L. venetus (Mill.) Vohlf. 14 

192. Lens L. nigricans (M.B.) Godr. 14 

193. Lotus L. corniculatus L. 24 

194. Medicago M. arabica (L.) Huds. 16 

195. M. lupulina L. 16 

196. M. minima (L.) Bartl. 16 

197. M. rigidula (L.) All. 14 

198. Melilotus M. alba Medik 16 

199. M. officinalis (L.) Med. 16 

200. Onobrychis O. alba (W.K) Desv. 14 

201. 

O. hypargyrea Boiss. f. spinuligera 

Bornm. 

14 

202. Ornithopus O. compressus L. 14


203. Trifolium T. angustifolium L. 16 

204. T. arvense L. 14 

205. T. balansae Boiss. 16 

206. T. campestre Schreb. 14 

207. T. cherleri L. 10 

208. T. hirtum All. 10 

209. T. incarnatum L. 14 

210. T. micranthum Viv. 16 

211. T. nigrescens Viv. 16 

212. T. scabrum L. 10 

213. T. sylvaticum Gerar. Ex oiss. 14 

214. T. striatum L. 14 

215. T. strictum L. 16 

216. T. subterraneum L. 16 

217. T. tenuifolium Ten. 12 

218. Vicia V. articulata Hornem. 14 

219. V. barbazitae Ten. et Guss. 14 

220. V. bithynica (L.) L. 14 

221. V. cracca L. 14 

222. V. dalmatica A.Kern. 12 

223. V. ervilia (L.) Willd. 14 

224. V. grandiflora Scop. 14 

225. V. hirsuta (L.)S.F.Gray 14 

226. V. hybrida L. 12 

227. V. incana Gouan 12 

228. V. lathyroides L. 12 

229. V. loiseleurii (M.B.)Litv. 14 

230. V. melanops Sibth. & Sm. 10 

231. V. narbonensis L. (agg.) 14 

232. V. onobrychoides L. 14 

234. V. peregrinus L. 14 

235. V. sativa L. subsp. nigra (L.) Her. 12 

236. V. sepium L. 14 

237. V. serratifolia Jacq. 14 

238. V. striata (M.) Bieb. 12 

240. V. tenuifolia Roth. 12 

241. V. tetrasperma Moench. 14 

242. V. villosa Roth. 14 

243. Geraniaceae Geranium G. columbinum L. 18 

244. 

G. cinereum Cav. subsp. subcaulescens 

(LHer ex DC) Hayek 

56 

245. Globulariaceae Globularia 

G. punctata Lapaeyr. (Syn.: G. 

16 

willkommii Nym; G. elongata Heg.) 

246. Iridaceae Crocus C. adamii Gay (Syn: C. biflorus Mill.) 18 

247. C. alexandri Nicic et Velenovski 8 

248. C. cancellatus Herb 16 

249. C. chrysanthus Herb. 8 

250. C. chrysanthus Herb. var.citrinus 8; 20 

251. C. cvijicii Kosanin 22 

252. C. dalmaticus Visiani 26 

253. 

C. flavus Weston (Syn: C. moesiacus 

8 

Ker.& Gawl.) 

254. C. heuffelianus Herb. 22 

255. C. hybridus Petr. 13 

256. C. kosaninii Pulevic 14 

257. C. nubigenoides Randjelovic 18 

175

176 


258. C. olivieri J. Gay. 6 

259. C. pallasii Goldb. f. pallasii 14 

260. C. pallasii Goldb. f. albidus Siehe 16 

261. C. pallidus Kitanov & Drenkovski 8 

262. C. pelistericus Pulevic 34 

264. C. pulchellus Herb. 12 

265. C. reticulatus Steven 14 

266. C. scardicus Kosanin 34; 35; 36 

268. C. speciosus M. B. 14 

269. C. sublimis Herbert 20 

270. C. tommasinianus Herbert. 16 

271. C. veluchensis Herb 26 

274. C. weldenii Hoppe & Furnohr. 8 

275. Iris I. attica Boiss et Heldr. 16 

276. I. germanica L 44 

277. I. mellita Janka 24 

278. I. pseudacorus L. 34 

279. I. pumila L. 16 

280. I. reichenbachii Heuft. 24 

281. I. rubromarginata Baker 16 

282. I. sintenisii Janka 32 

283. I. variegata L. 24 

284. Lamiaceae Acinos A. hungaricus (Simon.) Silic 18 

285. Ajuga A. genevensis L. 32 

286. B . nigra L. 22 

287. Betonica B. alopecuros L. 16 

288. B. scardica Griseb. 16 

289. Clinopodium C. vulgare L. 20 

290. Leonurus L. cardiaca L. 18 

291. Nepeta N. cataria L. 34 

292. Prunella P. vulgaris L. 28 

293. Salvia S. aethiopis L. 22 

294. S. jurisici Kosanin 22 

295. S. ringens S.S. 12 

296. S. verticilata L. 16 

297. S. viridis L. 16 

298. Scutellaria S. orientalis L. 22 

299. Sideritis S. montana L. 16 

300. Stachys S. angustifolia M.Bieb. 34 

301. S. annua (L.) L. 34 

302. S. horvaticii Micevski 34 

303. S. iva Griseb. 34 

304. S. macedonica Micev. 34 

305. S. plumosa Griseb. 34 

306. Teucrium T. montanum L. 26 

307. T. polium L. 26 

308. Thymus T alsarensis Ronn. 28 

309. 

T. ciliatopubescens (Hal.) Hal. var.bistrae 

Micev. et Matev. 

28 

310. 

T. ciliatopubescens (Hal.) Hal. var. 

28 

poliothrix (Ronn.) Micev. 

311. T. grisebachii Ronn. 28 

312. T. jankae Cel. 56 

313. T. karadzicensis Matev. et Micev. 28 

314. 

T. karadzicensis Matev. et Micev. var. 

doerfleri (Ronn.) Matev. et Micev. 

56


315. T. Longidens Vel. var. lanicaulis Ronn. 28 

316. T. macedonicus (Deg. et Urum.) Ronn. 28 

317. T. moesiacus Vel. 28 

318. T. pseudo-atticus Ronn. 52 

319. T. skopjensis Micev. et Matev. 28 

320. T. tosevii Vel. 28 

321. 

T. tosevii Vel. subsp. heterotrichus 

(Griseb.) Matev. 

28 

322. 

T. tosevii Vel. subsp. substriatus (Borb.) 

Matev. 

28 

323. 

T. tosevii Vel. subsp. tosevii var. 

cerasitifolius Ronn. 

28 

324. 

T. tosevii Vel. subsp. tosevii var. 

28 

longifrons Ronn. 

325. T. tosevii Vel. subsp. tosevii var. tosevii 28 

326. Ziziphora Z. capitata L. 16 

327. Liliaceae Allium A. ampleloprasum L. 32 

328. A. carinatum L. 24 

329. A. cupani L. 16 

330. A. flavum L. 16 

331. A. flavum L. var.minus Boiss. 16 

332. A. margaritaceum Sibth et Sm. 16; 24 

333. A. meteroricum Heldr. et Hayek 16 

334. A. moschatum L. 16 

335. A. nigrum L. 32 

336. A. oleraceum L. 32 

337. A. paniculatum L. 16 

338. A. pulchellum Don. 16 

339. A. rotundum L. 16; 32 

340. A. schoenoprasum L. 16 

341. A. sphaerocephalum L. 16 

342. A. ursinum L. 14 

343. A. vineale L. 32 

344. Anthericum A. liliago L. 48 

345. Asphodeline A. liburnica Reichenb. 28 

346. A. lutea Reichenb. 28 

347. A. taurica (Pall.) Kunth. 28 

348. Asphodelus A. albus Mill. 28 

349. Colchicum C. autumnale L. 63, 74 

350. C. doerfleri Hal. 

36; 45; 

46; 48; 

50; 52; 

351. C.macedonicum Kos. 

36; 42; 

45; 48; 52 

352. Fritillaria F. tenella M.B. 18+6B 

353. Gagea G. arvensis (Pers ) Dumort. 48 

354. G. bohemica Roem. et Schult. 48 

355. G. fistulosa (Ram.)Ker.-Gawl. 48 

356. G. lutea (L.) Ker.-Gawl. 24, 72 

357. G. minima (L.) Ker.-Gavl. 24 

358. G. pratensis (Pers.) Dumort. 24 

359. G. pusilla (F.W.Sch) J.A. et J.H.Schult. 24; 48; 60 

360. Leopoldia L. comosa Parl. 18 

361. L. comosa Parl. var. scorpillii (Vel.) Hay. 18 

362. L .tenuiflora (Tausch) Heldr. 18 

363. Lilium L. albanicum Griseb. 24 

177

178 


364. L. candidum L. 24 

365. L. martagon L. 24 

366. Merendera 

M. sobolifera C. A. Meyer in Fischer & 

C.A. Meyer 

43; 45; 54 

367. Muscari M. botryoides Mill. 18 

368. M. botryoides Mill. var.kerneri 18 

369. M. racemosum Mill. 18 

370. M. tenuiflorum Tausch. 54 

371. M. vandasii Vel. 18 

372. Ornithogalum O. comosum L. 18 

373. O. gussonii Ten. 16; 18; 20 

374. O. montanum Cyr. 14; 16 

375. O. nanum Sibth. et Smith. 18 

376. O. nutans subsp. prasandrum Grisb. 14 

377. O. oligophyllum Clarke 18 

378. O. pyrenaicum L. 16 

379. O. pyrenaicum L. var. sphaerocarpum 17 

380. O. refractum Kit. 14 

381. O. umbellatum L. 20; 54 

382. Polygonatum P. latifolium (Jacq) Desf. 20 

383. P. officinale All. 20+2 

384. Ruscus R. aculeatus L. 40 

385. Scilla S. autumnalis L. 28 

386. S. bifolia L. 18; 36 

387. Tulipa T. mariannae Lindtn. 24 

388. T. scardica Bornm. 24 

389. T. sylvestris L. 24 

390. T. sylvestris L. subsp. celsiana DC. 24 

391. Convallaria C. majalis L. 38 

392. Erythronium E. dens-canis L. 24 

393. Linaceae Linum L. austriacum L. 18 

394. 

L. perenne L. subsp. exstraaxillare (Kit.) 

S.& S. 

30 

395. Malvaceae Lavatera L. thuringiaca L. 44 

396. Paeoniaceae Paeonia P. corallina Retz. 10 

397. P. decora Anders 10; 20 

398. Papaveraceae Chelidonium Ch. majus L. 12 

399. Corydalis C. solida (L.) Smith 10 

400. Papaver P. argemone L. 14 

401. Plantaginaceae Plantago P. arenaria W.K. 12 

402. P. argentea Chaix 12 

403. P. atrata Hoppe 12; 24 

404. 

P. atrata Hoppe subsp.atrata var.atrata 

Pilger. 

12 

405. P. bellardi All. subsp. bellardi 12 

406. 

P. coronopus L. subsp. commutata 

(Guss.) Pilger 

20 

407. P. gentianoides Sibth. et Smith 12 

408. P. holosteum Scop. subsp. holosteum 12 

409. P. holosteum Scop. var. depauperata 12 

410. P. indica L. 12 

411. P. lanceolata L. (s.l) 12 

412. P. major L. 12 

413. P. media L. 24 

414. Plumbaginaceae Armeria A. rumelica Boiss. 18 

415. A. rumelica f. temskyana Boiss. 18


416. Poaceae Aegilops A. biuncialis Vis. 28 

417. A. cylindrica Host. 28 

418. A. neglecta Req. & Bertol. 28 

419. A. triaristata Willd. 28 

420. Agropyron A. cristatum Auct. 28 

421. Anthoxantum A. aristatum Boiss. 10 

422. Avena A. clauda Durand 28 

423. A. fatua L. 28 

424. Briza B. maxima L. 14 

425. Bromus B. arvensis L. 14 

426. B. hordeaceus L. 28 

427. B. japonicus Thunb. 14 

428. B. squarrosus L. 14 

429. 

B. squarrosus L. var.villosus (Gmel.) 

14 

Geor. 

430. B. sterilis L 14 

431. B. tectorum L. 14 

432. Cynosurus C. echinatus L. 14 

433. Echinaria E. capitata Desf. 18 

434. Festuca F. valesiaca Schleicher ex Gaudin 14 

435. Haynaldia H. villosa (L.) Schur. 14 

436. Hordeum H. asperum (Smk.) Deg. 14 

437. H. bulbosum L. 28 

438. H. maritimum With. 14 

439. H. murinum L. 28 

440. Melica M. ciliata L. 18 

441. M. ciliata L. var. transilvanica Schur. 18 

442. Micropyrum M. tenellum (L.) Link 14 

443. Phalaris P. canariensis L. 12 

444. Poa P. bulbosa L. 28 

445. P. bulbosa L. f. vivipara Koel. 28 

446. Taeniatherum T. caput-medusae (L.) Nevski 14 

447. Trisetum T. flavescens L. 28 

448. Vulpia V. myurus (L.) Gmel. 42 

449. Ranunculaceae Aconitum A. variegatum L. 16 

450. A. lamarckii Reichenb. 16 

451. Actea A. spicata L. 16 

452. Adonis A. vernalis L. 16 

453. Anemone A. apennina L. subsp. apennina 14 

454. 

A. apenina L. subsp. blanda (Sch.& Kots) 

16 

Hay. 

455. A. blanda Schott. et Kotschy. 14 

456. A. narcissiflora L. var. narcissiflora 14 

457. A. nemorosa L. f. nemorosa 30 

458. 

A. pavonina Lam. var. purpureoviolacea 

16 

(Boiss.) Hay. 

459. A. ranunculoides L. f. biflora 48 

460. Caltha C. palustris L. 32 

461. Clematis C. vitalba L. 16 

462. Consolida C. regalis S. F. Gray. 16 

463. Delphinium D. balcanicum Pawl. 16 

464. D. fissum Waldst. et Kit. 16 

465. D. halteratum Sibth. & Sm. 16 

466. Helleborus H. odorus Waldst. & Kit. 32 

467. Hepatica H. nobilis Miller 14 

468. Nigella N. arvensis L. 12 

179

180 


469. N. arvensis L. f. tuberculata (Gris.) Simk. 12 

470. N. damascena L. 12 

471. Pulsatila P. halleri (All) Willd. 16 

472. P. vernalis (L.) Mill. 16 

473. Ranunculus R. acris L. 14 

474. R. arvensis L. 32 

475. R. bulbosus L. 16 

476. R. cacuminis Strid. et Papan. 16 

477. R. carinhiacus L. 16 

478. R. crenatus W. K. 16 

479. R. degenii Kumm et Jav. 16 

480. R. demissus D. C. 16 

481. 

R. ficaria L. subsp. bulbifer (Marsden- 

Jones) L. 

32 

482. R. ficaria L. subsp. calthifolius Rchb. 16 

483. 

R. ficaria L. subsp. ficariformis Rony et 

32 

Fouc. 

484. R. illyricus L. 32 

485. R. lanuginosus L. 28 

486. R. millefoliatus Vahl. 16 

487. R. montanus Willd. 16; 32 

488. R. montenegrinus (Hal. ex Bald.) Lindtner 40 

489. R. neapolitanus Ten. 16 

490. R. nemorosus D. C. 16 

491. R. oreophilus Berb. 32 

492. R. oxyspermus Ross. 16 

493. R. pedatus Waldst. & K. 16 

494. R. platanifolius L. 16 

495. R. polyanthamos L. 16 

496. R. psilostachys Grsb. 16 

497. R. repens L. 32 

498. R. rumelicus Gris. 16; 32 

499. R. sardous Crantz 16 

500. R. sartorianus Boiss. et Heldr. 16 

501. R. sceleratus L. 16; 32 

502. R. serbicus Vis. 28 

503. R. sprunerianus Boiss. 16 

504. R. velutinus T. 14 

505. Thalictrum Th. aquilegifolium L. 14 

506. Trollius T. europaeus L. 16 

507. Rosaceae Dryas D. octopetala L. 16 

508. Potentila P. detomasii Ten. 14 

509. Sanguisorba S. minor Scop. 28 

510. Rubiaceae Asperula A. aristata L. 22 

511. Crucianella C. graeca Boiss. 22 

512. Galium G. divaricatum Lam. 22 

513. G. kerneri Deg. 22 

514. G. plebeium Boiss. & Heldr. 22 

515. Sherardia Sh. arvensis L. 22 

516. Scrophulariaceae Veronica V. austriaca L. 32 

517. V. dillenii Crautr. 16 

518. V. jacquini Baumg 16 

519. V. kindlii Adam. 16 

520. V. officinalis L. 16 

521. Valerianaceae Valeriana V. tuberosa L. 16 

522. Violaceae Viola V. aetolica Boiss. & Heldr. 16


523. V. allchariensis G. Beck 20 

524. V. arsenica G. Beck 20 

525. V. babunensis Erben 18 

526. V. bornmuelleri Erben 20 

527. V. doerfleri Degen. 20 

528. V. eximia Form. 36 

529. 

V. gostivariensis (W. Beck & Bornm.) 

Bornm. 

20 

530. V. grisebachiana Vis. 22 

531. V. herzogii (W. Becker) Bornm. 20 

532. V. hymettia Boiss. & Heldr. 16 

533. V. ivonis Erben 18 

534. V. latisepala Wettst. 26 

535. V. macedonica Boiss. & Heldr. 26 

536. V. orphanidis Boiss. 22 

537. V. schariensis Erben. 20 

538. V. slavikii Form. 20 

539. 

V. aetolica Boiss. & Heldr. X V. eximia 

Form. 

17; 20; 

27; 30 

540. 

V. babunensis Erben. X V. macedonica 

Boiss.& Heldr. 

19; 20; 22 

541. 

V. babunensis Erben. X V. herzogii 

(W.Becker) Bornm. 

20 

542. 

V. bornmuelleri Erben X V. hymettia 

Boiss. & Heldr. 

19 

543. 

V. bornmuelleri Erben. X V. 

orphanidis Boiss. 

21 

544. 

V. ivonis Erben X V. schariensis 

Erben. 

19 

545. 

V. latisepala Wettst. X V. schariensis 

Erben. 

19; 20; 21; 

22; 23; 24 

546. V. eximia Form. X V. velutina Form. 24 

547. 

V. orphanidis Boiss. X V. velutina 

Form. 

19; 20 

548. V. velutina Form. 18 

30 171 548 

181

182 


ANNEX 6 

Agrobiodiversity 

Table 1. Share of individual crops in field and garden production (ha). 

Wheat 114,000 Peas 1100 

Rye 6,300 Lentil 288 

Barley 50,000 Cabbage plants 3,537 

Oats 2,800 Tomato 6,750 

Corn 39,000 Pepper 7,520 

Rice 4,200 Watermelon 7,900 

Sugar beet 2,300 Clover 2,710 

Industrial pepper 770 Alfalfa 19,000 

Sunflower 10,000 Vetch 4,100 

Poppy 160 Fodder peas 1,800 

Onion 4,300 Fodder corn 2,100 

Garlic 1,325 Fodder beet 520 

Beans and green beans 7,000 Grapevine 31,000 

Table 2. Share of individual fruit plants in fruit production (productive fruit trees). 

Cherry 155,000 Pear 553 

Sour cherry 655,000 Plum 1,387,000 

Apricot 24,200 Peach 586,000 

Pomegranate 53,000 Walnut 175,000 

Apple 311,4000 Almond 213,000 

Table 3. Varieties registered in Macedonia. 

No. 


Macedonian common 

name 

Domestic recognized 

varieties 

Foreign approved varieties 

Domestic and 

domesticated foreign 

varieties 

1. Agropyron Gaertn. Spp. Pirej 4 

2. Agrostis sp. Polevica 3 1 

3. Allium cepa L. Kromid 4 20 22 

4. Allium cepa L. var. viviparum Proch. Rokambol 1 

5. 

Allium fistulosum var. viviparum 

Zimski kromid, alma 1 

Makino 

6. Allium porrum L. Praz 1 1 5 

7. Allium sativum L. Luk 2 16 

8. Alopecurus sp. Opashka 2 

9. Apium graveolens L. var. dulce (Mill.) Rebrest gerevis 3 

Apium graveolens L. var. rapaceum 

10. 

(Mill. Gaud.) 

Korenest gerevis 3 3 

Apium graveolens L. var. secalinum 

11. 

Alef. 

Listen gerevis 1 

12. Arachis hypogaea L. Kikiriki 2 

Armoratia rusticana Ph. Gartn, B. 

13. Ren 1 

14. 

Mey.et Scherb 

Arrhenatheum elatius (L.) P. Beauv. ex 

J.S. et K.B. Presl. 

Francuska treva 3 1


15. Asparagus officinalis L. Shpargla 3 

16. Astragalus cicer L. Kozinec gravolik 1 

17. Atriplex hortensis L. Loboda 3 

18. Avena sativa L. Oves 23 3 

Beta vulgaris L. subsp. saccharifera 

19. 

Lange 

Shekerna repa 76 

20. Beta vulgaris L. subsp. vulgaris Blitva 3 

Beta vulgaris L. subsp. vulgaris subvar. 

21. 

rubra Alef. et Helm. 

Cveklo 2 2 

22. Beta vulgaris L. var. crassa Alef. Dobitochna repka 22 2 

Brassica napus L. var. biennis Scuhbl. et 

23. Dobitochna repa 

Mart. Reichb. 

1 

Brassica napus L. var. napobrassica (L.) 

24. Broskva, brikva 

Rchb. 

2 

Brassica napus L. var. napobrassica (L.) 

25. Brikva 

Rehb. 

3 

26. Brassica napus L. var. oleifera D.C. Maslodayna repka 22 1 

27. Brassica nigra (L.) Koch. Sinap crn 1 

Brassica oleracea L. convar. acephala 

28. 

(DC.) Alef. var. planitolia DC 

Kel lisnat 1 


29. 

(DC.) Alef. var. sabellica L. 

Kel kadrav 1 


30. 

DC. var. gongylodes 

Alabas 9 

Brassica oleracea L. convar. 

31. 

botrytiscymosa Duch. 

Brokoli 2 1 

Brassica oleracea L. convar. oleracea 

32. 

var. gemmifera DC. 

Kel pupcar 9 3 

Brassica oleracea L. var. botrytis (L.) 

33. 

Alef. 

Karfiol 23 10 

34. Brassica oleracea L. var. sabauda L. Kel 2 9 

Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata f. 

35. Zelka 63 19 

alba Duch, f. rubra 

36. Brassica pekinensis (Lour.) Rupr. Kineska zelka 2 1 

37. Brassica rapa L. var. oleifera D.C. Krmna repka ogrstica 1 

38. Brassica rapa L. var. rapifera Metz. Bela repka, turneps 2 

39. Bromus inermis Leyss. Bezosilest vlasen 1 

40. Cannabis sativa L. Konop 4 2 

41. Capparis spinosa L. Kapra 3 

42. Capsicum anuum L. Piperka 5 51 18 

43. Carthamus tinctorius L. Shafranika 1 

44. Cicer arietinum L. Naut 2 

45. Cichorium endivia L. Endivija 17 

Cichorium inthybus L. var. foliosum 

46. Cikoria 3 

Bisch. 

47. Cichorium intybus L. Cikoriya 2 1 

48. Citrullus vulgaris L. Lubenica 15 4 

49. Cucumis melo L. Dinya 7 9 

50. Cucumis sativus L. Krastavica 45 14 

51. Cucumis sativus L. var. kornishon Kornishoni 8 2 

52. Cucurbita ficifolia Pangalo Tikva smokvolisna 1 

53. Cucurbita maxima Duch. Tikva pechenka 3 

54. Cucurbita mixta Duch. Tikva zimska 1 

183

184 


55. Cucurbita moschata Duch. Tikva muskatna 1 

Cucurbita pepo L. convar. melo pepo L. 

56. Patishon 

provar. patissonina Gred. 

1 1 

Cucurbita pepo L. var. maxima 

57. 

(Duchesne ex Lam.) Del. 

Tikva stambolka 1 

58. Cucurbita pepo L. var. oblonga Willd. Tikvica 5 13 

59. Cucurbita pepo L. var. oleifera P. Maslodayna tikva 4 

60. Cynara cardunculus L. Kardon 1 

61. Cynara scolymus L. Artichoka 1 

62. Dactylis glomerata L. Ezevka 9 

Daucus carota L. subsp. sativus 

63. 

(Hoffm.) Hayek 

Dobitochen morkov 2 

64. Daucus carota L. subsp. sativus Hoffm. Morkov 19 13 

65. Fagopyrum esculentum Moench. Elda 2 1 

66. Festuca arundinacea Schreb. Visoka vlasatka 2 14 

67. Festuca pratensis Huds. Livadska vlasatka 5 3 

68. Festuca rubra L. Crvena vlasatka 10 

69. Foeniculum vulgare P. Mill. var. dulce Anason 4 

70. Glycine hispida (Moench) Max. Soya 77 

71. Gossypium hirsutum L. Pamuk 3 1 1 

72. Helianthus annuus L. Sonchogled 39 2 

73. Helianthus tuberosus L. Cicoka 2 

74. Helianthus tuberosus L. Krkushka 1 

75. Hibiscus esculentus L. Bamya 2 

76. Hordeum vulgare L. var. distichon Alef Jachmen 6 65 1 

Hordeum vulgare L. var. polystichon 

77. 

Haller f. 

Jachmen 24 1 

78. Humulus lupulus L. Hmel 14 2 

79. Lactuca sativa L. Salata 25 23 

80. Lens esculenta Moench. Leka 3 

81. Lepidium sativum L. Kres salata 2 

82. Linum usitatissimum L. Len 7 

83. Lolium italicum L. (multiflorum) IItalianski raygras 16 

84. Lotus corniculatus L. Zholt zvezdan 7 1 

85. Lotus perenne L. Angliski raygras 18 1 

86. Lupinus albus L. Bela lupina 3 

87. Lycopersicon licopersicum (L.) Karsten Domat 4 76 18 

88. Medicago lupulina L. Hmelovidna lucerka 1 

89. Medicago sativa L. subsp.sativa Lucerka 1 53 

90. Melilotus albus Desr. Bela komuniga 1 

91. Nicotiana tabacum L. Tutun 29 23 17 

92. Onobrychis viciifolia Scop. Esparzeta 1 

93. Oryza sativa L. Oriz 5 7 2 

94. Panicum miliaceum L. Proso 3 2 

95. Papaver somniferum L. Afion 2 2 

96. Pastinaca sativa L. Pashkanat 1 2 1 

97. Petroselinum crispum P. Mill. Magdanos 5 

98. Phaseolus vulgaris L. Grav 21 8 

99. Phaseolus vulgaris L. var. communis Boraniya visoka 8 2 

Phaseolus vulgaris L. var. nanus (Jusl) 

100. 

Aschers f. sine fibris 

Boraniya 2 40 3


101. Phleum pretense L. Machkina opashka 9 1 

Pisum sativum L. convar. axiphium Alef. 

102. Grashok shekeren 

Mend C.O. Lehk. 

2 

103. Pisum sativum L. subsp. arvense Poir. Dobitochen grashok 8 

Pisum sativum L. subsp. sativum 

104. 

(partim) 

Grashok 54 8 

105. Poa pratensis L. Prava livadarka 6 1 

Portulaca oleracea L. subsp. sativa 

106. 

Haw. 

Portulak, tucnica 2 

107. Raphanus sativus L. oleiformis Pers. Maslodayna trupka 1 

Raphanus sativus L. var. niger Mil. S. 

108. 

Kerner 

Repa (rotkva) 4 

109. Raphanus sativus L. var. radicola DC. Repichka (rotkvica) 6 7 

110. Rheum rhabarbarum L. Reven 2 

111. Ricinus communis L. Ricinus 1 

112. Rumex acetosa L. Kiselec 1 

113. Rumex patientia L. Zelye 1 

Scorzonera hispanica L. convar. edulis 

114. 

Moench 

Crn koren 1 

115. Secale cereale L. Rzh 3 8 4 

116. Sesamum indicum L. Susam 2 

117. Setaria italika L. P. Beauv Brenica 2 

118. Sinapis alba L. Sinap 2 2 

119. Solanum melongena L. Patlidzan 9 2 

120. Solanum tuberosum L. Kompir 80 13 

121. Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf Sudanska treva 3 1 

122. Sorghum vulgare L. Sirak 9 

123. Sorghum vulgare Pers. Dobitochen sirak 10 

124. Spinacia oleracea L. Spanak 14 4 

125. Taraxacum officinale Wiggers Maslachok, gluvarche 1 

Tetragonia tetragonioides (Pall.) O. 

126. 

Kuntze 

Spanak novozelandski 1 

Tragopogon porrifolius L. 

127. 

Bel koren, Kozina 

Shpanska 

1 

128. Trifolium alexandrinum Juslen Aleksandriska detelina 1 

129. Trifolium hybridum L. Shvedska detelina 1 

130. Trifolium incarnatum L. Inkarnatska detelina 1 1 

131. Trifolium pratense L. Crvena detelina 16 1 

132. Trifolium repens L. Bela detelina 7 1 

133. Trifolium resupinatum L. Persiska detelina 1 

134. Trifolium subterraneum L. Podzemna detelina 1 

135. X Triticale Tritikale 3 6 

136. Triticum aestivum L. Meka pchenica 22 300 1 

137. Triticum durum Desf. Tvrda pchenica 28 1 1 

Valerianella locusta (L.) Laterr. Em. 

138. 

Betcke 

Motovilec 2 

139. Vicia faba L. Bakla 5 2 

140. Vicia pannonica Crantz Panonski graor 2 

141. Vicia sativa L. Graor 3 3 

142. Vicia sativa L. Graor 1 

143. Vicia villosa Roth. Movlest graor 3 1 

144. Zea mays L. Pchenka za zrno 4 604 3 

185

186 


145. Zea mays L. subsp. aorista var. oleifera Maslodayna pchenka 7 

146. Zea mays L. subsp. ceratina Kulesch. Pchenka amilopektinska 8 

147. Zea mays L. var. everta Sturt. Phenka za pukanki 5 

148. Zea mays L. var. saccharata Sturt. Pchenka shekerna 11 

Table 4. Fruit species in wild and domesticated forms used for food and rootstocks. 

1. Amygdalus communis L. Div badem, Gorchliv badem 

2. Castanea sativa Mill. Kosten 

3. Cornus mas L. Dren 

4. Corylus avellana L. Div leshnik, domestic tipes 

5. Corylus colurna L. Div leshnik, Mechkina leska 

6. Crataegus oxycantha Glog 

7. Cydonia oblonga L. Dunya 

8. Dyospiros lotus Divo yaponsko yabolko, Lotus 

9. Dyospiros virginiana Divo yaponsko yabolko 

10. Ficus carica L. Diva smokva, domestic tipes 

11. Fragaria vesca L. Shumska yagoda 

12. Juglans regia L. Orev, domestic tipes 

13. Malus pumila Mill. Nisko rano yabolko, Petrovka 

14. Malus silvestris Miller Divo yabolko 

15. Mespilus germanica L. Mushmula 

16. Morus alba L., Morus nigra L. Crnica, domestic tipes 

17. Pistacia terebinthus L. Div fistak, Smrdulka 

18. Poncirus trifoliata (L.)Raf. Div limon, Trolisten limon 

19. Prunus armeniaca L. Diva kaysiya, Zerdeliya 

20. Prunus avium L. Diva cresha, Vrapcharka 

21. Prunus cerasifera Ehrh. Diva sliva, Dzanka 

22. Prunus insititia (L.) Bonnier & Layens Magareshki slivi 

23. Prunus persica L. Diva praska, Lozarska praska 

24. Punica granatum L. Kalinka, domestic tipes 

25. Pyrus amygdaliformis Vill. Gornica krusha 

26. Pyrus communis L. Diva krusha 

27. Rosa canina L. Shipka 

28. Rubus idaeus Malina 

29. Rubus spp. Kapina 

30. Sorbus aucuparia L. Oskorusha 

31. Vaccinium myrtillus L. Borovnica 

32. Ziziphus jujuba Mill. Kineska urma, Sirka 

Table 5. Wild species found in natural meadows and pastures. 

1. Achillea millefolium L. Ajduchka treva 

2. Agropyron cristatum (L.) Geartner Cheslest zhitnik 

3. Agrostis capillaris L. Obicna polevica 

4. Agrostis stolonifera L. Bela polevica 

5. Alopecurus pratensis L. Lisichina opashka 

6. Astragalus spp. Kozinec 

7. Beta vulgaris L. var. crassa Alef. Dobitochna repa 

8. Brassica oleraceae L. var. acephala DC. Dobitochen kel 

9. Brassica spp. Repici 

10. Bromus inermis Leyss. Bezosilest vlasen 

11. Cynosurus cristatus L. Petlova kikiritka 

12. Dactylis glomerata L. Ezevka 

13. Dichanthium ischaemum (L.) Roberty. Kokoshkina noga 

14. Ervum ervilia L. Urov


15. Festuca arundinacea Schreb. Visoka vlasatka 

16. Festuca ovina L. Ovcha vlasatka 

17. Festuca paniculata (L.) Schinz & Thell. Ostrika 

18. Festuca pratensis Huds. Livadska vlasatka 

19. Festuca rubra L. Crvena vlasatka 

20. Glycine hispida (Moench.) Maxim. Soya 

21. Helianthus tuberosus L. Cicoka 

22. Lathyrus sativus L. Sekirche 

23. Lotus corniculatus L var. tenuis L.. Tesnolisen zvezdan 

24. Lotus corniculatus L. Zholt zvezdan 

25. Lotus uliginosus Schk. Barski zvezdan 

26. Lupinus spp. Lupina 

27. Malva verticillata var. crispa L. Dobitochen slez 

28. Medicago arabica (L.) Huds. Tochkesta lucerka 

29. Medicago falcata L. Zholta lucerka 

30. Medicago lupulina L. Hmelovidna lucerka 

31. Medicago orbicularis (L) Bartal. Konchesta lucerka 

32. Medicago sativa L. Lucerka 

33. Melilotus albus Desr. Bela komuniga 

34. Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pallas Zholta komuniga 

35. Nardus stricta L. Krtul 

36. Onobrychis sativa Lam. Esparzeta 

37. Pisum sativum L. var. arvense (L.) Poiret Dobitochen grashok 

38. Plantago major L., P. media L., P. lanceolata 

Tegavec 

L. 

39. Poa pratensis L. Vistinska livadarka 

40. Poa trivialis L. Obicna livadarka 

41. Rumex spp. Shtavelyi 

42. Sanquisorba officinalis L., S. minor Scop. Dinka 

43. Taraxacum officinale Wiggers. Gluvarche 

44. Trifolium alexandrinum Juslen Aleksandriska detelina 

45. Trifolium fragiferum L. Yagodesta detelina 

46. Trifolium incarnatum L. Inkarnatska detelina 

47. Trifolium montanum L. Planinska detelina 

48. Trifolium patens Schreb. Zholta detelina 

49. Trifolium pratense L. Crvena detelina 

50. Trifolium repens L. Bela detelina 

51. Trifolium resupinatum L. Persiska detelina 

52. Trifolium subterraneum L. Podzemna detelina 

53. Trisetum flavescens (L.) P. Beauv. Zlatnozholt oves 

54. Vicia faba L. Bakla 

55. Vicia pannonica Crantz. Panonski-ungarski graor 

56. Vicia sativa L. Obichen proleten graor 

57. Vicia villosa Roth. Vlaknest graor -glusina 

58. Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walpers. Vigna 

Table 6. Medicinal and ornamental plants. 

No. Scientific name Macedonian common name 

1. Achillea millefolium complex* Ayduchka treva 

2. Aconitum divergens Volchyi chemer 

3. Acorus calamus* Lirot 

4. Adonis vernalis* Gorocvet 

5. Aesculus hippocastanum Div kosten 

6. Agrimonia eupatoria Petrovec, kamshik 

7. Agropyrum repens* Pirevina 

187

188 


8. Alchemilla vulgaris Rosnik, arslanska shepa 

9. Allium cepa Kromid 

10. Allium sativum Luk 

11. Allium ursinum* Mechkin luk 

12. Althaea officinalis* Bel slez 

13. Althaea rosea Crven slez 

14. Anacmptis spp.* Salep 

15. Anethum graveolens Kopar 

16. Angelica archangelica Blag boz, angelika 

17. Angelica pancicii Blag boz, angelika 

18. Apium graveolens Celer 

19. Aquilegia vulgaris Kandilka 

20. Arbutus andrachne Gol chovek 

21. Arctium lappa* Cicok 

22. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi* Mechkino grozye 

23. Aristolochia clematitis Volchyo yabolko 

24. Artemisia absintium Pitom pelin 

25. Artemisia vulgaris Pelin 

26. Arum maculatum Zmisko grozye 

27. Asparagus acutifolius Asparagus 

28. Asperula odorata Lazarka 

29. Atropa belladona Pomamnica 

30. Avena sativa Oves 

31. Bellis perennis Pariche 

32. Berberis vulgaris Kisel trn 

33. Betula pendula* Breza 

34. Borago officinalis Volski yazik 

35. Brassica alba Bel sinap 

36. Brassica nigra Crn sinap 

37. Bryonia alba Diva tikva 

38. Calamintha grandiflora Shumski chay 

39. Calendula officinalis Neven 

40. Capsela bursa-pastoris* Ovcharska torbichka 

41. Carlina acaulis* Vilino sito 

42. Castanea sativa Kosten 

43. Celtis australis 

44. Centaurium umbelatum* Crven kantarion 

45. Cetraria islandica Islandski chay 

46. Chamomilla recutita* Kamilica 

47. Chelidonium majus Zmiysko mleko, rusa 

48. Chenopodium bonus-henricus* Cuen 

49. Chenopodium botrys 

50. Cichorium intyibus* Cukorija 

51. Clematis vitalba Povit 

52. Cnicus benedictus Pitom trn 

53. Armoracia rusticana Ren 

54. Colchicum autumnale* Mrazovec 

55. Conium maculatum Bucumis, kukut 

56. Convallaria majalis* Momina solza 

57. Coriandrum sativum Korijander 

58. Cornus sanguinea Crn dren 

59. Corylus avellana Leska, leshnik 

60. Cotoneaster melanocarpa Crna mushmula 

61. Crategus monogyna* Glog


62. Crategus oxyacantha* Glog 

63. Dactylorhiza spp.* Salep 

64. Datura stramonium Tatula 

65. Daucus carota Morkov 

66. Digitalis spp. Butin 

67. Ecballium elaterium Luda krastavica 

68. Echium vulgare Volcya opashka 

69. Ephedra spp. Efedra 

70. Equisetum arvense* Konysko opavche, preclika 

71. Erodium cicutarium Zdral 

72. Eryngium campestre Vetrogon 

73. Euphrasia officinalis Vidova treva 

74. Ficus carica Smokva 

75. Foeniculum vulgare* Makedonski anason 

76. Fragaria vesca* Yagoda 

77. Frangula spp. Krushina 

78. Fraxinus ornus Crn yasen 

79. Fumaria officinalis Dimarka 

80. Galega officinalis Zdralka 

81. Galeopsis dubia Smrdliva kopriva 

82. Galium verum Ivansko cveke 

83. Gentiana lutea* Lincura 

84. Gentiana punctata* Lincura 

85. Geranium spp. Zdravec 

86. Geum urbanum Zayachko stopalo 

87. Gymnadenia spp.* Salep 

88. Glaucium flavum Zholt afion 

89. Gleditchia triacanthos Glaedice 

90. Glycyrrhiza glabra Sladok koren 

91. Gnaphalium uliginosum Bel smil 

92. Gypsophila paniculata Belo sapunche 

93. Hamamelis virginiana Hamamelis 

94. Hedera helix Brshlen 

95. Helleborus sp. Kukurek 

96. Helichrysum plicatum* Smil 

97. Herniaria glabra* Sitnica gola, Zelena kilavica 

98. Herniaria hirsuta* Sitnica vlaknesta, Bela kilavica 

99. Humulus lupulus Hmely 

100. Hyoscyamus niger Bunika 

101. Hypericum perforatum* Kantarion 

102. Hyssopus officinalis Izop 

103. Inula helenium Oman, Volsko oko 

104. Iris germanica* Perunika 

105. Iris palida* Perunika 

106. Juglans regia* Orev 

107. Juniperus communis* Smreka 

108. Juniperus oxycedrus Smreka 

109. Lamium album Bela kopriva 

110. Lavandula sp. Lavanda 

111. Leonorus cardiaca Srcenica, gyavolsko uste 

112. Levisticum officinale Mil duh, Selen 

113. Lilium sp. Krin 

114. Linaria vulgaris Div len 

115. Lonicera xylosteum Anamska raka 

189

190 


116. Loranthus europaeus Zholta imela 

117. Malva sylvestris* Crn slez 

118. Marrubium vulgare Gorcica, pchelnik 

119. Melilotus officinalis Konyska detelina 

120. Melissa officinalis* Matochina, materka, pchelnik 

121. Mentha spp.* Nane 

122. Menyanthes trifoliata Gorchliva detelina 

123. Morus alba Bela crnica 

124. Morus nigra Crnica 

125. Ocimum basilicum Bosilek 

126. Olea europaea Maslinka 

127. Ononis spinosa* Zayacki trn, grmotrn 

128. Onopordon acanthium Magareshki trn 

129. Ophrys spp.* Salep 

130. Orchis spp.* Salep 

131. Origanum vulgare* Planinski chay 

132. Oxalis acetosela Kisela detelina 

133. Papaver rhoeas Bulka 

134. Papaver somniferum* Afion 

135. Paris quadrifolia 

136. Pastinaca sativa Pashkanat 

137. Peonia mascula* Bozhur 

138. Periploca greca Grchka grpka 

139. Petasites hybridus* Lopushnik 

140. Petroselinum sativum Magdonos 

141. Physalis alkekengi Zrneshnik, pluskavec 

142. Phytolacca americana Krmus 

143. Pimpinella anisum* Anason 

144. Pinus sylvestris Bel bor 

145. Pinus spp. Borovi 

146. Plantago lanceolata* Mashki tegavec 

147. Plantago major* Zhenski tegavec 

148. Polypodium vulgare* Slatka paprat 

149. Polygonum aviculare* Troskot 

150. Polygonum hydropiper Voden piper 

151. Populus nigra Crna topola 

152. Potentila anserina Petoprst 

153. Potentila erecta Treva od srce, Petoprst 

154. Primula veris* Yaglika, Petoprst 

155. Prunus amygdalus Badem 

156. Prunus laurocerasus Zeleniche 

157. Prunus spinosa Trnika 

158. Prunus spinosa* Trnika 

159. Pulmonaria officinalis Velikdenche 

160. Punica granatum Kalinka 

161. Evernia prunastri* Dabov lishay 

162. Quercus spp. Dabovi 

163. Raphanus sativus Repka 

164. Rhamnus catarica Pasdren, Gorchliv dren 

165. Cotinus coggygria Ruj 

166. Ribes spp. Ribizla 

167. Ricinus communis Ricinus 

168. Robinia pseudoacacia* Bagrem 

169. Rosa cannina* Shipka


170. Rosmarinus officinalis Rozmarin 

171. Rubia peregrina Div bros 

172. Rubus caesius Plava kapinka 

173. Rubus fruticosus agg.* Kapina 

174. Rubus ideaus* Malina 

175. Rumex acetosa Kiselec 

176. Ruscus aculeatus Bodlika, Diva shimshirka 

177. Ruta graveolens Sedvce 

178. Salix alba Bela vrba 

179. Salvia officinalis Zhalfija 

180. Salvia sclarea 

181. Sambucus nigra* Bozel 

182. Sanguisorba officinalis Krvavce 

183. Saponaria officinalis Sapunche 

184. Satureja hortensis Chubrica, Chebrika 

185. Satureja montana Planinska chubrica, Chebrika 

186. Sempervivum spp. Pazikukya 

187. Sideritis raeserii* Sharplaninski chay 

188. Sideritis scardica* Sharplaninski chay 

189. Silybum marianum Mlecen trn 

190. Symphytum officinalis Gavez 

191. Solanum dulcamara Pesyi trn 

192. Solanum nigrum Zrnec 

193. Solidago virga aurea Zlatica 

194. Sorbus aucuparia Ofika, Divo grozye 

195. Syringa vulgaris Yorgovan 

196. Tamus communis Bluzhd 

197. Taraxacum officinale* Gluvarche, Mlechna kozica 

198. Taxus baccata Tisa 

199. Teucrium montanum Planinski dupchec, Podubec 

200. Teucrium polium Bel dupchec, Podubec 

201. Teucrium scordium 

202. Thymus spp.* Majchina dushichka 

203. Tilia cordata* Lipa 

204. Tilia platyphylos* Lipa 

205. Tribulis terestris 

206. Trigonela foenum graecum Grchko seme 

207. Tropaeolum majus Latinka, Lazi bube 

208. Tussilago farfara Podbel 

209. Urtica dioica* Kopriva 

210. Vaccinium myrtillus* Borovinka 

211. Vaccinium uliginosum* Borovinka 

212. Vaccinium vitis-idaea Crvena borovinka, Brusnica 

213. Valeriana officinalis Mace treva 

214. Veratrum album* Chemerika 

215. Verbascum tapsiforme* Mopen 

216. Verbena officinalis Merbena 

217. Veronica officinalis Modrichica, Nevestinska solza 

218. Viburnum tinus 

219. Vinca minor Zelenice 

220. Viola odorata Mirisliva temyanushka 

221. Viola tricolor* Sharena temyanushka 

222. Viscum album Bela imela 

223. Zizyphus jujuba 

191

192 


Table 7. Area of forest reserves as classified by predominant tree cover species. 

Forest Area (ha) 

Forest Tree Species Group 

(1994 Inventory) 

Pure coniferous forests 81,905 

Mixed coniferous forests 9,610 

Pure broad-leaved forests 545,047 

Mixed broad-leaved forests 277,341 

Other forests, broad-leaved and coniferous 52,038 

Total 965,941 

Table 8. Forest ownership structure over different years. 

Forest 

Ownership 

Year Resource State-owned Privately-owned Total 

ha ha % ha % ha % 

1939 551,000 469,000 85.27 81,000 14.73 550,000 100 

1961 888,000 817,000 92.00 71,000 8.00 880,000 100 

1993 964,000 858,000 89.00 106,000 11.00 964,000 100 

1999 965,650 859,427 89.00 106,223 11.00 965,650 100


ANNEX 7 

List of Acronyms 

BERCEN - Balkan Environmental Regulatory Compliance and Enforcement Network 

BIOECO - Society for the Investigation and Conservation of Biodiversity and the 

Sustainable Development of Natural Ecosystems 

CARDS - Community Assistance for Reconstruction 

CFC - Chloro-fluorocarbon 

CITES - <strong>Convention</strong> on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 

Flora 

CORINE - CO-oRdination of INformation on the Environment (EU CORINE Biotopes 

Programme) 

DAD - Domestic Animal Diversity (FAO) 

DNA – Deoxyribonucleic acid 

EAR - European Agency for Reconstruction 

EIONET - European Environment Information and Observation Network 

EPC - Environmental Press Center 

EU - European Union 

FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 

FCI - Federation Cynologique International 

GDP - Gross Domestic Product 

GEF - Global Environmental Facility 

GNP - Gross National Product 

GRIN - Germplasm Resources Information Network 

GTZ - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (German Society for 

Technical Cooperation) 

IPGRI - International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (FAO) 

IUCN - International Union for Conservation of Nature 

KAM - Kinological Association of Macedonia 

KFOR - Kosovo Force (NATO) 

LEAP - Local Environmental Action Plan 

MANU - Macedonian Academy of Science and Arts 

MEIC - Macedonian Environmental Information Center 

MoEPP - Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning 

NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organisation 

NEAP - National Environmental Action Plan 

NGO - Non-governmental organisation 

POP - Persistent Organic Polluter 

REPC - Regional Environmental Press Center 

REReP - Regional Environmental Reconstruction Programme for South Eastern Europe 

RM - Republic of Macedonia 

SEEENN - South Eastern European Environmental NGOs Network 

SFRY - Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia 

UN - United Nations 

UNDP - United Nations Development Programme 

UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme 

UNESCO - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 

UNIDO - United Nations Industrial Development Organization 

193

194 


UNPROFOR - United Nations Protection Force 

USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency 

VAT - Value-added tax 

WCMC - World Conservation Monitoring Centre

References 

Adamovic, L., 1904. Beitrage zur Flora von Macedonien und Altserbien. DAWW, &4:115-150. 

Agricultural development strategy in the Republic of Macedonia to 2005. 2001. Macedonian 

Academy of Sciences and Arts, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Economy. Skopje 

Angelov, A., 1971. Beitrag zur kenntnis der Pisidien fauna (Mollusca- Sphaeridae) Mazedoniens. 

Fragmenta balcanica. Mus.. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje, 7 (185): 53:55. 

Angelovski, P. & J. Sapkarev. 1983. The composition and distribution of Chironomids (Diptera: 

Chironomidae) of Aegan Lakes. God. zb. Biol., Skopje. 36: 221-243. 

Angelovski, P., Sapkarev, J., Karaman, B. & S. Smiljkov., 1994. Qualitative composition and 

quantitative relations of the Macrozoobentos from Lake Prespa. God.zb. Biol., Skopje-47: 5-21. 

Apostolski, K., Petrovski, N., Popovska, O. & M. Sidorovski, 1956. Ribite vo Makedonija. Zavod 

za ribarstvo na NRM. Skopje. 

Aubert, J., 1963. Quelques Plecopteres de Yougoslavie. Mitt. D. Schweiz. Ent. Ges., 29(2): 187- 

213. 

Beazley, M., 2001. Guide to Freshwater Fish of Britain and Europe. Octopus Publishing Group Ltd. 

London. Pp. 1-192. 

Blazencic, J. & Blazencic, Z., 1997. Floristic characteristics of aquatic and marsh vegetation of 

Dojran Lake (Macedonia). Glas Inst. Bot. i Bast. Beograd. 31: 43-54. 

Bogojevic, J., 1968. Collembola. Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. Art. Slov. Ljubljana 

III/6:1-31. 

Bornmüller, J., 1925. Beiträge zur Flora Mazedoniens, I. Engl.Bot.Jahrb., 59:294-504, Leipzig. 

Bornmüller, J., 1926. Beiträge zur Flora Mazedoniens, II. Engl.Bot.Jahrb., 60:1-125, Leipzig. 

Bornmüller, J., 1928. Beitrag zur Flora Mazedoniens III. Engler's Bot.Jahrbücher, 61:1-195 

Brelih, S & G. Dzukic., 1974. Reptilia. Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. Art. Slov. 

Ljubljana IV/2:1-32. 

Brush S.B (editor)., 1999. Genes in the field: on-farm conservation of crop diversity. International 

Development research Centre and International Plant genetic Resources Institute, Lewis 

Publishers. 

Buturovic, A., 1954. Isopodes nouveaux (Isop.terrestria) de Macédoine et Dalmatie.Acta, Mus. 

Mac.Sci.Nat., Skopje, I (11):265-254. 

Buturovic, A., 1955. Isopodes nouveaux (Isop.terrestria) de Macédoine et Dalmatie.Acta, 

Mus.Mac.Sci.Nat., Skopje, III (5/27):145-157. 

Buturovic, A., 1955a. Contribution á la connaissance d’isopodes terrestres des grottes de 

Macédoine. Fragm.Balc., Mus. Mac.Sci.Nat., Skopje, I (14):117-123. 

Cekova, M., 1988. Epilitskata i terestricnata movna vegetacija vo Skopskata Kotlina, God. zb., 

PMF-Biologija, 39-40, 251-268. 

195

Cekova, M., 1990. Epifitskata i legnikolnata movna vegetacija vo Skopskata Kotlina. God. zb. 

Biol., 41-42:221-234. 

Cekova, M., 1991. Krajpotocnata movna vegetacija vo Skopskata Kotlina. God. zb. Biol., 43- 

44:219-224. 

Cekova, M., 1991. Prilog kon proucuvanjeto na akvaticnata movna vegetacija vo Makedonija. God. 

zb. Biol., 43-44:213-217. 

Cernjavski, P., 1943. Prilog za floristicko poznavanje sire okoline Ohridskog Jezera. Ohrid.Zborn., 

35(2):11-88. 

Cado, I., 1958a. Endolitofiti po klifovite i podvodnite steni na Ohridskoto Ezero. Zbornik 

Hidrobiol. Zavod Ohrid. VI/3 (19): 1-13 

Cado, I., 1958b. Sostav i zonacija na mikrofitite na krajbreznite steni na Ohridskoto Ezero. Zbornik 

Hidrobiol. Zavod Ohrid. VI br.5 (21): 1-43 

Cingovski J., 1958. Zweiter beitrag zur kenntnis der Blattwespenfauna von Macedonien. Acta, 

Musei Macedonici Scientarum Naturalum, Vol. 5, No10/51: 163-176. Skopje. 

Cingovski, J., 1985. Rastitelni osi, Symphyta - Tenthredinidae (Insecta-Hymenoptera). Fauna na 

Makedonija VI. Prirodonaucen Muzej na Makedonija, Skopje, pp.1-251. 

Curcic, B.P.M., 1974. Arachnoidea-Pseudoscorpiones. Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. 

Art. Slov. Ljubljana III/4:1-34. 

Curcic, P.M.B., & G. Legg., 1994. New or little- known species of Roncus L. Koch, 1873 

(Pseudosorpiones, Arachnida) from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). 

Arch.Biol. Sci., Belgrade, 47 (3-4): 137-152. 

Curcic, P.M.B., Dimitrijevic, N.R., E.A. Stojkoska, S.V. Stankovic & O. S. Karamata, 1999. 

Further report on some false scorpions (Neobisiidae, Pseudoscorpiones) from Macedonia 

(FYROM). Arch. Biol. Sci., Belgrade, 51 (1): 9P-10P. 

Curcic, P.M.B., Dimitrijevic, N.R., Makarov, E.S., Lucic, R.L., & O.S. Karamata, 1997. New and 

little-known false scorpions from the Balkan Peninsula, principally from caves, belong to the 

families Chthoniidae and Neobisiidae (Arachnida, Pseudoscorpiones). Monographs, Institute of 

zoology, Belgrade, II (2):1-159. 

Curcic, P.M.B., S.E. Makarov, E.A.Stojkoska & S.V. Stankovic-Jovanovic, 1999. Some remarks on 

the millipede fauna of Macedonia. Arch. Biol. Sci., Belgrade, 51 (1): 17P-19P. 

Dangel, M., 1973. Ornitologische beobachtungen am Dojran-See. Orn. Mitt. 26:133-141. 

Daniel, F., 1964. Die Lepidopteren fauna Jugoslawish Mazedoniens. II. Bombyces et Sphinges. 

Posebno Izdanie. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 2: 1-75. 

Degen, A., Dörfler, I., 1897. Beitrag zur Flora Albaniens und Mazedoniens. DAWW, 64:702-748 

Dimovski, A. & R. Grupce, 1975. Morfometriski karakteristiki na Alburnus alburnus macedonicus 

Kar. (Pisces: Cyprinidae) od Dojranskoto Ezero i nivna promena za vreme na rastot. Ann. Fac. 

Sci. Univer. Skopje. Ser. Biol. 27/28: 267-279. 

196

Doflein, F., 1921. Mazedonien. Erlebnisse und Beobachtungen eines Naturforschers im gefolge des 

deutsches heeres. Jena, Verlag von Gustav Fischer, 1-592. 

Drovenik, B. & H. Peks., 1994. Catalogus Faunae Carabiden der Balkanlander (Coleoptera: 

Carabidae). Coleoptera Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen, Schwanfeld. 1: 1-103. 

Dzekov, S., Rizovski, R., 1978. Sumskata rastitelnost vo Males i Pijanec. Poseb.izd. MANU- 

Vegetacija, Skopje. 

Dzukic, G., 1987. Taxonomic and biogeographic characteristics of the slow-worm (Anguis fragilis 

Linnaeus, 1758) in Yugoslavia and on the Balkan Peninsula. - Scopolia 12, Ljubljana. 

Dzukic, G., 1992. Vernacular names of the herpetofauna of Yugoslavia (Macedonian, Slovenian 

and Serbian). - in: “Nomina herpetofaunae Europaeae” (Handbuch der Reptilien und Amphibien 

Europas), Stumpel-Rienks, S. ed., Aula, Wiesbaden. 

Dzukic, G., 1995. Diverzitet vodozemaca (Amphibia) i gmizavaca (Reptilia) Jugoslavije, sa 

pregledom vrsta od medjunarodnog znacaja. - u: Stevanovic, V., Vasic, V. (eds.): “Biodiverzitet 

Jugoslavije sa pregledom vrsta od medjunarodnog znacaja”, 447-469., Bioloski fakultet & 

Ecolibri, Beograd. 

Dzukic, G., M. L. Kalezic, S. Petkovski & V. Sidorovska, 2001. General Remarks on batracho- and 

herpetofauna of the Balkan Peninsula. 75 Years Maced. Mus. Nat. Hist. p. 195-204. 

Em, H., 1959. Diviot ili konskiot kosten vo NR Makedonija. God.zborn., Zemj.-sum. fak., 12, 

Skopje. 

Em, H., 1967. Pregled na dendroflorata na Makedonija. Spontani i subspontani vidovi. 

Soj.Inz.teh.Sum.ind. SRM, 125. 

Em, H., 1978. O nekim osobenostima borovih suma Makedonije. I. Reliktne crnoborove zajednice.- 

Mitt.Ostalp.-din.Ges.f.Veget.-Innsbruck. 

Em, H., 1981. O nekim osobenostima borovih suma Makedonije. II.Prilozi, MANU, Odd.za biol. i 

medic. nauki, 2(1-2):5-16, Skopje. 

Em, H., 1986. Na juznoj granici areala smrce. Suma smrce na Sar Planini u Makedoniji. Prilozi, 

MANU, Odd. za biol. i medic. nauki, 5(1):11-28, Skopje. 

Em, H., Dzekov, S., 1969. Molikata i molikovata suma na Pelister. Zbornik na simpoziumot za 

molikata, 2-6.9.1969, 49-62, Bitola. 

Ember, A.W., 1974. Die Halictidae Macedoniens (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) Acta. Mus. Mac. Sci. 

Nat., Skopje. 14(3): 45-66. 

Fott, B., 1933. Die Schwebeflora des Ohrid-Sees. Bull.Inst.Jard.Bot.Univ. Beograd 2: 153-175. 

Gass T., Frese L., Begemann F., Lipman E., compilers. 1999. Implementation of the Global Plan of 

Action in Europe – Conservation and sustainable Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources for 

Food and Agriculture. Proceedings of the European Symposium, 30 June – 3 July 1998. 

Braunschweig, Germany. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute. Rome. 

Gaston, K.J. & David, R., 1994. Hotspots around Europe. Biodiversity Letters, 2: 108-116. 

Georgevitch, J., 1955. Sur les branchiobdellides des ecrevisses du Lac Dojran. Acta Musei 

Macedonici Scientiarum Naturalium, 2: 199-221. 

197

Georgevitch, P.,1910. Desmidiaceen aus dem Prespasee in Macedonien. Beihefte zum Botan. 

Centralblatt Bd. XXVI Abt. II. Dresden. 237-246. 

Georgiev, S., 1998. Kluc za odreduvanje na ribite (Osteichthyes) i zmijorkite 

(Cephalaspidomorpha) vo Republika Makedonija. Anfa, Skopje. pp.:1-177. 

Gjorgjevic, S., 1906. Prilozi za poznavanje slatkovodne faune Balkanskog Poluostrova.I. 

Planktonoorganizmi velikih jezera Balkanskog Poluostrova. Glas Srpske Kraljevske Akademije, 

71, Prvi razr. 28: 190-249. 

Glumac, C., 1968. Sirfide (Syrphoidea, Diptera) u Makedoniji God. Fil. Fak.. XI, sv. 2:845-880. 

Novi Sad. 

Glumac, C., 1972. Syrphoidea (Diptera -Insecta). Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. Art. 

Slov. Ljubljana III/6:1-43. 

Goellner-Scheiding, U., 1978. Beitrag zur kenntnis der Heteropterenfauna Mazedoniens. Acta. Mus. 

Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje, 15:145-150. 

Green, J., 1960. Crustacea in I,ake Ohrid, with special reference to their parasites and epibionts. 

Rec. trav. Stat. hydrobiol. Ohrid, 8, 2(47): 1-11. 

Grisebach. A., 1843-44. Spicilegium florae Rumelicae et Bithynicae. Brunsvigae. 

Grossu, A., 1972. Funf neue arte der Gattung Deroceras von der Balkanhalbinsel in der Sammlung 

des Naturhistorischen Museum in Wien (Gastropoda, Limacidae). Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien, 

Bd. 76: 639 - 648. 

Grupce, R. & A. Dimovski. 1973. Ihtiofaunata na rekata Vardar. Ann. Bull. Fac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 

Ser. Biol. 25:59-99. 

Grupce, R. & A. Dimovski, 1982. Morfoloska karakteristika na podvidovite na Leuciscus cephalus 

vo Makedonija. Acta. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 16 (4): 103-136. 

Grupce, R. & A. Dimovski, 1984. Sporedbeni proucuvanja vrz Scardinius erythrophthalmus 

scardafa i Scardinius erythrophthalmus dojranensis. Acta. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 17 (4): 

81-101. 

Gueorgiev, V., 1960. Contribution a la connaissance des Coleopteres Hydrocanthares de 

Yougoslavie. Acta. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 6 (2): 19-39. 

Gunther, K., 1980. Beitrage zur kenntnis der Psocoptera fauna Mazedoniens. Acta, Mus. Mac. Sci. 

Nat., Skopje. 16(1): 1-32. 

Hackethal, H. & Peters, G.,1987. Notizen über mazedonische Fledermäuse (Mammalia: 

Chiroptera). Acta Mus. maced. sci. nat., 18(6/152): 159-176. 

Hadzi, J., 1973. Opilionidea (Chelicerata). Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. Art. Slov. 

Ljubljana III/4:1-23. 

Hadzisce, S., 1953a. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Spongiliden fauna der Grossen Mazedonichen Seen 

(Dojran, Prespa und Ohridsee) Recueil des Travaux Station Hydrobiologique, Ohrid, 3: 73-104. 

Hadzisce, S., 1953b. Prilog poznavanju Gastropoda Prespanskog i Ohridskog jezera. Per. biol. 

Jugoslaviae, Ser. A II/8, 7: 174-177. Zagreb. 

198

Hadzisce, S., 1958a. Prilog poznavanju faune Gastropoda Prespanskog Jezera. Zborn. na rab., 

Hidrobiol. Zav., Ohrid. 6: 1-6. 

Hadzisce, S., 1958b. Prilog poznavanju faune Gastropoda Prespanskog Jezera. Zborn. na rab., 

Hidrobiol. Zav., Ohrid. 6 (17): 1-4. 

Hayek, A., 1924-1933. Prodromus Florae peninsulae Balcanicae, I-III. Feddes Repert., Beih., 

Dahlem bei Berlin. 

Hesse, R., 1928. Mazedonische Gastropoden gessammelt von Hern Pr. Dr. F. Doflein, Verlag von 

G. Fischer, Jena. 

Hieke, F., 1981. Die Carabidae Einer Sammelreise nach Mazedonien (Insecta: Coleoptera). Acta. 

Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje, 16(3): 71-101. 

Horvat, B., 1990. Callifera wagneri sp. n. (Diptera, Empididae:Hemerodromiinae) from Macedonia 

(Yugoslavia). Aquatic Insects, 12(4): 219-221. 

Horvat, B., 1995. Aquatic Empididae Fauna (Diptera) in Macedonia. Acta, Musei Macedonici 

Scientarum Naturalum, Vol. 19, No6/159: 147-170. Skopje. 

Horvat, I., 1960. La vegetation alpine de la macedonie dans L aspect des recherches 

contemporaines. Acta mus.mac.scient.nat. Skopje, 6:163-203. 

Horvat, I., Glavac, V., Ellenberg, H., 1974. Vegetetion Sudosteuropas.VEB Jena. 

Hrabé, S., 1958. Die Oligochaeten aus den Seen Dojran und Skadar. Publications of the Faculty of 

the University of Masaryk, Brno, 397: 337-354. 

Hrabe, S., 1931. Die Oligochaeten aus den Seen Ochrida und Prespa. Zool., Jahrb., 61: 1-62. 

Hristovski, N., 1999. Parazito-helmintofauna na ribite od Dojranskoto Ezero. In: Restavracija na 

Dojranskoto Ezero. Zavrsen izvestaj. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 

Hristovski, N., M. Jovanovska & S. Stojanovski, 2000. Survey of the hitherto ascertained parasites 

in Lake Prespa. In: Proceedings: Sustainable development of Prespa region. Macedonian 

Ecological Society. pp: 86-87. 

Hustedt, F., 1945. Diatomeen aus Seen und Quellgebieten der Balkan-Halbinsel. Arch. Protisrenk. 

40: 867-973. 

Ikonomov, P., 1953. Efemeroptera na Prespanskata kotlina. Annuaire de la Fac. Phil. Univ. Skopje. 

6(7): 1-30. 

Ikonomov, P., 1961. Ednodnevkite (Ephemeroptera) na Makedonija fam. Ephemerellidae. Acta. 

Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje, 8(3): 53-74. 

Ikonomov, P., 1986. Plekopterite na Makedonija (Insecta: Plecoptera), taksonomija i distribucija. 

Acta. Mus.Mac. Sci. Nat. Skopje. 18: 81-124. 

Jaeckel, S. G.,Klemm, W., Meise, W., 1957. Die Land und Süsswasser Mollusken der nordlichen 

Balkanhalbinsel, Abh. und Berichte aus dem Staatl. Museum fur Tierk., Dresden, Bd. 23 heft. 2: 

141-207. 

199

Jakovljevic, S., 1936. Makrofitska vegtacija Ohridskog Jezera. Ministarstvo poljoprivrede, Beograd, 

God. III (5): 1-31. 

Jaksic, P., 1998. Male genitalia of Butterflies on Balkan Peninsula with a check-list, Lepidoptera: 

Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea. Ed.:1-144. Bratislava 

Jankovic, Lj., 1971. Homoptera: Auchenorrhyncha from Macedonia. Acta. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., 

Skopje, 12 (3): 42-59. 

Jankovic Lj., 1978. Opis jedne nove vrste iz familije Cicadellidae (Homoptera: Auchenorrhyncha) 

iz Makedonije (Jugoslavija). Glas CCCVI Srpske akademije nauka i umetnosti, Odeljenje 

prirodno-matematickih nauka, kq. 43: 27-30. Beograd. 

Jerkovic, L., 1971. Two new relic Capmylodiscus species (diatoms of Ohrid Lake (Yugoslavia). 

Phycol. 10 (2/3): 277-280. 

Jovanovic, V. S., 1999. Contribution to the knowledge of taxonomic differentiating characteristics 

of Deroceras reticulatum (Müller, 1774) and Deroceras turcicum (Simroth, 1894) 

(Agriolimacidae, Gastropoda) from the mountains Baba and Bistra , R. Macedonia. Arch.biol. 

Sci., Belgrade 51 (4):219-223. 

Jurilj, A., 1948. Nove diajtomeje- Surirellaceae - iz Ohridskog Jezera i njihovo filogenetsko 

znacenje. Prirod. Istr. Zagreb, Jugosl. Akad. 24: 171-260. 

Jurilj, A., 1954. Flora i vegetacija dijatomeja Ohridskog Jezera. Prirod. Istr. Zagreb. 26: 99-190. 

Kalezic, M., Dzukic, G., Mesaros, G. & Crnobrnja-Isailovis, J. (1997): The cresred newt (Triturus 

cristatus superspecies) in ex-Yugoslavia: Morphological structuring and distribution patterns. - 

Univ.Thought, Nat.Sci., 4(1): 39-46. 

Karadelev, M., 1993. Contribution to the knowledge of wood-destroying fungi in the Republic of 

Macedonia, Fungi Macedonici I, Young.Exp.Mac., p.p. 1-78, Skopje. 

Karadelev, M., 1998. Basidiomycetes on Molika pine (Pinus peuce Griseb.) - relict and endemic 

pine on Central Balkan. Forest Research Institute - Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, p.p. 266- 

269, Sofia, 

Karadelev, M., 2000. Preliminary Red List of Fungi in the Republic of Macedonia, Newsletter 10, 

Europaen Council for the Conservation of Fungi, p.p. 7-11. 

Karadelev, N., 2002. Fungi Macedonici - Gabite na Makedonija. Makedonsko mikolosko drustvo, 

PGUP "Sofija", str. 1-300, Bogdanci. 

Karaman, B., 1981. Contribution a La Connaissance de la Faune des Odonates du Lac de Doiran. 

God. Zb. Biol., Skopje. 34: 215-223. 

Karaman, B., 1987. Les Odonates du Lac de Prespa (Macedoine, Yugoslavie) I partie: La 

composition qualitative et L’analyse zoogeographique de la Faune. Ann. Fac. Sci. Nat., Biol. 

Skopje. 37-38: 97-110. 

Karaman, G., 1960. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Mazedonischen Niphargiden. Bioloski Glasnik, 

Zagreb. 13: 389-396. 

Karaman, G., 1974. Crustacea, Amphipoda. Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. Art. Slov. 


200

Karaman, G., 1973. XLVI. Contribution to the knowledge of the Amphipoda. Two subterannean 

Niphragus species from Yugoslavia, N. stankoi n.sp. and N. ilidrensis Schaferna (fam. 

Gammaridae). Glasnik Rep. Zavoda Zast. Prirode Prir. Muzeja, Titograd, 6: 35-57. 

Karaman, M., 1966. Kopneni izopodi. Zbornik, Filoz. fak., Pristina, III: 371- 404. 

Karaman, M., 1976. Desetonogi rakovi-Decapoda (Crustacea: Malacostraca). Fauna na Makedonija 

II. Mac. Mus. Sci. Nat., Skopje. pp:1-61. 

Karaman, M., I. & D., Cemerlic, 1999. A new Hyloniscus species (Isopoda, Oniscidaea, 

Trichoniscidae) from Macedonia. Arch.Biol.Sci., Belgrade, 51 (4): 51P. 

Karaman, M.,I., 2003. Macedonethes stankoi n.sp. a rhithral onisciden isopod (Isopoda:Oniscidea: 

Trichoniscidae) from Macedonia. Org.Divers. Evol. 

Karaman, S. & G.Karaman, 1959. Gammarus (Fluviogammarus) triacanthus Schaft., argaeus 

Vavra und roeselii Gevr. am Balkan. Izdanija. Zavod za Ribarstvo Maked., Skopje, 2(9): 183- 

211. 

Karaman, S., 1955. Die fishe der Strumica (Struma-System). Acta . Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 

3(7). 

Karaman, S., 1924. Pisces Macedoniae. Derzeit am Institut Z. Enforschung und Bekampfung D. 

Malaria, Trogir (Dalmatien) Hrvatska stamparija, Split. Pp.: 1-90. 

Karaman, S., 1928. Prilozi ihtiologije Jugoslavije. I. Glas. Skop. Naucn. Drus. 6(2). 

Karaman, S., 1929. Die Potamobiden Jugoslaviens. Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja, Sarajevo. 

Karaman, S., 1931. IV. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Susswasser-amphipoden. Glasnik Naucnog 

Drustva, Skopje. 9 (3): 93-107. 

Karaman, S., 1954. Weitere Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Microparaselliden Mazedoniens, das Genus 

Microcharon Karaman. Ibid. 1(12): 107-114. 

Karaman, Z., 1971. Fauna na Makedonija I. Potkornici-Scolitoidea (Coleoptera-Insecta). Mac. Mus. 

Sci. Nat., Skopje. pp:1-178. 

Klie, W., 1931. Zwei neue Arten der Ostracoden - Gattung Candona aus unterirdischen Gewässern 

im südöstlichen Europa.- Zool. Anz. 96 (7/8), 161-168 

Klie, W., 1934. Zur Kenntnis der Ostracoden- Gattung Limnocythere. Arch. Naturgesch. Leipzig, 

N.F. 3: 534-544. 

Klie,W. 1936. Neue Ostracodaen aus Jugoslavien.- Bull. Soc. Sci. Skopje 17, Sect. Sci. Nat. 5, 143- 

150 

Klie,W., 1937. Zur Kenntnis der Ostracoden-Arten Eucypris reptans (Kaufmann) und Loxoconcha 

pusilla Brady & Robertson, - Zool. Anz 133 (11/12), 233-244 

Klie,W., 1939a Studien über Ostracoden aus dem Ohridsee. I. Candocyrinae. - Arch. Hydrobiol. 35, 

28-45 

Klie, W., 1939b. Studien über Ostracoden aus dem Ohridsee. II. Lymnocytherinae und Cytherinae. - 

Arch. Hydrobiol. 35, 631-646. 

201

Klie, W., 1941. Süßwasserostracoden aus Südosteuropa. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 133: 233-244. 

Klimesch, J., 1968. Die Lepidopteren fauna Mazedoniens. IV. Microlepidoptera. Posebno Izdanie. 

Mus.Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 5: 1-203. 

Kosanin, N., 1930. Sambucus ebulus L. var. deborensis n. var. BIJBU Belg., 1(3):241-246. 

Koenigsmann, E., 1969. Faltenwespen aus Mazedonien (Hymenoptera: Vespoidea). Acta. Mus. 

Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 11(8): 147-160. 

Kolekcioniranje i proucuvanje na zelencucite i na sitnoto ovosje od Makedonija. 1974. Zavrsen 

izvestaj od proekt. Zemjodelski institut – Skopje, Jugoslavija. 

Komarek, J., 1927. Die Suswasser - Tricladen des West balkans und die zoogeographischen 

Problems dieser Gegend. Zool. Jb. System., 53. 

Korniushin, V., 1998. Peculiarities of evolution of small clams (Mollusca: Bivalvia, Sphaeridae) in 

the Ancient lakes and perspectives of their investigations in the Balkans. Second International 

Congress on the Biodiversity, Ecology and Conservation of the Balkan Fauna (BIOECCO2). 

Macedonian Museum of Natural History, Abstract Book, pp.79. 

Kosanin, N., 1911. Vegetacija planine Jakupice u Makedoniji. Glas. SKA, 85:184-242. 

Kosanin, N., 1921. Biljni pokrivac planina zapadne i ju`ne Makedonije. Glasn. Geog. dr., 6:62-74, 

Beograd. 

Kosanin, N., 1926. Les especes nouvelle`s dans la flore de la Serbie du sud (Macedoine). Glas 

SKA, 69 (54):19-29, Beograd. 

Kovacevic, Z., 1971. Otiorrhynchus vrste i njihovo rasprostranjenje u Jugoslaviji (Coleoptera- 

Curculionidae. Acta Inst. Protect. Plant. Facult. Agr., Zagreb, 1971. pp. 1-103. 

Kozarov, G., 1958. Fitoplankton na Dojranskoto ezero. Izdanija. Zavod za ribarstov na NRM. Tom 

II. No.6: 103-125. 

Kozarov, G., 1959. Fitoplanktonot na Prespanskoto Ezero. Zbornik Hidrobiol. Zavod Ohrid. VII br. 

6 (39): 1-13 

Krstanovski, Z., 1994. Biosistematika i ekoloski istrazuvanja na planariite od Ohridskoto, 

Prespanskoto i Dojranskoto Ezero. (Doctor Thesis). 

Krstic, S., Levkov, Z., & Stojanovski, P., 1997. Saprobiological characteristics of diatom microflora 

in river ecosystems in Macedonia as a parameter for determination of the intensity of 

anthropogenic influence. In: Prygiel J, Whitton BA Bukowska J. (eds). Use of Algae for 

Monitoring Rivers III.145-153. 

Krstic, S., Melovski, Lj., Levkov, Z., & Stojanovski, P., 1994. Complex investigations on the river 

Vardar. II. The most polluted sites in the first 3 months. Ekol.Zast.Zivot.Sred., Tome 2, No.2, 

13-29. Skopje. 

Krystufek, B. & S. Petkovski, 1999. Mammals of Macedonia. In: The Atlas of European Mammals. 

Academic Press, London, San Diego, pp.:1-484. 

Krystufek, B., 1993. European sousliks (Spermophilus citellus; Rodentia, Mammalia) of 

Macedonia. Scopolia, 30: 1-39. 

202

Krystufek, B., 1994. The taxonomy of blind moles (Talpa caeca and T. stankovici, Insectivora, 

Mammalia) from south-eastern Europe. Bonn. zool. Beitr., 45: 1-16. 

Krystufek, B. & S. Petkovski, 1989. Distribution of water shrews (gen. Neomys Kaup 1829, 

Insectivora, Mammalia) in Macedonia. Fragmenta balc. Mus. maced. sci. nat., 14(12/305): 107- 

116. 

Krystufek, B. & S. Petkovski, 1990a. New records of mammals from Macedonia (Mammalia) 

Fragmenta balc. Mus. maced. sci. nat., 14(13/306): 117-129. 

Krystufek, B. & S. Petkovski, 1990b. New record of the jackal Canis aureus Linnaeus, 1758 in 

Macedonia (Mammalia, Carnivora). Fragmenta balc. Mus. maced. sci. nat., 14(14/307): 131- 

138. 

Krystufek, B.; Vohralík, V.; Flousek, J. & S. Petkovski, 1992. Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) of 

Macedonia, Yugoslavia. In: Horácek, I.; Vohralík, V. (eds.) Prague Studies in Mammalogy. 

Charles Univ. Press, Praha, pp. 93-111. 

Kungulovski, Dj., Krstic, S. & P. Stojanovski, 1987. Dijatomejskata flora vo Golema Reka 

(Prespa). God. Zb. Biol. Kn. 39-40. 269-277. 

Kusan, F., 1953. Prodromus flora lisaja Jugoslavije. JAZU, Zagreb. 

Lindner E., 1922. Mazedonische Ostracoden, - Zool. Jb. Abt. Syst. 45, 557-564. 

Lindner, E., 1920. Neue Mazedoniche Ostracoden. - Zool. Anz. 52, 37-41 

Lindtner, V., 1938/1939. Eine neue Tulpe der Flora Südserbien-mit einem Vorfruhlings-Aspect des 

Orlovo Brdo (Krivolak). BSS Sk. 20(7):137-140. 

Lista na priznati i odobreni sorti zemjodelski rastenija vo Republika Makedonija. 2001. 

Ministerstvo za zemjodelstvo sumarstvo i vodostopanstvo, Uprava za seme i saden materijal. 

Skopje 

Maggioni L., Ambrose M., Schachl R., Duc G., Lipman E., compilers. 2002. Report of a Working 

Group on Grain legumes, Third Meeting, 5-7 July 2001, Krakow, Poland. International Plant 

Genetic Resources Institute. Rome. 

Maggioni L., Astley D., Rabinowitch H., Keller J., Lipman E., compilers. 1999. Report of a 

Working Group on Allium, Sixth meeting, 23-25 October 1997, Plovdiv, Bulgaria. International 

Plant Genetic Resources Institute. Rome. 

Maggioni L., Frese L., Germeier C., Lipman E., compilers. 2000. report of a working Group of 

Beta. First meeting, 9-10 September 1999, Broom’s barn, Higham, bury St. edmunds, United 

Kingdom. 

Maggioni L., Janes R., Hayes A., Swinburne T., Lipman E., compilers. 1998. Report of a Working 

Group on Malus/Pyrus. First meeting, 15-17 May 1997, dublin, Ireland. International Plant 

Genetic Resources Institute. Rome. 

Maggioni L., Marum P. Sackville Hamilton N.R., Hulden M., Lipman E., compilers. 2000. Report 

of a Working Group on Forages, Seventh meeting, 18-20 November 1999, Elvas, Portugal. 

International Plant Genetic Resources Institute. Rome. 

203

Maggioni L., Spellman O., compilers. 2001. Report of a Network Coordinating Group on 

Vegetables, Ad hoc meeting, 26-27 May 2000, Vila Real, Portugal. International Plant Genetic 

Resources Institute. Rome. 

Makarov, E. S., 2001. Schizmohetera curcici, a new cavernicolous species from Macedonia 

(Diplopoda, Chordeumatida, Neoatractosomatidae). Arch. Biol. Sci., Belgrade, 53 (1-2): 19P- 

20P. 

Matevski, V., 1986-87. Thymus tosevii Vel. - kompleksot vo florata na SR Makedonija. God. zb. na 

PMF, Biol., 39-40:31-38, Skopje 

Matevski, V., 1988. Taksonomija i horologija vrste Thymus albanus H. Braun u flori Jugoslavije. 

Zemaljski muzej Bosne i Hercegovine. Zbornik radova nauc. skupa "Minerali, stijene, izumrli i 

živi svijet BiH". 291-299. Sarajevo 

Matevski, V., 1991. Prilog kon taksonomijata i horologijata na nekoi vidovi od rodot Thymus L. 

(Lamiaceae) Sect. Marginati (A. Kerner) A. Kerner Subsect. Marginati vo florata na 

Makedonija. MANU, Prilozi, 9(1-2):52-63, Skopje 

Matevski, V., 1995. Florata na planinskiot masiv Dobra Voda. 1-46. Skopje 

Matevski, V., Kostadinovski, M., 1996. Pregled na rastitelni vidovi cij locus classicus se naoga vo 

granicite na trite nacionalni parkovi vo Republika Makedonija. Balkanska Konferencija 

"Nacionalnite parkovi i nivna uloga vo zastitata na biodiverzitetot na Balkanskiot Poluostrov", 

89-98 

Matvejev, S., 1967. Orthopteroidea (Insecta). Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. Art. Slov. 


Matvejeva, J., 1982. Ruderalnata vegetacija na SR Makedonija. Odd.biol. nauki, MANU, 1-70, 

Skopje. 

Melovski, Lj., 1996. Kruzenje na biolementite vo makedonskiot ploskacevo-cerov ekosistem vo 

Nacionalniot park "Galicica". Doktorska disertacija, Prirodno-matematicki fakultet, Skopje. 

Micevski, B. & M. Schneider-Jacoby, 1997. Zimski cenzus na vodnite ptici na makedonskata strana 

na Prespanskoto Ezero vo januari 1997 godina (so nivna valorizacija i analiza na struktura i 

ishrana). Medjunaroden simpozium “Kon integralna zastita i odrzliv razvoj na transgranicnite 

ezera Golema i Mala Prespa”, 24-26 oktomvri 1997, Korca: 52-57. 

Micevski, B., 1991. Analiza na faunistickiot sostav i struktura na zimskata ornitofauna na 

Dojranskoto Ezero. God. zb., Biol.,Skopje. 43/44: 65-73. 

Micevski, B., 1988. Ornitofauna na nekoi biotopi vo Nacionalniot Park “Galicica”. Aktivus, 7: 13- 

18. 

Micevski, B., 1992. Strukturni i faunisticki karakteristiki na zimskata ornitofauna na Prespanskoto 

Ezero-makedonski del. God.zb., Biol, Skopje. 45: 51-55. 

Micevski, B., 1998. Ornitofauna na Prespanskoto Ezero. Drustvo za proucuvanje i zastita na pticite 

na Makedonija, Vest, Skopje. pp.: 1-60. 

Micevski, K., 1963a. Tipoloski istrazuvanja na blatnata vegetacija vo Makedonija. God.zbor. PMFbiologija, 

Skopje, 14:79-130. 

204

Micevski, K., 1963b. Vodnata i blatnata vegetacija na Dojranskoto Ezero. Acta Musei Macedonici 

Scientarum Naturalium, 8 (76): 175-192. 

Micevski, K., 1964. Tipoloski istrazuvanja na vegetacijata na nizinskite livadi vo Makedonija. 

God.zbor. PMF-biologija, Skopje, 15:121-174 

Micevski, K., 1965. Halofitska vegetacija Ovceg Polja. Acta Musei macedonici scientiarum nat., 

10(3):67-90 

Micevski, K., 1966. Blatna i livadska vegetacija na Poloska Kotlina. God.zbor. PMF-biologija, 

Skopje, 16:43-52 

Micevski, K., 1967. Blatnata vegetacija kaj Negorska Banja i nejzinoto znacenje za singenezata na 

blatnata vegetacija vo Makedonija. God.zbor. Prirodno-matematicki fakultet-biologija, Skopje, 

19:31-45. 

Micevski, K., 1969. Vodna vegetacija na Ohridskoto i Prespanskoto Ezero. Acta Musei Macedonici 

Scientarum Naturalium, 4 (94): 61-80. 

Micevski, K., 1970. Astragalo-Potentilletalia, nov vegetaciski red na brdskite pasista vo 

Makedonija. "Prilozi", MANU, odd. za prir. matem. nauki, 2(2):15-23. 

Micevski, K., 1970. Nov endemicen sojuz vo vegetacijata na Makedonija-Artemision maritimae 

Micevski fed.nov. God.zbor. PMF-biologija, Skopje, 22:157-166. 

Micevski, K., 1971. "Stepska" vegetacija vo Makedonija. God.zbor. PMF-biologija, Skopje, 

23:131-150 

Micevski, K., 1985. Flora na Republika Makedonija. MANU, 1(1):1-152 

Micevski, K., 1988. Osmunda regalis L. i njena pripadnost mocvarnoj vegetaciji Jugoslavije. 

Zbor.referata nauc. skupa “Minerali, stijene, izumrli i zivi svijet BiH, Sarajevo. 


Micevski, K., 1994. Visokoplaninska vegetacija na planinata Bistra. MANU, 1-91 


Micevski, K., 1998. Flora na Republika Makedonija. MANU, 1(4): 781-1113. 

Micevski, K., 2001. Flora na Republika Makedonija. MANU, 1(5): 1121-1430. 

Micevski, K. & V. Matevski, 1987. Teritorijalna podela endema u SR Makedoniji i problem njihove 

ugrozenosti. ANUBiH. Posebna izdanja.Odd. prir. nauka. 14:199-207.Sarajevo 

Miksic, R. & E. Georgievitsch, 1971. Cerambicidae Jugoslavije. Monographies, Sect. Des Sci. 

Nat.et Math., Acad. Sci. Art Bosnie-Hercegovine, Sarajevo. 43: 1-175. 





205

Mikulic F., 1961. Nove Candona vrste iz Ohridskog jezera. - Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. Beograd, Ser. 

B.17, 87-108. 

Ministerstvo za zivotna sredina i prostorno planiranje (2003). Prv nacionalen izvestaj na Republika 

Makedonija kon Ramkovnata konvencija na Obedinetite nacii za klimatski promeni. Skopje, 

2003. 

Mitic, V., Novevska, V., Lokoska, L., & Naumoski, T., 1997. Pelagic phytoplankton and primary 

productivity of Prespa Lake. Int. Simposium: Towards Integrated Conservation and Sustainable 

Development of Transboundry Makro and Micro Prespa Lakes. Korca, 97-101. 

Mrsic, N., 1993. The fauna of diplopods (Diplopoda) of Macedonia. Rasprave, SAZU, Ljubljana, 

XXXIV (1): 20-44. 

Murati, M., 1992. Flora lisajeva. Univerzitet u Pristini. Pristina. str. 397. 

Naumovski, M., 1991. Fishes and fisheries in Doyran Lake. In: Gasevski, M. (ed.), Sostojbite i 

perspectivite za zastita na Dojranskoto ezero. Zbornik na trudovi od sovetuvanjeto vo Star 

Dojran: 118-129. Skopje; Dvizenje na Ekologistite na Makedonija. 

Naumovski, M., 1995. Ribite vo Makedonija. Zaki, Skopje. pp.: 1-162. 

Ocevski, B., 1960. Mikrobioloski istrazuvanja na Dojranskoto Ezero. Folia Balcanica, Skopje. 2 

(2): 1-18. 

Pavletic, Z. & M. Murati, 1978. Karakteristike lisajne flore Sar Planine. Biosistematika 4 (2). 

Beograd. 

Pavletic, Z. & M. Murati, 1977. Prilog poznavanja lisajeva Sar Planine. Acta Bot. Crat. 36. 

Pavlovski, T., 1987. Dva novi i retki vida vo trihopterskata fauna na Makedonija. God. zbornik na 

P.M.F., kn. 37-38:111-115. Skopje. 

Peters, G. & H. Hackethal, 1986. Notizen uber die Libellen (Odonata) in Mazedonien. Acta. Mus. 

Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 18 (5): 125-158. 

Petkov, S., 1910. Vodnata i vodoraslovata flora na Jugozapadna Makedonija. Plovdiv. 1-195. 

Petkovski, S & V. Sidorovska, 2001. Biodiversity Assessment for Macedonia. Chemonics 

International Inc., Washington, D.C. & USAID/Macedonia. pp: 1-61. 

Petkovski, S. & B. Krystufek, 1998. Cicaci na Makedonija. Zavrsen Izvestaj. Mus. Mac.Sci. Nat., 

Skopje. pp.:1-170. 

Petkovski, S., 1986. The fairy shrimp Chirocephalus pelagonicus n. sp. (Crustacea: Anostraca) 

from Macedonia. Fraqm. balc., Mus. maced. sci. nat., Skopje, 13 (3): 15-26. 

Petkovski, S., 1990. Nachweise von Daphnia pulicaria Forbes, 1893 emend. Hrbacek (1959) und 

Daphnia parvula Fordyce, 1901 in Jugoslawien (Crustacea: Cladocera, Anomopoda). Mitt. 

hamb.zool. Mus. Inst., Hamburg. 87: 261-272. 

Petkovski, S., 1991. Anostraca, Notostraca & Cladocera. In: B. Sket & al. Bogatstvo in raziskanost 

jugoslovanske favne: nizji nevretencarji (Metazoa, Invertebrata, ex. Insecta). Plenarni referat na 

2. Kongresu biosistematikov Jugoslavije, Biol. vestn., Ljubljana, 39 (1,2): 37-52. 

206

Petkovski, S., 1991. Moina weismanni Ishikawa, 1896, a rare East Palearctic faunistic element from 

S.W. Yugoslavia (Crustacea: Cladocera). Spixiana Zeitschift fur Zoologie, Munchen. 14(1): 1-7. 

Petkovski, S., 1992. Uber die Plankton-Cladoceren des Kastorias-Sees in N.W. Griechenland 

(Crustacea: Anomopoda). Scopolia, Mus. Hist. Nat. Slov., Ljubljana, 26: 1-24. 

Petkovski, S., 1995. On the presence of the genus Tanymastix Simon, 1886 (Crustacea: Anostraca) 

in Macedonia. In: Studies on Large Branchiopod Biology and Aquaculture II, D. Belk, H.J. 

Dumond & G. Maier (Editors). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht-Boston-London, DH 

103, 298: 307-313. 

Petkovski, S., 1996. The Sara Mountain Biodiversity from the aspect of the faunistic study. In: 

Petkovski et al. The Sara Mountain Natural Resources Conservation, pp. 29-39. Balkan 

Conference "National Parks and their Role in Biodiversity Protection on Balkan Peninsula", 

June 25-28, Ohrid, Macedonia. 

Petkovski, S., 1997. On the presence of the genus Branchipus Schaeffer, 1776 (Crustacea: 

Anostraca) in Macedonia. Developments in Hydrobiology 125. Studies on Large Branchiopod 

Biology and Conservation. M.A. Simovich, C. Sassaman & d. belk (eds.) Hydrobiology 359: 37- 

44. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 

Petkovski, S., 1998. Fauna na Branchiopoda (Anostraca, Notostraca, Spinicaudata, Haplopoda, 

Ctenopoda, Anomopoda) vo Makedonija. In: Fauna na Makedonija 5, Zav. izvestaj. Mac. Mus. 

Sci. Nat., Skopje. pp.3-55. 

Petkovski, T., 1954. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der jugoslavischen Cyclopiden. Acta Mus. Maced. Sci. 

Nat., Skopje. 2(1): 1-32. 

Petkovski, T., 1958. Zwei neue Ostracoden aus dem Dorjansee. Bioloski glasnik, 11: 27-34. 

Petkovski, T., 1959a. Beitrage zur Kenntnis de Ostracoden-Fauna Jugoslawiens (V). Istanbul 

Üniversiteti Fen Fakütesi Hidrobiologi Arastirma Enstitüsü Yaylinlarindan (Seri B), 4: 158-165. 

Petkovski, T., 1959b. Susswasserostracoden aus Jugoslavien VI. Acta, Mus. Maced. Sci. Nat., 

Skopje. 6(3): 53-75. 

Petkovski, T., 1960a. Zur Kenntnis der Crustaceen des Prespasees. Fragm. balc., Mus. Mac. Sci. 

Nat., Skopje. 3(15): 117-131. 

Petkovski, T., 1960b. Susswasserostracoden aus Jugoslavien VII. Fragm. balc. Mus. Maced. Sci. 

Nat., Skopje. 3(15): 117-131. 

Petkovski, T. K., 1960c. Zwei neue Ostracoden aus dem Ohrid- und Prespa -See.- Izdanija Inst. 

Piscicult. Maced. Skopje 3 (2), 57-65 

Petkovski, T., 1962. Die Hydrofauna der glazialer Gewasser am Perister. Acta Mus. maced. sci. 

nat., Skopje, 8 (4): 77-98. 

Petkovski, T., 1976. Zwei neue und eine seletene Ostracoden-Art der Gattung Cypria Zenker aus 

Jugoslawien. Acta Macedonici Scientiarum Naturalium, 14: 173-192. 

Petkovski, T., 1983. Calanoida (Crustacea: Copepoda) Fauna na Makedonija. Mus. maced. sci. nat., 

Skopje, 5: 1-182. 

207

Petkovski, T., 1993. Taxonomic Revision of the Freshwater Ostracoda Species Cypridopsis 

lusatica Schaefer, 1943 (Crustacea). Trav. Sci. Nat.Natl. Hist. Nat. Luxemburg. 19: 49-66. 

Petkovski, T., 1995a. Neue und seltene limnische Ostracoden aus Mazedonien (Crustacea: 

Ostracoda). Mitt. Hamb. Zool. Mus. Inst. Hamburg. 92: 295-314. 

Petkovski, T., 1995b. Interesting Freshwater Ostracoda from Macedonia. Bull. Sci. Nat. 

Luxemburg. 96 (1995): 167-183. 

Petkovski, T. 1996. Species of the Genus Stenocypris Sars, 1889 from the Rice Fields of 

Macedonia (Crustacea: Ostracoda). Bull. Sci. Mus. Nat. Hist., Luxemburg. 23: 57-85. 

Petkovski, T., 1997. Two new Copepod species (Crustacea: Copepoda) from the Ohrid Lake. 

Annales Limnol. 33: 245-253. 

Petkovski, T., 1997. Eucypris kurtdiebeli - Ersatzname fur Eucypris diebeli Petkovski & Keyser, 

1995. Mitt. Hamb. Zool. Mus. Inst. Hamburg. 94: 1-187. 

Petkovski, T., 1998. Ostracodi (Crustacea: Ostracoda) na Makedonija. In: Fauna na Makedonija 5. 

Zav. Izvestaj. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. pp.60-77. 

Petkovski, T., 1999a. Two interesting Ostracod species from Montenegro (SE Europr). Annales 

Limnol. 35 (2): 123-132. 

Petkovski, T., 1999b. Two new species of the Subfamily Candoninae (Crustacea: Ostracoda) 

from Montenegro (SE Europe). Crustaceana, Leiden. 72: 603-616. 

Petkovski, T., 2000a. New and little known Ostracods of the Genus Heterocypris (Crustacea: 

Ostracoda) from the Balkan Peninsula. Limnologica, Urban & Fischer Verlag. 30 (1): 45-57. 

Petkovski, T. 2000b. On Eucandona balatonica (Daday, 1904) and Eucandona levanderi 

(Hirschman, 1912) two rare and little known Ostracod species (Crustacea: Ostracoda). 

Mesogee, Mus. Hist. Nat. Marseille. 58: 77-84. 

Petkovski, T., 2002. New and little known species of the Genus Candona (Crustacea: 

Ostracoda) from Macedonia and other Balkan areas. (In Press). 

Petrovska Lj. & Stojanov P. (1975): Algenata flora na Monospitovsko blato. MANU VII, 2: 25-43. 

Petrovska, Lj., 1966a. Nekoi novi formi na termalnite algi vo Makedonija. God. Zb. PMF, Skopje, 

16: 53-59. 

Petrovska, Lj., 1966b. Prilog kon poznavanjeto na termalnata mikroflora na Makedonija. God. Zb. 

PMF, Skopje, 19: 61-106. 

Petrovska, Lj., 1997.Modrozeleni algi (Cyanophyta) na Republika Makedonija. MANU, 141. 

Pinker, R., 1968. Die Lepidopteren fauna Mazedoniens. III. Geometridae. Posebno Izdanie. Mac. 

Mus. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 4:1-72. 

Pistorius R., 1997. Scientists, plants and politics - A history of the plant genetic resources 

movement. International Plant genetic resources institute. Rome. 

Popovska - Stankovic, O., 1990. Zooplanktonot na Dojranskoto Ezero.- Posebno izdanie, 

Prirodonauc. Muz. Mak., 9:7-124. 

208

Popovska-Stankovic, O., 1971. A contribution to a better knowledge of the Microfauna (Rotatoria, 

Copepoda and Cladocera) of Stenje Marsh. Folia balc., Inst. Pisc., Skopje. 3(1): 1-8. 

Puytorac de P., 1958. Comparaison de la Faune Infusorienne Endoparasite des Oligochetes du Lac 

D'Ohrid et de Ceux du Baikal. Station Hydrobiologique, Ohrid. 2(18):1-8. 

Radoman, P., 1973. New classification of fresh and brackish water Prosobranchia from the Balkans 

and Asia Minor. Prir. Muz. Beograd, Pos. Izd., 32: 1-30. 

Radoman, P., 1976. Speciation within the family Bythinellidae on the Balkans and Asia Minor. Z. 

zool. Syst. Evolut.-forsch., 14: 130-152. 

Radoman, P. & S. Stankovic, 1978. Jedan novi predstavnik roda Graecoanatolica iz Dojranskog 

Jezera. Bulletin du Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle Belgrade, Série B, 33: 5-6. 

Remy, P., 1934. Sur quelques Hirudinees des Balkans. Ann.Soc.Linn. Lyon. pp. 77. 

Richard, J., 1892. Animaux inferieurs, notamment Entomostraces, recueillis par le Prof. 

Steindachneri dans les lacs de la Macedoine. Ann. Hof. Mus. Wien. 7 (4): 151-153. 

Riedel, A., 1984. Über die makedonishen Gyralina Arten (Gastropoda, Zonitidae), Fragm. balcan. 

Mus. Maced. scient. natural., Skopje, 12, 31-43. 

Riedel, A. & F Velkovrh, 1976. Drei neue balkanische Zonitiden (Gastropoda) und neue Funde 

einiger seltener Arten, Biol. Vestn., Ljubljana, 24: 219-227, 3+12 ff. 

Rizovski, R., 1974. Cenozi na dabot ploskac (Quercus farnetto Ten) kako zaseben vegetaciski pojas 

vo dolnoto Povardarje. God.Zborn.Zemj.-Sumar. fak., 26:89-99, Skopje. 

Rizovski, R., Dzekov, S., 1990. Bistra II. Sumskata vegetacija na planinata Bistra, MANU, 1-72, 

Skopje. 

Roding, G., 1966. Molluskenfunde Whrend zwei Fahrten in Jugoslawien, insbesondere in 

Mazedonien. Fragm. Balc. Mus. Maced. Sci. Nat., Skopje, V (18): 125-141. 

Rot-Nikcevic, I., Sidorovska, V., Dzukic, G. & M. Kalezic, 2001. Sexual size dimorphism and life 

history traits of two European spadefoot toads (Pelobates fuscus and P.syriacus) in allopatry and 

sympatry. Annales (Koper), Series Historia Naturalis, 11,1 (23): 107-120. 

Sapkarev, J., 1956. Pridones za poznavanjeto na faunata na oligohetite od trite pogolemi ezera vo 

Jugoslavija. Arhiv Biol. Nauka, Beograd. 8: 135-144. 

Sapkarev, J. 1962. Faunata na oligohetite od pribreznite vodi na Prespanskata kotlina. Fragm. balc., 

Skopje. 16: 123-128. 

Sapkarev, J., 1963. Die fauna Hirudinea Mazedoniens. Systematik und Okologie der Hirudinea des 

Prespa Sees. Bull. Scient. Zagreb. 8. 

Sapkarev, J., 1975. Sistematika i rasprostranjenje pijavica (Hirudinea) Makedonije. Biosistematika, 

Beograd, 1. 

Sapkarev, J., 1978. Fauna na Makedonija - Dozdovni glisti Lumbricidae (Oligochaeta, Annelida). 

Mac. Mus. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 4: 1-116. 

209

Sapkarev, J., 1987. Endemicna fauna oligohaeta Jugoslavije. Akad. nauk.umetn. BiH, Sarajevo. 14: 

253-260. 

Sapkarev, J., Angelovski, P., Petkovski, T. & S. Stankovic, 1991. Segasnata sostojba na 

zoobentosot na Dojranskoto Ezero sporedena so taa od poranesnite istrazuvanja. In: Gasevski, 

M. (Ed.): Sostojbite i perspektivite za zastita na Dojranskoto Ezero. Zbornik na trudovi od 

Sovetuvanjeto vo Star Dojran. DEM., Skopje. pp.: 99-118. 

Schaider, P. & P. Jaksic. 1989. Die Tagfalter von Jugoslawisch Mazedonien Diurna (Rhopalocera 

und Hesperiidae). Selbsverlag Paul Schaider, Ratoldstrasse 36, Munchen. pp.: 1-82. 

Schedl, W., 1999. Eine noe Unterart der Bersingzikade im Balkan, Cicadetta montana macedonica 

n. ssp. (Homoptera, Auchenorrhyncha: Cicadomorpha: Tibicinidae). Reichenbachia, 33(11): 86- 

90. 

Schröder, B., 1921. Phytoplankton aus Seen von Mazedonien. Aus den Sitzungsberichten der 

Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien. Abteilung I. 130. Band 4 und 5. 

Schutt, H., 1974. Zwei neue reliktare Susswassermollusken der Dinariden. Sond. Aus. Ann. 

Naturhist. Mus., Wien. 78: 473-480. 

Schwoerbel, J., 1963. Susswassermilben aus Mazedonien. Acta. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje, 9(4): 

51-75. 

Serafimova-Hadzisce, J., 1958. Particularites du Zooplancton du Lac de Prespa et opercu de la 

composition du zooplancton des Grands Lacs de la Peninsule des Balkans. Station 

Hydrobiologique, Ohrid. 12 (28): 1-8. 

Shumka, S., 2000. Zooplankton community as an indicator of lake trophic state (Macro Prespa 

Lake). In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Sustainable development of 

Prespa region. Macedonian Ecological Society, Skopje. pp. 24-29. 

Sidorovska, V., S. Petkovski & G. Dzukic, 2001. The Green Frog Rana balcanica Schneider, Sinch 

& Sofianidou, 1993 (=Rana kurtmuelleri) (Amphibia: Anura) in Macedonia. In: Anniversary 

Edition of the Macedonian Museum of Natural History, pp. 187-194, Skopje. 

Sidorovska, V., Ljubisavljevic, K., Dzukic, G. & M.L., Kalezic, 2002. Tadpole morphology of two 

spadefoot toads (Pelobates fuscus and P. syriacus). Spixiana (München), 25 (2): 183-191. 

Sidorovska, V., I. Krizmanic, G. Dzukic & M.L. Kalezic, 2003. The first recorded incidence of 

paedogenesis in the European newts (Triturus, Salamandridae) from Macedonia. Biota, (in 

press). 

Sidorovska, V. 2003. Pelobatidae (Amphibia: Anura) on the Balkan Peninsula: distribution, 

morphological differentation and life history traits. Doctor Thesis, Faculty of Natural Sciences 

and Mathematics, Skopje. 

Sidorovska, V., 2003. The spadefoot toads (Pelobates spp.) on the Balkan Peninsula: historical and 

present-day distribution patterns (in manuscript). 

Sket, B., 1967. Crustacea, Isopoda (aquatica). Catalogus faunae Jugoslaviae. Acad. Sci. Art. Slov. 

III/3:1-21. 

210

Smiljkov, S., 1999. Taksonomsko-ekoloski istrazuvanja na hironomidnata fauna (Diptera: 

Chironomidae) od Ohridskoto Ezero i negovite krajbrezni vodi. PMF. Skopje, pp.:1-107. 

(Doctor thesis). 

Snegarova, L., 1954. Gastropodna fauna na Ohridsko Ezero. Acta. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 

16(6): 55-64. 

Soska, Th., 1939. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Schluchtenfloren von Südserbien, III. Glasnik SND, 

20(7):167-191. 

Soska, Th, 1940. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Schluchtenfloren von Südserbien, IV. BSS Sk., 22 

(8):169-181. 

Soska, Th.., 1929. Ein Blick auf die Vegetation des Jama-Bistra Gebirges in Südserbien. BIJBU 

Belg., 1 (2):203-204. 

Soska, Th., 1933. Beitrag sur Marmorflora der Umgebung von Prilep. BIJBU Belg., 2 (3):176-182. 

Soska, Th., 1938. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Schluchtenfloren von Südserbien. I. Glas. SND, 

18(6):223-238. 

Soska, Th., 1939. Zur Flora des Berges Bukovik bei Gostivar in Südserbien. AMSM, 1(6):55-59. 

Soska, Th., 1938/39. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Schluchtenfloren von Südserbien. II. Glas. SND, 

20(7):35-58. 

Speight, M. C. D., 2001. Species accounts of European Syrphidae (Diptera), 2001.Syrph the Net: 

The database of European Syrphidae (Diptera), Vol 27, 2001:1-287. Dublin. 

Stankovic, S., 1931a. Die Fauna des Ochrid-Sees und ihre Herkunft. Arch. Hydrobiol. 23. 

Stankovic, S., 1931b. Sur les particularités limnologiques des lacs égéens. Verhandlungen der 

Internationale Vereinigung für theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie, 5: 158-190. 

Stankovic, S., 1951. Naselje dna jegejskih jezera. Zbor. rad. inst. ekol. biog. Beograd. XI (2). 

Stankovic, S., 1969. Turbellaries Triclades endemiques nouveaux du Lac d’Ohrid. Arch. 

Hydrobiol., 65. 

Stankovic, S., 1985. A contribution to the knowledge of Gastropods fauna of Dojran Lake and the 

surrounding waters. Fragm. balc., Mus. mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje, 13 (274): 141-152. 

Stankovic, S. 1991. Gastropoda. In: Sapkarev et. al. Segasnata sostojba na zoobentosot na 

Dojranskoto Ezero sporedena so toa od poranesnite istrazuvanja. Gasevski (Ed.) Sostojbite i 

perspektivite za zastita na Dojranskoto Ezero. Zbornik na trudovi od Sovetuvanjeto vo Star 

Dojran. DEM, Skopje, 99-119. 

Stojanov, P. & Lj. Petrovska, 1980. Algenata flora na tresetistata vo istocna Makedonija, (Bukovi} - 

Pehcevo). God. zb. Biol. Skopje, Kn. 33: 143-158. 

Stojanov, P., 1975. Prilog kon poznavaweto na fitoplanktotnot vo Dojranskoto Ezero. God. Zb. 

PMF, Univ. Skopje, Kn. 27-28: 221-236. 

Stojanov, P., 1982a. Dijatomeje vodenih ekosistema Nacionalnog Parka “Pelister”. Biosistematika, 

Vol. 8 (1): 1-17. 

211

Stojanov, P., 1982b. Dijatomejskata mikroflora na nekoi vodeni ekosistemi na planinata Jakupica, 

Makedonija. God. Zb.Biol. Kn.35: 115-129. 

Stojanov, P., 1982c. Dijatomejskata mikroflora vo nekoi termalni izvori na Makedonija, 

Jugoslavija. God. Zb. Biol. Kn. 35: 175-182. 

Stojanov, P., 1983a. Dijatomejskata mikroflora na tresetistata na Nacionalniot park “Mavrovo”. 

God. Zb. Biol. Kn. 36, 87-94. 

Stojanov, P., 1983b. Algenata flora vo perifitonot na Dojranskoto Ezero. God.zb., Biol. Kn.36, 95- 

109. 

Stojanovski, P., 1991. Promeni vo mikroflorata na Dojranskoto ezero poradi prekumerno opa|awe 

na vodnoto nivo. Zbornik trudovi. Sostojbite i perspektivite za zastita na Dojranskoto ezero. Star 

Dojran 1991, 90-99. 

Stojanovski, P. & S. Krstic, 1995. Zabrzanata distrofija na Dojranskoto Ezero kako direktna 

posledica na antropogenoto vlijanie. God.Zb.Biol. Kn 48, Skopje, 139-173. 

Strasser, K., 1971. Diplopoda. Catalogus Faunae Jugoslaviae III/4, Ljubljana, pp.: 1-50. 

Sturany, R., 1894. Zur Molluskenfauna der europaischen Turkei. Ann. Naturh. Hofmns. 9: 369-390. 

Thurner, J., 1964. Die Lepidopterenfauna Jugoslawish Mazedoniens. I. Rhopalocera, Grypocera 

und Noctuidae. Posebni Izdanie. Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje. 1: 1-159. 

Todorovski, A., 1972. Pelister i negoviot rastitelen svet. Nacion. park "Pelister" Bitola, 1-17. 

Tortich, M., 1988. Materials for the mycoflora of Macedonia. Maked. akad. na naukite i 

umetnostite., p.p. 1-64, Skopje. 

Ugurtas, I. H., K. Ljubisavljevic, V. Sidorovska, M. L. Kalezic & G. Dzukic, 2002. Morphological 

differentiation of eastern spadefoot toad (Pelobates syriacus) populations. Israel Journal of 

Zoology, 48: 13-32. 

Urbanski, J., 1939. Uber drei neue Schneckenarten aus dem sudlichen Teile Jugoslawiens. Zool. 

Pol., 3: 260-266. 

Vavilov N. I., 1997. Five Continents. International Plant genetic resources institute. Rome. 

Walter and Gillet, 1998. IUCN global red list from 1997. 

Weber, F., 1957. Botanicka vychazka do pohori Galicica. Sborn.klub.Prirodov.Brne, 39:1-11. 

Wiktor, A., 1996. The slugs of the Former Yugoslavia (Gastrop. terr. nuda - Arionidae, Milacidae, 

Limacidae, Agriolimacidae). Ann. Zool., 46 : 84 - 110, Warszawa- Wroclaw. 

Wiktor, A., 1997. Endemism of slugs within the Balkan Peninsula and adjacent islands ( 

Gastropoda: Pulmonata; Arionidae, Milacidae, Limacidae, Agriolimacidae). Genus, Wroclaw, 8 

(1):205-221. 

Wiktor, A., 2000. Agriolimacidae (Gastropoda: Pulmonata) – a systematic monograph. Ann. zool. 

Warszawa, 49 (3): 347-590. 

Willmann, R. & H. Pieper, 1978a. Gastropoda. In: Limnofauna Europaea. Joachim Illies-Editor. 

Gustav Fisher Verlag. Stuttgart, New York, Amsterdam. pp. 118-134. 

212

Willmann, R.& H. Pieper, 1978b. Lamellibranchiata. In: Limnofauna Europaea. Joachim Illies- 

Editor. Gustav Fisher Verlag. Stuttgart, New York, Amsterdam. pp.135-137. 

Winkler A., 1924-1932. Catalogus Coleopterorum regionis palaearcticae XVIII. Wien. 

Zombori, L., 1974. Data to the sawfly fauna of Yugoslavia (Hymenoptera: Symphyta) Fragmenta 

Balcanica, Mus. Mac. Sci. Nat., Skopje 9: 173-185. 

213

English - Convention on Biological Diversity

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?