Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronted Goose conservation project ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1. Introduction The numbers of Lesser White-fronted Goose (Anser erythropus, later LWfG) and its range have declined seriously throughout recent decades and this process is going on all over the species range. The once continuous breeding range of the species is at present split into several isolated areas. Twenty years ago the world population was estimated at about 130,000 individuals (Vinogradov 1990), but such high estimates is considered to have been too high (e.g. Rogacheva 1992). Currently, the western (European – central Siberian) LWfG populations are estimated at ca. 8,500–17,000 individuals (Lorentsen et al. 1999). LWfG is included in the list of threatened waterfowl species (Tucker & Heath 1994), and it has been enlisted in the second edition of the Red Data book of the Russian Federation as a species of status II (Vulnerable). Recently it has been suggested that several geographically separated breeding populations of LWfG exist, with different wintering grounds and migration routes (Morozov 1995). Results from studies carried out by the Wetlands International LWfG Task force in different parts of the LWfG breeding range (Aarvak et al. 1997, Morozov & Kalyakin 1997, Karvonen & Markkola 1998, Lorentsen et al. 1998, Øien et al. 1999) confirmed this suggestion. Within Russia, the population inhabiting European tundras is the most vulnerable. According to estimations made 10 years ago, it does not exceed a total of 500–1,000 birds. In the eastern part of Bolshezemelskaya Tundra, only 125 adults were counted (Morozov Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronted Goose conservation project – Annual report 1999 Photo 1. Landscape view of the Bolshaya Rogovaya River basin area. © Vladimir Morozov, 1999 Morozov: Surveys for Lesser White-fronted Goose in the Bolshezemelskaya Tundra, European Russia, in 1999 Surveys for Lesser White-fronted Goose in the Bolshezemelskaya Tundra, European Russia, in 1999 Vladimir V. Morozov Russian Research Institute for Nature Protection, Znamenskoye-Sadki, Moscow 113628, Russia & Zoological Museum of Moscow State University, Bolshaya Nikitskaya St., 6, Moscow 103009, RUSSIA, e-mail: morozov@1.zoomus.bio.msu.ru 1988). The data collected in the period 1993–1995 have indicated extinction of the LWfG in many sites of this region (Morozov 1995). Besides being the most vulnerable, the population of the European tundras of Russia remains one of the least known ones. Recently published information on genetic structure exist for the Fennoscandian and Yamal populations of LWfG. The genetic structures of these populations are very different, but we still lack knowledge on genetic structure, migration routes, wintering grounds and present status of the LWfG population of Bolshezemelskaya Tundra between the two subpopulations of Fennoscandia and Yamal. Data on genetic structure of the LWfG population in this region is important since it occupies the territory between the breeding areas of the Fennoscandian and Yamal LWfG populations. The existing information on the LWfG population of European tundras of Russia is obviously insufficient to implement effective conservation measures for this population on the breeding grounds. Therefore, a pilot project to clear up the present status of the LWfG population of the Bolshezemelskaya Tundra was initiated . The main aim of the survey was to outline the recent breeding grounds, to estimate the numbers and to find staging areas for the European LWfG population in Russia. In accordance with this final goal the following objectives should be pursued: – check breeding sites that were not checked for 10 years; – estimate breeding numbers; – catch LWfG for marking with neckbands and colour legrings; 35
Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronted Goose conservation project – Annual report 1999 Morozov: Surveys for Lesser White-fronted Goose in the Bolshezemelskaya Tundra, European Russia, in 1999 Photo 2. Landscape view of the Polar Ural area. © Vladimir Morozov, 1999 36 – study breeding biology, productivity, habitat preferences and moult patterns; – collect feathers and blood samples for genetic analyses. 2. Study areas The study was carried out in the eastern part of Bolshezemelskaya Tundra and the Polar Ural mountains, where LWfG were observed in the period 1984–93 (Morozov 1988, 1995). The study area is located in the southern tundra subzone within 67º30’–68º30’ N, 60º00’–70º00’ E. It encompasses the basins of Bolshaya Rogovaya River and foothills of the Polar Ural. Co-ordinates of the Bolshaya Rogovaya River basin are 67º25’–67º36’ N, 62º01’–62º30’ E, and for Polar Ural areas: 67º02’–67º28’, N, 63º55’–65º10’ E. The landscape of the lowland tundras of Bolshaya Rogovaya River basin is hilly, and watersheds are usually flat and considerably swampy (Photo 1). Profusely meandering rivers occupy deep valleys and sometimes form steep slopes. Rivers flow usually slowly, and sandy or muddy banks prevail. In the watersheds there is a great number of lakes of different origin. The landscape of the Polar Ural is typically mountainous (Photo 2). Watersheds in foothills are drier than those of lowland tundras. There are practically no lakes and areas dominated by mires are scarce. Rivers are of mountain character with rapid flow, stony bottoms and banks composed of rocks. Some river valleys form narrow canyons. The vegetation in the lowland tundra is similar to the vegetation in the mountains. Shrub tundras and dense bushes prevail everywhere within the study area. In these types of tundras, dwarf birch (Betula nana) and willows (Salix lanata, S. glauca, S. phylicifolia and S. lapponum) dominate. The shrubs reach 50-60 cm in height, and dense bushes of more than 2 m high grow along river and stream valleys. On the flood-plains there are small sedge and grassy meadows. 3. Weather conditions In general 1999 was characterised by cold and wet weather. The spring came late, and in early June 80% of the area was covered by snow. Regularly the temperature fell below 0ºC. It was snowing practically every day, and frost at night occurred daily. By mid June, about 50% of the area was covered by snow. Due to a very cold winter, many rivers were frozen to the bottom. Drifting of ice observed 7–15 June, occurred only in large rivers, in small ones the water flowed on top of the melting ice. The lakes became ice-free after 5 July. The summer was cool, cloudy and rainy. From 1 July to 20 August only 20 days were without precipitation. Strong rain showers in August caused short time floods in the mountains and foothills. In total the breeding conditions were not favourable. Bean Geese started to breed late, the broods had few goslings and the percentage of non-breeding birds was relatively high. Apparently LWfG did not breed in one of the investigated areas because of the unfavourable weather conditions. 4. Methods Transportation. Since the distance between the two study areas was more than 150 km, we rented a caterpillar truck, by which our team moved from Vorkuta to both study areas. During the spring flooding we used motorboat. In summer, when rivers became shallow, a rubber boat was used to drive along the large rivers (Usa and Bolshaya Rogovaya rivers). In the foothills of the Polar Ural we went by foot. Counts. We counted geese in order to reveal present distribution and numbers of LWfG within the study area. In the Usa and Bolshaya Rogovaya River valleys, the geese were counted by using motorboat in spring and rubber boat in summer. One field worker went by boat along the stream while two others moved by foot along each river bank. Watersheds and small streams were surveyed by walking. Attention was paid to traces of geese (footprints, feathers, excrements, grazing sites). The total length of the boat censuses was 320 km, and for counts by foot 440 km. The surveyed area in the Bolshaya Rogovaya River basin totalled 400 km2 , and the one in Polar Ural 950 km2 . The surveyed area of the foothills of Polar Ural was 450
Page 1 and 2: WWF Finland Report No 12 - NOF Rapp
Page 3 and 4: Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronted
Page 31: Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronted
Page 49 and 50: al report 1999 Persson: Occurrence
Page 51: Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronted
Page 56 and 57: Lesser White-fronted Goose protecte
Page 58 and 59: fronted), the Barnacle Goose - pena
Page 60 and 61: Co-operation partners and contacts
Page 64 and 65: Numenius arquata Kustanay: 11 Octob
Page 66 and 67: Carduelis spinus Kustanay: 7 Octobe

Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronted Goose conservation project ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?