International Single Species Action Plan for the ... - AEWA

AEWA Technical Series No. 36
Islamic Republic of NO YES (?) YES
Iran
Iraq NO YES (?) YES
Kazakhstan NO YES NO
Russian Federation YES YES NO
Syria NO YES (?) YES
Turkey NO YES YES (?)
Turkmenistan NO YES (?) YES (?)
Ukraine NO YES YES
Uzbekistan NO YES YES
(?) = uncertain and/or significant shortage of information
1.5 Survival and Productivity, Life Cycle and Habitat Requirements
The following is a brief summary of the key points influencing the Action Plan.
Survival and productivity
Rather good productivity and survival data are available for the Fennoscandian population
and an elasticity analysis has been performed (Lampila 2001, Markkola & Lampila 2003), but
patchy count data and the low number of ringing recoveries means that evidence for the
Western main population is essentially anecdotal. Lampila (2001) demonstrated that low
survival was the key factor determining the negative population development for
Fennoscandian Lesser White-fronts.
Further research has shown that the productivity of the Fennoscandian population has less
annual variation than it is the case for other arctic geese (this may be because the species
breeds further south than other arctic geese species). Survival of 1st calendar year (1cy) and
2nd calendar year (2-cy) birds is relatively poor. Modelling work indicates that increases in
both adult and 1-cy/2-cy survival are required in order for the current population decline to be
arrested and reversed. A very small increase in adult survival can have a greater impact on the
overall population level than an apparently more significant increase in juvenile/immature
survival. (J. Markkola, P. Lampila pers. comm; Markkola and Lampila 2003) 4 . Hunting
pressure is considered the main cause of adult mortality.
In future productivity of Lesser White-fronted Geese could be assessed by counting the
proportion of juvenile birds in autumn staging flocks at Porsanger Fjord, Norway
(Fennoscandian population) and north-west Kazakhstan (Western main population).
However, this requires a long-term, intensive and consistent effort. Calculating survival rates
is more challenging still, since counts are required both in spring and in autumn. Such biannual
counts are already done for the small Fennoscandian population, but would be a major
undertaking for the Western main population.
More research is needed to compare the survival and productivity of the
supplemented/reintroduced and wild populations.
Life cycle
Because Lesser White-fronted Geese are long-distance migrants, international cooperation is
a prerequisite for effective conservation. Furthermore, as breeding occurs in the sub-arctic
4
A theoretic study using differently pre-defined age classes for demographic modelling currently assesses the
potential impact of juveniles and 1-2-cy survival on population growth rate (P. S. Gulve pers. comm.). A PVA
analysis on the basis of time-series data from annual bird counts is also underway in 2008 (pers. comm. Aaravak).
The relative implications of differential mortality of adult and young birds will be subject to further examination,
bearing in mind the central importance of reducing overall LWfG mortality.
International Single Species Action Plan for the Conservation of the Lesser White-fronted Goose 19