Action Description Impact Livelihood, economic and other <strong>in</strong>centives Targeted agri-environmental measures <strong>in</strong> Portugal and Spa<strong>in</strong>. Beneficial agri-environmental measures <strong>in</strong> France and Bulgaria. High/Critical Land/water protection Monitor<strong>in</strong>g and plann<strong>in</strong>g Species management Education Legislation There are 231 IBAs identified for Lesser kestrel <strong>in</strong> Europe, of which 42% are fully designated as SPAs or other protected areas and 22% are not protected. Protected areas cover the majority of the populations <strong>in</strong> the Mediterranean countries. International Species Action plan <strong>in</strong> place. National Species Action Plan <strong>in</strong> France. Surveyed <strong>in</strong> most countries, except Slovenia, but patchily. Artificial nests or provision of nest<strong>in</strong>g opportunities, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g sensitive restoration of old build<strong>in</strong>gs and colony restoration, e.g. erection of Lesser kestrel ‘houses’ (primillares) <strong>in</strong> Spa<strong>in</strong> and breed<strong>in</strong>g walls and breed<strong>in</strong>g towers <strong>in</strong> Portugal [35] . Captive breed<strong>in</strong>g to re<strong>in</strong>force populations <strong>in</strong> Spa<strong>in</strong>, Portugal and France. Re<strong>in</strong>troduction project <strong>in</strong> Bulgaria <strong>in</strong>itiated. Awareness campaigns, especially <strong>in</strong> the Mediterranean countries, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g websites, <strong>in</strong>formation brochures and workshops. Legally protected <strong>in</strong> all countries, but enforcement should be improved (Bosnia and Herzegov<strong>in</strong>a, Croatia, Greece, Italy, FYRO Macedonia, Romania and Spa<strong>in</strong>). High High Medium High, but local Low High High densities through appropriate rotational cereal cultivation practices and traditional low-<strong>in</strong>tensity pastoral systems [15, 27, 37] . For example, the persistence of the largest population of Lesser kestrels <strong>in</strong> Portugal (Castro Verde SPA, hold<strong>in</strong>g c. 80% of the Portuguese population) is guaranteed as a result of a ban on afforestation and support for a targeted agri-environment scheme <strong>in</strong> the area, which ensures a large area of fallow land, low pesticide and herbicide use and controlled graz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>tensity [7, 35] . Table 4. Conservation actions <strong>in</strong> place for Lesser kestrel [15] . 202
References 1. Negro, J.J. 1997. Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni. BWP Update 1: 49–56. 2. Iñigo, A. & Barov, B. 2010. Action Plan for the Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni <strong>in</strong> the European Union. Strasbourg: European Commission. 3. Bijleveld, M. 1974 Birds of Prey <strong>in</strong> Europe. London: Macmillan Press. 4. BirdLife International. 2004. Birds <strong>in</strong> Europe: Population Estimates, Trends and Conservation Status. Cambridge: BirdLife International. 5. Kmetova, E., Zhelev, P., Mechev, A., Gradev, G. & Ivanov, I. 2012. Natural colonies of Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni) <strong>in</strong> European Turkey and discussion on the chances of natural re-colonization of the species <strong>in</strong> Bulgaria. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica Suppl. 4: 45–52. 6. Biber, J.-P. 1990. Aciton Plan for the Conservation of Western Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni Populations. ICBP Study Report 41. Cambridge: International Committee for Bird Protection. 7. Catry, I., Franco, A.M.A., Rocha, P., Alcazar, R., Reis, S., Cordeiro, A., Ventim, R., Teodósio, J. & Moreira, F. 2013. Forag<strong>in</strong>g habitat quality constra<strong>in</strong>s effectiveness of artificial nest-site provision<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> revers<strong>in</strong>g population decl<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> a colonial cavity nester. PLoS ONE 8: e58320. 8. Rodríguez, C., Tapia, L., Kieny, F. & Bustamante, J. 2010. Temporal changes <strong>in</strong> Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni) diet dur<strong>in</strong>g the breed<strong>in</strong>g season <strong>in</strong> southern Spa<strong>in</strong>. Journal of Raptor Research 44: 120–128. 9. Sarà, M., D., C. & L., Z. 2012. Effects of nest and colony features on Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni) reproductive success. Avian Biology Research 5: 209–217. 10. Franco, A.M.A., Marques, J.T. & Sutherland, W.J. 2005. Is nest-site availability limit<strong>in</strong>g Lesser Kestrel populations? A multiple scale approach. Ibis 147: 657–666. 11. De Frutos, Á., Olea, P., Mateo-Tomás, P. & Purroy, F. 2009. The role of fallow <strong>in</strong> habitat use by the Lesser Kestrel dur<strong>in</strong>g the post-fledg<strong>in</strong>g period: <strong>in</strong>ferr<strong>in</strong>g potential conservation implications from the abolition of obligatory set-aside. European Journal of Wildlife Research 56: 503–511. 12. IUCN. 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Available from: http://www.iucnredlist.org [accessed on 04 April 2013]. 13. BirdLife International. 2004. Birds <strong>in</strong> the European Union: A Status Assessment. Wagen<strong>in</strong>gen: BirdLife International. 14. Tucker, G.M. & Heath, M.F. 1994. Birds <strong>in</strong> Europe: Their Conservation Status. Cambridge: BirdLife International. 15. Barov, B. & Derhé, M. 2011. Review of the Implementation of Species Action Plans of Threatened Birds <strong>in</strong> the European Union (2004–2010). Cambridge: BirdLife International. 16. Zoll<strong>in</strong>ger, R. & Hagermeijer, W.J.M. 1994. The Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni: a review of the status of a globally threatened species. In B.-U. Meyburg & R.D. Chancellor (eds). Raptor Conservation Today: 219–228. Budapest: WWGBP & Pica Press. 17. Biber, J.-P. 1996. International Action Plan for the Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni). Strasbourg: European Commission. 18. Kotrošan, D. & Hatibović, E. 2012. Raptors <strong>in</strong> Bosnia and Herzegov<strong>in</strong>a – their status and perspectives for monitor<strong>in</strong>g development. Acrocephalus 33: 173−179. 19. LPO BirdLife France. 2012. 1980–2012 Breed<strong>in</strong>g bird <strong>in</strong>ventory of France. Database. Rochefort: LPO. 20. Legakis, A. & Maragou, P. 2009. The Greek Red Data Book. Athens: Hellenic Zoological Society. 21. Kastritis, T. 2013. <strong>in</strong> litt. 22. Velevski, M., Hallmann, B., Grubač, B., Lisičanec, T., Stoynov, E., Lisičanec, E., Avukatov, V., Božic, L. & Stumberger, B. 2010. Important Bird Areas <strong>in</strong> Macedonia: sites of global and European importance. Acrocephalus 147: 181−282. 23. Munteanu, A. (ed.) 2011. Atlasul Păsărilor Clocitoare d<strong>in</strong> Republica Moldova. Chis<strong>in</strong>ău: Inst. de Zoologie al Acad. de Sti<strong>in</strong>Ńe a Moldovei & Soc. Ornitologică d<strong>in</strong> Rep. Moldova. 24. Franco, A. 2013. <strong>in</strong> litt. 25. Voous, K.H. 1960. Atlas of European Birds. New York: Nelson. 26. Hagermeijer, W.J.M. & Blair, M.J. 1997. The EBCC Atlas of European Breed<strong>in</strong>g Birds: Their Distribution and Abundance. London: T. & A. D. Poyser. 27. Tella, J.L., Forero, M.G., Hiraldo, F. & Donázar, J.A. 1998. Conflicts between Lesser Kestrel conservation and European agricultural policies as identified by habitat use analyses. Conservation Biology 12: 593–604. 28. Sarà, M. 2010. Climate and land-use changes as determ<strong>in</strong>ants of Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni abundance <strong>in</strong> Mediterranean cereal steppes (Sicily). Ardeola 57: 3–22. 29. Donázar, J.A., Negro, J.J. & Hiraldo, F. 1993. Forag<strong>in</strong>g habitat selection, land-use changes and population decl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> the Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni. Journal of Applied Ecology 30: 515–522. 30. Sarà, M. 2013. <strong>in</strong> litt. 31. Catry, I., Alcazar, R., Franco, A.M.A. & Sutherland, W.J. 2009. Identify<strong>in</strong>g the effectiveness and constra<strong>in</strong>st of conservation <strong>in</strong>terventions: a case study of the endangered Lesser Kestrel. Biological Conservation 142: 2782–2791. 32. Mihoub, J.-B., Mouawad, N.G., Pilard, P., Jiguet, F., Low, M. & Teplitsky, C. 2012. Impact of temperature on the breed<strong>in</strong>g performance and selection patterns <strong>in</strong> Lesser Kestrels Falco naumanni. Journal of Avian Biology 43: 472–480. 33. Rodríguez, C. & Bustamante, J. 2003. The effect of weather on Lesser Kestrel breed<strong>in</strong>g success: can climate change expla<strong>in</strong> historical population decl<strong>in</strong>es? Journal of Animal Ecology 72: 793–810. 34. Mihoub, J.-B., Gimenez, O., Pilard, P. & Sarraz<strong>in</strong>, F. 2010. Challeng<strong>in</strong>g conservation of migratory species: Sahelian ra<strong>in</strong>falls drive first-year survivalof the vulnerable Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni. Biological Conservation 143: 839–847. 35. Catry, I. 2013. <strong>in</strong> litt. 36. “Lesser Kestrel Recovery” Project. LIFE11 NAT/BG/360: http://greenbalkans.org/ birdsofprey/lesserkestrellife/en/. 37. Íñigo, A., Infante, O., Valls, J. & Atienza, J.C. 2008. Directrices para la Redacción de Planes o Instrumentos de Gestión de las Zonas de Especial Protección para las Aves. Madrid: SEO/BirdLife. Peer reviewers • Javier Bustamante • Inês Catry • Ald<strong>in</strong>a Franco • Thanos Kastritis • Carlos Rodríguez • Maurizio Sarà 203
- Page 1 and 2:
Stefanie Deinet Christina Ieronymid
- Page 3 and 4:
Wildlife comeback in Europe The rec
- Page 5 and 6:
Table of contents Foreword . . . .
- Page 7:
Foreword Shifting baselines In Euro
- Page 10 and 11:
The Adriatic coastline of the Veleb
- Page 12 and 13:
96 year old olive farmer with his d
- Page 14 and 15:
12
- Page 16 and 17:
Limitations of population trend dat
- Page 18 and 19:
Constructing historical distributio
- Page 20 and 21:
Red deer at the Oostvaardersplassen
- Page 22 and 23:
Table 2. Definitions of classificat
- Page 24 and 25:
22
- Page 26 and 27:
3.1. European bison Bison bonasus S
- Page 28 and 29:
Table 2. Latest population estimate
- Page 30 and 31:
Figure 1c. Map highlighting areas o
- Page 32 and 33:
Rank Reason for change Description
- Page 34 and 35:
3.2. Alpine ibex Capra ibex Summary
- Page 36 and 37:
Figure 1a. Distribution of Alpine i
- Page 38 and 39:
% change 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Fig
- Page 40 and 41:
3.3. Iberian ibex Capra pyrenaica S
- Page 42 and 43:
Figure 1a. Distribution of Iberian
- Page 44 and 45:
Rank Reason for change Description
- Page 46 and 47:
3.4. Southern chamois Rupicapra pyr
- Page 48 and 49:
Figure 1a. Distribution of Southern
- Page 50 and 51:
Rank Reason for change Description
- Page 52 and 53:
3.5. Northern chamois Rupicapra rup
- Page 54 and 55:
Scale Status Population trend Justi
- Page 56 and 57:
% change 80 60 40 20 0 and Italy [2
- Page 58 and 59:
Subspecies balcanica Exploitation B
- Page 60 and 61:
3.6. Eurasian elk Alces alces Summa
- Page 62 and 63:
Figure 1a. Distribution of Eurasian
- Page 64 and 65:
Poland [10] and Estonia [28] . It i
- Page 66 and 67:
References 1. Geist, V. 1998. Deer
- Page 68 and 69:
3.7. Roe deer Capreolus capreolus S
- Page 70 and 71:
Estimate Year assessed Reference Gl
- Page 72 and 73:
Figure 2. Change in Roe deer popula
- Page 74 and 75:
Recent developments As discussed ab
- Page 76 and 77:
3.8. Red deer Cervus elaphus Summar
- Page 78 and 79:
Estimate Year assessed Reference Gl
- Page 80 and 81:
% change 750 600 450 300 150 0 Figu
- Page 82 and 83:
lineages for the local area and min
- Page 84 and 85:
3.9. Wild boar Sus scrofa Summary T
- Page 86 and 87:
Estimate Year assessed Reference Gl
- Page 88 and 89:
Abundance and distribution: changes
- Page 90 and 91:
References 1. IUCN 2011a. The IUCN
- Page 92 and 93:
3.10. Golden jackal Canis aureus Su
- Page 94 and 95:
Estimate Year assessed Reference Gl
- Page 96 and 97:
Recent developments Table 3. Major
- Page 98 and 99:
3.11. Grey wolf Canis lupus Summary
- Page 100 and 101:
Estimate Year assessed Reference Gl
- Page 102 and 103:
Drivers of recovery Figure 2. Distr
- Page 104 and 105:
References 1. Mech, L.D. & Boitani,
- Page 106 and 107:
3.12. Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx Summa
- Page 108 and 109:
Estimate Year assessed Reference Gl
- Page 110 and 111:
% change 750 600 450 300 150 0 Figu
- Page 112 and 113:
Figure 3. Map of recent development
- Page 114 and 115:
3.13. Iberian lynx Lynx pardinus Su
- Page 116 and 117:
Figure 1a. Distribution of the Iber
- Page 118 and 119:
Table 3. Major reasons for positive
- Page 120 and 121:
18. IUCN 2011b. European Red List.
- Page 122 and 123:
3.14. Wolverine Gulo gulo Summary T
- Page 124 and 125:
Figure 1a. Distribution of Wolverin
- Page 126 and 127:
Rank Reason for change Description
- Page 128 and 129:
3.15. Grey seal Halichoerus grypus
- Page 130 and 131:
Estimate assessed Reference Global
- Page 132 and 133:
% change 1500 1200 900 600 300 0 Fi
- Page 134 and 135:
3.16. Harbour seal Phoca vitulina S
- Page 136 and 137:
east coast, the distribution is res
- Page 138 and 139:
% change 200 150 100 50 0 populatio
- Page 140 and 141:
Figure 3. Map of recent development
- Page 142 and 143:
3.17. Brown bear Ursus arctos Summa
- Page 144 and 145:
Table 2. Latest population estimate
- Page 146 and 147:
144
- Page 148 and 149:
Recent developments % change 200 15
- Page 150 and 151:
mation, e.g. between Slovenia and C
- Page 152 and 153:
3.18. Eurasian beaver Castor fiber
- Page 154 and 155: Estimate Year assessed Reference Gl
- Page 156 and 157: % change 20,000 16,000 12,000 200 1
- Page 158 and 159: Table 3. Major reasons for change i
- Page 160 and 161: 158
- Page 162 and 163: 4.1. Pink-footed goose Anser brachy
- Page 164 and 165: Table 2. Major threats that drove P
- Page 166 and 167: 4.2. Barnacle goose Branta leucopsi
- Page 168 and 169: Figure 2. Current breeding and wint
- Page 170 and 171: Table 3. Conservation actions in pl
- Page 172 and 173: 4.3. Whooper swan Cygnus cygnus Sum
- Page 174 and 175: Threat Description Impact Hunting a
- Page 176 and 177: 4.4. White-headed duck Oxyura leuco
- Page 178 and 179: No. of individuals 5000 4500 4000 3
- Page 180 and 181: educing the population in the count
- Page 182 and 183: 4.5. White stork Ciconia ciconia Su
- Page 184 and 185: Country No. of breeding pairs Trend
- Page 186 and 187: Action Description Impact Monitorin
- Page 188 and 189: 4.6. Eurasian spoonbill Platalea le
- Page 190 and 191: Country No. of breeding pairs No. o
- Page 192 and 193: Threat Description Impact Residenti
- Page 194 and 195: 4.7. Dalmatian pelican Pelecanus cr
- Page 196 and 197: 194
- Page 198 and 199: Table 3 Major threats that drove th
- Page 200 and 201: 4.8. Lesser kestrel Falco naumanni
- Page 202 and 203: Figure 2. Current distribution of L
- Page 206 and 207: 4.9. Saker falcon Falco cherrug Sum
- Page 208 and 209: Table 2. Latest Saker falcon popula
- Page 210 and 211: Action Description Impact Planning
- Page 212 and 213: 4.10. Peregrine falcon Falco peregr
- Page 214 and 215: No. of breeding pairs 1,600 1,200 8
- Page 216 and 217: Action Description Impact Legislati
- Page 218 and 219: 4.11. Red kite Milvus milvus Summar
- Page 220 and 221: Country No. of breeding pairs Trend
- Page 222 and 223: Action Description Impact Monitorin
- Page 224 and 225: 4.12. White-tailed eagle Haliaeetus
- Page 226 and 227: Country No. of breeding pairs Year
- Page 228 and 229: References 1. Bijleveld, M. 1974 Bi
- Page 230 and 231: 4.13. Bearded vulture Gypaetus barb
- Page 232 and 233: Figure 2. Current distribution of B
- Page 234 and 235: 4.14. Griffon vulture Gyps fulvus S
- Page 236 and 237: Figure 2. Current distribution of G
- Page 238 and 239: Action Description Impact Monitorin
- Page 240 and 241: 4.15. Cinereous vulture Aegypius mo
- Page 242 and 243: Figure 2. Current distribution of C
- Page 244 and 245: 4.16. Spanish imperial eagle Aquila
- Page 246 and 247: Threat Description Impact Transport
- Page 248 and 249: Drivers of recovery The spectacular
- Page 250 and 251: 4.17. Eastern imperial eagle Aquila
- Page 252 and 253: Figure 2. Current distribution of E
- Page 254 and 255:
252
- Page 256 and 257:
4.18. Common crane Grus grus Summar
- Page 258 and 259:
Figure 2. Current breeding and wint
- Page 260 and 261:
Action Monitoring and planning Site
- Page 262 and 263:
4.19. Roseate tern Sterna dougallii
- Page 264 and 265:
Threat Description Impact Human int
- Page 266 and 267:
264
- Page 268 and 269:
337,539 2,000 20,000 >163,750 % abu
- Page 270 and 271:
1950s 1980s Present 50km grid Speci
- Page 272 and 273:
No. of species 1 2 3 4 5 6 > 6 No.
- Page 274 and 275:
272
- Page 276 and 277:
A Range change B Range change C Ran
- Page 278 and 279:
Reason for positive change Species
- Page 280 and 281:
Dalmatian pelicans at the Kerkini L
- Page 282 and 283:
280
- Page 284 and 285:
The comeback of large and charismat
- Page 286 and 287:
A safari group in the Velebit mount
- Page 288 and 289:
The view from a bear watching hide
- Page 290 and 291:
species [44] [45] and if animals be
- Page 292 and 293:
One of the challenges around increa
- Page 294 and 295:
Box 1. Return and urbanization of w
- Page 296 and 297:
Table 1. Livestock damage by mammal
- Page 298 and 299:
key tool for wildlife population in
- Page 300 and 301:
Some of the over 500,000 visitors a
- Page 302 and 303:
Box 2. The native versus alien spec
- Page 304 and 305:
References 1. Navarro, L.M. and H.M
- Page 306 and 307:
113. Potena, G., et al., Brown Bear
- Page 308 and 309:
Appendix 1. Sources of distribution
- Page 310:
Acknowledgements This study on wild