113. Potena, G., et al., Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) impact on Livestock and agricolture <strong>in</strong> the southern L’Aquila Prov<strong>in</strong>ce, Italy. Biologia e Conservazione della Fauna, 2005. 115: p. 126–140. 114. Kaczensky, P., et al., Status, management and distribution of large carnivores – bear, lynx, wolf & wolver<strong>in</strong>e – <strong>in</strong> Europe: Part 1, 2012, European Commission. 115. Kaczensky, P., et al., Status, management and distribution of large carnivores – bear, lynx, wolf & wolver<strong>in</strong>e – <strong>in</strong> Europe: Part 2, 2012, European Commission. 116. Garrote, G., et al., Human-felid conflict as a further handicap to the conservation of the critically endangered Iberian lynx. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 2013. 59(2): p. 287–290. 117. Austrheim, G. and O. Eriksson, Plant species diversity and graz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the Scand<strong>in</strong>avian mounta<strong>in</strong>s – patterns and processes at different spatial scales. Ecography, 2001. 24(6): p. 683–695. 118. Jalkanen, A., The probability of moose damage at the stand level <strong>in</strong> southern F<strong>in</strong>land. Silva Fennica, 2001. 35(2): p. 159–168. 119. Gazzola, A., et al., Livestock damage and wolf presence. Journal of Zoology, 2008. 274(3): p. 261–269. 120. Milchunas, D.G. and W.K. Lauenroth, Quantitative effects of graz<strong>in</strong>g on vegetation and soils over a global range of environments. Ecological Monographs, 1993. 63: p. 327–366. 121. Côté, S.D., et al., Ecological impacts of deer overabundance. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 2004. 35: p. 113–147. 122. Schley, L. and T.J. Roper, Diet of wild boar Sus scrofa <strong>in</strong> Western Europe, with particular reference to consumption of agricultural crops. Mammal Review, 2003. 33(1): p. 43–56. 123. Mysterud, A. and E. Østbye, Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) brows<strong>in</strong>g pressure affects yew (Taxus baccata) recruitment with<strong>in</strong> nature reserves <strong>in</strong> Norway. Biological Conservation, 2004. 120(4): p. 545–548. 124. Putman, R., et al., Identify<strong>in</strong>g threshold densities for wild deer <strong>in</strong> the UK above which negative impacts may occur. Mammal Review, 2011. 41(3): p. 175–196. 125. Gill, R.M.A., A review of damage by mammals <strong>in</strong> North Temperate Forests. 1. Deer. Forestry, 1992. 65(2): p. 145–169. 126. Gill, R.M.A., A review of damage by mammals <strong>in</strong> North Temperate Forests. 3. Impact on trees and forests. Forestry, 1992. 65(4): p. 363–388. 127. Milligan, H.T. and J. Koricheva, Effects of tree species richness and composition on moose w<strong>in</strong>ter brows<strong>in</strong>g damage and forag<strong>in</strong>g selectivity: an experimental study. Journal of Animal Ecology, 2013. 82(4): p. 739–748. 128. Foppen, R.P.B., Pers. comm., 2013. 129. L<strong>in</strong>nell, J.D.C., et al., Zon<strong>in</strong>g as a means of mitigat<strong>in</strong>g conflicts with large carnivores: pr<strong>in</strong>ciples and reality, <strong>in</strong> People and <strong>wildlife</strong>: conflict or coexistence?, R. Woodroffe, S. Thirgood, and A. Rab<strong>in</strong>owitz, Editors. 2005, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 130. UNESCO (2013). “Biosphere Reserves – Learn<strong>in</strong>g Sites for Susta<strong>in</strong>able Development.” Retrieved 28th August 2013, from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/naturalsciences/environment/ecological-sciences/ biosphere-reserves/. 131. Huygens, O.C. and H. Hayashi, Us<strong>in</strong>g electric fences to reduce Asiatic black bear depredation <strong>in</strong> Nagano prefecture, central Japan. Wildlife Society Bullet<strong>in</strong>, 1999. 27(4): p. 959–964. 132. Jonker, S.A., et al., Black bear depredation on agricultural commodities <strong>in</strong> Massachusetts. Wildlife Society Bullet<strong>in</strong>, 1998. 26: p. 318–324. 133. Walter, W.D., et al., Management of damage by elk (Cervus elaphus) <strong>in</strong> North America: a review. Wildlife Research, 2010. 37(8): p. 630–646. 134. Hofman-Kam<strong>in</strong>ska, E. and R. Kowalczyk, Farm Crops Depredation by European Bison (Bison bonasus) <strong>in</strong> the Vic<strong>in</strong>ity of Forest Habitats <strong>in</strong> Northeastern Poland. Environmental Management, 2012. 50(4): p. 530–541. 135. Boitani, L., Ecological and cultural diversities <strong>in</strong> the evolution of wolf-human relationships. Canadian Circumpolar Institute Occasional Publication No. 35; Ecology and conservation of wolves <strong>in</strong> a chang<strong>in</strong>g world. 1995. 3–11. 136. Rigg, R., et al., Mitigat<strong>in</strong>g carnivore-livestock conflict <strong>in</strong> Europe: lessons from Slovakia. Oryx, 2011. 45(2): p. 272–280. 137. Gehr<strong>in</strong>g, T.M., K.C. VerCauteren, and J.-M. Landry, Livestock Protection Dogs <strong>in</strong> the 21st Century: Is an Ancient Tool Relevant to Modern Conservation Challenges? BioScience, 2010. 60(4): p. 299–308. 138. Schwerdtner, K. and B. Gruber, A conceptual framework for damage compensation schemes. Biological Conservation, 2007. 134(3): p. 354–360. 139. Swenson, J.E. and H. Andrén, A tale of two countries: large carnivore depredation and compensation schemes <strong>in</strong> Sweden and Norway, <strong>in</strong> People and Wildlife: Conflict or Co-Existence?, R. Woodroffe, S. Thirgood, and A. Rab<strong>in</strong>owitz, Editors. 2005, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. p. 323–339. 140. Nyhus, P.J., et al., Bear<strong>in</strong>g the costs of human<strong>wildlife</strong> conflict: the challenges of compensation schemes, <strong>in</strong> People and <strong>wildlife</strong>: conflict or coexistence?, R. Woodroffe, S. Thirgood, and A. Rab<strong>in</strong>owitz, Editors. 2005, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. p. 107–121. 141. de Klemm, C., Compensation for Damage Caused by Wild Animals, Issues 18–84, 1996, Council of Europe. 142. Eerden, M.R.V., The solution of goose damage problems <strong>in</strong> The Netherlands, with special reference to compensation schemes. Ibis, 1990. 132(2): p. 253–261. 143. Bleier, N., et al., Relationships between wild ungulates density and crop damage <strong>in</strong> Hungary. Acta Theriologica, 2012. 57(4): p. 351–359. 144. Naughton-Treves, L., R. Grossberg, and A. Treves, Pay<strong>in</strong>g for tolerance: rural citizens’ attitudes toward wolf depredation and compensation. Conservation Biology, 2003. 17(6): p. 1500–1511. 145. Woodroffe, R., S. Thirgood, and A. Rab<strong>in</strong>owitz, People and <strong>wildlife</strong>: conflict or coexistence. 2005, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 146. Bisi, J., et al., Human dimensions of wolf (Canis lupus) conflicts <strong>in</strong> F<strong>in</strong>land. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 2007. 53(4): p. 304–314. 147. Glikman, J.A., et al., Residents’ support for wolf and bear conservation: the moderat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>fluence of knowledge. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 2012. 58(1): p. 295–302. 148. Wilson, R.S., Balanc<strong>in</strong>g Emotion and Cognition: a Case for Decision Aid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Conservation Efforts. Conservation Biology, 2008. 22(6): p. 1452–1460. 149. Karlsson, J. and M. Sjöström, Human attitudes towards wolves, a matter of distance. Biological Conservation, 2007. 137: p. 610–616. 150. Fritts, S.H., et al., Wolves and humans, <strong>in</strong> Wolves: behavior, ecology and conservation, L.D. Mech and L. Boitani, Editors. 2003, The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USA. 151. Ericsson, G. and T.A. Heberle<strong>in</strong>, Attitudes of hunters, locals, and the general public <strong>in</strong> Sweden now that the wolves are back. Biological Conservation, 2003. 111: p. 149–159. 152. Bagchi, S. and C. Mishra, Liv<strong>in</strong>g with large carnivores: predation on livestock by the snow leopard (Uncia uncia). Journal of Zoology, 2006. 268(3): p. 217–224. 153. Kloskowski, J., Otter Lutra lutra damage at farmed fisheries <strong>in</strong> southeastern Poland: an <strong>in</strong>terview survey. Wildlife Biology, 2005. 11: p. 201–206. 154. Bangs, E.E., et al., Manag<strong>in</strong>g wolf-human conflict <strong>in</strong> the northwestern United States, <strong>in</strong> People and <strong>wildlife</strong>: conflict or coexistence?, R. Woodroffe, S. Thirgood, and A. Rab<strong>in</strong>owitz, Editors. 2005, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. p. 340–356. 155. Marquez, C., et al., Risk mapp<strong>in</strong>g of illegal poison<strong>in</strong>g of avian and mammalian predators. Journal of Wildlife Management, 2013. 77(1): p. 75–83. 156. Marquez, C., et al., Understand<strong>in</strong>g the propensity of wild predators to illegal poison bait<strong>in</strong>g. Animal Conservation, 2013. 16(1): p. 118–129. 157. Hazzah, L., M. Borgerhoff Mulder, and L. Frank, Lions and Warriors: Social factors underly<strong>in</strong>g decl<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g African lion populations and the effect of <strong>in</strong>centive-based management <strong>in</strong> Kenya. Biological Conservation, 2009. 142(11): p. 2428–2437. 158. Liv<strong>in</strong>g with Lions, Laikipia Predator Project & Kilimanjaro Lion Conservation Project Anual Report July 2006-September 2007, 2007, Liv<strong>in</strong>g with Lions. 159. Mishra, C., et al., The Role of Incentive Programs <strong>in</strong> Conserv<strong>in</strong>g the Snow Leopard (El Papel de Programas de Incentivos en la Conservación del Uncia uncia). Conservation Biology, 2003. 17(6): p. 1512–1520. 160. Stoll-Kleemann, S., Reconcil<strong>in</strong>g Opposition to Protected Areas Management <strong>in</strong> Europe: The German Experience. Environment: Science and Policy for Susta<strong>in</strong>able Development, 2001. 43(5): p. 32–44. 161. Brendel, U.M., R. Eberhardt, and K. Wiesmann, Conservation of the Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) <strong>in</strong> the European Alps – A comb<strong>in</strong>ation of education, cooperation, and modern techniques. Journal of Raptor Research, 2002. 36(1): p. 20–24. 162. Pauly, D., Anecdotes and the shift<strong>in</strong>g basel<strong>in</strong>e syndrome of fisheries. Trends <strong>in</strong> Ecology and Evolution, 1995. 10(10): p. 430. 163. Willis, K.J., et al., How can a knowledge of the past help to conserve the future? Biodiversity conservation and the relevance of long-term ecological <strong>studie</strong>s. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 2007. 362: p. 175–186. 164. Kals, E., D. Schumacher, and L. Montada, Emotional aff<strong>in</strong>ity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environment and Behavior, 1999. 31(2): p. 178–202. 165. Nisbet, E.K., J.M. Zelenski, and S.A. Murphy, The Nature Relatedness Scale L<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g Individuals’ Connection With Nature to Environmental Concern and Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 2009. 41(5): p. 715–740. 166. RSPB (2012). “’Disconnected children’ mean nature is at risk.” Retrieved 20th August 2013, from http://www.rspb.org.uk/news/326839- disconnected-children-mean-nature-isat-risk. 167. van den Berg, A.E. and C.C. Konijnendijk, Ambivalence towards nature and natural landscapes, <strong>in</strong> Environmental Psychology: An Introduction, L. Steg, J.I.M. de Groot, and E.A. van den Berg, Editors. 2012, British Psychological Society and Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK. p. 67–76. 304
305
- 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 204 and 205:
Action Description Impact Livelihoo
- 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 308 and 309: Appendix 1. Sources of distribution
- Page 310: Acknowledgements This study on wild