130925-studie-wildlife-comeback-in-europe

Recommendations

Info

lineages for the local area and minimise interbreeding where possible. Further restocking from farms must be avoided even if the correct lineages are present, as the artificial selection process may have important effects on the species that cannot be easily detected in many genetic analyses [31, 67] . In addition, management should be designed in such a way that it maintains the natural composition and behaviour of populations (e.g. sex and age structure, food habits) and does not alter the transmission and conservation of genetic features, which in turn allows for the preservation of a natural selection process [31, 67] . Furthermore, some management practices, such as maintenance of high population density and local aggregation of animals around watering holes or feeding stations, and the resulting contact between species increases the prevalence and transmission of tuberculosis [68] . However, the Wild boar Sus scrofa is considered the main reservoir of tuberculosis in Spain and is thus much more relevant for transmission to livestock than Red deer [69] . References 1. Burbaitė, L. & Csányi, S. 2010. Red deer population and harvest changes in Europe. Acta Zoologica Lituanica, 20 (4): 179–188. 2. Mitchell-Jones, A.J., Amori, G., Bogdanowicz, W., et al. 1999. The Atlas of European Mammals, London, UK: T. and A.D. Poyser. 3. Gill R.M.A. 1990 Monitoring the status of European and North American Cervids. GEMS Information Series 8. Global Environment Monitoring System, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya 277p 4. Wilson, D.E. & Reeder, D.M. 2005. Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Third Edition, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 5. Linnell, J.D.C. & Zachos, F.E. 2011. Status and distribution patterns of European ungulates: genetics, population history and conservation, in Ungulate Management in Europe: Problems and Practices, R. Putman, M. Apollonio, and R. Andersen, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 6. Macdonald, D.W. & Barrett, P. 1993. Mammals of Britain and Europe, London: Collins. 7. Zachos, F.E. & Hartl, G.B. 2011. Phylogeography, population genetics and conservation of the European red deer Cervus elaphus. Mammal Review, 41 (2): 138–150. 8. Sommer, R.S., Zachos, F.E., Street, M., et al. 2008. Late Quaternary distribution dynamics and phylogeography of the red deer (Cervus elaphus) in Europe. Quarternary Science Reviews, 27 (7–8): 714–733. 9. Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. & Putman, R., eds. 2010. European ungulates and their management in the 21st century. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 10. Ward, A.I. 2005. Expanding ranges of wild and feral deer in Great Britain. Mammal Review, 35 (2): 165–173. 11. Maillard, D., Gaillard, J.-M., Hewison, A.J.M., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in France, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 12. Andersen, R., Lund, E., Solberg, E.J., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Norway, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 13. Liberg, O., Bergström, R., Kindberg, J., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Sweden, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 14. Bartoš, L., Kotrba, R. & Pintíř, J. 2010. Ungulates and their management in the Czech Republic, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 15. Andersone-Lilley, Ž., Balčiauskas, L., Ozoliņš, J., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in the Baltics (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 16. Imesch-Bebié, N., Gander, H. & Schnidrig-Petrig, R. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Switzerland, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 17. Adamic, M. & Jerina, K. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Slovenia, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 507–526. 18. Stojanov, A., Melovski, D., Ivanov, G., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Macedonia, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 572–577. 19. Vingada, J., Fonseca, C., Cancela, J., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Portugal, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 392–418. 20. Apollonio, M., Ciuti, S., Pedrotti, L., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Italy, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 21. Findo, S. & Skuban, M. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Slovakia, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 22. Wawrzyniak, P., Jędrzejewski, W., Jędrzejewska, B., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Poland, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 23. Kusak, J. & Krapinec, K. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Croatia, in European 80
ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 527–539. 24. Council of Europe 1979. Convention On The Conservation Of European Wildlife And Natural Habitats. European Treaties Series. 25. Council of Europe 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. 26. IUCN 2011a. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2011.1:Available from: http://www. iucnredlist.org/. 27. IUCN 2011b. European Red List. Available from: http://www.iucnredlist.org/initiatives/europe/european-red-list-site. 28. McDevitt, A.D., Edwards, C.J., O’Toole, P., et al. 2009. Genetic structure of, and hybridisation between, red (Cervus elaphus) and sika (Cervus nippon) deer in Ireland. Mammalian Biology, 74 263–273. 29. Pérez-Espona, S., Pemberton, J.M. & Putman, R. 2009. Red and sika deer in the British Isles, current management issues and management policy. Mammalian Biology, 74 247–262. 30. Biedrzycka, A., Solarz, W. & Okarma, H. 2012. Hybridization between native and introduced species of deer in Eastern Europe. Journal of Mammalogy, 93 (5): 1331–1341. 31. Carranza, J. 2013. Pers. comm. 32. Nussey, D.H., Pemberton, J.M., Donald, A., et al. 2006. Genetic consequences of human management in an introduced island population of red deer (Cervus elaphus). Heredity, 97 56–65. 33. Carranza, J., Martínez, J.G., Sánchez-Prieto, C.B., et al. 2003. Game species: extinction hidden by census numbers. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, 26 (2): 81–84. 34. Pérez-González, J., Frantz, A.C., Torres- Porras, J., et al. 2012. Population structure, habitat features and genetic structure of managed red deer populations. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 58 933–943. 35. Torres-Porras, J., Carranza, J. & Pérez- González, J. 2009. Selective culling of Iberian red deer stags (Cervus elaphus hispanicus) by selective montería in Spain. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 55 117–123. 36. Pérez-González, J., Mateos, C. & Carranza, J. 2009. Polygyny can increase rather than decrease genetic diversity contributed by males relative to females: evidence from red deer. Molecular Ecology, 18 1591–1600. 37. IUCN/Zoological Society of London National Red List. Available from: http:// www.nationalredlist.org/. 38. Karandinos, M. & Paraschi, L. 1992. The red data book of threatened vertebrates of Greece, Athens, Greece: Hellenic Zoological Society and Hellenic Ornithological Society. 39. Savić, I.R., Paunović, M., Milenković, M., et al. 1995. Diverzitet faune sisara (Mammalia) SR Jugoslavije, sa listom vrsta od međunarodnog značaja, in Biodiverzitet Jugoslavije, sa listom vrsta od međunarodnog značaja, V. Stevanović and V. Vasić, Editors., Biološki fakultet i Ecolibri: Belgrade, Serbia. 517–554. 40. Reimoser, F. & Reimoser, S. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Austria, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 338–356. 41. Casaer, J. & Licoppe, A. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Belgium, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 184–200. 42. Andersen, R. & Holthe, V. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Denmark, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 71–85. 43. Wotschikowsky, U. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Germany, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 44. Csányi, S. & Lehoczki, R. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Hungary, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 291–318. 45. Putman, R. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Great Britain and Ireland, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 129–164. 46. van Wieren, S.E. & Groot Bruinderink, G.W.T.A. 2010. Ungulates and their management in the Netherlands, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 165–183. 47. Micu, I., Náhlik, A., Neguş, Ş., et al. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Romania, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 319–337. 48. Paunović, M., Ćirović, D. & Linnell, J.D.C. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Serbia, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 563–571. 49. Carranza, J. 2010. Ungulates and their management in Spain, in European ungulates and their management in the 21st century, M. Apollonio, R. Andersen, and R. Putman, Editors., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 419–440. 50. Ward, A.I. 2007. Trends in deer distribution and abundance within the UK, in Deer, Habitats and Impacts: The Deer Initiative Conference: Buxton, UK. 51. Stewart, F. & Hester, A. 1998. Impact of red deer on woodland and heathland dynamics in Scotland, in Population ecology, management and welfare of deer, C.R. Goldspink, S. King, and R. Putman, Editors., British Deer Society/Universities’ Federation for Animal Welfare: UK. 54–60. 52. Gärdenfors, U. 2005. The 2005 Red List of Swedish Species, Uppsala, Sweden: ArtDatabanken, SLU. 53. UICN France, MNHN, SFEPM, et al. 2009. La Liste rouge des espèces menacées en France – Chapitre Mammifères de France métropolitaine. Paris, France. 54. Carden, R.F., Carlin, C.M., Marnell, F., et al. 2011. Distribution and range expansion of deer in Ireland. Mammal Review, 41 (4): 313–325. 55. Gill, R. 2013. Pers. comm. 56. Senseman, R. 2002. Cervus elaphus. Available from: http://animaldiversity. ummz.umich.edu/accounts/Cervus_ elaphus/. 57. van den Brink, F.H. 1955. A field guide to the mammals of Britain and Europe, London, UK: Collins & Sons. 1–221, figs, pls. 58. WWF Greece 2013. Threatened species: Red deer: The majestic mountain dweller. [cited 26th February]. Available from: http://www.wwf.gr/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=138&Itemid=67. 59. Tjernberg, M., Ahlén, I., Andersson, Å., et al. 2010. Däggdjur – Mammals (Mammalia), in Rödlistade arter i Sverige 2010, U. Gärdenfors, Editor ArtDatabanken SLU: Uppsala, Sweden. 60. Milner, J.M., Bonenfant, C., Mysterud, A., et al. 2006. Temporal and spatial development of red deer harvesting in Europe: biological and cultural factors. Journal of Applied Ecology, 43 721–734. 61. Palmer, S.C.F. & Truscott, A.M. 2003. Browsing by deer on naturally regenerating Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and its effects on sapling growth. Forest Ecology and Management, 182 (1–3): 31–47. 62. Kuijper, D.P.J. 2011. Lack of natural control mechanisms increases wildlife–forestry conflict in managed temperate European forest systems. European Journal of Forest Research, 130 895–909. 63. BBC News 2012. Assynt red deer cull defended by John Muir Trust. [cited 27th February]. Available from: http://www. bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-20066698. 64. BBC News 2013. Concern over culling of red deer. [cited 27th February]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-20875309. 65. Breitenmoser, U. 1997. Large predators in the Alps: the fall and rise of man’s competitors. Biological Conservation, 83 (3): 279–289. 66. Nilsen, E.B., Milner-Gulland, E.J., Schofield, L., et al. 2007. Wolf reintroduction to Scotland: public attitudes and consequences for red deer management. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 274 995–1003. 67. Mysterud, A. 2010. Still walking on the wild side? Management actions as steps towards ‘semi-domestication’ of hunted ungulates. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47 920–925. 68. Castillo, L., Fernández-Llario, P., Mateos, C., et al. 2011. Management practices and their association with Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex prevalence in red deer populations in Southwestern Spain. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 98 58–63. 69. Hermoso de Mendoza, J., Parra, A., Tato, A., et al. 2006. Bovine tuberculosis in wild boar (Sus scrofa), red deer (Cervus elaphus) and cattle (Bos taurus) in a Mediterranean ecosystem (1992–2004). Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 74 239–247. Reviewers: • Dr Juan Carranza • Dr Robin M. A. Gill • Dr John E. Jackson 81
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 46 and 47: 3.4. Southern chamois Rupicapra pyr
Page 48 and 49: Figure 1a. Distribution of Southern
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 80 and 81: % change 750 600 450 300 150 0 Figu
Page 84 and 85: 3.9. Wild boar Sus scrofa Summary T
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 96 and 97: Recent developments Table 3. Major
Page 98 and 99: 3.11. Grey wolf Canis lupus Summary
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 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 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:
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:
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
show all

130925-studie-wildlife-comeback-in-europe

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?