Birds in the European Union - BirdLife International

12
■ The population trends of Annex I species in the
EU15 versus Annex I species in the countries
outside the EU15
In order to investigate further the effect of inclusion on Annex
I of the Birds Directive, we compared the population trends of
Annex I species in the EU15 countries with the trend for the
same species in countries outside the EU15.
The results again showed positive trends for the EU15 and
a significant difference between EU15 and countries outside
the EU15.
Conclusion:
Annex I species in the EU15 did better than the
same species in non-EU15 countries as shown by
population trends in the period between 1990–2000.
■ Action plans for Europe’s most threatened birds:
helping stop declines
In July 2004, BirdLife International produced a report for the
European Commission reviewing implementation of the first
23 international Species Action Plans (SAPs), as adopted in
1996 (Nagy and Crockford 2004). BirdLife International found
out the following:
Implementation of the SAPs was fullest in the UK, the
Netherlands, Hungary, Portugal and Austria.
The most complete implementation was for two critically
endangered birds, Zino’s Petrel Pterodroma madeira and
Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris, with Dalmatian
Pelican Pelecanus crispus being the next most complete.
Significant progress was made in implementation of 18 of
the 23 species action plans.
Progress was limited for only two species; White-headed
Duck Oxyura leucocephala, due to inadequate eradication
of the introduced Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis and
Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni.
The EU LIFE Nature 2 fund contributed to the conservation
of all 23 species; it was the main driving force in the
conservation of the eight island endemics in Portugal and
Spain, and has played a very significant role in the
implementation of some 14 plans in Spain and Greece.
Overall, BirdLife International found that the situation has
improved for 12 species, been maintained for three and declined
for six species. Data were insufficient to assess the status change
of two Canarian endemics (Nagy and Crockford, 2004).
Conclusion:
Significant progress has been made for certain
species through the implementation of Species
Action Plans.
■ The population trends of Annex I species with an
international Species Action Plan compared to
those without a SAP in the EU 15
In order to investigate further whether having a Species Action
Plan (SAP) can make a difference for the Conservation Status
of a species, the population trends of those Annex I species with
a SAP were compared with those without a SAP. The comparison
was done on 166 Annex I species taking into account those 23
with a SAP from the mid-1990s. The results showed that the
species with a SAP did better compared to those without.
Birds in the European Union: a status assessment – Results
Conclusion:
Annex I species with a Species Action Plan did
better than those without a SAP in the EU15, in
the period 1990–2000.
■ IBAs and SPAs for species with a Species Action
Plan (SAP)
According to the same report (Nagy and Crockford, 2004) it
was concluded that overall the obligations arising from article
4 of the Directive had played an important role in the protection
of species with a SAP. In most cases, the Important Bird Areas
(IBA) that had been proposed for those species had been
classified as SPAs, and thereby covered the majority of the
populations. The species for which this was not the case were:
Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca, Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni,
Corncrake Crex crex, Great Bustard Otis tarda, Houbara
Bustard Chlamydotis undulata and Aquatic Warbler
Acrocephalus paludicola.
The low coverage of species like Corncrake and Aquatic
Warbler results from the fact that the large part of the
population of these species occur in the new Member States
and at the time of compiling the report above these countries
had not submitted SPA lists yet.
The almost complete coverage of these species by the SPA
network can be one of the reasons why these species do better
when compared to other Annex I species.
Conclusion:
The almost complete coverage of the species with
SAPs by the SPA network can be one of the reasons
why these species do better in general when
compared to other Annex I species.
■ The population trends of bird species with
differing migration strategies
BirdLife International also compared the population trends of
species with differing migration strategies. These were species
that are long-distance migrants, i.e. cross the Sahara to get to
their wintering grounds, short distance migrants and partial
migrants or residents. Short-distance migrants are species which
winter in Europe, North Africa or the Middle East, while partial
migrants or residents, are species, which do not migrate or
migrate very short distances often responding to adverse
weather conditions. The results show that long distance
migrants are doing significantly worse than residents or shortdistance
migrants. The overall trend for long distance migrants
was one of strong decline at EU and Pan-European level. This
was significantly different to the trends of short-distance
migrants and residents.
Conclusion:
Long-distance migrants are declining alarmingly.
2. LIFE Nature, the EU Financial Instrument, introduced in 1992 co-finances projects aimed at conservation of natural habitats and the wild fauna and flora of EU interest, in support of
implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives.