DOCSLIB.ORG

BIRDS in the EUROPEAN UNION a a BIRDS in the EUROPEAN UNION the Birdlife International Partnership Works in All Member States of the European Union and Beyond

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BIRDS in the EUROPEAN UNION a a BIRDS in the EUROPEAN UNION the Birdlife International Partnership Works in All Member States of the European Union and Beyond BirdLife in the European Union BIRDS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION BIRDS IN a The BirdLife International Partnership works in all Member States of the European Union and beyond BIRDSBIRDS ININ THETHE EUROPEANEUROPEAN UNIONUNION status assessment aa statusstatus assessmentassessment BIRDS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION a status assessment This report has been produced with the support of: Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, European Commission Vogelbescherming Nederland Nature and Food Quality The BirdLife Partner in the Netherlands For further information please contact: BirdLife International European Community Office (ECO), Rue de la Loi 81a, box 4, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium BirdLife International Tel. +32 2 280 08 30 Fax +32 2 230 38 02 Email [email protected] www.birdlife.org BIRDS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: a status assessment Compilers Clairie Papazoglou, Konstantin Kreiser, Zoltán Waliczky, Ian Burfield Contributors Frans van Bommel, Ariel Brunner, Ian Burfield, Bernard Deceuninck, Paul Donald, Alison Duncan, Mauro Fasola, Mich Herrick, Konstantin Kreiser, Szabolcs Nagy, Eduard Osieck, Clairie Papazoglou, Fiona Sanderson, Carlota Viada, Zoltán Waliczky ■ This BirdLife International publication was supported by The European Commission The Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality and BirdLife/Vogelbescherming Nederland BirdLife INTERNATIONAL Together for birds and people i Birds in the EU_ status_prelims.p65 1 25/10/2004, 16:01 To download this publication please refer to the website http://birdsineurope.birdlife.org Recommended citation: BirdLife International (2004) Birds in the European Union: a status assessment. Wageningen, The Netherlands: BirdLife International. © 2004 BirdLife International Wellbrook Court, Girton Road, Cambridge CB3 0NA, United Kingdom Tel. +44 1223 277318; Fax: +44 1223 277200; Email: [email protected]; Internet: www.birdlife.org BirdLife International is a UK-registered charity All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrical, chemical, mechanical, optical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. ISBN 0 946888 56 6 British Library-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library First published 2004 by BirdLife International Designed and produced by NatureBureau, 36 Kingfisher Court, Hambridge Road, Newbury, Berkshire RG14 5SJ, United Kingdom For photographs on the cover we thank the European Parliament, A. Hay, C. Ziechaus and I. J. Øien. The presentation of material in this book and the geographical designations employed do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BirdLife International concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. ii Birds in the EU_ status_prelims.p65 2 25/10/2004, 16:01 ■ CONTENTS iv Executive summary v Forewords vi Acknowledgements 1 Introduction 3 Methodology 8 Results: Birds in the EU and the impact of the Birds Directive 8 Populations of all birds: articles 2 and 3 of the Birds Directive 11 SPAs, Annex I and migrants: article 4 of the Birds Directive 18 Trade of wild birds: article 6 of the Birds Directive 18 Hunting: article 7 of the Birds Directive 19 Monitoring under article 4 of the Birds Directive and article 6 of the Habitats Directive 20 The implementation of the Birds Directive: judgements and infringement procedures 21 Research: article 10 and Annex V of the Birds Directive 22 Reporting: article 12 22 The EU Sustainable Development Strategy and the 2010 Target: The outermost regions of the EU 25 Conclusions and recommendations 28 Species tables 28 List of all bird species occurring in the European Union and their Conservation Status 44 List of all species of Annex I of the Birds Directive and their Conservation Status 47 List of all species of Annex II of the Birds Directive and their Conservation Status 49 References iii Birds in the EU_ status_prelims.p65 3 25/10/2004, 16:01 ■ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Birds in the European Union, published by BirdLife It is also noted in the assessment that a major omission in International marks the 25th anniversary of the EU Birds the existing EU nature legislation is the protection of the Directive (79/409/EEC). Using the most recent data, the outstanding bird diversity of the EU’s tropical outermost effectiveness of the Directive has been assessed, and knowledge regions, the French departments of French Guiana, gaps as well as challenges for the future have been identified. Guadeloupe, Martinique and Réunion Island. These territories This assessment shows that the Birds Directive has been together hold a bird fauna that is richer than the whole of successful in protecting some of Europe’s threatened species Europe, with eight globally threatened and 13 near-threatened when properly implemented and backed by plans and resources. species. The application of some of the EU’s policies and Evidence that the Directive works includes: budgets in these territories, without adequate legislative • Overall, the population trends of Annex I species were more safeguards for the protection of biodiversity, can spell doom positive than non-Annex I species between 1990–2000. for these species. • The analysis revealed that the populations of Annex I species in the EU15 did better than the same species in non-EU15 For the next 25 years, BirdLife has the following between 1990–2000. recommendations for strengthening the implementation of the • Significant progress has been made through the Directive in order to improve the Conservation Status of birds implementation of Species Action Plans (SAP) for species in the EU: such as Zino’s Petrel, Pterodroma madeira and Dalmatian • Full implementation of all provisions of the Birds and Pelican, Pelecanus crispus. Habitats Directives across all EU Member States. • Annex I species with a Species Action Plan did better than • Full integration of the provisions of these Directives in other those without a SAP in the EU15, in the period 1990–2000. EU policies, like CAP, transport, regional development, • The almost complete coverage of the species with SAPs by energy and others. the Special Protection Area (SPA) network is suggested as • Classification of all IBAs as Special Protection Areas (SPAs) a key reason why these species fare better in general when in the EU. compared to other Annex I species. • Consideration of the list of species with Unfavourable • The Birds Directive has been successful by almost completely Conservation Status in this publication in possible future eliminating the trade of wild birds, which is illegal according reviews of the Annex I list of the Birds Directive. to its provisions, across the EU. • Full implementation, including financing, of the Species • Cases brought before national or EU courts have been Action Plans. successful not only in clarifying important aspects of the • Ensuring adequate and targeted EU co-funding for nature Directive, but also to help solving conflicts between conservation measures with the “LIFE Nature” (or an conservation and development. equivalent) instrument and updating the list of priority species for this funding, taking into account the results of The Birds Directive, however, does not work in isolation and this review. the overall picture for birds does not look so positive. In • Continuation and strengthening of control of illegal trade particular, the analysis revealed: of wild birds in order to eliminate all occurrences across the • The Conservation Status of birds has deteriorated in Europe, EU. although within the EU the overall situation did not change • Completion, implementation and assessment of the species in the last 10 years. management plans for all Annex II species with • There is a higher proportion of species with Unfavourable Unfavourable Conservation Status and cooperative work Status within the EU25 than at the Pan-European level. to reverse those trends. • Farmland birds are still in steep decline at the EU and on • Monitoring systems set in place by the Commission and Pan-European level, a trend that is linked to increased yields Member States to provide necessary information concerning: driven, within the EU, by the Common Agricultural Policy. – Effective delivery of the nature directives against their • The SPA network in the EU15 is unfortunately rather overall goals. incomplete when compared to Important Bird Areas – The contribution to broader biodiversity conservation identified by BirdLife International (only 44% of IBA area objectives within the EU. is covered by SPA classification). There is a strong difference – Effective delivery of SPAs against their objectives (e.g. though between individual countries and between regions through identification of targets and site specific in terms of SPA classifications. indicators for all SPAs). • The status of Annex II species (which can be hunted) has • Promotion and support of: worsened. A total of 36 species out of 79 (46%) on Annex II – Research in order to set baselines, targets and investigate have Unfavourable Conservation Status at EU25 level and a network coherence. total of 31 (39%) have the same status at the Pan-European – Development of predictive modelling for the effect of level. issues like climate change on biodiversity. • Long-distance migrants are declining at an alarming rate. – Gap analysis and prioritisation. – Research on habitat management
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hermit Thrush (<Em>Catharus Guttatus</Em>) and Veery (<Em>C
    East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 5-2010 Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus) and Veery (C. fuscescens) Breeding Habitat Associations in Southern Appalachian High-Elevation Forests. Andrew J. Laughlin East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Laughlin, Andrew J., "Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus) and Veery (C. fuscescens) Breeding Habitat Associations in Southern Appalachian High-Elevation Forests." (2010). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1695. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1695 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus) and Veery (C. fuscescens) Breeding Habitat Associations in Southern Appalachian High-Elevation Forests __________________ A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of Biological Sciences East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for degree Masters of Science in Biological Sciences _________________ by Andrew J. Laughlin May 2010 __________________ Dr. Fred J. Alsop III, Chair Dr. Istvan Karsai Dr. Thomas F. Laughlin Keywords: Birds, Habitat Partitioning, Principal Components Analysis ABSTRACT Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus) and Veery (C. fuscescens) Breeding Habitat Associations in Southern Appalachian High-Elevation Forests by Andrew J. Laughlin The Hermit Thrush is a new breeding bird in the Southern Appalachian high-elevation mountains, having expanded its range southward over the last few decades.
    [Show full text]
  • 444 Yellowhammer Put Your Logo Here
    Javier Blasco-Zumeta & Gerd-Michael Heinze Sponsor is needed. Write your name here 444 Yellowhammer Put your logo here Yellowhammer. Winter. Adult. Male (04-XI) Yellowhammer. Spring. Pattern of upperparts and YELLOWHAMMER (Emberiza citri- head: top male (Photo: nella) Ottenby Bird Observa- tory); bottom female IDENTIFICATION (Photo: Ottenby Bird Observatory). 14-18 cm. Breeding male with yellow head; reddish upperparts, brown streaked; chestnut- reddish rump and uppertail coverts, unstreaked; bluish bill; in winter similar to female. Female more brownish and streaked than male. Yellowhammer. Juvenile. Pattern of head (Photo: Ondrej Kauzal) and up- perparts (Photo: Alejan- dro Corregidor). SIMILAR SPECIES Male in breeding plumage unmistakable. Fe- Yellowhammer. Win- male similar to female Cirl Bunting which ter. Pattern of upper- has grey-olive rump and lacks pale patch on parts and head: top nape. Female Ortolan Bunting has brown rump male; bottom female. and grey-buff underparts. Juveniles Yellowham- mer are unmistakable due to their chestnut rump. http://blascozumeta.com Write your website here Page 1 Javier Blasco-Zumeta & Gerd-Michael Heinze Sponsor is needed. Write your name here 444 Yellowhammer Put your logo here Yellowham- mer. Spring. Sexing. Pat- tern of head: top male (Photo: Ot- tenby Bird Observa- tory); bot- tom female (Photo: Ot- tenby Bird Observa- Cirl Bunting. Female tory). Yellowhammer. Spring. Sexing. Pattern of breast: Ortolan Bunting. 1st year. left male (Photo: Reinhard Vohwinkel); right female (Photo: Reinhard Vohwinkel). SEXING In breeding plumage, male with head and under- parts deep yellow. Female with head and under- parts brownish. After postbreeding/postjuvenile moults, adult male with crown feathers yellow on more than half length without a dark shaft streak.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamics of Woodpecker – Common Starling Interactions: a Comparison of Old World and New World Species and Populations
    Ornis Hungarica 2016. 24(1): 1–41. DOI: 10.1515/orhu-2016-0001 Dynamics of Woodpecker – Common Starling interactions: a comparison of Old World and New World species and populations Jerome A. JACKSON1* & Bette J. S. JACKSON2 Received: May 03, 2016 – Accepted: June 10, 2016 Jerome A. Jackson & Bette J. S. Jackson 2016. Dynamics of Woodpecker – Common Starling interactions: a comparison of Old World and New World species and populations. – Ornis Hun- garica 24(1): 1–41. Abstract Woodpecker species whose cavities are most usurped by Common Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) are widespread and generalists in their use of habitats. These include primarily woodpeckers that are similar in size to or slightly larger than the starling – such as the Great-spotted Woodpecker (Dendrocopos major) of Eurasia and the Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus) and Red-bellied (Melanerpes carolinus) and Red-headed (M. erythrocephalus) Woodpeckers of North America. Usurpation occurs primarily in human-dominated urban, suburban and exurban habitats with pastures, sports fields and other open areas that serve as prime feeding habi­ tats for starlings. Starlings prefer high, more exposed cavities with a minimal entrance diameter relative to their body size. Usurpation success depends on timing – optimally just as a cavity is completed and before egg-lay- ing by the woodpeckers. Starlings likely reduce woodpecker populations in more open, human-dominated habi- tats. Woodpecker habitat losses and fragmentation are more serious problems that enhance habitat quality for star- lings and reduce habitat quality for most woodpeckers. The only woodpeckers that might become in danger of extinction as a primary result of starling cavity usurpation are likely island species with small populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Disaggregation of Bird Families Listed on Cms Appendix Ii
    Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 2nd Meeting of the Sessional Committee of the CMS Scientific Council (ScC-SC2) Bonn, Germany, 10 – 14 July 2017 UNEP/CMS/ScC-SC2/Inf.3 DISAGGREGATION OF BIRD FAMILIES LISTED ON CMS APPENDIX II (Prepared by the Appointed Councillors for Birds) Summary: The first meeting of the Sessional Committee of the Scientific Council identified the adoption of a new standard reference for avian taxonomy as an opportunity to disaggregate the higher-level taxa listed on Appendix II and to identify those that are considered to be migratory species and that have an unfavourable conservation status. The current paper presents an initial analysis of the higher-level disaggregation using the Handbook of the Birds of the World/BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World Volumes 1 and 2 taxonomy, and identifies the challenges in completing the analysis to identify all of the migratory species and the corresponding Range States. The document has been prepared by the COP Appointed Scientific Councilors for Birds. This is a supplementary paper to COP document UNEP/CMS/COP12/Doc.25.3 on Taxonomy and Nomenclature UNEP/CMS/ScC-Sc2/Inf.3 DISAGGREGATION OF BIRD FAMILIES LISTED ON CMS APPENDIX II 1. Through Resolution 11.19, the Conference of Parties adopted as the standard reference for bird taxonomy and nomenclature for Non-Passerine species the Handbook of the Birds of the World/BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, Volume 1: Non-Passerines, by Josep del Hoyo and Nigel J. Collar (2014); 2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal of Caribbean Ornithology
    THE J OURNAL OF CARIBBEAN ORNITHOLOGY SOCIETY FOR THE C ONSERVATION AND S TUDY OF C ARIBBEAN B IRDS S OCIEDAD PARA LA C ONSERVACIÓN Y E STUDIO DE LAS A VES C ARIBEÑAS ASSOCIATION POUR LA C ONSERVATION ET L’ E TUDE DES O ISEAUX DE LA C ARAÏBE 2005 Vol. 18, No. 1 (ISSN 1527-7151) Formerly EL P ITIRRE CONTENTS RECUPERACIÓN DE A VES M IGRATORIAS N EÁRTICAS DEL O RDEN A NSERIFORMES EN C UBA . Pedro Blanco y Bárbara Sánchez ………………....................................................................................................................................................... 1 INVENTARIO DE LA A VIFAUNA DE T OPES DE C OLLANTES , S ANCTI S PÍRITUS , C UBA . Bárbara Sánchez ……..................... 7 NUEVO R EGISTRO Y C OMENTARIOS A DICIONALES S OBRE LA A VOCETA ( RECURVIROSTRA AMERICANA ) EN C UBA . Omar Labrada, Pedro Blanco, Elizabet S. Delgado, y Jarreton P. Rivero............................................................................... 13 AVES DE C AYO C ARENAS , C IÉNAGA DE B IRAMA , C UBA . Omar Labrada y Gabriel Cisneros ……………........................ 16 FORAGING B EHAVIOR OF T WO T YRANT F LYCATCHERS IN T RINIDAD : THE G REAT K ISKADEE ( PITANGUS SULPHURATUS ) AND T ROPICAL K INGBIRD ( TYRANNUS MELANCHOLICUS ). Nadira Mathura, Shawn O´Garro, Diane Thompson, Floyd E. Hayes, and Urmila S. Nandy........................................................................................................................................ 18 APPARENT N ESTING OF S OUTHERN L APWING ON A RUBA . Steven G. Mlodinow................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Birds (Aves) of Oromia, Ethiopia – an Annotated Checklist
    European Journal of Taxonomy 306: 1–69 ISSN 2118-9773 https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2017.306 www.europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu 2017 · Gedeon K. et al. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Monograph urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A32EAE51-9051-458A-81DD-8EA921901CDC The birds (Aves) of Oromia, Ethiopia – an annotated checklist Kai GEDEON 1,*, Chemere ZEWDIE 2 & Till TÖPFER 3 1 Saxon Ornithologists’ Society, P.O. Box 1129, 09331 Hohenstein-Ernstthal, Germany. 2 Oromia Forest and Wildlife Enterprise, P.O. Box 1075, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia. 3 Zoological Research Museum Alexander Koenig, Centre for Taxonomy and Evolutionary Research, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany. * Corresponding author: [email protected] 2 Email: [email protected] 3 Email: [email protected] 1 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:F46B3F50-41E2-4629-9951-778F69A5BBA2 2 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:F59FEDB3-627A-4D52-A6CB-4F26846C0FC5 3 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:A87BE9B4-8FC6-4E11-8DB4-BDBB3CFBBEAA Abstract. Oromia is the largest National Regional State of Ethiopia. Here we present the first comprehensive checklist of its birds. A total of 804 bird species has been recorded, 601 of them confirmed (443) or assumed (158) to be breeding birds. At least 561 are all-year residents (and 31 more potentially so), at least 73 are Afrotropical migrants and visitors (and 44 more potentially so), and 184 are Palaearctic migrants and visitors (and eight more potentially so). Three species are endemic to Oromia, 18 to Ethiopia and 43 to the Horn of Africa. 170 Oromia bird species are biome restricted: 57 to the Afrotropical Highlands biome, 95 to the Somali-Masai biome, and 18 to the Sudan-Guinea Savanna biome.
    [Show full text]
  • Tinamiformes – Falconiformes
    LIST OF THE 2,008 BIRD SPECIES (WITH SCIENTIFIC AND ENGLISH NAMES) KNOWN FROM THE A.O.U. CHECK-LIST AREA. Notes: "(A)" = accidental/casualin A.O.U. area; "(H)" -- recordedin A.O.U. area only from Hawaii; "(I)" = introducedinto A.O.U. area; "(N)" = has not bred in A.O.U. area but occursregularly as nonbreedingvisitor; "?" precedingname = extinct. TINAMIFORMES TINAMIDAE Tinamus major Great Tinamou. Nothocercusbonapartei Highland Tinamou. Crypturellus soui Little Tinamou. Crypturelluscinnamomeus Thicket Tinamou. Crypturellusboucardi Slaty-breastedTinamou. Crypturellus kerriae Choco Tinamou. GAVIIFORMES GAVIIDAE Gavia stellata Red-throated Loon. Gavia arctica Arctic Loon. Gavia pacifica Pacific Loon. Gavia immer Common Loon. Gavia adamsii Yellow-billed Loon. PODICIPEDIFORMES PODICIPEDIDAE Tachybaptusdominicus Least Grebe. Podilymbuspodiceps Pied-billed Grebe. ?Podilymbusgigas Atitlan Grebe. Podicepsauritus Horned Grebe. Podicepsgrisegena Red-neckedGrebe. Podicepsnigricollis Eared Grebe. Aechmophorusoccidentalis Western Grebe. Aechmophorusclarkii Clark's Grebe. PROCELLARIIFORMES DIOMEDEIDAE Thalassarchechlororhynchos Yellow-nosed Albatross. (A) Thalassarchecauta Shy Albatross.(A) Thalassarchemelanophris Black-browed Albatross. (A) Phoebetriapalpebrata Light-mantled Albatross. (A) Diomedea exulans WanderingAlbatross. (A) Phoebastriaimmutabilis Laysan Albatross. Phoebastrianigripes Black-lootedAlbatross. Phoebastriaalbatrus Short-tailedAlbatross. (N) PROCELLARIIDAE Fulmarus glacialis Northern Fulmar. Pterodroma neglecta KermadecPetrel. (A) Pterodroma
    [Show full text]
  • Four Year Study Involving Wildlife Monitoring of Commercial SRC Plantations Planted on Arable Land and Arable Control Plots
    Four year study involving wildlife monitoring of commercial SRC plantations planted on arable land and arable control plots DTI TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMME: NEW AND RENEWABLE ENERGY CONTRACT NUMBER B/U1/00627/00/00 URN NUMBER 04/961 PROJECT REPORT The DTI drives our ambition of ’prosperity for all' by working to create the best environment for business success in the UK. We help people and companies become more productive by promoting enterprise, innovation and creativity. We champion UK business at home and abroad. We invest heavily in world-class science and technology. We protect the rights of working people and consumers. And we stand up for fair and open markets in the UK, Europe and the world. ii ARBRE MONITORING - ECOLOGY OF SHORT ROTATION COPPICE B/U1/00627/REP DTI/PUB URN 04/961 Contractor The Game Conservancy Trust (GCT) Sub-Contractor The Central Science Laboratory (CSL) Prepared by M.D.Cunningham (GCT) J.D. Bishop (CSL) H.V.McKay (CSL) R.B.Sage (GCT) The work described in this report was carried out under contract as part of the DTI Technology Programme: New and Renewable Energy. The views and judgements expressed in this report are those of the contractor and do not necessarily reflect those of the DTI. First published 2004 © Crown Copyright 2004 ii i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction This project, funded by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) through Future Energy Solutions, was conducted over a four-year period starting in 2000. The project involved wildlife monitoring within Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) plots managed commercially for the project ARBRE (Arable Biomass Renewable Energy) throughout Yorkshire.
    [Show full text]
  • S Montserrat National Trust, Montserrat Tourist Board, That Rats Rattus Spp
    Important Bird Areas in the Caribbean – Montserrat ■ MONTSERRAT LAND AREA 102 km2 ALTITUDE 0–914 m HUMAN POPULATION 4,819 CAPITAL Plymouth (defunct due to volcanic eruption) IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS 3, totalling 16.5 km2 IMPORTANT BIRD AREA PROTECTION 48% BIRD SPECIES 101 THREATENED BIRDS 2 RESTRICTED-RANGE BIRDS 12 GEOFF HILTON (ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS), LLOYD MARTIN AND JAMES ‘SCRIBER’ DALY (DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, MONTSERRAT) AND RICHARD ALLCORN (FAUNA AND FLORA INTERNATIONAL) The endemic Montserrat Oriole lost 60% of its forest habitat during the eruptions of the Soufriere Hills volcano. (PHOTO: JAMES MORGAN/DWCT) INTRODUCTION in the lowlands, through semi-deciduous and evergreen wet forest in the hills, to montane elfin forest on the highest peaks. Montserrat is a UK Overseas Territory in the Leeward Islands There are small areas of littoral woodland, and in the driest towards the northern end of the Lesser Antilles, just 40 km areas of the lowlands, the vegetation is xerophytic scrub, with south-west of Antigua and between the islands of Nevis and numerous cacti. All but a few small forest patches were Guadeloupe. The island is about 16 km long and 11 km wide, apparently cleared during the plantation era, and the bulk of and its volcanic origins are reflected in an extremely rugged the remaining forest is therefore secondary. In the Centre topography. There are three major volcanic hill ranges—the Hills, the largest remaining forest block, native trees are mixed Soufriere and South Soufriere Hills, the Centre Hills, and the with numerous large, non-native fruit trees—remnants of Silver Hills.
    [Show full text]
  • Breeding Farmland Birds and the Role of Habitats Created Under Agri-Environment Schemes
    Breeding farmland birds and the role of habitats created under agri-environment schemes Niamh M. McHugh Department of Life Sciences Imperial College London A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy rd 23 of April, 2015 Abstract In this thesis, I aim to assess how farmland birds use insect-rich agri-environment scheme (AES) foraging habitats during the breeding season and how such birds might benefit from them. It is particularly focused on how the coverage and quality (measured by insect food levels and food accessibility) of AES habitats influence territory selection, foraging activities and breeding success. The thesis begins by explaining why farmland birds have declined, reviewing how AES may help reverse these trends, along with outlining why AES may fail to benefit breeding birds (Chapter one). I then investigated whether the addition of wildflowers to AES margins, boundary type, crop type, chick food availability or accessibility influenced the foraging activity of insectivores, mixed diet species and the passerine community in general (Chapter two). Next, I wanted to find out if territory selection by a declining farmland bird the yellowhammer Emberiza citronella related to the quantity of AES habitat available; models also accounted for chick food abundance, landscape diversity and nest site features (Chapter three). Subsequently I investigated how the availability of AES can affect chick diet and survival using the Eurasian tree sparrow Passer monatus as a focus species. I compared the abundance and diversity of tree sparrow chick food items between nest boxes with and without access to AES habitats aimed at foraging birds (Chapter four).
    [Show full text]
  • Rejection Behavior by Common Cuckoo Hosts Towards Artificial Brood Parasite Eggs
    REJECTION BEHAVIOR BY COMMON CUCKOO HOSTS TOWARDS ARTIFICIAL BROOD PARASITE EGGS ARNE MOKSNES, EIVIN ROSKAFT, AND ANDERS T. BRAA Departmentof Zoology,University of Trondheim,N-7055 Dragvoll,Norway ABSTRACT.--Westudied the rejectionbehavior shown by differentNorwegian cuckoo hosts towardsartificial CommonCuckoo (Cuculus canorus) eggs. The hostswith the largestbills were graspejectors, those with medium-sizedbills were mostlypuncture ejectors, while those with the smallestbills generally desertedtheir nestswhen parasitizedexperimentally with an artificial egg. There were a few exceptionsto this general rule. Becausethe Common Cuckooand Brown-headedCowbird (Molothrus ater) lay eggsthat aresimilar in shape,volume, and eggshellthickness, and they parasitizenests of similarly sizedhost species,we support the punctureresistance hypothesis proposed to explain the adaptivevalue (or evolution)of strengthin cowbirdeggs. The primary assumptionand predictionof this hypothesisare that somehosts have bills too small to graspparasitic eggs and thereforemust puncture-eject them,and that smallerhosts do notadopt ejection behavior because of the heavycost involved in puncture-ejectingthe thick-shelledparasitic egg. We comparedour resultswith thosefor North AmericanBrown-headed Cowbird hosts and we found a significantlyhigher propor- tion of rejectersamong CommonCuckoo hosts with graspindices (i.e. bill length x bill breadth)of <200 mm2. Cuckoo hosts ejected parasitic eggs rather than acceptthem as cowbird hostsdid. Amongthe CommonCuckoo hosts, the costof acceptinga parasiticegg probably alwaysexceeds that of rejectionbecause cuckoo nestlings typically eject all hosteggs or nestlingsshortly after they hatch.Received 25 February1990, accepted 23 October1990. THEEGGS of many brood parasiteshave thick- nestseither by grasping the eggs or by punc- er shells than the eggs of other bird speciesof turing the eggs before removal. Rohwer and similar size (Lack 1968,Spaw and Rohwer 1987).
    [Show full text]
  • ETHIOPIA: Birding the Roof of Africa; with Southern Extension a Tropical Birding Set Departure
    ETHIOPIA: Birding the Roof of Africa; with Southern Extension A Tropical Birding Set Departure February 7 – March 1, 2010 Guide: Ken Behrens All photos taken by Ken Behrens during this trip ORIENTATION I have chosen to use a different format for this trip report. First, comes a general introduction to Ethiopia. The text of this section is largely drawn from the recently published Birding Ethiopia, authored by Keith Barnes, Christian, Boix and I. For more information on the book, check out http://www.lynxeds.com/product/birding-ethiopia. After the country introduction comes a summary of the highlights of this tour. Next comes a day-by-day itinerary. Finally, there is an annotated bird list and a mammal list. ETHIOPIA INTRODUCTION Many people imagine Ethiopia as a flat, famine- ridden desert, but this is far from the case. Ethiopia is remarkably diverse, and unexpectedly lush. This is the ʻroof of Africaʼ, holding the continentʼs largest and most contiguous mountain ranges, and some of its tallest peaks. Cleaving the mountains is the Great Rift Valley, which is dotted with beautiful lakes. Towards the borders of the country lie stretches of dry scrub that are more like the desert most people imagine. But even in this arid savanna, diversity is high, and the desert explodes into verdure during the rainy season. The diversity of Ethiopiaʼs landscapes supports a parallel diversity of birds and other wildlife, and although birds are the focus of our tour, there is much more to the country. Ethiopia is the only country in Africa that was never systematically colonized, and Rueppell’s Robin-Chat, a bird of the Ethiopian mountains.
    [Show full text]