DOCSLIB.ORG

Migration of Waders in the Khabarovsk Region of the Far East

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Migration of Waders in the Khabarovsk Region of the Far East Pronkevlch Migrationof wadersm the Khabaroskregion Migration of waders in the Khabarovskregion of the Far East V.V. Pronkevich Pronkevich,V.V. 1998. Migration of wadersin the Khabarovskregion of the Far East. International Wader Studies 10: 425-430. In the areaof the LowerAmur Rivertwo migrationcorridors for wadersare known - alongthe sea coastand acrossthe mainland. The overlandroute divides near the city of Komsomolskand runs alongthe Evoronand Chukchagirlakes and the Nimelenand Tugurrivers, as well asalong the Lowe.rAmur valley. On the inland route, a totalof 1,850-2,050 waders were counted along a 500m stripat the Evoronlake during one and a half months(four hour observationseach day) of spring migrationin theperiod 1986-88. In theperiod 1988-90 at thesea coast, spring migration had low intensity:50-80 waders per km2 of the intertidalzone of TugurBay. GreenshankTringa nebularia and Black-tailedGodwit Limosalimosa were the mostnumerous species. In contrastto spring, duringautumn migration mean density at TugurBay was 600-700 waders per km 2and a totalof 3,000-6,000waders were countedalong the 10 km coastalroute. GreatKnot Calidristenuirostris (46%)and Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus (30%) were the mostnumerous, while in someperiods Black-tailedGodwit and Dunlin Calidrisalpina prevailed. V.V. Pronkevich,Institute of Waterand Ecological Problems, Far EasternBranch of Russian Academy of Sciences,Kim-Yu-Chen Str., 65, Khabarovsk,680063, Russia. Hpouaess,l,B.B. t998. Msrpa•!sa ayasaos s Xa6aposcao•apae Aaa•,I•ero BocTo•a. Internan'onal Wader Studies 10: 425•430. Introduction of two large power stations- a tidal power stationat TugurskiyBay, on the Seaof Okhotskand a nuclear The seasonalmigration of birds, particularly powerstation at LakeEvoron - areaswith large waders,is poorly studiedin the whole of Far concentrationsof migratingbirds. Informationon EasternRussia, and in the Khabarovskregion in wader migrationhas been collected in the pastby particular. The vast coastlineand presenceof Vtorov (1963), who carried out censuseson the Sea longitudinally,or almostlongitudinally oriented of Okhotskcoast near the Ayan settlement;by lowlands,as well asits largewater courses make Dul'keit (1973) and Yakhontov (1977), who studied this areaa very importantpart of a flyway where the wader faunaof the ShantaryIslands; and by largemovements of birds,including waterbirds and Babenko(1990), who carried out severalwader shorebirds, occur. countsat EkaterinaBay and SchastyaBay in summer and autumn. Studiesof wadermigration and the placeswhere Two springmigration routes are known for waders they stopduring passageare becoming especially of Khabarovskregion: along the Amur river valley importantin the light of the proposedconstruction and alongthe marinecoast (Rakhilin 1972; our data). 425 International Wader Studies 10: 425-430 Sea of Okhotsk Sakhalin '3 Sla;nd 02 ,.. ß., '. ß] !•ikir•River ..• Figure1. Studyarea and studylocations: 1 - theAmur river flood-plainnear the Khabarovsk;2 - Lake .< Sea of Japan ßß Evoron;3 - ^mgun' river valley;4 - TugurskiyBay; , •.•. 5 - Gulf of Udskaya;6 - KonstantinaBay; 7- UlbanskiyBay. The former divides into two branches in the Migrationusually starts in the firstten-day period northernpart of the Middle Amur lowland,one to of April; the earliestmigrants are Lapwing Vanellus the Evoron-Chukchagir-Nimelen-TugurskiyBay, vanellus,then Eastern Curlew Nurnenius and the otherto the lowerAmur river valley. The rnadagascariensisand Redshank Tringa totanus. In marinemigration route passes along the coastof the April, the intensityof migrationis extremelylow: TatarskyStrait and dividesinto severalsmall on average21-43 waders were counted on the20 km branches at the Amur river mouth; one of these transect,most of which were breedingLapwings. branches is directed towards Sakhalin Island, the In May, migrationbecomes more intense, reaching a otherstowards the mainland. In spring,the peakduring the third week of May. A recordspring mainland and marine routes meet at the coastal area numberof waders(168 per 20 km route)was between the Amur river mouth and the Gulf of countedon 20 May 1989. CommonSnipe Gallinago Uclskaya;in autumn,a singlemigration route gallinago(21%) and SpottedRedshank Tringa runningfrom the north divides into two here. erythropus(18%) were the mostnumerous migrants. In June,wader densitiesare stable,and only Methods breedingspecies such as Lapwing, Redshank, CommonSandpiper Actitis hypoleucos, Common Our data were mainly collectedin four areaswithin Snipeand Little RingedPlover Charadrius dubius Khabarovskregion: on the Amur river flood-plain remain there. near the Khabarovsk(1989), at Lake Evoron (1986, 1988,1992),in the Amgun'river valley near the Autumnmigration lasts from July until mid- PolinaOsipenko settlement (1991), and at Tugurskiy October,although the earliestmovements were Bayon the Seaof Okhotsk(1989,1990). Surveys of recordedat the end of June. The beginningof these differinglevels of detailwere made. Waderswere movementsusually coincides with the arrival of mostlycounted on footon transectswith the WoodSandpiper Tringa glareola. Intense migration exceptionof LakeEvoron, where observations were occursin July,August and the firsthalf of conductedfrom a stationarypoint. Singlewader Septemberwhen Wood Sandpiper (42.9%), censuses were also conducted in some areas of the CommonSnipe (17.9%) and Black-tailedGodwit marinecoast: at the Gulf of Udskaya,and at Limosalirnosa (11.4%) are recordedmore often than KonstantinaBay and UlbanskiyBays (Figure 1). At the otherwaders. Sometimes,during intense the Amur river flood-plainwader countswere migration,up to 190waders a day werecounted on carriedout onceevery five daysin April, May, July the 20 km transectin the Amur river flood-plain. and Septemberon a 20 km transectalong the bank Observationsof springmigration at Lake Evoron of the Amur river and in the flood-plainmeadows, were conductedfrom a stationarypoint, located on which have ox-bow lakes. the southernshore of the lake (Table 2). In 1986 and 1988birds were counted during two hoursin the Results morningand two hoursin theevening for a month The averagenumber of wadersper counton the and a half. Censuses were also carried out on a four Amur river flood-plainfor eachtwo-week period km transectonce every five daysfrom springuntil are shown in Table 1. autumn. The results of the counts from the stationarypoint indicated that waders form 426 Pronkevichß Migration of wadersin the Khabaroskregion Table1. Averagenumbers of waderson the 20 km transectin theAmur river flood-plainnear the Khabarovskduring half- monthperiods in the 1989spring and autumn migrations. •--•-• •--•.••---.• ........ t• '•" ' ,, •. &.' '. '•.' ;.•:.:d .• .; ;..;. :.:,o;. :, .... - ........ • ...... i!• H: ii II I .H I H PacificGolden Plover Pluvialisfulva - - 3 - - 1 Lapwing Vanellusvanellus 37 17 24 26 15 50 - - GreenSandpiper Tringa ochropus - 1 - - - 1 WoodSandpiper Tringa glareola - 1 3 84 61 24 1 GreenshankTringa nebularia - - - 1 2 5 1 2 RedshankTringa totanus 3 3 1 3 4 11 1 1 SpottedRedshank Tringa erythropus 1 - 18 21 - - 8 MarshSandpiper Tringa stagnatilis - - 1 1 - - - CommonSandpiper Actitis hypoleucos - 1 1 1 - Calidrisspp. - - 1 6 1 5 - - CommonSnipe Gallinagogallinago - 23 26 3 21 33 14 Swinhoe'sSnipe Gallinagomegala 1 2 - - - Far EasternCurlew Numeniusmadagascariensis 2 - - 1 - Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa - - 9 36 - Total 43 21 73 91 119 190 59 28 approximately13-17% of all birdsmigrating across The graphof seasonalchanges in numbersof the Evoron Lake. wadersbased on transectcounts in 1986(Figure 2) showsa sharppeak in springand at leastone, WoodSandpiper, Spotted Redshank and Black- possiblytwo smallerones in autumn,observed tailed Godwit were mostabundant on spring duringthe firsthalf of August. The periodwhen migration.The proportionof CommonSnipe numbers are stable is rather short and is observed observedwas under-estimatedas the speciesis from the end of Juneto the beginningof July. In difficultto detecton migration.The main bulk of generalCommon Snipe, Black-tailed Godwit and migrantspassed the stationarypoint in the second WoodSandpiper were recordedmost often on half of May: peakmigration was observed in transectsduring summer-autumn migration on the differentyears from 17-18May to 25-27May, when shores of Lake Evoron. In order to estimate the 85-87%of all wadersrecorded during a spring approximatenumber of wadersthat simultaneously passedthrough. In spiteof pronounceddifferences stopat Lake Evoron,we undertookcensuses at the in the weather conditions of the 1986 and 1988 beginningof Augustin the mostproductive habitats springs,the datesof migrationin differentwader whichwere at the mouthsof the riversrunning into specieswere very similar. Lake Evoron (Table3). (The data for small wader Table2. Cumulativenumber of waderson springmigration recorded during daily fourhour observationperiods from a stationarypoint in the southernpart of Lake Evoronin 1986and 1988. LittleRinged Plover Charadriusdubius - 5 0.6 Lapwing Vandlusvanellus 50 4.7 6 0.7 GreenSandpiper Tringaochropus 9 0.8 7 0.8 WoodSandpiper Tringa glareola 245 23.0 288 34.0 GreenshankTringa nebularia 9 0.8 11 1.3 RedshankTringa totanus 1 0.09 - SpottedRedshank Tringa erythropus 311 29.2 166 19.6 Grey-tailedTattler Heteroscelusbrevipes - 2 0.2 CommonSandpiper Actitis hypoleucos 73 6.9 115 13.6 CommonSnipe Gallinagogallinago 73 6.9 37 4.3 Swinhoe'sSnipe Gallinagomegala 2 0.2 4 0.5 Far EasternCurlew Numeniusmadagascariensis 32 3.0 78 9.2 Whimbrel
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015)
    IUCN Red List version 2015.4: Table 7 Last Updated: 19 November 2015 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2014 (IUCN Red List version 2014.3) and 2015 (IUCN Red List version 2015-4) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.); E - Previous listing was an Error. IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2014) List (2015) change version Category Category MAMMALS Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter LC NT N 2015-2 Ailurus fulgens Red Panda VU EN N 2015-4
    [Show full text]
  • Nordmann's Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi
    Final Report Nordmann’s Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi Cipto Dwi Handono1, Ragil Siti Rihadini1, Iwan Febrianto1 and Ahmad Zulfikar Abdullah1 1Yayasan Ekologi Satwa Alam Liar Indonesia (Yayasan EKSAI/EKSAI Foundation) Surabaya, Indonesia Background Many shorebirds species have declined along East Asian-Australasian Flyway which support the highest diversity of shorebirds in the world, including the globally endangered species, Nordmann’s Greenshank. Nordmann’s Greenshank listed as endangered in the IUCN Red list of Threatened Species because of its small and declining population (BirdLife International, 2016). It’s one of the world’s most threatened shorebirds, is confined to the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (Bamford et al. 2008, BirdLife International 2001, 2012). Its global population is estimated at 500–1,000, with an estimated 100 in Malaysia, 100–200 in Thailand, 100 in Myanmar, plus unknown but low numbers in NE India, Bangladesh and Sumatra (Wetlands International 2006). The population is suspected to be rapidly decreasing due to coastal wetland development throughout Asia for industry, infrastructure and aquaculture, and the degradation of its breeding habitat in Russia by grazing Reindeer Rangifer tarandus (BirdLife International 2012). Mostly Nordmann’s Greenshanks have been recorded in very small numbers throughout Southeast Asia, and there are few places where it has been reported regularly. In Myanmar, for example, it was rediscovered after a gap of almost 129 years. The total count recorded by the Asian Waterbird Census (AWC) in 2006 for Myanmar was 28 birds with 14 being the largest number at a single locality (Naing 2007). In 2011–2012, Nordmann’s Greenshank was found three times in Sumatera Utara province, N Sumatra.
    [Show full text]
  • Migratory Shorebirds Management Plan
    Report GLNG Curtis Island Marine Facilities Migratory Shorebirds Environmental Management Plan 17 MARCH 2011 Prepared for GLNG Operations Pty Ltd Level 22 Santos Place 32 Turbot Street Brisbane Qld 4000 42626727 Project Manager: URS Australia Pty Ltd Level 16, 240 Queen Street Angus McLeod Brisbane, QLD 4000 Senior Ecologist GPO Box 302, QLD 4001 Australia T: 61 7 3243 2111 Principal-In-Charge: F: 61 7 3243 2199 Chris Pigott Senior Principal Author: Angus McLeod Senior Ecologist Reviewer: Date: 17 March 2011 Reference: 42626727/01/03 Status: Final Chris Pratt Principal Environmental Scientist j:\jobs\42626727\5 works\draft emp\for tina 17.3.11\3310-glng-3-3 3-0065_shorebirds_final_17 03 2011.doc Table of Contents Abbreviations............................................................................................................iii Executive Summary..................................................................................................iv 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Background .........................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose of the Migratory Shorebirds Environment Management Plan ...................................................................................................................1 1.3 Aims and Objectives ........................................................................................3 1.4 Study Area ........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Long-Billed Curlew Distributions in Intertidal Habitats: Scale-Dependent Patterns Ryan L
    LONG-BILLED CURLEW DISTRIBUTIONS IN INTERTIDAL HABITATS: SCALE-DEPENDENT PATTERNS RYAN L. MATHIS, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, Cali- fornia 95521 (current address: National Wild Turkey Federation, P. O. Box 1050, Arcata, California 95518) MARK A. ColwELL, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521; [email protected] LINDA W. LEEMAN, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521 (current address: EDAW, Inc., 2022 J. St., Sacramento, California 95814) THOMAS S. LEEMAN, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521 (current address: Environmental Science Associates, 8950 Cal Center Drive, Suite 300, Sacramento, California 95826) ABSTRACT. Key ecological insights come from understanding a species’ distribu- tion, especially across several spatial scales. We studied the distribution (uniform, random, or aggregated) at low tide of nonbreeding Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) at three spatial scales: within individual territories (1–8 ha), in the Elk River estuary (~50 ha), and across tidal habitats of Humboldt Bay (62 km2), Cali- fornia. During six baywide surveys, 200–300 Long-billed Curlews were aggregated consistently in certain areas and were absent from others, suggesting that foraging habitats varied in quality. In the Elk River estuary, distributions were often (73%) uniform as curlews foraged at low tide, although patterns tended toward random (27%) when more curlews were present during late summer and autumn. Patterns of predominantly uniform distribution across the estuary were a consequence of ter- ritoriality. Within territories, eight Long-billed Curlews most often (75%) foraged in a manner that produced a uniform distribution; patterns tended toward random (16%) and aggregated (8%) when individuals moved over larger areas.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Record of Far Eastern Curlew (Numenius Madagascariensis) in British Columbia
    The First Record of Far Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariensis) in British Columbia. By Rick Toochin and Don Cecile. Submitted: April 15, 2018. Introduction and Distribution The Far Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariensis) is the largest migratory shorebird in the world. This species is found only along the East Asian–Australasian Flyway. The Far Eastern Curlew breeds on open mossy or transitional bogs, moss-lichen bogs and wet meadows, and on the swampy shores of small lakes in Siberia and Kamchatka in Russia, as well as in north-eastern Mongolia and China (Hayman et al. 1986, del Hoyo et al. 1996). The Yellow Sea of the Republic of Korea and China is a vitally important stopover site on migration. This species is also a common passage migrant in Japan and Indonesia, and is occasionally recorded moving through Thailand, Brunei, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and Singapore (O’Brien et al. 2006). During the winter a few birds occur in southern Republic of Korea, Japan, China, and Taiwan (Brazil 2009, EAAFP 2017). About 25% of the population is thought to winter in the Philippines, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. Most birds, approximately 73% or 28,000 individuals, spend the winter in Australia, where birds are found primarily on the coast of all states, particularly the north, east and south-east regions including Tasmania (Bamford et al. 2008, BirdLife 2016). In the early 2000’s, the global population of the Far Eastern Curlew was estimated at 38,000 individuals (BirdLife 2016). Unfortunately due to the fact that the global population is declining, the true population size is likely to be much smaller, and may not exceed 20,000 individuals (BirdLife 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Version Target Shorebird Species List
    Draft Version Target Shorebird Species List The target species list (species to be surveyed) should not change over the course of the study, therefore determining the target species list is an important project design task. Because waterbirds, including shorebirds, can occur in very high numbers in a census area, it is often not possible to count all species without compromising the quality of the survey data. For the basic shorebird census program (protocol 1), we recommend counting all shorebirds (sub-Order Charadrii), all raptors (hawks, falcons, owls, etc.), Common Ravens, and American Crows. This list of species is available on our field data forms, which can be downloaded from this site, and as a drop-down list on our online data entry form. If a very rare species occurs on a shorebird area survey, the species will need to be submitted with good documentation as a narrative note with the survey data. Project goals that could preclude counting all species include surveys designed to search for color-marked birds or post- breeding season counts of age-classed bird to obtain age ratios for a species. When conducting a census, you should identify as many of the shorebirds as possible to species; sometimes, however, this is not possible. For example, dowitchers often cannot be separated under censuses conditions, and at a distance or under poor lighting, it may not be possible to distinguish some species such as small Calidris sandpipers. We have provided codes for species combinations that commonly are reported on censuses. Combined codes are still species-specific and you should use the code that provides as much information as possible about the potential species combination you designate.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds Along Lehi's Trail
    Journal of Book of Mormon Studies Volume 15 Number 2 Article 10 7-31-2006 Birds Along Lehi's Trail Stephen L. Carr Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Carr, Stephen L. (2006) "Birds Along Lehi's Trail," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Vol. 15 : No. 2 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol15/iss2/10 This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Title Birds Along Lehi’s Trail Author(s) Stephen L. Carr Reference Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 15/2 (2006): 84–93, 125–26. ISSN 1065-9366 (print), 2168-3158 (online) Abstract When Carr traveled to the Middle East, he observed the local birds. In this article, he suggests the possi- bility that the Book of Mormon prophet Lehi and his family relied on birds for food and for locating water. Carr discusses the various birds that Lehi’s family may have seen on their journey and the Mosaic law per- taining to those birds. Birds - ALOnG LEHI’S TRAIL stephen l. cARR 84 VOLUME 15, NUMBER 2, 2006 PHOTOGRAPHy By RICHARD wELLINGTOn he opportunity to observe The King James translators apparently ex- birds of the Middle East came to perienced difficulty in knowing exactly which me in September 2000 as a member Middle Eastern birds were meant in certain pas- Tof a small group of Latter-day Saints1 traveling in sages of the Hebrew Bible.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Diversity of Wetland Birds of Basavanahalli Lake and Hiremagaluru Lake, Chikmagaluru, Karnataka, India
    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Index Copernicus Value (2016): 79.57 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391 Status and Diversity of Wetland Birds of Basavanahalli Lake and Hiremagaluru Lake, Chikmagaluru, Karnataka, India Annpurneshwari .H1, Padmini .N2 Department of Zoology IDSG Government College, Chikkamagaluru -577102, Karnataka Abstract: Wetlands are the unique and most productive ecosystem of the world .They support a wide range of flora and fauna. The present study deals with the study of the Avifaunal diversity of wetlands and adjoining area of lake. In this survey two wetlands of Chikkamagaluru have been studied which include Basavanahalli Lake, and Hiremagaluru Lake . The survey was carried for the period of 14 months i.e. from October 2016 to November 2017. During the study period forty two species of birds, belonging to thirteen families were recorded .Which includes both local and migratory birds. Birds belonging to the family Ardeidae found to be dominated by the representation of 8 species, followed by Anatidae7 species, Scolopacidae 5 species, Phalacrocracidae, Threskiornithidae and Ralidae 3species each, Ciconiidae, Laridae, Jacanidae, Charadriidae and Alcedinidae 2 species each and Podicipedidae 1 species.The study also revealed that the study sites harbor many resident as well as migratory birds. Four species like Black headed ibis(Threskiornismelanocephalus),Black tailed God wit (Limosalimosa) , Painted Stork (Mycterialeucocephala) and River tern(Sterna aurantia ) were near threatened and have a protected status under the schedule IV of Indian Wild life Protection Act,1972. Keywords: Avifauna, Wetland birds, Chikkamagaluru, Diversity, Anthropogenic 1. Introduction in the mega diversity of its flora and fauna.
    [Show full text]
  • Tringarefs V1.3.Pdf
    Introduction I have endeavoured to keep typos, errors, omissions etc in this list to a minimum, however when you find more I would be grateful if you could mail the details during 2016 & 2017 to: [email protected]. Please note that this and other Reference Lists I have compiled are not exhaustive and best employed in conjunction with other reference sources. Grateful thanks to Graham Clarke (http://grahamsphoto.blogspot.com/) and Tom Shevlin (www.wildlifesnaps.com) for the cover images. All images © the photographers. Joe Hobbs Index The general order of species follows the International Ornithologists' Union World Bird List (Gill, F. & Donsker, D. (eds). 2016. IOC World Bird List. Available from: http://www.worldbirdnames.org/ [version 6.1 accessed February 2016]). Version Version 1.3 (March 2016). Cover Main image: Spotted Redshank. Albufera, Mallorca. 13th April 2011. Picture by Graham Clarke. Vignette: Solitary Sandpiper. Central Bog, Cape Clear Island, Co. Cork, Ireland. 29th August 2008. Picture by Tom Shevlin. Species Page No. Greater Yellowlegs [Tringa melanoleuca] 14 Green Sandpiper [Tringa ochropus] 16 Greenshank [Tringa nebularia] 11 Grey-tailed Tattler [Tringa brevipes] 20 Lesser Yellowlegs [Tringa flavipes] 15 Marsh Sandpiper [Tringa stagnatilis] 10 Nordmann's Greenshank [Tringa guttifer] 13 Redshank [Tringa totanus] 7 Solitary Sandpiper [Tringa solitaria] 17 Spotted Redshank [Tringa erythropus] 5 Wandering Tattler [Tringa incana] 21 Willet [Tringa semipalmata] 22 Wood Sandpiper [Tringa glareola] 18 1 Relevant Publications Bahr, N. 2011. The Bird Species / Die Vogelarten: systematics of the bird species and subspecies of the world. Volume 1: Charadriiformes. Media Nutur, Minden. Balmer, D. et al 2013. Bird Atlas 2001-11: The breeding and wintering birds of Britain and Ireland.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia) Biodiversity
    © Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at SCHLOTGAUER • Anthropogenic changes of Priamurje biodiversity STAPFIA 95 (2011): 28–32 Anthropogenic Changes of Priamurje (Russia) Biodiversity S.D. SCHLOTGAUER* Abstract: The retrospective analysis is focused on anthropogenic factors, which have formed modern biodiversity and caused crucial ecological problems in Priamurje. Zusammenfassung: Eine retrospektive Analyse anthropogener Faktoren auf die Biodiversität und die ökologischen Probleme der Region Priamurje (Russland) wird vorgestellt . Key words: Priamurje, ecological functions of forests, ecosystem degradation, forest resource use, bioindicators, rare species, agro-landscapes. * Correspondence to: [email protected] Introduction Our research was focused on revealing current conditions of the vegetation cover affected by fires and timber felling. Compared to other Russian Far Eastern territories the Amur Basin occupies not only the vastest area but also has a unique geographical position as being a contact zone of the Circum- Methods boreal and East-Asian areas, the two largest botanical-geograph- ical areas on our planet. Such contact zones usually contain pe- The field research was undertaken in three natural-historical ripheral areals of many plants as a complex mosaic of ecological fratries: coniferous-broad-leaved forests, spruce and fir forests conditions allows floristic complexes of different origin to find and larch forests. The monitoring was carried out at permanent a suitable habitat. and temporary sites in the Amur valley, in the valleys of the The analysis of plant biodiversity dynamics seems necessary Amur biggest tributaries (the Amgun, Anui, Khor, Bikin, Bira, as the state of biodiversity determines regional population health Bureyza rivers) and in such divines as the Sikhote-Alin, Myao and welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Information for Persons Who Wish to Seek Asylum in the Russian Federation
    INFORMATION FOR PERSONS WHO WISH TO SEEK ASYLUM IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in the other countries asylum from persecution”. Article 14 Universal Declaration of Human Rights I. Who is a refugee? According to Article 1 of the Federal Law “On Refugees”, a refugee is: “a person who, owing to well‑founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of particular social group or politi‑ cal opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country”. If you consider yourself a refugee, you should apply for Refugee Status in the Russian Federation and obtain protection from the state. If you consider that you may not meet the refugee definition or you have already been rejected for refugee status, but, nevertheless you can not re‑ turn to your country of origin for humanitarian reasons, you have the right to submit an application for Temporary Asylum status, in accordance to the Article 12 of the Federal Law “On refugees”. Humanitarian reasons may con‑ stitute the following: being subjected to tortures, arbitrary deprivation of life and freedom, and access to emergency medical assistance in case of danger‑ ous disease / illness. II. Who is responsible for determining Refugee status? The responsibility for determining refugee status and providing le‑ gal protection as well as protection against forced return to the country of origin lies with the host state. Refugee status determination in the Russian Federation is conducted by the Federal Migration Service (FMS of Russia) through its territorial branches.
    [Show full text]
  • Iucn Red Data List Information on Species Listed On, and Covered by Cms Appendices
    UNEP/CMS/ScC-SC4/Doc.8/Rev.1/Annex 1 ANNEX 1 IUCN RED DATA LIST INFORMATION ON SPECIES LISTED ON, AND COVERED BY CMS APPENDICES Content General Information ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Species in Appendix I ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Mammalia ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Aves ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Reptilia ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Pisces .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]