Falco tinnunculus -- Linnaeus, 1758 ANIMALIA -- CHORDATA -- AVES -- FALCONIFORMES -- FALCONIDAE Common names: Common Kestrel; Eurasian Kestrel; Faucon crécerelle; Kestrel European Red List Assessment European Red List Status LC -- Least Concern, (IUCN version 3.1) Assessment Information Year published: 2015 Date assessed: 2015-03-31 Assessor(s): BirdLife International Reviewer(s): Symes, A. Compiler(s): Ashpole, J., Burfield, I., Ieronymidou, C., Pople, R., Wheatley, H. & Wright, L. Assessment Rationale European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC) EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27. Occurrence Countries/Territories of Occurrence Native: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czech Republic; Denmark; Faroe Islands (to DK); Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Ireland, Rep. of; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of; Malta; Moldova; Montenegro; Netherlands; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; Russian Federation; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Canary Is. (to ES); Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; Ukraine; United Kingdom; Gibraltar (to UK) Vagrant: Greenland (to DK); Iceland; Svalbard and Jan Mayen (to NO) Population The European population is estimated at 409,000-603,000 pairs, which equates to 819,000-1,210,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 315,000-460,000 pairs, which equates to 629,000-919,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF. Trend In Europe and the EU27 the population size is estimated to be decreasing by less than 25% in 16.2 years (three generations). For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF. Habitats and Ecology Populations in the northern part of the species’s range tend to be migrant, with others resident (Orta and Boesman 2013). Migrant birds leave their breeding grounds between August and October and those arriving in sub-Saharan Africa do so from October onwards (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The return journey begins from February through until April (the exact time probably dependent on food availability), and is often undertaken in small mixed groups with F. naumanni and occasionally F. vespertinus (Brown et al. 1982, Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The species can be solitary or gregarious, being most often seen singly but sometimes travelling in flocks of up to 10 individuals, especially on migration. Larger groups may congregate at sources of abundant food. It is mainly diurnal (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The species tolerates a wide range of open and partially forested habitats. It feeds mainly on small mammals, particularly in northern Europe, with insects possibly more important in the Mediterranean. The locations of nests are variable, with rock ledges, buildings and abandoned corvid nests being commonly reported sites. Typically lays three to six eggs (Orta and Boesman 2013). Habitats & Altitude Habitat (level 1 - level 2) Importance Occurrence Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land suitable breeding Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land suitable non-breeding Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland suitable breeding Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland suitable non-breeding Artificial/Terrestrial - Plantations suitable breeding Artificial/Terrestrial - Plantations suitable non-breeding Artificial/Terrestrial - Urban Areas suitable breeding Artificial/Terrestrial - Urban Areas suitable non-breeding Forest - Boreal suitable breeding Forest - Temperate suitable breeding Forest - Temperate suitable non-breeding Grassland - Temperate suitable breeding Grassland - Temperate suitable non-breeding Grassland - Tundra suitable breeding Shrubland - Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation suitable breeding Shrubland - Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation suitable non-breeding Shrubland - Temperate suitable breeding Shrubland - Temperate suitable non-breeding Altitude 0-3500 m Occasional altitudinal limits Threats Past population declines resulted from the heavy use of organochlorine and other pesticides in the 1950s– 1960s (Orta and Boesman 2013). In Malta, the species was exterminated by shooting, though it has since returned (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The population in much of the rest of Europe has shown a more recent steady decline, thought to be due to agricultural intensification (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species is vulnerable to the effects of potential wind energy development (Strix 2012). Threats & Impacts Threat (level 1) Threat (level 2) Impact and Stresses Agriculture & Agro-industry Timing Scope Severity Impact aquaculture farming Ongoing Majority (50-90%) Rapid Declines Medium Impact Stresses Ecosystem degradation Biological resource Hunting & trapping Timing Scope Severity Impact use terrestrial animals Ongoing Minority (<50%) Rapid Declines Medium Impact (intentional use - species is the target) Stresses Species mortality Energy production Renewable energy Timing Scope Severity Impact & mining Ongoing Minority (<50%) Negligible declines Low Impact Stresses Species mortality Pollution Herbicides and Timing Scope Severity Impact pesticides Past, Unlikely to Majority (50-90%) Slow, Significant Past Impact Return Declines Stresses Species mortality Conservation Conservation Actions Underway CMS Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. The ban of organochlorine pesticides, which were used heavily during the 1960s and 1970s has allowed this species to recover in some areas (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997).

Conservation Actions Proposed This species requires wide-scale conservation, which alleviates agricultural intensification. Policies should encourage mixed farming and high crop diversity and maintain non-cultivated marginal habitats, which decrease stocking rates and pesticide use (Tucker and Heath 1994). Management should also ensure suitable perches and roosting sites, usually provided by trees, telegraph poles, buildings or rock faces are maintained (Orta and Boesman 2013). Kestrel populations should be monitored, particularly with regards to the effects of modern farming (Tucker and Heath 1994). Bibliography Brown, L.H., Urban, E.K. and Newman, K. 1982. The birds of Africa volume I. Academic Press, London. Ferguson-Lees, J. and Christie, D.A. 2001. Raptors of the world. Christopher Helm, London. Orta, J. and Boesman, P. 2013. Common Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., Christie, D.A. and de Juana, E. (eds.). 2013. Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. (retrieved from http://www.hbw.com/node/53213 on 16 March 2015). Snow, D.W. and Perrins, C.M. 1998. The Birds of the Western Palearctic vol. 1: Non-Passerines. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Strix. 2012. Developing and testing the methodology for assessing and mapping the sensitivity of migratory birds to wind energy development. BirdLife International, Cambridge. Map (see overleaf)