DOCSLIB.ORG

CMS/SPWG3/Doc.3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals Secretariat provided by the United Nations Environment Programme 3rd Meeting of the CMS Strategic Plan Working Group Bonn, Germany, 12-13 October 2015 CMS/SPWG3/Doc.3 Programmes of Work, Action Plans and other implementation support tools developed within the CMS Family Introduction 1. The following compilation of documents concerning strategic planning, policy and implementation tools from CMS and its instruments (Agreements and Memoranda of Understanding) was compiled by the Secretariat in consultation with the chair of the Strategic Plan Working Group (SPWG) in pursuance of paragraph 10 of Resolution 11.2, with a view to feed into the efforts of the SPWG. In particular, the Secretariat was tasked with compiling background documents to support the Working Group in the analysis of programmes of work and action plans adopted under the Convention and CMS Family instruments, along with their own indicators, for synergies. 2. Relevant documents have been compiled in a tabular format, providing for each document summarized information concerning scope, overall objectives, structure, any type of prioritization of actions, existence of targets and indicators and of a timeframe for implementation. After initial compilation and analysis, the documents were grouped into one of three categories: 1) strategic planning or policy documents (such as programmes of work or individual species action plans), 2) implementation tools (such as CEPA strategies), 3) documents which contain both strategic planning and policy as well as implementation elements. The resulting table is appended to this note as Annex 1. 3. Attachment 1 contains a list of indicators referenced in the documents in Annex 1. The working definition of “indicator” varied considerably from document to document. In some documents, “indicator” is used interchangeably with “target”, “result” or some other description of a desired outcome. In other documents, “indicator” designates a quantitative measurement unit that allows assessing progression from an initial state to such a desired outcome. Attachment 1 contains information on which type of definition was used by each document. Based on this preliminary assessment, the Secretariat would consider it desirable if there was some agreement on the terminology to be used in the further analysis of existing documents and the development of the Companion Volume. 4. Attachment 2 contains the sources of all documents in Annex 1, including (where applicable) information on which body adopted or endorsed a particular document, and when. The documents were mainly sourced from the CMS website, or the Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding website where applicable. CMS/SPWG3/Doc.3 ANNEX 1 Programmes of Work, Action Plans and other implementation support tools developed within the CMS Family Content 1. Programmes of Work, Action Plans and other implementation support tools at the level of the Convention 2. Programmes of Work, Action Plans and other implementation support tools at the level of the CMS instruments a. AGREEMENTS b. MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING Attachment 1: Indicators Attachment 2: Sources of the documents Table legend for Annex 1 Table headers Scope: Scope of the document. Can either be Strategic (S), dealing with planning or policy aspects concerning species (sp), habitats (hab) or threats (thr), or Implementation (I), dealing with implementation tools and strategies, including information management (inf man), communication (com), awareness & education (aware), partnerships (part), capacity development (cap), monitoring & evaluation (mon) and progress reporting (prog). Priorities: Type of prioritization. Can be timing, urgency, importance, feasibility, effectiveness, other (e.g. priority indicated as high, medium, low). Ind.: Indicators. Either Yes or No. See “Attachment 1: Indicators” for a list of indicators in each document (where applicable). Time: Timeframe during which the document is relevant. Meaning of row colours Red: contains NO implementation elements Grey: contains both strategic planning/policy and implementation elements Blue: contains ONLY implementation elements White: Documents are under development Definitions of terms in ANNEX 1 Target: A desired end state, to be achieved by a given timeline Indicators: A quantitative measurement unit that allows assessing progression from initial state to desired state 2 CMS/SPWG3/Doc.3 1. Programmes of Work, Action Plans and other implementation support tools at the level of the Convention Index Instrument Document name Scope Overall objective Structure Priorities Targets Ind. Time 1 CMS FAO Guidelines to S (thr) “The key objectives of these See Res. 10.14; methods to NO NO NO NO Reduce Sea Turtle guidelines are to: (i) present avoid bycatch of sea turtles, Mortality in Fishing measures for avoiding or best practice for handling and Operations (2009) minimizing sea turtle interactions release in marine capture fisheries; and (ii) consolidate existing handling and release guidelines.” 2 CMS Climate Change I (cap, inf Conserving migratory species in a Themes, activities Timing NO NO 2014-2023+ Programme of Work man)/S (hab) changing climate 3 CMS Programme of Work on I(com, aware, Conservation of migratory birds Themes, objectives Timing YES (called YES 2014-2023 Migratory Birds and part, cap, indicators) Flyways mon)/S(hab, thr) 4 CMS Programme of work for I(cap, inf man, “To improve the conservation of Issues, activities Other NO NO 2014-2020 the Central Asian aware, mon, migratory large mammals and their Mammals Initiative part,com), S habitats in the Central Asian region (sp/hab/thr) by strengthening coordination and cross-border cooperation.” 5 CMS Sahelo-Saharan I (aware, inf Safeguard populations of migratory Objective, programme, NO Objectives NO NO Megafauna man, cap, com, megafauna in the Sahelo-Sahara activity mon)/S region (Sp/hab) 6 CMS Guidelines to prevent the I(cap)/S (thr) Recommendations on effective Res 11.15, Adopted by NO NO NO NO risk of poisoning to ways to reduce poisoning of StC36, Recommends both migratory birds migratory birds non-legislative and legislative instruments to address different sources of poisoning for migratory birds 7 CMS FAO International Plan I(aware, cap, “ Reduce the incidental catch of See Res. 10.14; related Best NO NO NO NO of Action for Reducing mon)/S (thr) seabirds in longline fisheries where Practices Technical Incidental Catch of this occurs” Guidelines (concept, Seabirds in Longline effectiveness and costs of Fisheries (IPOA- different deterring strategies) Seabirds) (1999) 3 CMS/SPWG3/Doc.3 Index Instrument Document name Scope Overall objective Structure Priorities Targets Ind. Time 8 CMS FAO International Plan I(cap, prog)/S “Conservation and management of See Res. 10.14. Principles, NO NO NO NO of Action for the (sp, thr) sharks and their long-term implementation; format of Conservation and sustainable use” national plan of action for Management of Sharks conservation and (IPOA-Sharks) (1999) management of shark stocks” 9 CMS FAO International I (aware, com, “Assist States and RFMO/As in the See Res. 10.14; inter alia, NO NO NO NO Guidelines on Bycatch cap)/ S (thr) management of bycatch and measures to manage bycatch Management and reduction of discards in conformity and reduce discards Reduction of Discards with the FAO Code of Conduct for (2011) Responsible Fisheries” 10 CMS Saker Falcon Action Plan I(com, aware, Saker Falcon conservation Objectives, activities Timing, other Result NO 2014-2024 cap)/S(sp, hab, thr) 11 CMS Single Species Action Plan I(inf man, “To ensure a favourable Objectives, results, action Urgency, Result NO 2014-2010 for the Loggerhead Turtle comm, aware, conservation status of the timing (inferred) part, cap, mon, loggerhead turtle in the South prog)/S (sp, Pacific Ocean.” thr) 12 CMS Central Asian Flyway I (inf man, Conservation and sustainable use of Themes, objectives Other NO NO NO Waterbird Action Plan com, aware, migratory wildfowl in Central Asia (prioritises part, cap, mon, species) prog)/S(sp, hab, thr) 13 CMS Conservation of I (inf man, cap, “Improving the conservation status Themes, activities Urgency NO NO 2014-2023+ migratory Landbirds in com, aware, of migratory landbird species in the the African-Eurasian mon, part)/S African-Eurasian region [through] Region (thr, hab) develop[ping] an initial overarching, strategic framework for action at the international level” 14 CMS International Single I(inf man, com, “Goal: To maintain and restore Objectives, results, actions Timing, other Result, NO 2014-2024 Species Action Plan for cap)/S(sp, hab, argali populations to favourable “indicator” the Conservation of the thr) conservation status throughout their per result are Argali Ovis ammon range.” targets 15 CMS International Single I (com, cap, inf Protecting Chinese Crested Tern Programme, Activity Timing, other NO NO 2010-2015 Species Action Plan for man, from imminent extinction the Conservation the aware)/S(hab, Chinese Crested Tern thr, sp) (Sterna bernsteini) 4 CMS/SPWG3/Doc.3 Index Instrument Document name Scope Overall objective Structure Priorities Targets Ind. Time 16 CMS International Single I (cap, com, inf “Contribute to increasing Programme, Activity: general Timing, other NO NO 2010-2020 Species Action Plan for man, awareness on the status of the and per Range State the Conservation of the mon)/S(hab, Black-faced Spoonbill, encouraging Black-faced Spoonbill thr further research and monitoring in
Recommended publications
  • Poland, May 2011

    Poland, May 2011

    Woodpeckers, Waders and Warblers: North-eastern Poland, 12-17th May Participants: Ian Reid and Tom Bedford North-eastern Poland had been on my list of places to go ever since Bill Oddie’s second series went there and he was guided around by Marek Borkowski to see goodies such as Aquatic Warbler and Great Snipe. Finally in ’11 I decided it was high time I went and I was delighted when Tom showed enthusiasm for joining me. In fact having set the ball rolling, choosing the dates, sorting out guides, and pricing flights, I then ended up in a very busy period at work and it was Tom took care of most of the remaining logistics. It is possible to do such a trip rather cheaper than we did, but we opted for the convenience of Heathrow and took BA to Warsaw at a cost of approx. £150 each. Car hire, booked through carhire3000.com was a Toyota Yaris with Thrifty, and once we had added a second driver came to about £200 for 6 days. We booked guides through Lukasz Masurek’s site wildpoland.com for the evening of 12th (for Pygmy Owl), 8 hours on 13th (Woodpeckers and the Strict Reserve), and the evening of 13th (Great Snipe). Arek Szmyura, mentioned in many trip reports was our guide for the first two, and his son Mateusz took us to the Great Snipe lek. Prices have gone up a lot since the reports I read from ’09. The Pygmy Owl trip cost 90euros, Arek’s services for 8 hours on 13th was 150euros, and the Great Snipe trip was also 90euros.
  • A 2010 Supplement to Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World

    A 2010 Supplement to Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World by Paul A. Johnsgard Papers in the Biological Sciences 2010 The World’s Waterfowl in the 21st Century: A 2010 Supplement to Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World Paul A. Johnsgard University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/biosciducksgeeseswans Part of the Ornithology Commons Johnsgard, Paul A., "The World’s Waterfowl in the 21st Century: A 2010 Supplement to Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World" (2010). Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World by Paul A. Johnsgard. 20. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/biosciducksgeeseswans/20 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Papers in the Biological Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World by Paul A. Johnsgard by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. The World’s Waterfowl in the 21st Century: A 200 Supplement to Ducks, Geese, and Swans of the World Paul A. Johnsgard Pages xvii–xxiii: recent taxonomic changes, I have revised sev- Introduction to the Family Anatidae eral of the range maps to conform with more current information. For these updates I have Since the 978 publication of my Ducks, Geese relied largely on Kear (2005). and Swans of the World hundreds if not thou- Other important waterfowl books published sands of publications on the Anatidae have since 978 and covering the entire waterfowl appeared, making a comprehensive literature family include an identification guide to the supplement and text updating impossible.
  • Iucn Red Data List Information on Species Listed On, and Covered by Cms Appendices

    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 .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
  • Fastest Migration Highest

    Fastest Migration Highest

    GO!” Everyone knows birds can fly. ET’S But not everyone knows that “L certain birds are really, really good at it. Meet a few of these champions of the skies. Flying Acby Ellen eLambeth; art sby Dave Clegg! Highest You don’t have to be a lightweight to fly high. Just look at a Ruppell’s griffon vulture (left). One was recorded flying at an altitude of 36,000 feet. That’s as high as passenger planes fly! In fact, it’s so high that you would pass out from lack of oxygen if you weren’t inside a plane. How does the vulture manage? It has Fastest (on the level) Swifts are birds that have that name for good special blood cells that make a small amount reason: They’re speedy! The swiftest bird using its own of oxygen go a long way. flapping-wing power is the common swift of Europe, Asia, and Africa (below). It’s been clocked at nearly 70 miles per hour. That’s the speed limit for cars on some highways. Vroom-vroom! Fastest (in a dive) Fastest Migration With gravity helping out, a bird can pick up extra speed. Imagine taking a trip of about 4,200 And no bird can go faster than a peregrine falcon in a dive miles. Sure, you could easily do it in an airplane. after prey (right). In fact, no other animal on Earth can go as But a great snipe (right) did it on the wing in just fast as a peregrine: more than 200 miles per hour! three and a half days! That means it averaged about 60 miles The prey, by the way, is usually another bird, per hour during its migration between northern which the peregrine strikes in mid-air with its balled-up Europe and central Africa.
  • Belarus Resolution

    Belarus Resolution

    САВЕТ МІНІСТРАЎ СОВЕТ МИНИСТРОВ РЭСПУБЛІКІ БЕЛАРУСЬ РЕСПУБЛИКИ БЕЛАРУСЬ ПАСТАНОВА ПОСТАНОВЛЕНИЕ 3rd September, 2015 № 743 Minsk Minsk The Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus Resolution On the National Action Plan for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity for 2016-2020 and on amendments to the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus №1707 dated November, 19, 2010 The Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus has DECIDED: 1. To approve the attached National Action Plan for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity for 2016-2020. 2. To amend the resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus №1707 dated November, 19, 2010 "On some issues in the area of the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity" (the National Register of Legal Acts of the Republic of Belarus, 2010, № 287, 5/32887) in the following way: to delete words "for the period 2011 - 2020" from the paragraph 1; to present the new edition of the Strategy on the Conservation and Sustainable use of Biological Diversity for 2011-2020, approved by this Resolution (attached). 3. This Decision shall enter into force on January 1, 2016 Prime Minister of the Republic of Belarus A.Kobiakov 06 APPROVED Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus 19.11.2010 № 1707 (as amended by the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus 03.09.2015 № 743) Strategy on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Reduction of diversity of species and ecological systems has a special place among the main modern ecological problems.
  • European Red List of Birds

    European Red List of Birds

    European Red List of Birds Compiled by BirdLife International Published by the European Commission. opinion whatsoever on the part of the European Commission or BirdLife International concerning the legal status of any country, Citation: Publications of the European Communities. Design and layout by: Imre Sebestyén jr. / UNITgraphics.com Printed by: Pannónia Nyomda Picture credits on cover page: Fratercula arctica to continue into the future. © Ondrej Pelánek All photographs used in this publication remain the property of the original copyright holder (see individual captions for details). Photographs should not be reproduced or used in other contexts without written permission from the copyright holder. Available from: to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed Published by the European Commission. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. ISBN: 978-92-79-47450-7 DOI: 10.2779/975810 © European Union, 2015 Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Printed in Hungary. European Red List of Birds Consortium iii Table of contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................................1 Executive summary ...................................................................................................................................................5 1.
  • Chapter 11 Chapter 11 Wetland Conservation Plan

    Chapter 11 Chapter 11 Wetland Conservation Plan

    CHAPTER 11 CHAPTER 11 WETLAND CONSERVATION PLAN 11.1 Wetland Management Conditions 11.1.1 Natural Parks and Reserves (1) Legal conditions for natural parks and reserves 1) National environmental policy The National Environmental Policy Plan (NEPP) for Latvia was accepted by the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Latvia in 1995. NEPP reflects long-term strategy (25~30 years), and has two long-term goals, i) maintenance and protection of existing biodiversity and landscape characteristics of Latvia, and ii) sustainable use of natural resources. 2) National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) Since Latvia is a country with limited institutional, human, and financial resources, NEAP is incorporated with the National Biodiversity Strategy and the Action Plan, and it will also incorporate implementation of the Ramsar Strategic Plan. NEAP was adopted in 1997, and it emphasizes an establishment of administrative bodies for the Kemeri national park and Lake Engure which include several internationally important wetlands. An elaboration of the Integrated Management Plan for the Lubana Wetland Complex (LWC) is also placed high priority of nature conservation action. 3) Environmental laws and regulations Latvian environmental legal system has been prepared rapidly, and the following laws are relevant to protected areas, especially wetlands. a. The Environmental Protection Law (1991, 1997) determines the general environmental protection objectives, i.e. to ensure preservation of the genetic basis of nature, diversity of biotopes and landscape. It is an umbrella law on nature protection including land use and protection area planning. b. The Law on Specially Protected Nature Areas (1993, 1997) regulates the categories of protected natural areas, the procedure of their establishment and protection.
  • Survival Rates of Russian Woodcocks

    Survival Rates of Russian Woodcocks

    Proceedings of an International Symposium of the Wetlands International Woodcock and Snipe Specialist Group Survival rates of Russian Woodcocks Isabelle Bauthian, Museum national d’histoire naturelle, Centre de recherches sur la biologie des populations d’oiseaux, 55 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France. E-mail: [email protected] Ivan Iljinsky, State University of St Petersburg, Russia. E-mail: [email protected] Sergei Fokin, State Informational-Analytical Center of Game Animals and Environment Group. Woodcock, Teterinsky Lane, 18, build. 8, 109004 Moscow, Russia. E-mail: [email protected] Romain Julliard, Museum national d’histoire naturelle, Centre de recherches sur la biologie des populations d’oiseaux, 55 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France. E-mail: [email protected] François Gossmann, Office national de la chasse et de la faune sauvage, 53 rue Russeil, 44 000 Nantes, France. E-mail: [email protected] Yves Ferrand, Office national de la chasse et de la faune sauvage, BP 20 - 78612 Le-Perray-en-Yvelines Cedex, France. E-mail: [email protected] We analysed 324 recoveries from 2,817 Russian Woodcocks ringed as adult or yearling in two areas in Russia (Moscow and St Petersburg). We suspected that birds belonging to these two areas may experience different hunting pressure or climatic conditions, and thus exhibit different demographic parameters. To test this hypothesis, we analysed spatial and temporal distribution of recoveries, and performed a ringing-recovery analysis to estimate possible survival differences between these two areas. We used methods developed by Brownie et al. in 1985. We found differences in temporal variations of the age ratio between the two ringing areas.
  • Phylogeny and Comparative Ecology of Stiff-Tailed Ducks (Anatidae: Oxyurini)

    Phylogeny and Comparative Ecology of Stiff-Tailed Ducks (Anatidae: Oxyurini)

    Wilson Bull., 107(2), 1995, pp. 214-234 PHYLOGENY AND COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY OF STIFF-TAILED DUCKS (ANATIDAE: OXYURINI) BRADLEY C. LIVEZEY’ ABSTRACT.-A cladistic analysis of the stiff-tailed ducks (Anatidae: Oxyurini) was con- ducted using 92 morphological characters. The analysis produced one minimum-length, completely dichotomous phylogenetic tree of high consistency (consistency index for infor- mative characters, 0.74). Monophyly of the tribe was supported by 17 unambiguous syna- pomorphies. Within the tribe, Heteronetta (1 species) is the sister-group of other members; within the latter clade (supported by 2 1 unambiguous synapomorphies), Nomonyx (1 species) is the sister-group of Oxyura (6 species) + Biziura (I species). The latter clade is supported by 10 unambiguous synapomorphies. Monophyly of Oxyuru proper is supported by three unambiguous synapomorphies. All branches in the shortest tree except that uniting Oxyuva, exclusive of jumaicensis, were conserved in a majority-rule consensus tree of 1000 boot- strapped replicates. Biziuru and (to a lesser extent) Heteronetta were highly autapomorphic. Modest evolutionary patterns in body mass, reproductive parameters, and sexual dimorphism are evident, with the most marked, correlated changes occurring in Heteronetta and (es- pecially) Biziura. The implications of these evolutionary trends for reproductive ecology and biogeographic patterns are discussed, and a phylogenetic classification of the tribe is presented. Received 27 April 1994, accepted 10 Nov. 1994. The stiff-tailed ducks (Anatidae: Oxyurini) include some of the most distinctive species of waterfowl; among its members are the only obligate nest-parasite (Black-headed Duck; Heteronetta atricapilla) and the spe- cies showing the greatest sexual size dimorphism (Musk Duck; Biziuru lob&z) in the order Anseriformes (Delacour 1959; Johnsgard 1962, 1978; Weller 1968; Livezey 1986).
  • EUROPEAN BIRDS of CONSERVATION CONCERN Populations, Trends and National Responsibilities

    EUROPEAN BIRDS of CONSERVATION CONCERN Populations, Trends and National Responsibilities

    EUROPEAN BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN Populations, trends and national responsibilities COMPILED BY ANNA STANEVA AND IAN BURFIELD WITH SPONSORSHIP FROM CONTENTS Introduction 4 86 ITALY References 9 89 KOSOVO ALBANIA 10 92 LATVIA ANDORRA 14 95 LIECHTENSTEIN ARMENIA 16 97 LITHUANIA AUSTRIA 19 100 LUXEMBOURG AZERBAIJAN 22 102 MACEDONIA BELARUS 26 105 MALTA BELGIUM 29 107 MOLDOVA BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 32 110 MONTENEGRO BULGARIA 35 113 NETHERLANDS CROATIA 39 116 NORWAY CYPRUS 42 119 POLAND CZECH REPUBLIC 45 122 PORTUGAL DENMARK 48 125 ROMANIA ESTONIA 51 128 RUSSIA BirdLife Europe and Central Asia is a partnership of 48 national conservation organisations and a leader in bird conservation. Our unique local to global FAROE ISLANDS DENMARK 54 132 SERBIA approach enables us to deliver high impact and long term conservation for the beneit of nature and people. BirdLife Europe and Central Asia is one of FINLAND 56 135 SLOVAKIA the six regional secretariats that compose BirdLife International. Based in Brus- sels, it supports the European and Central Asian Partnership and is present FRANCE 60 138 SLOVENIA in 47 countries including all EU Member States. With more than 4,100 staf in Europe, two million members and tens of thousands of skilled volunteers, GEORGIA 64 141 SPAIN BirdLife Europe and Central Asia, together with its national partners, owns or manages more than 6,000 nature sites totaling 320,000 hectares. GERMANY 67 145 SWEDEN GIBRALTAR UNITED KINGDOM 71 148 SWITZERLAND GREECE 72 151 TURKEY GREENLAND DENMARK 76 155 UKRAINE HUNGARY 78 159 UNITED KINGDOM ICELAND 81 162 European population sizes and trends STICHTING BIRDLIFE EUROPE GRATEFULLY ACKNOWLEDGES FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION.
  • Biodiversity Assessment for Georgia

    Biodiversity Assessment for Georgia

    Biodiversity Assessment for Georgia Task Order under the Biodiversity & Sustainable Forestry IQC (BIOFOR) USAID C ONTRACT NUMBER: LAG-I-00-99-00014-00 SUBMITTED TO: USAID WASHINGTON E&E BUREAU, ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION SUBMITTED BY: CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. WASHINGTON, D.C. FEBRUARY 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I INTRODUCTION I-1 SECTION II STATUS OF BIODIVERSITY II-1 A. Overview II-1 B. Main Landscape Zones II-2 C. Species Diversity II-4 SECTION III STATUS OF BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION III-1 A. Protected Areas III-1 B. Conservation Outside Protected Areas III-2 SECTION IV STRATEGIC AND POLICY FRAMEWORK IV-1 A. Policy Framework IV-1 B. Legislative Framework IV-1 C. Institutional Framework IV-4 D. Internationally Supported Projects IV-7 SECTION V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS V-1 SECTION VI RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVED BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION VI-1 SECTION VII USAID/GEORGIA VII-1 A. Impact of the Program VII-1 B. Recommendations for USAID/Georgia VII-2 ANNEX A SECTIONS 117 AND 119 OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT A-1 ANNEX B SCOPE OF WORK B-1 ANNEX C LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED C-1 ANNEX D LISTS OF RARE AND ENDANGERED SPECIES OF GEORGIA D-1 ANNEX E MAP OF LANDSCAPE ZONES (BIOMES) OF GEORGIA E-1 ANNEX F MAP OF PROTECTED AREAS OF GEORGIA F-1 ANNEX G PROTECTED AREAS IN GEORGIA G-1 ANNEX H GEORGIA PROTECTED AREAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT DESIGN SUMMARY H-1 ANNEX I AGROBIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN GEORGIA (FROM GEF PDF GRANT PROPOSAL) I-1 SECTION I Introduction This biodiversity assessment for the Republic of Georgia has three interlinked objectives: · Summarizes the status of biodiversity and its conservation in Georgia; analyzes threats, identifies opportunities, and makes recommendations for the improved conservation of biodiversity.
  • British Birds VOLUME 69 NUMBER IO OCTOBER I976

    British Birds VOLUME 69 NUMBER IO OCTOBER I976

    British Birds VOLUME 69 NUMBER IO OCTOBER I976 Distinguishing Great Snipe from Snipe D. I. M. Wallace Records of the Great Snipe Gallinago media are among the hardest to prove. The Rarities Committee has harped upon this theme and observers unfamiliar with the species and lacking The Handbook in their libraries are not given more than a few pointers to the possi­ bilities of its identification. This paper is therefore concerned with restating and clarifying the differences between it and the Snipe G. gallinago. GROUND CHARACTERS The Great Snipe is the largest of the three species in western Europe, but it does not exceed the Snipe in all standard measurements. It is 5% to 10% longer- and broader-winged and about 10% longer- legged, but 10% shorter-billed and marginally shorter-tailed. It is bulkier, primarily because of its stouter bill, larger head, greater girth and broader wings. The second last difference gives it more of a ball shape on the ground. In the ideal circumstances of Snipe being present for comparison, these differences are obvious. Subtle but constant plumage differences are not restricted to the usually invisible tail markings and merit full discussion. General plumage pattern The Great Snipe is more barred than the Snipe, both above, where the individual feather patterns are very intricate, and below, where the markings are strong and numerous, extending in all plumages [Brit. Birds, 6g: 377-383, October 1976] 377 378 Great Snipe and Snipe over a wider area. This increased complexity reduces the clarity of the back stripes and the prominence of the white belly, which is virtually invisible in immatures.