THE DIRECTIVE ON
THE CONSERVATION OF WILD BIRDS
Jan Hora, Česká
společnost ornitologická, (Czech
Ornithological Society)
Hornoměcholupská 34,
102 00 Praha 10,
INTRODUCTION
The Council
Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds, known in short as the 'Bird
Directive', is intended to protect, manage and monitor avian
wildlife along with their nests, eggs and habitats in the European Union. It should ensure basic protection for all
free-living birds from being captured or
killed, the conservation of enough habitat sites to enable the survival of
threatened and migratory species, ensure that wide-ranging and non-selective
means of catching and killing birds is forbidden, and prevent the exploitaion,
sale and commercialisation of any species.
The directive also stipulates the conditions under which certain species
of bird can be hunted, and allows governments to adopt measures against birds
which pose a serious threat to human health and safety, crops, domestic
animals, fishing, woods, waterways and flora and fauna. It also requires governments to adopt
measures to ensure adequate diversity and distribution of habitats so that the
populations of all species will be preserved.
A number of habitat protection requirements stipulated in this directive
were replaced in the directive on the conservation of natural habitats of wild
birds and wild plants (in short, the Habitats Directive). Individual member states are given the choice
as to forms and methods of attaining the directive's objectives.
The Bird Directive
consists of 19 paragraphs and 5 appendices.
This contribution is intended to complement Paragraph 4, which requires
member states to specify and declare the most suitable locations for Special
Protection Areas (SPA's). The SPA's
should be for:
1. species and
sub-species of wild birds named in the appendix
2. migratory species
which return regularly. Even if they are
not specifically mentioned in Appendix I, they will still need protected nest
sites, moulting sites, resting sites and over-wintering sites. This means
that special attention should be given to wetlands, especially wetlands
of international importance.
SPA's, along with sites
declared as being natural habitats under Appendix I of the Habitats Directive
or as a habitat of certain species under Appendix II, will constitute the
Natura 2000 system. In its Appendix III,
the Habitats Directive sets out criteria for choosing sites of community
importance (SCI's), but the Bird Directive contains no such indications, and
that is a fundamental defect. Because of
this, it is important to decide what species are to benefit from the SPA's, and
in what way.
WHAT SPECIES ARE TO BE
CHOSEN?
1. Species mentioned in Appendix I of the Bird
Directive
In a dispute that took place
between the European Commission and the Netherlands, the European Court
adjudicated that SPA's must be intended for all species mentioned in Appendix I
which are found in the country concerned.
This means that the first step is to find all species mentioned in
Appendix I which can be found in the national list of bird species. There are, however, many reasons why some
species might not be included. These are
mainly species which do not originate in that country, birds which have strayed
or are not normally seen there, and other species which make use of sites and
habitats which cannot be known in advance.
Species that are found
dispersed over wide areas and in extensive habitats such as woodlands pose
particular problems when it comes to planning out SPA's, and from a legal point
of view they cannot, of course, be simply left out.
The
important thing is that in choosing SPA's, both nesting sites and sites used
for migration and over-wintering need to be considered. This means that fixed species with roughly the same
distribution throughout the year have to be distinguished from fixed species
whose distribution varies according to the time of year, and migratory species
can be distinguished in the same way.
This
analysis gives rise to two lists:
(a) species
with no SPA's devoted to them (for the reasons given)
(b) species
for which, in principle, SPA's can be
chosen. A site can be chosen for its
nesting period or outside its nesting period, but if only one variant is chosen
the reason should be given.
2.
Migratory species not mentioned in Appendix I
The first
step will be to identify those species for which wetlands of international
importance (Ramsar localities) can be declared.
This will be according to the criteria set out in the Ramsar Agreement
nr. 6 (originally 3c): A wetland should
be considered of international importance if it is regularly used by at least
1% of the individuals that make up the population of one species or sub-species
of water bird.
The list
will also include other species that regularly collect there, ie. species that
collect in great numbers as part of their migratory behaviour, especially in
their migratory corridors. Very few of
them, though, actually need be considered as most of these species are included
in Appendix I. Finally, the selection
will include regularly appearing migratory species, SPEC 1-3, ie. species which
covered by European nature conservation (Tucker & Heath, 1994) and
migratory species which are on that country's endangered list and where protection
measures could be of value. In Czech
land, those species will include the black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa) and the common
redshank (Tringa totanus) which are listed as endangered species not only in
SPEC 2 but also on both lists held by the Czech Republic. The list of endangered species includes many
migratory species which are mentioned neither in Appendix I nor in SPEC, such
as the little grebe (Tachybaptus ruficollis), red-crested
pochard (Netta rufina), common snipe (Gallinago gallinago), common sandpiper (Actitis hypoleucos) and others.
CHOICE OF
LOCATIONS
What data about birds do we need, and what
data do we have?
1. An up to
date list of all recorded species including, if possible, information about
their numbers. The list of birds recorded
in the CR over the last 200 years was published in 1995 (Hudec et al.
1995). It is regularly augmented by the
Zoological Commision (Faunistická komise) of the Czech Ornithological Society (ČSO). At
present, the list of birds in the CR includes 395 species.
2. Knowledge of the
distribution of all species.
There are two atlases of
bird distribution currently available, which date from 1973-77 and 1985-89 (astný et al. 1987, astný et al. 1996). There is also an atlas showing the winter
distribution of birds dating from 1983-85 (Bejček et al. 1995). A third mapping survey of nest distribution
is to be started in 2001, which will
record changes in the distribution of all nesting species over the last 30
years.
3. Reliable data about
national nesting populations for the species mentioned in Appendix I and
Paragraph 4.2. The basic source of these
data will be the estimates of nesting populations for all species derived from
the mapping survey of 1985-89 (astný
et al. 1996, astný & Bejček 1993).
Estimates for some species were made more accurate in 1994 (Hudec et al.
1995) or, for some species or groups of species, regularly brought up to date
using findings by ČSO working groups.
These groups include white and black storks, wading birds, swans, geese,
owls and other birds of prey, digging birds, ashy crane, corncrakes, mud hens,
painted bee-eaters, and bluethroats.
There is nonetheless a large number of species for which we have no
current number estimates. This lack
needs to be rectified with a new mapping survey of nest distributions. When the results from the mapping survey are
obtained they can be combined with those from the 1981 bird census (Jednotného programu sčítání ptáků), the 1988 monitor of nesting populations of water
birds, and the 1987 survey of important bird sites in Czech land (programu Významná ptačí území v ČR) to establish what the trends there are in nesting
populations.
4. All species' needs
for habitat and protection.
There is much
information dispersed among a variety of literary sources, but the information
has not been brought together into one publication comparable with Habitats
for birds in Europe (Tucker & Evans
1997).
5. Up to date
information about the number of potential sites for SPA's.
Ideally, census data
will be available from the last 3-5 seasons (number of nests, seasonal
maxima). Information covering a longer
period will only be of value if no large changes have taken place in
populations. Research undertaken in a
number of locations has already been published and evaluated, and data are
available from the database of important bird areas and other sources. This information is expected to be updated
and augmented in 2001, and research will be carried out in further selected
localities.
Defining areas and localities, their extent and their
boundaries
Any area to be classifed
as an SPA should be (a) distinguishable from surrounding areas as a habitat or
place of ornithological importance, (b) meet the needs of each species it
serves in terms of protection at the appropriate time or times of year. There is no minimum or maximum size
stipulated for SPA's, and there is no definition of suitable size. Within the EU, SPA's range from one hectare
to 550,000 hectares (Sweden) - the
average size is 7587.4 hectares (BirdLife International 2000) - but nonetheless
great care should be taken before including any site covering more than 100,000
hectares. It would need to be a location
of the greatest importance and with a large number of classified species. They would typically be extensive wetlands,
extensive mountain areas or woodlands containing endangered species which
depend on a large, uninterrupted habitat.
Groups of ponds, never more than a few kilometers apart from each other,
can be considered as a single entity with a single population, and the size of
the whole will not be of fundamental importance.
Criteria for selecting potential SPA's.
In a dispute between the
European Commission and the Netherlands, the European Court adjudicated that
the list of important bird areas will be acknowledged as the authoritative,
scientific basis in declaring SPA's. The
Important Bird Areas (IBA) program was launched by the bird protection
organisation, BirdLife International, in 1981 when it drew up a preliminary
inventory of areas discussed in Paragraph 4 of the Bird Directive, processed
for the European Commission (Osieck
& Morzer Bruyns 1981). In 1989, a list of 2444 IBA's, covering the whole of
Europe, was published (Grimmett &
Jones 1989), and in the same year the European commision ordered an independent
report on IBA's in the then 12
member states of the EC (Grimmett
& Gammell 1989). In 1994, a revised list of IBA's in Europe was begun on
the basis of new criteria valid throughout the world, and this resulted in a
list of 3619 IBA's (Heath & Evans
2000).
The choice of an IBA is
based on numbers of birds, using what is known of the size of a bird population
and how it has been changing.
International legal instruments are also used, such as the EC directive
on the protection of wild birds and the Ramsar Agreement (in particular,
developments at OSIECK 1998). 20 criteria were set for Europe which would make
it possible to seek out IBA's of international importance for: (1) endangered
species of bird, (2) swarming species of bird, (3) communities of bird species
distributed over a limited area, (4) communities of bird species considered to
be a certain biome. When using various
minimum numbers, the importance of a location for a species can be divided into
three geographical levels:
1. World level (criterion A)
A1. Species endangered throughout the world
A location which regularly, and in substantial
numbers, sees species under threat throughout the world, or other species
important from the point of view of worldwide nature protection.
Of the 35 European
species that meet this criterion, 21 appear on the list of birds in the CR,
although only the white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) and
corncrake (Crex crex) meet the
condition of "regularly and in substantial numbers".
A2. Species distributed over a limited area
Species which are distributed over an area of less
that 50,000 km2. No species come into this category in the CR.
A3. Communities limited to a certain biome
No species come into
this category in the CR.
A4. Gathering sites
(i) The regular gathering site of at least 1% of the
biogeographical population of a species of water bird
(ii) The regular gathering site of at least 1% of the
world population of a marine or land species.
(iii) The regular gathering site of at least 20,000
water birds or 10,000 pairs of marine birds of one or more species.
(iv) A site which regularly attracts more that 20,000
storks, birds of prey or cranes in the Spring or Autumn.
The species described in
A4 are to be found in Czech land in only very limited numbers. A4i will apply only to the greylag goose (Anser anser),
white fronted goose (Anser albifrons)
and gadwall (Anas strepera).
2. European level (criterion
B)
B1. Gathering sites
(i) Regular gathering site of at least 1% of the
transitory or otherwise limited population of a species of water bird.
(ii) Regular gathering site of at least 1% of a
certain population of a species of marine bird.
(iii) Regular gathering site of of at least 1% of the
transitory or otherwise limited population of another species which gathers at
particular locations.
(iv) Migratory corridor regularly used in Spring or
Autumn by more than 5,000 storks or more than 3,000 birds of prey or cranes.
The only species to
regularly meet the minimum numbers stipulated in any Czech locations for IBA's
is the greylag goose (Anser anser).
B2. Unfavoured species from the point of view of
European nature conservation
(SPEC 2 and 3)
Location which is designated "n"; one of the
most important in the given country. It
is also assumed that suitable local protection is provided for the given
species.
The minimum value
"n" is determined by the minimum population of the species in that
country in relation to the estimated minimum of its population throughout
Europe. A location can be chosen for an
IBA if it is host to at least 1% of the national population of that species,
albeit on condition that the minimum national population be at least 1% of the
minimum European population. In this way
the problem is removed of choosing locations for species which are found
dispersed over a wide area, and the maximum number of sites for a given species
in a country is limited if it is found there in great numbers. This rule would, of course, have no point for
species with only a small national population (100 pairs, for instance). Countries which cover less than 1% of the
area of Europe as a whole would be entitled to suggest IBA's even if the
national population of a species is less than 1% of its European
population.
B3. Favoured species from the point of view of
European nature conservation
Location which is designated "n"; one of the
most important in the given country. It
is also assumed that suitable local protection is given for the given species.
The same procedure was
followed as in category B2. No important
bird territory has been declared for this category in the CR, and selected
species were used to augment the importance of areas in higher categories.
3. EU (C
criteria )
The criteria for
choosing IBA's within the European Union were put into seven categories
(C1-C7), of which some correspond to the higher categories, A and B.
C1 Species endangered throughout the world
Locations where species endangered throughout the
world, or other species important from the point of view of world nature
conservation, appear regularly and in significant numbers.
This criterion is in
accord with the criterion of catergory A1.
The same applies for minimum numbers.
C2 Gathering site for species endangered on the level
of the EU
A location which is regularly host to at least 1% of
the migratory population of a species which is not considerd endangered within
the EU.
"A migratory
species not considered to be endangered" is described in Paragraph 4.2 of
the Bird Directive (ie. a regularly appearing migratory species not mentioned
in Appendix I). This criterion covers
most wetlands of international importance as determined by Ramsar 6 (formerly
3c). These wetlands are mentioned in Paragraph 4.2, but do not include wetlands
of international importance which are devoted solely to the species of water
bird set in Appendix I of the directive
(C2). The one-percent limits are in
accord with the limits for B1.
C4 Large gathering sites
The regular gathering site for at least 20,000
migratory water birds or 10,000 pairs of migratory marine birds of one or more
species.
This criterion is in
accord with criterion A4iii and is used for the same species. This category is used for species which are
vulnerable by gathering either when they are already nesting, or overwintering
or while migrating.
C5 Large gathering sites - migratory corridors
A place passed through by at least 5,000 storks or at
least 3,000 migratory birds of prey or cranes in the Spring or Autumn.
This criterion is
compatible with criterion B1iv, and applies to the same species. As most of the species that this category is
concerned with are included in Appendix I of the Bird Directive, the criterion
will extend to include locations which are regarded as important under
Paragraph 4.1.
C6 Species endangered at the EU level
One of the five most important sites in the European
Region for a species or sub-species considered endangered at the EU level
This concerns species
and sub-species cited in Appendix I of the Bird Directive. By "European Region" is meant Nomenclature
of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS). There will normally be up to five locations declared for a species or sub-species affected under NUTS, although
in exceptional circumstances more can be declared if reasons are given. However it is often not possible to designate
five locations for a certain species, usually a species with small populaions
or limited distribution, or a species found dispersed over a very wide
area. The appropriate species or
sub-species should be found at a given location regularly and in significant
numbers, from an EU point of view. A
location should not be chosen if it can be shown that the population of the
species it is to serve cannot be expected to survive (just a single pair, for
instance). Criterion C6 can be used
where birds are found but do not nest, if they are not properly covered by
other criteria.
C7 Other ornithological criteria
A site declared as an SPA or potential SPA on the
basis of ornithological criteria similar to those of C1-C6, but not identical
with them.
This criterion should
not be used in applicant states.
ACTION NECESSARY FOR THE
IBA PROGRAM IN THE CR
In selecting IBA's, the
Czech Republic used criteria A and B.
This means that it is necessary to assess existing important bird areas
(eg. Hora 2000) according to criterion C and seek out further areas which meet
it. It is necessary at the same time to
:
ˇ
use lower limits
for numbers of species in category C2 - for instance the great bittern (Botaurus
stellaris), little bittern(Ixobrychus
minutus), black crowned night heron (Nycticorax
nycticorax), black-headed gull (Larus melanocephalus), common tern (Sterna hirundo), and the black tern (Chlidonias niger).
ˇ
some
species have only small populations in the CR, and for this reason criteria B2
and B3 were not used. Use of criterion
C6 for SPEC's from Appendix I of the Bird Directive should be resumed for these
species- for instance the black kite (Milvus
migrans), red kite (Milvus milvus),
peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus),
spotted crake (Porzana porzana),
little crake (Porzana parva), tawny
pipit (Anthus campestris), and the
ortulan bunting (Emberiza hortulana).
ˇ
resume use of
criterion C6 for species which are not SPEC's but are nonetheless named in
Appendix I of the Bird Directive - for instance the marsh harrier (Circus
aeruginosus), capercaillie (Tetrao
urogallus), hazel grouse (Bonasa
bonasia), common tern (Sterna hirundo),
Eurasian pygmy owl (Glaucidium passerinum),
tengmalm's owl (Aegolius funereus),
black woodpecker (Dryrocopus martius),
white-backed woodpecker (Dendrocopos
leucotos), bluethroat (Luscinia
svecica), and the red breasted flycatcher (Ficedula parva).
USING IBA CRITERIA IN
SELECTING POTENTIAL SPA's
Because IBA criteria, in
this case criteria C, are somewhat complicated, problems may arise in trying to
explain them to land owners, land users, politicians, administrative bodies
etc. when negotiating sites to form part of the Natura 2000 complex. Experience in the Netherlands (Thissen 1999)
shows that a simpler system can be introduced whereby C1 is connected with C6
and C2 with C3. C5 does not come into
consideration for conditions in the CR.
In this way the number of categories of criteria is reduced to three:
1. A site which is
regularly used by at least one percent of that country's population of that
species, named in Appendix I of the Bird Directive, at any time of year. (C1,
C6)
For species with a small
population (where 1% of the national population would not represent a
population capable of surviving) the minimum population is set at three pairs
for large species, eight pairs for medium sized species and fifteen pairs for
small species of bird.
The five best locations
will be selected for each species (assuming, of course, that is possible).
Outside of nesting time,
the minimum number of pairs will be trebled.
2. A site regularly used
by at least one percent of the biogeographical population of a migratory
species regularly found there (species mentioned in Appendix I and species not
mentioned in Appendix I) at any time of year.
(C2, C3)
3. A site regularly used
by more than twenty thousand water birds at any time of year. (C4)
ACTION NECESSARY FOR
SELECTING POTENTIAL SPA's IN THE CR
1. Select the species
named in Appendix I for which, in principle, SPA's can be chosen.
The list of these
species is already available.
2. Select the migratory
species not named in Appendix I for which however, in principle, SPA's can be
chosen, according to Paragraph 4.2.
This list, too, is
already available.
3. Compile a database of
species in Appendix I.
Compilation of this
database has begun.
4. Large IBA's should be
examined to decide whether they can be proposed for an SPA as a whole or
whether one or more smaller sites within that area should be planned.
This examination is
nearly complete. Some areas are to be
proposed as a whole and the process of planning out smaller areas is in
progress.
5. Select and/or locate
the five best sites for each species named in Appendix I. Failing this, select and/or locate sites
meeting the criterion of 1% or the stipulated minimum number of pairs.
Sites have been chosen
for most species, and the remaining potential sites will be examined in the
course of 2001.
6. Examine sites
indicated from the list of wetlands in the Czech Republic (Chytil et al. 1999)
and the list of important land bird areas (ČSO, unpublished).
This task is expected to
be completed during 2001.
6. Set out the
boundaries of potential SPA's on 1:10,000 maps.
This task is in
progress.
7. Compile a database of
sites proposed for SPA's.
At present, the IBA
database is being used.
8. Monitor the network
of potential SPA's to assess how well the appropriate bird species and their
habitats are represented there.
CONCLUSION
In deciding for what
species potential SPA's are to be chosen, what criteria are to be used and how
big the sites are to be, it is of fundamental importance to interpret Paragraph
4 of the Bird Directive properly. It is
equally important, despite the effort needed, to carry out a thorough analysis
of the full range of birdlife in the CR, including analyses of all available
data about their numbers at each site and in every area. Birds are among the best known groups of
fauna in the CR, but we nonetheless do not have sufficient, up to date figures
about the numbers of some species, either in the areas concerned or in the
country as a whole. Another problem that
needs to be faced is how to draw up the boundaries of some sites. Taken as a whole this means that it is
essential that we spend the time between now and our entry into the European
Union carrying out some intensive work in the field.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bejček, V., astný,
K. & Hudec, K. (1995): Atlas zimního rozíření ptáků v České republice
1982-1985. Nakl. a vydav. H & H, Praha.
BirdLife
International (2000): Additional information for the application of the IBA C
criteria: Annex I species populations on IBAs and sizes of Special Protection
Areas (SPAs) in the European Union. BirdLife International, Cambridge, nepubl.
zpráva.
Grimmett, R. F. A.
& Gammell, A. B. (1989): Inventory of Important Bird Areas in the European
Community. International Council for Birds Preservation, Cambridge, nepubl.
zpráva pro Evropskou komisi.
Grimmett, R. F. A.
& Jones, T. A. (1989): Important Bird Areas in Europe. International
Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK.
Heath, M. F. &
Evans, M. I. (2000): Important Bird Areas in Europe: Priority sites for
conservation. 2 vols. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK (BirdLife
Conservation Series No. 8).
Hora, J. (2000):
Czech Republic. Pp. 123-135 in M. F. Heath and M. I. Evans, eds. Important Bird
Areas in Europe: Priority sites for conservation. 1: Northern Europe. BirdLife
International, Cambridge, UK (BirdLife Conservation Series No. 8).
Hudec, K., Chytil,
J., astný, K. & Bejček, V. (1995): Ptáci České republiky. Sylvia 31: 97-148.
Chytil, J., Hakrová,
P., Hudec, K., Husák, ., Jandová, J., Pellantová, J., eds. (1999): Mokřady
České republiky - přehled vodních a mokřadních lokalit ČR. Český Ramsarský
výbor, Mikulov.
Osieck, E. (1998):
IBA Review and the EU Bird Directive. BirdLife International, Cambridge,
interní zpráva, está a závěrečná verze.
Osieck, E. &
Mörzer Bruyns, M. F. (1981): Important Bird Areas in the European Community.
International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK.
astný, K. &
Bejček, V. (1993): Početnost hnízdních populací ptáků v České republice. Sylvia 29: 72-81.
astný, K., Bejček,
V. & Hudec, K. (1996): Atlas hnízdního rozíření ptáků v České republice
1985-1989. Nakl. a vydav. H & H, Praha,.
astný, K., Randík,
A. & Hudec, K. (1987): Atlas hnízdního rozíření ptáků v ČSSR 1973/77.
Academia, Praha.
Thissen, J. (1999):
Site selection for Natura 2000 in the Netherlands. In Végh, M. & SzÜcs, D.,
eds.: Proc. Establishing Natura 2000 in EU Accession Countries. European Centre
for Nature Conservation, Tilburg (ECNC Teechnical report series): 66-68.
Tucker, G. M. &
Evans, M. I. (1997): Habitats for birds in Europe: a conservation strategy for
the wider environment. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK (BirdLife
Conservation Series No. 6).
Tucker, G. M. &
Heath, M. F. (1994): Birds in Europe: their conservation status. BirdLife
International, Cambridge, UK (BirdLife Conservation Series No. 3).