CONSERVATIONSCIENCE IN THE RSPB

2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001

The RSPB works for a healthy environment rich in birds and

wildlife. It depends on the support and generosity of others to

make a difference. The RSPB works with bird and habitat

conservation organisations worldwide in a global partnership

called BirdLife International.

The RSPB prides itself on using the best scientific evidence

available to guide its conservation policies and practice. Only by

basing our work on such evidence can we be confident that our

actions will be of benefit to birds and other wildlife.

For further copies of this report, please contact the Conservation

Science Department, The RSPB, UK Headquarters, Sandy,

Bedfordshire SG19 2DL, or visit www.rspb.org.uk.

1CONSERVATION SCIENCEIN THE RSPB, 2001

Andrew Hay (RSPB Im

ages)Andrew

Hay (RSPB Images)

FOREWORDmanagement of our 172 nature reserves and

to influence government policy, nationally

and internationally. If the RSPB is to achieve

its ambitious future conservation goals then

we will need to combine our scientific

knowledge with policy development and

advocacy to influence not only UK wildlife

legislation but also wider policy areas such

as agriculture, fisheries and planning.

For many declining species, RSPB research

has provided much of the information on

which successful conservation action has

been based. This has led to marked

population recoveries. For example, we have

shown that to reverse the rapid decline of

the bittern population it was necessary to

halt the natural succession of its reed habitat

to scrub. This knowledge was used to

manage RSPB and other reserves, such that

bittern numbers have tripled in the last five

years. For several birds of farmland,

including corncrakes, stone-curlews and cirl

buntings, research to elucidate causes of

decline was followed by implementation of

2

Dr Mark Avery

Director,

Conservation,

The RSPB

Supported by more than one

million members, the RSPB is

the largest wildlife conservation

charity in Europe. We promote

and practise evidence-based

conservation, and endeavour to

use the best scientific evidence

available to guide our work.

During its 112-year history, the RSPB has

aspired to develop a blueprint for translating

the results of scientific research into

successful conservation action. Working with

an array of partners, we monitor bird

populations to set conservation priorities, to

assess the efficacy of conservation actions

and to produce indicators of sustainability

that have been adopted by government.

Through our research, we have diagnosed

the causes of decline of many species, have

developed and tested practical solutions,

and have used this knowledge to guide the

RSPB research wascentral to recovery ofcirl buntings in the UK.

Mik

e La

ne (R

SPB

Imag

es)

government- and occasionally RSPB-funded

farm-based conservation programmes. These

too led to marked population recoveries.

The RSPB works with other BirdLife partners

in many countries worldwide and research

has contributed to significant population

increases in such critically endangered

species as the bald ibis and Seychelles

magpie-robin.

To ensure that our conservation work is based

on scientific evidence, we invest – and will

continue to invest – in applied conservation

science. A core of 70 or so permanent and

long-term contract staff undertakes this work,

most within the RSPB’s Conservation Science

Department but also in our Reserves Ecology

Section, Biodiversity Unit and Conservation

Data Management Unit. Between them, these

staff are involved in more than 100 projects

annually, ranging from surveys of little-known

but threatened invertebrates to predicting

the likely impacts of climate change on

Europe’s birds.

The RSPB is committed to sharing its

scientific knowledge with as wide an audience

as possible, and it is for this reason that I

have great pleasure in presenting the RSPB’s

first report on its scientific work, Conservation

science in the RSPB, 2001. While this report

does not attempt to cover all of our scientific

work, it uses the results from 24 projects to

illustrate the depth and breadth of our

research and monitoring.

We hope to be able to produce such reports

annually, and would be delighted to hear

any suggestions you may have to improve

the report’s content.

FORE

WOR

D

3

Left: RSPB researchcontributed to recovery of theSeychelles magpie-robin.

Below: Gillian Gilbert (r) andSarah Ruff (l) electrofishing.

Bottom: Ken Smith (r) andGlen Tyler (l) radio-trackingbitterns.Ch

ris G

omer

sall

(RSP

B Im

ages

)An

drew

Hay

(RSP

B Im

ages

)An

drew

Hay

(RSP

B Im

ages

)

Arguably, 2001 was the most

inauspicious year on which to

base the first annual report of the

RSPB’s conservation science

programme. It was the first year

in memory that the RSPB has

cancelled such a high proportion

of its planned fieldwork, due to

the outbreak of foot-and-mouth

disease. The timing of the

outbreak could barely have been

worse for our research and

monitoring work, as many of the

season’s field staff had been

appointed only a few days before

the initial outbreak.

The near-total closure of the countryside

across much of UK at the outset of bird

breeding seasons meant that we had to

postpone many field projects. We were able

to continue some, but greatly scaled down.

Viewed over the longer term, perhaps, the

impact of foot-and-mouth on our scientific

work will not seem quite so devastating.

Most projects postponed in 2001 re-started

in 2002, so we will have collected the

information, but a year later. It is probably

our monitoring work, undertaken principally

with the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO),

the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT) and

the statutory nature conservation agencies,

which suffered most. We will have lost the

best part of a year of data from several long-

running monitoring schemes.

Despite the bleak start to the year, there

were still many highlights. One of the

greatest of these was the government’s

increasing commitment to agri-environment

schemes, such as the roll-out of arable

options within the Countryside Stewardship

Scheme (CSS), in which farmers manage

land to benefit wildlife. The CSS has been a

product of close collaboration between

government, independent scientists –

including those from the RSPB – farmers

and advisors. It contains a menu of practical

and effective prescriptions to make farmland

more wildlife-friendly; many of these

prescriptions are based on RSPB research.

Our work on cirl buntings (p 20) and

breeding waders (p 35), for example,

demonstrates that carefully targeted

schemes can improve biodiversity. The

RSPB’s acquisition of Hope Farm, a lowland

arable farm in Cambridgeshire, allows us to

trial such prescriptions on our own land.

During 2001, we began research aimed at

returning some of the beneficial

characteristics of spring cropping to wildlife-

unfriendly winter wheat fields.

Although much of the monitoring in which

the RSPB is a partner was cancelled, three

common bird monitoring schemes, in Spain

(p 11), Hungary and Poland, continued

unaffected. At the same time, we instigated

a new project to collate common bird

monitoring information across Europe to

allow us to produce pan-European trends.

Back in the UK, we worked with the BTO and

the Department for Environment, Food and

Rural Affairs (DEFRA) to update the wild bird

‘quality of life’ indicator (p 13) and with the

BTO and WWT to produce State of the UK’s

birds, 2000, the second in a series of annual

reports. Ten years of monitoring birds on

our own land has demonstrated the

importance of the RSPB reserve network in

conserving the UK’s most threatened species

(p 14).

4 INTRODUCTION

Dr David Gibbons

Head of

Conservation

Science, The RSPB

Not all of the monitoring work in which we are

involved is on birds. For example, a survey of

the hoverfly Hammerschmidtia ferruginea in

aspen stands in North Scotland estimated its

UK population at 300 individuals. We also now

have a more thorough understanding of the

status and distribution of the medicinal leech

following a UK-wide survey.

Over the last two decades, the RSPB has

developed a well-respected niche in diagnosing

the causes of decline of many threatened bird

species through research into their ecology.

Our work on skylarks (p 18), for example, has

shown that the switch from spring to autumn

sowing of cereals has been one of the main

drivers of this species decline. Some of the

results of this research were published in 2001

in The ecology and conservation of skylarks,

the proceedings of an RSPB/BTO conference.

Our work on song thrushes (p 19) suggests that

in arable landscapes, woodland and grassland

are needed to ensure sufficient invertebrates to

allow thrushes to continue nesting throughout

the summer.

RSPB/English Nature (EN) research has shown

that the natural succession of reedbeds to carr

makes them less suitable for bitterns (p 21).

Therefore, reedbeds need to be made wetter to

halt this succession and the bittern’s decline.

Our research on the black-tailed godwit (p 22),

by contrast, has shown that this species needs

less, rather than more, water as its decline at

the Ouse Washes, formerly its stronghold, has

been driven by the increased incidence of

spring flooding.

Abroad, the alarming decline of Gyps vultures

in India became ever more apparent (p 25) and

we stepped up our efforts to diagnose the

cause of these declines. On the sub-continent,

we also obtained the first recording of the call

of the globally threatened Jerdon’s courser,

which will allow us to assess its status more

fully in the future. On the south Atlantic island

of Gough, we discovered that introduced house

mice may be predators of globally threatened

Tristan albatross chicks (p 26), while on the

Caribbean island of Montserrat, introduced rats

INTR

ODUC

TION

5

Left: Research has shownthe need to keepreedbeds wet for bitterns.

Below: The impact ofpredators on capercailliehas been testedexperimentally.

Bottom: DPhil studentDavid Hole and SashaNorris check a housesparrow nestbox.

Andr

ew H

ay (R

SPB

Imag

es)

Rich

ard

Broo

ks (R

SPB

Imag

es)

Pete

Cai

rns

(RSP

B Im

ages

)

reduced the nesting success of the island’s

endemic oriole, a species that has already

lost two-thirds of its range to volcanic

activity. All of our international projects are

undertaken with a range of partners. The UK

Government, specifically the Foreign and

Commonwealth Office and the Darwin

Initiative, help fund many of them.

Though research into the ecology of

threatened species will always form a large

part of the RSPB’s work, there are

circumstances where it may be more efficient

to undertake research on an ecological

process. Because of this, research into

process ecology has accounted for an

increasing proportion of our work. Here we

report on research into a range of ecological

processes, from the impacts of intensive

agriculture on European birds (p 30) and

grazing on moorland birds (p 32), to the

impact of native and introduced predators on

capercaillies (p 33) and breeding waders

respectively (p 34). In addition to undertaking

our own research on the effects of climate

change on European breeding bird

distributions (p 37) in 2001, we published

with partners the conference proceedings

Impacts of climate change on wildlife.

For clarity, the bulk of this report is divided

into three sections, covering the main

aspects of our work – ie monitoring and

prioritisation, species ecology, and process

ecology. In the interests of brevity, we do

not report on all of the scientific work

undertaken during 2001, but provide brief

synopses of the results of 24 projects.

Some of these have recently finished, with

results published or in press, while others

are at an earlier stage of development, so

the results are only provisional. We have

listed all scientific projects undertaken by

the RSPB at the end of the report.

The RSPB invests considerable resources

on the results of its scientific research and

asks others to do the same. It is therefore

vital that our research is of the highest

quality, which is why we place great

emphasis on publishing our results in

peer-reviewed scientific journals. To allow

the reader to judge the quality of our

work, we have included a full list of our

scientific publications for 2001 and the

first half of 2002 towards the back of

this report.

I hope that you find the report interesting.

INTR

ODUC

TION

6

Mik

e Re

ad (R

SPB

Imag

es)

The RSPB’s OuseWashes reserve inCambridgeshire.

FUNDINGWhile its members and supporters fund

most of the RSPB’s scientific work, many

organisations (listed below) have funded

specific projects through, for example,

research contracts and grants towards

partnership projects. Many of those listed

are also active partners in the research, or

may have provided support for wider

conservation action.

Anglian WaterBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilBritish Potato CouncilCJ WildBird FoodsCountryside Council for WalesCrop Protection Association UKDarwin InitiativeDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural AffairsEnglish NatureEnvironment and Heritage ServiceEU LIFE FundForeign and Commonwealth OfficeForestry CommissionFrizzell InsuranceGlaxoSmithKlineHome Grown Cereals AuthorityJoint Nature Conservation CommitteeNational TrustSafeway Stores plcSainsbury’s Supermarkets LtdScottish Natural HeritageScottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs DepartmentSyngenta Crop Protection UKTesco

FUN

DIN

G

7Sources of fundingfor RSPB science2001/02.

RSPB scienceexpenditure 2001/02(£3,142,985).

By working with a wide range of partners,

listed below, the RSPB is able to maximise

both the quantity and quality of conservation

science that it undertakes. The value of

partnerships is nowhere more evident than in

the contribution made by the thousands of

birdwatchers that take part in bird monitoring.

Their contribution is invaluable.

Academy of Sciences, BelarusAculeate Conservation GroupAgricultural Development and Advisory ServiceAtlantic Frontier Environmental NetworkAquatic Warbler Conservation TeamAustralian Animal Health LaboratoryBird Conservation Belarus (APB) (the BirdLife partner in Belarus) Bird Conservation NepalBirdLife InternationalBirdWatch Ireland (the BirdLife partner in Ireland)BirdLife South Africa (the BirdLife partner in South Africa)British Antarctic SurveyBritish Museum of Natural HistoryBiomathematics and Statistics ScotlandBombay Natural History Society (BNHS) (the BirdLife partner in India)Botanical Society of the British IslesBritish BirdsBritish Bryological SocietyBritish Ornithologists’ UnionBritish Trust for OrnithologyBritish Lichen SocietyBumblebee Working GroupButterfly ConservationCambridge Conservation ForumCape Verde GovernmentCentre for Agri-Environmental ResearchCentre for Ecology and HydrologyCentral Science LaboratoryThe Chough Study GroupsCzech Society for Ornithology (CSO) (the BirdLife partner in the CzechRepublic)Département des Eaux et Forêts – MoroccoDepartment of Agriculture and Rural Development (Northern Ireland)Direction Regionale des Eaux et Forêts du Sud-ouest, Agadir, MoroccoDurrell Wildlife Conservation TrustDoñana Biological StationECOSA (Ecological Survey and Assessment)Entotax Consultants UKEnvironment AgencyEuronaturEuropean Bird Census CouncilForestry CommissionForest EnterpriseFrizzell InsuranceThe Game Conservancy TrustGhana Wildlife Society (the BirdLife partner in Ghana)G Spoor AssociatesThe Hawk and Owl TrustHungarian Ornithological Nature Conservation Society (MME)Institute of Grassland and Environmental ResearchInvertebrate Link

Gdansk Ornithological Station – Polish Academy of Sciences (GOS)Institute of ZoologyMr Jonathan TipplesLaboratoire D’Analyses et Récherches Vétérinaires D’Agadir, Agadir,MoroccoLake District National Park AuthorityLeicestershire and Rutland Wildlife TrustLinking Environment and FarmingThe Macaulay InstituteMakerere University Institute of the Environment and Natural ResourcesMalloch SocietyMinistry of DefenceMinsk Institute of ZoologyMinistre Délégué, Chargé des Eaux et Forêts, Morocco Montserrat Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Housing & EnvironmentMontserrat National TrustNational Audubon Society (the BirdLife partner designate in the USA)National Bird of Prey CentreNational Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New ZealandNational Trust for ScotlandNatural Environment Research CouncilNature Uganda (the BirdLife partner in Uganda) Nature Kenya (the BirdLife partner in Kenya)Nigerian Conservation Foundation (the BirdLife partner in Nigeria)Nyiregyhaza College, HungaryParc National de Souss-MassaPenny Anderson AssociatesPercy Fitzpatrick Institute of OrnithologyPlantlifePolish Society for the Protection of Birds (OTOP) (the BirdLife partner inPoland)Portuguese Society for the Study of Birds (SPEA) (the BirdLife partner inPortugal)Poultry Diagnostics Research Centre – IndiaThe Raptor Study GroupRare Breeding Birds PanelRoyal Holloway CollegeRussian Bird Conservation Union (the BirdLife partner in Russia)Scottish Environmental Protection AgencyScottish Agricultural CollegeScottish Forestry AllianceThe Scottish Raptor Study GroupsThe Seabird GroupShetland Oil Terminal Environmental Advisory GroupSpanish Ornithological Society (SEO) (the BirdLife partner in Spain)Statistics NetherlandsUniversities Federation for Animal WelfareThe following universities:Aberdeen, Adam Mickiewicz (Poland), Cambridge, Cape Town, Copenhagen,Cork, Cranfield, De Montfort, Durham, East Anglia, Edinburgh, Glasgow,Harper Adams, Helsinki, Hull, Lancaster, Liverpool, Manchester, Minsk,Montana, Newcastle, Oxford, Queens (Belfast), Reading, Riga, Southampton,Stirling, Wolverhampton, York and the Open UniversityUK Overseas Territories Conservation ForumUNEP World Conservation Monitoring CentreThe Welsh Kite TrustWildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (the BirdLife partner in Tanzania)The Wildlife TrustsThe Wildfowl & Wetlands TrustThe Woodland TrustWWF-UKYorkshire Dales National Park AuthorityZoological Society of London

PART

NER

SHIP

S

8 PARTNERSHIPS

The RSPB is involved in a wide variety of monitoring

schemes for birds and, to a lesser extent, other

taxonomic groups. These include annual, multi-

species monitoring schemes carried out in

partnership with other organisations (principally

the Breeding Birds Survey, the Wetland Birds

Survey, the Rare Breeding Birds Panel and the

Seabird Monitoring Programme), monitoring

programmes on our own reserves, and single-

species surveys undertaken as part of the

Statutory Conservation Agencies/RSPB

Annual Breeding Bird Scheme

(SCARABBS). We have established a

biodiversity monitoring scheme on our

reserves, covering a wide range of taxa,

and are involved in UK-wide common

plant monitoring and in surveys of a

variety of UK Biodiversity Action

Plan priority species.

9MONITORING ANDPRIORITISATION, DATAAND INDICATORS

Red kite by Chris Gomersall (RSPB Im

ages)

The Statutory Conservation

Agencies/RSPB Annual Breeding

Bird Scheme (SCARABBS) is a

rolling programme of surveys

covering about 50 species.

The species monitored in the scheme are

either too rare or localised to be covered by

standard schemes such as the Breeding Bird

Survey (BBS), or need special survey

techniques. Some species are surveyed each

year, and others are surveyed every 5 or 10

years. As well as allowing population trends

to be monitored, SCARABBS provides

regularly revised population estimates for

each species.

Species surveyed recently include the ring

ouzel (in partnership with Scottish Natural

Heritage (SNH), the Countryside Council for

Wales and English Nature (EN)), the twite

(with the Joint Nature Conservation

Committee and EN) and the red kite (with

EN and SNH). The ring ouzel and twite

surveys were carried out in 1999, and were

the first sample surveys designed to provide

UK population estimates for these species;

because of this, field methods had to be

tailor-made. The ring ouzel survey used tape

playback and indicated that there were a

minimum of 6,155 territories (95%

confidence interval (CI) 3,586–9,369) and a

maximum of 7,547 territories (95% CI

4,469–11,200) in the UK. The results of this

survey suggested that the ring ouzel had

undergone a further contraction in range

and probably a further decline in numbers.

The twite also showed a further contraction

in breeding range, even in parts of its former

strongholds, such as Shetland and Orkney.

The population of this species was

estimated to be between 5,000 and 15,000

pairs, with the majority (9,948 pairs, 95% CI

6,293–14,586) being in Scotland and

England. Both of these surveys provided

baseline estimates for future comparisons.

The first co-ordinated survey of red kites in

Britain since reintroduction began in 1989

took place in 2000. There were estimated to

be 430 breeding pairs (95% CI 372–490), of

which 259 were in Wales (95% CI 200–318)

and 109 were in the Chilterns (95% CI

96–124). A further 40 pairs were found in

Scotland, and the remainder were scattered

across several locations in England.

MON

ITOR

ING

AND

PRIO

RITI

SATI

ON, D

ATA

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

10 The ups and downs ofspecies monitoring

Wotton SR, Langston RHW andGregory RD (2002) The breedingstatus of the ring ouzel Turdustorquatus in the UK in 1999. BirdStudy 49: 26–34.

Wotton SR, Carter I, Cross AV,Etheridge B, Snell N, Duffy K,Thorpe R and Gregory RD (2002)Red kites Milvus milvus in Britainin 2000. Bird Study (in press).

The UK population ofthe ring ouzel was

assessed in 1999.

John

Far

mer

(RSP

B Im

ages

)

The RSPB has supported several

new schemes designed to

monitor common bird

populations in European

countries.

One such scheme, known as SACRE

(Programa de Seguimiento de Aves

Comunes Reproductoras en España), was

established by SEO (the BirdLife partner in

Spain) in 1996. The aims of the survey are:

to improve knowledge of common bird

populations, paying particular attention to

factors associated with declines; to identify

the areas where declines are most

pronounced; to identify the habitats that are

suffering the greatest damage; and to

promote the conservation of birds and

habitats by involving large numbers of

volunteers.

The design of SACRE is modified from that

of the UK Breeding Bird Survey. Sample

squares, each 10 km by 10 km, are chosen at

random within circles of 100-km radius

centred on selected urban centres. The plan

is to increase coverage progressively by

adding new focal areas as the scheme

develops. In addition, SEO aims to set up a

network of regional coordinators and

increase training for prospective counters. In

a trial designed to increase participation in

the scheme, volunteers have been allowed

to survey squares of their own choice if they

have no suitable random square nearby.

Each square is visited twice in the breeding

season, and birds are surveyed using a point

count method. The same squares are

surveyed year after year.

The number of squares counted has

increased annually. In 2000, the fifth year of

SACRE, nearly 300 squares were surveyed

around Madrid, León, Sevilla, Valencia,

Vitoria, Cataluña and Galicia; 65% of these

squares were selected randomly. Some

225 species were recorded, the most

abundant being the house sparrow, swift,

spotless starling, swallow and goldfinch.

Although the time series is short, trend

analyses suggest that most populations

are doing quite well. Only seven of 50

abundant species show signs of decline

between 1996 and 2000; these are the bee-

eater, crested lark, skylark, pied wagtail,

Sardinian warbler, coal tit and azure-

winged magpie. Continued monitoring is

needed to see if these trends persist and

to help us understand what might be

causing them.

MON

ITOR

ING

AND

PRIO

RITI

SATI

ON, D

ATA

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

11Common bird monitoring in Spain

SEO/BirdLife (2001) Tendencias de laspoblaciones de aves comunes enEspaña (1996-2000), Progama SACRE,Informe 2000. SEO/BirdLife, Madrid.

The distribution of SACRE squares in 2000.

The population status of birds in

the UK has recently been

assessed in a collaborative

review led by the RSPB and

involving the UK’s leading

governmental and non-

governmental conservation

organisations.

We used seven criteria to place

each regularly occurring

species onto one of three lists:

‘red’, ‘amber’ or ‘green’. This

categorisation gives an

indication of the relative

priority that should be given to

each species, and the lists will

help to guide conservation

efforts in the UK between 2002

and 2007.

Red list species are those that are globally

threatened, whose population or range has

declined rapidly in recent years (ie by more

than 50% in 25 years), or which have

declined historically and not recovered.

Amber list species are those whose

population or range has declined moderately

in recent years (by more than 25% but less

than 50% in 25 years), those whose

population has declined historically but

recovered recently, rare breeders (fewer

than 300 pairs), those with internationally

important populations in the UK, those with

localised populations, and those with an

unfavourable conservation status in Europe.

The red list therefore reflects only the

extent to which a species is threatened,

whereas the amber list reflects both threat

status and the UK’s responsibility for bird

populations. Species that meet none of

these criteria are green-listed.

Of the 247 species assessed, 40 (16%) were

red-listed, 121 (49%) were amber-listed and

86 (35%) were green-listed. The number of

red list species has increased by four since

a previous review, Birds of conservation

concern, was published in 1996, and the

number of amber list species has increased

by eleven. Of the 40 species on the red list,

nine are new to this list; all of these species

have been added because of declines in

breeding populations. Five species have

moved from the red to the amber list

because their populations have more than

doubled in the last 25 years.

Several themes emerge from the new list,

some familiar, some less so. Farmland

birds again feature strongly on the red list,

and the yellowhammer is new to this list. A

suite of rare species remain red-listed

despite targeted conservation action by the

RSPB and others. For some of these

species, like the bittern, corncrake and

stone-curlew, the prognosis is relatively

rosy. For others, like the black grouse and

capercaillie, the outlook is bleak. Perhaps

surprisingly, several widespread woodland

birds now feature on the red list, indicating

that there has been some deterioration in

this habitat, and two urban birds, the house

sparrow and starling, have been added to

the red list because of long-term declines.

MON

ITOR

ING

AND

PRIO

RITI

SATI

ON, D

ATA

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

12

Gregory RD, Wilkinson NI, NobleDG, Robinson JA, Brown AF,Hughes J, Procter D, Gibbons DWand Galbraith C (2002) Thepopulation status of birds in theUnited Kingdom, Channel Islandsand Isle of Man: an analysis ofconservation concern 2002–2007.British Birds 95: 410–448.

The population status of birds inthe UK: birds of conservationconcern, 2002–2007

The front cover ofThe populationstatus of birds in theUK. For moreinformation on thenew lists visitwww.rspb.org.uk.

In 1999, the Government

published the White Paper

Achieving a better quality of life,

which contained a draft set of 150

indicators of the sustainability

of lifestyles in the UK. Fifteen of

the proposed indicators were

identified as ‘headline’

indicators, and one of these

was based on population trends

of breeding birds.

The publication of a wildlife indicator

alongside more familiar economic and social

indicators reinforces the point that the

maintenance of biodiversity is a key part of

sustainability. Birds were chosen for the

indicator partly because the data for this

group are so good, but also because they

have varied ecologies and widespread

distributions across the UK and can

therefore be used as ‘barometers’ of change

in the wider environment. Whether birds can

act as bio-indicators in all situations is

unclear, and care is needed when promoting

them as indicators for other wildlife.

The wild bird indicator was developed jointly

by the RSPB, the British Trust for

Ornithology and the Department for

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

(DEFRA). It is based on an average trend

across species, calculated on a geometric

scale and with missing data imputed. The

indicator summarises information on the

status of more than 100 commoner breeding

species over the last 30 years. It rose slightly

until the mid-1970s and then went into a

shallow decline until 1998, when it showed a

marked upturn; overall, it fell by more than

5% between the mid-1970s and 2000. The

recent upturn is due partly to mild winters,

which have increased the survival of small

birds vulnerable to cold weather.

The ‘headline indicator’ is broken down into

indicators for different habitats to reveal

underlying trends. Woodland specialists

show a slow but steady drop in numbers,

decreasing by 22% between the mid-1970s

and 2000. However, they have increased

every year since 1998; this increase has been

driven partly by mild winter weather, but

other factors also seem to have played a part.

Farmland specialists have declined severely,

decreasing by an average of 46% between

the mid-1970s and 2000. Recent warm

winters do not seem to have helped much,

and a number of farmland birds remain in a

precarious position. It is generally accepted

that the decline in farmland birds has been

driven by agricultural intensification.

The Government has pledged to reverse the

long-term trends in woodland and farmland

birds. In particular, DEFRA has published a

Public Service Agreement target to reverse

the long-term decline in the number of

farmland birds by 2020. Although a series of

policy initiatives have been launched to help

farmland birds, meeting this target will be a

significant challenge.

MON

ITOR

ING

AND

PRIO

RITI

SATI

ON, D

ATA

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

13The ‘quality of life’ indicator forbreeding birds

Anon (2001) Achieving a better quality oflife. Review of progress towardssustainable development. Governmentannual report 2000. Department of theEnvironment, Transport and Regions,London.

Gregory RD, Noble DH, Field RF,Marchant JH and Gibbons DW (2002)Using birds as indicators of biodiversity.Ornis Hungarica (in press).

The UK wild birdpopulations headlineindicator, 2001.

Nature reserves are a widely used

mechanism for conserving

biodiversity. However, there is

little published information on the

effectiveness of nature reserve

networks in conserving national

or regional biodiversity.

We have evaluated the contribution made by

RSPB reserves to conserving breeding

populations of birds of conservation concern

in the UK (ie species on the red and amber

lists in the 1996 publication Birds of

conservation concern (BoCC)) in two ways.

First, we have calculated the proportion of

the UK population of each BoCC species that

is supported by our reserve network. Second,

we have modelled population trends of BoCC

species in the reserve network over the

period 1990–99, using a loglinear model with

Poisson errors, and compared these trends

(where sufficient data are available) with

those on non-RSPB land.

In 2000, the RSPB’s reserve network

comprised 161 sites (currently 172) covering

0.46% of the UK’s land surface. It supported a

mean of 9.3% of the UK’s populations of

BoCC species, and a mean of 17.3% of the

UK’s populations of BoCC species with

national populations of less than 1,000 pairs.

Lowland wetlands support the highest

proportion of national populations of BoCC

species relative to their area on RSPB

reserves.

Of the 68 regularly breeding BoCC species on

RSPB reserves for which sufficient data were

available, 26 showed a significant upward

population trend, 10 showed a significant

downward trend and 32 showed no significant

trend. The majority of species showing

significant upward trends were birds with

small UK populations, associated primarily

with lowland wetlands, uplands and coastal

habitats. The majority of species showing

significant downward trends were birds with

only a small proportion (less than 2%) of their

national populations on RSPB reserves –

mainly birds of farmland and woodland.

Five species showed more favourable trends

on RSPB reserves than elsewhere (lapwing,

redshank, black-tailed godwit, capercaillie and

corncrake). Seven additional species may also

have done so, but there were insufficient data

to be sure. For most remaining species, there

were no significant differences between

trends on RSPB and non-RSPB land; however,

one species, the avocet, increased more on

non-RSPB than RSPB land. Up to 1990, avocet

numbers increased on RSPB reserves, which

held most of the UK population. Since then,

numbers on our reserves have stabilised, and

the avocet has spread to other areas and is

increasing in these areas.

In conclusion, the RSPB’s reserve network

contributes to conserving national populations

of BoCC species primarily by maintaining or

increasing numbers of birds with small UK

populations, especially those associated with

lowland wetland, upland and coastal habitats.

MON

ITOR

ING

AND

PRIO

RITI

SATI

ON, D

ATA

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

14 The contribution of RSPB reserves toconserving bird populations

The percentage of the UKpopulation of eachbreeding BoCC speciesfound on RSPB reservesplotted against the total UKpopulation of each species.

Advances in desktop computer technology

over the past 10 years have moved us from

an essentially text-based environment into a

new world where visualising information on

maps is commonplace. As part of a drive to

maximise the use of its conservation data, the

RSPB has developed an in-house Geographic

Information System (GIS) called Merlin,

enabling staff without specialist GIS skills to

analyse and present bird, site and habitat

data. This system is proving to be a valuable

tool across the RSPB, with over 100 regular

users. Merlin has a customised user interface,

based on MapInfo, linked to a heavy-duty

Sybase database.

As well as taking advantage of Merlin, an

increasing number of staff are using MapInfo

itself to handle more specialist tasks, some of

which relate to countries other than the UK.

For example, the RSPB, in conjunction with

country BirdLife partners, has assessed the

potential impact of proposed changes to road

infrastructure in those eastern European

countries that are planning to join the

European Union (EU) in the near future. We

did this by measuring the proximity of

Important Bird Areas (IBAs) to proposed road,

rail and waterway developments. A total of 85

sites were found to be affected by the

proposed developments – 21% of all IBAs in

the countries concerned. These sites hold

internationally important populations of 128

bird species, including more than two-thirds

of the countries’ populations of three globally

threatened species: Dalmatian pelican, red-

breasted goose and aquatic warbler. A report

on this work was presented to EU

Environment Ministers in the summer of 2001.

MON

ITOR

ING

AND

PRIO

RITI

SATI

ON, D

ATA

AND

INDI

CATO

RS

15Geographic Information Systems andconservation at the RSPB

IBAs and proposedroad networkchanges in Hungary.

The Dalmationpelican is threatenedby transportdevelopments.

Fisher I and Waliczky Z (2001) Anassessment of the potential impactof the TINA network on ImportantBird Areas (IBAs) in the accessioncountries. BirdLifeInternational/RSPB, Sandy.

Richard Brooks (RSPB Images)

THE ECOLOGY OFTHREATENED SPECIES

Research into the ecology of threatened species is a particular strength

of the RSPB, and can provide a wealth of valuable information to guide

conservation work. Such research usually focuses on the birds

themselves, but habitat studies may also be needed. Outside the UK,

most of our ecological research is undertaken on globally threatened

species in RSPB ‘focal’ countries. In the UK, however, where there are

few globally threatened species, research is directed at those species

that have declined the most in recent decades.

17

Bittern by Andrew Hay (RSPB Im

ages)

Of all the farmland birds that

have declined over the last 25

years, none is missed more than

the skylark. Although this species

has declined less in percentage

terms than some others, its

abundance means that the

number we have lost (more than

two million) is greater than for

any other species.

on average than nests in any other habitat.

We have found that territory densities are

consistently higher in traditional spring-sown

crops than in the autumn-sown crops that

have largely replaced them. This may be due

entirely to differences in crop structure: the

taller, more developed swards of winter

cereals hold lower densities of skylarks than

shorter, patchier spring cereal swards.

Furthermore, as crop height increases over

the summer, territory densities fall. The

reasons for this are likely to be related to the

availability of safe nesting sites. As the

sward becomes thicker and taller during the

growing season, access to nests becomes

more difficult and skylarks increasingly build

their nests in tramlines, the unsown tractor

tracks that never develop a sward.

Unfortunately, survival rates of nests on

tramlines are less than half as good as those

of nests built further into the crop, as

tramline nests are easily found by predators.

Experiments with ‘skylark scrapes’ are now

being carried out at the RSPB’s Hope Farm

and elsewhere. We hope that these

unplanted patches away from tramlines will

allow skylarks to nest successfully late in the

season, and will therefore represent a simple

way in which winter cereals can be managed

to provide some of the beneficial features of

spring crops.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

18 Ecology and conservation of skylarks

Donald PF, Evans AD, BuckinghamDL, Muirhead LB and Wilson JD(2001) Factors affecting the territorydistribution of skylarks Alaudaarvensis breeding on lowlandfarmland. Bird Study 48: 271–278.

Donald PF, Evans AD, Muirhead LB,Buckingham DL, Kirby WB andSchmitt SIA (2002) Survival rates,causes of failure and productivity ofskylark Alauda arvensis nests onlowland farmland. Ibis 144: 652–664.

This study was supported by Tesco.

Paul Donald

Skylark nest on a tramline.

Skylark territory density and crop height in autumn-sown and spring-sown cereals. The points representtwo-weekly means from two breeding seasons, andeach is the mean of a large number of fields.

The reasons for the decline of the skylark

have been the subject of intense RSPB

research over the last few years. This

research has focused on cereal crops,

because a high proportion of the UK’s

skylarks nest in such crops and because

skylark nests in cereals produce more chicks

Between 1972 and 1996, the

British song thrush population

declined by 66% on farmland

(British Trust for Ornithology

data).

This rapid decline led to the initiation of an

RSPB study to identify the demographic and

environmental factors responsible. Given the

large number of environmental factors that

might have contributed to the decline, we

decided to compare demography and

habitat requirements in two study areas, one

with a stable population and one with a

declining population.

The success of individual nesting attempts

was similar in the two populations, with

approximately 30% of nests producing at

least one fledgling, and the brood size of

successful nests averaged 3.4 young in both

areas. What differed between populations

was the number of nesting attempts per pair

per summer; this averaged 4–5 in the stable

population but only 2–3 in the declining

population. Consequently, only 1.8–2.5

fledglings were reared by each pair in the

declining population compared to 4.5–4.8 in

the stable population. This difference in

annual productivity was large enough to

account for the contrasting trends in the two

populations. It seems that thrushes in the

declining population were taking much

longer to resume nesting following a

previous attempt than those in the stable

population.

The environmental factor that is most likely

to account for longer intervals between

nesting attempts is lack of food. The second

phase of the study therefore focused on

habitat selection and food resources. The

stable population was located in mixed

farmland with relatively large areas of

woodland and grazed grassland, while the

declining population was located on

intensive arable farmland dominated by

winter cereals. Radio-tracking showed that

woodland and grazed grassland were the

main summer foraging habitats for breeding

thrushes in the stable population,

particularly later in the breeding season

when dry soil conditions make key

invertebrates like earthworms much less

available. Thrushes in the arable landscape

spent much more time foraging in arable

fields, which supported much lower

earthworm densities than the woods and

pastures available to the stable population.

The study therefore suggests that woodland

and grazed grassland can allow song

thrushes to continue nesting throughout the

summer. In arable-dominated landscapes

lacking woodland and grassland, the

availability of earthworms and other

invertebrates may limit the ability of

thrushes to nest later in the season.

Conservation measures for song thrushes

should aim to provide invertebrate-rich

habitats throughout the summer.

Maintaining damper soil conditions in

ditches or on grass fields might be one way

to do this.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

19Breeding ecology of farmlandsong thrushes

Thomson D and Cotton P (2000)Understanding the decline of theBritish population of song thrushes.In: Aebischer NJ, Evans AD, GricePV and Vickery JA (eds) Ecologyand conservation of lowlandfarmland birds. BritishOrnithologists’ Union, Tring: 151–155.

Peach W, Taylor R, Cotton P, GruarD, Hill I and Denny M (2002) Habitatutilisation by song thrushes onlowland farmland during summerand winter. Aspects of AppliedBiology 67: 11–20.

This study was supported by FrizzellInsurance.

Bob Glover (RSPB Images)

When a survey in 1989 indicated

that the British cirl bunting

population had fallen to just 118

pairs, alarm bells began to ring.

Extinction from the British mainland of this

attractive farmland specialist was a real

possibility. A research project was launched

that aimed to identify the main reasons for

the population decline. Weedy stubble fields

were found to be the main winter feeding

habitat, providing a rich source of weed

seeds and grain. Unimproved grassland

proved to be a key foraging habitat during

the breeding season, providing large

invertebrates like grasshoppers for cirl

buntings to feed to their chicks.

At about the same time, reform of the

Common Agricultural Policy led to the

introduction of agri-environment schemes

under which farmers could receive

payments for introducing wildlife-friendly

management prescriptions to their farms.

The Countryside Stewardship Scheme (CSS)

became available to farmers in south Devon

and included low-intensity grazing as one of

its prescriptions. Negotiations with the

Countryside Commission and subsequently

the Department for Environment, Food and

Rural Affairs led to the introduction of a

minimal-herbicide, spring barley option that

provides weedy winter stubbles and is

specifically targeted at cirl buntings.

Additional funding from English Nature

allowed the employment of a Cirl Bunting

Project Officer who helped local farmers

develop applications for CSS agreements.

Since the start of the CSS in 1992, the RSPB

has monitored changes in the numbers of

cirl buntings across south Devon. Between

1992 and 1998, cirl bunting numbers

increased by 83% on land under CSS

agreements and by just 2% on surrounding

countryside. Increases in cirl bunting

numbers were greatest on land under

agreements providing grass margins around

arable fields and weedy barley stubbles.

This is one of very few examples of a

targeted agri-environment scheme

delivering clear conservation benefits. We

believe that the success of the CSS in

conserving cirl buntings has been due to the

presence of two essential elements: carefully

designed prescriptions providing key

limiting resources (in this case, winter seeds

and summer invertebrates) and dedicated

staff to help and encourage farmers to

follow these prescriptions in priority

locations. By 1998, the British cirl bunting

population had increased to 450 pairs.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

20

Evans AD (1997) Cirl buntings inBritain. British Birds 90:267–282.

Peach WJ, Lovett LJ, Wotton SRand Jeffs C (2001) Countrysidestewardship delivers cirlbuntings (Emberiza cirlus) inDevon, UK. BiologicalConservation 101: 361–373.

Changes in the relativedensity of cirl buntingterritories between 1992and 1999 on land enteringCSS agreements andadjacent countryside notentering agreements. Theerror bars show ± onestandard error.

Countryside Stewardship deliverscirl buntings in Devon

Our bittern research and

monitoring programme, which

is jointly funded by English

Nature, aims to improve our

understanding of the factors

limiting the population of this

rare and elusive breeding

species in the UK.

We have monitored the bittern population

since 1990 by counting ‘booming’ (singing)

males, and have measured numbers of

nesting attempts and breeding success at

key sites since 1998.

We use sound spectrograms to identify

individual males from their booms. This

not only helps us to determine population

size, but also allows us to estimate the

local annual survival rate of males. This

rate is higher when there is more rain

during January to March, probably because

high rainfall results in deeper water which

leads in turn to reduced mortality or

permanent emigration.

The characteristics of sites with breeding

birds and the locations of territorial males

determined from radio-tracking have

shown that bitterns need wet reedbeds

with an extensive interface between reeds

and open water. Natural succession of

reedbeds to carr habitats tends to make

them less suitable for bitterns. This

information has been used to improve the

management of RSPB and other reedbed

sites with spectacular results. At the RSPB’s

Minsmere reserve, for example, the

number of booming bitterns has increased

from one in 1991 to seven in 2002

following lowering of the reedbed to make

it wetter. We have carried out reedbed

restoration and habitat creation at 13 sites

as part of an EU–LIFE Nature project, and

bitterns are responding well to this

management. The UK population

increased for the fourth successive year in

2001, with 30 booming males at 19 sites –

the highest figure since the 1980s. Most of

this increase has occurred at sites where

the habitat has been specifically managed

for bitterns.

Analysis of the diet of bittern nestlings has

highlighted the importance of eels, rudd

and sticklebacks, and work is in hand to

improve the numbers and availability of

these prey species at bittern sites.

Valuable data on productivity, survival and

dispersal have been collected by radio-

tagging young bitterns in the nest between

1997 and 2001. This has shown that young

birds can travel more than 200 km to seek

out new sites during their first winter, and

that they can successfully breed in these

new sites in their first year. This

information has helped us secure funding

for a second EU LIFE Nature project to

create a network of suitable sites for

bitterns so they can become established

away from their current strongholds in

East Anglia.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

21Bittern ecology

Tyler GA, Smith KW and Burges DJ(1998) Reedbed management andbreeding Bitterns Botaurus stellaris inthe UK. Biological Conservation 86:257–266.

Gilbert G, Tyler GA and Smith KW(2001) Local annual survival ofbooming male Great Bittern Botaurusstellaris in Britain, in the period1990–1999. Ibis 144: 51–61.

Fish selection by bitternsfor nestlings. Positivevalues indicate preferenceand negative valuesindicate avoidance.

The population of breeding black-

tailed godwits at the RSPB’s Ouse

Washes reserve declined during

the period 1970–2002, while that

at the Nene Washes reserve

increased.

Prior to the decline at the Ouse Washes, this

site supported more than 90% of the UK

breeding population. The discrepancy in

trends between the two sites is probably

explained by an increased incidence of spring

flooding at the Ouse Washes. Flooding

inundates breeding habitat, resulting in any

nests present being washed away and forcing

birds to nest on arable land where success is

low. We have tested engineering measures to

mitigate flooding using hydraulic models, but

the benefits of these measures for godwit

breeding success were unclear. We have therefore

undertaken research to inform a cost-benefit

analysis of the various flood mitigation options.

We constructed models of godwit productivity

using breeding parameters measured at the Ouse

and Nene Washes. In the absence of flooding,

godwit productivity was 0.79 chicks per pair,

which would result in a population increase of

about 3% per year. Flooding at the Ouse Washes

resulted in productivity being below the level

required to maintain a stable population in 67% of

the years assessed, but in only 16% of these years

at the Nene Washes. Population models with

constant adult and immature survival rates and

flood-dependent productivity explained 89% of

the variation in observed population trends at the

two sites.

We used the models, together with data provided

by the Environment Agency, to predict the effects

of flood mitigation options on godwit productivity

and population trends. Individual flood mitigation

options, such as river re-profiling or an upstream

flood storage reservoir, proved inadequate to

produce a recovering population, as did pairs of

these options. However, all of the options

combined produced a viable and rapidly

recovering population. Unfortunately, this

approach would cost £87 million, and is therefore

unlikely to be affordable or practical in the short

term. Further hydraulic modelling is needed to

examine which measures could be removed

without reducing godwit population viability.

We have also examined initiatives to create wet

grasslands next to the Ouse Washes that would

not be flooded, so that godwits could breed

successfully during flood years. Models show that

this initiative would produce an increasing and

viable population at a fraction of the cost of the

flood mitigation measures (£44,000). We have

recently taken out a management agreement on

44 ha of arable fields and are currently converting

these into wet grassland.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

22 Black-tailed godwit population viabilityand flooding at the Ouse Washes

Observed and predictedpopulation trends of black-tailed godwits at the Ouseand Nene Washes. Thepredicted trends come froma population model inwhich all variables wereconstant except forproductivity, which variedas a function of floodingpatterns.

The Scottish crossbill was

originally thought to be a sub-

species of the common crossbill.

However, when it was discovered

that the two birds nested in the

same woods but did not

interbreed, the Scottish crossbill

was given full species status and

became Britain’s only endemic

bird.

There are no plumage differences between

Scottish, common and parrot crossbills, and

although the Scottish crossbill is

intermediate in size between common and

parrot crossbills, it overlaps in size with both.

This raises questions about the accuracy of

identification in earlier studies, and has

prompted debate concerning the taxonomic

status and identification of the Scottish

crossbill. Only if the Scottish crossbill can be

identified in the field will it be possible to

assess its population size and habitat

preferences for conservation purposes. Most

work to date has focused on resolving the

taxonomic status of Scottish crossbills and

on developing a reliable method of field

identification. Recently, parrot crossbills were

found to be breeding in Scotland, further

complicating the situation.

Sonograms of the calls of crossbills of known

bill size (and, therefore, putative identity)

have shown that the three crossbill species

have different calls, with the common

crossbill having three call types. These

distinctions, though subtle, may assist with

identification in the field.

If the Scottish crossbill is a biological species,

the composition of its neutral (non-

functional) DNA should have diverged

substantially from that of the common and

parrot crossbill. In a collaborative study with

Aberdeen University and the Centre for

Ecology and Hydrology, two types of neutral

DNA were examined: microsatellites and the

control gene of mitochondrial DNA. No

differences were found among any of the

three crossbill types – not even common and

parrot crossbills, whose species status has

never been questioned.

There are three possible explanations for

this result. First, the three crossbill types

interbreed freely and are not species but

different morphs. Second, a low level of

hybridisation prevents divergence of the

neutral DNA, but all three types remain

phenotypically distinct. Finally, the three

species diverged only recently and the

neutral DNA has not had time to diverge

sufficiently to reveal differences. These

hypotheses are now being tested by a study

of call types and morphology in pairs of

crossbills in the field.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

23The taxonomic status andidentification of the Scottish crossbill

Piertney SB, Summers RW and MarquissM (2001) Microsatellite and mitochondrialDNA homogeneity among phenotypicallydiverse crossbill taxa in the UK.Proceedings of the Royal Society ofLondon 268: 1511–1517.

Summers RW (2002) Parrot crossbillsbreeding in Abernethy Forest, Highlands.British Birds 95: 4–11.

Summers RW, Jardine DC, Marquiss Mand Rae R (2002) The distribution andhabitats of crossbills Loxia spp. in Britain,with special reference to the Scottishcrossbill Loxia scotica. Ibis 144: 393–410.

Sonograms of theexcitement calls fordifferent crossbill species.

The major remaining wild

population of the critically

endangered northern bald ibis

breeds in coastal Morocco, in the

Souss-Massa National Park and

at an undesignated site 100 km to

the north in the region of Tamri.

The birds nest and roost on sea

cliffs and feed inland in semi-arid

areas, mainly on invertebrates,

skinks and lizards.

The Moroccan national parks service Eaux et

Forêts asked for help with setting up a

monitoring system and collecting data that

could be used to develop conservation

recommendations for the species. The RSPB

has provided this help on behalf of the

BirdLife International partnership since 1994.

During this time, a team of local wardens

has been trained and managed, disturbance

by fishermen and birdwatchers has been

controlled, cliffs have been modified by

volunteer climbers and a limited amount of

predator control has been carried out. An

experiment begun in 1998 has shown that

providing water in small artificial ponds near

sub-colonies can increase ibis breeding

success.

Daily monitoring of each breeding attempt,

combined with regular and systematic

recording of where birds feed, has shown

the importance of several areas of littoral

steppe and fallow fields as foraging sites in

certain seasons and years. A hotel

development was proposed for one of these

areas in 2001, and the foraging data proved

invaluable during negotiations with the

developers.

Overall, the number of breeding pairs

increased slightly in 2001 to 66 pairs, and

the population is now larger than at any

time since the 1996 population crash in

which 38 full-grown birds – out of a global

population of 223 – died over the course of a

few days. The cause of this mortality event

is still being investigated, but disease seems

the most likely explanation.

Because local involvement with and support

for the ibis is essential, small-scale,

ecologically sound developments are being

encouraged. BirdLife support to the national

park for these, and ultimately for all aspects

of the ibis project, is becoming the

responsibility of SEO, the Spanish BirdLife

partner.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

24 The northern bald ibis in Morocco

Bowden CGR, Aghnaj A, Smith KWand Ribi M (2002). The status andrecent breeding performance ofthe critically threatened NorthernBald Ibis Geronticus eremita onthe Atlantic coast of Morocco. Ibis(in press).

Touti J, Oumellouk F, Bowden CGR,Kirkwood JK and Smith KW (1999)Mortality incident in Northern BaldIbis Geronticus eremita inMorocco in May 1996. Oryx 33:160–167.

Chris Gomersall (RSPB Im

ages)

Monitoring at Keoladeo National

Park in India revealed severe

population declines in Indian

white-backed and long-billed

vultures in the 1990s, and

anecdotal reports of similar

declines were received from all

over India.

This prompted the Bombay Natural History

Society (BNHS), the BirdLife partner in India, to

conduct a nationwide vulture survey with the

support of the RSPB to quantify the extent of

the declines and investigate possible causes. In

2000, transect counts were conducted along

more than 6,000 km of roads across protected

and unprotected areas of India, replicating

counts from the early 1990s.

The survey revealed huge declines in both

species in all parts of the country, exceeding

92% overall. Rates of decline did not differ

between protected areas and unprotected

areas. Moribund birds were observed in all

regions, and dead adults and juveniles were

frequently seen. Food availability did not

decline greatly between the two surveys, but

most livestock carcasses seen in 2000 had no

attendant vultures.

The RSPB engaged the services of a wildlife

pathologist from the Institute of Zoology (IoZ),

and – together with a consortium involving IoZ,

BNHS, the National Bird of Prey Centre and the

Poultry Diagnostic and Research Centre –

applied successfully for Darwin funding to

investigate the problem. The Australian Animal

Health Laboratory is also assisting.

Freshly dead vultures were collected from

different regions. Gross post-mortem findings

commonly included enteritis, and histo-

pathological findings included visceral gout.

Some birds had severe and almost certainly

fatal renal gout, although this appeared to be

the proximate cause of death rather than the

underlying problem. A phenomenon known

as perivascular lymphocytic cuffing was

observed in most birds. This phenomenon is

typically associated with infectious agents,

usually of viral origin.

The hypothesis that the population declines

have been caused by an infectious disease is

supported by epidemiological and other

evidence. Only vultures of the genus Gyps

appear to be affected, and genus specificity is

typical of some groups of diseases,

particularly viral diseases. Infectious disease

is one of the few things that could explain the

speed of the declines and the fact that they

occurred nationwide, in both protected and

unprotected areas and in both rural and

urban areas. Tissue analyses for a wide range

of contaminants have so far proved negative,

and contaminant poisoning would be unlikely

to cause such an extensive and non site-

specific pattern of deaths.

Investigations are continuing. An avian

diagnostics laboratory with dedicated project

staff was set up in India in 2001, and a captive

care centre was constructed in 2002 to study

the progress of the disease in sick birds and

investigate remedial measures. Although

disease remains the most likely cause, other

avenues are also being explored.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

25

Cunningham AA, Prakash V, Ghalsasi GRand Pain D (2001) Investigating the causeof catastrophic declines in Asian griffonvultures (Gyps indicus and G.bengalensis). In: Katzner T, Parry-Jones J(eds) Reports from the workshop onIndian Gyps vultures, 4th EurasianCongress on Raptors; 10–11. (Documentcan be downloaded fromwww.vulturedeclines.org)

Prakash V (1999) Status of vultures inKeoladeo National Park, Bharatpur,Rajasthan, with special reference topopulation crash in Gyps species.Journal of the Bombay Natural HistorySociety 96: 365–378.

Prakash V, Pain DJ, Cunningham AA,Donald PF, Prakash N, Verma A, Gargi R,Sivakumar S and Rahmani A (2003)Catastrophic collapse of Indian white-backed Gyps bengalensis and long-billedGyps indicus vulture populations.Biological Conservation (in press).

Investigating causes of the collapseof Gyps vulture populations in India

Road transect counts ofGyps vultures in 1991–93and 2000.

Andrew Cunningham

Gough Island in the South

Atlantic is one of the most

important seabird islands in the

world. Twenty seabird species

breed here, of which five are

globally threatened and two are

near-endemics.

There are also two globally threatened

endemic land birds. Gough is part of the UK

Overseas Territory of Tristan da Cunha, and

the UK therefore has a responsibility to help

conserve this World Heritage Site.

Between 2000 and 2002, a joint

RSPB/University of Cape Town project

established the first major ornithological

fieldwork programme on Gough. The project

was funded by the UK Foreign and

Commonwealth Office and assisted by the

British Antarctic Survey. Some of the work

carried out is summarised below.

Satellite tracking of the endangered Tristan

albatross has given us a detailed picture of

the distribution of this bird at sea, and

indicates that there is substantial overlap

with longline fishing activity. A population

model suggests that adult mortality is high,

and it appears that the Tristan albatross is

particularly at risk of longline mortality in

south-west Atlantic waters.

New anecdotal observations suggest that

introduced house mice prey on chicks of the

Tristan albatross and the globally threatened

Atlantic petrel. Predation levels may be high

enough to constitute a significant

conservation problem, and further work on

this issue is planned. Experiments with

dummy eggs imply that mouse predation on

nests of the endemic Gough bunting may

also be very high, preventing the bunting

occupying otherwise suitable lowland areas.

We have collated new and existing data to

assess the health of populations of key

species. It appears that sooty albatrosses

have declined steeply since the 1970s, while

rockhopper penguins have remained stable

and Southern giant-petrels have probably

increased. We have established repeatable

monitoring schemes for a range of

threatened and endemic species, and a

manual for these is in preparation.

THE

ECOL

OGY

OF T

HREA

TEN

ED S

PECI

ES

26

Satellite tracking locationsof Tristan albatrosses.White spot = Gough Island;purple dots = females; reddots = males.

RSPB biologist Richard Cuthbert and a Tristanalbatross chick.

Gough Island research and monitoring

ECOLOGICAL PROCESSRESEARCHEcological processes (eg predation, pollution, land-use and climate

change) are responsible for widespread and varied effects on

species’ populations and habitat quality. Because of this, research

into process ecology can provide a more effective scientific

understanding of anthropogenic impacts on bird communities and

their habitats than single-species studies. Research into ecological

processes has therefore become an increasingly important part of

RSPB’s research portfolio.

27

House sparrows by Chris Gom

ersall (RSPB Images)

Stubble fields support high

wintering densities of many seed-

eating birds. As part of a joint study

involving the RSPB, Oxford

University and the Biotechnology

and Biological Sciences Research

Council, factors affecting the use of

such fields by eight bird species

were examined.

The study took place on mixed, lowland

farmland in central England, and included

organic and non-organic wheat and barley

stubble fields. General linear models were used

to test for associations between the frequency

of occupancy of fields by birds, seed

abundance and physical field characteristics.

seed abundance and sparse vegetation cover

than wheat stubbles. Seed numbers fell

throughout the winter in all stubble types, but

reductions were greatest on ‘intensive’ (ie not

organically managed) barley stubbles,

intermediate on intensive wheat stubbles and

lowest on undersown organic wheat stubbles.

A more detailed study of foraging site selection

by linnet flocks showed that, within fields

occupied by this species, areas used for

feeding had significantly greater quantities of

seeds known to be important in their diet. They

also had a greater area of bare earth than

randomly selected areas where linnets were

not seen feeding.

Linnets and reed buntings were rarely found

on fields where densities of weed seeds

important in their diets were below 250/m2. In

autumn, yellowhammers and grey partridges

rarely fed in fields where cereal grain density

was below 50/m2. In spring, however, the

distributions of these species were unaffected

by grain density, perhaps indicating that they

switched to other food sources as the densities

of their preferred seed types declined.

These results suggest that land managers

wishing to maximise the value of over-winter

stubble fields for seed-eating birds should

locate them where there is substantial natural

regeneration of weed flora and where previous

cropping (eg barley) is likely to leave a sparse

stubble with substantial areas of bare ground.

Further research is needed to understand

whether the selection of relatively sparsely

vegetated areas within stubble fields by seed-

eating birds is a response to greater

accessibility of seed food, predation risk or a

combination of the two. These hypotheses are

now being tested by research at Oxford

University, funded jointly by the Natural

Environment Research Council and the RSPB.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

28

Moorcroft D, Whittingham MJ,Bradbury RB and Wilson JD(2002) The selection of stubblefields by wintering granivorousbirds reflects vegetation coverand food abundance. Journal ofApplied Ecology 39: 535–547.

The predicted effect (fromeach species’ model) ofthe proportion of bareearth on field occupancy.

The use of stubble fields by winteringseed-eating birds

Higher seed abundance was associated with

greater occupancy by linnets, grey partridges,

chaffinches, yellowhammers, reed buntings

and corn buntings. Larger areas of bare earth

within stubble fields were associated with

greater occupancy by linnets, yellowhammers,

reed buntings and corn buntings, but lower

occupancy by woodpigeons. Barley stubbles

were more likely to offer a combination of high

During the past three decades,

agricultural pesticide use in the

UK has increased substantially. A

1997 report highlighted concerns

that pesticides may have an

indirect effect on birds by

reducing the abundance of plant

seeds and invertebrate food.

The Game Conservancy Trust has provided

experimental proof of such an effect for the

grey partridge. In 1999, the Ministry of

Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (now the

Department for Environment, Food and

Rural Affairs) commissioned a consortium,

led by the Central Science Laboratory and

including the RSPB, to investigate the

possibility that pesticides indirectly affect

other species and, if appropriate, to propose

ways to ameliorate any effects. The RSPB’s

role was to analyse data on nesting success

and/or foraging locations for lapwings,

swallows, skylarks and yellowhammers in

relation to food availability and pesticide

applications

Pesticide use significantly affected two

species, the yellowhammer and the skylark.

Early in the breeding season, foraging adult

yellowhammers used fields with summer

applications of insecticide (and consequently

relatively few invertebrates) less than fields

with no such applications. Later in the

season, however, adults showed no

preference for fields with no summer

insecticide applications; this was probably

because yellowhammer chicks are fed

entirely on invertebrates early in the season,

but eat cereal grains as well later on. In both

yellowhammers and skylarks, chick

condition was poorer when insecticides

were used. In addition, there was a trend

towards higher mortality in yellowhammer

broods next to fields exposed to herbicides.

These results extend the range of species for

which indirect effects of pesticides are

known. It appears that the timing of

pesticide application is critical: most

significant effects on breeding birds were

associated with pesticide use in summer,

rather than cumulative use over the crop

year. The results have clear implications for

the development of prescriptions for agri-

environment schemes.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

29

Campbell LH, Avery MI, Donald P, EvansAD, Green RE and Wilson JD (1997) Areview of the indirect effects ofpesticides on birds. JNCC Report no 227.

Morris AJ, Bradbury RB and Wilson JD(2002) Determinants of patch selection byyellowhammers Emberiza citrinellaforaging in cereal crops. Aspects ofApplied Biology 67: 43–50.

Morris AJ, Bradbury RB and Wilson JD(2003) Indirect effects of pesticides onyellowhammers Emberiza citrinella.Proceedings of BCPC Pests and DiseasesConference, 2002 (in press).

Modelled densities of foraging yellowhammers forearly and late nests in fields with and withoutsummer insecticide applications.

Fields sprayed with insecticides in summer are usedless by yellowhammers, than those that are not.

Indirect effects of pesticides on birds

Roger Wilm

shurst (RSPB Images)

Numerous studies by the RSPB

and others have demonstrated

that agricultural intensification in

the UK has had deleterious

effects on farmland bird

populations.

If these findings hold across Europe, we

would expect countries with more intensive

agriculture to have suffered more severe

bird population declines.

We tested this prediction by obtaining

population trend information for 52 farmland

bird species from the European Bird Census

Council/BirdLife International European Bird

Database. From these data, we were able to

calculate the mean trend across all farmland

birds in each country between 1970 and

1990, taking into account the quality of the

data. These trends showed that farmland

bird populations declined in most European

countries during that period, but that there

was considerable variation between

countries. These differences between

countries could be explained in terms of

several measures of agricultural intensity. As

predicted, bird population declines were

significantly greater in countries with more

intensive agriculture, with cereal and dairy

yields explaining a substantial proportion of

the variation.

Population declines were greater in

European Union (EU) countries, subject to

the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), than

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

30 Agricultural intensification and thecollapse of Europe’s farmland birdpopulations

The relationship betweenagricultural intensity (cerealyield) and mean farmlandbird trend in each Europeancountry.

Au = Austria; Be = Belgium;Br = Belarus; Bu = Bulgaria;Cr = Croatia; Cz = CzechRepublic; De = Denmark; Es = Estonia; Fi = Finland; Fr = France; Ge = Germany;Gr = Greece; Hu = Hungary; Ir = Ireland; It = Italy; La= Latvia; Li = Lithuania; Mo = Moldova; Ne = The Netherlands; No = Norway; Pl = Poland; Po = Portugal; Ro = Romania;Se = Slovenia; Sl = Slovakia;Sp = Spain; Sw = Sweden; Sz = Switzerland; UK = UK; Ur = Ukraine.

in former Communist countries. The

UK has one of the greatest cereal yields

and, perhaps unsurprisingly, the

steepest farmland bird declines. These

results show that agricultural

intensification can affect bird

populations on a continental scale and

should be regarded as a major threat to

biodiversity. The RSPB is using the

results of this study to argue for a

greening of the CAP, in particular to

ensure that the conservation status of

farmland birds in eastern European

countries does not worsen when these

countries accede to the EU.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

31

Donald PF, Green RE and Heath MF(2001) Agricultural intensification andthe collapse of Europe’s farmland birdpopulations. Proceedings of the RoyalSociety of London B, 268: 25–29.

Donald PF, Pisano G, Rayment MD andPain DJ (2002). The CommonAgricultural Policy, EU enlargementand the conservation of Europe’sfarmland birds. Agriculture,Ecosystems & Environment (in press).

Mean farmland birddeclines in eachEuropean country.

Agricultural intensification has led to a decline in greatbustards across Europe.

Chris Gomersall (RSPB Im

ages)

Sheep numbers have increased

markedly in the uplands in recent

decades. Associated with this,

heather moorland has decreased

in extent and has been partly

replaced by grassland. Few

studies have quantified the

impact of these changes on bird

populations.

low grazing pressure (particularly medium to

tall heather cover), although both species

preferred heterogeneous habitats to a

monoculture of tall heather. Although

moorland breeding waders are often thought

to have declined due to increases in grazing

pressure, we found no evidence to support

this hypothesis in southern Scotland. Indeed,

the affinity of golden plovers for open

vegetation suggests that high grazing

pressure may enhance densities of this

species. Skylark and wheatear densities were

highest on moorland with short vegetation,

while whinchats and meadow pipits were

most abundant where bracken and grass

respectively predominated over heather.

These four species are therefore unlikely to

have been adversely affected by increased

grazing on heather moorland.

The results of this study confirm that few

moorland bird species are closely associated

with extensive heather cover, and

demonstrate that changes to grazing

regimes need to be tailored to the existing

habitat condition of a site if they are to be

beneficial for moorland birds. Widespread

losses of hill sheep may be detrimental to

some moorland birds of conservation

importance.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

32 Grazing and moorland birds

Pearce-Higgins JW and GrantMC (2001) The effects ofgrazing-related variation inhabitat on the distribution ofmoorland skylarks Alaudaarvensis and meadow pipitsAnthus pratensis. Aspects ofApplied Biology 67: 155–163.

Summary of thedistribution of ninewidespread moorland birdspecies in southernScotland according tograzing-related habitatvariation. The linesindicate the range ofhabitats occupied, and thesolid lines indicatepreferred habitats.

The golden plover favours areas of open vegetation.

In a study conducted by the RSPB in

collaboration with the Game Conservancy

Trust and Scottish Natural Heritage, the

abundance of a suite of moorland breeding

bird species was measured and related to

detailed vegetation assessments across 85

plots in southern Scotland that had been

subject to a range of historical grazing

regimes. General linear models were used

to analyse the effect of non-vegetation

factors such as altitude, soils and crow

abundance on bird distribution. Then, the

effect of grazing-related vegetation variables

in explaining residual variation in bird

abundance was determined.

Of the nine species considered in detail,

only red grouse and stonechats were

associated with vegetation characteristic of

Stev

e Kn

ell (

RSPB

Imag

es)

When the RSPB acquired its

Abernethy Forest reserve and

started to monitor the

capercaillie, it soon became

evident that chick production was

very poor.

In 1989, 1990 and 1991, productivity was

only 0.6, 0.0 and 0.1 chicks per hen

respectively. We thought that predation on

capercaillie nests by crows might be the

cause, as crow-predated eggs were found.

Remains of a capercaillie were also found at

a fox den. However, we did not know if the

level of predation was sufficient to cause the

poor productivity.

To investigate the effect of crows and red

foxes on capercaillie productivity, we carried

out a study in which crows and foxes were

culled for a number of years (1992–1996)

and productivity was compared with years

when there was no culling (1989–1991 and

1997–1999). In order to measure the

effectiveness of predator control, we

obtained indices of predator numbers. These

included the number of fox scats along

tracks and the number of territorial crows. In

addition, we estimated the likely predation

pressure on capercaillie nests from the rate

of predation on artificial nests containing

domestic hens’ eggs set in the forest in May.

Chick production was measured in

July/August. Finally, in order to check

whether any changes in productivity

observed at Abernethy were unique, several

reference sites elsewhere in Scotland were

studied.

The results showed that, during the latter

part of the predator culling period

(1994–1996), productivity at Abernethy

improved greatly and was greater than

productivity at the reference sites; at other

times, productivity at Abernethy was lower

than elsewhere. Regression analysis showed

that capercaillie productivity was high when

the predation rate on artificial nests by

crows was low and when June rainfall was

low. High June rainfall was probably

associated with low productivity, because

rain wets newly hatched chicks. It therefore

seems likely that crow control could benefit

capercaillies, but only in years when June is

dry. Although we attempted fox control,

there was no detectable change in fox

numbers, and no association was detected

between capercaillie productivity and fox

numbers.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

33

This study was conducted withthe Centre for Ecology andHydrology and the GameConservancy Trust.

Productivity of capercaillies atAbernethy and reference sitesbetween 1989 and 1999. Theerror bars show 95%confidence intervals.Predators were culled atAbernethy between 1992 and1996.

Capercaillie productivity andpredators at Abernethy Forest

Based on these results, the RSPB has

reinstated crow control at Abernethy to

benefit the capercaillie. Although this study

did not produce good evidence that foxes

are a major problem, a Swedish study has

shown that this predator can affect

productivity. Because of this, and the fact

that the capercaillie is in danger of

extinction in the UK, fox culling has also

been reinstated.

Introduced predators are a major

threat to island avifaunas

worldwide. In the Western Isles of

Scotland, recently introduced

hedgehogs have become a serious

predator of the eggs of the

internationally important

populations of wading birds

nesting there.

Previous research

by the RSPB had

strongly suggested

that egg predation

by hedgehogs was

largely responsible

for the declines of

several waders,

including dunlins,

redshanks, snipe

and lapwings. To

further test this

hypothesis, we

carried out an

experiment in which we removed hedgehogs

from two fenced plots and compared the

hatching success of waders (mainly dunlins and

lapwings) within these plots and in nearby

control areas.

The hatching success of waders nesting inside

the plots was approximately 2.4 times that of

birds nesting in the control areas. There was no

evidence of a compensatory increase in egg

loss to native avian predators. It is therefore

likely that removal of hedgehogs on a larger

scale would result in a large increase in nest

success.

The removal experiment also tested the

practicalities of using relatively cheap fences

against hedgehogs. Fences were generally

effective, but on dry, sandy ground rabbits

burrowed under them, enabling some

hedgehogs to re-enter plots. Well-designed

fences could be used as a conservation tool,

both as a barrier to protect key sites and slow

further spread, and to aid the trapping and

removal of hedgehogs. However, fences

cannot be seen as a long-term solution to the

problem.

The threat to biodiversity, particularly on

islands, from the redistribution of native

species within a country is generally

overlooked and under-appreciated. The

establishment of hedgehogs in the Western

Isles provides an example of a threat to

biodiversity following human-mediated

redistribution of a species native to the UK to

parts of the country outside that species’

natural range, an activity that is not currently

prohibited by law. Policy action to deter or

control introductions should consider species’

ecological ranges within national boundaries.

In partnership with Scottish Natural Heritage

and the Scottish Executive, the RSPB is

currently seeking solutions to the problem of

introduced hedgehogs on the islands.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

34

Jackson DB and Green RE (2000)The importance of the introducedhedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus)as a predator of the eggs ofwaders (Charadrii) on the machairin South Uist, Scotland. BiologicalConservation 93: 333–348.

Jackson DB (2001) Experimentalremoval of introduced hedgehogsimproves wader nest success inthe Western Isles, Scotland.Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 802–812.

Daily failure rates of wader nests (% per day)due to hedgehogs on unfenced and fenced plotsat two study sites.

The impact of introduced hedgehogson wader nesting success

Hedgehog eatinglapwing eggs.

DB J

acks

on

The two principal mechanisms

available to conserve breeding

wading birds on lowland wet

grassland in England are nature

reserves and agri-environment

schemes, particularly the

Environmentally Sensitive Area

(ESA) scheme.

ESAs offer payments to landowners in

return for maintaining (‘low tier options’) or

enhancing (‘high water level options’) the

landscape, biodiversity and historic value of

the land. In this study, we evaluated the

effectiveness of RSPB reserves and different

ESA tier options in conserving breeding

lapwings, redshanks and snipe. Population

trends of these species on RSPB reserves

were estimated using a loglinear model with

Poisson errors incorporating adjustments for

overdispersion. Population trends and

densities on sample areas of ESAs were

derived from existing survey reports.

Habitat management on RSPB lowland wet

grassland nature reserves has been

successful at increasing breeding lapwings

and redshanks but unsuccessful at

conserving breeding snipe on non-peat soils.

Overall, breeding lapwings and redshanks

have increased by an estimated 51% and

58% respectively on RSPB lowland wet

grassland reserves between 1987 and 2000.

Numbers of breeding snipe on RSPB

lowland wet grassland reserves declined by

an estimated 70% over the same period.

This is mainly due to a large decline at their

most important lowland RSPB site, the Ouse

Washes, probably caused by an increase in

the frequency of spring and summer

flooding.

Within ESAs, populations of breeding

wading birds fared better on land entered

into high water level options than on land

entered into low tier options. High water

level options also supported more pairs of

breeding wading birds per £ of ESA grant

received than low tier options. ESAs could

therefore be more cost-effective at

conserving breeding wading birds if a higher

proportion of land was entered into high

water tiers. This might be achieved by

increasing the level of advice given to

landowners and increasing payments for the

high water level options relative to those for

low tier options.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

35Nature reserves for breeding wadingbirds and implications for ESAs

Ausden M and Hirons GJM (2002)Grassland nature reserves forbreeding wading birds in Englandand the implications for the ESAagri-environment scheme. BiologicalConservation 106: 279–291.

Population trend ofbreeding lapwings onlowland wet grassland onRSPB reserves inEngland. The error barsshow ± one standarderror.

Chris Knights (RSPB Images)

Water entering the Ouse Washes

has long been known to contain

high concentrations of nutrients,

particularly phosphorus, and

attempts have been made in the

Ouse catchment to reduce point

source pollution from sewage

works. The RSPB and English

Nature have been monitoring the

ditch flora of the Ouse Washes

since 1978 to investigate whether

there has been any improvement

in water quality.

We surveyed 600 10-metre lengths of ditch

in 1978, 1992 and 2001 (the same lengths

were surveyed on each occasion). For each

length, we recorded the percentage cover of

floating, submerged and emergent plants.

The study area covered the length of the

Ouse Washes (some 32 km) from Earith to

north of Welney, and encompassed the

RSPB’s Ouse Washes reserve.

Of the 20 submerged and floating taxa that

occur at the Ouse Washes, six expanded

their distribution significantly between 1978

and 2001 (Spirodela polyrhiza, Potamogeton

trichoides, Cladophera, Ceratophyllum

demersum, Elodea nutallii and Lemna minor)

and four contracted significantly

(Enteromorpha, Callitriche spp, Lemna gibba

and Ranunculus circinatus). All of these species

are typical of nutrient-rich conditions. It is

therefore apparent that the site has not been

colonised by species typical of lower nutrient

conditions, and although some species typical

of nutrient-rich conditions have declined, none

have become extinct at the site. It seems that

the reduction in the amount of nutrients

entering the Ouse Washes has been insufficient

to improve the diversity of the ditch flora.

Of the 29 emergent plant species occurring at

the Ouse Washes, eight increased significantly

between 1978 and 2001 (Alisma plantago-

aquatica, Alisma lanceolatum, Berula erecta,

Butomus umbellatus, Eleocharis palustris,

Equisetum fluviatile, Rorripa amphibia and

Sparganum erectum) and two decreased

significantly (Apium nodiflorum and

Oenanthe aquatica). All of these 10 species are

indicative of moderately high nutrient

concentrations, so, once again, there is little

evidence of any change in water quality. The

spread of these emergent macrophytes is

instead linked to improved habitat

management by the RSPB involving reprofiling

of ditches to enlarge the area of marginal

habitat along their edges.

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

36 Ditch flora changes at theOuse Washes

Changes in the ditch floraat the Ouse Washesprovide little evidence ofan improvement in waterquality.

Mike Richards (RSPB Im

ages)

ECOL

OGIC

AL P

ROCE

SS R

ESEA

RCH

37

A study carried out jointly by the

RSPB and the Environmental

Research Centre at the University

of Durham is exploring the

possible effects of climate change

on European breeding birds.

The first step in this study was to make

simulation models of the recent distributions

of all European breeding birds, based on the

European Bird Census Council’s atlas of

European breeding birds. The models

describe the probability that a given species

breeds in each 50-km square in Europe as a

function of the long-term averages of three

bioclimate variables: the sum of day-degrees

above 5°C (a measure of summer warmth

and the duration of the growing season); the

mean temperature of the coldest winter

month; and a measure of the availability of

water to plants. The distributions predicted

from these models fit the real distributions

very well for the great majority of species.

The next step was to take a scenario for the

future climate of Europe, generated by a

global climate model, and then to use the

bird distribution models to identify the areas

each species would have to occupy in the

future if it was to keep the climatic conditions

in its breeding range the same. This exercise

showed that, for many species, there is likely to

be a substantial shift in the location of their

‘typical climate space’ by the end of the 21st

century. Climate change scenarios vary

substantially according to the assumptions and

details of the model used to generate them, but

our study used a scenario from the middle of the

range.

We do not know how birds will respond to these

projected changes. Some species may shift their

geographical range so that the climatic conditions

they experience remain similar to those they live

in now. However, some species may not be able

to do this. This could be the case if change is too

rapid to be tracked by essential habitat features

such as plants or insects, or if a bird’s powers of

dispersal are insufficient to cross landscapes in

which its habitat has been fragmented by

humans. Species that do not shift their range will

experience climate conditions that they have not

encountered in the recent past, and this may

place them under stress.

A compendium of the present and projected

future locations of the typical climate spaces of all

European breeding birds is to be published. This

will be valuable in helping researchers to identify

the species and the parts of Europe for which

future impacts of climate change can be expected

to be most severe.

Current (left) andsimulated future (right)distribution of the marshtit. The simulateddistribution is based ona climate changescenario for 2070–99.Dark blue showsoccupied and yellowunoccupied squares.

Climate change and the distribution ofEuropean breeding birds

Although only established and

long-term contract staff are

listed, we appoint many senior

research assistants and research

assistants for short fieldwork

contracts each year.

Head of Conservation Science Department Dr David Gibbons

Research Coordinator Anita McClune

Principal Research Biologist Dr Rhys Green1

Research Biologistc Dr Jorn Scharlemann1

Principal Research Manager Dr Lennox Campbell

Research Biologist Dr Ian Johnstone

Head of Aquatic Research Dr Ken Smith

Senior Research Biologist Dr Norman Ratcliffe

Senior Research Assistant Georgina Pickerell(until May 2002)

Senior Research Assistant Sabine Schmitt

Research Biologist Dr Mark Bolton(from May 2002)

Senior Research Assistantc Nick Wilkinson

Senior Research Assistantc Roy Bamford

Senior Research Assistantc Richard Allcorn

Research Biologist Dr Gillian Gilbert

Senior Research Assistantc Chris Dunn

Research Biologist Dr Glen Tyler (until April 2002)

Research Biologistc Dr Jeremy Lindsell(from August 2002)

Technical Development Officer Nigel Butcher

Assistant p/t (volunteer) Colin Gooch

Head of International Research Dr Debbie Pain

Research Biologist Chris Bowden

Research Biologist p/t Dr Geoff Hilton

Research Biologistc Dr Richard Cuthbert(until July 2002)

Research Biologist Dr Paul Donald

Research Biologistc Dr Charlie Williams

Research Biologistc p/t Dr Thais Martins

Head of Monitoring and Survey Dr Richard Gregory

Senior Research Assistant Innes Sim

Research Biologist Dr Rowena Langston

Senior Research Assistant Simon Wotton

Research Biologist Dr Mark Eaton

European Monitoring Coordinator Dr Petr Vorisek2

Head of Research, Scotland Dr Jeremy Wilson

Secretary Alix Middleton

Senior Research Biologist Dr Ron Summers

Research Biologistc Dr Alastair Hamilton(until Jan 2002)

Research Biologist Mark Hancock

Senior Research Assistantc Allan Perkins

Research Assistant Bob Proctor

Senior Research Biologist Dr Murray Grant

Research Biologistc Dr James Pearce-Higgins

Senior Research Assistantc Dr Alison Taylor

Research Biologistc Dr Graeme Buchanan

Research Biologist Dr Digger Jackson

Research Biologist Dr Mark O'Brien

Head of Terrestrial Research Dr Andy Evans

Secretary Kathy Berkery

Senior Research Assistantc Sarah Nelson

Senior Research Biologist Dr Will Peach

Research Biologistc Dr Nick Brickle(until March 2002)

Research Biologist Dave Buckingham

Senior Research Assistantc Kim Fenton

Research Biologistc Dr Matt Denny(until September 2001)

Senior Research Assistant Derek Gruar

Research Assistantc Dave Barritt

Research Biologist Dr Guy Anderson

Research Biologistc Dr Rob Field

Senior Research Assistantc Danae Stevens

38 RSPB SCIENTIFIC STAFF2001/02

Senior Research Assistantc Trevor Smith

Research Assistantc Dominic Coath

Research Assistantc Emily Woodfield

Research Assistantc Roger Taylor

Research Biologist Dr Richard Bradbury

Research Biologist Tony Morris

Research Assistantc Chris Bailey

Senior Research Assistant Will Kirby

Head of Conservation DataManagement Unit Ian Fisher

Data Management Officer Ellen Kelly

Data Management Officer Rhoda Kennedy

Data Management Assistant Paul Britten

Data Management Assistant p/t Stephen Blain

Data Management Assistant p/t Irene Hutson

Data entry volunteer p/t Eric Readman

Data entry volunteer p/t Margaret Burgess

Data entry volunteer p/t John Davies

Head of Reserves Ecology3 Dr Graham Hirons

Senior Departmental Secretary Anne Smith

Reserves Ecologist Dr Malcolm Ausden

Reserves Ecologist (monitoring) Julianne Evans

Reserves Ecologist Dr Joanne Gilbert

Reserves Ecologist Dr Matt Self

Reserves Ecologistc (biodiversity) Dr Mark Gurney

Reserves Ecologist (biodiversity) Matt Shardlow(until February 2002)

Senior Reserves Ecologist, Scotland4 Dr Dave Beaumont

Reserves Ecologist, Scotland Dr Neil Cowie

Biodiversity Science Officer5 Dr Jane Sears

Invertebrate Conservation Officerc Dr Ian Middlebrook6

1 based at University of Cambridge2 based at Czech Ornithological Society3 part of Conservation Management Department4 part of Land Management Department, Scotland5 part of Sites and Species Conservation Department6 based at Butterfly Conservationc contract staff

RSPB

SCI

ENTI

FIC

STAF

F 20

01/2

39

Niall Benvie (RSPB Im

ages)Andrew

Hay (RSPB Images)

Bob Proctor collectinga core sample from aScots pine.

Will Kirby surveyingbirds and butterflies.

The RSPB funds and supervises a substantial number of PhD

studentships each year. This is a valuable mechanism for

undertaking important research, and shows the RSPB’s commitment

to training conservation biologists.

The following list shows those PhD studentships involving the RSPB that were active at

some stage during 2001 and 2002. All projects were funded and supervised by the RSPB to

varying extents, with the exception of those marked with an asterisk, for which the RSPB

provided supervision only. In addition, the RSPB helped initiate and funds the annual

Student’s Conference on Conservation Science at Cambridge.

Research project Student University / college Other partners

Bombus distinguendus ecology Tom Charman Cambridge NERC, IoZ

Breeding ecology of ring ouzels Ian Burfield Cambridge NERC

Egg-shell thinning Jorn Scharlemann Cambridge BMNH

Ouse Washes ditch flora Rob Cathcart Cambridge

Stone-curlew disturbance Elisabeth Taylor Cambridge EN

Stone-curlews and roads Tom Day Cambridge

Rudd's lark ecology David Maphisa Cape Town

Urban & suburban house sparrows Kate Vincent De Montford EN

Dartford warblers and disturbance Giselle Murison East Anglia EN

Red-breasted geese in Romania Dan Hulea East Anglia

Management of blanket bog Allan Gray Edinburgh

Breeding wader declines in N Britain Mark O'Brien Edinburgh

Seabird survival rates Sarah Davies Glasgow NERC

Skuas, discards and seabird predation Steve Votier Glasgow

Lapwings & arable stewardship Rob Sheldon Harper Adams

Non-inversion tillage Heidi Cunningham Harper Adams

Farmland birds in the Baltic Republics* Irina Herzon Helsinki

Reedbeds & fish availability Richard Noble Hull

Belarus bitterns Marina Dzmitranok Minsk

Bullfinch declines Fiona Proffitt Oxford NERC

Ecology of malimbes in Nigeria Manu Shiiwua Oxford

Farmland house sparrows Dave Hole Oxford NERC

Stubble field prescriptions Simon Butler Oxford BBSRC

Swallows & agricultural intensification Karl Evans Oxford

Ecology of crows in pastoral areas Ian Adderton Queens, Belfast DARD

Northern Ireland foxes Declan O'Mahoney Queens, Belfast DARD

Intensification of lowland grassland Dave Buckingham Reading

Orthoptera & grassland management David Smith Reading

Seychelles magpie-robin Peter Njoroge Reading

Conservation of Bryozoa Samantha Hill Reading EA

Corncrakes in Latvia Oskars Keiss Riga, Latvia

Avermectin and dung invertebrates Lisa Webb SAC

Heathland grazing Sophie Lake Southampton

Farmland processes, insects and birds Jenny Bright Stirling

Lapwing management at Gruinart Claire McKeever Stirling

Remote sensing of wetlands Crona O’Shea Stirling

Corncrakes on Shannon callows* Anita Donaghy University College, Cork

Kite population dynamics* Andrew Simpkins Wolverhampton

PhD

TRAI

NIN

G

40 PhD TRAINING

The complete list of all of the

RSPB’s scientific publications for

2001, and the first half of 2002, is

as follows.

Publications in scientificjournals and booksAghnaj A, Smith KW, Bowden CGR and Ribi M (2001) Studiesof the feeding ecology and habitat use of Northern Bald Ibis,Geronticus eremita, in the Souss-Massa National Park,Morocco. Ostrich Supplement 15: 197.

Amar A and Burthe S (2001) Observations of predation ofHen Harrier nestlings by Hooded Crows in Orkney. ScottishBirds 22: 65–66.

Amar A and Redpath SM (2002) Determining the cause of thehen harrier decline on the Orkney Islands: an experimentaltest of two hypotheses. Animal Conservation 5: 21–28.

Anderson GQA, Gruar DJ, Wilkinson NI and Field RH (2002)Tree sparrow Passer montanus chick diet and productivity inan expanding colony. Aspects of Applied Biology 67: 35–42.

Ausden M (2001) The effects of flooding grassland on foodsupply for breeding waders. British Wildlife 12: 179–187.

Ausden M, Banks B, Donnison E, Howe M, Nixon A, PhillipsD, Wicks D and Wynne C (2002) The status, conservationand use of the medicinal leech. British Wildlife 13: 229–238.

Ausden M and Hirons GJM (2002) Grassland nature reservesfor breeding wading birds in England and their implicationsfor the ESA agri-environment scheme. BiologicalConservation 106: 279–291.

Ausden M, Sutherland WJ and James R (2001) The effects offlooding lowland wet grassland on soil macroinvertebrateprey of breeding wading birds. Journal of Applied Ecology38: 320–338.

Balmford A, Bruner A, Cooper A, Costanza R, Farber S,Green RE, Jenkins M, Jefferiss P, Jessamy V, Madden J,Munro K, Myers N, Naeem A, Paavola J, Rayment M,Rosendo S, Roughgarden J, Trumper K and Turner RK (2002)Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science 297:950–953.

Boatman ND, Carter N, Evans AD, Grice PV, Stoate C, andWilson JD (eds) (2002) Birds and agriculture. Aspects ofApplied Biology 67. The Association of Applied Biologists,Warwick.

Bowden CGR (2001) The birds of Mount Kupe, southwestCameroon. Malimbus 23: 13–44.

Bowden CGR, Aghnaj A, Smith KW and Ribi M (2001)Conservation actions for the last wild population ofNorthern Bald Ibis, Geronticus eremita: results andimplications from a five year study in Morocco. OstrichSupplement 15: 252.

Bowden CGR, Fenton C, Gray GAL, Mackley L, Hilton GMand Atkinson PW (2001) The Montserrat oriole: in troubleagain. Dodo 37: 100–110.

Bradbury RB, Payne RJH, Wilson JD and Krebs JR (2001)Predicting population responses to resource management.Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16: 440–445.

Buckingham D (2001) Within-field habitat selection bywintering skylarks Alauda arvensis in southwest England.In: Donald PR and Vickery JA (eds) The ecology andconservation of skylarks Alauda arvensis. The RSPB,Sandy; 149–158.

Buckingham DL, Peach WJ and Fox D (2002) Factorsinfluencing bird use of different pastoral systems. In: FrameJ (ed) Conservation pays? BGS Occasional Symposium no36; 55–58.

Cadbury CJ and Ausden M (2001) Bird communities ofcoastal shingle and lagoons. In: Packham JR, Randall RE,Barnes RSK and Neal A (eds) Ecology and geomorphologyof coastal shingle. Westbury Academic & ScientificPublishing, Otley; 304–319.

Clausen P, Fredricksen M, Percival SM, Anderson GQA andDenny MJH (2001) Seasonal and annual survival rates ofEast-Atlantic Light-bellied Brent Geese Branta berniclahrota assessed by capture-recapture analysis. Ardea 89:101–110.

Cook AS, Grant MC, McKay CR and Peacock MA (2001)Status, distribution and breeding success of the Chough inScotland in 1998. Scottish Birds 22: 82–91.

Cunningham HM, Chaney K, Wilcox A and Bradbury R(2002) The effect of non-inversion tillage on earthworm andarthropod populations as potential food sources forfarmland birds. Aspects of Applied Biology 67: 101–106.

Dawson RJG, Bowden CGR, Cameron HM (2001) Pelagicseabird report and status review of selected speciesoccurring off the Atlantic coast of Morocco. Bulletin of theAfrican Bird Club 8: 107–112.

De Swardt DH and Peach WJ (2001) Annual survival ofGurney’s Sugarbird, Promerops gurneyi. Ostrich 72:199–218.

Donald PF, Buckingham DL, Moorcroft D, Muirhead LB,Evans AD and Kirby WB (2001) Habitat use and diet ofskylarks Alauda arvensis wintering on lowland farmland insouthern Britain. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 536–547.

Donald PF, Buckingham DL, Muirhead LB, Evans AD, KirbyWB and Schmitt SIA (2001) Factors affecting clutch size,hatching rates and partial brood losses in skylark Alaudaarvensis nests on lowland farmland. In: Donald PF andVickery JA (eds) The ecology and conservation of skylarksAlauda arvensis. The RSPB, Sandy; 63–77.

41PUBLICATIONS

Donald PF, Evans AD, Buckingham DL, Muirhead LB andWilson JD (2001) Factors affecting the territory distributionof skylarks Alauda arvensis breeding on lowland farmland.Bird Study 48: 271–278.

Donald PF, Evans AD, Muirhead LB, Buckingham DL, KirbyWB and Schmitt SIA (2002) survival rates, causes of failureand productivity of skylark Alauda arvensis nests onlowland farmland. Ibis 144: 652–664.

Donald PF, Green RE and Heath MF (2001) Agriculturalintensification and the collapse of Europe’s farmland birdpopulations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B268: 25–29.

Donald PF and Greenwood JJD (2001) Spatial patterns ofrange contraction in British breeding birds. Ibis 143:593–601

Donald PF, Muirhead LB, Buckingham DL, Evans AD, KirbyWB and Gruar D (2001) Body condition, growth rates anddiet of skylark Alauda arvensis nestlings on lowlandfarmland. Ibis 143: 658–669.

Donald PF, Pisano G, Rayment MD and Pain DJ (2002) TheCommon Agricultural Policy, EU enlargement and theconservation of Europe’s farmland birds. Agriculture,Ecosystems and Environment 89: 167–179.

Donald PF and Vickery JA (eds) (2001) The ecology andconservation of skylarks Alauda arvensis. The RSPB,Sandy.

Edwards PJ, Schmitt SIA, Jenner T, Cracknell J and EverettCJ (2001) Research into the value of field margins forskylarks Alauda arvensis. In: Donald PR and Vickery JA(eds) The ecology and conservation of skylarks Alaudaarvensis. The RSPB, Sandy; 203–207.

Evans AD and Armstrong-Brown S (2002) The role ofresearch and development in the evolution of a "smart" agri-environment scheme. Aspects of Applied Biology 67:253–262.

Gibbons DW and Avery MI (2001) Birds. In: Hawksworth D(ed) The changing wildlife of Great Britain and Ireland.Taylor & Francis, London; 373–404.

Gilbert G (2002) The status and habitat of Spotted CrakesPorzana porzana in Britain in 1999. Bird Study 49: 79–86.

Gilbert G, Tyler G and Smith K (2002) Local annual survivalof booming male Great Bittern Botaurus stellaris in Britain,in the period 1990–1999. Ibis 144: 51–61.

Gill JA, Norris KJ and Sutherland WJ (2001) The effects ofdisturbance on habitat use by black-tailed godwits Limosalimosa. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 846–856.

Goddard PJ, Summers RW, Macdonald AJ, Murray C andFawcett AR (2001) Behavioural responses of red deer tofences of five different designs. Applied Animal BehaviourScience 73: 289–298.

Grant MC (2002) Effects of radiotagging on the weight gainand survival of Curlew Numenius arquata chicks. BirdStudy 49: 172–176.

Green RE (2002) Diagnosing causes of population declinesand selecting remedial actions. In: Norris K and Pain DJ(eds) Conserving bird biodiversity: general principles andtheir application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge:139–156.

Green RE (2002) Corncrakes, conservation management andagri-environment schemes. Aspects of Applied Biology 67:189–190.

Green RE, Schäffer N and Wend D (2001) A method forageing adult Corncrakes Crex crex. Ringing & Migration 20:352–357.

Gregory RD, Wilkinson NI, Noble DG, Robinson JA, BrownAF, Hughes J, Procter D, Gibbons DW and Galbraith C (2002)A priority list for bird conservation in the United Kingdom,Channel Islands and Isle of Man: Birds of ConservationConcern, 2002–2007. British Birds 95: 410–450.

Hancock MH and Wilson JD (2002) Winter habitatassociations of grey partridge Perdix perdix in Scotland,1997–1999. Aspects of Applied Biology 67: 171–178.

Heaney V, Ratcliffe N, Brown A, Robinson PJ and Lock L(2002) The status of European Storm-petrels Hydrobatespelagicus and Manx Shearwaters Puffinus puffinus on theIsle of Scilly. Atlantic Seabird 4: 1–16.

Hole DG, Whittingham MJ, Bradbury RB, Anderson GQA,Lee PLM, Wilson JD and Krebs JR (2002) Widespread localextinctions of House Sparrows are caused by agriculturalintensification. Nature 418: 931–932.

Hopkinson P, Travis JMJ, Evans J, Gregory RD, Telfer MGand Williams PH (2001) Flexibility and the use of indicatortaxa in the selection of sites for nature reserves.Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 271–285.

Jackson DB (2001) Experimental removal of introducedhedgehogs improves wader nest success in the WesternIsles, Scotland. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 802–812.

Jeganathan P, Green RE, Bowden CGR, Norris KI, Pain Dand Rahmani A (2002) Use of tracking strips and automaticcameras for detecting critically endangered Jerdon’scoursers Rhinoptilus bitorquatus in scrub jungle in AndhraPradesh, India. Oryx 36: 182–188.

Johnstone I, Whitehead S and Lamacraft D (2002) Theimportance of grazed habitats for foraging choughsPyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax, and its implication for agri-environment schemes. Aspects of Applied Biology 67:59–66.

Langston RHW, Gregory RD and Adams R (2002) The statusof the Hawfinch in the UK 1975–1999. British Birds 95:166–173.

Lee PLM, Bradbury RB, Wilson JD, Flanagan NS,Richardson L, Perkins AJ and Krebs JR (2001) Microsatellitevariation in the Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella:population structure of a declining farmland bird.Molecular Ecology 10: 1633–1644.

Lee PLM, Collins KP, Richardson L and Bradbury RB (2001)Loss of genetic variation in the declining Irish population ofYellowhammers Emberiza citrinella. Irish Birds 6: 590–592.

PUBL

ICAT

ION

S

42

Lee PLM, Richardson LJ and Bradbury RB (2001) Thephylogenetic status of the Corn Bunting Miliaria calandrabased on mitochondrial control-region DNA sequences.Ibis 143: 299–303.

Manu S (2001) Possible factors influencing the decline ofNigeria’s rarest endemic bird, the Ibadan MalimbeMalimbus ibadanensis. Ostrich Supplement 15: 119–121.

Moorcroft D, Whittingham MJ, Bradbury RB and Wilson JD(2002) The selection of stubble fields by winteringgranivorous birds reflects vegetation cover and foodabundance. Journal of Applied Ecology 39: 535–547.

Morris AJ, Bradbury RB and Wilson JD (2002) Determinantsof patch selection by yellowhammers Emberiza citrinellaforaging in cereal crops. Aspects of Applied Biology 67:43–50.

Morris AJ, Whittingham MJ, Wilson JD, Bradbury RB,Kyrkos A, Buckingham DL and Evans AD (2001) Foraginghabitat selection by yellowhammers (Emberiza citrinella)nesting in agriculturally contrasting regions in lowlandEngland. Biological Conservation 101: 197–210.

Norris K and Pain DJ (eds) (2002) Conserving birdbiodiversity: general principles and their application.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

O’Brien M (2002) The relationship between field occupancyrates by breeding lapwing and habitat management onupland farmland in Northern Britain. Aspects of AppliedBiology 67: 85–92.

O’Brien M and Bainbridge IP (2001) The evaluation of keysites for breeding waders in lowland Scotland. BiologicalConservation 103: 51–63.

Ogilvie MA and the Rare Breeding Birds Panel (2001) Rarebreeding birds in the United Kingdom in 1999. British Birds94: 344–381.

Ogilvie MA and the Rare Breeding Birds Panel (2001) Non-native birds breeding in the United Kingdom in 1999. BritishBirds 94: 518–522.

Owen KM and Marrs RH (2001) The use of mixtures of sulfurand bracken litter to reduce pH of former arable soils andcontrol of ruderal species. Restoration Ecology 9: 397–409.

Pain DJ and Donald PF (2002) Outside the reserve:pandemic threats to bird diversity. In: Norris K and Pain DJ(eds) Conserving bird diversity: general principles and theirapplication. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge;157–179.

Peach WJ, Hanmer DB and Oatley TB (2001) Do southernAfrican songbirds live longer than their Europeancounterparts? Oikos 93: 235–249.

Peach WJ, Lovett LJ, Wotton S and Jeffs C (2001)Countryside Stewardship delivers cirl buntings (Emberizacirlus) in Devon, UK. Biological Conservation 101: 361–373.

Peach W, Taylor R, Cotton P, Gruar D, Hill I and Denny M(2002) Habitat utilisation by song thrushes Turdusphilomelos on lowland farmland during summer and winter.Aspects of Applied Biology 67: 11–20.

Pearce-Higgins JW (2001) A model describing theexchange of individuals between Turnstone Arenariainterpres roosts on the North Wales coast. Ringing &Migration 20: 209–212.

Pearce-Higgins JW and Grant MC (2002) The effects ofgrazing-related variation in habitat on the distribution ofmoorland skylarks Alauda arvensis and meadow pipitsAnthus pratensis. Aspects of Applied Biology 67: 155–164.

Pearce-Higgins JW and Yalden DW (2002) Variation in thegrowth and survival of golden plover Pluvialis apricariachicks. Ibis 144: 200–209.

Perkins AJ and Anderson GQA (2002) Seed selection bytree sparrows Passer montanus: determining appropriateseeds for supplementary feeding on farmland. Aspects ofApplied Biology 67: 213–220.

Piertney SB, Summers RW and Marquiss M (2001)Microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA homogeneity amongcrossbill taxa extant in the UK. Proceedings of the RoyalSociety of London 268: 1511–1517.

Proctor R and Summers RW (2002) Nesting habitat, clutchsize and nest failure of Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus inScotland. Bird Study 49: 190–192.

Ratcliffe N, Catry P, Hamer KC, Klomp NI and Furness RW(2002) The effect of age and year on the survival of adultbreeding great skuas Catharacta skua in Shetland. Ibis 144:384–392.

Reid J, Ruxton GD, Monaghan P and Hilton GM (2002) Theenergetic consequences of clutch size for an uniparentalintermittent incubator. Auk 119: 54–61.

Robinson RA, Wilson JD and Crick HQP (2001) Theimportance of arable habitat for farmland birds in grasslandlandscapes. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 1059–1069.

Scharlemann JPW (2001) Museum egg collections asstores of long-term phenological data. InternationalJournal of Biometeorology 45: 208–211.

Shardlow ME (2001) A review of the conservationimportance of shingle habitats for invertebrates in theUnited Kingdon (UK). In: Packham JR, Randall RE, BarnesRSK and Neil A. Ecology and geomorphology of coastalshingle. Westbury Academic and Scientific Publishing,Otley.

Sheldon RD, Chaney K and Tyler G (2002) Lapwings,earthworms and agriculture. Aspects of Applied Biology 67:93–100.

Sim IMW, Cross AV, Lamacraft DL and Pain DJ (2001)Correlates of Common Buzzard Buteo buteo density andbreeding success in the West Midlands. Bird Study 48:317–329.

Sim IMW and Zefania S (2002) Extension of the knownrange of the Red-shouldered Vanga Calicalicusrufocarpallis in southwest Madagascar. Bulletin of theBritish Ornithologists’ Club 122: 194–196.

Siriwardena GM, Baillie SR, Crick HQP and Wilson JD(2001) Changes in agricultural land use and breedingperformance of some granivorous farmland passerines.Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 84: 191–206.

PUBL

ICAT

ION

S

43

Siriwardena GM, Wilson JD, Baillie SR and Crick HQP(2001) Can the historical CBC trend for skylarks be‘recovered’ using present-day agricultural habitatpreferences and changes in agricultural land use? In:Donald PF and Vickery JA (eds) The ecology andconservation of skylarks Alauda arvensis. The RSPB,Sandy; 53–60.

Stanbury A, O’Brien M and Donaghy A (2001) Trends inbreeding wader populations on ‘Key Areas’ within NorthernIreland between 1986 and 2000. Irish Birds 6: 513–526.

Stevens DK, Donald PF, Evans AD, Buckingham DL andEvans J (2002) Territory distribution and foraging patterns ofcirl buntings (Emberiza cirlus) breeding in the UK.Biological Conservation 107: 307–313.

Stillman R, Goss-Custard J, West A, McGrorty S, Caldow R,le V dit Durrell S, Norris K, Johnstone I, Ens B and Triplet P(2001) Predicting shorebird mortality and population sizeunder different regimes of shellfishery management.Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 857–868.

Stoate C, Morris RM and Wilson JD (2001) Cultural ecologyof Whitethroat (Sylvia communis) habitat management byfarmers. Part I: field boundary vegetation in lowlandEngland. Journal of Environmental Management 62:329–341.

Stoate C, Morris RM and Wilson JD (2001) Cultural ecologyof Whitethroat (Sylvia communis) habitat management byfarmers. Part II: winter in farmland trees and shrubs inSenegambia. Journal of Environmental Management 62:343–356.

Summers RW (2001) High-level mist-netting. Ringers’Bulletin 10: 76.

Summers RW (2002) Parrot crossbills breeding in AbernethyForest. British Birds 95: 4–11.

Summers RW and Canham M (2001) The distribution ofCrested tits in Scotland during the 1990s. Scottish Birds 22:20–27.

Summers RW and Dugan D (2001) An assessment ofmethods used to mark fences to reduce bird collisions inpinewoods. Scottish Forestry 55: 23–29.

Summers RW, Jardine DC, Marquiss M and Rae R (2002)The distribution of crossbills Loxia spp. in Britain, withspecial reference to the Scottish Crossbill Loxia scotica.Ibis 144: 393–410.

Summers RW, Peach W and Nicoll M (2001) Numbers,migration phenology and survival of purple sandpipersCalidris maritima at Gourdon, eastern Scotland. Bird Study48: 139–146.

Summers RW, Underhill LG and Simpson A (2002) Habitatpreferences of waders (Charadrii) on the coast of theOrkney Islands. Bird Study 49: 60–66.

Swetnam RD, Wilson JD, Bradbury RB and Krebs JR (2001)Modelling the effects of agricultural change on skylarknumbers using GIS. In: Donald PF and Vickery JA (eds) Theecology and conservation of skylarks Alauda arvensis. TheRSPB, Sandy; 209–219.

Tharme AP, Green RE, Baines D, Bainbridge IP and O’BrienM (2001) The effect of management for red grouse shootingon the population density of breeding birds on heather-dominated moorland. Journal of Applied Ecology 38:439–457.

Underhill L and Gibbons DW (2002) Mapping and monitoringbird populations: their conservation uses. In: Norris K andPain D (eds) Conserving bird biodiversity: general principlesand their appliaction. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge; 34–60.

Van den Berg LJL, Bullock JM, Clarke RT, Langston RHWand Rose RJ (2001) Territory selection by the Dartfordwarbler (Sylvia undata) in Dorset, England: the role ofvegetation type, habitat fragmentation and population size.Biological Conservation 101: 217–228.

Vanhinsbergh D and Evans A (2002) Habitat associations ofthe Red-backed Shrike (Lanius collurio) in Carinthia,Austria. Journal für Ornithologie 143: 000–000.

Van Strien AJ, Pannekock J and Gibbons DW (2001)Indexing European bird population trends using results ofnational monitoring schemes: a trial of a new method. BirdStudy 48: 200–214.

Vickery JA and Buckingham DL (2001) The value of set-aside for skylarks Alauda arvensis in Britain. In: Donald PFand Vickery JA (eds) The ecology and conservation ofskylarks Alauda arvensis. The RSPB, Sandy; 161–175.

Votier SC, Bearhop S, Ratcliffe N and Furness RW (2001)Pellets as indicators of diet in Great Skuas Catharacta skua.Bird Study 48: 373–376.

Whittingham MJ, Bradbury RB, Wilson JD, Morris AJ,Perkins AJ and Siriwardena GM (2001) Chaffinch Fringillacoelebs foraging patterns, nestling survival and territorydensity on lowland farmland. Bird Study 48: 257–270.

Wilkinson NI, Langston RHW, Gregory RD, Gibbons DW andMarquiss M (2002) Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus abundanceand habitat use in Scotland, in winter 1998–99. Bird Study49: 177–185.

Wilson JD (2001) Weeds as a food resource for farmlandbirds: what, where and how many should we leave?Brighton Crop Protection Conference 2001 – Weeds 1:391–398.

Wilson JD (2001) Foraging habitat selection by skylarksAlauda arvensis on lowland farmland during the nestlingperiod. In: Donald PF and Vickery JA (eds) The ecology andconservation of skylarks Alauda arvensis. The RSPB,Sandy; 91–101.

Wilson JD, Akriotis T, Balmer DE and Kyrkos A (2001)Identification of Marsh Warblers Acrocephalus palustrisand Reed Warblers A. scirpaceus on autumn migrationthrough the eastern Mediterranean. Ringing & Migration20: 224–232.

Wilson AM, Vickery JA and Browne SJ (2001) Numbers anddistribution of Northern Lapwings Vanellus vanellusbreeding in England and Wales in 1998. Bird Study 48: 2–17.

PUBL

ICAT

ION

S

44

Wolfenden IH and Peach WJ (2001) Temporal changes inthe survival rates of skylarks breeding in duneland in NWEngland. In: Donald PF and Vickery JA (eds) The ecologyand conservation of skylarks Alauda arvensis. The RSPB,Sandy; 79–89.

Wotton SR, Langston RHW and Gregory RD (2002) Thebreeding status of the Ring Ouzel Turdus torquatus in theUK in 1999. Bird Study 49: 26–34.

Reports, theses and other publicationsAmar A (2001) Determining the cause of the hen harrierdecline on Orkney. PhD thesis, University of Aberdeen.

Amar A, Arroyo B and Redpath S (2002) Analysis ofbreeding success of Orkney hen harriers in relation tohabitat. Report to SNH.

Anderson GQA, Bradbury RB and Evans AD (2001) Evidencefor the effects of agricultural intensification on wild birdpopulations in the UK. RSPB report, Sandy.

Bradbury RB (2001) Winter birds. In: Ecological evaluationof the arable stewardship pilot schemes, 1998–2000.Technical Annex VI/1. MAFF, London.

Bradbury RB (2001) Breeding birds. In: Ecologicalevaluation of the arable stewardship pilot schemes,1998–2000. Technical Annex VI/2. MAFF, London.

Cadbury CJ, Shardlow M and Buisson R (2001) Salinelagoons: a scarce habitat of biodiversity importance. RSPBConservation Review 13: 75–84.

Cunningham AA, Prakash V, Ghalsasi GR and Pain D (2001)Investigating the cause of catastrophic declines in Asiangriffon vultures (Gyps indicus and G. bengalensis). In:Katzner T and Parry-Jones J (eds) Reports from theworkshop on Indian Gyps vultures, 4th Eurasian Congresson Raptors, Seville, Spain. Estación Biológica Donaña,Raptor Research Foundation; 10–11.

Donald PF and Gregory RD Silent fields: the decline offarmland birds in Europe. Biologist 49: 101–106.

Evans AD and Wilson JD (2001) The implication of ten yearsof research on lowland farmland birds: an RSPBperspective. RSPB Conservation Review 13: 7–17.

Evans KL (2001) The effect of agriculture on swallowsHirundo rustica. DPhil thesis, University of Oxford.

Fisher I and Waliczky Z (2001) An assessment of thepotential impact of the TINA network on Important BirdAreas (IBAs) in the accession countries. BirdLifeInternational/The RSPB, Sandy, UK.

Green RE, Harley M, Spalding M and Zöckler C (2001) (eds)Impacts of climate change on wildlife. The RSPB, Sandy.

Gregory RD, Noble DH, Cranswick PA, Campbell LH,Rehfisch MM and Baillie SR (2001) The state of the UK’sBirds 2000. RSPB/BTO/WWT.

Hancock M, Summers R and Clark L (2001) Slavonian grebestudies, 2001. Nest outcomes from timelapse videocameras, mammal records from triggered still cameras,and stickleback surveys. RSPB report, Sandy.

Hilton GM, Bowden CGR, Ratcliffe N, Lucking V andBrindley E (2001) Bird conservation priorities in the UKOverseas Territories. RSPB Research Report no 1. TheRSPB, Sandy.

Jackson DB (2001) Uist wader surveys 2000: provisionalestimates and recent trends. In: Rabbitts B (ed) OuterHebrides Bird Report 2000. SOC, Edinburgh.

Johnstone I and Norris K (2001) Oystercatchers andcockles: a management tool for fisheries and conservation.RSPB Conservation Review 13: 53–59.

Kirby W (2001) A summary of monitoring at Grange Farm,Knapwell for the year 2000. RSPB report, Sandy.

Langston R (2002) Wind energy and birds: results andrequirements. RSPB Research Report no 2. The RSPB,Sandy.

Martin J, Dunn CJ, Douglas D, Calbrade N, Gilbert G andSmith KW (2001) Bittern Botaurus stellaris monitoring andresearch in the UK. Summary of the 2001 season. RSPBreport, Sandy.

Mavor RA, Pickerell G, Heubeck M and Thompson KR(2001). Seabird numbers and breeding success in Britainand Ireland, 2000. JNCC, Peterborough.

O’Brien M (2001) Factors affecting the numbers anddistribution of breeding waders on upland enclosedgrassland in northern Britain. PhD thesis, University ofEdinburgh.

Pain DJ, Rose L and Castro F (2001) The Doñana disaster.RSPB Conservation Review 13: 32–38.

Peach WJ (2001) Minimum breeding population of BeardedTits on the Tay reedbeds in 2000: an analysis of Tay RingingGroup mark recapture data. In: Robertson D (ed) TayRinging Group Report 1998–2000; 24–28.

Pickerell G (2001) The National Beached Bird Survey, 2001.RSPB report, Sandy.

Schäffer N and Green RE (2001) The global status of thecorncrake. RSPB Conservation Review 13: 18–24.

Scharlemann JPW (2001) Eggshell thickness of some birdsis declining. Nature First 24: 16.

Summers RW (2001) The status of aspen Populus tremula atAbernethy Forest. RSPB report, Sandy.

Summers RW and Clark LE (2001) The Slavonian grebepopulation in Scotland, 1971–2000. RSPB report, Sandy.

Summers RW and Donald C (2001) Scottish Crossbill nestcovered by snow. Scottish Bird News 62: 5.

Thomas M, Elliott G and Gregory R (2001) The impact of eggcollecting on scarce breeding birds 1982–1999. RSPBConservation Review 13: 39–44.

PUBL

ICAT

ION

S

45

We have provided a full list of

RSPB projects for 2001 and those

running during the first half of

2002, with similar projects

combined for brevity. Major

funders (bold type) and partners

are given for each project. City

names refer to universities. PhD

projects are listed separately on

p 40.

Conservation ScienceDepartmentMonitoring, prioritisation and indicatorsWetland Birds Survey (JNCC, BTO, WWT)

Breeding Bird Survey (JNCC, BTO)

Rare Breeding Birds Panel (JNCC, BTO, British Birds)

Seabird Monitoring Programme (JNCC, SOTEAG)

Seabird 2000 (JNCC, BirdWatch Ireland, SOTEAG, SeabirdGroup)

Shetland skua survey (SNH, AFEN, SOTEAG)

Sample cirl bunting survey (EN)

UK peregrine (BTO, SNH) and bearded tit (EN) surveys

Britain and Ireland chough survey (CCW, BirdWatch Ireland)

Repeat upland birds survey, UK (EN, DEFRA, CCW, LNDPA,YDNPA)

Repeat breeding waders of wet meadows survey, E & W(DEFRA, EN)

Repeat woodland birds surveys, UK (DEFRA, EN, FC, WoodlandTrust, BTO)

‘Quality of life’ wild bird indicator (DEFRA, BTO)

Spanish (SEO), Hungarian (MME, Nyiregyhaza) and Polish(OTOP, GOS) breeding bird surveys

Pan-European breeding bird monitoring (CSO, EBCC, StatisticsNetherlands, BTO)

Bird monitoring priorities in UK Overseas Territories

Surveys of corncrakes in Russia (RBCU) and spotted eagles inBelarus (APB)

Gough Island bird surveys (FCO, Cape Town)

IBAs in Uganda (Cambridge & Copenhagen, MUIENR)

The ecology of threatened speciesBittern ecology (EN)

The ecology of yellow wagtails on wet grassland

Productivity and survival of capercaillie (CEH, GCT)

Taxonomic status of crossbills in Scotland (CEH, Aberdeen)

Causes of breeding failure in Slavonian grebes (SNH)

Hen harrier habitat use and range management (SNH, GCT,CEH)

Correlates of black grouse decline

Habitat management for red-necked phalaropes

The ecology of farmland song thrushes (Frizzell) and reedbuntings (EN)

Tree sparrow ecology (EN, Anglian Water, CJ WildBirdFoods, L&RWT)

Causes of house sparrow declines (NERC, DEFRA, CJWildBird Foods, Oxford)

Conservation of bald ibis (SEO, Parc National de Souss-Massa, DWCT, Euronatur)

Ecology of the Razo lark (SEO, SPEA)

Ecology of the Rudd’s lark (BirdLife South Africa, PercyFitzpatrick Institute)

The ecology of Jerdon’s courser (Reading, BNHS, DarwinInitiative)

Gyps vulture declines in Asia (IoZ, BHNS, PDRC, NBPC,Darwin Initiative, AAHL)

Monitoring Ascension Island seabirds following feral catremoval (FCO)

Conservation of Montserrat orioles (FCO, MNT, MALHE,DWCT, Montana)

Tern trapping in Ghana (GWS)

Using stable isotopes to understand declines of rockhopperpenguins (NIWAR)

Determining the winter range of aquatic warblers usingstable isotopes

Determining the breeding range of slender-billed curlewsusing stable isotopes

Lead poisoning in Spanish imperial eagles (DoñanaBiological Station, Aberdeen)

Ecological process researchPredators and breeding lapwing experiment

Hedgehog predation and breeding waders on the Uists(SNH, UFAW)

Reducing the impact of cat predation on garden birds

The impacts of flooding and predation on breeding black-tailed godwits

Wet grassland ESA management for breeding waders

The effects of surface slotting of grassland on breedingwaders (Manchester, Silsoe)

46 THE RSPB’S SCIENTIFICPROJECTS IN 2001

Grassland re-seeding and corncrakes

Moorland management and birds at Geltsdale

The abundance of moorland birds and grazing pressure

Environmentally sustainable and economically viable grazingsystems (DEFRA, ADAS, IGER, SAC, Newcastle, CEH)

Grazing management and upland birds (SEERAD, Macaulay,SAC, CEH, BioSS)

Remote sensing upland habitats

Foot-and-mouth and breeding waders (EN) and barnaclegeese (SEERAD, WWT)

Population dynamics of, and seed regeneration in, nativeCaledonian pine

The role of fire and grazing in native Caledonian pinewoods

Indirect effects of pesticides on birds (DEFRA, CSL, GCT,CEH, Oxford)

Seed selection trials (CJ WildBird Foods)

Factors affecting lowland grassland birds (EN)

Predicting responses of farmland birds to agriculturalchange (DEFRA, BTO, GCT)

Corn buntings and Rural Stewardship Scheme (SNH)

Arable silage and corn buntings on the Uists

The effects of reduced crop density on skylarks (EN)

Stubble management and birds (Oxford, BBSRC)

Agri-environment schemes and winter bird food (DEFRA,BTO, UEA)

Sustainable arable farming for an improved environment(ADAS, BTO, CAER, CEH, CSL, GCT, CPA, Syngenta CropProtection, NT, LEAF, BPC, HGCA, Sainsbury’s, Safeway, MrJonathan Tipples, DEFRA, SEERAD, EN,

The impact of artificial food on breeding and wintering farmbirds (BirdAid)

Monitoring of Hope Farm

Factors affecting Polish farmland birds (OTOP)

European ornithological climate change atlas (Durham)

Climate change and the African IBA network (BirdLifeInternational, Copenhagen and Durham)

Reserves Ecology(ConservationManagement Department)BirdsImproving suitability of fields for snipe at West Sedgemoor

Chough habitat use at South Stack (CCW)

Provision of arable on reserves to benefit farmland birds

Site condition assessment for breeding waders at RSPB wetgrassland reserves

Repeat survey of woodland birds at Nagshead (EN, York)

Habitat use by breeding wood sandpipers

Fish and waterImproving elver runs at reedbed reserves

Monitoring fish at RSPB’s reserves managed for bitterns

Hydrological and topographical surveys of RSPB reserves(Cranfield, G Spoor Assoc)

Nutrient levels at the Ouse Washes

VegetationRepeat Ouse Washes vegetation survey (EN)

Monitoring the conversion of arable fields to wet grassland atthe Ouse Washes

Monitoring vegetation establishment at Otmoor

NVC surveys of Marshside, Forsinard, Blar nam Faoileag andLoch of Strathbeg

Vegetation monitoring at Meadow Marsh (Minsmere), InshMarshes and Cliffe Pools

Monitoring of vegetation in cattle-grazed areas of fen atSurlingham

Vegetation monitoring at red-necked phalarope mires, Fetlar

Re-survey of vegetation following ditch blocking, Forsinard

Site condition monitoring, Forsinard

Monitoring of permanent quadrats and mapping forest fieldlayer at Abernethy

Survey of stand structure, Craigmore Wood

Mondhuie wet woods survey

NVC survey of wet heath and mire at Arne

Monitoring heather restoration at Vyrnwy and heathlandestablishment at Tudeley

Survey of corncrake early cover on management agreementareas

EstuarineMonitoring effects of managed realignment at Havergate

Study of saltmarsh erosion, Morecambe Bay (Lancaster)

InvertebratesMonitoring of soil and sward invertebrates and vegetation,Otmoor and Lakenheath

Organic content and invertebrates in artificial saline lagoons,Minsmere

Invertebrates of newly created wetlands, Lakenheath and HamWall

Availability of soil invertebrates after arable to wet grasslandconversion, Ouse Washes

GrazingMonitoring deer and browsing at Wolves Wood

Deer distribution and densities, Abernethy and Wood of Cree

Monitoring of browsing on tree regeneration, Inversnaid

The effects of grazing by Konik horses at reedbed margins,Minsmere

Effects of grazing on floodplain vegetation, Insh Marshes

Effects of grazing on breeding curlew at Rendall Moss

Effects of cattle grazing on wet heath, Grange and Avon Heath

THE

RSPB

’S S

CIEN

TIFI

C PR

OJEC

TS IN

200

1

47

Habitat management techniquesEstablishment of acid grassland (Liverpool) and grass heath(Liverpool, CEH)

Producing ridge and furrows at wet grassland creation sites

Assessing the suitability of degraded peat sites for wet grasslandrestoration

Development of multi-row reed seedling planter (Cranfield)

Forest edge burning and tree regeneration, Abernethy

Arable reversion to heathland, Minsmere (Liverpool)

Sub-soiling to improve soil structure, Otmoor and Berney

Woodland management and heathland restoration, Tudeley

Biodiversity Unit (Sites andSpecies ConservationDepartment)Surveys of:

Northern colletes in Western Isles (ACG, SNH)

Dark-bordered beauty moth (Butterfly Conservation)

Andreaea frigida in Scotland and northern England

Alectoria ochroleuca potential sites in Scotland

Cladonia botrytes potential sites in Scotland

The mason bee, Osmia uncinata (ACG, SNH)

Action for Invertebrates surveys (EN) of:

The ground beetle Amara famelica in England (Entotax)

The ground beetle Anisodactylus poeciloides (Alex Williams,Peter Hammond)

The click beetle Anostirus castaneus (NHM, ECOSA)

The click beetle Melanotus punctolineatus (NHM)

The diving beetle Agabus brunneus (David Bilton, Jonty Denton)

The spangled water beetle (Jonty Denton)

The stonefly Brachyptera putata in Scotland (Michael Hammett)

Distribution and ecology of the bryozoan Lophopus crystallinus(Aaron O’Dea)

Survey and management of Hammerschmidtia ferruginea(Malloch Society, SNH)

Re-establishment of stinking hawksbeard (EN, RoyalHolloway College)

Experimental management for Blera fallax (Malloch Society, SNH)

Conservation DataManagement UnitEnhancements to Merlin, RSPB’s conservation datamanagement system

Training in Merlin and MapInfo

Processing of national and local survey data(eg capercaillie, ring ouzel)

National Biodiversity Network access andaccreditation project

Collection and dissemination of bird data via the Internet

GIS applications: bald ibis in Morocco, IBAs and transportnetworks in E Europe

THE

RSPB

’S S

CIEN

TIFI

C PR

OJEC

TS IN

200

1

48

Chris Gomersall (RSPB Im

ages)

Rowena Langsten sampling invertebrates.

I N T E R N A T I O N A LBirdLife

21-1475-01-02 RSPB regd charity no 207076 Cover photograph by Geoff Dore (RSPB Images)

The RSPB works for an environment rich in birdsand wildlife. It depends on the support andgenerosity of others to make a difference. We workwith bird and habitat conservation organisations ina global partnership called BirdLife International.

RSPB UK Headquarters

The LodgeSandy

Bedfordshire SG19 2DLTel: 01767 680551

RSPB Scotland Headquarters

Dunedin House25 Ravelston Terrace

Edinburgh EH4 3TPTel: 0131 311 6500

RSPB Northern Ireland Headquarters

Belvoir Park Forest Belfast BT8 7QT

Tel: 028 9049 1547

RSPB South Wales Office

Sutherland House Castlebridge

Cowbridge Road East Cardiff CF11 9AB

Tel: 029 2035 3000