Advertisement

Journal of Ornithology

, Volume 148, Supplement 2, pp 295–303 | Cite as

The Swiss agri-environment scheme promotes farmland birds: but only moderately

  • Simon BirrerEmail author
  • Martin Spiess
  • Felix Herzog
  • Markus Jenny
  • Lukas Kohli
  • Bernard Lugrin
Original Article

Abstract

Agricultural production is intensive in the Swiss lowlands, where about half of farmland bird species are on the Red List. A nationwide agri-environment scheme was launched in 1993 to improve biodiversity on farmland. To qualify for subsidies, farmers have to use at least 7% of their farmland as ecological compensation areas (ECAs). We evaluated the effect of the ECAs on three levels. The national Swiss Bird Index for farmland birds shows a decline from 1990 to 2004. On a regional level, we monitored breeding bird communities on 23 study areas twice, with an interval of 4 years. Endangered species were largely absent and species richness was low. Between 1998 and 2002 and 1999 and 2003, respectively, common species showed a slight increase, whereas endangered species continued to decline. On a local level, it was expected that ECAs would have an effect on density and distribution of bird territories. The percentage area covered by ECAs had no influence on the population density of open farmland indicators nor on landscape indicators. A stepwise forward multiple regression model showed that “ECA-hedges” were significantly more often occupied by indicator species than hedges not financially supported by the agri-environment scheme. The Common Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus is an indicator species of traditional orchards. It occupies large traditional orchards with a high percentage covered by ECAs within 50 m of the edges more often than in the absence of ECAs. In two experimental study areas, ECAs of high ecological quality covered an exceptionally high proportion of farmland. In Laconnex in south-western Switzerland, many species benefit from these extra ecological improvements not part of the official agri-environment scheme. The Whitethroat Sylvia communis for example increased more than tenfold within 12 years to an actual density of 12 territories/km2, Stonechats Saxicola torquatus reached more than 8 territories/km2 and the Melodious Warbler Hippolais polyglotta also showed a remarkable increase. In the experimental study area “Widen” in north-eastern Switzerland, Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella and Red-backed Shrike Lanius collurio doubled in numbers between 1998 and 2003, but not in the control area. We conclude that ECAs do have some positive effects on the breeding distribution of selected indicator bird species. However, the effects are moderate which is due the low quality of the ECAs.

Keywords

Agri-environment scheme Ecological compensation area Breeding birds Switzerland 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Field work and data handling was carried out by Raffael Aye, Albert Bassin, Ursula Bornhauser-Sieber, Marcel Burkhardt, Andrea Capol, Monika Frey, Jörg Günther, Daniela Heynen, Petra Horch, Laurent Juillerat, Simon Keller, Wolfgang Linhart, Roland Lüthi, Fredy Madörin, Lukas Merkelbach, Gottfried Oesterhelt, Stefano Pozzi, Peter Richterich, Manuel Schweizer, Sandrine Seidel, Thomas Stalling, Manfred Steffen, Marco Thoma, Thomas Tschopp und Martin Weggler. Christian Marfurt helped with his experience in applying the GIS. Niklaus Zbinden improved the manuscript. Luc Schifferli improved the English. The expertise of Lukas Jenni was crucial while planning and setting up the project. The project was greatly improved by the collaboration of our partners Thomas Walter, Suzanne Dreier, Gabriela Hofer, Philippe Jeanneret and Beatrix Schüpbach at Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon ART. The project was financially supported by the Federal Office for Agriculture. We are very grateful for this generous assistance and thank all who contributed to the success of the project.

References

  1. Aschwanden J, Birrer S, Jenni L (2005) Are ecological compensation areas attractive hunting places for kestrels Falco tinnunculus and long-eared owls Asio otus? J Ornithol 146:279–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Böhning-Gaese K, Bauer H-G (1996) Changes in species abundance, distribution, and diversity in a central european bird community. Conserv Biol 10:175–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Charollais M, Koller N, Kuchen S, Pearson S, Schiess-Bühler C, Schüpbach H, Stäheli B (2004) Compensation écologique. Conditions–contributions–suggestions. Version 2004. Landwirtschaftliche Beratungszentrale LBL & Service Romand de Vulgarisation Agricole SRVA, Lindau & LausanneGoogle Scholar
  4. Dreier S, Hofer G (2005) Les prairies en compensation écologique. Cahiers FAL 56:57–66Google Scholar
  5. Dreier S, Oberholzer B, Kohli L (2005) Arbres fruitiers haute tige. Cahiers FAL 56:73–79Google Scholar
  6. Garnier M (1994) Milieux naturels servant à la compensation écologique. Documents environnement 17. Office fédéral de l’environnement, des forêts et du paysage, BerneGoogle Scholar
  7. Herzog F, Walter T (2005) Évaluation des mesures écologiques domaine biodiversité. Cahiers FAL 56:1–206Google Scholar
  8. Jenny M, Josephy B, Lugrin B (2003) Ökologische Aufwertungsmassnahmen in Ackerbaugebieten und ihre Auswirkungen auf ausgewählte Brutvogelarten. In: Oppermann R, Gujer H U (eds): Artenreiches Grünland, bewerten und fördern—MEKA und ÖQV in der Praxis. Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 151–155Google Scholar
  9. Jenny M, Weibel U, Lugrin B, Josephy B, Regamey J-L, Zbinden N (2002) Perdrix grise. Rapport final 1991–2000. Cahier de l’environnement. Faune sauvage. No. 335. Office fédéral de l’environnement, des forêts et du paysage OFEFP, BerneGoogle Scholar
  10. Josephy B (2000) GIS-gestützte Analyse zum Ansiedlungsverhalten ausgewählter Brutvogelarten bei Revitalisierungsmassnahmen in der Champagne genevoise (GE) von 1992 bis 1996. Diplomarbeit, Universität ZürichGoogle Scholar
  11. Keller V, Zbinden N, Schmid H, Volet B (2001) Liste rouge des oiseaux nicheurs menacées de Suisse. Office fédéral de l’environnement, des forêts et du paysage, Station ornithologique suisse de SempachVogelwarte, Berne et SempachGoogle Scholar
  12. Kestenholz M, Jenny M, Jenni L (2005) Une agriculture respectueuse de la faune sauvage. Point de vue. Station ornithologique Suisse, SempachGoogle Scholar
  13. Kohli L, Birrer S (2003) Diversité envolée dans la zone agricole – état des habitats de notre avifaune. Avifauna Report Sempach 2. Station ornithologique Suisse, SempachGoogle Scholar
  14. Kohli L, Spiess M, Herzog F, Birrer S (2004) Auswirkungen ökologischer Ausgleichsflächen auf typische Kulturlandvögel und ihre Lebensräume. Schweizerische Vogelwarte, SempachGoogle Scholar
  15. Luder R (1981) Qualitative und quantitative Untersuchungen der Avifauna als Grundlage für die ökologische Landschaftsplanung im Berggebiet. Methodik und Anwendung am Beispiel der Gemeinde Lenk (Berner Oberland). Ornithol Beob 78:137–192Google Scholar
  16. OFEFP (1999) Conception “Paysage Suisse”. Office fédéral de l’environnement, des forêts et du paysage, et Office fédéral du développemnte territorial, BernGoogle Scholar
  17. Roux O, Schüpbach B (2005) Surfaces des compensation écologique: évolution dans le temps et distribution dans l’éspace. Cahiers FAL 56:36–47Google Scholar
  18. Schelske O, Seidl I (2002) Anbau und Vermarktung alter Landsorten: Ein Fallbeispiel. Agrarforschung 9:424–429Google Scholar
  19. Schmid H, Luder R, Naef-Daenzer B, Graf R, Zbinden N (1998) Atlas des oiseaux nicheurs de Suisse. Distribution des oiseaux nicheurs en Suisse et au Liechtenstein en 1993–1996. Station ornithologique suisse, SempachGoogle Scholar
  20. Seidl I, Schelske O, Joshi J, Jenny M (2003) Entrepreneurship in biodiversity conservation and regional development. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 15:333–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Spiess M, Marfurt C, Birrer S (2002) Evaluation der Ökomassnahmen mit Hilfe von Brutvögeln. Agrarforschung 9:158–163Google Scholar
  22. Weibel U (1999) Effects of wildflower strips in an intensively used arable area on skylarks (Alauda arvensis). Dissertation, ETH Zürich, ZürichGoogle Scholar
  23. Zbinden N, Schmid H, Kéry M, Keller V (2005) Swiss bird index SBI®—Kombinierte Indices für die Bestandsentwicklung von Artengruppen regelmässig brütender Vogelarten der Schweiz 1990–2004. Ornithol Beob 102:283–291Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dt. Ornithologen-Gesellschaft e.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Birrer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Martin Spiess
    • 1
  • Felix Herzog
    • 2
  • Markus Jenny
    • 1
  • Lukas Kohli
    • 3
  • Bernard Lugrin
    • 4
  1. 1.Swiss Ornithological InstituteSempachSwitzerland
  2. 2.Agroscope Reckenholz - Tänikon ARTZürichSwitzerland
  3. 3.SchlierenSwitzerland
  4. 4.BernexSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations