Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus): an iconic focal species for knowledge-based integrative management and conservation of Baltic forests

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biodiversity loss was a central argument for redefining sustainable forest management in the 1990s, but threatened species remain poorly addressed in forestry governance. Management history of the Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) population in the Baltic States reveals a high potential of socially valued threatened species for developing the missing forestry–conservation interfaces. We review the history of the Baltic Capercaillie population since the 19th century, showing how its status transformed, both ecologically and socially, from a famous hunting target to the most widely protected forest species in the region. Compilation of recent national survey data confirms that at least 3450 lekking males currently survive in 961 leks; they are distributed between six large and about twenty small populations. During the 20th century, lek sizes decreased and local extirpations spread from South-Baltic mosaic lands to northern forests. As a social response, innovative management initiatives have repeatedly enabled periods of population stability and local recoveries. The most recent developments in Capercaillie conservation combine elements from the historically separated nature conservation, forestry and game-management approaches. The consistency of such social responses despite political upheavals suggests that iconic species can culturally stabilize long-term sustainable development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahti T, Hämet-Ahti L, Jalas J (1968) Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern Europe. Ann Bot Fenn 5:169–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Blicharska M, Baxter PWJ, Mikusiński G (2014) Practical implementation of species’ recovery plans—lessons from the White-backed Woodpecker Action Plan in Sweden. Ornis Fenn 91:108–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomberg EJ, Sedinger JS, Nonne DV, Atamian MT (2013) Annual male lek attendance influences count-based population indices of greater sage-grouse. J Wildl Manag 77:1583–1592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braunisch V, Suchant R (2008) Using ecological forest site mapping for long-term habitat suitability assessments in wildlife conservation—demonstrated for Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus). For Ecol Manag 256:1209–1221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broome A, Connolly T, Quine CP (2014) An evaluation of thinning to improve habitat for capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus). For Ecol Manag 314:94–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bušs K (1997) Forest ecosystem classification in Latvia. Proc Latvian Acad Sci B 51:204–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Butleris A (2014) Reintroduction of Capercaillie in Karšuva forest. Paukščiai 12(4):18–21 (in Lithuanian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Caro T (2010) Conservation by proxy: Indicator, umbrella, keystone, flagship and other surrogate species. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:8086–8091

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Chapron G, Kaczensky P, Linnell JDC, Von Arx M, Huber D, Andrén H, López-Bao JV, Adamec M et al (2014) Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes. Science 346:1517–1519

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chlevickas J (1978) Capercaillie in Šimoniu forest. Mūsų gamta 2:5 (in Lithuanian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dautartas M, Paltanavičius S (1988) Status of the Capercaillie in Lithuania. In: Abstracts of the XII Eastern Baltic Ornithological Conference. Vilnius, pp 67

  • EEA (European Environment Agency) (2007) CLC2006 technical guidelines. EEA Technical report 17. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen

  • Fedy BC, Aldridge CL (2011) The importance of within-year repeated counts and the influence of scale on long-term monitoring of sage-grouse. J Wildl Manag 75:1022–1033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer JB (1791) Versuch einer Naturgeschichte von Livland. Nicolovius, Königsberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gasparatos A, Willis KJ (2015) Biodiversity in the green economy. Routledge studies in ecological economics. Routledge, Oxon, p 40

    Google Scholar 

  • Gjerde I (1991) Cues in winter habitat selection by Capercaillie. II. Experimental evidence. Ornis Scand 22:205–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graf RF, Bollmann K, Sachot S, Suter W, Bugmann H (2006) On the generality of habitat distribution models: A case study of Capercaillie in three Swiss regions. Ecography 29:319–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graf RF, Bollmann K, Bugmann H, Suter W (2007) Forest and landscape structure as predictors of Capercaillie occurrence. J Wildl Manag 71:356–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross L (2005) Why not the best? How science failed the Florida panther. PLoS Biol 3:e333

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gulbrandsen LH (2008) The role of science in environmental governance: competing knowledge producers in Swedish and Norwegian forestry. Global Environ Politics 8:99–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Gossner MM, Meyer ST, Eggermont H, Lens L, Dengler J, Weisser WW (2013) Mind the gaps when using science to address conservation concerns. Biodivers Conserv 22:2413–2427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MC, Potapov PV, Moore R, Hancher M, Turubanova SA, Tyukavina A, Thau D, Stehman SV, et al (2013) High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342:850–853. (The database at http://earthenginepartners.appspot.com/science-2013-global-forest. Accessed on April 2015)

  • Hutchings JA, Marco FB (2009) Scientific advice on species at risk: a comparative analysis of status assessments of polar bear, Ursus maritimus. Environ Rev 17:45–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivanauskas T (1957) Birds of Lithuania, vol 1. Valstybinės politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla, Vilnius (in Lithuanian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob G, Debrunner R, Gugerli F, Schmid B, Bollmann K (2010) Field surveys of capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) in the Swiss Alps underestimated local abundance of the species as revealed by genetic analyses of non-invasive samples. Conserv Genet 11:33–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones-Walters L, Çil A (2011) Biodiversity and stakeholder participation. J Nat Conserv 19:327–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalniņš A (1943) Huntsmanship. Latvju grāmata, Rīga (in Latvian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kask E (1973) That the Capercaillie might continue to mount treetops. Eesti Loodus 16:208–210 (in Estonian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Keskkonnaagentuur (2014) Yearbook Forest 2013. Estonian Environmental Agency, Tartu

  • Krüdener A (1898) Von der Auerhahnbalz in Livland, 1898. Das Waldwerk in Wort und Bild 24:306–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuku J (1940) Let’s extirpate hawks and raise game! Eesti Mets 20:286–288 (in Estonian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumari E (1954) Birds of the Estonian S.S.R. Eesti Riiklik Kirjastus, Tallinn (in Estonian)

  • Kurki S, Nikula A, Helle P, Lindén H (2000) Landscape fragmentation and forest composition effects on grouse breeding success in boreal forests. Ecology 81:1985–1997

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurlavičius P, Kuuba R, Lukins M, Mozgeris G, Tolvanen P, Angelstam P, Karjalainen H, Walsh M (2004) Identifying high conservation value forests in the Baltic States from forest databases. Ecol Bull 51:351–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambeck RJ (1997) Focal species: a multi-species umbrella for nature conservation. Conserv Biol 11:849–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazdinis I, Mavsar R, Weiss G, Lazdinis M (2009) Trends in marketing of non-market forest goods and services in the Baltic States. Balt For 15:65–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Leivits M (2014) Characterisation of capercaillie metapopulation spatial structure by means of habitat suitability model. Publ Inst Geogr Univ Tartu 111:248–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Logminas V (1960) Distribution of Capercaillie in Lithuania. Lietuvos Mokslų Akademijos darbai, Serija C 2(22):97–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Logminas V (1962) Distribution, ecology and possibilities of the population management of some grouse species in Lithuania. PhD dissertation. Vilnius (in Lithuanian)

  • Lõhmus E (1984) Estonian forest site types. Eesti NSV Agrotööstuskoondise Info- ja juurutusvalitsus, Tallinn (in Estonian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lõhmus A (2011) Three-year periodicity in historical raptor-persecution data: an indication of vole cycles? Estonian J Ecol 60:155–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loudon H (1909) Isolierte Auerhühner. Neue Baltische Waidmannsblätter 13:302

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan DC, Marshall K (2006) The Delphi process—an expert-based approach to ecological modelling in data-poor environments. Anim Conserv 9:11–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martenson A (1899) Wald, Wild und Jadg in den russischen Ostseeprovintzen. Neudamm

  • Miettinen J, Helle P, Nikula A, Niemelä P (2009) Changes in landscape-scale habitat selection of capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) in managed north-boreal forest. Silva Fenn 43:595–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihelsons H (1958) Bird protection in Latvian SSR. Saudzējiet un mīliet dabu. Latvijas PSR Zinātņu Akadēmijas izdevniecība, Rīga, pp 119–137 (in Latvian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mikoláš M, Svitok M, Tejkal M, Leitão PJ, Morrissey RC, Svoboda M, Seedre M, Fontaine JB (2015) Evaluating forest management intensity on an umbrella species: Capercaillie persistence in central Europe. For Ecol Manag 354:26–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mollet P, Badilatti B, Bollmann K, Graf RF, Hess R, Jenny H, Mulhauser B, Perrenound A, Rudmann F, Sachot S, Studer J (2003) Verbreitung und Bestand des Auerhuhns Tetrao urogallus in der Schweiz 2001 und ihre Veränderungen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Ornithol Beob 100:67–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Mollet P, Kéry M, Gardner B, Pasinelli G, Royle JA (2015) Estimating population size for capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus L.) with spatial capture-recapture models based on genotypes from one field sample. PLoS ONE 10:e0129020

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Monroe AP, Edmunds DR, Aldridge CL (2016) Effects of lek count protocols on greater sage-grouse population trend estimates. J Wildl Manag 80:667–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolcken B (1870) Hunting in Livonia. Zhurnal Moskovskogo Obschestvo okhoty 6:23–27 (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pakkala T, Pellikka J, Lindén H (2003) Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus: a good candidate for an umbrella species in taiga forests. Wildl Biol 9:309–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Pregernig M (2014) Framings of science-policy interactions and their discursive and institutional effects: examples from conservation and environmental policy. Biodivers Conserv 23:3615–3639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priednieks J, Strazds M, Strazds A, Petriņš A (1989) Latvian Breeding Bird Atlas 1980–1984. Zinātne, Rīga

    Google Scholar 

  • Rametsteiner E, Mayer P (2004) Sustainable forest management and Pan-European forest policy. Ecol Bull 51:51–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Renno O (ed) (1993) Estonian Bird Atlas. Valgus, Tallinn (in Estonian, English summary)

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberge JM, Mikusiński G, Svensson S (2008) The white-backed woodpecker: umbrella species for forest conservation planning? Biodivers Conserv 17:2479–2494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolstad J, Wegge P (1989a) Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) populations and modern forestry: a case for landscape ecological studies. Finn Game Res 46:43–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolstad J, Wegge P (1989b) Effects of logging on Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) leks. II. Cutting experiments in southeastern Norway. Scand J Forest Res 4:111–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolstad J, Wegge P, Sivkov AV, Hjeljord O, Storaunet KO (2009) Size and spacing of grouse leks: comparing Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) and Black grouse (Tetrao tetrix) in two contrasting Eurasian boreal forest landscapes. Can J Zool 87:1032–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romanov AN (1960) Some ecological features of the Capercaillie in relation to cuttings in northern taiga. Trudy Komi filiala AN SSSR 9:61–73 (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Romanov AN (1988) The Capercaillie. Agropromizdat, Moskva (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rootsmäe I, Rootsmäe L (1983) Die Ornitologische Literatur Estlands. Tartu

  • San-Miguel-Ayanz J, Parviainen J, Schuck A, Bozzano M, Estreguil C, Koskela J, Lier M, Spielmann M, Van Brusselen J, Bücking W, Caudullo G, Larsson TB (2011) Criterion 4: maintenance, conservation and appropriate enhancement of biological diversity in forest ecosystems. State of Europe’s Forests 2011: status and trends in sustainable forest management in Europe. Forest Europe, UN Economic Commission for Europe and FAO, Oslo, pp 65–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Santangeli A, Hanski IK, Mäkelä H (2013) Integrating multi-source forest inventory and animal survey data to assess nationwide distribution and habitat correlates of the Siberian flying squirrel. Biol Conserv 157:31–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savchenko IA (2009) Forest management influence on the Hazel grouse and the Wood-grouse resources in the Central Siberia Subtaiga. Vestnik KrasGAU 9:117–121 (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayer JA, Maginnis S (2005) Forests in landscapes: Expanding horizons for ecosystem forestry. In: Sayer JA, Maginnis S (eds) Forests in landscapes: ecosystem approaches to sustainability. The Earthscan Forestry Library, London, pp 177–192

    Google Scholar 

  • Segura A, Castaño-Santamaría J, Laiolo P, Obeso JR (2014) Divergent responses of flagship, keystone and resource-limited bio-indicators to forest structure. Ecol Res 29:925–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg K (1996) Modern forestry and the Capercaillie. In: DeGraaf RM, Miller RI (eds) Conservation of faunal diversity in forested landscapes. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 111–135

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Spies TA, McComb BC, Kennedy RSH, McGrath MT, Olsen K, Pabst RJ (2007) Potential effects of forest policies on terrestrial biodiversity in a multi-ownership province. Ecol Appl 17:48–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Storch I (1997) The importance of scale in habitat conservation for an endangered species: the Capercaillie in Central Europe. In: Bissonette JA (ed) Wildlife and landscape ecology: effects of pattern and scale. Springer, New York, pp 310–330

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Storch I (2007) Conservation status of grouse worldwide: an update. Wildl Biol 13(Suppl 1):5–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchant R, Braunisch V (2004) Multidimensional habitat modelling in forest management: a case study using Capercaillie in the Black Forest, Germany. Ecol Bull 51:455–546

    Google Scholar 

  • Summers RW (2007) Stand selection by birds in Scots pinewoods in Scotland: the need for more old-growth pinewood. Ibis 149(Suppl 2):175–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suter W, Graf RF, Hess R (2002) Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) and avian biodiversity: testing the umbrella-species concept. Conserv Biol 16:778–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teino J (1939) On game management in 1918–1938. Eesti Mets 19:33–37 (in Estonian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Toll E (1987) Beiträge zu einer Avifauna Estlands unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Insel Oesel. Holtland

  • Tyzenhauz K (1842–1846) General ornithology, with the description of birds of the world. Glucksberg, Wilno (in Polish)

  • Uliczka H, Angelstam P, Roberge JM (2004) Indicator species and biodiversity monitoring systems for non-industrial private forest owners: is there a communication problem? Ecol Bull 51:379–384

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (2011) Revised recovery plan for the northern spotted owl, Strix occidentalis caurina. US Fish Wildlife Service, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Viht E (1985) The influence of human action on the Tetraonids population. Ornitol kogum 10:48–57 (in Estonian, English summary)

    Google Scholar 

  • Viht E (1988) Grouse at Lahemaa National Park. Lahemaa uurimused 3:158–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Viht E (1990) Status of tetraonid populations in Estonia. In: Proceedings of the 5th conference on the study and conservation of migratory birds of the Baltic Basin, vol 2. Zinātne, Rīga, pp 216–225

  • Viht E (1974) Changes in the numbers of the Tetraonidae in Estonia. Eesti Lood 17:349–350 (in Estonian, English summary)

    Google Scholar 

  • Viht E, Randla T (2002) The Capercaillie: status of the Estonian population and its survival prospects. Hirundo Suppl 5:1–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegge P, Rolstad J (2011) Clearcutting forestry and Eurasian boreal forest grouse: long-term monitoring of sympatric Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus and Black grouse T. tetrix reveals unexpected effects on their population performances. For Ecol Manag 261:1520–1529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner SR, Spurgeon JPG, Isaksen GH, Smith JP, Springer NK, Gettleson DA, N’Guessan L, Dupont JM (2014) Rapid prioritization of marine ecosystem services and ecosystem indicators. Mar Policy 50:178–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood S, Scheipl F (2014) gamm4: generalized additive mixed models using mgcv and lme4. R package version 0.2-3. http://www.CRAN.R-project.org/package=gamm4

  • Young JC, Jordan A, Searle KR, Butler A, Chapman DS, Simmons P, Watt AD (2013) Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation? Biol Conserv 158:359–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zawadzka D (2004) Directions in active protection of Capercaillie in Poland. Part I. History and present state. Sylwan 5:50–59 (jn Polish, English summary)

    Google Scholar 

  • Zizas R (2015) The influence of forest structure on the Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus L.) habitats and distribution in south-eastern Baltic Sea region. PhD Dissertation. Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper is a tribute to hundreds of devoted bird-watchers, foresters, and gamekeepers across the Baltic States who have collected information on the locations and size of Capercaillie leks. We are particularly grateful to the following persons who contributed large datasets or consulted us during the manuscript preparation: Algis Butleris, Eugenijus Drobelis, Fred Jüssi, Evaldas Klimavičius, Tiit Randla, Vahur Sepp, Gytautas Stukas, Indrek Tammekänd, Tomas Tukačiauskas and Ene Viht. Eerik Leibak critically reviewed the data of the first Estonian bird atlas, and members of the Estonian Capercaillie consortium read the social description provided in the manuscript. Erik Blomberg, an anonymous reviewer and an associate editor provided helpful comments on the full draft. The national surveys in 2008–2015 were funded by the Estonian National Environmental Board and JVC “Latvia’s State Forests”. While compiling the paper, A.L was supported by the Estonian Research Council (Grant IUT 34-7).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Vanemuise 46, 51014, Tartu, Estonia

    Asko Lõhmus

  2. Department of Geography, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Vanemuise 46, 51014, Tartu, Estonia

    Meelis Leivits

  3. Latvijas valsts meži, Vaiņodes 1, Riga, 1004, Latvia

    Elmārs Pēterhofs

  4. Institute of Forestry, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, Liepu st. 1, Kaunas District, 53101, Girionys, Lithuania

    Rytis Zizas

  5. Nature Conservation Agency of Latvia, Baznīcas iela 7, Sigulda, 2150, Latvia

    Helmuts Hofmanis

  6. Department of Landscape Management and Nature Conservation, Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014, Tartu, Estonia

    Ivar Ojaste

  7. Estonian Ornithological Society, Veski 4, 51005, Tartu, Estonia

    Ivar Ojaste

  8. Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences, Studentu st. 39, 08106, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Petras Kurlavičius

Authors
  1. Asko Lõhmus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Meelis Leivits
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elmārs Pēterhofs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rytis Zizas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Helmuts Hofmanis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ivar Ojaste
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Petras Kurlavičius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asko Lõhmus.

Additional information

Communicated by Matts Lindbladh.

This article belongs to the Topical Collection: Forest and plantation biodiversity.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 52 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 1937 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lõhmus, A., Leivits, M., Pēterhofs, E. et al. The Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus): an iconic focal species for knowledge-based integrative management and conservation of Baltic forests. Biodivers Conserv 26, 1–21 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1223-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1223-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation