A highly endangered species on the edge: distribution, habitat use and outlook for Colias myrmidone in newly established Natura 2000 areas in Romania

  • Jacqueline LoosEmail author
  • Tibor-Csaba Vizauer
  • Agnes Kastal
  • Martin Davies
  • Hans Hedrich
  • Matthias Dolek


Romania is one of the last strongholds of the Danube Clouded Yellow (Colias myrmidone), which is a critically endangered European butterfly species. Knowledge gaps of the ecology and the underlying drivers for its decline hinder the development and implementation of suitable management plans. Here, we investigated habitat characteristics and the social-ecological conditions in two recently established Natura 2000 sites in Romania. We conducted ecological surveys of the species’ occurrence and its habitats. We interviewed local farmers about their land-use practices and their perception of the Natura 2000 areas. Moreover, we investigated the information flow on the Natura 2000 implementation process between representatives of local governmental and non-governmental organizations. Occupied sites contained a mixture of small-scale, extensively used parcels with larger extensively grazed pastures interspersed with semi-natural elements. None of our interview partners knew previously about the designation of the respective Natura 2000 areas. People appreciated conservation efforts for the butterfly but feared restrictions that may narrow their activities and their economic benefits. Further land-use changes may threaten C. myrmidone in Romania still more in future. Fostering viability of humans and butterflies in Romania requires integration of scientific knowledge and people into management decisions. Instead of dictating rigid management schemes, such a participatory approach bears the potential to allow for spatial and temporal heterogeneity that seems to support the butterfly. Eventually, the survival of C. myrmidone depends on coordination between policies and sufficient financial support to maintain traditional and ecologically feasible management instead of detrimental developments such as intensification, abandonment and afforestation.


Butterfly conservation EU-policy Grassland management Invertebrates Land-use change Participation Protected Area Sustainable rural development 



We dedicate this work to deceased Anton Koschuh, whose family kindly shared his observations. We thank Mike Prentice, Simon Spencer, Kevin Tolhurst and Dave Plowman (European Butterflies Group) for helping with the ecological surveys. Land owners, mayors, environment agencies, Lehel Csaba Sándor, Florin Păcurar, Ágnes Balázsi and László Rákosy provided important information. Funded through a start-up grant for Young Academics at Goettingen University, with additional support from the European Butterflies Group and the Bavarian Academy for Nature Conservation and Landscape Management as well as with contributions from a project (No. 89475) of the German Federal Environment Ministry’s Advisory Assistance Programme (AAP) supervised by the German Environment Agency and the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation.

Supplementary material

10668_2018_297_MOESM1_ESM.doc (71 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 71 kb)


  1. Abrams, M. (2003). The advanced spaceborne thermal emission and reflection radiometer (ASTER): Data products for the high spatial resolution imager on NASA’s Terra platform. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 21(5), 847–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Apostolopoulou, E., & Pantis, J. D. (2009). Conceptual gaps in the national strategy for the implementation of the European Natura 2000 conservation policy in Greece. Biological Conservation, 142(1), 221–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Babai, D., & Molnár, Z. (2014). Small-scale traditional management of highly species-rich grasslands in the Carpathians. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 182, 123–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Babai, D., & Molnár, Z. (2016). Species-rich mountain grasslands through the eyes of the farmer: Flora, species composition, and extensive grassland management. Martor, 21, 147–169.Google Scholar
  5. Babai, D., Tóth, A., Szentirmai, I., Bíró, M., Máté, A., Demeter, L., et al. (2015). Do conservation and agri-environmental regulations effectively support traditional small-scale farming in East-Central European cultural landscapes? Biodiversity and Conservation, 24(13), 3305–3327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Batáry, P., Dicks, L. V., Kleijn, D., & Sutherland, W. J. (2015). The role of agri-environment schemes in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 29(4), 1006–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkes, F. (2004). Rethinking community-based conservation. Conservation Biology, 18(3), 621–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertzky, M., Dickson, B., Galt, R., Glen, E., Harley, M., Hodgson, N., et al. (2010). Impacts of climate change and selected renewable energy infrastructures on EU biodiversity and the Natura 2000 network: Summary report. Brussel: European Commission and International Union for Conservation of Nature.Google Scholar
  9. Bíró, R., Demeter, L., Knowles, B. (2011). Farming and management of Hay Meadows in Csík and Gyimes—Experiences from social research. In B. Knowles (Ed.), Mountain hay meadows—hotspots of biodiversity and traditional culture. London: Society of Biology. Available online at: Accessed on 2, May 2018.
  10. Bubová, T., Vrabec, V., Kulma, M., & Nowicki, P. (2015). Land management impacts on European butterflies of conservation concern: a review. Journal of Insect Conservation, 19(5), 805–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cumming, G. S., Allen, C. R., Ban, N. C., Biggs, D., Biggs, H. C., Cumming, D. H., et al. (2015). Understanding protected area resilience: a multi-scale, social-ecological approach. Ecological Applications, 25(2), 299–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis, M., Naumann, S., McFarland, K., Graf, A., Evans, D. (2014). Literature review, the ecological effectiveness of the Natura 2000 Network. ETC/BD report to the EEA (p. 30).Google Scholar
  13. Dennis, R. L. H. (2004). Butterfly habitats, broad-scale biotope affiliations, and structural exploitation of vegetation at finer scales: The matrix revisited. Ecological Entomology, 29, 744–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dolek, M., Freese, A., Geyer, A., Stetter, H. (2005). The decline of Colias myrmidone at the western edge of its range and notes on its habitat requirements. Versita Solipska 14A.Google Scholar
  15. Dolek, M., & Geyer, A. (2002). Conserving biodiversity on calcareous grasslands in the Franconian Jura by grazing: A comprehensive approach. Biological Conservation, 104, 351–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dorresteijn, I., Loos, J., Hanspach, J., & Fischer, J. (2015). Socioecological drivers facilitating biodiversity conservation in traditional farming landscapes. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 9, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Environment Agency. (2012). CORINE land cover. Acquired from Accessed Oct 2017.
  18. Epstein, G., Pittman, J., Alexander, S. M., Berdej, S., Dyck, T., Kreitmair, U., et al. (2015). Institutional fit and the sustainability of social-ecological systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. European Commission. (1992). Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Accessed Oct 2017.
  20. European Commission. (2011). Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Acquired from Accessed Oct 2017.
  21. Freese, A., Dolek, M., Geyer, A., & Stetter, H. (2005). Biology, distribution, and extinction of Colias myrmidone (Lepidoptera, Pieridae) in Bavaria and its situation in other European countries. Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera, 38, 51–58.Google Scholar
  22. Gaston, K. J., Jackson, S. F., Nagy, A., Cantú-Salazar, L., & Johnson, M. (2008). Protected areas in Europe. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1134(1), 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Geyer, A., & Dolek, M. (2001). Das Artenhilfsprogramm für den Apollofalter (Parnassius apollo) in Bayern. Schriftenreihe des Bayerischen LFU, 156, 301–318.Google Scholar
  24. Hartel, T., Olga Réti, K., Craioveanu, C., Gallé, R., Popa, R., Ioniţă, A., et al. (2016). Rural social-ecological systems navigating institutional transitions: case study from Transylvania (Romania). Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 2(2), e01206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hijmans, R. J., Cameron, S. E., Parra, J. L., Jones, P. G., & Jarvis, A. (2005). Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology, 25, 1965–1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hochkirch, A., Schmitt, T., Beninde, J., Hiery, M., Kinitz, T., Kirschey, J., et al. (2013). Europe needs a new vision for a Natura 2020 network. Conservation Letters, 6(6), 462–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Iojă, C. I., Pătroescu, M., Rozylowicz, L., Popescu, V. D., Vergheleţ, M., Zotta, M. I., et al. (2010). The efficacy of Romania’s protected areas network in conserving biodiversity. Biological Conservation, 143(11), 2468–2476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Joppa, L. N., Loarie, S. R., & Pimm, S. L. (2008). On the protection of “protected areas”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(18), 6673–6678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kadlec, T., Vrba, P., Kepka, P., Schmitt, T., & Konvicka, M. (2010). Tracking the decline of the once-common butterfly: delayed oviposition, demography and population genetics in the hermit Chazara briseis. Animal Conservation, 13(2), 172–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kati, V., Hovardas, T., Dieterich, M., Ibisch, P. L., Mihok, B., & Selva, N. (2015). The challenge of implementing the European network of protected areas Natura 2000. Conservation Biology, 29(1), 260–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keenleyside, C., Beaufoy, G., Tucker, G., Jones, G. (2014). High nature value farming throughout EU-27 and its financial support under the CAP. Report Prepared for DG Environment, Contract No ENVB.1/ETU/2012/0035. Institute for European Environmental Policy, London.Google Scholar
  32. Konvicka, M., Benes, J., Cizek, O., Kopecek, F., Konvicka, O., & Vitaz, L. (2008). How too much care kills species: Grassland reserves, agri-environmental schemes and extinction of Colias myrmidone (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) from its former stronghold. Journal of Insect Conservation, 12(5), 519–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kümmerle, T., Müller, D., Griffiths, P., & Rusu, M. (2009). Land use change in Southern Romania after the collapse of socialism. Regional Environmental Change, 9(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Löffler, F., Stuhldreher, G., & Fartmann, T. (2013). How much care does a shrub-feeding hairstreak butterfly, Satyrium spini (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), need in calcareous grasslands? European Journal of Entomology, 110(1), 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Loos, J., Dorresteijn, I., Hanspach, J., Fust, P., Rákosy, L., & Fischer, J. (2014). Low-intensity agricultural landscapes in Transylvania support high butterfly diversity: Implications for conservation. PLoS One. Scholar
  36. Mace, G. M. (2014). Whose conservation? Science, 345, 1558–1560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Manolache, S., Ciocanea, C. M., Rozylowicz, L., & Nita, A. (2017). Natura 2000 in Romania–A decade of governance challenges. European Journal of Geography, 8(2), 24–34.Google Scholar
  38. Marhoul, P., & Dolek, M. (2012). Action plan for the conservation of the Danube Clouded Yellow Colias myrmidone in the European Union. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  39. Mascia, M. B., & Pailler, S. (2011). Protected area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement (PADDD) and its conservation implications. Conservation Letters, 4, 9–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mathevet, R., Thompson, J. D., Folke, C., & Chapin, F. S. (2016). Protected areas and their surrounding territory: Socioecological systems in the context of ecological solidarity. Ecological Applications, 26(1), 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mikulcak, F., Newig, J., Milcu, A. I., Hartel, T., & Fischer, J. (2013). Integrating rural development and biodiversity conservation in Central Romania. Environmental Conservation, 40, 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Milieu, IEEP and ICF. (2016). Evaluation study to support the fitness check of the birds and habitats directives.Google Scholar
  43. Nakonieczny, M., Kedziorski, A., & Michalczyk, K. (2007). Apollo butterfly (Parnassius apollo L.) in Europe–its history, decline and perspectives of conservation. Functional Ecosystems and Communities, 1(1), 56–79.Google Scholar
  44. Nastran, M. (2015). Why does nobody ask us? Impacts on local perception of a protected area in designation, Slovenia. Land Use Policy, 46, 38–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Oppermann, R., Beaufoy, G., & Jones, G. (2012). High nature value farming in Europe. 35 European countries—Experiences and perspectives. Ubstadt-Weiher: Verlag Regionalkultur.Google Scholar
  46. Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325(5939), 419–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Popescu, V. D., Rozylowicz, L., Niculae, I. M., Cucu, A. L., & Hartel, T. (2014). Species, habitats, society: An evaluation of research supporting EU’s Natura 2000 network. PLoS One, 9(11), e113648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schmitt, T., & Rákosy, L. (2007). Changes of traditional agrarian landscapes and their conservation implications: A case study of butterflies in Romania. Diversity and Distributions, 13(6), 855–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Settele, J., Dover, J., Dolek, M., & Konvicka, M. (2009). Butterflies of European ecosystems: Impact of land use and options for conservation management. In J. Settele, T. G. Shreeve, M. Konvicka, & H. Van Dyck (Eds.), Ecology of butterflies in Europe (pp. 353–370). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Stancioiu, P. T., Abrudan, I. V., & Dutca, I. (2010). The Natura 2000 ecological network and forests in Romania: implications on management and administration. International Forestry Review, 12(1), 106–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stephanson, S. L., & Mascia, M. B. (2014). Putting people on the map through an approach that integrates social data in conservation planning. Conservation Biology, 28(5), 1236–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stoate, C., Báldi, A., Beja, P., Boatman, N. D., Herzon, I., Van Doorn, A., et al. (2009). Ecological impacts of early 21st century agricultural change in Europe—A review. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(1), 22–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stürck, J., & Verburg, P. H. (2017). Multifunctionality at what scale? A landscape multifunctionality assessment for the European Union under conditions of land use change. Landscape Ecology, 32(3), 481–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sutcliffe, L., Akeroyd, J., Page, N., & Popa, R. (2015). Combining approaches to support high nature value farmland in southern Transylvania, Romania. Hacquetia, 14(1), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Szentirmai, I., Mesterházy, A., Varga, I., Schubert, Z., Sándor, L. C., Ábrahám, L., et al. (2014). Habitat use and population biology of the Danube Clouded Yellow butterfly Colias myrmidone (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in Romania. Journal of Insect Conservation, 18(3), 417–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Van Swaay, C. A. (2002). The importance of calcareous grasslands for butterflies in Europe. Biological Conservation, 104(3), 315–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Swaay, C. A., Cuttelod, A., Collins, S., Maes, D., López Munguira, M., Šašić, M., et al. (2010). European red list of butterflies. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  58. Verovnik, R., Govedič, M., & Šalamun, A. (2011). Is the Natura 2000 network sufficient for conservation of butterfly diversity? A case study in Slovenia. Journal of Insect Conservation, 15(1–2), 345–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Vizauer, T. C. (2011). Distribution data of the Danube Clouded Yellow (Colias myrmidone Esper, 1781) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in Romania. [A narancslepke (Colias myrmidone Esper, 1781) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) elterjedési adatai Romániában]. In B. Markó & E. Sárkány-Kiss (Eds.), A Gyergyói-medence: egy mozaikos táj természeti értékei (pp. 75–100). Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.Google Scholar
  60. Watson, J. E., Dudley, N., Segan, D. B., & Hockings, M. (2014). The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature, 515, 67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Special Working Session, Our common future, 1987.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AgroecologyGeorg-August University GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  2. 2.Faculty of Sustainability Science, Sustainable Use of Natural Resources, Institute of EcologyLeuphana UniversityLüneburgGermany
  3. 3.Romanian Lepidopterological SocietyCluj-NapocaRomania
  4. 4.Hungarian Department of Biology and EcologyBabeş-Bolyai UniversityCluj-NapocaRomania
  5. 5.European Butterflies GroupSandyUK
  6. 6.SighisoaraRomania
  7. 7.Ecological Research and Planning Geyer and DolekWörthseeGermany

Personalised recommendations