Study

Higher populations of waders in reserves and higher-tier ESA agreements in southern England

  • Published source details Ausden M. & Hirons G.J.M. (2002) Grassland nature reserves for breeding wading birds in England and the implications for the ESA agri-environment scheme. Biological Conservation, 106, 279-291

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Maintain traditional water meadows

Action Link
Bird Conservation

Maintain traditional water meadows (includes management for breeding and/or wintering waders/waterfowl)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Legally protect habitats

Action Link
Bird Conservation

Pay farmers to cover the costs of bird conservation measures

Action Link
Bird Conservation

Pay farmers to cover the cost of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Maintain traditional water meadows

    A replicated study in 19 nature reserves established across England between 1983 and 1999 (Ausden & Hirons 2002) found that the number of northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus and common redshank Tringa totanus on 13 nature reserves increased by 300% and 500% respectively in the first seven years following the initiation of management aimed at wading birds. Numbers then declined but were still higher than before the initiation of management. However, across all reserves, common snipe Gallinago gallinago declined, largely due to population collapses on reserves with mineral soils. Management included immediate changes to grazing (reduced during breeding seasons and adjusted to produce a favourable sward) and mowing (delayed until after nesting) and hydrological changes (raising water levels, surface flooding) introduced over two or more years. This study is also discussed in ‘Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures’ and ‘Legally protect habitats’.

     

  2. Maintain traditional water meadows (includes management for breeding and/or wintering waders/waterfowl)

    A replicated study in 19 lowland wet grassland nature reserves established across England between 1983 and 1999 (Ausden & Hirons 2002) found that the number of northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus and common redshank Tringa totanus on 13 nature reserves increased by 300% and 500% respectively in the first seven years following the initiation of management aimed at wading birds. Numbers then declined but were still higher than before the initiation of management. However, across all reserves, common snipe Gallinago gallinago declined, largely due to population collapses on reserves with mineral soils. Management included immediate changes to grazing (reduced during breeding seasons and adjusted to produce a favourable sward) and mowing (delayed until after nesting) and hydrological changes (raising water levels, surface flooding) introduced over two or more years.

     

  3. Legally protect habitats

    A replicated study in 1997 in 19 nature reserves across England (Ausden & Hirons 2002) found that they held consistently higher densities of northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus, common redshank Tringa totanus and common snipe Gallinago gallinago than the non-reserve Environmentally Sensitive Areas (an agri-environment scheme designation) surrounding them (densities approximately 730% higher for lapwing, 520% higher for redshank and 1600% higher for snipe). In addition, population trends were generally positive in reserves (except for snipe), but negative outside them (lapwing: 0.9-7.4% annual increase inside reserves vs. 0.7-13% decline outside; redshank: 3.9-8.6% increase vs. 1.8-18.6% decrease; snipe: 6.1-16.8% decrease in reserves vs. 7.3-29.7% decrease outside). The authors note that snipe have declined by approximately 70% across all reserves, due mainly to declines at a single reserve with a large population and on reserves with mineral soils (i.e. those with little organic matter). However, declines outside reserves were considerably higher than those on reserves (20% vs. 10% annually). This study is discussed in detail in ‘Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures’ and ‘Maintain traditional water meadows’.

  4. Pay farmers to cover the costs of bird conservation measures

    A study in 1997 in two Environmentally Sensitive Areas in eastern England (Ausden & Hirons 2002) found that higher tier options (i.e. those with more demanding prescriptions but higher financial compensation) held significantly higher densities of wading birds (northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus, common redshank Tringa totanus and common snipe Gallinago gallinago) than lower tiers (Tier 1: 0.02-0.04 pairs/ha; Tier 2: 0.07-0.22; Tier 3: 0.40). In addition, they held more waders for each unit of money spent on the Environmentally Sensitive Area (Tier 1: 18-46 pairs/£100,000; Tier 2: 29-114; Tier 3: 167). However, when examining 1988-1997 population trends in four Environmentally Sensitive Areas, the authors found all three species investigated declined significantly (lapwing: 0.7-13% decline each year; redshank: 1.8-18.6%; snipe: 7.3-29.7%). The impact of wetland protection and management on waders is discussed in ‘Maintain traditional water meadows’ and ‘Legally protect habitats’.

  5. Pay farmers to cover the cost of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes)

    A study in 1997 in two Environmentally Sensitive Areas in eastern England (Ausden & Hirons 2002) found that higher tier options (i.e. those with more demanding prescriptions but higher financial compensation) held significantly higher densities of wading birds (northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus, common redshank Tringa totanus and common snipe Gallinago gallinago) than lower tiers (Tier 1: 0.02-0.04 pairs/ha; Tier 2: 0.07-0.22; Tier 3: 0.40). In addition, they held more waders for each unit of money spent on the Environmentally Sensitive Area (Tier 1: 18-46 pairs/£100,000; Tier 2: 29-114; Tier 3: 167). However, when examining 1988-1997 population trends in four Environmentally Sensitive Areas, the authors found all three species investigated declined significantly (lapwing: 1-13% decline each year, redshank: 2-19%, snipe: 7-30%).

     

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust