# European_Red_List_2017_December

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU 27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 166,000-220,000 pairs, which equates to 332,000-440,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 55,800-81,200 pairs, which equates to 112,000-162,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is mainly resident, but its northernmost populations in Scandinavia and Russia migrate south between September and November, returning in March and April (Snow and Perrins 1998, Orta and Marks 2014). Soaring flight is used frequently (Snow and Perrins 1998). It is always seen singly or in pairs (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). It inhabits mature woodland, preferring areas near clearings and the forest edge. Small birds and mammals make up the vast majority of its diet, with grouse, pheasants and partridges being especially important in boreal zones. Nests are built on the forks or branches of large trees and are made of sticks, lined with twigs and fresh leaves. Clutches are usually two to four (Orta and Marks 2014).

threats:
Significant declines in Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries are thought to have resulted from persecution and deforestation, with later declines in the 1950s and 1960s a result of poisoning from pesticides and heavy metals. Persecution continues to be a threat, as is nest robbing for falconry (Orta and Marks 2014). It is also highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind farm developments (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. SubspeciesA. g. arrigonii is listed on Annex I of the EU Birds Directive. The species benefits from natural and managed reafforestation, for example in Ukraine, it is expanding southwards in plantations (Orta and Marks 2014).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Restrictions on hunting and nest robbing should be implemented and enforced where they are lacking. Important areas of optimal habitat, consisting of farmland interspersed with mature forest should be preserved (Orta and Marks 2014).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU 27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 403,000-582,000 pairs, which equates to 805,000-1,160,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 214,000-357,000 pairs, which equates to 428,000-714,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is migratory in the north of its range, with these birds wintering in southern Europe, southern Asia and less commonly in Africa (Meyburg and Marks 2014). Further south, birds tend to be resident or dispersive (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Meyburg and Marks 2014). Migrants move south between July and November, returning between March and June (Snow and Perrins 1998). Birds are generally solitary, except when nesting, and tend to migrate singly although large concentrations do form at narrow sea crossings (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). It mainly inhabits forest, although preferring this to be interspersed with open areas. Small birds make up the vast majority of its diet. The nest is built in the lower crown of trees, on a fork or branch. A new nest is built each year by both sexes and is a platform of sticks with little or no greenery. It typically lays three to six eggs (Meyburg and Marks 2014).

threats:
Widespread persecution, especially from gamekeepers, in the 20th century caused large numbers of the birds to be killed (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Meyburg and Marks 2014). Sharp declines in Europe in the 1950s and 1960s were driven by the use of harmful organochlorine pesticides, which causes direct mortality of adults as well as reduced breeding success. The species is still trapped in its thousands annually in Turkey, where it is used by falconers, but habitat alteration is thought to be the major contemporary threat (Meyburg and Marks 2014). It is also highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind energy developments (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. The species has recovered in range and numbers from 1970 to 1990 due to the ban on organochloride pesticides. It has also recovered in areas where persecution has been controlled (Meyburg and Marks 2014) and illegal killing is no longer a serious threat (Meyburg and Schmidt 2006).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Pesticide use should be reduced and maintained and agricultural practices should support large populations of songbirds. Trapping and hunting restrictions should be enforced. During the breeding season, forestry operations should be avoided. The placement of wind turbines should considered carefully to minimise mortality in this and other species.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 2,300-2,500 pairs, which equates to 4,600-5,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 2,100 pairs, which equates to 4,300 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species inhabits forested areas in hills and mountains at 300–1,500 m. Two different eco-geographical categories occur in Europe: lowland sierras covered by dense Mediterranean maquis (Spain and Greece) and sub alpine forests (Spain) (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). It forages over many kinds of open terrain, including forest, bare mountains, steppe and open grasslands (Batbayar et al. 2006).

Egg-laying occurs February to April, often in loose colonies or nuclei. It builds a very large (145–190 cm wide, 95–300 cm deep) stick nest, mainly in evergreen oak (Quercus) or pine (Pinus) in Spain and in Armenia and Azerbaijan mainly in juniper (Juniperus). Nesting on rock is extremely rare in Europe. Clutch size is typically one egg (Meyburg and Christie 2014). Its diet consists mainly of carrion from medium-sized or large mammal carcasses, although snakes and insects have been recorded as food items. Live prey is rarely taken (Batbayar et al. 2006). The species is largely resident although some small scale dispersive movements occur in Europe (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997).

threats:
The two main threats to the species are direct mortality caused by humans (either accidentally or deliberately) and decreasing availability of food. The main cause of unnatural death is the use of poisoned baits for predator extermination (Anon. 2004b), although shooting and destruction of nests also occurs (Anon. 2004b; N. Batbayar in litt. 2005). There are fears that veterinary application of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug Diclofenac, which has caused the near-extinction of several Gyps vultures in India, may have a negative impact on this species (N. Batbayar in litt. 2005). A study in central Spain during 2003-2005 found high concentrations of antibiotics in blood samples from 57% of nestlings tested (Lemus et al. 2008). The same study found two antibiotics in the liver samples of all dead nestlings that were tested. It is hypothesised that antibiotic residues, particularly quinolones, cause liver and kidney damage, and deplete lymphoid organs and alter bacterial flora, facilitating pathogenic bacterial and fungal infections (Lemus et al. 2008). In Europe, decreased food availability was formerly caused by European Union legislation on carcass disposal (Anon. 2004b); however, recently passed regulations will allow the operation of feeding stations for scavengers (A. Brunner in litt. 2010). In eastern Europe, particularly in the former Soviet Union, changes in agricultural practices and human migration from the countryside to the cities have greatly reduced numbers of domestic livestock. In Georgia and Armenia, declines may be linked to the loss of subsidies for sheep-herding in the post-Soviet era (M. McGrady in litt. 2007). Additionally, there have been steep declines in many populations of wild ungulates which provide a major food source for the species. Habitat loss is also thought to be important (Anon. 2004). Outside of Europe, the majority of brood losses occur during the incubation period and it is suspected this may be partially due to low and fluctuating temperatures (Batbayar et al. 2006) and so changes in air temperatures resulting from climate change may be a potential future threat to the species.

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. A European Action Plan for the species was published in 1996 (Heredia 1996). The EU Birds Directive has contributed to the recovery and conservation of the species in Europe, particularly Spain, where the population increased from an estimated 290 pairs in 1984 to a minimum of 1,845 pairs in 2006 (De la Puente et al. 2007). Co-operation between Spanish government agencies and conservationists under the 'Antidote Programme' also appears to have been effective in mitigating the effects of poisoned baits. Both the Spanish and the Andalusian Governments have produced anti-poisoning strategies, but the former still remain to be financially supported while the latter need more decisive official endorsement. A reintroduction project in Grands Causses, southern France has resulted in the establishment of a small breeding population (16 pairs were breeding in 2006 (Eliotout et al. 2007)) with good prospects. Supplementary feeding programmes have been initiated in Spain and France to provide a safe, poison-free food source, although there are concerns that the species may be not very prone to feeding at conventional feeding stations. Captive breeding populations have also been established (Tewes et al.1998).  In the Balkans, the species has only one stable colony in the Dadia forest reserve in northern Greece, where WWF has long been involved. Supplementary food is also provided in Bulgaria for breeding birds (Anon. 2007). In eastern Europe, fewer conservation actions are known, although the species occurs within a number of protected areas in the region. The Balkan Vulture Action Plan aims to transfer expertise and technology relating to the conservation of the species from western to eastern parts of Europe (Anon. 2004b). 

Conservation Actions Proposed
Survey to determine the species's status and population trends on breeding grounds outside Europe and on wintering grounds (Anon. 2004b). Research threats, particularly the decline in abundance of prey species. Carry out reintroductions to link up the western and the eastern sub-areas of the present range, following the recommendations of IUCN and the Black Vulture Conservation Foundation. Develop the captive breeding programme to support both this and future reintroduction and supplementation efforts.  Restore wild rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) populations in the Iberian Peninsula and the Balearic Islands (Spain) as this may help to increase food availability, particularly during the breeding period. Promote cooperation and information exchange among people working on the species, both at a national and international level. Strengthen and enforce legislation regulating trade in pesticides that are used to poison meat baits. Increase the rate of prosecution and the severity of judicial sentences for illegal poisoning.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

This species has a very small population, which is increasing but is dependent on on-going intensive management measures to mitigate the impact of threats such as poisoning, electrocution and insufficient food availability, as well as the increasing cooperation of land-owners. It is endemic to the EU27 and is therefore listed as Vulnerable in both Europe and the EU27.

range:
The species breeds in Spain in the Sierras of Guadarrama and Gredos, the plains of the Tajo and Tiétar rivers, the central hills of Extremadura, Montes de Toledo, the Alcudia valley, Sierra Morena and the Guadalquivir marshes, with occasional nesting in Salamanca (González 1996). The species has not been recorded as breeding in Málaga province since at least the early 1970s (J. R. Garrido in litt. 2013). The species recolonised Portugal in 2003, after an absence of breeding activity for over 20 years (S. Cabezas-Díaz, J. C. Atienza et al. in litt. 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 370-380 pairs, which equates to 740-750 mature individuals. The entire population is found in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species occurs in alluvial plains and dunes in the Guadalquivir marshes, plains and hills in central Spain, and high mountain slopes in the Sistema Central and other areas of Portugal, where there is an absence of irrigated farmland (Fernández et al. 2009). It nests only on trees, typically in the crown (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013). Data from Doñana National Park in Spain show that the most important variables explaining nest site selection are height of tree and distance from human activity (Bisson et al. 2002). Both adults construct the nest, a large structure of twigs with a cup lined with green twigs, fur, grass and debris. Each pair has between two to six nests, but reuse of same nest in consecutive seasons fairly common. Clutch size is between one to four eggs (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013). The abundance and distribution of rabbits, its favoured prey, influences population density, range (Fernández et al. 2009) and reproductive performance. Indeed, its evolutionary dependence on rabbits has been suggested as permanently limiting its abundance and distribution (Ferrer and Negro 2004), although a recent study has suggested the species exhibits a certain dietary plasticity, at least during the non-breeding season, adapting its diet when rabbits are scarce (Sánchez et al. 2010). Many recently-colonised territories are in marginal areas, and several of the occupying pairs include at least one sub-adult bird (González and Oria 2004, González et al. 2006b, Margalida et al. 2007). Adults are sedentary but young birds, when they become independent disperse in all directions (strongly influenced by prevailing winds at time of departure), regularly travelling up to 350 km (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
The analysis of 267 records of non-natural mortality in this species over a 16-year period (1989-2004) shows an average annual rate of 15.1 individuals found dead annually, and that electrocution (47.7%) and poisoning (30.7%) were the most frequent causes of mortality (González et al. 2007). Juveniles are frequently killed through electrocution by powerlines, and this has increased in recent years (L. M. González in litt. 2005). This remains the primary threat in Andalucía, with six birds found to have died this way in 2011 and three found dead in 2012 where mitigation measures had been attempted (J. R. Garrido in litt. 2013). Renewable energy development poses another potentially significant threat. Habitat fragmentation has occurred as a result of deforestation for agriculture and timber, having negative impacts on nest site preferences in particular. Suitable habitat in breeding and dispersal areas has also declined as a consequence of urban development and land-use changes (e.g. new irrigation schemes in Huelva (B. Sánchez in litt. 2007)). Mortality from intentional poisoning has risen sharply, particularly in hunting reserves where game is commercially exploited. Between 1990 and 1999, 57 birds died from poisoning and this is thought to be the primary cause of declines in the late 1990s (J. Criado in litt. 1999). In Doñana National Park in particular, the population has been seriously affected by the illegal use of poisoned bait, especially during the 1990s (Ortega et al. 2009). Rabbit populations have declined in both Spain and Portugal, as a result of viral haemorrhagic disease, and this is believed to have reduced breeding success (Margalida et al. 2007; S. Cabezas-Díaz, J. C. Atienza et al. in litt. 2013). In addition, changes in the management of hunting estates in both Spain and Portugal to favour larger quarry species, such as deer and boar, rather than rabbits and partridges, has further reduced prey availability (B. Sánchez in litt. 2007, S. Cabezas-Díaz, J. C. Atienza et al. in litt. 2013). In spring 2009, a male bird was shot and killed in Portugal, highlighting the current threat of hunting to this species. Human activities in the vicinity of active nests can disturb incubating adults and reduce hatching success (González et al. 2006, Margalida et al. 2007). The ingestion of lead shot embedded in the flesh of prey items may be a problem in certain areas (González and Oria 2004, Pain et al. 2005). Recent modelling suggests no subpopulations are currently at risk of extinction, provided that active management is maintained (L. M. González in litt. 2005).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix I. CMS Appendix I and II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. There are 24 Important Bird Areas identified for the species, 22 in Spain and 2 in Portugal. Altogether, there are 107 areas protected by Law (national and EU Special Protected Areas,) containing c.70% of the total breeding population (Barov and Derhé 2011). Since 1987, national and regional governments have been implementing a coordinated conservation plan for the species. A European action plan was published in 1996 and updated in 2008 (Sánchez et al. 2008), and a national plan is being implemented. From 1991-1999, 14,370 dangerous electric towers were modified, considerably reducing deaths from electrocution (L. M. González in litt. 2005) and more recently, work has been carried out to isolate dangerous powerlines on private farms (Cabezas 2011). It is thought that nearly €2.6 million were spent on the mitigation of bird electrocution in Andalucía during 1992-2009, although not all mitigation measures have proved to be totally effective for this species (J. R. Garrido in litt. 2013). A supplementary feeding programme has been established to mitigate the effects of rabbit decreases, and has significantly increased breeding success (L. M. González in litt. 2005). Nest monitoring has reduced disturbance and improved reproductive success. The Flying High Programme created by SEO/BirdLife in 2006, begun its second phase in 2009 until 2012, based on a large land stewardship network (of municipalities, land-owners and schools). This network focuses on habitat management, species conservation, awareness and information activities covering the species’s entire distribution. So far, 54 municipalities have joined the network. Work is on-going to raise awareness and support on private land where the species breeds, including improving habitat management (García 2007), and nearly 50% of breeding pairs are covered by such projects (L. M. González in litt. 2005). From 2002 to 2011, 73 young birds were released in Cádiz as part of a reintroduction project, and by 2012 five breeding pairs had become established in the province; however, mortality associated with powerlines appears to be high amongst these birds (M. Pandolfi in litt. 2003, B. Sánchez in litt. 2007, J. R. Garrido in litt. 2013). Nevertheless, the establishment of a breeding population in Cádiz further reduces the overall probability of extinction (Muriel et al. 2011). Two birds originating from a reintroduction project in Andalucía are known to have bred in Portugal (J. R. Garrido in litt. 2013).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Continue with actions to reduce mortality, particularly from poisoning and electrocution (González and Oria 2004). Survey the breeding population annually. Approve regional recovery plans (González and Oria 2004).  Maintain an adequate area of legally protected habitat (e.g. within the Natura 2000 network (González and Oria 2004)).  Protect and manage breeding sites and key dispersal areas.  Continue the successful nest monitoring and supplementary feeding programmes  and develop a captive breeding programme to support future reintroduction and supplementation efforts.  Promote the recovery of the rabbit population (González and Oria 2004). Modify dangerous powerlines.  Avoid the construction of wind farms in key areas for the species (B. Sánchez in litt. 2007). Increase coordination between private landowners, NGOs and government (González and Oria 2004, B. Sánchez in litt. 2007).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 9,300-12,300 pairs, which equates to 18,500-24,500 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 4,900-5,700 pairs, which equates to 9,700-11,400 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This is the most widespread of the Aquila eagles, ranging across the Nearctic and Palearctic (70°N to 20°S). It is uncommon to scarce across its range. In general, the species is sedentary, with juveniles dispersing as far as 1,000 km in their first few years. Birds occupying the mostly northerly regions (>65°N), such as Fennoscandia and northern Russia, migrate south. In the Palearctic, movements occur in a broad front to wintering areas in south-east Europe and the Russian steppes. Juveniles and immatures will go as far as North Africa (Ferguson- Lees and Christie 2001). The species occupies a wide range of flat or mountainous, largely open habitats, often above the tree line (Watson 2010), from sea level to 4,000 m (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). The species’s diet is very broad, taking mammals, birds, reptiles, fish, amphibians, insects and carrion variously, depending on the regional prey availability. Prey taken are usually 0.5–4.0 kg and the species can hunt in pairs or small groups (Ferguson- Lees and Christie 2001). Nesting occurs on cliff ledges and where these are not available, in large trees or similar artificial structures. Nests are constructed from sticks and are added to in successive years, growing to 2 m in diameter. The breeding season spans March – August throughout the majority of its range, and in southern areas begins as early as November; whilst in the most northerly regions it will start as late as April (Ferguson- Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
The species was heavily persecuted in the 19th Century, and although this threat has diminished significantly with populations now generally stable, the species is still deliberately poisoned, shot and trapped, and it is declining in Spain (Katzner et al. 2012a).  In the past the species was affected by the use of organochlorine pesticides although this is not a significant problem today. There are records of mortality as a result of electrocution when perching on power lines, but no data to suggest any substantial demographic impact. Wind energy developments are a source of direct mortality for the species (Watson 2010).  Future developments in flyways may affect migrating adult eagles, and locally may cause effective habitat loss and lead to collisions (Katzner et al. 2012b). In addition, afforestation, long term changes in food supply, including reduced livestock carrion through changing management practices and climate change, may threaten the species in the future (Watson 2010).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. The banning of poisons and the introduction of legal protection in some areas of its range have permitted the species to increase or at least stabilize in many countries (Ortaet al. 2013).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Enforcement of protection against illegal killings and egg-collecting is needed in many countries. Education programmes demonstrating the benefits and desirability of maintaining healthy populations of this species should be implemented. In remote upland areas, general land-use policies should not compromise key feeding and nesting requirements. There is a particular need to protect extensive areas of wooded peatland in north-east Europe. Further information is required on numbers and the stability of unmonitored populations (Tucker and Heath 1994).


taxonomicNotes:
Aquila fasciata (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously listed as A. fasciatus.

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)

This eagle underwent moderately rapid population declines in Spain, which holds c.66% of the European population, during the past three generations (54 years). These declines appear to have stabilised but the species nevertheless warrants classification as Near Threatened within Europe and the EU27.

range:
This sedentary species's distribution stretches from the Iberian Peninsula east through the Mediterranean (Orta et al. 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 1,100-1,200 pairs, which equates to 2,100-2,400 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,100-1,200 pairs, which equates to 2,100-2,300 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species occupies garrigue, maquis, rocky habitats and pine and evergreen forests alternated with small dry fields of low intensity farming from sea level to 1,500 m (Tucker and Heath 1994, Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). Juveniles often occupy areas near large water bodies (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). In the Mediterranean region egg-laying occurs mainly from February to mid-March (Orta et al. 2013). The nest is up to 2 m in diameter, composed of sticks and located on remote cliff ledges or in a large tree. The nest is re-used in successive years (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001) and pairs will often have several nests. Clutch size is normally one or two eggs but very occasionally three (Orta et al. 2013). The eagle's prey principally comprises of small or medium-sized birds, but it will also take mammals, some reptiles, insects and rarely, carrion (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The species is resident throughout its range, although juveniles will disperse up to 200 km and individuals occasionally wander further afield and pass through key migration routes (Shirihai et al. 2000, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
Since the 1950s the species has declined throughout its range. It was affected by pesticide use in the mid-20th Century and since then populations have not recovered to their pre-organochlorine levels. The species is persecuted by hunters and pigeon-fanciers in the west of its range and juveniles suffer high mortality from collisions with power lines (Rollan et al. 2010). Declining prey availability, increasing human disturbance and poaching at nest sites, and agricultural intensification are thought to be key factors in the species's decline (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2013).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. In France most nests are wardened during the breeding season and in southern France and Catalonia artificial food sources have been successfully provided for some breeding pairs. Research on species demography including juvenile dispersal, mortality and adult recruitment has been undertaken in eastern Spain and southern France (Tucker and Heath 1994).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The implementation of access restrictions and legal habitat protection is required in nesting areas to avoid disturbance and habitat destruction. Dangerous electricity pylons should be modified or buried. Game crops should be used to enhance prey populations, extensive pastoral farming should be maintained and hedges bordering fields preserved. These measures could be promoted in the EU under agri-environmental regulation. In addition, undertaking education campaigns with the active involvement of hunting associations and the continuation of research and monitoring, extending into Portugal and eastern Mediterranean countries would help preserve the species (Tucker and Heath 1994).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT°)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size may be small, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the small population size qualifies for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<1,000 mature individuals), but as population size is increasing in the EU27 and in Europe, the final category is adjusted to Near Threatened.

range:
The species breeds in Austria, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Macedonia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Turkey, Ukraine (Heredia 1996) and Russia, reaching to 55°N (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013). Breeding has not been proved but possibly occurs in Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Moldova and Romania and it is thought that the species is extinct in Cyprus (Demerdzhiev et al. 2011). Wintering birds occur in southern Turkey (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 1,300-1,900 pairs, which equates to 2,500-3,800 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 190-250 pairs, which equates to 380-490 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This is a lowland species that has been pushed to higher altitudes by persecution and habitat loss in Europe. In central and eastern Europe, it breeds in forests up to 1,000 m and also in steppe and agricultural areas with large trees, and nowadays also on electricity pylons. In Turkey it is known to very rarely nest on the ground or on cliffs. In the Caucasus, it occurs in steppe, lowland and riverine forests and semi-deserts (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Meyburg and Kirwan 2013). Wetlands are apparently preferred on the wintering grounds. From late-February to early-May adults return to breeding areas. Both sexes construct a large stick nest, typically 100?150 cm in diameter with the nest cup lined with green sticks and other materials such as grass, fur and wool. Clutches are usually two to three eggs (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013). It hunts small to medium-sized mammals as well as birds and carrion. In the Caucasus the main prey include hare, tortoises, lizards and carrion (Tucker and Heath 1994). Adults in central Europe, the Balkan Peninsula, Turkey and the Caucasus are usually residents, whilst most immatures move south. (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
Breeding sites are threatened primarily by intensive forestry in the mountains, and by the shortage of large indigenous trees in the lowlands. Other threats are loss and alteration of feeding habitats, shortages of small and medium-sized prey species (particularly ground-squirrels Spermophilus spp.), human disturbance of breeding sites, nest robbing and illegal trade, shooting, poisoning and electrocution by powerlines. Habitat alterations associated with agricultural expansion threaten historical and potential breeding sites in former range countries. Hunting, poisoning, prey depletion and other mortality factors are also likely to pose threats along migration routes and in wintering areas.

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway 
CITES Appendix I. CMS Appendix I and II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. It is legally protected in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Turkey and Ukraine. The Eastern Imperial Eagle Working Group was established in 1990. A European action plan was published in 1996 and its implementation reviewed in 2010 (Barov and Derhé 2011). Regional Action Plans have been published for the Balkan Peninsula (Stoychev et al. 2004) and for the Southern Caucasus (Horváth et al. 2006). The Eastern Imperial Eagle Management Guidelines for Hungary were published in 2005 (Kovács et al. 2006) and for Slovakia in 2007 (Demeter and Maderič 2007).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Conduct surveys to identify breeding and wintering sites, and migration routes. Improve protection of species and sites. Implement beneficial forestry policies. Maintain large trees in open land and protect old woodland on slopes (B. Hallmann in litt. 1999). Prevent mortality from nest robbing, nest destruction, illegal trade, poisoning and electrocution on medium-voltage powerlines, as well as persecution in wintering grounds and migratory routes. Maintain feeding habitats by preserving traditional land use. Increase the availability of prey species by habitat management. Raise public awareness and involve stakeholders in conservation activities.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Critically Endangered (CR)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Applicable (NA)

This eagle has undergone extremely rapid population declines in European Russia within three generations (50 years). It is therefore classified as Critically Endangered in Europe. It does not occur within the EU27.

range:
Although this species, once bred in Moldova, Romania and Ukraine, it now breeds only east of 42°E in European Russia from the Astrakhan to Stavropol regions (Hagermeijer and Blair 1997) and in a small area of Turkey (Meyburg and Boesman 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 800-1,200 pairs, which equates to 1,600-2,400 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
In Europe this species inhabits virgin plain or hill-steppes, semi-deserts and remote steppic valleys amongst mountains, preferably where feather grass (Stipa pennata) or wormwood (Artemisa) are present and especially where rodents such as suslik are common (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). It returns to its breeding grounds between January and May (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001) and breeding occurs April to July. Birds time their arrival for spring and the start of breeding is highly dependent on availability of its chief prey species. The nest is constructed of sticks with the nest cup lined with smaller twigs and many other materials, such as old rags, bones, moulted feathers and camel dung. Nests have traditionally been built as large platforms on the ground, although recent habitat alterations seem to have caused a shift to building a few metres higher in bushes or trees. It feeds mainly on small mammals on its breeding grounds, with susliks forming the vast majority of its diet in some areas (Meyburg and Boesman 2013). When susliks are scarce they will feed on middle-sized mammals or dead saiga antelope (Tucker and Heath 1994). The species is migratory, with birds wintering in south-east Africa and southern Asia (Meyburg and Boesman 2013).

threats:
The species has declined in the west of its breeding range, including extirpation from Romania, Moldova and Ukraine, as a result of the conversion of steppes to agricultural land combined with direct persecution (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Meyburg and Boesman 2013). It is also adversely affected by power lines and is very highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind energy developments (Strix 2012, Meyburg and Boesman 2013). Young eagles are taken out of the nest in order to sell them to western European countries (Mebs & Schmidt 2006). This species is also vulnerable to the veterinary drug diclofenac (Sharma et al. 2014).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. There are currently no conservation actions known to be in place for this species.  

Conservation Actions Proposed
Establish large nature reserves and other kinds of protected areas within the remaining grassland steppes of Europe. Dangerous electric powerline constructions should be replaced or fitted with protective devices. Educate herdsmen and other locals in the ecological value and vulnerability of this species (Tucker and Heath 1994). Continue research into the impacts of diclofenac and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to establish the sensitivity of this species to veterinary drugs. Promote a ban on the use of diclofenac in Europe.


taxonomicNotes:
Buteo buteo, B. japonicus and B. refectus (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) were previously lumped as B. buteo following Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 814,000-1,390,000 pairs, which equates to 1,630,000-2,770,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 528,000-768,000 pairs, which equates to 1,060,000-1,540,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
Populations in Scandinavia and most of the former Soviet Union are migratory, wintering in Africa and southern Asia. Those elsewhere are resident (Orta et al. 2015). Migrants move south between August and November and make the return journey between February and May. Birds tend to occur singly or in pairs, sometimes forming small family groups at roosts. However, they can migrate in groups, and as birds avoid sea crossings (and even freshwater bodies) as far as possible, they form huge concentrations at peninsulas and narrow straits (Brown et al. 1982, Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). Migration is strictly diurnal, and also often follows mountain ranges and ridges (Brown et al. 1982). It inhabits a wide variety of habitats but requires at least some tree cover for nesting and roosting; ideal habitat appears to be forest edge, or mosaics of forest and open areas. It is versatile depending on the prey animals available, with small mammals usually predominating, but in some areas invertebrates making up the majority. The nest is built on a fork or branch of a large tree, usually near to forest edge. It is a bulky platform of sticks and twigs, lined with greenery near trunk 3–25 m above ground, or on cliff ledge. Clutches are normally two to four eggs (Orta et al. 2015).

threats:
In the U.K., it suffered a significant reduction in available prey in the 1950s when a myxomatosis epidemic killed off c.99% of the rabbit population. The most important historical threat though has been from persecution, including through poisoned bait traps, with pesticides and habitat loss also causing some declines (Orta et al. 2015). It is highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind energy developments (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Although this species is not threatened, populations should be monitored for declines. Suitable habitat should be protected and trees preserved for breeding (Orta et al. 2015). Artificial perches or planted bushes in meadows can increase habitat quality.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Endangered (EN)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size is very large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be fluctuating, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the species is undergoing very rapid declines, and it is therefore classified as Endangered (A2abcd) and there is not considered to be significant potential for rescue from outside the EU27, so the final category is unchanged.

range:
The species is is a widespread breeder in Fennoscandia and northern Russia. Wintering populations can be found in central and southern Europe east through Russia (Orta et al. 2015).

population:
The European population is estimated at 37,200-79,200 pairs, which equates to 74,400-158,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 2,200-9,200 pairs, which equates to 4,400-18,400 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species is typically found in tundra, mainly treeless, although also wooded tundra and even extreme northern taiga, particularly in years of lemming and vole abundance. In the winter, it is often in areas more modified by humans, such as pastures, hayfields and croplands, but still mainly in open terrain such as prairies, marshes and shrublands. Egg-laying normally occurs from May to June. Nests are built on vantage points; normally high on cliffs, rocky outcrops or riverbanks, preferring protected ledges but infrequently uses trees and slopes.  The nest is a bulky nest of sticks or twigs, lined with grass, sedges, hair and feathers. Clutches are usually three to five eggs. It feeds principally on mammals, mainly voles and lemmings. It will also take small birds, fish, insects and carrion. The species is migratory (Orta et al. 2015).

threats:
In Sweden many birds were recovered in the area where they were rung due to hunting; illegal shooting may be a problem in some areas. It also suffers mortality from collisions with cars and electrocution from powerlines (Mebs and Schmidt 2006). The species may also suffer reduced reproductive success from fluctuating weather caused by climate change (Pokrovsky et al. 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
The conservation of suitable habitat and sufficient prey is important. Roads should not be built through these areas to minimise collisions and disturbance. Illegal hunting should be stopped and powerlines modified to make them safe (Mebs and Schmidt 2006).


taxonomicNotes:
Buteo buteo (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) was split into B. buteo and B. bannermani by Hazevoet (1995) but Clouet and Wink (2000) and Hazevoet (1995) noted that bannermani has a close genetic affinity with B. rufinus: bannermanni and rufinus are thus cur

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 11,800-19,200 pairs, which equates to 23,700-38,400 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,300-2,000 pairs, which equates to 2,600-4,100 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species inhabits uncultivated and dry scrubby areas near to suitable nest sites on crags, gorges and mountains up to 1,600 m. Nests are built mainly on cliffs but it does sometimes use trees in rural regions (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997) and electricity pylons (Tucker and Heath 1994). Both adults build a nest of twigs and sticks lined with green leaves, wool or other materials. Nests can be re-used and it will also use the old nests of other birds. Clutch size is normally two to four eggs (Orta 1994). It feeds preferentially on small mammals such as susliks (Citellus) but its diet is diverse, including lizards, snakes, small birds and large insects (Tucker and Heath 1994). In Europe, it is uncertain if it is completely or partially migratory in the north of its range but it is sedentary in the south. Those that do migrate move south to North Africa and southern Asia, leaving their breeding grounds in August and September and returning in March and April (Orta 1994). It is generally observed singly, in pairs or in small family groups, but is more gregarious on migration when larger flocks can form (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
It is very highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind energy developments (Strix 2012). The species is also threatened by habitat destruction though agricultural intensification which may also reduce prey species. Electrocution has also caused fatalities (Mebs and Schmidt 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. There are no known conservation measures currently in place for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Environmental impact assessments should be made for new windfarm developments and powerlines should be made more visible. Ensure the preservation of its steppe habitat and populations of prey species.


taxonomicNotes:
Circaetus gallicus (including beaudouini) and C. pectoralis (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) were previously  lumped into C. gallicus following Dowsett and Forbes-Watson (1993).  Following a review by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group all three are now c

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 17,600-20,900 pairs, which equates to 35,100-41,800 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 14,800-16,600 pairs, which equates to 29,500-33,100 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
Birds breeding in the Palearctic are migratory. Most migrants winter in tropical North Africa (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta and Kirwan 2013), with small numbers staying in southern Europe (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). Migrants move south between August and November, and north between February and May (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). Birds are usually observed singly or in pairs, even on migration, though migrants will sometimes form groups of up to 12 (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). They soar at c.20–100 m above the ground (Brown et al. 1982). It uses a variety of habitats within warm temperate and tropical environments, and is recorded up to 1,200 m. It specialises in feeding on reptiles, particularly snakes. The nest is almost always built in low trees, usually on the crown and is constructed of sticks and twigs, and lined with green leaves or grass, occasionally even pine needles. Usually only a single egg is laid (Orta and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
Changes in agriculture and land use have reduced the extent of suitable hunting habitat. In addition snake populations have been reduced by increased cultivation of monocultures, hedge destruction, use of pesticides and the abandonment of traditional farmland and subsequent afforestation. Habitat fragmentation has resulted from forest fires and road construction. The species is often shot and nests destroyed and it suffers mortality from powerlines (Tucker and Heath 1994). It is also very highly vulnerable to the effects of potential wind energy development (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. The species is legally protected in almost all countries within its range (Tucker and Heath 1994). It is listed in the Red Data Books for the Moscow region and the Russian Federation (Kalyakin and Voltzit 2006) and is listed as vulnerable in Croatia (Radovícet al. 2003).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Wide-scale habitat conservation measures are required, including the maintenance of low-intensity farming with the preservation of hedges and a reduction of pesticide use. Appropriate management of woodlands should maintain old trees, prevent fires and limit road construction. Education campaigns aimed at hunting organisations should be undertaken to limit illegal shooting. Powerlines should be flagged, moved or buried to reduce collisions, particularly in important areas. Species monitoring should be maintained and improved (Tucker and Heath 1994).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 99,300-184,000 breeding females, which equates to 199,000-367,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 37,700-87,800 breeding females, which equates to 75,500-176,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
It is mainly migratory, although populations in western Europe are generally resident (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2014). Migrant birds leave their breeding grounds in September and October, wintering from France south as far as sub-Saharan Africa (Orta et al. 2014). They begin their return journey in February and March, arriving in March and April (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2014). Migration is generally on a broad front, although there is some concentration at a few sites (Brown et al. 1982). Hundreds of birds occasionally gather at roosting sites, sometimes with other harriers such as C. pygargus, but otherwise they are usually solitary, associating only temporarily at especially rich feeding sites (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2014). They have a slightly greater tendency to be gregarious while on migration but the above still generally applies. Birds fly c.10–30 m above the ground (Brown et al. 1982). The species inhabits extensive areas of dense marsh vegetation, in fresh or brackish water, generally in lowlands (Orta et al. 2014), up to 400 m (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). It is a generalist predator taking a variety of prey types, with small birds generally preferred but mammals such as voles, rabbits and rats being more important in parts of its range. The nest is a pile of reeds built in dense marsh vegetation. Typically lays three to six eggs (Orta et al. 2014).

threats:
Major threats include wetland desiccation and drainage; persecution by shooting; pollution, especially from excessive pesticide use in and around wetlands, and poisoning by heavy metals, notably the consumption of lead-shot through feeding on contaminated waterbirds (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2014). The historical threat of hunting in southern Europe has mostly subsided, but illegal shooting is still rife locally, notably on Malta (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The species is also highly vulnerable to the effects of potential wind energy development (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. The widespread ban of persistent pesticides has allowed the recovery of populations in some areas (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997, Orta et al. 2014). In the Netherlands, parts of the Ijsselmeer have been reclaimed, providing huge reedbeds and thus breeding and feeding habitat for the species (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). The use of lead shot has been completely banned in Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway and partial bans are in place in many other countries (AEWA 2009).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Conservation of this species’s wetland habitat is most important; existing wetlands should be legally protected and degraded wetlands restored. In agricultural areas, an unharvested area should be left around active nests of 30 m x 30 m until the chicks have fledged (Mebs and Schmidt 2006). Lead free ammunition should be banned completely across the species’s range.


taxonomicNotes:
Circus cyaneus and C. hudsonius (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) were previously lumped as C. cyaneus following Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

This raptor began undergoing rapid declines in its European breeding range during the 2000s. Extrapolated over a three generation period (23 years) these declines result in its classification as Near Threatened in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size may be moderately small to large, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within the EU27.

range:
In Europe, this species breeds from Ireland in the west to European Russia in the east (Orta et al. 2014). However it does not breed in the Balkans, Italy, switzerland and Austria (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997).

population:
The European population is estimated at 30,000-54,400 breeding females, which equates to 60,000-109,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 9,300-13,200 breeding females, which equates to 18,600-26,400 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species inhabits open country with some grass or shrub cover, especially grassland, steppe, meadows, moorland, scrub and cultivation and it is also found in wetlands and young conifer plantations. In the winter it becomes more widespread, for example occurring over ploughed land. Egg-laying begins in mid-April and continues until early July but varies with latitude; in Europe it peaks in May. It nests on the ground, in dense grass or scrub, crops or marshy vegetation. The nest is a pile of small sticks and grass, 30–60 cm wide. Clutch size is usually three to six eggs. It feeds mostly on vertebrates, especially mammals such as voles, mice and ground squirrels. It also takes birds of open habitats like wetlands and grasslands, particularly passerines. Birds are often the principal prey in the breeding season. The species is completely migratory in northern and north-east Europe and is partially migratory and dispersive elsewhere (Orta et al. 2014).

threats:
The current main threat is the transformation of habitat owing to intensified agriculture, disappearance of marshes and reafforestation. Persecution is still severe locally, for example on managed grouse moors of Scotland; in 2013 not a single pair successfully nested in England (Pitches 2013), despite the fact that there is estimated habitat for more than 300 pairs (Fielding et al. 2011). The species is also shot illegally in central and eastern Europe (Tucker and Heath 1994).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. A range of conservation initiatives have been launched in the U.K. (Fieldinget al. 2011).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Large areas of open country should be preserved for this species, particularly lowland and upland heath and heather moorland, steppe, damp marsh and unimproved and marginal grassland with low-intensity grazing. The afforestation of heather moorland and montane scrubland should be banned in countries where these habitats are under threat. Both sporting and conservation interests need to address the issue of illegal killing in the U.K. (Tucker and Heath 1994).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Endangered (EN°)

In Europe this raptor has a moderately small population (approaching the threshold for classification as Vulnerable), with an unknown trend, and it is therefore classified as Near Threatened (D1).

Within the EU27 the population is tiny (meeting the threshold for classification as Critically Endangered), but it is apparently increasing and spreading, and the final category is therefore adjusted down one category to Endangered (EN° D).

range:
In Europe, small populations breed in Azerbaijan, Romania, Turkey and Ukraine, and it breeds irregulary farther west to Sweden and Germany. A minority winter in south-east and central Europe but most migrate to the Afrotropics and the Indian subcontinent (Orta and Christie 2015).

population:
The European population is estimated at 300-1,100 breeding females, which equates to 600-2,300 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1-12 breeding females, which equates to 2-24 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds in uncultivated grasslands. It evidently avoids very dry open sites and selects wetter areas for nesting, preferably with sparse shrubs and weeds (Tucker and Heath 1994). It will nest above 1,000 m in the Caucasus (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). The species returns to its breeding grounds in March and April and nests in loose colonies. The nest consists of a pile of grass placed on the ground and protected by vegetation. Clutch size can be from three to six eggs but usually four or five (Orta and Christie 2015). Birds fly at c. 1.9 m above the ground when hunting (Snow and Perrins 1998, Orta and Christie 2015). The principal prey is small rodents (mostly voles and mice), lizards, and small birds, especially fledglings but it is also quite capable of taking larks and other passerines, in flight as well as on the ground (Tucker and Heath 1994). The species is migratory, with most birds wintering in sub-Saharan Africa or south-east Asia. They leave their breeding grounds between August and November and return in March and April (Orta and Christie 2015). Birds migrate on a broad front, with only minor concentrations at bottleneck sites (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta and Christie 2015). Although birds are most often seen singly, females and juveniles can form parties of 10–15 on migration (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
In its breeding range it is primarily threatened by the destruction and degradation of steppe grasslands through conversion to arable agriculture, burning of vegetation, intensive grazing of wet pastures and the clearance of shrubs and tall weeds (Galushin et al. 2003, E. Bragin in litt. 2007). Fires are started by farmers, arsonists and dry thunderstorms (E. Bragin in litt. 2007).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
It is listed in Appendix II of CITES, Annex II of the Bonn and Bern Conventions and Annex I of the EU Birds Directive. It is also listed in the Red Data Books of Belarus, Ukraine, Russia and Turkey (Galushin et al. 2003, Kiliç and Eken 2004). It occurs in five state nature reserves in Russia (Galushin et al. 2003). An International Action Plan for the species was produced in 2003 (Galushin et al. 2003).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Encourage conservation of wetlands and ponds in typical steppe grassland and semi-desert. Support moderate grazing and conservation of grasslands. Develop survey methodology (including GIS) and carry out surveys, primarily in the core breeding range and, secondarily, to establish its northern and southern range limits as well as to search for new nesting places outside core breeding grounds. Carry out research into diet and foraging range size, and their role in the movement of populations. Lobby for enactment and enforcement of legislation in the recovering agricultural economy in the breeding range. Encourage full legal protection and education in countries on migration routes (Galushin et al. 2003).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 54,500-92,200 breeding females, which equates to 109,000-184,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 15,600-21,400 breeding females, which equates to 31,200-42,800 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This is a migratory species, wintering in sub-Saharan Africa (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2014). It leaves its breeding grounds in August and September, beginning their return in March and April (Snow and Perrins 1998, Orta et al. 2014). Birds tend to migrate on broad fronts, but there are concentrations in Gibraltar and along the Rift Valley (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2014). Nevertheless it will readily migrate over expanses of water (Brown et al. 1982). Birds tend to hunt alone, although they do gather at high prey concentrations and will roost in groups of often over 50, sometimes communally with C. macrourus and C. aeruginosus (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). It is a bird of open country, usually in lowlands. Small birds and mammals form the majority of its diet; voles are a particularly dominant food source locally in abundant areas. It nests in tall vegetation on the ground. The nest is a small, narrow platform, 20–40 cm wide, made of grass stems or thin twigs. Clutches are normally three to five eggs (Orta et al. 2014).

threats:
In the past, the use of organochlorine pesticides seemed to cause a decline in Europe (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). It is currently in decline owing to the conversion of its habitat to agricultural land, an environment in which crop gathering by combine harvesters causes frequent breeding failure in the species (Orta et al. 2014). Intensification on this land increases this threat (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). It is commensal with some forms of agriculture, and changes in these practices could leave it potentially vulnerable by depleting its supply of small birds and mammals to prey on (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2014). It is highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind energy developments (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. Successful conservation programmes in Bavaria resulted in the population there growing from only a few pairs in the 1990s to 153 in 2008. Across Europe, particularly France and Spain, important protection measures have benefited the species. These measures include the rescue of nestlings from combine harvesters, chicks being moved to safety during harvesting and a small area around the nest being left untouched by the farmer. Mediterranean populations are highly dependent on these measures owing to high nest-failure rates in the absence of intervention (Ortaet al. 2014). Satellite tracking of this species began in 2005 (Trierweiler et al. 2007).
 
Conservation Actions Proposed
Tall vegetation must be left during the breeding season, with high rates of chick mortality when this is harvested on agricultural land. The key management practices that include moving nestlings to safe places during harvesting, and leaving areas unharvested around the vicinity of nests should be continued (Ortaet al. 2014). In addition research on migration routes and the location and structure of stopover sites and wintering quarters of the species would assist the development of conservation measures (Trierweiler 2009).


taxonomicNotes:
Clanga clanga (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously placed in the genus Aquila.

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Endangered (EN)
EU27 regional assessment: Critically Endangered (CR)

This eagle is undergoing very rapid declines within its European range, and it is therefore classified as Endangered (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde; C1). Within the EU27 the population is extremely small and decreasing, and it is classified as Critically Endangered (C1; D).

range:
The species occupies a fragmented range across Europe, breeding in Estonia (Lõhmus 1998), Poland, Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine (Meyburg et al. 1999), with some individuals possibly still breeding in Finland, Latvia and Lithuania (Database of the Lithuanian Ornithological Society 1999), although this has not been confirmed recently. Passage or wintering birds occur in small numbers over a vast area, including central and eastern Europe.

population:
The European population is estimated at 770-1,000 pairs, which equates to 1,500-2,100 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 17-33 pairs, which equates to 34-70 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species occurs in lowland wet forests near wetlands, away from human settlements (Tucker and Heath 1994). It nests 5–25 m above ground in tall, usually broad leaf, trees inside the forest, a few 100 m from the edge. Both sexes construct a large platform of sticks with a central cup lined with fresh green sprigs or grass. The nest is often used in successive years and may therefore become very large, although many pairs have two or three nests used alternately. Clutch size normally two but second chick rarely survives due to cainism (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013). It feeds on unretrieved quarry, small mammals, waterbirds, frogs and snakes. It hunts over swamps, wet meadows and, in Europe, over extensively managed agricultural land (A. Lõhmus in litt. 1999); birds soar to c.100 m high when hunting.

It is a migratory species, with birds leaving their breeding grounds in October and November to winter in southern Europe, southern Asia and north-east Africa (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013). They generally return in February and March. Birds migrate on a broad front, tending to pass in singles, twos and threes with the occasional larger group (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). They do not concentrate at bottleneck sites to the extent of many other raptors such as Lesser Spotted Eagle (Clanga pomarina) (Meyburg and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
There is strong evidence of hybridisation between this species and C. pomarina (Bergmanis et al. 1997, Lohmus & Vali 2001, Dombrovski 2002, Vali et al. 2010). In some European countries mixed pairs can constitute 50% of pairs of this species (Maciorowski and Mizera 2010) or even more (Vali 2011). It is unclear whether this represents a new phenomenon or a conservation concern, but C. pomarina is far more numerous than C. clanga in the zone of overlap, and the range of C. pomarina appears to be spreading east, further into the range of C. clanga. Other key threats are habitat destruction and disturbance, also poaching and electrocution can be considered important. Suitable habitat mosaics have been lost as a result of afforestation and wetland drainage. 

In eastern Europe, agricultural intensification and the abandonment of traditional floodplain management have reduced habitat quality (A. Lõhmus in litt. 1999). Birds are intolerant of permanent human presence in their territories. Forestry operations are a major cause of disturbance. Shooting is a threat in Russia and the Mediterranean (P. D. Round in litt. 1998, P. Mirski in litt. 2012), together with deliberate and accidental poisoning across much of its range.

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix I and II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. It is legally protected in Belarus, Estonia, France, Greece, Latvia, Poland, Romania and Russia. An International Lesser and Greater Spotted Eagle Working Group has been established and a European action plan was published in 2000 (Meyburg et al. 1999). The first national census was conducted in Belarus during 2000-2002. Research into hybridisation and habitat requirements began in Belarus in 2003. National Action Plans for the species have been produced in Belarus (Dombrovski et al. (2002), Estonia and Ukraine (Domashevsky 2000). Site protection measures have been initiated at key Belarusian, Polish and Estonian sites, including restricting forestry activities at nest sites during the breeding season.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Survey range and population. Establish long-term monitoring schemes to improve understanding of population trends. Improve understanding of breeding habitat requirements. Protect breeding areas from drainage and rising of infrastructure. Maintain traditional wet meadows. Regulate forestry to minimise disturbance and protect potential nesting trees. Investigate potential threat of hybridisation with C. pomarina. Prevent illegal shooting, poisoning and electrocution. Investigate lead poisoning from feeding on quarry. Raise awareness.


taxonomicNotes:
Clanga pomarina (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously placed in the genus Aquila.

Aquila pomarina (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) has been split into A. pomarina and A. hastata following Parry et al. (2002).

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 16,400-22,100 pairs, which equates to 32,800-44,200 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 11,500-15,400 pairs, which equates to 23,000-30,900 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This is a migratory species, migrants leaving their breeding grounds between August and November, and returning in March and April (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Meyburg et al. 2014). It relies heavily on soaring flight using thermals, and thus avoids large bodies of water (Meyburg et al. 2014). Birds are generally observed singly or in pairs, but will congregate at plentiful food sources, and migrate in flocks (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Porter and Aspinall 2010). It breeds near forest edges, preferring moist woodland; most nest in lowlands but it is recorded breeding up to 2,200 m in montane areas. Mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians are all taken as prey, with different prey types predominating in different parts of its range. Egg-laying occurs in late April and early May. Nests are built in trees, usually close to the forest edge and are a large stick construction, lined with green twigs and sometimes grass. Eyries are often reused over several years. Normally two eggs are laid (Meyburg et al. 2014).

threats:
The main threats posed to this species are through habitat loss (notably the draining of wet forests and meadows, and on-going deforestation) and hunting (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Meyburg et al. 2014). The latter is especially prevalent on migration, with possibly thousands of birds shot annually in southern Europe (Tucker and Heath 1994). It is also very highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind energy developments (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex I. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. A European Union Species Action Plan was published in 1997 (Meyburget al. 1997) and was reviewed in 2010. There are 98 Important Bird Areas designated for this species in its breeding range. The species is in the Red Data Books of several countries and is legally protected in all countries where the action plan applies. National action plans have been developed in Estonia, Slovakia and Ukraine (Barov and Derhé 2010).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Research should focus on monitoring population numbers during migration, identifying major migratory roosting sites and investigating the habitat requirements, food diversity and conservation measures for this species. Major roosting areas along the migratory route should be protected and disturbance near nests should be prevented (Barov and Derhé 2010). Wide-scale conservation measures are needed to protect the breeding and foraging habitats (Tucker and Heath 1994). Agricultural and farming policies should be sympathetic to the conservation of this species (Barov and Derhé 2010).


population:
The European population is estimated at 1,100-2,600 pairs, which equates to 2,200-5,300 mature individuals. The entire population is found in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
Northern populations of this species make long-distance migratory movements, travelling southwards to their wintering grounds between August and November and returning to their breeding areas between March and April (Hayman et al. 1986). In more temperate regions the species is sedentary or only locally dispersive (Pierce and Boesman 2013). The species breeds solitarily or in loose colonies of 2–50 or occasionally up to several hundred pairs (Urban et al. 1986, Pierce and Boesman 2013). It is typically a gregarious species, occurring in small groups (Snow and Perrins 1998) (up to 15 individuals) (Urban et al. 1986, Pierce and Boesman 2013) or larger flocks of several hundred up to a thousand individuals on migration, during the winter (Urban et al. 1986, Snow and Perrins 1998) and at nightly roosts (Urban et al. 1986).

The species typically breeds in shallow freshwater and brackish wetlands with sand, mud or clay substrates and open margins, islets or spits near water level (Snow and Perrins 1998). Suitable habitats include marshes and swamps, shallow lake edges, riverbeds, flooded fields, sewage ponds (Pierce and Boesman 2013), irrigated areas and fish-ponds (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species may also breed around alkaline and high-altitude (montane) lakes (Pierce and Boesman 2013) or in more saline environments such as river deltas, estuaries (Snow and Perrins 1998), coastal lagoons (Johnsgard 1981, Snow and Perrins 1998) and shallow coastal pools with extensive areas of mudflats, salt meadows (Johnsgard 1981), saltpans, coastal marshes (Pierce and Boesman 2013) and swamps (Snow and Perrins 1998). Outside of the breeding season the species occupies the shores of large inland waterbodies and estuarine or coastal habitats (Pierce and Boesman 2013) such as river deltas (Snow and Perrins 1998), coastal lagoons (Johnsgard 1981, Snow and Perrins 1998) and shallow freshwater or brackish pools with extensive areas of mudflats, salt meadows (Johnsgard 1981), saltpans, coastal marshes (Pierce and Boesman 2013) and swamps (Snow and Perrins 1998). Its diet is strongly seasonal but generally includes adult and larval aquatic insects (e.g., Coleoptera, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Hemiptera, Odonata, Diptera, Neuroptera and Lepidoptera), molluscs, crustaceans, spiders, oligochaete and polychaete worms, tadpoles (Pierce and Boesman 2013) and amphibian spawn (Urban et al. 1986), small fish, fish eggs (Pierce and Boesman 2013) and occasionally seeds (Urban et al. 1986). The nest is a depression or shallow scrape positioned on hard ground near water on a hummock (Flint et al. 1984) or amongst grass and sedge (Pierce and Boesman 2013). Alternatively the nest may be a more elaborate platform of vegetation (Snow and Perrins 1998) constructed on a floating mass of aquatic vegetation. The species nests singly or in loose colonies (Pierce and Boesman 2013), showing a preference for open areas close to foraging sites with good all-round (360 degree) visibility (Johnsgard 1981).

threats:
Locally, populations are heavily impacted by annual rainfall. In eastern Europe (e.g. in Greece, Hungary and Bulgaria) declines are attributed to the loss of wetland habitats (Pierce and Boesman 2013). Disturbance by people and fluctuating water levels are also a threat to the species (Tinarelli 1992). In some areas, housing and commercial development threaten the wetland habitats of this species (Goutner and Papakostas 1992).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed on Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and Annex II of the Bern Convention. A network of protected wetlands in western Europe is providing secure breeding and feeding grounds for the species (Pierce and Boesman 2013).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Pollution of wetland habitats, land reclamation, infrastructure development and human disturbance at breeding sites needs to be stopped. Abandonment of salt pans should be reversed.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

In Europe this species has a small, declining population and is therefore classified as Vulnerable (C1+2a(i)). Within the EU27 the population is very small but increasing and it also qualifies as Vulnerable (D1).

range:
The species is widely and disjunctly distributed across the Palearctic, Afrotropical and Indomalayan regions (Ferguson- Lees and Christie 2001). In Europe, the population consists of a few isolated groups from the Caucasus to the Pyrenees (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). The population has grown in the Alps (with the emergence of new breeding pairs due to a reintroduction project), and in the Pyrenees, particularly in its central part (Aragon, Spain) (J. A. Gil Gallus in litt. 2011).

population:
The European population is estimated at 580-790 pairs, which equates to 1,200-1,600 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 180-180 pairs, which equates to 350-360 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species occupies remote, mountainous areas, with precipitous terrain, usually above 1,000 m and in particular, areas where large predators such as wolves and Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) are present, and there are herds of mammals such as Mountain Goats, Ibex, and sheep (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The species is typically monogamous but polyandrous trios occur in the Pyrenees, probably in response to habitat saturation (Orta et al. 2014). Nesting occurs in December or January and the young hatch in February and March (Tucker and Heath 1994). The species will construct large nests (averaging 1 m diameter), composed of branches and lined with animal remains such as skin and wool, as well as dung and occasionally also rubbish. Nests are located on remote overhung cliff ledges or in caves and will be re-used over the years (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). Clutches are one or two eggs. Both parents take part in nest building, nest defence, incubation, brooding and feeding of chicks (Orta et al. 2014). The species will forage over vast distances, using a soaring flight. Its principle food is carrion, with its diet including a large proportion of bones (as much as 85%) whereupon the bird gets nutrition from the marrow inside. The rest of its diet comprises tortoises, and occasionally also live mammals and birds. It is generally unwilling to compete with vultures at carcasses, and will wait patiently to feed, scavenging older carcasses if fresh meat is scarce. Bones are either consumed whole, broken using the bill, hammered against the ground, or lifted into the air and dropped from 50-80 m high onto hard rock. Tortoises are generally treated in the same way as bones. It is resident where it occurs, but has vast home ranges, and juveniles will wander even more widely than adults (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
The main causes of ongoing declines appear to be non-target poisoning, direct persecution, habitat degradation, disturbance of breeding birds, inadequate food availability, changes in livestock-rearing practices and collisions with powerlines and wind turbines (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Barov and Derhé 2011, S. Xirouchaki in litt. 2012). Despite the provision of targeted conservation actions, the European population remains susceptible to poisoning, and mortality caused by powerlines (J. A. Gil Gallus in litt. 2011). Since European reintroductions began, mortality from shooting has decreased, however poisoning (both intentional and accidental) has increased (Margalida et al. 2008).Veterinary drugs and livestock pathogens as mortality sources among scavengers that feed on medicated and diseased livestock carcasses have recently emerged as a threat. Three of five failed eggs of this species and four dead nestlings sampled in the Spanish Pyrenees from 2005-2008 had high concentrations of multiple veterinary drugs (especially fluoroquinolones) and evidence of several livestock pathogens (Blanco and Lemus 2010). Rapid increases in grazing pressure and human populations in the mountains of Turkey are causing habitat degradation there (S. Viter in litt. 2014). Suitable habitat is also threatened by pipeline construction through the Caucasus mountains (S. Viter in litt. 2014).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. In Europe, captive breeding and reintroduction programmes have been carried out in the Austrian, French, Italian and Swiss Alps with individuals subsequently spreading into other parts of France (Frey and Walter 1989, Snow and Perrins 1998). Reintroduction programmes are underway in parts of Spain (J. A. Gil Gallus in litt. 2011). Feeding stations have been provided in the Pyrenees with resulting increases in numbers of the species, and the provision of similar stations across the species's range could improve its global population density (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Conduct coordinated surveys to monitor the species's population trend. Assess the threat posed by diclofenac and other drugs used in livestock, as well as the impacts of climate change. Reduce disturbance in and around nesting areas. Mitigate against the impacts of wind turbines and powerlines. Combat the threat of persecution through laws and awareness-raising activities. Provide feeding stations throughout the species's range.


population:
The European population is estimated at 32,400-34,400 pairs, which equates to 64,800-68,800 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 31,500-33,200 pairs, which equates to 63,000-66,300 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
Some birds are migratory, overwintering in Africa, although many others are resident or nomadic (Orta et al. 2015). It relies heavily on soaring flight, and has been shown to fly at altitudes of 10,000 m and higher. Birds hunt alone but congregate at food sources and roosts; they also tend to migrate singly, but concentrations (usually up to 15 individuals) form at sea crossings and strong thermals (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2015). It is a species of expansive open areas in a wide array of environments, from mountains to semi-desert, and is recorded regularly from sea level up to c. 2,750 m. It feeds almost exclusively on carrion, mainly that of large mammals. The nest is usually built on a rocky outcrop, with sheltered ledges or small caves preferred and it is a thin, fairly small platform of branches, sometimes stolen from other large raptors. A single egg is laid (Orta et al. 2015).

threats:
It declined markedly throughout the 19th–20th centuries in much of Europe, mainly due to direct persecution and "bycatch" from the poisoned carcasses set for livestock predators (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2015). In some areas a reduction in available food supplies, arising from changes in livestock management practices, also had an impact (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2015). It is very highly vulnerable to the effects of potential wind energy development (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex I. CMS Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. Five successful reintroductions have occurred in France (Global Raptor Information Network 2015) including in 1981 in the Massif Central as well as in Drôme and Provence (Orta et al. 2015). Additional reintroduction projects have led to the establishment of colonies in Italy, Spain and Austria. During the 1980s, in Serbia, the species benefited from winter feeding stations (Global Raptor Information Network 2015). Increases in recent decades have also been due to the banning of poisoning of carcasses (Le Gouaret al. 2008). European laws prohibiting farmers from leaving dead animals on their land have also been rescinded, benefiting this species (Global Raptor Information Network 2015).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Non-intensive livestock management systems, such as pastoralism, should be maintained and promoted to ensure a food supply for this species; the provision of feeding stations is also beneficial, particularly when food is scarce. Large and continuous areas of afforestation should be avoided to maintain the large areas of habitat needed for foraging (Tucker and Heath 1994). The ban on poisoned carcasses should be enforced and the leaving of dead animals encouraged.


range:
The species has its strongholds in Norway and Russia (which together hold >55% of the European population (BirdLife International 2004), and important populations in south-west Greenland (to Denmark), Sweden, Poland and Germany. Smaller numbers breed in Iceland, United Kingdom, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Austria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, the former Yugoslav states, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Moldova, Greece, Turkey, Iran, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Mongolia, mainland China, and Japan. It formerly bred in Algeria and may still do so in Iraq.

population:
The European population is estimated at 9,000-12,300 pairs, which equates to 17,900-24,500 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 3,500-4,200 pairs, which equates to 7,000-8,500 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species requires large and open expanses of lake, coast or river valley, within the boreal, temperate and tundra zones, near to undisturbed cliffs or open stands of large, old-growth trees for nesting. Its food is vertebrates (fish, mammals and especially birds), from marine, freshwater and terrestrial environments. It is mainly migratory in the north and east of its breeding range, wintering in continental Europe and southern Asia, but sedentary elsewhere. Birds are usually seen singly, or in twos or threes (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
Threats that affect this species include loss and degradation of wetlands, human disturbance and persecution, environmental pollution, collision with wind generators (Krone and Scharnweber 2003), and indiscriminate use of poisons (Orta et al. 2013) and pesticides (Tucker and Heath 1994). Modern forestry methods reduce the availability of suitable nesting habitat (Orta et al. 2013).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix I and II. CMS Appendix I and II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Reintroduction programmes have been successful in re-establishing populations in areas including Scotland and southern Bohemia (Ortaet al. 2013).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Conservation measures should include the prevention of habitat loss from modern forestry and from human developments encroaching on nesting and hunting areas. Nests should also be protected from human disturbance and robbing; action should be taken against illegal shooting as well as the use of poisoned bait for predators. Reintroductions have proven successful and could be used in the future. In some areas the provision of feeding stations would help juvenile survival and increase reproduction rates (Tucker and Heath 1994).


taxonomicNotes:
Spizaetus nanus, S. lanceolatus, S. philippensis, S. pinskeri, S. nipalensis, S. alboniger and S. bartelsi (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) and S. cirrhatus and S. floris (Gjershaug et al. 2004) have been transferred into the genus Nisaetus following Haring

population:
The European population is estimated at 23,100-29,100 pairs, which equates to 46,300-58,300 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 21,000-24,300 pairs, which equates to 42,100-48,700 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is mainly migratory, although populations in the Balearic Islands are resident. Migratory birds winter in southern Africa; northern birds leave their breeding grounds in September and return in March and April (Orta and Boesman 2013). Migrants are thought to partially cross water on a broad front (assumed from regular occurrence on islands across the Mediterranean), but nevertheless many pass through bottleneck short crossing points each season. Birds tend to be seen singly or in pairs, and even on migration rarely form groups of more than five, and stay away from other raptors (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). Birds soar c.200–300 m above the ground when hunting (Brown et al. 1982). It is a species of open woodland, preferring patches of forest interspersed with open areas; it is recorded up to 2,000 m. Small birds are the most important part of its diet. Nests are built in trees and are made of sticks and twigs, lined with fresh leaves. They are often reused each year. Normally two eggs are laid (Orta and Boesman 2013).

threats:
Threats affecting the species include habitat degradation, direct persecution and human disturbance, each causing some decline in parts of Europe (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta and Boesman 2013). Declines in the Ukraine are being driven by deforestation (Orta and Boesman 2013). Habitat loss is also due to urbanization, construction of reservoirs and fire. The accumulation of organochloride pesticides in wintering areas may affect the species’s reproductive success (Tucker and Heath 1994). It is also highly vulnerable to the impacts of potential wind energy developments (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Extensive areas with a mixture of open habitats and mature forests should be maintained and protected. Any unavoidable afforestation or deforestation should occur outside the breeding season and should only be a partial habitat change, not complete. Legislation against shooting should be more firmly enforced and education programmes aimed at reducing illegal persecution and nest-robbing initiated. Electrocution mortality could be reduced by modifying the design of power lines. The species’s distribution, numbers, habitat preferences, population dynamics, and local diets should be researched, as well as the impact of pesticides on fertility (Tucker and Heath 1994).


taxonomicNotes:
Milvus migrans and M. lineatus (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) have been lumped following AERC TAC, a treatment supported by review by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group of the Milvus phylogeny presented by Johnson et al. (2005) which nests lineatus with

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 81,200-109,000 pairs, which equates to 162,000-218,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 47,500-52,900 pairs, which equates to 94,900-106,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species is found almost ubiquitously throughout habitats. It inhabits semi-deserts, cultivated areas and fragmented woodland, preferring areas below 1,000 m with adjacent aquatic environments. In Europe, unlike elsewhere in its range, it generally avoids breeding in urban areas (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). It arrives at its breeding grounds between February and May (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001) and can be loosely colonial or a solitary breeder. Eggs are laid between March and June. It normally nests in the fork or on the branch of a tree but will also use cliff ledges and man-made structures.

The nest is constructed from sticks and lined with materials such as rags, plastic, paper, dung or skin and it, or at least the nest site, will be re-used annually. Clutch size is normally two or three eggs. An extremely versatile feeder, it takes carrion as well as live birds, mammals, fish, lizards, amphibians and invertebrates. Also human refuse has become a plentiful food source in many areas. The species is mainly migratory, with birds from Europe wintering in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East (Orta and Marks 2014). It is generally a gregarious species, with birds often roosting communally and migrating in scattered flocks (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta and Marks 2014).

threats:
The species has suffered historically as a result of poisoning, shooting and the pollution of water by pesticides and other chemicals (Orta and Marks 2014). Carcass poisoning and water pollution continues to drive declines in Europe. Whilst it is well-suited to the presence of humans, particularly in terms of its diet, the modernisation of cities has been shown to reduce available habitat (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). It is very highly vulnerable to the effects of potential wind energy development (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. There are no known conservation actions currently in place.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Stricter legislation against poisoning, shooting and pollution should be developed and enforced. Suitable impact assessments should be made for wind energy developments.


taxonomicNotes:
Milvus milvus (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) was split into M. milvus and M. fasciicauda by Hazevoet (1995), but for reasons given in Johnson et al. (2005) this treatment has not been adopted by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group.

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)

This European near-endemic raptor is undergoing moderately rapid population declines in the three core range states, Germany, Spain and France, and despite recoveries in many smaller populations it therefore warrants classification as Near Threatened in both Europe and the EU27.

range:
This is very much a European species (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). It breeds from Spain and Portugal east through central Europe to Ukraine, north to southern Sweden, Latvia and the U.K., and south to southern Italy. Populations winter within the western breeding range, and formerly in isolated patches south and east to eastern Turkey (Knott et al. 2009).

population:
The European population is estimated at 25,200-33,400 pairs, which equates to 50,400-66,800 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 24,000-31,900 pairs, which equates to 48,000-63,700 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds in broadleaf woodlands and forests, mixed with farmland, pasture and heathland. In winter it also occupies farmland without trees, wasteland, scrub and wetlands. Formerly an urban scavenger, it still visits the edges of towns and cities. Eggs are laid between March and May. The nest is a platform of sticks, often with rags or plastic incorporated, and normally lined with wool. It is built in a fork or on a wide side branch of a tree (coniferous or broadleaf), in forests, woods or clump of trees. Each pair normally has several nests, using the same one each year or alternating. Clutches range between one to four eggs, normally two but sometimes three. It takes a wide range of food, but feeds mainly on carrion and small to medium-sized mammals and birds. Reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates are less important prey. Most birds in north-east Europe are migratory, wintering mainly in southern France and Iberia, but with some travelling as far as Africa (Orta and Christie 2013). Migrants travel south from their breeding grounds between August and November, returning between February and April (Snow and Perrins 1998). Birds are usually seen singly or in pairs, but sometimes form small flocks, possibly family groups, when soaring on migration (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
The most pertinent threat to this species is illegal direct poisoning to kill predators of livestock and game animals (targeting foxes, wolves, corvids etc.) and indirect poisoning from pesticides and secondary poisoning from consumption of poisoned rodents by rodenticides spread on farmland to control vole plagues, particularly in the wintering ranges in France and Spain, where it is driving rapid population declines (A. Aebischer in litt. 2009); there is a strong correlation between rapid declines and those populations that winter in Spain (Carter 2007). The Spanish government released more than 1,500 tons of rodenticide-treated baits over about 500,000 ha to fight against a common vole plague in agricultural lands between August 2007 and April 2008; records of Red Kites dying by secondary poisoning in treated areas resulted (J. Vinuela in litt. 2009). Illegal poisoning is also a serious threat to the species in north Scotland, with 40% of birds found dead between 1989 and 2006 having been killed by poisoning (Smart et al. 2010). In France populations disappeared at the same rate as conversion from grasslands to cereal crops (P. Tourret in litt. 2009). The decline of grazing livestock and farming intensification leading to chemical pollution, homogenization of landscapes and ecological impoverishment also threatens the species (Knott et al. 2009). Wind turbines are a potentially serious future threat (Duchamp 2003, Mammen et al. 2009, P. Tourret in litt. 2009) and more research needs to be conducted to assess the level of threat windfarms pose to the species. Other less significant threats include electrocution and collision with powerlines (Mionnet 2007, P. Tourret in litt. 2009),  hunting and trapping (Mionnet 2007, P. Tourret in litt. 2009), road-kills, deforestation, egg-collection (on a local scale) and possibly competition with the generally more successful Black Kite (Milvus migrans) (Cardiel in litt. 2000, Ferguson-Lees et al. 2001, Cardiel and Viñuela 2007, Mammen 2007). Another factor implicated in the declines in France and Spain is a decrease in the number of rubbish dumps (Cardiel and Viñuela 2007, Mionnet 2007).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. CITES Appendix II. Annex II Bern Convention. The species is on Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and is the focus of close monitoring and targeted conservation actions across most of its range, including reintroduction to parts of the U.K. since 1989 (English Nature 1995, RSPB 2007). Since 2007, further reintroduction projects are aiming to re-establish the species in Tuscany and in the Marche (Italy), the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland - the first breeding attempt in the Republic was recorded in 2009. An EU species action plan for the Red Kite was published in 2009 (Knott et al. 2009). National species action plans are in place in Germany, France, the Balearic Islands and Denmark, and a draft national action plan is in place in Portugal. Ongoing research in Germany aims to examine further the impact of windfarms on the breeding population of this species. In 2007, for the first time, three young birds in France were fitted with satellite transmitters, although only one provided regular information (Mionnet 2007). In Spain, radio-tracking was carried out in Segovia in 2006-2007.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Continue to monitor population trends and breeding productivity. Continue to manage reintroduction projects. Regulate the use of pesticides, especially in France and Spain. Reduce persecution through law enforcement, prosecutions and awareness campaigns. Carry out further studies into the impact of changing land-use practices. Lobby for changes in EU and national agricultural policies. Increase the area of suitable woodland and forest with protected status. Work with land-owners to protect habitat and prevent persecution. Consider extending supplementary feeding to more areas of low food availability. Ensure national legislation on animal by-products takes into account the needs of scavengers. Promote control on feeding stations to be compliant with sanitary regulations.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Endangered (EN)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

Within Europe this vulture has undergone very rapid declines over three generations (53 years) and it is therefore classified as Endangered. In the EU27 declines have apparently stabilised but it qualifies as Vulnerable based on the rate of past declines.

range:
The species is a widespread but patchily distributed breeder in southern Europe, with an isolated resident population in the  Canary Islands (Ferguson-Lees et al. 2001). Elsewhere, migratory populations are found from Spain in the west, through the Mediterranean, Turkey and the Caucasus in the east (Iñigo et al. 2008).

population:
The European population is estimated at 3,000-4,700 pairs, which equates to 6,000-9,300 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,500-1,700 pairs, which equates to 3,000-3,300 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species forages principally in arid open areas such as steppes, savannas and river banks (Tucker and Heath 1994). Nesting occurs in cliffs or crags, occasionally in trees and it sometimes occupies the old nest of another raptor. Birds usually form monogamous pairs but occasionally polyandrous trios too. Both sexes construct a nest of sticks with a deep central cup, which is usually heavily lined with a range of materials including wool, hair, rags and the remains of food, even excrement, although sometimes scarcely lined at all. Clutches vary from one to three eggs, although normally two (Orta et al. 2013). It has a broad diet including carrion, tortoises, organic waste, insects, young vertebrates, eggs and faeces. It is usually solitary, but will congregate at feeding sites, such as rubbish tips, or vulture restaurants (i.e. supplementary feeding stations). It also scavenges at human settlements, and forms roosts of non-breeding birds (Ceballos & Donázar 1990). This species is migratory and most European birds will winter in sub-Saharan Africa between 14° and 17°N although a few winter in Spain (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997).

threats:
This species faces a number of threats across its range. Disturbance, lead poisoning (from gun shot), direct poisoning, electrocution (by powerlines), collisions with wind turbines, reduced food availability and habitat change are currently impacting upon European populations (Donázar et al. 2002, N. Petkov in litt. 2005, Kurtev et al. 2008, Zuberogoitia et al. 2008, Carrete et al. 2009, Dzhamirzoev and Bukreev 2009, Sara et al. 2009, Angelov et al. in prep. 2011). Illegal poisoning against carnivores seems to be the main threat operating on the breeding grounds in Spain (Hernandez and Margalida 2009) and the Balkans (I. Angelov in. litt. 2012). Within the European Union, regulations introduced in 2002, controlling the disposal of animal carcasses, greatly reduced food availability, notably through the closure of traditional muladares in Spain and Portugal (Donázar 2004, J. C. Atienza in litt. 2007, Lemus et al. 2008, Donázar et al. 2009, Cortás-Avizanda et al. 2010, Donázar et al. 2010a, Cortés-Avizanda 2011); however, recently-passed regulations will permit the operation of feeding stations for scavengers (A. Brunner in litt. 2010). Poisoning is a threat to the species, often through the use of poison baits targeted at terrestrial predators (Carrete et al. 2007, Carrete et al. 2009, Cortés-Avizanda et al. 2009), and through the consumption of inappropriately disposed of poisoned animals. Recent analyses from many countries such as Spain (Lemus et al. 2008) and Bulgaria (Angelov 2009) have highlighted high levels of contamination of the species leading to increased mortality. Antibiotic residues present in the carcasses of intensively-farmed livestock may increase the susceptibility of nestlings to disease (Lemus et al. 2008) (e.g. avian pox has been reported as a cause of mortality in Bulgaria (Kurtev et al. 2008)). It appears that Diclofenac, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) often used for livestock, and which is fatal to Gyps spp. when ingested at livestock carcasses (BirdLife International 2007 news (www.birdlife.org/news)), is driving the recent rapid declines in India (Cuthbert et al. 2006, A. Rahmani in litt. 2012). NSAIDs are reportedly toxic to raptors, storks, cranes and owls, suggesting that vultures of other genera could be susceptible to its effects (BirdLife International 2007 news (www.birdlife.org/news)). It seems plausible that this species previously had less exposure to the toxin owing to competitive exclusion from carcasses by Gyps spp. vultures (Cuthbert et al. 2006). Mortality at power lines has been found to be particularly common on the Canary Islands (Donazar et al. 2002, Donazar et al. 2007a) and  potentially risky in other regions of Spain (Donazar et al. 2007b, 2010b). Competition for suitable nest sites with Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus) may reduce breeding success in the short-term (Kurtev et al. 2008).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix I and II. Occurs within a number of protected areas across its range. Monitoring programmes, supplementary feeding (Cortés-Avizanda et al. 2010) and campaigns against illegal use of poisons, including awareness-raising, are in place for a number of national populations. An International Species Action Plan for the species was published in 2008 (Iñigo et al. 2008). National species action plans are in place in France, Bulgaria and Italy, and the species is included in the Balkan Vulture Action Plan (BVAP). Efforts are being taken to release captive-bred individuals in parts of Italy. In Spain, France, Italy, Bulgaria and Macedonia birds have been fitted with satellite tags to study juvenile dispersion, migratory movements and wintering areas (e.g. García-Ripollés et al. 2010). Nest guarding schemes for pairs that are most threatened by poachers have been implemented in Italy and Bulgaria, where very small populations survive. Expeditions to study the limiting factors in the wintering areas and along the migration flyway have taken place together with local organizations in Turkey and other, non-European countries.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Start and maintain intensive cooperation with local key stakeholders to ensure poison- and poaching-free zones at sites with high densities or congregations of the species throughout the breeding and migration, alongside similar efforts for other threatened species. Build capacity in countries along the migration flyways. Research the causes and extent of current declines across the species's range. Insulate dangerous electricity pylons in areas where high mortality is recorded. Coordinate monitoring to assess trends throughout the range. Relax the European Union animal hygiene regulations in relation to necrophagous birds. Establish supplementary feeding sites where appropriate, especially at sites where congregations of non-breeders can be supported. Effectively reduce risks of poisoning through strict enforcement of poison-bait ban and education. Lobby for the banning of Diclofenac for veterinary purposes throughout the species's range, and support the enforcement of this ban where it has been adopted. Where applicable, establish the impact of wind turbines, and lobby for effective impact assessments to be carried out prior to their construction. Where appropriate, reduce disturbance by guarding nests. Confiscate illegally-kept live birds and use them for the purposes of captive breeding and future restocking and reintroduction programs. In key areas of the species's range, implement long-term and large-scale education and community involvement programmes.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 118,000-171,000 pairs, which equates to 235,000-342,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 44,000-71,100 pairs, which equates to 88,100-142,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This is a migratory species, wintering in in tropical Africa. It leaves its breeding grounds in August and September, returning between April and June (Orta et al. 2013). Birds are mostly solitary except on migration, when they flock throughout, gathering in large numbers at preferred crossing points as well as roosting socially (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Porter and Aspinall 2010, Orta et al. 2013). They fly chiefly by soaring, although are able to cross wide stretches of water with flapping flight (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). The species is diurnal (Snow and Perrins 1998). It is found in forests and woods, preferably deciduous, but also mixed forests in temperate and boreal zones. It also uses a variety of habitats with both wooded and open areas, including heathland and cultivated area. It feeds mainly on wasps and hornets. Nests are built in woods, preferentially in deciduous trees. Typically lays two eggs (Orta et al. 2013).

threats:
Many birds are shot on migration, notably in Italy, Malta and Lebanon (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001, Orta et al. 2013). Population declines in northern Europe have resulted from deforestation, forest conversion and shooting. Human disturbance is also a threat. Pesticide use has not had significant impacts in Europe (due to the species living in woodland and feeding on wasps). It is very highly vulnerable to the effects of potential wind energy development (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex I. CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. In Armenia, it is protected in preserves (Adamian and Klem 1999). It is listed as ‘vulnerable’ in Croatia (Radovícet al. 2003) and ‘near threatened’ in Turkey (Kirwan et al. 2008) and is listed in the Red Data Books of the city of Moscow and the Moscow region (Kalyakin and Voltzit 2006).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Illegal hunting should be prevented and low-intensity agriculture and forestry promoted. Disturbance during the breeding season should be minimised.


taxonomicNotes:
Pandion haliaetus (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993; Christidis and Boles 1994) was split into P. haliaetus and P. cristatus by Christidis and Boles (2008) but this treatment is not followed by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group (BTWG) because the authors b

population:
The European population is estimated at 8,400-12,300 pairs, which equates to 16,700-24,600 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 5,800-7,500 pairs, which equates to 11,600-15,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
It inhabits the areas around shallow waters, being sufficiently tolerant of human settlement to persist in suburban and sometimes urban environments. It breeds from late May to early September and most pairs are monogamous but polygynous trios form where males can easily defend two nests. The nest is a large collection of sticks and flotsam, lined with grasses and moss where available, usually wedged high (up to 30 m above the ground) in an exposed tree or will also nest on cliff. Clutches are from one to four eggs. Its diet almost entirely consists of live fish (Poole et al. 2014). The species migrates on broad fronts and is not dependent on land bridges during migration (Snow and Perrins 1998, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). Migrants begin moving to lower latitudes in August and arrive by October, returning in March and April (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

threats:
Human persecution was the main historical threat, prevalent from the 18th–20th centuries (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001). A combination of deforestation and the collection of eggs and live birds drove the species extinct in Azerbaijan (Poole et al. 2014). Numbers fell from 1950–1970 as a result of pesticide use, although they are now recovering. Pesticide use has now been reduced to a minor threat. In Scotland the species had been extirpated by collection and hunting but is now recovering (Poole et al. 2014, Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001), but shooting still affects many birds on migration in the Mediterranean, notably in Malta. It is very highly vulnerable to the effects of potential wind energy development (Strix 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex I. CMS Appendix II. Reintroduction has helped populations to recover across parts of its range and pesticide use has been reduced, as seen in the Fennoscandian population which increased after a reduction in pollutants (mainly organochlorides and mercury) (Pooleet al. 2014).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Disturbance during the breeding season can be reduced by establishing protective zones 200–300 m wide around the nest. This, along with nest wardening, rebuilding of damaged nests and the provision of artificial nests in safe locations where necessary, would also assist breeding success. The spread of pollutants should be reduced. Fish-farms visited by migrating birds should use equipment to scare birds and prevent access to fish stocks rather than shoot them (Tucker and Heath 1994).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size is very large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the species is undergoing rapid declines that exceed 30% over the last three generation lengths (one GL = 6.8 years), and it is therefore classified as Vulnerable. Since the wider European population is also decreasing, there is not considered to be significant potential for rescue from outside the EU27 and the final category is unchanged.

range:
The species has a more northern range than other dabbling ducks and it covers northern and temperate regions across Europe although it avoids Arctic islands.  In more southerly countries, its distribution is extremely patchy (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997).

population:
The European population is estimated at 210,000-269,000 pairs, which equates to 419,000-539,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 8,600-17,300 pairs, which equates to 17,200-34,700 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species shows a preference for open lowland grassland (Snow and Perrins 1998), prairie or tundra habitats (Johnsgard 1978) containing freshwater, brackish and saline wetlands with shallow water to facilitate dabbling (Kear 2005). Wetland habitats include shallow freshwater marshes, small marshy lakes, slow-flowing rivers (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and wet meadows (Madge and Burn 1988), especially favouring ponds with low, dense marginal vegetation and wetlands interspersed with brushy thickets or copses (Johnsgard 1978). During the winter it also frequents large inland lakes (Scott and Rose 1996), brackish coastal lagoons, brackish (Madge and Burn 1988) and saline marshes (Steele et al. 1997), shallow fresh or brackish estuaries (Johnsgard 1978, Brown et al. 1982, Snow and Perrins 1998), tidal flats (Madge and Burn 1988) and river deltas (Scott and Rose 1996) with adjacent agricultural land and scattered impoundments (Johnsgard 1978).

It breeds in solitary pairs or loose groups from April to June (Madge and Burn 1988). The nest is a slight hollow on the ground amongst vegetation (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and can be close to or more than 1 km away from water (Kear 2005). This species is omnivorous (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and opportunistic (Johnsgard 1978), its diet consisting of algae (Brown et al. 1982), seeds (Hockey et al. 2005) and rice (Brown et al. 1982), tubers, and the vegetative parts of aquatic plants, sedges (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and grasses (Brown et al. 1982, Hockey et al. 2005), as well as aquatic invertebrates, amphibians and small fish. This species is strongly migratory throughout its northern range (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is threatened by wetland habitat loss on its breeding and wintering grounds (Scott and Rose 1996). Reclamation of coastal areas for industrial development poses a threat in Europe (Scott and Rose 1996). The species is also threatened by petroleum pollution, wetland drainage, peat-extraction, changing wetland management practices (decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub over-growth) and the burning and mowing of reeds in Russia (Grishanov 2006). It suffers from over-exploitation in Europe (Kear 2005). The species is predated by feral cats (Felis catus) and rats (Rattus norvegicus) on islands (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), and is susceptible to avian botulism (Rocke 2006) and avian influenza (Melville and Shortridge 2006, Gaidet et al. 2007) so may be threatened by future outbreaks of these diseases. The species is hunted recreationally in Denmark (Bregnballe et al. 2006) and the Po delta, Italy (Sorrenti et al. 2006). The eggs of this species used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. An EU management plan for the species was published in 2007. The important sites for the species are protected in Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden, U.K., Spain, Portugal and Greece (Jensen 2007).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Hunting of this species should be banned during migration and at the end of the breeding season and annual data on bag numbers should be collected for all countries where the species is hunted. Breeding sites should be identified, preserved and managed to increase reproductive success and colonising ability and all internationally important staging and wintering sites should be designated as SPAs and managed favourably. Censusing of winter populations and breeding populations, to provide an assessment of breeding productivity, should be carried out annually. Ringing on breeding and wintering sites should also be carried out and existing ringing data analysed to identify population units and provide annual estimates of mortality (Jensen 2007).


taxonomicNotes:
Although Anas crecca was split by Sangster et al. (2001) into A. crecca and A. carolinensis and this treatment was followed in BirdLife International (2004), AOU (1998) do not adopt this treatment and this source is now followed here.

population:
The European population is estimated at 557,000-915,000 pairs, which equates to 1,110,000-1,830,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 226,000-419,000 pairs, which equates to 453,000-838,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species shows a preference for shallow (Madge and Burn 1988, Kear 2005), permanent waters (Johnsgard 1978) in the breeding season (Madge and Burn 1988, Snow and Perrins 1998), especially those in the vicinity of woodlands with fairly dense herbaceous cover available nearby for nesting (Johnsgard 1978). Small freshwater lakes and shallow marshes with abundant emergent vegetation  are preferred to open water (Johnsgard 1978), as are small waterbodies forming part of a larger wetland, lake or river system, especially in the valleys of small forested rivers. Other suitable habitats include small ponds, pools, oxbow lakes, lagoons and slow-flowing streams (Snow and Perrins 1998). Outside of the breeding season the species frequents similar habitats to those in which it breeds (Brown et al. 1982), including marsh and lake habitats and other sheltered waters with high productivity and abundant vegetation (Kear 2005) as well as flooded fields and artificial waters (Snow and Perrins 1998). During the winter the species also occurs along the coast (Carboneras et al. 2013) on saline (Snow and Perrins 1998) or brackish lagoons with abundant submergent vegetation (Kear 2005), saltmarshes (Madge and Burn 1988), tidal creeks, intertidal mudflats (Johnsgard 1978), river deltas , estuarine waters and even sheltered coastal bays).

The species breeds from May onwards (Madge and Burn 1988). The nest is a hollow in the ground placed amongst dense vegetation (Carboneras et al. 2013) or under bushes close to water (rarely more than 100 m away) (Kear 2005). Clutch size is usually eight to eleven eggs. In spring and summer the diet of the species consists predominantly of animal matter such as molluscs, worms, insects and crustaceans. During winter the species mainly takes the seeds of aquatic plants (Carboneras et al. 2013). Northern breeding populations of this species are highly migratory (Madge and Burn 1988) although populations in more temperate regions are sedentary (Carboneras et al. 2013) or locally dispersive (Scott and Rose 1996).

threats:
This species is threatened by lowland habitat loss and degradation (e.g. through wetland drainage) (Musil 2006) and by upland habitat loss due to afforestation and other land-use changes (Kear 2005). The species suffers mortality as a result of lead shot ingestion (France) (Mondain-Monval et al. 2002). It is also intensively hunted in its winter quarters (Carboneras et al. 2013). The species is threatened by disturbance from human recreational activities (Pease et al. 2005), hunting (Bregnballe et al. 2004) and construction work (U.K.) (Burton et al. 2002). The species is susceptible to avian botulism (Rocke 2006) and avian influenza (Melville and Shortridge 2006, Gaidet et al. 2007) so may be threatened by future outbreaks of these diseases. The species is hunted for sport in Denmark (Bregnballe et al. 2006), France (Mondain-Monval et al. 2006) and Italy (Sorrenti et al. 2006). The eggs of this species were (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. A study in the Czech Republic found that fish ponds with a fish stock density of less than 400 kg/ha, water transparency of more than 50 cm, mixed fish stocks (e.g. tench and pike or perch) rather than monospecific stocks (e.g. of carp), and systems that include ponds with fish fry (to provide areas with low fish competition and high invertebrate availability) are more successful in supporting breeding pairs of this species (Musil 2006). Studies in Danish coastal wetlands found that the spatial restriction of shore-based shooting was more successful at maintaining waterfowl population sizes than was the temporal restriction of shooting, and therefore that wildfowl reserves should incorporate shooting-free refuges that include adjacent marshland in order to ensure high waterfowl species diversity (Bregnballe et al. 2004). Since 2000 the use of lead shot has gradually been banned for wildfowling in some European countries (Guillemain and Elmberg 2014).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Habitat management measures that provide safe and food-rich shallow wetlands are beneficial for this species. Information is lacking on specific conservation measures for this species so future research should focus on experimental trials of management procedures to find out what benefits this species. Also the impact of climate change on the current network of protected areas should be assessed. Landscape-scale habitat management may be necessary for this species. There is also a need to develop an adaptive harvest management system for this species, which regularly evaluates harvest and management measures and compares them to population demographics (Guillemain and Elmberg 2014).


taxonomicNotes:
Anas platyrhynchos and A. fulvigula (incorporating diazi) (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) were previously treated as A. platyrhynchos (incorporating diazi) and A. fulvigula following Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

population:
The European population is estimated at 2,850,000-4,610,000 pairs, which equates to 5,700,000-9,220,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,700,000-2,910,000 pairs, which equates to 3,400,000-5,830,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species occurs in almost every wetland type, although it generally avoids fast-flowing, oligotrophic (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), deep, exposed, rough, rockbound waters and hard unvegetated areas such as rocky ground, sand dunes and artificial surfacing (Snow and Perrins 1998). It requires water less than 1 m deep for foraging (Snow and Perrins 1998) and shows a preference for freshwater habitats (Madge and Burn 1988). Habitats commonly frequented include flooded swampy woodlands, seasonal floodlands (Snow and Perrins 1998), wet grassy swamps and meadows, oxbow lakes (Flint et al. 1984), open waters with mudflats, banks or spits, irrigation networks, reservoirs, ornamental waters (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), canals and sewage farms (Snow and Perrins 1998). During the winter the species may also be found in saline habitats along the coast (Madge and Burn 1988) where water is shallow, fairly sheltered and within sight of land (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species breeds between March and June although the exact timing varies with latitude (Madge and Burn 1988). The nest is a shallow depression (Snow and Perrins 1998) or bowl of vegetation that can be situated in many different locations such as within vegetation on the ground, in natural tree cavities (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), under fallen dead wood, on tree stumps and even in abandoned nests of other species (Flint et al. 1984). Clutch size is generally nine to thirteen eggs. The species is omnivorous and opportunistic, feeding on seeds and the vegetative parts of aquatic and terrestrial plants, as well as terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates such as insects, molluscs, crustaceans, worms and occasionally amphibians and fish (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). In temperate regions breeding populations of this species are sedentary or dispersive, often making local movements during severe weather (Scott and Rose 1996). Other populations are fully migratory (Kear 2005).

threats:
The species is threatened by wetland habitat degradation and loss from pollution (e.g. petroleum (Grishanov 2006) and pesticide pollution (Kwon et al. 2004)), wetland drainage, peat-extraction, changing wetland management practices (e.g. decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub over-growth) and the burning and mowing of reedbeds (Grishanov 2006). The species also suffers mortality as a result of lead shot ingestion (e.g. in Spain (Mateo et al. 1999) and France (Mondain-Monval et al. 2002)). It is also susceptible to duck virus enteritis (DVE) (Friend 2006), avian influenza (Melville and Shortridge 2006) and avian botulism (Rocke 2006) so may be threatened by future outbreaks of these diseases (although it may be able to withstand sporadic losses due to its high reproductive potential) (Rocke 2006). The species is predated by American Mink (Neovison vison) (Opermanis et al. 2001). The species is hunted throughout its range (Kear 2005) mainly for sport (Evans and Day 2002, Bregnballe et al. 2006, Mondain-Monval et al. 2006, Sorrenti et al. 2006). The eggs of this species were (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. Studies have revealed some of the species's requirements. Extensive grazing of wetland grasslands (c. 0.5 cows per hectare) was found to attract a higher abundance of the species in Hungary (Baldi et al. 2005). Studies in Danish coastal wetlands found that the spatial restriction of shore-based shooting was more successful at maintaining waterfowl population sizes than was the temporal restriction of shooting, and therefore that wildfowl reserves should incorporate shooting-free refuges that include adjacent marshland in order to ensure high waterfowl species diversity (Bregnballe et al. 2004). The cyclical removal of adult fish from an artificial waterbody (gravel pit) in the U.K. resulted in an increase in invertebrate food availability and an increase in the growth of submerged aquatic macrophytes, which in turn led to an increased use of the habitat for brood rearing by the species (Giles 1994). The removed fish (dead or alive) were sold to generate funds (Giles 1994). However, no conservation measures are currently targeted at this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
The species is not threatened and does not require any immediate conservation action but is likely to benefit for conservation measures implemented for other wetland species.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment:Least Concern (LC)

This species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter, however it is considered Least Concern there based on available winter population data.

population:
The European population is estimated at 259,000-310,000 pairs, which equates to 518,000-620,000 mature individuals. The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter and the minimum population is estimated at 1,440,000-2,280,000 individuals, which equates to 940,000-1,500,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds in open (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), low-lying, shrubby tundra (Snow and Perrins 1998) on the coast and inland, in close proximity to marshes, lakes, pools, rivers (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), and willow- and shrub-lined ponds and streams (Johnsgard 1978). It requires dry slopes, banks, mounds, hummocks or patches of sand or clay for nesting sites, especially those commanding good views of the surrounding area (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species winters in open country on steppe and agricultural land (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) and wet meadows (Johnsgard 1978)), or in brackish (Kear 2005) and freshwater marshy habitats (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). It may also roost on tidal marshes, in sheltered bays or in estuaries and frequents inland lakes and reservoirs in North America (Kear 2005). The species breeds from late-May or early-June in single pairs or loose groups (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). The nest is a shallow construction of plant matter on the ground (del Hoyo et al. 1992) amongst vegetation such as grass or dwarf scrub heath, often on raised hummocks or slopes to reduce the risk of flooding and provide a vantage point of the surrounding area (Kear 2005). Usually five to six eggs, although larger clutches are thought to be laid by more than one female. The species is herbivorous, its diet consisting of the roots, leaves, stems, seeds and fruits of terrestrial plants such as herbs, grasses and sedges (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), as well as agricultural grain, wheat, rice and barley (Johnsgard 1978), potatoes and sprouting cereals (especially in the winter). This species is fully migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), travelling in stages via several stop-over sites between separate breeding and wintering grounds (Madge and Burn 1988).

threats:
The species is threatened by intense hunting pressure (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) resulting in mortality and disturbance at staging (Nikolaeva et al. 2006) and moulting sites (Glahder and Walsh 2006). It is also susceptible to poisoning by pesticides used on agricultural land (Kwon et al. 2004). The species is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). Climatic changes are likely to cause range contractions in this species's already highly restricted breeding range (Kear 2005), and are already causing other species (e.g. Canada Geese (Branta Canadensis)) to move northward, increasing competition for resources (Kear 2005, Fox et al. 2006). Oil exploration in the tundra habitat poses a threat to the species's breeding (Kear 2005a) and moulting sites (Glahder and Walsh 2006) through oil spills and chronic oil pollution (Grishanov 2006, Nikolaeva et al. 2006), by direct habitat destruction (influencing breeding site selection and reducing reproductive success) (Kear 2005) and through human disturbance (Glahder and Walsh 2006). Wetland habitat degradation due to drainage, peat-extraction and changing management practices (decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub over-growth) is also a problem in areas of Russia (Grishanov 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex I, II and III. CMS Appendix II. Race flavirostris is amongst least numerous subpopulation, but it is increasing, with active protection on its wintering grounds in the U.K. since 1982/1983 (although hunting was only finally banned completely in 2006) (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). In 2012 an International Species Action Plan for A. a. flavirostris was published (Stroud et al. 2012).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The protection of winter roost sites is extremely important for the overall conservation of species (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). Thus key areas should be protected from habitat alteration and disturbance. Strict legislation should be developed and enforced with regards to oil exploration and transportation and the promotion of less intensive farming methods undertaken. Research and monitoring programmes should be maintained and developed to provide data and inform conservation of the species (Stroud et al. 2012).


population:
The European population is estimated at 259,000-427,000 pairs, which equates to 519,000-853,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 197,000-343,000 pairs, which equates to 395,000-687,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
During the breeding season the species inhabits wetlands surrounded by fringing vegetation in open grassland (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), sedge or heather moorland (Johnsgard 1978), arctic tundra, steppe or semi-desert from sea-level up to 2,300 m (Snow and Perrins 1998). It nests near streams, saltmarshes (Kear 2005), river flood-plains, reedy marshes, grassy bogs, damp meadows, reed-lined freshwater lakes and estuaries (Johnsgard 1978) close to potential feeding sites such as meadows, grasslands, stubble fields and newly sown cereal fields (Kear 2005). It requires isolated islands out of reach of land predators for nesting. In the autumn (before migration) the species also frequents agricultural land (Kear 2005). In the winter the species inhabits lowland farmland in open country, swamps, lakes, coastal lagoons (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), reservoirs and estuaries (Madge and Burn 1988).
The species breeds from May or April in loose colonies (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013, Kear 2005). The nest is a shallow construction of plant matter placed among reedbeds, on the ground (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), in or at the base of trees, under bushes or in sheltered hollows on isolated wooded islands on lakes or along coasts (Johnsgard 1978, Kear 2005), as well as on rafts of vegetation in rivers (Snow and Perrins 1998). Usually four to six eggs are laid (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). The species is herbivorous, its diet consisting of grasses, the roots, shoots, leaves, stems, seedheads and fruits of other herbaceous marsh vegetation (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), aquatic plants (Johnsgard 1978), and agricultural grain and potatoes. This species is fully migratory although some populations in temperate regions are only sedentary (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) or locally dispersive (Scott and Rose 1996), occasionally making irregular movements in very icy winters (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
This species is threatened by considerable hunting pressures across much of its range (Madge and Burn 1988, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) and is susceptible to poisoning from lead shot ingestion (Mateo et al. 1998). It is also persecuted by farmers as it can cause considerable crop damage (Madge and Burn 1988, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). The destruction and degradation of wetland habitats due to drainage (Madge and Burn 1988, Grishanov 2006, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), conversion to agriculture (Madge and Burn 1988, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), petroleum pollution, peat-extraction, changing wetland management practices (e.g. decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub over-growth) and the burning and mowing of reeds is also a threat, especially in breeding areas (Grishanov 2006). The species is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Directives Annex II. CMS Appendix II. The species has been successfully reintroduced or introduced in some areas, for example Austria, Belgium, parts of Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Accurate monitoring of bag numbers in countries where the species is hunted should be implemented. The integration of farming and conservation measures along with protection of key wetland sites is needed to ensure the population remains stable.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
This species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.
The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter, however it is considered Least Concern there based on available winter population data.

population:
The European population is estimated at 57,000-74,000 pairs, which equates to 114,000-148,000 mature individuals. The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter and the minimum population is estimated at 418,000-427,000 individuals, which equates to 279,000-285,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds on rocky outcrops, crags and steep river gorges in open arctic tundra (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), especially near seabird colonies. The species overwinters on extensive areas of saltmarsh (Kear 2005) in estuaries and on flat agricultural land (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) (e.g. improved or fertilised grasslands, stubble fields, pastures and newly sown cereal fields) (Kear 2005). In Scotland favoured winter daytime roosting sites include estuarine mudflats, lochs and reservoirs (Madge and Burn 1988).
It breeds from mid-May to late-June or early-July (Kear 2005) in territorial pairs which may form loose colonies (Madge and Burn 1988). The nest is a low mound of vegetation on cliffs, rocky outcrops or snow-free hummocks (Kear 2005). Three to five eggs are usually laid. The species is herbivorous (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and an opportunistic forager (Kear 2005). During the breeding season its diet includes leaves, stems, roots, berries and seed-heads of sedges, mosses, lichens, and grasses. In its wintering areas the species is more reliant on grass, grain, vegetables and potatoes grown on agricultural land. This species is fully migratory travelling on a narrow front between separate breeding and wintering grounds (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is hunted illegally in the spring in Iceland which may become a threat. Disturbance from hunting on spring staging grounds in Norway has major negative impact on breeding success, and persecution (shooting and disturbance) of the species by farmers is likely to increase in the future if populations increase (due to the species's impact on agricultural grassland) (Kear 2005). The species is subject to hunting in Svalbard and Denmark as well as Norway, although mortality due to hunting does not seem to be a major factor controlling population sizes (O'Connell et al. 2006). Disturbance from farmers discouraging foraging individuals from their land in the winter has been shown to reduce the species's reproductive success in the spring (Madsen 1995), and the species is also threatened by general disturbance (e.g. from helicopters surveying areas for oil exploration) (Mosbech and Glahder 1991). It may be threatened by land-management changes (such as a reduction in the intensity of management and land abandonment) (Tombre et al. 2005), and by future habitat loss such as the development of hydroelectric projects on interior rivers in Iceland (which would flood a major moulting area) (Kear 2005). The nesting success of breeding pairs in Svalbard is greatly reduced as a result of Arctic Fox (Vulpes lagopus) predation (Madsen et al. 1992).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex II. CMS Appendix II. In the Netherlands and the UK and some other areas in Europe, governments compensate farmers in relevant goose areas to further conservation. Recent population increases are most likely due to the protection of sites, changed behaviour (birds using inland roosting sites such as reservoirs), improved food supplies and a reduction of hunting. Although the species is considered legitimate quarry in all range states, special restrictions are in force throughout, for example in Denmark goose shooting is only permitted early mornings during a short autumn season and recreational hunting in spring is banned everywhere (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). In 2012 an International Species Management Plan was developed for the Svalbard population (Madsen and Williams 2012).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Compensation schemes for farmers should be continued and improved. Research in Norway has suggested the current compensation scheme can be made ten times more efficient through strategic prioritization. Careful management in important areas is needed to maintain the current population. In the UK, one study suggested that the manipulation of sward height and fertiliser application provides suitable habitat for this and other species of geese (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Hunting should be monitored and sustainable hunting levels ensured where hunting is in practice. Spatial management should be enhanced and maintained (Madsen and Williams 2012).


taxonomicNotes:
Anser caerulescens (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously placed in the genus Chen.

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Applicable (NA)

Although this species may have a restricted range, it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

This species is considered Not Applicable for the EU27 as it is an introduced non-native species (in the UK) or vagrant in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 1,000-2,000 pairs, which equates to 2,000-4,000 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is found on low, grassy tundra, generally in close association with water (ponds, shallow lakes or river deltas) or on stony ground. Breeding begins in June usually as soon as areas become free of snow and generally within 7-10 days of arrival on nesting grounds. It is monogamous, often for life, although extra-pair copulations have been recorded. The nest is built by the female, who chooses the site as well and is a shallow depression filled with moss and lined with grass and down on the ground. Normally five or six eggs are laid. The diet is principally vegetarian, comprising of roots, tubers, leaves, grasses, stems and seed heads of various aquatic plants and sedges. The species is migratory (Carboneras et al. 2014).

threats:
Despite hunting pressure this species is increasing in numbers (Kear 2005). Climatic effects may impact the species in the future (Murphy-Klassen et al. 2005).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. There are no known conservation measures currently in place for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
No conservation measures are currently needed for this species.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Endangered (EN)
EU27 regional assessment: Critically Endangered (CR)

In Europe, this species has a very small, declining population and is therefore classified as Endangered (C1). Within the EU27, the population is tiny and it is therefore listed as Critically Endangered under criterion D.

Due to limited genetic introgression of Greater White-fronted Goose genetic material in the reinforced Swedish population, some concerns have been raised about whether that population should be considered in the current Red List assessment. The current Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria (Version 11, February 2014) do not provide any guidance on what levels of hybrid gene frequency are acceptable to allow inclusion of populations of released birds from captive breeding programmes in a Red List assessment. However, the European and EU27 Red List Categories are not affected by that debate.

range:
In Europe, the Fennoscandian population breeds in the Nordic countries and the Kola Peninsula in Russia and winters around the Black and Caspian Seas, in Azerbaijan, and in the Evros Delta between Greece and Turkey (Lorentsen et al. 1998). Small numbers occur on passage or in winter in Hungary, Germany (Morozov and Syroechkovski 2005, Kruckenberg and Krüger 2013), Slovakia, Romania (Munteanu et al. 1991, Aarvak et al. 1997) Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania and Bulgaria (Petkov et al. 1999). In Sweden the population was reinforced with captive bred birds since 1981 (Marchant and Musgrove 2011). A small wintering population is also now established in The Netherlands and Germany, which originates from the population in Sweden. There are important staging areas in Estonia (Tolvanen et al. 1999), Lithuania and Poland (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 140-310 pairs, which equates to 280-620 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 15-30 pairs, which equates to 30-60 mature individuals. In winter, the European population is estimated at 2,200-7,600 individuals, which equates to 1,500-5,100 mature individuals. The population in winter in the EU27 is estimated at 90-270 individuals, which equates to 60-180 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds in low-lying bogs, scrub-covered tundra and taiga-forest edges close to wetlands, up to 700 m Asl (Kear 2005). It can also be found on the slopes by the lower parts of mountain streams, on mountain foothills, mountain lakes and on alpine precipices, often in thawing boggy areas or on stone fields (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Johnsgard 1978). It often nests on snow-free patches available early in the breeding season (such as rocky outcrops or prominent hummocks) hidden amongst vegetation or in boggy hollows (Madsen 1996, Kear 2005), usually in close proximity to open water or marshy areas (Kear 2005). The nest is a shallow depression on the ground lined with grass, moss and down and frequently the same site is used in subsequent seasons. Clutch size is normally four to six (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). This species is herbivorous, feeding on grasses, roots, stems, leaves, fruits and the green parts of aquatic and terrestrial plants. During the winter the species supplements its diet with winter agricultural grains. This species is fully migratory (Kear 2005). The species departs from its breeding grounds in northern Scandinavia and arctic Russia in late August to early September and travels to wintering grounds in south-east Europe and the Middle East (Alerstam 1990, Snow and Perrins 1998). Small wintering populations, originating from the reinforcement of the breeding population in Sweden, are now established in the Netherlands and Germany (Hornman et al. 2012, Kruckenberg and Krüger 2013). The return passage to the breeding grounds begins in February, with the species arriving from early May (Snow and Perrins 1998) to late June (Madsen 1996).

threats:
Illegal spring hunting and round-ups of moulting birds are taking place on the Russian breeding grounds (Jones 2011) and illegal shooting continues in Norway (T. Aarvak pers. comm. 2007). In the western Palearctic at least 20–30% of the population are shot each year (Mooij 2010) often accidentally during the hunting of other species. Habitat deterioration, as a result of land cultivation and increased water-levels in the Caspian Sea, is a further threat (Madsen 1996), as is habitat loss through the creation of reservoirs for hydroelectric power in Scandinavia (Madsen 1996). The species may also be threatened by nest predation from the Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) (Madsen 1996) and the restocked population in Sweden has suffered from predation by White-tailed Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) and Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) (Jones et al. 2008). Disturbance on breeding grounds (e.g. from increasing tourism and angling) causes much disruption to nesting birds (Madsen 1996). Climate change and associated habitat shifts are expected to impact negatively on this species and others dependent on tundra habitat for breeding. Modelling indicates that 28% of the habitat for this species could be lost by 2070 (Zöckler and Lysenko 2000).
 
Outside of the breeding season, high mortality in autumn and winter is caused by illegal hunting, and accidental shooting on the staging and wintering grounds is the most important threat (Madsen 1996, Aarvak et al.1997, Lorentsen et al. 1998, Kear 2005, Morozov 2006, Jones 2011). Disturbance of roosting and feeding birds by hunters is a potentially significant limiting factor on survival and breeding output (Ebbinge and Spaans 1995, N. Petkov in litt. 2007). In the Kaliningrad region of Russia, important migratory stop-over points on the Baltic Sea coastline are being degraded through petroleum pollution, wetland drainage for agriculture, changes in wetland management leading to scrub and reed overgrowth, peat extraction, and the burning and mowing of reed beds (Grishanov 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix I and II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. It is protected by law in all key range states. Satellite telemetry studies have improved knowledge of its ecology and the key threats (Aarvak et al.1997, Tolvanen et al. 1999). Satellite tracking was also carried out as part of a recent European LIFE project, which also enabled the preparation of National Action Plans for Norway, Finland and Estonia, habitat management and restoration in Estonia and Hungary and awareness campaigns, especially targeting hunters and farmers (Tonlaven et al. 2009). A European Action Plan was published in 1996 (Madsen 1996) and an updated International Single Species Action Plan for the western Palearctic population was published in 2008 (Jones et al. 2008). Several captive breeding populations exist (AEWA). A restocking programme in Sweden was ongoing until 2000, when concerns were raised regarding the presence of Great White-fronted Goose (Anser albifrons) mtDNA in the released captive bred birds (Ruokonen et al. 2007, Marchant and Musgrove 2011). At least 3-7% of birds released in Sweden until that time were estimated to be carrying DNA from Greater White-fronted Goose. Releases in Sweden of birds from a stock originating from Russia resumed in 2010 (Naturvårdsverket 2011).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Reduce illegal hunting pressure in key wintering and staging areas. Locate, monitor and protect key areas. Continue satellite tracking and other research. Prevent habitat loss and manage habitats in staging and wintering areas. Promote international and national legal protection and develop captive breeding programmes. Promote public awareness.


taxonomicNotes:
Anser fabalis (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) has been split into A. fabalis and A. serrirostris by Sangster and Oreel (1996) and A. fabalis and A. middendorfi by Ruokonen et al. (2008). Given that these two treatments are contradictory and undermine one a

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 134,000-144,000 pairs, which equates to 268,000-288,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,700-3,500 pairs, which equates to 3,300-7,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds near lakes, pools, rivers and streams in high Arctic tundra or the taiga forest zone (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Taiga nesting populations show a preference for scrubby birch (Betula spp.) forest and dense spruce forest with bogs or mires (Madge and Burn 1988), whereas tundra-based populations nest on damp tundra of moss, grass, sedge or scrub (Johnsgard 1978) near river flood-plains (but above flood levels) on Arctic islands and in Arctic coastal regions (Madge and Burn 1988). During the winter and on passage the species inhabits marshes, agricultural land (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), damp steppe grassland (Madge and Burn 1988), flood-lands, rivers and coastal shallows (Snow and Perrins 1998) in open country. It also roosts on lakes, rivers and flood-lands in Europe during this season. Populations that breed in the taiga nest in early-May, with those breeding in the tundra nesting one month later in early-June (Kear 2005). The species builds a nest of vegetation in a shallow scrape on the ground and clutch size is generally four to six eggs. The species is herbivorous, its diet consisting of herbs, grasses, sedges (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and mosses (Johnsgard 1978), complemented during the breeding season by berries. During the winter it feeds predominantly on agricultural land taking grain, beans, potatoes (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and sprouting winter cereal crops (Kear 2005). This species is strongly migratory and travels between breeding grounds in the high Arctic to wintering grounds in the temperate and subtropical zones (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species declined in the past due to hunting (resulting in mortality, injury and disturbance) (Kear 2005, Nikolaeva et al. 2006, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and habitat loss (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Habitat degradation due to oil pollution (Grishanov 2006, Nikolaeva et al. 2006), drainage, peat-extraction, changing management practices (decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub over-growth) and forest clearance is a threat to breeding areas in Russia (Grishanov 2006), Norway and Sweden (Madge and Burn 1988). The species also suffers from human persecution (Madge and Burn 1988) and is susceptible to poisoning by pesticides used on agricultural land (Kwon et al. 2004). Climate change poses a potential threat longer term on breeding grounds, most likely particularly to tundra populations (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Directives Annex II. CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix III. The species is listed on the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement. Compensatory payments are paid to farmers in the Netherlands; as a result research has been undertaked focusing on minimizing damage by altering land use in agricultural areas and restoring original habitats for wintering geese (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). In many countries, counts of the species and monitoring are carried out each year. International protection of key wetland habitats for the species is provided by Special Protection Areas, Ramsar and the Bern Convention (Hearn 2004).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Better quality and more widespread monitoring is needed for this species, particularly to assess the impact of hunting. A Flyway Management Plan is essential for international co-ordination of monitoring (Hearn 2004). More key sites should be protected and management and conservation needs should be integrated. Stricter regulation on hunting and persecution should be implemented.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

This widespread diving duck is undergoing rapid population declines across Europe. It is therefore classified as Vulnerable (A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd) in both Europe and the EU27.

range:
The species breeds from Russia in the east to Iceland, Ireland and Spain in the west, mainly between 45� and 60�N, although an isolated breeding population occurs in Turkey. European migratory populations winter mostly in north-western and western Europe, the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, as well as in Turkey, the Middle East and Africa (Hagemijer and Blair 1997).

population:
The European population is estimated at 198,000-285,000 pairs, which equates to 397,000-570,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 85,400-127,000 pairs, which equates to 171,000-254,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species requires well-vegetated eutrophic to neutral swamps, marshes, lakes and slow-flowing rivers with areas of open water and abundant emergent fringing vegetation. It also breeds on saline, brackish and soda lakes and occasionally even in sheltered coastal bays (Kear 2005). The breeding grounds are reoccupied from early March (in the south) to early May (in Siberia) (Scott and Rose 1996) with breeding starting from April-May.

The nest is a depression or shallow cup in a thick heap of vegetation positioned on the ground or over water and concealed in thick waterside vegetation (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), or on floating mats of reeds or other vegetation (Johnsgard 1978). Clutches are usually eight to ten eggs. The species is omnivorous, its diet consisting of seeds, roots (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), rhizomes (Kear 2005) and the vegetative parts of grasses, sedges and aquatic plants, as well as aquatic insects and larvae, molluscs, crustaceans, worms, amphibians and small fish (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Northern populations of this species are highly migratory, with those breeding in the milder parts of western or southern Europe being sedentary or only making short-distance dispersal movements (Snow and Perrins 1998) governed by harsh weather conditions (Scott and Rose 1996).

threats:
The species is threatened by disturbance from hunting (Evans and Day 2002, Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), water-based recreation (Fox et al. 1994, Kear 2005) and from machinery noise from urban development (Marsden 2000). It is also threatened by habitat destruction (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) on its wintering grounds due to eutrophication (partially as a result of nutrient run-off from agricultural land) (Kear 2005). The species suffers from nest predation by American Mink (Neovison vison) in Poland (Bartoszewicz and Zalewski 2003), and adults are poisoned by ingesting lead shot (Spain) (Mateo et al. 1998). The species is also susceptible to avian influenza, so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the disease (Melville and Shortridge 2006). This species is hunted in Northern Ireland (Evans and Day 2002), Spain (Mateo et al. 1998) and Italy (Sorrenti et al. 2006), and the eggs of this species used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex II. CMS Appendix II. The cyclical removal of adult fish from an artificial waterbody (gravel pit) in the U.K. attracted nesting pairs to the area by causing an increase in invertebrate food availability and an increase in the growth of submerged aquatic macrophytes. The removed fish (dead or alive) were sold to generate funds (Giles 1994). In the Trebon Basin Biosphere Reserve, Czech Republic, it was found that artificial islands and wide strips of littoral vegetation are the most secure breeding habitats that can be created for the species (nest survival in littoral habitats was improved by reduced nest visibility, increased water depth, and increased distance from the nest to the habitat edge, and nest survival on islands was improved with increased distance to open water) (Albrechtet al. 2006). The use of lead shot in Europe is being phased out.

Conservation Actions Proposed
This species would benefit from the protection and maintenance of wetland habitat. Lead shot use should continue to be prohibited and legislation properly enforced. Accurate monitoring of bag numbers in countries where this species is hunted should be implemented and maintained.


population:
The European population is estimated at 551,000-742,000 pairs, which equates to 1,100,000-1,480,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 181,000-292,000 pairs, which equates to 362,000-584,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds in lowland regions and shows a preference for eutrophic waters (Kear 2005) with open water, islands for breeding (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and abundant marginal and emergent vegetation. It is common on large, freshwater lakes, ponds, reservoirs, gravel-pits and quiet stretches of wide slow-flowing rivers during this season. During the winter the species frequents large freshwater lakes (Kear 2005), reservoirs (Snow and Perrins 1998) and sheltered coastal locations such as brackish inland seas (Kear 2005) brackish lagoons, tidal bays (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and estuaries (Snow and Perrins 1998). Migratory populations arrive on their breeding grounds from late-April (Kear 2005) where they breed in single pairs or loose groups (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The nest is constructed of vegetation and is placed in water (Kear 2005) on floating mats or islets (Flint et al. 1984), or on the ground on islands (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) in rush or grass tussocks (Snow and Perrins 1998), under bushes or in the open amidst marsh-nesting gull or tern colonies (Kear 2005). The species is omnivorous (Kear 2005), feeding mainly on molluscs, gastropods, crustaceans and aquatic insects, as well as seeds and vegetative parts of aquatic plants (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and grain (Kear 2005). In central and north-west Europe this species is mainly sedentary (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) although other populations are chiefly migratory (Madge and Burn 1988).

threats:
The species is threatened by habitat degradation due to oil pollution, drainage, peat-extraction and changing land management practices (e.g. decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub over-growth (Grishanov 2006) and agricultural intensification (Kear 2005)) in breeding areas (Kear 2005, Grishanov 2006). It also suffers decreased reproductive success as a result of disturbance from increased recreational use of inland waterbodies (Kear 2005), machinery noise from urban development (Marsden 2000), hunting (Evans and Day 2002) and predation by American Mink (Neovison vison) on islands (Nordstrom et al. 2002). The species is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is hunted for sport in Denmark (Bregnballe et al. 2006) and Italy (Sorrenti et al. 2006). The eggs of this species were (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. Experimental removal of the nest predator American Mink (Neovison vison) in the outer archipelago of south-west Finland resulted in an increase in the breeding density of this species (Nordstrom et al. 2002). The cyclical removal of adult fish from an artificial waterbody (gravel pit) in the U.K. resulted in an increase in invertebrate food availability and increases in the growth of submerged aquatic macrophytes, which in turn led to an increase in brood use of the habitat by the species and increased species survival (Giles 1994). The removed fish (dead or alive) were sold to generate funds (Giles 1994).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Large scale conservation measures should look to protect key breeding sites from habitat alteration and look to promote low-intensity farming. Hunting should be monitored to ensure numbers harvested are sustainable. Predator control should be considered in breeding areas.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

Within Europe and the EU27 the winter population of this seaduck has undergone rapid declines. Although these may have now levelled off, the species still warrants classification as Vulnerable (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde).

range:
Summer breeding grounds of the species range across the northern limits of Europe (including Iceland). It winters further south, reaching the Adriatic Sea, northern Black Sea and western Caspian Sea in Europe (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The breeding population in Europe is estimated at 134,000-178,000 pairs, which equates to 269,000-355,000 mature individuals. In the EU27 the breeding population is estimated at 1,3000-2,400 pairs, which equates to 2,6000-4,8000 mature individuals. In winter, the minimum European population is estimated at 154,000-283,000 individuals, which equates to 102,000-188,000 mature individuals. The minimum winter population in the EU27 is estimated at 152,000-275,000 individuals, which equates to 101,000-183,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds in tundra, moorland regions (Kear 2005) and wooded tundra (Scott and Rose 1996) in the high Arctic, occupying small, shallow (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), freshwater lakes, pools and rivers (Kear 2005) with grassy shorelines and high densities of invertebrate life (Johnsgard 1978). It shows a preference for water less than 6 m deep (usually 2 m) for diving. The species winters on shallow coastal waters (Kear 2005) less than 10 m deep (Scott and Rose 1996) as well as sheltered bays, estuaries and brackish coastal lagoons. It is also found inland on large lakes (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and reservoirs during this season (Madge and Burn 1988). It breeds in the high Arctic from late-May or early-June (depending on the timing of the Arctic thaw) (Kear 2005) in single pairs or loose groups (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), often with colonies of nesting gulls or terns (Kear 2005) although it is not itself a colonial species (Snow and Perrins 1998). The nest is a shallow depression on the ground close to water, either in thick vegetation (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), in cracks in rocks, under woody shrubs or under perennial herbaceous vegetation less than 50 cm high (Iceland) (Johnsgard 1978). Clutch size is normally 8–11 eggs. The species is omnivorous. Its diet consisting predominantly of molluscs but also includes laver shells (Hydrobia), insects, aquatic insect larvae, crustaceans, worms, small fish, and the roots, seeds and vegetative parts of aquatic plants such as sedges and water weeds. This species is fully migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The autumn migration begins after the moulting period in mid-August (Scott and Rose 1996), with males tending to remain much further north than females or immatures (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) leading to some sexual segregation during the winter (Madge and Burn 1988).

threats:
The species is susceptible to oil pollution (Kirby et al. 1993, Kear 2005) when moulting and in winter and may be threatened by high levels of organochloride contaminants (Kear 2005). Its habit of congregating around coastal sewage outlets in the winter also puts it at risk from other pollution types (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Oil and gas exploration have caused habitat loss in European Russia and losses of feeding opportunities in some wintering areas through the over-harvesting of mussels and cockles, eutrophication and offshore windfarms are also considered possible threats. (Jensen 2009). Large numbers often drown due to entanglement in fishing nets (Kirby et al. 1993). It is susceptible to avian influenza, so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is hunted legally for sport in seven countries of the European Union (Kear 2005) (e.g. Denmark [Bregnballe et al. 2006]) and suffers from disturbance from hunting (Evans and Day 2002). In Sweden the presence of Mink (Mustela vison) has probably contributed to the decline of birds on the Stockholm archipelago (Jensen 2009).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. This species is listed on Annex II (and III) of the EU Birds Directive and can only be hunted in those ten Member States specifically mentioned in the Birds Directive: Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, France, Ireland, Latvia, Netherlands, Romania and U.K.. There are management plans to reduce fishery activity at two sites in the Netherlands (Ijsselmeer and Waddenzee) and in Finland a large-scale eradication of Mink (Mustela vison) in the Quark as an EU LIFE project (Jensen 2009) began in 2001 (Anon 2005). 

Conservation Actions Proposed
Preservation of large areas of breeding habitat in northern Europe and its highly localised north-west European wintering grounds. Identify Important Bird Areas and protect habitats and sites. Implement stricter regulations on oil exploitation and transportation. Restrict hunting. Conduct further research on the effects of disturbance from hunting and the nomadic habits of the species outside the breeding season (Tucker and Heath 1994). Continue Mink eradication programme.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 17,400-30,100 pairs, which equates to 34,800-60,300 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 13,100-20,600 pairs, which equates to 26,200-41,200 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species shows a strong preference for fresh standing water (Snow and Perrins 1998, N. Petkov in litt. 2008). It frequents shallow pools and marshes with abundant emergent, floating and shoreline vegetation such as reeds, willows and alders. In the breeding season, it also frequents saline, brackish or alkaline lakes in some areas, e.g. in Hungary, also well-managed fishponds are important summer habitat locally. Outside breeding season, it may frequent larger lakes, including inland seas, reservoirs, lagoons and coastal marshes (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Generally breeding commences April to May in central Europe and Turkey, but can commence as early as February in southern Europe and as late as end of June in northern areas of its range (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It breeds in single pairs or loose groups. The nest is a low platform (Snow and Perrins 1998) of reeds, grass and leaves (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) placed on the ground or on an islet or hummock in thick vegetation close to water (Johnsgard 1978, Kear 2005). Alternatively nests may be placed over water on floating mats of vegetation or in dense reedbeds along the shoreline (Johnsgard 1978). Clutches are usually 8-10 eggs. Although the species is omnivorous, plant material such as seeds, roots and vegetative parts of aquatic plants dominates its diet. Animal matter taken includes worms, molluscs, crustaceans, insects and larvae, amphibians and small fish. This species is chiefly migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), although little is known about its migratory routes (Scott and Rose 1996). Adults undertake a wing moulting period on the breeding grounds between July and August (Robinson and Hughes 2006) and departure from the breeding grounds begins in mid- to late-August (N. Petkov in litt. 2008). The return migration to the breeding grounds begins in early March (Scott and Rose 1996).

threats:
The species is threatened by the degradation and destruction of well-vegetated shallow pools and other wetland habitats (Vinicombe 2000, Kear 2005, Robinson and Hughes 2006, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) (e.g. changes to the vegetation community, disruption of water regimes, siltation, and increased water turbidity (Robinson and Hughes 2006)) as a result of excessive drainage and water abstraction (Vinicombe 2000, Grishanov 2006, Robinson and Hughes 2006), peat extraction (Grishanov 2006), eutrophication (from inadequate sewage treatment and nutrient run-off (Robinson and Hughes 2006)), oil pollution (Grishanov 2006), dam and barrage construction, the building of infrastructure on flood-plains (Vinicombe 2000, Robinson and Hughes 2006) and river canalisation (Kear 2005). Changing land management practices such as reed cutting and burning during the breeding season (Petkov 2006), over-grazing (Robinson and Hughes 2006) decreased grazing and mowing of wet meadows (Grishanov 2006), and abandonment (causing succession to scrub) or intensification (causing reversion to open water) of extensively managed fishponds (Vinicombe 2000, Kear 2005, Petkov 2006, Robinson and Hughes 2006) also threatens the species. The introduction of non-native species has caused further habitat degradation. For example the stocking of lakes with and accidental introduction of Grass Carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) has resulted in reductions in macrophyte biomass and corresponding reductions in invertebrate biomass (Kear 2005, Robinson and Hughes 2006), and in Bulgaria an introduced shrub (Desert False Indigo (Amorpha fruticosa)) is changing the ecological character of wetlands (Robinson and Hughes 2006). Increased drought due to global climate change may pose a threat to the species in part of its range (Vinicombe 2000, Robinson and Hughes 2006). Disturbance by fishing boats and anglers alongside fringe vegetation could cause abandonment of the breeding sites or disrupt the timing of breeding (N. Petkov in litt. 2008). Hunting is another serious threat to the species (Vinicombe 2000, Robinson and Hughes 2006, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Large numbers are shot on passage in the autumn (e.g. through the Volga delta) (Kear 2005, Balmaki and Barati 2006). Illegal and accidental hunting also persists in most European countries. Other lower-level threats include lead poisoning (from ingestion of discarded lead shot), fires in areas of reed thickets, peat bogs and woods (Grishanov 2006), entanglement and drowning in fishing nets (Robinson and Hughes 2006) and hybridisation with native species (e.g. Tufted Duck (Aythya fuligula) and Common Pochard (Aythya farina) in Switzerland (Leuzinger 2010)).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is fully protected in Belarus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Moldova, Netherlands, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Switzerland, and is protected from hunting in Austria, Belgium, Greece, Poland, Turkey and Ukraine. It is listed on Annex I of the European Union Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds, on Appendix III of the Bern Convention and on Appendices I and II of the Bonn Convention. The species has received little international conservation action, although a number of national initiatives have been developed recently, notably habitat management in Bulgaria and re-introduction schemes in Italy (Berezovikov and Samusev 1998). An International Single Species Action Plan has been adopted by the Bern Convention, CMS and AEWA, which lays out a framework for conservation action throughout the species's range (Robinson and Callaghan 2003). A restoration project for two key breeding sites on the Danube in Bulgaria is underway, funded by the World Bank (N. Petkov in litt. 2003).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Promote the full legal protection of the species and its habitat through national and international legislation; promote environmentally friendly management of fishponds in eastern Europe; promote adequate protection and management of key sites; promote conservation in the wider environment for the benefit of the species and its habitat; prevent mortality and disturbance caused by hunting; monitor the remaining population and develop census techniques; investigate productivity and mortality; investigate ecology and limiting factors; investigate the impact of C. idella on the species and its habitat; develop and implement education programmes for the conservation of A. nyroca and its habitats.


taxonomicNotes:
Branta bernicla (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) was putatively split into B. bernicla, B. hrota and B. nigricans by Shields (1990) but this treatment is not followed by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group.

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

This species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter, however it is considered Least Concern there based on available winter population data.

population:
The European population is estimated at 1,500-1,800 pairs, which equates to 3,000-3,600 mature individuals. The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter and the minimum population is estimated at 307,000-329,000 individuals, which equates to 205,000-219,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds in coastal Arctic tundra (Carboneras et al. 2014) in or close to wet coastal meadows with abundant grassy vegetation (Kear 2005) and on tundra-covered flats with tidal streams (only just above the high tide line). In some parts of its range it shows a preference for nesting on small grassy islands (Johnsgard 1978) in tundra lakes and rivers. High Arctic nesters may also breed widely dispersed over icy tundra, well-away from water (Kear 2005). Outside of the breeding season the species becomes predominantly coastal, inhabiting estuaries, sandy shores (Carboneras et al. 2014), tidal mudlflats (Madge and Burn 1988), coastal saltmarshes, and shallow muddy bays (Kear 2005). In recent years the species has taken to grazing on coastal cultivated grasslands (Madge and Burn 1988) and winter cereal fields (Scott and Rose 1996), but rarely occurs on freshwater wetlands except on passage. It arrives on the breeding grounds in early June where it may breed in small, loose colonies (Madge and Burn 1988) or dispersed in single pairs (Snow and Perrins 1998). The nest is a shallow depression on the ground. Although the species often nests close to water (Carboneras et al. 2014) typically within a few hundred metres of the tideline (Snow and Perrins 1998), high Arctic nesters may breed on icy tundra well away from water (Kear 2005). Clutch size is typically three to five eggs. The species is mainly herbivorous although it may take animal matter. In its breeding habitat the diet of the species generally consists of grasses, mosses, lichens and aquatic plants (Carboneras et al. 2014), although the young may also take insects and aquatic invertebrates (Johnsgard 1978). Breeding success is highly dependent on the lemming cycle. Effectively only once every three years (the lemming peak years) is breeding success relatively high. Outside of the breeding season the species predominantly takes marine algae, seaweeds and other aquatic plants linked with salt or brackish water (Carboneras et al. 2014). This species is fully migratory, the main routes of migration being along Arctic coastlines (Snow and Perrins 1998).

threats:
This species is threatened by hunting (Kear 2005) which has caused severe declines in the past, although hunting bans have allowed it to begin to recover (Carboneras et al. 2014). It is susceptible to disturbance from vehicles in the U.K. (Burton et al. 2002) (although it is relatively tolerant of human disturbance, e.g. walkers, compared to other species) (Vickery and Gill 1999, Burton et al. 2002). In its winter range the species may be persecuted by farmers as in recent years it has increasingly taken to grazing on cultivated grasslands and winter cereal fields near the coast (Scott and Rose 1996). The species may also be threatened in the future by reductions in abundance of sea lettuce (Ulva lactuca) and eelgrasses (Zostera) (Clausen et al. 2012). It can use alternative feeding sources as demonstrated following the collapse of eelgrasses in the Netherlands (1930-1940), but these need to be highly nutritious and diverse. It has been shown that nest success is dependent on fat reserves that have been acquired in the staging areas (Ebbinge & Spaans 1995). The nesting success of breeding pairs in Svalbard is greatly reduced as a result of Arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) predation (Madsen et al. 1992), and the species is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). Inbreeding depression has also been identified as a threat to current population growth (Harrison et al. 2011).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II. In England and the Netherlands alternative feeding sites have been established to prevent conflict with agriculture. Dutch farmers who suffer damage from geese are paid compensation and in the German Wadden Sea farmers are subsidized to accept foraging geese (Tucker and Heath 1994).

Conservation Actions Proposed
International management plan including policies on crop damage and shooting should be agreed upon (Tucker and Heath 1994). An asssessment of methods of predator control in Svalbard should be undertaken. Alternative feeding sites should continue to be provided.


taxonomicNotes:
Branta canadensis (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously split as B. canadensis and B. hutchinsii following AOU (2004), and before then lumped as B. canadensis following Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Applicable (NA)

This species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 region, the bird is considered vagrant or introduced and is therefore Not Applicable for the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 1,000-5,000 pairs, which equates to 2,000-10,000 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species occurs in a wide diversity of habitats, from tundra to semi-desert and in wooded or open country and is frequently found in agricultural or urban areas in Europe although almost always found near water. The species is generally monogamous and egg-laying begins in mid-March. It builds a shallow nest of vegetation, lined with down and feathers, on ground, frequently near waterbodies. Clutches are usually four to seven eggs (Carboneras et al. 2014). The diet is primarily plant materials, including stems, leaves, tubers, fruits and seeds (Snow and Perrins 1998). Natural populations found in Greenland are mainly migratory, wintering in the southern states of the USA and along coasts of North America (Carboneras et al. 2014). In Europe, it is sedentary in some areas and migratory in other, and a moult migration takes place (Snow and Perrins 1998).

threats:
Temperate breeders are frequently in conflict with human activities, for example, they may cause fouling of parks, golf courses or other recreational areas but also cause considerable crop damage in spring-winter to wheat and hayfields, and in the autumn to unharvested grains. As a result in Europe, farmers are permitted to scare or exceptionally shoot geese. In Sweden numbers killed rose from 17,000 in 1990 to 20,000?25,000 in 1996, with smaller numbers shot in Denmark, Germany and Norway. In addition, local governments with nuisance problems can request permission to destroy nests and eggs (Carboneras et al. 2014). Although hunting and other direct mortality takes a substantial toll, this species has increased its range and population since the 1940s (Mowbray et al. 2002).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive AnnexI I. CMS Appendix II. The species is not legal quarry in the Netherlands or Belgium (Kear 2005).

Conservation Actions Proposed
No conservation measures are currently needed for this species.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27, although this species may have a small range, it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 196,000-247,000 pairs, which equates to 392,000-494,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 18,700-38,000 pairs, which equates to 37,400-76,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds in Arctic semi-desert tundra (fjellmark) (Kear 2005) on crags, rocky outcrops (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), cliffs, rocky slopes (Johnsgard 1978) and coastal islands (Svalbard) (Kear 2005) near wetlands such as lakes, rivers, marshes, the upper parts of fjords, coastlines (Johnsgard 1978), wet meadows and mudflats (Kear 2005). In years when the snow is slow to melt the species first forages on grassy vegetation on south-facing mountain slopes fertilised by the droppings of cliff-nesting seabirds before moving down to breeding areas (Kear 2005a). During the non-breeding season the species frequents tidal mudflats, saltmarshes and adjacent coastal meadows (Johnsgard 1978), with agricultural fields becoming increasingly more important as winter feeding areas (Scott and Rose 1996). It is present on its breeding grounds from May or June to August or September (Kear 2005) where it breeds in small but often closely packed colonies (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) of 5-50 pairs, occasionally singly or in groups of up to 150 pairs (Snow and Perrins 1998). It uses the same nesting sites year after year (Johnsgard 1978). The nest is a shallow depression lined with grass, moss, lichen and down, with thick layer of droppings around rim found on cliff ledges or on ground on coastal islands, although Svalbard birds also traditionally nested on cliffs or hillsides in larger valleys. Usually three to five eggs are laid. The species is herbivorous; its diet consisting of the leaves, stems and seed-heads of grasses, sedges, aquatic plants. It may also take agricultural grain and vegetables during the winter (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). This species is fully migratory and travels on a narrow front (Kear 2005) between extremely localised breeding and wintering areas (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
Adults of this species, eggs and down were once exploited by humans (Kear 2005), and the species may be disturbed by shooting even though it is not directly hunted (Peberdy 1991). The species faces possible threats from persecution (disturbance) by farmers as in winter it favours grasslands and pastures used for grazing livestock (Cope et al. 2003). The species also suffers from nest predation by arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) in Svalbard (Madsen et al. 1992).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. CMS Appendix II. Today the species is fully protected throughout its range (Kear 2005). The Barnacle Goose Management Scheme (BGMS) awards payments to farmers who manage pastures outside of established reserves for reducing the level of disturbance (e.g. scaring away feeding flocks) on their land. Its efforts, integrating conservation and agricultural aims, have succeeded in increasing goose populations around the Solway Firth, U.K. (Cope et al. 2003). The species is also listed on the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The expansion and quality of measures that integrate conservation and agricultural aims, should be expanded and the dedicated reserve network increased (Cope et al. 2003). Research should be undertaken to investigate the impacts of Arctic Fox predation on Svalbard.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)

Within Europe and the EU27 the winter population of this apparently declining goose is often restricted to a few locations within a small total area. It is therefore precautionarily listed as Near Threatened (B2ab(iii,v)).

range:
In winter many birds migrate to south-east Europe. Prior to the 1950s, much of the population occurred along the western coast of the Caspian Sea, mainly in Azerbaijan. The wintering area then rapidly shifted to the western Black Sea coast, and 80-90% of birds now congregate in January/ February at 5–10 roost sites on the Black Sea coast, particularly at Shabla Lakes and Durankulak Lake, Bulgaria, Razelm-Sinoe lagoons, Romania, and in the coastal area between the rivers Danube and Dniester in Ukraine (Cranswick et al. 2010, Rusev et al. 2008, A. Mikityuk in litt. 1999). Small numbers also winter in Azerbaijan. The precise distribution in winter varies according to the severity of the weather from the Crimean peninsula to the Dobrudzha region of Bulgaria. In cold weather, small numbers are occasionally on the Aegean shore of Greece and Turkey (Cranswick et al. 2010); during prolonged mild periods, significant numbers may remain in Kalmykya, Stavropol and Rostov districts in Russia (S. Rozenfeld in litt. 2012). Migration is believed to follow a relatively narrow route south down the Ob to Kazakhstan and then east to the Black Sea. The known main staging areas include the Kumo-Manych depression in Russia and they are also regularly recorded in small numbers on passage in Hungary (e.g., Pigniczki 2008). There may be other, currently unknown, staging sites and knowledge of the migration route should therefore be considered incomplete. It is also possible that some wintering grounds remain undetected (perhaps in eastern Ukraine and southwest Russia), and use of these areas during mild weather may account for the variation in winter survey totals in recent years.

population:
The minimum European population in winter is estimated at 10,800-81,600 individuals, which equates to 7,200-54,400 individuals mature individuals. There exists also a marginal breeding population in Europe estimated at 5-10 pairs, which equates to 10-20 mature individuals. The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter and the minimum population is estimated at 9,900-74,900 individuals, which equates to 6,600-49,900 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds in northern Siberia to the east of the Urals and winters along the coast of the Black Sea (Tucker and Heath 1994). It winters in low arable land near lakes and reservoirs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) which they use to roost at night.  It arrives October to November and departs between March and early May. The species feeds on grasses, sedges and some aquatic plants, particularly in winter, as well green sprouts of cereals, grain and tubers.

threats:
Deliberate hunting of birds occurs in Russia (Rozenfeld 2009, 2011b). Following land privatization, and especially the residential and tourist development boom in winter roosting and feeding areas, the quality of roosting areas has decreased. In addition, the low profitability of agriculture has reduced the area under winter wheat cultivation which, together with conversion to other crops, has decreased the availability of food. Some key feeding sites have been lost in Bulgaria (S. Dereliev in litt. 1999). Hunting pressure on waterfowl as a whole is substantial in Bulgaria and Romania, including illegal shooting of Red-breasted Goose (Simeonov in litt. 2007). There are no effective hunting-free areas around roost sites in Bulgaria (hunting is only prohibited for 100 m around the lake edge and this rule is regularly ignored). However, conservation activities in the area of Shabla and Durankulak lakes reduced deliberate shooting of the species in 2010-2012 (N. Petkov in litt. 2012). Disturbance in the lakes used for roosts is also caused by poachers and fishermen (Dereliev 1997, D. Hulea in litt. 2006). Disturbance/chasing of feeding birds by hunters (because they associate with White-fronted Geese (Anser erythropus), a legal quarry species) is a significant limitation on foraging behaviour and prenuptial accumulation of fat reserves, which has a negative effect on survival during spring migration and breeding (N. Petkov in litt. 2007). Hunting by tourists in Ukraine poses an increasing threat (WWT TWSG News 10 1997) and birds are shot at staging grounds in Russia. Other threats in wintering areas include the use of rodenticides and displacement by windfarms. Windfarms have undergone a major expansion in the wintering areas since 2008. Many thousands of wind turbines have been proposed in Dobrudhza area both in Bulgaria and Romania, including large complexes adjacent to IBAs and SPAs. Data analysis from wintering grounds in Bulgaria suggest that the constructed windfarms are already having an impact, leading to displacement and shifting of the foraging areas (Petkov et al. 2012).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix I and II. It is legally protected in key states (Hunter et al. 1999). It is listed in the (national and regional) Red Book of Russia and Red Book of Bulgaria. Principal wintering roost sites are protected (some qualifying as Ramsar sites), including the implementation of hunting regulations and hunting-free areas in Russia, although hunting occurs in many feeding areas. A management plan is being implemented for roosting lakes in Bulgaria (S. Dereliev in litt. 1999). Wintering sites in Bulgaria and Romania are monitored and research and public awareness projects are ongoing (S. Dereliev in litt. 1999; D. Hulea in litt. 1999; Hunter et al. 1999). An International Action Plan was published in 2010 (Cranswick et al. 2010). An International Species Working Group is active and a coordinator is in place. In 2010 an EU Life project began in Bulgaria, which aims to address many of the key threats operating on the wintering grounds. A study of geese distribution, movements and feeding preferences will enable a sensitivity map to be developed and goose-sensitive guidance provided to authorities to help guide development proposals. A payment for the species has been included in the national agri-environmental programme of Romania. In Bulgaria, an agri-environmental payment to farmers for seeding winter wheat in key wintering areas for geese was introduced in 2012. Spring-hunting of wildfowl was prohibited in south-west Russia in spring 2012. Since 2010, a joint Bulgarian-U.S. project has been initiated to consolidate research into the species's ecology and to promote its conservation via engagement with local stakeholders, including landowners and farmers (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Study migration patterns and determine species's non-breeding range using satellite telemetry. Expand monitoring and research programmes, especially in Ukraine and Romania to determine whether more birds are overwintering there. Implement a Strategy for Hunting and Waterbird Resource Management (Rozenfeld 2011b). Regulate hunting in key sites (particularly spring hunting in Russia). Monitor and reduce disturbance and illegal hunting. Identify and protect key staging areas. Prevent loss of roosting lakes to urbanization. Monitor changes in agriculture and propose measures (in EU agri-environmental measures) to ensure suitable foraging habitat is available. Promote beneficial agricultural policies and spatial crop rotation planning around roosting areas. Continue public awareness initiatives. Lobby for full designation of qualifying wetlands and feeding areas as Natura 2000 sites, ensure hunting is not allowed within them and ensure they are properly managed.


population:
The European population is estimated at 489,000-623,000 pairs, which equates to 977,000-1,250,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 268,000-381,000 pairs, which equates to 536,000-763,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is restricted to water close to the shore and less than 10 m deep (Scott and Rose 1996). When breeding the species shows a preference for oligotrophic lakes devoid of fish (Kear 2005) but with abundant invertebrate life (Johnsgard 1978), and requires tree-holes (or artificial nestboxes) for nesting. Suitable habitats include freshwater lakes, pools, rivers (Carboneras et al. 2014) and deep marshes (Johnsgard 1978) surrounded by coniferous forest (Carboneras et al. 2014). The species winters mainly at sea (Scott and Rose 1996) on inshore waters, estuaries, coastal lagoons (Carboneras et al. 2014) and shallow bays (Kear 2005), especially in the vicinity of sewage outfalls (Carboneras et al. 2014). Further to the south and on migration the species may also frequent large rivers, lakes and reservoirs (Scott and Rose 1996). The species breeds from April in solitary pairs. The species nests in hollows of mature trees (Carboneras et al. 2014) formed by woodpeckers or by bacterial or fungal heart-rot invasions (Kear 2005). The species will also nest in artificial nest boxes Clutches are usually between eight and eleven. It feeds predominantly on aquatic invertebrates such as molluscs, worms, crustaceans, aquatic insects and insect larvae, as well as amphibians, small fish and some plant material (mainly in the autumn) such as seeds, roots and the vegetative parts of aquatic plants (Carboneras et al. 2014). Most of this species is fully migratory although it may only travel short distances (Kear 2005), but certain populations in the north-west of Europe may also be sedentary (Carboneras et al. 2014).

threats:
The species is very sensitive to habitat alterations. In the winter, the main threats for this species are from major oil incidents near the coast or from eating contaminated food (organochlorines and polychlorinated biphenyls are elevated in some important wintering areas), as large flocks will often gather to feed around sewer outfalls. The species is hunted sustainably in Denmark (Bregnballe et al. 2006); however the impact of hunting of this species across its range is unknown, although an estimated 100,000–250,000 were once shot annually in north-west and central Europe. Lead shot ingestion however, does not appear to be a significant risk, at least compared to some other species of seaducks (Carboneras et al. 2014). Modern forestry management work is limiting as it does not favour the retention of old and decaying trees with likely nest holes (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II. In some areas nestbox erection programmes have been shown to cause significant range expansions and population increases (Dennis 1987, Carboneras et al. 2014), although an experiment in southern Finland found that even though nestbox provision increased breeding numbers of the species there was a negative density-dependent effect on reproductive output (i.e. the number of fledged young did not increase despite an increase in breeding pairs) (Poysa and Poysa 2002).

Conservation Actions Proposed
In general nesting habitats may benefit from a more extended rotation of timber harvesting (Kear 2005) and the species may benefit from the introduction of strict legislation on oil transportation. Monitoring and research should be introduced to determine the impact of hunting on this species.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Applicable (NA)

This species has a restricted range within Europe, breeding only in Iceland where it is largely restricted to a small area which is at risk from future development for hydroelectric and geothermal energy, which could cause rapid future declines. It is therefore classified as Near Threatened.

The bird does not breed in the EU27 and is considered Not Applicable there.

range:
Breeding colonies are found south-west Greenland (to Denmark) and Iceland. The Icelandic population is sedentary, whereas the population in Greenland undertakes longer trips to winter along the north-eastern coast of North America (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 800-900 pairs, which equates to 1,600-1,800 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species uses relatively productive lakes and rivers in Iceland. It is a hole-nesting species using natural holes in lava fields and nest boxes erected on farmhouses at the edge of the breeding area (Tucker and Heath 1994).  It winters mainly on ice-free fresh water in the breeding area but small numbers winter on other partly ice-free fresh waters, mostly within the volcanic zone (Gardarsson 1978). Laying is usually from mid-May although slightly earlier if using nest boxes. It lays 8 to 11 eggs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It feeds mainly on benthic invertebrates (Tucker and Heath 1994). It is largely sedentary in Iceland (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014)

threats:
In Europe this species is mainly confined to NE Iceland, where 85–90% of the local population occurs at Lake Mývatn and on the River Laxá, and c. 50% of population disappeared in 1989 due to a crash in foraging resources (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Plans to introduce Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) into the river system (Einarsson and Magnúsdóttir 1993), along with sediment dredging that occurs, could negatively affect future food availability (Kear 2005). Eggs are harvested by local people but this is considered sustainable as each nest is subject to a quota. There is a comparatively large sexual imbalance in the Icelandic population with rarely more than 400 females available in any given breeding season (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. Listed as Endangered on Icelandic National Red List (Institute of Natural History 2000). The species is fully protected from hunting in Iceland (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Research should be undertaken into the species's ecology, habitat and foraging needs. An assessment of the impacts of S. salar introduction and sediment dredging should be made as well as ensuring the sustainability of local egg harvesting. Research studies into the causes of the population sexual imbalance should be developed.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

The wintering population of this seaduck is undergoing rapid population declines across Europe. It is therefore classified as Vulnerable (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde) in both Europe and the EU27.

range:
The species is circumpolar, breeding on the Arctic coasts Greenland and Europe (Iceland and Norway). It winters at sea further south and within Europe can be found as far as south the United Kingdom and other areas including the Black Sea and Caspian Sea (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
In Europe the breeding population is estimated at 338,000-445,000 pairs, which equates to 676,000-890,000 mature individuals. In the EU27 the breeding population is estimated at 2,400-3,800 pais, which equates to 4,800-7,600 mature individuals. In winter, the minimum European population is estimated at 1,430,000-3,520,000 individuals, which equates to 954,000-2,350,000 mature individuals. The minimum winter population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,230,000-2,270,000 individuals, which equates to 819,000-1,510,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds on small tundra lakes, pools, bogs, rivers and coastal sites of the high Arctic. It generally avoids wooded tundra, although in north Scandinavia it does reach the arctic-alpine zone among willows and dwarf birch. It winters mostly at sea, generally far offshore, but also inland in large, deep, freshwater lakes or brackish lagoons (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

It breeds from late-May onwards (Madge and Burn 1988) in single pairs or loose groups (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The nest is a natural depression, or rock crevice, lined with surrounding plant matter and down, among vegetation or in the open and frequently close to water. Clutches are normally six to nine eggs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The species shows a preference for marine foods (Johnsgard 1978). Its diet consists predominantly of animal matter (Snow and Perrins 1998) such as crustaceans, molluscs, other marine invertebrates, fish, and in fresh water, insects and their larvae; also a little plant material. The species is migratory, moving in large flocks at night. Many birds winter at sea in the far northern regions, generally as far south as Britain, the Danube River and the Black Sea. Birds leave their breeding grounds in the first half of October and return mid-March (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is threatened by wetland habitat degradation and loss from petroleum pollution, wetland drainage and peat-extraction (Grishanov 2006). It is also threatened with direct mortality from oil pollution (Gorski et al. 1977, Kirby et al. 1993, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), drowning through entanglement in fishing nets (Kirby et al. 1993, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and from hunting on migration routes over certain regions of the Arctic (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The species has previously suffered heavy losses from an outbreak of avian cholera (Friend 2006) and is susceptible to avian influenza (Melville and Shortridge 2006) so may be threatened by future outbreaks of these diseases. There is evidence that the species is experiencing low reproductive success on its Arctic breeding grounds. The results of autumn migration monitoring at various Baltic sites shows that juveniles now represent a very low proportion of the population (e.g. Hario et al. 2009, Ellermaa et al. 2010), indicating that insufficient young are being raised to compensate for adult mortality. The breeding success of this (and other) species seems to have declined since the mid-1990s, when the formerly distinctive 3-4 year cycle in the abundance of Arctic rodents collapsed, probably due to climate change. With fewer rodents around, Arctic predators now take a heavier toll on breeding birds every year, instead of only once every 3-4 years. However, the main reason for low breeding productivity seems likely to be connected mainly with skipped breeding, rather than with increased predation pressure, possibly owing to worsened female body condition (A. Kondratyev in litt. 2012). A decline in breeding productivity is supported by unpublished data on the age ratio of gillnet victims in the southern Baltic, which suggest a decline in breeding success by c.75% from prior to 1990 until c. 2000 (J. Bellebaum in litt. 2012). Drastic declines on the tundra of eastern European Russia since 1973 are thought to be connected to the natural cycles of the species, pollution from oil and gas extractions, and pollution from the deposition of nuclear and chemical waste in northern seas (Y. and O. Mineev in litt. 2012). In 2006-2007, on the Hatpudirskaya Bay coast (Barents Sea), several thousand dead C. hyemalis were found washed-up on beaches (Y. and O. Mineev in litt. 2012). The species is hunted for sport in several countries including Denmark (Bregnballe et al. 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II. Some of the species's habitat is protected. Efforts are on-going to monitor populations of this species in many parts of its range.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Continue to assess trends in Europe. Carry out research to identify the causes of the decline in the Baltic Sea. React to improved knowledge of threats to the species by implementing actions to mitigate their impacts. Study the causes of reduced breeding productivity.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Endangered (EN)
EU27 regional assessment: Endangered (EN)

Following a long-term increase, this species began undergoing rapid declines in its wintering population in the two key European and EU27 range states (Netherlands and the UK) since the year 2000. Extrapolated over a three generation period (38 years), allowing for considerable uncertainty given the long trend period (and even assuming current rates of decline do not continue), the wintering population of the species warrants classification as Endangered (A4abcde) in both Europe and the EU27.

range:
The species breeds across the northern Russian Palearctic and in Europe is found from the Kanin to the Ural Mountains. These birds migrate southwest along the White Sea and Baltic coasts to winter in northwest Europe (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997) (mostly in UK, the Netherlands and Ireland, with smaller numbers in Germany, Denmark and Baltic countries) (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). Small number of birds also winter in Turkey (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997) and Ukraine (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013).

population:
The breeding population in Europe is estimated at 5,000-6,000 pairs, which equates to 10,000-12,000 mature individuals. The minimum European population in winter is estimated at 19,600-25,200 individuals, which equates to 13,000-16,800 mature individuals. The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter and the minimum population is estimated at 19,500-24,500 individuals, which equates to 13,000-16,300 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds near shallow pools, lakes and broad slow-flowing rivers with emergent littoral vegetation and pondweeds (e.g. Potamogeton spp.) connected to coastal delta areas in open, moist, low-lying sedge-grass or moss-lichen Arctic tundra (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). It rarely nests in shrub tundra, and generally avoids forested areas (Kear 2005). On migration the species frequents shallow ponds, lowland and upland lakes, reservoirs, riverine marshes, shallow saline lagoons and sheltered coastal bays and estuaries (Madge and Burn 1988, Kear 2005). During the winter it inhabits brackish and freshwater marshes (Madge and Burn 1988), rivers, lakes, ponds and shallow tidal estuarine areas with adjacent grasslands, flooded pastures or agricultural arable fields (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013, Kear 2005) below 100 m (Snow and Perrins 1998).

It arrives on the breeding grounds from early-May to late-June (Madge and Burn 1988) (depending on local conditions (Kear 2005)) where it breeds well-dispersed (Snow and Perrins 1998) in single pairs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), occasionally nesting semi-colonially in optimum habitats (Madge and Burn 1988, Kear 2005). The nest is a large mound of plant matter positioned on elevated ground (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) such as a ridge or hummock, often at some distance from feeding pools to reduce the risk of flooding (Kear 2005). Clutch size is generally three to five eggs. The species is predominantly herbivorous, feeding on seeds, fruits, leaves, roots, rhizomes and stems of aquatic plants (e.g. Potamogeton,Zostera and Glyceria spp.), grasses (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), sedge and herbaceous tundra vegetation (Kear 2005). This species is fully migratory and travels on a narrow front via specific routes using well-known stop-over sites (Madge and Burn 1988) between its Arctic breeding and temperate wintering grounds (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
The species is threatened by the degradation and loss of wetland habitats due to drainage (Kear 2005) (e.g. for agriculture (Grishanov 2006)), petroleum pollution, peat extraction, changing wetland management practices (e.g. decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub overgrowth), the burning and mowing of reeds (Grishanov 2006) and eutrophication (Kear 2005). The NW European population is thought to be particularly sensitive to land-use change as well as climate change due to its narrow breeding distribution across the Russian high Arctic and its high dependency on a small number of stop-over sites during spring and autumn migration (Nagy et al. 2012).  Its Arctic breeding habitat is also threatened by oil and gas exploration (Kear 2005). The species is threatened by mortality from oil pollution (oil spills) in moulting and pre-migrational staging areas, from collisions with powerlines and wind turbines, and from lead poisoning as a result of lead shot (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) and fishing weight ingestion during migration and on wintering grounds (Kear 2005). The species suffers from poaching in north-west Europe and is hunted considerably for subsistence throughout its range (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). The species is also susceptible to avian influenza, so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the disease (Melville and Shortridge 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I (subspecies found in Europe). Bern Convention Appendix II. Category A(2) of the African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA). Listed in the Red Data Book of Russia (2000) under the category "rehabilitating species". Part of its breeding areas and stop-over sites in Russia are protected as nature reserves. In spring, at least 60% of the population passes through the Dvinskoi sanctuary in the south-east corner of the White Sea. Natura 2000 network protects some of the key staging and wintering wetlands in the EU, but most feeding sites are on arable and grasslands outside of these sites. In all range countries it is protected from direct persecution by national law. In Estonia and Lithuania active site management programmes are in place for this species at key stop-over sites. Important wintering sites are managed in the U.K. (by the RSPB and WWT) and in the Netherlands. The EU's environmental and nature conservation financial instrument LIFE has co-financed several targeted demonstration and best practice projects in countries such as Finland, Latvia and the Netherlands, aimed at the conservation of coastal inlets and wetlands which are habitats used by the species. Monitoring of populations and breeding success in most countries within its European range and intensive research on its ecology has been carried out in the Netherlands and at various stop-over sites in recent decades (Nagy et al. 2012).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The protected status of the species across the range of the population should be maintained. Key stop-over and wintering sites should be maintained and, if necessary, restored, ensuring suitable aquatic macrophyte availability through managing water levels and water quality. In addition, measures should be implemented to prevent the negative impacts of infrastructure and industrial development by avoiding key sites, or by mitigating any potential negative impacts in the absence of alternative locations. Where necessary, develop and implement emergency plans by companies involved in the exploitation and transportation of petrochemicals on the flyway to reduce mortality in case of accidents. Monitoring and research of population changes and demographic parameters should continue and dead bird surveillance should be expanded to cover the entire flyway of the species. Introduce compensatory payments and other site management measures and increase efforts to reduce illegal shooting (Nagy et al. 2012).


population:
The European population is estimated at 25,300-32,800 pairs, which equates to 50,600-65,500 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 13,900-19,100 pairs, which equates to 27,900-38,200 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds on islands in or along the banks of shallow freshwater pools, lakes, slow-flowing rivers (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), marshes, swamps and bogs, showing a preference for habitats with abundant emergent vegetation (Kear 2005) and reedbeds in taiga (coniferous forest) zones, birch forest zones (Johnsgard 1978) and shrub/forest tundra (Kear 2005). Non-breeders may also be found in flocks on lakes, river channels and coastal bays (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). On migration the species frequents lakes, estuaries and sheltered coasts. It traditionally winters on freshwater lakes and marshes, brackish lagoons and coastal bays (Kear 2005), floodlands (Snow and Perrins 1998), although low-lying coastal agricultural land (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and wet pastures (Snow and Perrins 1998) are now used increasingly (Kear 2005). It breeds from mid-May in solitary pairs with well-defined territories. The nest is a large mound of plant matter (del Hoyo et al. 1992) built on dry ground or in reedbeds (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) on small islands in or along the edges of lakes, pools or rivers (Madge and Burn 1988). The same nest mound may be used over several years although it is often repaired and new material is added (Kear 2005). Clutch size is typically four or five eggs, although can be up to 12. The species is predominantly herbivorous, its diet consisting of grasses (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), the leaves, stems and roots of aquatic plants, sedges and horsetails (Equisetum spp.) (Johnsgard 1978, Kear 2005). During the winter the species also takes agricultural grain, vegetables (e.g. potatoes and turnips (Johnsgard 1978) and acorns (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014)), and on the breeding grounds young birds often take adult and larval insects (Johnsgard 1978). This species is predominantly migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is threatened by habitat degradation and loss. Threats to its habitats include agricultural expansion, wetland drainage for irrigation, overgrazing by livestock (e.g. sheep), the development of roads (Kear 2005) and chronic oil pollution from oil exploration and transportation. The species may suffer heavy losses from future oil spills (Nikolaeva et al. 2006), flying accidents (such as collisions with overhead lines (Kear 2005) or wind turbines (Larsen and Clausen 2002)), poisoning (Kear 2005) from lead shot ingestion (Spray and Milne 1988) and it is susceptible to avian influenza, so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the disease (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is also threatened by hunting (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), nest destruction and by subsistence egg collecting (Gudmundsson 1979, Nikolaeva et al. 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. CMS Appendix II. In the U.K., the species is listed as Amber on the national Red List (Eaton et al. 2009).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Key sites should be identified and protected by legislation against all forms of development and habitat alteration. Strict legislation should also be enforced with regards to oil drilling and transportation. Power lines should be made more visible or moved and careful assessment made during planning of wind farm construction. Protection from hunting and persecution should also be implemented and enforced.


population:
The European population is estimated at 83,400-116,000 pairs, which equates to 167,000-231,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 67,700-92,800 pairs, which equates to 135,000-186,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species inhabits a variety of lowland freshwater wetlands (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) such as shallow lakes (Kear 2005), ponds (Madge and Burn 1988), lagoons, marshes (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), reedbeds (Snow and Perrins 1998, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) and slow-flowing rivers (Kear 2005) (showing a preference for clean, weed-filled streams over larger, polluted rivers) (Johnsgard 1978). It is also common on artificial waterbodies such as reservoirs, gravel-pits, ornamental lakes (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013), ditches (Snow and Perrins 1998) and canals (Scott and Rose 1996), and will graze on grassland and agricultural land (e.g. arable cereal fields) (Kear 2005). Moulting congregations of adults and non-breeders (Snow and Perrins 1998) may also utilise brackish or saline habitats (Johnsgard 1978) including brackish marshes (Kear 2005), estuaries and sheltered coastal sites (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) and bays (Madge and Burn 1988).

The species breeds during the local spring as isolated pairs in well-defended territories. The nest is a large mound of aquatic vegetation placed close to or floating on shallow water or amongst reeds (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). Breeding pairs often re-use nesting sites from previous years if it was successful (Johnsgard 1978). Usually five to seven eggs are laid at two-day intervals. Its diet consists predominantly of leaves and the vegetative parts of aquatic plants and grasses (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) as well as algae (Johnsgard 1978) and grain, occasionally also taking small amphibians and aquatic invertebrates (e.g. molluscs, insects and worms). Truly wild populations of this species are migratory (particularly where displaced by cold weather) (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) although European and feral populations are essentially sedentary or only locally migratory or nomadic (Scott and Rose 1996, Snow and Perrins 1998).

threats:
The species suffers heavy losses from lead poisoning due to ingested lead fishing weights (Kelly and Kelly 2004), lead shot (Spray and Milne 1988) and lead-contaminated sediments from mining and smelting activities (Day et al. 2003). Heavy losses have also been recorded from local incidences of copper poisoning (Kobayashi et al. 1992). The ingestion of or entanglement in fishing lines and/or hooks can also cause severe injury or mortality (Kelly and Kelly 2004) as can collisions with overhead lines (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) although European and feral populations are essentially sedentary or only locally migratory). The species may be threatened by future oil spills (which can cause death by oil saturation) (Berglund et al. 1963). The species is also susceptible to avian influenza (e.g. strain H5N1) (Melville and Shortridge 2006, Nagy et al. 2007) so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus. Significant mortality can occur with prolonged freezing weather in winter which prevents birds from feeding (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex II. CMS Appendix II. In the U.K. management to decrease competition has shown to be successful (Giles 1994).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Legislation to ban the use of lead weights in fishing and measures to minimise mortality from fishing lines and nets should be introduced. The creation and protection of wetland habitats, particularly from mining waste would also benefit the species. Powerlines should be moved or made more visible.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Applicable (NA)

This species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

The bird is considered vagrant in the EU27 and is assessed as Not Applicable (NA) for this region.

population:
The European population is estimated at 4,000-7,000 pairs, which equates to 8,000-14,000 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is a river specialist during the breeding season and winters along exposed rocky seashores. Laying occurs in May and June. It nests on small islands in rivers (Tucker and Heath 1994). The nest is a thin layer of grass occasionally with a few dry twigs and leaves and lined with down (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013) and is usually concealed in dense vegetation (Tucker and Heath 1994). It usually lays five to seven eggs (Kear 2005). In summer the species occurs at high densities around lake outlets where it feeds on its favoured food resource: blackfly (Simulium vittatum) larvae (Bengtson and Ulfstrand 1971, Gudmundsson 1971). It also takes molluscs (Kear 2005). In summer it feeds on insect larvae and pupae, other invertebrates and small fish (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). In winter it forages along exposed rocky seashores where it feeds on intertidal and subtidal invertebrates (Tucker and Heath 1994). In Iceland birds from the north and north-east of the island move to the west and south-west coasts in winter (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
In Europe, the species is threatened by the development of hydroelectric schemes which result in the diversion and siltation of rivers (Tucker and Heath 1994, Carboneras and Kirwan 2013); one colony may have been lost through the diversion of the River Thorisos. The large-scale introduction of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo samar) and Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) can result in competition for blackfly larvae and pupae, the ducks main food source. In the 1930s American Mink (Mustela vison) were introduced and subsequently escaped; these may have reduced breeding success although this has not been studied (Tucker and Heath 1994). Oils spills have been known to cause significant mortality outside of Europe (Carboneras and Kirwan 2013). Also dredging for minerals in Lake Mývatn may affect algae blooms which form an important food source (Tucker and Heath 1994).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. The species is protected against hunting and egg-collecting in Iceland. The core area, River Laxá, is partly protected by law, is an Important Bird Area (IBA) and a Ramsar Site (Tucker and Heath 1994).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The identification of other rivers with high numbers of breeding pairs is needed and these should be protected from development. A study of the effect of the American mink on the species should be undertaken (Tucker and Heath 1994). Research should also be undertaken on resource use on the coast, individual females and the survival of small young and the relationship between breeding, moulting and wintering sites (Gardarsson 2008).


taxonomicNotes:
Mareca penelope (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously placed in the genus Anas.

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size is very large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the species is undergoing rapid declines, and it is therefore classified as Vulnerable (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde), and there is not considered to be significant potential for rescue from outside the EU27, so the final category is unchanged.

range:
The species breeding range extends from Iceland and northern Britain east across northern Europe. Outside the breeding season, populations winter in central and southern Europe (Carboneras et al. 2014). It breeds in subarctic and boreal zones, overlapping in the arctic tundra and temperate steppes zones, south to c. 50°N (and north to 70°N in Europe)  (Hagmeijer and Blair 1997).

population:
The European population is estimated at 469,000-645,000 pairs, which equates to 937,000-1,290,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 79,500-124,000 pairs, which equates to 159,000-248,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds in lowland freshwater marshes, slow-flowing large rivers (Kretchmar 1994) and shallow lakes and lagoons with ample submerged, floating and emerging vegetation (Kear 2005). Ideal wetland habitats for this species are those surrounded by sparse open forest, woodland and especially agricultural land (Kretchmar 1994, Kear 2005), in the boreal and subarctic zone (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Kear 2005). It avoids tundra, densely forested and mountainous country, as well as fast flowing rivers and streams, but tolerates saline or alkaline steppe lakes and wetlands (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Madge and Burn 1988). In the non-breeding season this species shows a preference for coastal salt-marshes, freshwater, brackish and saline lagoons, flooded grasslands, estuaries, intertidal mudflats (Cramp and Simmons 1977), and other sheltered marine habitats (Kear 2005). The breeding season is from April to June, varying across its range according to latitude, with nests sometimes initiated in April in Scotland, but may not arrive on breeding grounds in northern Russia until the second half of May (Carboneras et al. 2014). The nests of this species are shallow depressions in the ground lined with vegetation, usually positioned not far from water and well concealed under overhanging vegetation, in grass tussocks, scrub (Kear 2005), and especially in heather (Jacobsen and Ugelvik 1998). Usually eight or nine eggs are laid (Carboneras et al. 2014).It is vegetarian and consumes the leaves, seeds, stems and root bulbs of pond weeds, fine grasses (Myrfyn and Thomas 1979), horsetails (Kretchmar 1994) and eelgrass, as well as algae (Johnsgard 1978). Animal material is taken rarely and usually incidentally along with vegetation or seeds (Myrfyn and Thomas 1979, Kear 2005). The species is strongly migratory, undertaking significant cold weather movements of varying magnitude (Scott and Rose 1996).

threats:
This species is susceptible to disturbance from freshwater recreational activities (Grishanov 2006, Carboneras et al. 2014) (e.g. tourists walking) (Mathers et al. 2000), pollution, petroleum pollution (Grishanov 2006)), wetland drainage (Grishanov 2006, Carboneras et al. 2014), peat-extraction (e.g. in the Kaliningrad region of Russia), changing wetland management practices (decreased grazing and mowing in meadows leading to scrub over-growth) and the burning and mowing of reeds (Grishanov 2006). Avian influenza virus (strain H5N1) is also a potential threat (Melville and Shortridge 2006, Jonassen and Handeland 2007), as is poisoning from the ingestion of lead shot pellets (Mondain-Monval et al. 2002). This species is hunted for sport (e.g. in the U.K.) (Kear 2005, Carboneras et al. 2014), and although population numbers in an area decrease significantly after a period of shooting, there is no current evidence that such utilisation poses an immediate threat to the species (Vaananen 2001, Bregnballe et al. 2006). The eggs of this species used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. Red Foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and Pine Martens (Martes martes)  were removed from regions in Finland resulting in a significant increase in the breeding success of this species (Kauhala 2004).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Suitable areas of wetland habitat should be protected from changing management practices, disturbance and modification. The impact of hunting should be researched and monitored to ensure bag numbers are sustainable and the use of lead shot banned.


taxonomicNotes:
Mareca strepera (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously placed in the genus Anas.

population:
The European population is estimated at 75,400-125,000 pairs, which equates to 151,000-250,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 37,400-69,900 pairs, which equates to 74,700-140,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species inhabits highly productive (Carboneras et al. 2014) and eutrophic (Snow and Perrins 1998) freshwater marsh or lake habitats (Carboneras et al. 2014) in open lowland grassland (Madge and Burn 1988), showing a preference for sheltered, shallow, standing or slow-flowing waters with abundant emergent vegetation (Snow and Perrins 1998, Kear 2005) and grass-covered islands providing cover for nesting. It may also be found on permanent, shallow, slightly alkaline marshes (Johnsgard 1978, Carboneras et al. 2014), as well as on oxbow lakes, channels (Flint et al. 1984), reservoirs and gravel-pits (Kear 2005). After hatching, females move their broods to deeper marshes or to the edges of large impoundments, sometimes more than 1 mile away from the nesting sites (Johnsgard 1978). Breeding begins in April and May, with egg-laying generally from second half of April in northern and central Europe and during early May in Turkey (Carboneras et al. 2014). The nest is a well-hidden (Johnsgard 1978) hollow (Snow and Perrins 1998) in grass and leaves positioned on the ground in thick vegetation (Carboneras et al. 2014). The species shows a preference for dense, dry herbaceous vegetation (Johnsgard 1978) and often nests far from water (Madge and Burn 1988, Kear 2005). Clutch size is generally eight to twelve eggs. The species is predominantly herbivorous consuming mostly the seeds, leaves, roots and stems of aquatic plants (Carboneras et al. 2014) (submerged and emergent) as well as grasses and stoneworts (Chara spp.). The species is strongly migratory in the north of its range (Kear 2005) although breeding populations in temperate regions are largely sedentary (Carboneras et al. 2014).

threats:
The species is threatened by pollution (Kear 2005) and disturbance from recreational use of freshwater wetlands (Kear 2005, Pease et al. 2005). It also suffers mortality as a result of lead shot ingestion (Spain) (Mondain-Monval et al. 2002) and nest predation by American Mink (Neovison vison) (Europe) (Opermanis et al. 2001). The species is susceptible to avian influenza, so may be threatened by future outbreaks (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is hunted throughout most of its range, but is rarely taken in large numbers except where it is particularly abundant (Kear 2005). The eggs of this species used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II. The cyclical removal of adult fish from an artificial waterbody (gravel pit) in the U.K. (leaving small fish for piscivorous birds) resulted in an increase in the winter use of the habitat by the species as result of an increase in the growth of submerged aquatic macrophytes (Giles 1994). The removed fish (dead or alive) were sold to generate funds (Giles 1994).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Important wetland sites should be protected to minimise degradation and disturbance appropriate predator control undertaken in breeding areas. The impact of hunting should be researched and monitored to ensure bag numbers are sustainable and the use of lead shot banned.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Critically Endangered (CR)

In Europe this duck has a small, declining population and is classified as Vulnerable (C1; D1). Within the EU27 the population is very small and declining, and it therefore qualifies as Critically Endangered (C2a(ii)).

range:
The species has a fragmented distribution and in Europe it occurs in Spain, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia (Green 1996), and there have bee recent records of  breeding in Italy (Sicily and Sardinia) (Podda and Grussu 2014). During the 20th century its range contracted and the species formerly bred in southern France, Hungary, Greece (Crete), the former Yugoslavia, Russia (Volga Delta) and possibly Cyprus and the Canary Islands (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 330-1,100 pairs, which equates to 650-2,300 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 25-120 pairs, which equates to 50-230 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species frequents shallow brackish or freshwater pools and marshes with abundant emergent and submergent vegetation in arid country, including seasonal and semi-permanent wetlands (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It starts breeding between April and July (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and usually nests in dense reedbeds although in Spain it also uses clumps of saltmarsh vegetation (Tucker and Heath 1994). The species is monogamous and will nest in single pairs or loose groups. The nest is a slight depression on the ground, lined with grass and down, normally close to water but occasionally over it (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Clutches range from 5-20 eggs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). In Spain the mean clutch size was recorded to be 11.8 (Green 1998). Diet varies considerably between seasons and sites and additionally with age. Diptera are an important component of the diet, especially before and during the breeding season. Small seeds become increasingly important after the breeding season with faeces of post-breeding birds in Turkey composing of 95% dry weight Scirpus seeds (Green and Selva 2000, Green and Sánchez 2003, Fuentes et al. 2004). This species is dispersive and partially migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It shows variable, nomadic movements and is capable of dispersal in search of suitable habitat at any time of year as changing conditions require (Scott and Rose 1996). In winter it can be found at a number of sites around the Mediterranean basin where it does not normally breed (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
Over 50% of suitable habitat may have been destroyed during the 20th century. Wetland drainage for agriculture occurs across its range. Hydrological work has severely affected breeding sites in Turkey and Spain. Reed-cutting, reed-burning and grazing commonly reduce the amount of habitat for nesting. Pollution from agricultural, industrial and domestic sources is a threat at many sites. When breeding, it is vulnerable to shooting and egg collection. Further mortality results from birds caught in fishing nets and lead poisoning (Mateo et al. 2001, Svanberg et al. 2006). A lack of habitat following hot, dry summer months probably results in high juvenile and adult mortality post-breeding (Green 2000, 2007). Lack of water availability for the El Hondo reservoirs in Alicante have led to a major decline in Spain since 1998 (Ballesteros et al. 2008).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix I and II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. It is legally protected in Bulgaria, Spain, Russia and Turkey. Conservation programmes have been carried out in Spain. Survey and research projects have been carried out in Turkey. An updated European action plan was published in 2008 (Iñigo et al. 2008).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Conduct regular surveys and monitoring. Research its ecology. Protect habitat at all sites regularly holding the species. Prevent mortality from hunting and other causes. Increase public awareness.


taxonomicNotes:
Melanitta fusca has been split into Melanitta fusca, M. deglandi and M. stejnegeri following a review of recent literature (Livezey 1995, Garner et al. 2004, Sangster et al. 2005, Collinson et al. 2006, AOU 2010) and museum specimens by the BirdLife Taxon

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

Within Europe and the EU27 the winter population of this seaduck has undergone rapid declines. Although these may have now levelled off, the species still warrants classification as Vulnerable (A2abcde).

range:
The species breeds in Scandinavia, from Norway and Sweden, into Finland and Estonia, and western Siberian Russia, and winters mostly in the Baltic Sea and along the coasts of western Europe, including Estonia, Poland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, U.K., Ireland, France, Spain and Portugal (Kear 2005), accounting for the vast majority of the global population (Delany and Scott 2006). Small isolated breeding populations are also found in Turkey, Armenia and Georgia and some birds winter around the Black Sea (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
In Europe the breeding population is estimated at 72,000-94,900 pairs, which equates to 144,000-190,000 mature individuals. In the EU27 the breeding population is estimated at 11,800-24,100 pairs, which equates to 23,500-48,200 mature individuals. In winter the minimum European populationis estimated at 322,000-549,000 individuals, which equates to 214,000-366,000 mature individuals. The minimum winter population in the EU27 is estimated at 302,000-518,000 individuals, which equates to 201,000-345,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species winters mainly at sea, most commonly along exposed shores or offshore, although it is occasionally recorded inland during this period. Breeding occurs at middle to high altitudes in boreal forest and wooded tundra near to fresh water (Tucker and Heath 1994) and begins from mid-May (Madge and Burn 1988). A small relict population in Turkey is recorded breeding at around 3000 m on islands in high-altitude water-bodies, including crater lakes. It breeds in solitary pairs or loose groups and is seasonally monogamous (del Hoyo et al. 1992, Kear 2005). Nests are a shallow depression on the ground, poorly lined with plant matter and down and found among vegetation. Clutch size is normally seven to nine eggs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It feeds on molluscs, crustaceans, echinoderms, annelids, insects and small fish. In addition it may also consume plant material while on its breeding grounds. The species is migratory and small populations winter in the North Sea, the north-west Mediterranean, the Black Sea, along the Atlantic coast to Spain, and less commonly in freshwater lakes in central Europe. However the majority winter in the Baltic Sea (Tucker and Heath 1994).

threats:
Moulting and wintering concentrations of this species are very susceptible to oil spills and other marine pollutants (Gorski et al. 1977, Kear 2005, UICN France 2011, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) (an oil spill could destroy a large proportion of the global population if it occurred in a key moulting or wintering area (Madge and Burn 1988)). The species is also susceptible to the effects of commercial exploitation of marine benthic organisms and shellfish (Kear 2005), and is threatened by drowning in fishing nets (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014, Kear 2005). It is threatened by habitat degradation as a result of the human exploitation of natural resources in the taiga and lower tundra regions of its breeding range (Kear 2005), and by lake drainage for irrigation and hydroelectric power production (Armenia) (Balian et al. 2002). It is susceptible to disturbance from tourism in remote coastal and freshwater habitats in its breeding range (Kear 2005), as well as disturbance from wind farms (wind turbines) (Garthe and Huppop 2004). The species suffers predation from American mink (Neovison vison) on islands (Nordstrom et al. 2002) and is also susceptible to avian influenza, so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is a target of hunters in some areas (e.g. Bregnballe et al. 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
No targeted conservation actions are known for this species, although numbers in some parts of its range (accounting for most of the population) have received monitoring in recent decades and it occurs in some protected areas. An EU Management Plan for 2007-2009 was published.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Continue to monitor numbers in both its breeding and wintering range. Carry out research into the causes of the recently detected decline. Increase the area of breeding habitat that is protected. Tackle potential causes of mortality in wintering birds, such as drowning in fishing nets.


taxonomicNotes:
Melanitta nigra has been split into Melanitta nigra and M. americana following a review of recent literature (Livezey 1995, Garner et al. 2004, Sangster et al. 2005, Collinson et al. 2006, AOU 2010) and museum specimens by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working G

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 107,000-131,000 pairs, which equates to 214,000-263,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 6,100-9,900 pairs, which equates to 12,200-19,800 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds on Arctic dwarf heath (Snow and Perrins 1998, Kear 2005) or boggy tundra on pools, small lakes, streams (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and slow-flowing rivers (Snow and Perrins 1998). It shows a preference for freshwater habitats (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) with low banks (Flint et al. 1984), small islets (Kear 2005) and high abundances of aquatic invertebrate and plant life positioned in swampy valleys or among mossy bogs (Flint et al. 1984), especially where suitable shrubs (e.g. willow or birch) and herbaceous vegetation are available for nesting cover (Johnsgard 1978, Snow and Perrins 1998, Kear 2005). Although the species may use freshwater lakes on migration the majority moult and overwinter at sea on shallow inshore waters less than 20 m deep with abundant benthic fauna (Kear 2005), generally between 500 m and c.2 km from the shore (Snow and Perrins 1998). It arrives on its breeding grounds between late-April and May and breeds from late-May onwards (Madge and Burn 1988) in highly dispersed (Kear 2005) solitary pairs. The nest is a scrape on the ground hidden amongst vegetation (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) close to water or placed further away in dwarf heath (Kear 2005). Its diet consists predominantly of molluscs, especially during the winter, although it occasionally takes other aquatic invertebrates such as crustaceans, worms (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), echinoderms, isopods, amphipods (Kear 2005) and insects as well as small fish (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and fish eggs (Snow and Perrins 1998). On the breeding grounds the species may also consume plant matter such as seeds, roots and tubers (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and the vegetative parts of aquatic plants (Flint et al. 1984). This species is strongly migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The large concentrations of this species that occur during the moulting period and in winter are highly vulnerable to oil spills (Gorski et al. 1977, Nikolaeva et al. 2006), chronic oil pollution, human disturbance and the degradation of food resources as a result of oil exploration (Nikolaeva et al. 2006). The species also suffers disturbance from high-speed ferries (Larsen and Laubek 2005) and populations wintering off the coasts of western Europe are threatened by offshore wind farms (Kear 2005, Fox and Petersen 2006, Petersen 2006). The effects of commercial exploitation of benthic shellfish also poses a threat (through competition for food resources), and the species's breeding habitats are threatened by eutrophication in some areas (Kear 2005). The species is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is hunted in some areas (e.g. Bregnballe et al. 2006) and its eggs used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. CMS Appendix II. Current measures for the protection of this species are not sufficient and the species suffers from a lack of knowledge and research interest (Kear 2005). In the U.K. the species is listed as Red on the national Red List and is a U.K. Priority Species and Biodiversity Action Plan species. It is also listed as Endangered on the Red List of Baltic Wintering Birds (HELCOM 2013). Research and monitoring has been initiated by several organisations to identify the driving factors behind its decline and better understand the species's movements (WWT 2013).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Management actions at non-breeding sites are essential to maintain the health of this species. Measures should be taken to minimise bycatch in fisheries, regulate shipping traffic, implement and enforce hunting regulations (Bellebaum et al. 2012, HELCOM 2013), prevent accidental and chronic oil pollution and preserve feeding grounds (HELCOM 2013). Research and monitoring should continue, particularly into the effects of climate change on the species and its prey (Bellebaum et al. 2012).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 9,200-17,600 pairs, which equates to 18,300-35,200 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 3,100-7,500 pairs, which equates to 6,200-15,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
It breeds on freshwater oligotrophic lakes, pools, oxbow lakes, backwaters of large slow-flowing rivers, muskegs (bogs) (Kear 2005) and flooded riverside woods (Johnsgard 1978, Snow and Perrins 1998) in the coniferous and mixed deciduous/evergreen forest zones (Snow and Perrins 1998, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It shows a preference for shallow water, and requires mature broadleaved trees with holes in which to nest (Johnsgard 1978). The species overwinters on large freshwater lakes, brackish coastal lagoons, estuaries (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), reservoirs (Johnsgard 1978), ice-free rivers (Kear 2005) and sheltered coastal bays (Madge and Burn 1988) (although rarely on the open sea) (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), often resting and feeding on small bodies of water or small streams when on passage (Kear 2005). It arrives on the breeding grounds from April (Kear 2005) or early-May and breeds from mid-May onwards (Madge and Burn 1988). The species nests in tree hollows (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) up to 10 m or more above the ground (Kear 2005) in mature broadleaved trees (Johnsgard 1978). It may also nest in artificial nest boxes. Typically it lays seven to nine eggs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). During the breeding season its diet consists predominantly of benthic aquatic invertebrates such as adult and larval, crustaceans, molluscs and polychaete worms, as well as fish (Kear 2005), amphibians and plant matter. During the winter and in early spring however the species mainly feeds on fish. This species is highly migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
Where it occurs in large numbers on coastal waters the species is particularly vulnerable to oil pollution (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Populations declined in Europe throughout the 19th and 20th centuries due to habitat degradation and loss (e.g. the loss of mature trees in river valleys as a result of logging, conversion to agriculture and river canalisation). The species has also suffered local declines as a result of predation by American mink (Neovison vison) (Kear 2005) and is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is susceptible to a certain amount of hunting pressure when on passage and during the winter (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Climate change is also affecting the range of this species (Pavón-Jordán et al. 2015).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. The total population of this species wintering in north-east Europe has increased from 6% to a third in two decades. SPAs have proven effective in accommodating this range shift, with population growth in this region doubling inside EU Birds Directive's SPAs compared to those outside over the last 25 years (Pavón-Jordán et al. 2015).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Gaps in the current network of protected areas need to be filled and national and international assessments of the EU Natura 2000 network should be made regularly (Pavón-Jordán et al. 2015). Strict legislation on oil transportation needs to be implemented and enforced to minimise the risk of spills. Investigation into the impacts of American Mink should be undertaken and suitable eradication methods trialled. In areas where the species is hunted, research and legislation is needed to ensure that it is sustainable.


population:
The European population is estimated at 66,800-103,000 pairs, which equates to 134,000-206,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 56,100-85,000 pairs, which equates to 112,000-170,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds on large clear freshwater lakes, pools, the upper reaches of rivers (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and streams in the boreal, montane (Kear 2005) and temperate forest zones (Johnsgard 1978). It requires waters with a fairly high productivity of fish surrounded by mature hardwood trees with holes excavated by woodpeckers or natural cavities for nesting in (Kear 2005). The species winters on large unfrozen lakes, rivers, lagoons, brackish waters and marshes, generally avoiding highly saline waters (Madge and Burn 1988) although it may move to estuaries, coastal lagoons and sheltered sea coasts with waters less than 10 m deep in particularly harsh winters (Scott and Rose 1996). The species arrives on its breeding areas between March and May (Scott and Rose 1996), actually breeding as early as late-March (although often considerably later in more northerly regions) (Madge and Burn 1988).The species nests in holes excavated by large woodpeckers or natural cavities in mature hardwood trees with entry holes more than 15 m above the ground (Kear 2005). When natural tree-nesting sites are not available the species will use artificial nestboxes (Johnsgard 1978, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) or may nest in rock clefts (Flint et al. 1984), among tree roots in undercut banks, on cliff ledges or in dense scrub or loose boulders on islands (Kear 2005). Clutches are usually eight to twelve eggs. Its diet consists predominantly of fish, but may also include aquatic invertebrates (such as molluscs, crustaceans, worms, and adult and larval insects), amphibians, small mammals and birds (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Northern breeding populations of this species are fully migratory (Snow and Perrins 1998) although breeders in temperate regions are sedentary or only travel short distances (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is subject to persecution by anglers and fish-farmers who accuse it of depleting fish stocks (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The species is also threatened by the degradation of freshwater lakes through drainage and petroleum pollution in Russia (Grishanov 2006). The species is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is hunted in Russia (Grishanov 2006) (although it is not a popular game bird (Kear 2005)), and its eggs used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II.  There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
The erection of nest boxes may encourage the use of local areas by this species (Kear 2005). Future research to inform the conservation and management of this species should include investigations into its breeding requirements, winter habitats and population size (Mallory and Metz 1999). Strict legislation on petroleum drilling and transport should be enforced and important areas protected from drainage and other habitat modifications. Research into the impact this species has on fish stocks and ways to minimise conflict should be established.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)

Within Europe this seaduck has undergone moderately rapid declines and is classified as Near Threatened.

In the EU27 declines have been more rapid and it qualifies as Vulnerable (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde).

range:
The species breeds in Greenland (to Denmark), Iceland, and much of northern Eurasia south to the United Kingdom and parts of eastern Europe. Its wintering grounds expand its range to include areas of central Europe and the Mediterranean basin and the Black Sea (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 70,100-120,000 pairs, which equates to 140,000-240,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 48,600-68,600 pairs, which equates to 97,200-137,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds along the wooded shorelines (Kear 2005) of deep lakes, small rivers and streams (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) with moderate currents, in the tundra, boreal and temperate forest zones, as well as on more saline waters such as sheltered shallow bays, inlets, straits or estuaries with sandy rather than muddy substrates. It shows a preference for narrow channels rather than open expanses of water, with islands or islets and spits, projecting rocks or grassy banks (Snow and Perrins 1998). The majority of the species winters at sea, frequenting both inshore and offshore waters, estuaries, bays and brackish lagoons (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) but showing a preference for clear, shallow waters not affected by heavy wave action (Johnsgard 1978). It will also utilise large freshwater lakes on passage (Madge and Burn 1988). It breeds from April or May (later in northern populations) (Kear 2005). The nest is constructed within 25 m of water in a variety of locations such as natural cavities on the ground, burrows (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), under boulders (Madge and Burn 1988), amongst tree or scrub roots (Snow and Perrins 1998), in tree cavities, artificial nest boxes (Madge and Burn 1988), amongst reeds or on floating reed mats (Flint et al. 1984).  Clutch size is normally eight to ten. Its diet consists predominantly of small, shoaling marine or freshwater fish, as well as small amounts of plant material and aquatic invertebrates. This species is fully migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) although in temperate regions it only undertakes short distance movements to nearby coasts (Scott and Rose 1996)

threats:
The species is subject to persecution and may be shot by anglers and fish-farmers who accuse it of depleting fish stocks. It is also threatened by accidental entanglement and drowning in fishing nets (Kear 2005). Alterations to its breeding habitats by dam construction and deforestation, and habitat degradation from water pollution are other major threats to the species (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It is also susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). The species is hunted in Denmark (Bregnballe et al. 2006), although it may not be a popular game species (Kear 2005). The eggs of the species also used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II.  The breeding density of this species increased on islands in the outer archipelago of south-west Finland as a result of feral American Mink (Neovison vison) removal (Nordstrom et al. 2002).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The erection of nest boxes may encourage the use of local areas by this species. Strict legislation on petroleum drilling and transport should be enforced and measures to reduce bycatch implemented and enforced. Important areas should be protected from drainage and other habitat modifications. Research into the impact this species has on fish stocks and ways to minimise conflict should be established.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 27,500-43,000 pairs, which equates to 55,100-86,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 10,500-14,100 pairs, which equates to 21,100-28,100 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species inhabits inland deep fresh or brackish reed-fringed lakes, rivers or saline and alkaline lagoons (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) in open country, also occurring (less often) on estuaries, river deltas and other sheltered coastal habitats (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) on passage (Madge and Burn 1988) or during the winter (Scott and Rose 1996). It breeds from mid-April to early-June (Madge and Burn 1988). The nest is constructed of roots, twigs and leaves near water (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) on the ground in dense vegetation or on floating mats of vegetation amidst reedbeds (Johnsgard 1978).  Clutches are usually eight to ten eggs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Although the species usually breeds well-dispersed, neighbouring pairs may sometimes nest as close as 30 m apart (Snow and Perrins 1998, Kear 2005). The diet of this species consists predominantly of the roots, seeds and vegetative parts of aquatic plants, although it will occasionally take aquatic invertebrates (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The species is a short-distance migrant (Tucker and Heath 1994).

threats:
The two main threats to this species are habitat degradation (Defos du Rau 2002) (e.g. through land-use changes) and hunting (Kear 2005) (e.g. the species is hunted in France, Portugal and Spain without any official hunting bag monitoring (Defos du Rau 2002)).  Loss of habitat through wetland drainage is also a serious threat (Tucker and Heath 1994). The species also suffers poisoning from lead shot ingestion (Spain) (Mateo et al. 1998). Deterioration in the water quality of wetlands can reduce the abundance of stonewort (Nitellopsis obtuse) which is an important part of the species's diet (Ruiters et al. 1994), and it is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II.  The species is listed in the Red Book of endangered species in seven countries in the European Union (Defos du Rau 2002).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Long-term monitoring should be continued and extended to cover all potential wintering sites and formal programs for monitoring hunting bags should be introduced. Research is needed on the species's population dynamics and habitat selection to help inform conservation measures, hunting regulation and the restoration of habitat (Defos du Rau 2002). The protection of key wetland sites is also needed (Tucker and Heath 1994).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Endangered (EN)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

This species has a small, rapidly declining population in Europe and is therefore classified as Endangered. Within the EU27 the small population is fluctuating or stable and it is therefore listed as Vulnerable.

range:
The species is resident in Spain and larger populations breed in Russia and Turkey. It occurs on passage and in winter in the eastern Mediterranean. Concurrently, breeding populations have become extinct in Italy, France, Hungary, Albania, former Yugoslavia and Greece, and probably also in the Ukraine and Armenia (Snow and Perrins 1998, Carboneras and Kirwan 2015).

population:
The European population is estimated at 250-610 pairs, which equates to 500-1,200 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 120-320 pairs, which equates to 240-640 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds in small, shallow, fresh to brackish wetlands with dense submerged vegetation and extensive reedbeds (Tucker and Heath 1994). Breeding begins in April with broods hatching mostly in June and July (Carboneras and Kirwan 2015). Nests are a platform of reed stems and leaves sparsely lined with down and are built in dense vegetation, on the ground or over water, often in old nests of other waterbirds. They are sometimes sited within gull and tern colonies, and birds will use specially constructed nest-boxes. Clutches are usually four to nine white eggs and females may re-lay if the first clutch is lost. As a diving duck, its diet consists of midge larvae and other aquatic invertebrates.  Seeds and the vegetative parts of aquatic plants are also taken (Carboneras and Kirwan 2015). Most birds are migratory, wintering in Europe from further east in Russia and Kazakhstan. Breeding in Europe is mostly concentrated in Spain where the population is resident but also occurs in Russia and Turkey (Tucker and Heath 1994).

threats:
The greatest long-term threat to the species's survival is thought to be competition and introgressive hybridisation (i.e. genetic swamping) with the non-native North American Ruddy Duck (Oxyura jamaicensis) (Green and Hughes 1996, Green and Hughes 2001, Muñoz-Fuentes et al. 2007). Both male Ruddy Ducks and male hybrids are socially dominant over male White-headed Ducks during courtship (Johnsgard and Carbonell 1996). The threat from the Ruddy Duck is extremely serious, given that, if allowed to proceed beyond a certain point, the Ruddy Duck's spread across the Palearctic will become unstoppable, especially if the species was allowed to become established in White-headed Duck range-states such as Turkey or the Russian Federation, where the huge size and area of the wetlands and their infrequent monitoring would make control impossible (Hughes et al. 2006). Approximately 50% of breeding habitat has been drained during the 20th century. Remaining sites are vulnerable to drainage, filling, pollution and disturbance. Water abstraction for agriculture and other uses has affected water levels in many important sites throughout the range. The genetic diversity of the western European population is low (Muñoz-Fuentez et al. 2005) owing to its having suffered a bottleneck in the 1970s and early 1980s when only a few dozen individuals remained in the wild (Johnsgard and Carbonell 1996, Muñoz-Fuentez et al. 2005). This may lessen the adaptive potential of the population, rendering it less able to withstand environmental change (Muñoz-Fuentez et al. 2005). Further threats include drowning in fishing-nets, hunting and ingestion of lead shot (Green et al. 1996, J. Criado in litt. 1999, Mateo et al. 2001, A.A. Khan, A. Parveen, and R. Yasmeen in litt. 2005). The species is hunted illegally in most of the range states but this has not been quantified, apart from in Turkey. Hunting and egg collection are the most likely reason for extinction in some countries (Hughes et al. 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CITES Appendix II. CMS Appendix I and II. The species is legally protected in many range countries and occurs in a number of protected areas. A conservation programme in Spain has resulted in a significant population increase (J. Criado in litt. 1999). Ruddy Ducks (O. jamaicensis) are controlled in 15 western Palearctic countries, including Spain, Portugal and France. A programme was started in 2005 to eradicate the U.K. population of Ruddy Ducks and by 2009, over 6,200 ducks had been culled, resulting in a suggested decrease in the U.K. population of almost 90% (Henderson 2009). Reintroduction schemes are operational in Majorca and Italy (B. Hughes in litt. 1999, A. J. Green in litt. 2012). A European action plan was published in 2006 (Hughes et al. 2006). Sport hunting has been banned on two primary wintering lakes (Burdur Gölü and Yarisli Gölü) in Turkey where hunting from speedboats was threatening the White-headed Duck (Green et al. 1996).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Survey breeding and wintering grounds and migration sites. Enforce strict protection from hunting. Conduct comprehensive winter monitoring and tracking studies to improve knowledge of migration routes and phenology (Li and Mundkur 1993). Protect and manage key sites and their catchments, including monitoring of hydrology and water pollution (M.A. Tabur in litt. 2005). Reduce disturbance by fisheries. Ensure legislative protection for this species in all range states (Li and Mundkur 1993). Alleviate hunting pressure and ban lead shot throughout its range. Prevent drowning in fishing nets by regulating fisheries. Promote policies to control O. jamaicensis and hybrids.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Endangered (EN)

In Europe, although this species may have a small range it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size may be moderately small to large, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the species is undergoing rapid declines, and it is therefore classified as Endangered (C1), and there is not considered to be significant potential for rescue from outside the EU27, so the final category is unchanged.

range:
In Europe, the species breeds from the Yamal Peninsula, Russia, eastwards. Non-breeding populations summer in Novaya Zemlya, Russia, northern Norway and adjacent Russian waters (C. Dau in litt. 1999, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The minimum European population in winter is estimated at 30,800-41,200 individuals, which equates to 20,500-27,500 mature individuals. There also exists a marginal breeding population in Europe estimated at 5-50 pairs, which equates to 10-100 mature individuals. The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter and the minimum population in the EU27 is estimated at 820-2,200 individuals, which equates to 550-1,500 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species very rarely breeds in Europe (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). Small numbers of birds winter in Europe, mostly at sea, along low-lying rocky coasts and frequenting bays and river mouths (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It feeds mostly by diving, chiefly consuming molluscs, crustaceans and other marine invertebrates as well as small fish and freshwater insects and larvae. The species is migratory, travelling 3,000 km to its moulting sites (Kear 2005), before some continue migration to more distant wintering sites (Petersen et al. 2006). It arrives at its wintering grounds in Europe between October and November and departs April to May (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Some birds remain at wintering sites over the summer (Kear 2005)

threats:
Over-hunting in Siberia and in other breeding areas may be impacting the population. Eiders breeding in Russia are subject to human subsistence harvesting and exposure to lead shot. Males are subject to particular hunting pressure as they arrive on the moulting grounds before females (Morse 2009). Increasing human habitation of Arctic regions has increased the range and numbers of ravens (Corvus corax) and some large gulls, leading to a greater risk of predation (Kear 2005). Recent dramatic changes in Arctic sea ice extent and thickness north of Alaska and Russia may affect eiders in unknown ways (Kear 2005). In addition, climate change is causing the loss of Arctic tundra ponds (Andresen  and Lougheed 2015), which could be contributing to declines in this species. Habitat loss also occurs through prospecting for, and the exploitation of, natural resources such as oil and gas (Kear 2005). The increasing traffic of tankers carrying oil from Arctic areas imposes the risk of contamination following spills (Kear 2005). It is not currently clear which of these many factors is driving the overall decline (K. Laing in litt. 2004, Žydelis et al. 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix I and II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. A European action plan was published in 2000 (Anon. 2001). It is a protected species in Russia. Work has begun in Russia to conduct waterfowl population and subsistence harvest surveys (K. Laing in litt. 2004).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Survey breeding and wintering grounds (particularly surrounding the Kola Peninsula, Russia) to determine population size and trends. Determine causes of current declines. Work to mitigate threats such as lead poisoning. Ensure subsistence harvest is sustainable.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Endangered (EN)

This widespread seaduck began undergoing rapid declines across the majority of its European breeding range during the 2000s. Extrapolated over a three generation period (27 years) these declines result in its classification as Vulnerable in Europe, and Endangered in the EU27 (where declines have been even more rapid).

range:
The species is distributed over the northern coasts of Europe and southern Greenland (Carboneras et al. 2014) up to 80°N (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). It breeds in the Arctic and northern temperate regions, but in Europe, its range expands during winter to as far south, as the western Mediterranean (Carboneras et al. 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 791,000-955,000 pairs, which equates to 1,580,000-1,910,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 224,000-320,000 pairs, which equates to 449,000-640,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds on offshore islands and islets (Kear 2005) along low-lying rocky coasts (Carboneras et al. 2014), on coastal shores and spits, on islets in brackish and freshwater lagoons (Kear 2005), lakes and rivers (Johnsgard 1978) close to the sea (Kear 2005) or on tundra pools, rivers (Carboneras et al. 2014) and lakes (Madge and Burn 1988) up to 5 or 6 km inland (Kear 2005). It shows a preference for boulder-strewn or grassy islands (Johnsgard 1978) with sheltered approaches (Snow and Perrins 1998) that are safe from nest predators, although in the high Arctic where such shelter is unavailable more open sites must be used (in which case the species often nests in closely packed groups for protection) (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species typically winters on shallow seashores, bays and estuaries (Carboneras et al. 2014), especially where there are high abundances of benthic molluscs (Camphuysen et al. 2002, Ens 2006). The species breeds from early-April (although the most northerly populations may not breed until mid-June (Madge and Burn 1988)), and generally nests in colonies. The nest is a slight hollow in the ground that is usually positioned in the shelter of rocks or vegetation but may also be in the open. Its diet consists predominantly of benthic molluscs although crustaceans, echinoderms, other marine invertebrates and fish may also be taken. During the breeding season incubating females frequently complement their diet with algae, berries and the seeds and leaves of surrounding tundra plants (Carboneras et al. 2014). The majority of this species is migratory (Flint et al. 1984), with some populations e.g. in Europe being largely sedentary (Scott and Rose 1996).

threats:
The species is vulnerable to chronic coastal oil pollution (Nikolaeva et al. 2006), especially oil spills (Kear 2005, Nikolaeva et al. 2006, Carboneras et al. 2014), in areas where large moulting and wintering concentrations occur (Carboneras et al. 2014). It also comes into conflict with the shellfish aquaculture industry which depletes the species's food resources (Kear 2005, Ens 2006, Nikolaeva et al. 2006,) and has previously lead to mass starvation events due to the over-fishing of benthic molluscs (e.g. in the Dutch Wadden Sea) (Camphuysen et al. 2002, Ens 2006). On the breeding grounds, disturbance from the development of mineral resources along the coast (Nikolaeva et al. 2006) and from local shore-based activities (e.g. angling, dog-walking (Keller 1991) and scientific research (Bolduc and Guillemette 2003)) increases the likelihood of predation on young (Keller 1991). Unregulated tourism and shipping also cause disturbance to the species on its wintering grounds (Nikolaeva et al. 2006). The species commonly becomes entangled and drowned in monofilament nets (Kear 2005), and it is hunted unsustainably (Nikolaeva et al. 2006)

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. CMS Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Sustainable levels of hunting should be established in those areas where the species is harvested and legislation established and enforced to ensure this. Key areas should be protected from all forms of disturbance as well as oil exploration, drilling and transportation. Levels of shellfish harvesting should be monitored to ensure sustainability and measures to minimise bycatch in fishing nets promoted amongst fisheries. International monitoring plans should be developed and a programme of research put in place, while taking precautions to minimise the impact of scientific work.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Applicable (NA)

This species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

The bird is considered a vagrant or passage species in the EU27 and is assessed as Not Applicable (NA) for this region.

population:
The European population is estimated at 37,500-45,500 pairs, which equates to 75,000-91,000 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds on dry Arctic tundra near freshwater lakes, pools, bogs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), marshes (Kear 2005), streams (Madge and Burn 1988) and small rivers (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) on the coast or up to 50 km (rarely up to 100 km) inland. It shows a preference for shallow fresh waters with emergent vegetation for initial brood rearing, afterwards moving to more saline waters where the young fledge. The species generally moults in sheltered fjords and bays with high densities of benthic fauna (Kear 2005), and winters at sea on deep offshore waters (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) close to the edge of sea ice or in coastal areas with shallow waters (Kear 2005). It breeds from late-June onwards (Madge and Burn 1988) usually in well-dispersed (Kear 2005) solitary pairs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), although in some areas it may also form loose colonies (Madge and Burn 1988). The nest is a slight hollow on dry ground and is usually positioned near water in the open or under the cover of driftwood, grass hummocks or rocks (Flint et al. 1984). Its diet consists predominantly of animal matter such as benthic molluscs, crustaceans, larval insects, echinoderms and other marine invertebrates, although the seeds and the vegetative parts of tundra plants, sedges and aquatic plants may also be taken on the breeding grounds (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), and algae, eelgrass Zostera spp. and Ruppia maritima may be taken at sea (Johnsgard 1978). It breeds from June onwards in solitary pairs. This species is fully migratory (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is threatened by chronic coastal oil pollution (Nikolaeva et al. 2006) and future oil spills (Nikolaeva et al. 2006), especially where it forms large aggregations on the sea during the moult period, on migration or in the winter (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The species is also threatened by the degradation of food resources as a result of oil exploration and by human disturbance when moulting and on migration, and is threatened by disturbance from uncontrolled shipping (e.g. oil transportation) on its wintering grounds (Nikolaeva et al. 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. CMS Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Strict legislation on oil exploration and transportation is needed as well as protection of key sites. Research into the species's ecology and population dynamics will help future conservation measures.


taxonomicNotes:
Spatula clypeata (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously placed in the genus Anas.

population:
The European population is estimated at 170,000-233,000 pairs, which equates to 340,000-466,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 27,100-42,900 pairs, which equates to 54,300-85,700 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
It inhabits permanent shallow freshwater wetlands (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), preferred sites being those surrounded by dense stands of reeds or other emergent vegetation whilst being free of overhanging trees or fringing forest (Snow and Perrins 1998). Suitable habitats include well-vegetated lakes and marshes and with muddy shores and substrates in open country (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), as well as oxbow lakes, channels and swamps (former U.S.S.R.) (Flint et al. 1984). It also frequents artificial waters bordered by lush grassland (Snow and Perrins 1998) such as sewage farms, rice-fields (Kear 2005) and fish ponds (Musil 2006). In the winter it can be found on coastal brackish lagoons, tidal mudflats (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), estuaries (Madge and Burn 1988), coastal shorelines, fresh and brackish estuarine marshes (Johnsgard 1978), inland seas and brackish or saline inland waters (Snow and Perrins 1998), occasionally occurring (briefly) on marine waters during migration (Madge and Burn 1988, Snow and Perrins 1998).  It arrives on the breeding grounds from March where it breeds in solitary pairs or loose groups in the northern spring (chiefly from mid-April to June). The nest is a scrape or depression (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) on the ground in tall grass, among hummocks, in the open (Flint et al. 1984) or (rarely) in bulrush marshes (Kear 2005). Normally between nine and eleven eggs are laid. Its diet consists of small aquatic invertebrates such as adult and larval insects, molluscs, the seeds of emergent and aquatic plants (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), planktonic crustaceans (Snow and Perrins 1998), annelids, amphibian spawn, tadpoles, spiders, fish and the vegetative parts of aquatic plants (Johnsgard 1978, Brown et al. 1982). This species is highly migratory although it may be present all year round in parts of Europe (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is threatened by habitat loss from drainage and changing farmland practices (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997), is occasionally killed by collisions with power transmission lines (Malcolm 1982), and suffers from nest predation by American Mink (Neovison vison) (Opermanis et al. 2001, Nordstrom et al. 2002, Bartoszewicz and Zalewski 2003). It is susceptible to avian influenza (Melville and Shortridge 2006, Gaidet et al. 2007) and avian botulism (Forrester et al. 1980) so may be threatened by future outbreaks of these diseases. The species suffers mortality as a result of lead shot ingestion (Camargue, France and Spain (Mateo et al. 1998, Mondain-Monval et al. 2002)). The species is a favoured quarry species throughout most of the world, but is rarely taken in large numbers (Kear 2005). It is hunted for sport in Denmark (Bregnballe et al. 2006) and the Po delta, Italy (Sorrenti et al. 2006). The eggs of this species used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex II and III. Some studies have been done on the requirements of this species. A study in the Czech Republic found that fish ponds with a fish stock density of less than 400 kg/ha, water transparency of more than 50 cm, mixed fish stocks (e.g. tench and pike or perch) rather than monospecific stocks (e.g. of carp), and systems that include ponds with fish fry (to provide areas with low fish competition and high invertebrate availability) are more successful in supporting breeding pairs of this species (Musil 2006). The cyclical removal of adult fish from an artificial waterbody (gravel pit) in the U.K. attracted nesting pairs to the area by causing an increase in invertebrate food availability and an increase in the growth of submerged aquatic macrophytes (Giles 1994). The removed fish (dead or alive) were sold to generate funds (Giles 1994).

Conservation Actions Proposed
A network of key sites needs to be preserved and low-intensity farmland practices encouraged to help preserve habitat for this species. Power lines should be moved or made more visible and appropriate predator control undertaken in breeding areas. The impact of hunting should be researched and monitored to ensure bag numbers are sustainable.


taxonomicNotes:
Spatula querquedula (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously placed in the genus Anas.

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size is very large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the species is undergoing rapid declines, and it is therefore classified as Vulnerable. Since the wider European population is also decreasing, there is not considered to be significant potential for rescue from outside the EU27 and the final category is unchanged.

range:
The species breeds through much of Europe, mostly between 42°N and 65°N, outside the breeding season it is principally found  in Africa and Asia but some bird do winter in Mediterranean Europe (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 352,000-524,000 pairs, which equates to 704,000-1,050,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 12,100-23,900 pairs, which equates to 24,100-47,800 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
In the breeding season this species frequents small, shallow ponds and lakes with abundant floating, emergent and fringing vegetation (Johnsgard 1978, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) (that is not too tall or dense, such as bulrush (Typha spp.)) (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Green 1998), in grass dominated environments, like swampy meadows, flooded fields, shallow freshwater marshes (Johnsgard 1978, Schricke 2001, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It is a highly sociable and gregarious species, and regularly forms large congregations of several hundred on passage but whilst breeding can be found in single pairs or small groups (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Madge and Burn 1988). Meadows are the favoured nesting areas of this species, with nests rarely located more than 150 m from water (usually within 20 m) (Cramp and Simmons 1977). The nest itself is a depression in the ground, typically situated under rushes or tall grasses (such as manna grass, Glyceria), but not generally under shrubs (Johnsgard 1978, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Typically eight to eleven eggs laid (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). When breeding this species is omnivorous (Johnsgard 1978). In spring and summer its diet is dominated by animal matter: chiefly molluscs, aquatic insects and their larvae (waterbugs, caddisfly, water beetles, midges), crustaceans (ostracods and phyllopods especially), worms, leeches, young and spawn of frogs, and small fish (Johnsgard 1978, Hockey et al. 2005). Seeds, roots, tubers, stems, leaves and buds of plants such as Hornwort Ceratophyllum, Naiad Najas, sedge, grass and other aquatic plants are also important at this time (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Johnsgard 1978, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). During the non-breeding season the birds are mainly vegetarian (Treca 1981). This species is highly migratory, breeding widely across western Eurasia and wintering within the northern tropics. It migrates on a broad front, the autumn migration beginning in late July and peaking in August or early September (in Europe and Egypt). The spring migration begins in February, with birds beginning to arrive on breeding grounds from mid-March to early-May (Scott and Rose 1996).

threats:
The most significant threat encountered by this species on its breeding grounds in Europe is habitat deterioration through the drainage and reclamation of wetlands (Kear 2005), the increasing climatic aridity and subsequent lowering of the water table, and the transformation of wetlands to dammed reservoirs (Scott and Rose 1996). Other threats to this species include the destruction of nests during the early mowing of meadows, increased human disturbance, lead poisoning, botulism during hot summers (Kear 2005) and hunting disturbance in Africa and Europe (Vaananen 2001) (500,000 are shot annually in Russia, Ukraine, France and Poland) (Kear 2005). The invasive species American Mink (Neovison vison) also poses a threat through nest predation (Opermanis et al. 2001), and the species is susceptible to avian influenza (particularly strain H5N1) so is therefore threatened by outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). This species is hunted in Denmark, but there is evidence that this may be sustainable (Bregnballe et al. 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Key areas of breeding habitat for this species should be identified and protected. Monitoring should be implemented and accurate bag numbers recorded in countries where the species is hunted to ensure sustainability. Predator control may be necessary in some areas.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT°)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence<20,000 km2 combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population size may be moderately small to large, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the small population size qualifies for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<1,000 mature individuals), but as population size is increasing in the EU27, the final category is adjusted down one category to Near Threatened (NT°).

range:
The species is a widespread breeder across south-east Europe. It is found mainly around the Black Sea region, south-east Russia and Transcaucasia; there are also small breeding populations in Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Moldova and Ukraine (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). It also colonized the Canary Islands (Fuerteventura) in 1994 (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 17,000-26,500 pairs, which equates to 33,900-53,100 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 140-240 496, which equates to 280-480 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species frequents the shores of inland freshwater, saline and brackish lakes and rivers in open country, particularly those in open steppe, upland plateau and mountainous regions (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Johnsgard 1978, Brown et al. 1982, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). However it is less dependent upon large water bodies for resting and feeding than most other Anatidae, and often occurs a considerable distance from water during the breeding season (Scott and Rose 1996). In the non-breeding season this species prefers streams, slow-flowing rivers, freshwater pools, flooded grasslands, marshes and brackish or saline lakes in lowland regions and is also found on artificial reservoirs (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Johnsgard, 1978, Brown et al. 1982, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). It avoids coastal waters and tall, dense vegetation or emergent and floating aquatic plants (Madge and Burn 1988). Breeding occurs in single pairs or loose groups and in Europe eggs are laid from mid-March. Clutches are normally eight or nine eggs (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). The species is omnivorous, its diet consisting of tender green shoots and the seeds of terrestrial vegetation, agricultural grains such as millet and wheat, littoral crustaceans such as shrimps, aquatic and terrestrial insects (especially Locusts), aquatic molluscs, small fish, frogs, amphibian spawn and worms (Cramp and Simmons 1977, Johnsgard, 1978, Brown et al. 1982, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). In Europe the species is chiefly sedentary or dispersive, undertaking local movements linked to the availability of suitable water (moving away from drought-affected areas or to temporary wetlands) (Tucker and Heath 1994, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
Hunting is a threat, especially in south-east Europe (Johnsgard 1978, Kear 2005, Popovkina 2006, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) (e.g. in Turkey) (Scott and Rose 1996). Other threats to western populations include the loss and degradation of inland wetlands through subterranean water extraction for irrigation (Popovkina 2006) (leading to decreasing water supplies for seasonal and semi-permanent wetlands), widespread drainage of shallow marshes and lakes (Scott and Rose 1996), salt extraction (Green et al. 2002, Popovkina 2006, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014), urban development, pollution, introduction of exotic fish and overgrazing (Green et al. 2002, Popovkina 2006, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). At the Klingnau Dam in northern Switzerland the species has been known to hybridise with the South African Shelduck (Tadorna cana) from escaped captive populations, which could pose a threat to the integrity of both species (Owen et al. 2006). The species is also susceptible to avian influenza (strain H5N1) and is therefore threatened by outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. The restoration of habitats, creation of artificial nests and feeding (Popovkina 2006) seems to have benefited this species (Zubko et al. 2001).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Conservation priorities for the species include protection from hunting in south-east Europe and further ringing studies to investigate the status of individual populations and their migratory patterns (Kear 2005, Popovkina 2006). The protection of key sites from development and habitat change should be ensured. Research to assess the impacts of hybridisation with Tadorna cana should be undertaken.


population:
The European population is estimated at 50,800-68,900 pairs, which equates to 102,000-138,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 40,800-53,900 pairs, which equates to 81,700-108,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species shows a preference for saline habitats and frequents mudflats (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) and muddy or sandy estuaries in coastal regions, and occurs inland on saline and brackish lakes in steppe or semi-desert (Madge and Burn 1988). Breeding begins in April and May in single pairs or small groups.

The nest is commonly positioned in a tree-hollow (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014) up to 8 m above the ground (Kear 2005) or in a mammal burrow (Kear 2005, Carboneras and Kirwan 2014). Rarely nests may also be placed in the open or in dense vegetation up to 1 km from water (Madge and Burn 1988, Kear 2005). The species will also nest in artificial nest boxes (Kear 2005). Its diet consists predominantly of saltwater molluscs (e.g. Hydrobia spp.) as well as other aquatic invertebrates (e.g. insects, crustaceans and worms), small fish, fish spawn and plant material. Most populations of this species are migratory (although European populations are largely sedentary) and undertake extensive moult migrations to favoured moulting sites after breeding (Carboneras and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is threatened by habitat loss as a result of tidal barrage schemes in Europe (Kear 2005, Burton 2006). It also suffers predation from American Mink (Neovison vison) on islands (Nordstrom et al. 2002) and is susceptible to avian influenza so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the virus (Melville and Shortridge 2006). Its eggs used to be (and possibly still are) harvested in Iceland (Gudmundsson 1979).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II.  There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Predator control at breeding sites would help this species locally and the construction of artificial caves may increase local breeding pair numbers (HELCOM 2013). Important areas for this species need to be protected. Environmental impact assessments for new tidal energy schemes should be undertaken.


taxonomicNotes:
Upupa epops and U. africana (Sibley and Monroe 1990, 1993) have been lumped into U. epops but U. marginata is split from this taxon following Dowsett and Forbes-Watson (1993). This treatment is under review by the BirdLife Taxonomic Working Group.

population:
The European population is estimated at 1,300,000-2,760,000 pairs, which equates to 2,600,000-5,530,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,020,000-2,070,000 pairs, which equates to 2,040,000-4,140,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species occupies open country such as pastures, parkland, orchards, sand-heathland, olive groves, and vineyards and requires the presence of features offering perches, shade, nest-sites and accessible food. It is frequently found around villages and in traditionally farmed areas. Breeding can occur up to 3,000 m in Turkey (Krištín and Kirwan 2014). In central and southern Europe, egg-laying occurs from late April or early May, although begins in January in the Canaries (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species is monogamous, solitary and a territorial breeder, although extra-pair paternity has been found in southeast Spain. It nests in natural holes in stumps, trees, walls, old buildings, cliffs, among boulders, in abandoned vehicles, drainpipes, wells, roof spaces and nest boxes and may use the same site for several seasons (Krištín and Kirwan 2014). The nest may  unlined or lined with moss, grass, leaves or pine needles (Snow and Perrins 1998) and is normally relatively close to the ground but occasionally found over 40 m. (Krištín and Kirwan 2014). Typically lays seven to eight eggs. It feeds almost entirely on animal matter, primarily large insects and their larvae and pupae (Snow and Perrins 1998). Northern populations are fully migratory while others our only partially migratory. European populations winter in northwest Africa, the Canary Isles, Israel and Arabia (Krištín and Kirwan 2014).

threats:
The species is hunted in Mediterranean region (Krištín and Kirwan 2014). Food quality and accessibility has been shown to affect reproductive success (Martin-Vivaldi et al. 1999, Fournier and Arlettaz 2001) as has the availability of suitable nesting cavities (Arlettaz et al. 2000) as a result of habitat changes after agricultural intensification (Bauer and Berthold 1997).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Research suggests that large areas of suitable breeding habitat should be maintained to allow functional and sustainable populations (Bötsch et al. 2012) therefore landscape scale management needs to be employed to maintain suitable foraging and breeding habitats for the species. Controls on hunting need to be introduced and enforced.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU°°)

In Europe this species has a small, declining population and is therefore classified as Vulnerable. Within the EU27 it is a recent colonist; the population is currently extremely small (meeting the threshold for classification as Critically Endangered) but the final category is adjusted to Vulnerable given the potential to spread and increase further.

range:
This species is found predominantly across Africa and the Middle East however its breeding range just extends into south-east Europe, where it is breeds in Turkey. It is accidental elsewhere in Europe, but is increasingly recorded in other European countries(Chantler and Boesman 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 900-2,500 pairs, which equates to 1,800-5,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at at least one pair, which equates to two mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species occurs over a wide range of habitats and latitudes, though less frequently in truly arid regions, and usually close to human habitation (Chantler and Boesman 2013). In Europe it breeds in Turkey (Snow and Perrins 1998). In Turkey nesting occurs from April to September (Kirwan et al. 2013). It typically nests on man-made structures in the angle between the roof and wall; eviction by House Sparrows (Passer domesticus) has been recorded (Chantler and Boesman 2013). Cliff sites and abandoned swallow (Hirundo) nests can be employed and forcible eviction noted (Chantler and Boesman 2013). The nest is a sturdy, untidy, yet internally neat and smooth, hemispherical 'bag' of vegetable matter, mainly grass, down and small twigs, with feathers, agglutinated with saliva; built in dense, often overlapping clusters with up to three entrances, sometimes communal (Chantler and Boesman 2013). It needs a perch to cling to while building (Chantler and Boesman 2013). It feeds on invertebrates, foraging as far as 15–20 km from the nest site on occasions (Chantler and Boesman 2013). It is migratory and only present in Turkey from March to September (Chantler and Boesman 2013).

threats:
Dam construction leading to habitat loss may lead to the decrease of populations in Turkey (Kiziroglu 2008) and large declines (50%) (BirdLife International 2004).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
There are currently no conservation measures known to be in place for this species.  

Conservation Actions Proposed
Protection of important sites including legislation to protect them from development. Research into the species's ecology and habitat needs. Assess potential threats and develop appropriate responses.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).
For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 19,100,000-32,500,000 pairs, which equates to 38,200,000-65,000,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 15,800,000-23,300,000 pairs, which equates to 32,000,000-47,500,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species inhabits a wide range of habitats from arid steppe, desert, temperate, Mediterranean and boreal zones. It breeds between March and June. In the U.K. it breeds mid-May to late July and a week earlier and later in Switzerland and Fenno-Scandia respectively. It typically lays one to four eggs. It nests mainly in buildings, but in remote parts of the range it also uses tree hollows and rock crevices. The nest cup is constructed of small pieces of vegetable matter and feathers, agglutinated with saliva. It feeds on insects and spiders. It is a long-distance migrant wintering in Africa mainly from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Tanzania south to Zimbabwe and Mozambique, it is present on the African wintering grounds from September (Chantler and Boesman 2013).

threats:
Although widespread, the species is thought to be in decline due to the loss of nest sites through building renovation, re-roofing or demolition (Mayer 2008).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed as 'amber' on both the U.K. and Irish national Red Lists (Lynas et al. 2007, Eaton et al. 2009).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The species should be considered when repairing or replacing roofs, ensuring that holes and eaves that it uses for nesting are maintained and work does not take place during the breeding season (Mayer 2008). Nest boxes or nest bricks should be incorporated into new buildings or added to existing ones (RSPB 2012).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT°)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT°)

This species is widespread across sub-Saharan Africa but extends into Europe and the EU27 only in very small numbers in Spain and Portugal. The population size within the region meets the threshold for classification as Vulnerable under the small population criterion, with an unknown population trend but no evidence of a decline. The species could therefore be listed as Vulnerable, but given the historic colonisation and spread within the region there is clearly significant potential for rescue from outside the region and the final category is downlisted by one category to Near Threatened (NT° D1) in both Europe and the EU27.

range:
This species has a predominantly resident African distribution, however a small number of migratory birds breed in southern Spain and eastern Portugal. The winter range of migratory populations is unknown (Chantler and Boesman 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 110-200 pairs, which equates to 220-400 mature individuals. The entire population is found in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species is found over a wide range of habitats including Mediterranean scrub (Chantler and Boesman 2013). It is found in rural areas, close to woodland adjacent to meadows and fields and generally uses similar habitats to Red-rumped Swallow (Hirundo daurica) (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). The species is loosely colonial or solitary. In Spain it breeds from late May. It typically uses disused Little Swift (Apus affinis) or certain swallow (Hirundo) nests, though niches in rock-faces or buildings are sometimes used. In disused nests, it uses feathers and down adhered with saliva as lining; in rock sites it makes a shallow cup of feathers and vegetable matter agglutinated with saliva. Typically lays one to three eggs (Chantler and Boesman 2013). It feeds on small flying insects (Snow and Perrins 1998). The species is migratory; the Spanish population is present from early May to August–October and some birds are recorded into early December, with autumn migration through the Straits of Gibraltar occurring mid-August to mid-October (Chantler and Boesman 2013).

threats:
The size of the European population renders it susceptible to the risks affecting small populations; however it is adjacent to a much larger non-European population (Birdlife International 2004).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
No conservation measures are currently required for this species.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 63,200-106,000 pairs, which equates to 126,000-213,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 54,400-79,900 pairs, which equates to 109,000-160,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is typically associated with coastal sites, especially islets. It is typically found around cliff-faces and gorges, though in many parts of range also in urban areas, where it commonly breeds. It forages over many habitats. In Gibraltar the first clutch is produced from mid-April, peaking late May with second clutches from late July and last fledging mid-October. It lays two to three eggs. It nests in a variety of sites such as caves, cliff faces, niches, eaves, under tiles, holes in palms, and on Gibraltar forcibly vacated fresh nests of House Martins (Delichon urbica). The round nest is made of straw and feathers agglutinated and adhered to substrate with saliva. It feeds on insects and spiders. The species is a medium-distance migrant, wintering in west and central Africa. It is present in France from early April to mid-November, Gibraltar from late February to October and the Canaries from January to September. It migrates through north-west Africa from late February to early May and August/November (Chantler et al. 2014).

threats:
There are currently no known threats to this species.

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
No conservation measures are currently required foe this species.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales, although this species may have a small range it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 7,500-20,000 pairs, which equates to 15,000-40,000 mature individuals. The entire population is found in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species uses sea cliffs and is never found very far from the sea. It occurs over all habitats in Canaries from sea-level to 2,500 m; especially common in deep coastal gulleys. On Madeira it occurs from sea-level to the highest summit, Pico Ruivo, breeding on rocky islets. It breeds between March and August and lays two eggs. It nests in a variety of natural sites, such as caves and cliffs, where suitable rock niches occur, or under tiles or in holes in man-made structures. The saucer-shaped nest is constructed largely from downy seed cases with other plant matter or man-made items less frequently incorporated, agglutinated with saliva with occasional feathers adhered to surface. It feeds on insects. Numbers are reduced in winter on the Canary Islands; migrants probably winter mainly in north-west Africa, as there are winter records from Mauritania and northern Morocco for the species there (Chantler and Boesman 2014).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. There are currently no known conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
No conservation measures are currently required for this species.


population:
The European population is estimated at 151,000-327,000 pairs, which equates to 302,000-653,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 29,200-42,500 pairs, which equates to 58,700-99,100 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species occurs over a wide range of habitats and forages over vast areas. It is found in temperate and Mediterranean zones, typically in mountains but occasionally in lowlands. It typically breeds below 1,500 m, sometimes to 2,200–2,300 m. It breeds from March to June, laying mid-late May or as late as early June in central Europe, nestlings are seen being fed in the Caucasus in early July. It typically lays three eggs. It uses ledges or holes in cliff-faces or tall man-made structures with the pairs using the same nest-site in successive years. The nest is saucer-shaped, consisting of downy feathers from many species, and swift primaries, tightly bound with dried plant matter and saliva (Chantler et al. 2014). The species is migratory, with West Palearctic populations probably wintering all across the northern tropics of Africa (Snow and Perrins 1998).

threats:
Foraging habitats are lost to human development across its range. In addition, the increasing use of pesticides reduces both the numbers and variety of insects available for it to feed on. (Perrins 2009).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Bern Convention Appendix II. There are no known current conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Key forging areas should be identified and protected from development and the use of pesticides should be reduced.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 614,000-1,100,000 calling or lekking males, which equates to 1,230,000-2,200,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 142,000-279,000 calling or lekking males, which equates to 283,000-558,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species nests on bare or sparsely vegetated ground, often on free-draining soils (Cramp 1985). It uses mainly dry, open country including lowland heaths with scattered trees and bushes, commons and moorland, forest and woodland (especially glades, clearings and edges), recently felled woodland and young forestry plantations. It also uses chalk downland, industrial waste tips, wooded or scrub-covered steppe, sparsely forested or stony hillsides, oak scrubland, dense coppices, shingle, sand dunes, semi-deserts and deserts. It breeds between late May and August. It usually lays one to two eggs. Eggs are laid directly on the ground on leaf litter, pine needles or bare soil. It feeds on flying insects. It hunts over open country in clearings, along woodland edges and borders, in woodland glades and rides, in gardens and orchards, over wetlands, in meadows and farmland, around grazing animals, and over stagnant ponds. The species is highly migratory wintering mainly in south and east Africa, although small numbers may winter in west Africa (Cleere and Christie 2013).

threats:
The main threats to this species are the reduction of insect availability due to pesticide use (Tucker and Heath 1994, Cleere and Christie 2013) and habitat loss or degradation, generally caused through the grazing of heathlands and pastoral woodlands and conversion of such habitats to agricultural land, vineyards, commercial forestry and urban areas. Disturbance from recreational use of heathlands and road deaths may also contribute to its decline (Tucker and Heath 1994). The species has numerous predators, especially of eggs and chicks, including: crows (Corvus), Magpies (Pica pica), Jays (Garrulus glandarius), owls (Strigidae), Sooty Falcon (Falco concolor), hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus), weasels (Mustela nivalis) and domestic dogs (Cleere and Christie 2013). Nitrogenous pollutants in rain may lead to eutrophication of dry-land breeding areas and unsuitable vegetation structure. Also, climate change may change the geographic range of the species in the future (Tucker and Heath 1994).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. In some areas, such as Britain, creation of habitat through commercial forestry has seen increase in numbers in recent years, though habitats are not permanent and stability of higher population levels is not guaranteed (Cleere and Christie 2013). It is a U.K. Biodiversity Action Plan species. Conservation actions targeted at the nightjar will also likely help the woodlark (Lullula arborea) (Langston et al. 2007).

Conservation Actions Proposed
The maintenance and enhancement of existing forest and heathland habitats is essential. Further work should be undertaken to restore heathlands, including those in planted forests to prevent fragmentation and increase spatial connectivity and agri-environment schemes to help provide foraging habitat should be developed. Visitor numbers to important heathland areas should be minimised to reduce disturbance and the development of urban areas near by prevented. Research should focus on the role of foraging habitat on population processes (Langston et al. 2007).


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

At both European and EU27 scales this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations).

For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within both Europe and the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 101,000-140,000 calling or lekking males, which equates to 202,000-281,000 mature individuals.The entire population is found in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species typically uses lowlands and hillsides, with scattered vegetation and bare ground, in pine woodland, coastal forest, eucalyptus or olive plantations, vineyards, open scrubland with cork oak (Quercus suber), prickly pear (Opuntia) or scattered trees, and dense thickets of broom, gorse (Ulex), bramble (Rubus fruticosus), tree heath (Erica arborea) or pistachio (Pistacea lentiscus) (Cleere et al. 2013). In south-west Spain it is attracted towards the warmth of paved roads during migration and during cool weather (temperature below 20°C) or low temperatures (below 14°C), with paved roads providing significantly warmer substrate than gravelled or sandy areas (Camacho 2013). It breeds from early May to late August in Spain and Portugal (Cleere et al. 2013). It usually lays one to two eggs (Cuadrado and Domínguez 1996). The eggs are laid directly on the ground, on leaf litter or pine needles. It feeds on flying and flightless insects. The species is migratory, wintering in west Africa although the exact range is unclear (Cleere et al. 2013).

threats:
In the Algarve region of Spain the species is declining due to habitat loss and disturbance from the tourist industry. More broadly loss of habitat due to urbanization or agriculture probably is the biggest threat. In cultivated areas, nests are often at risk from agricultural activities. The impacts of predation are poorly documented, but in southern Spain eggs and chicks may be taken by lizards (Lacerta lepida), snakes and foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Their habit of perching on tarmac in cooler weather makes them vulnerable to collision with vehicles (Cleere et al. 2013).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
There are no known current conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Research on the species's biology and ecology is needed to help inform conservation measures (Forero et al. 2001). In addition, the impacts and extent of predation should be investigated. Key sites for the species should be identified and protection from development and disturbance ensured.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

This auk began undergoing rapid declines in parts of its European breeding range during the 2000s, primarily in Iceland, which holds at least 60% of the European population, but where the population declined by 18% over the period 2005-2008. Extrapolated over a three generation length (GL 13.6 years) period (41 years), these declines are estimated to range between 20-29%, resulting in its classification as Near Threatened in Europe under Criterion A.

Within the EU27 the range size has not been quantified, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be>10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population size is very large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing within the EU27 region, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within the EU27.

range:
The species breeds on northern Atlantic coasts, in Greenland and in western Europe from north-western Russia to northern France. Eurasian birds winter at sea, with some moving south as far as the western Mediterranean (Nettleship 1996).

population:
The European population is estimated at 979,000-1,020,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 279,000-295,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species lives on rocky sea coasts, breeding on cliff ledges and under boulders. Northern populations migrate outside the breeding season, while southern ones are both migratory as far as the Mediterranean (mainly immatures) and dispersive (adults). Iceland holds over two-thirds of the European total, followed in importance by the U.K. and Norway, these three countries together supporting over 90% of the European population (Tucker and Heath 1994). 

The species is a pursuit diver that propels itself through the water with its wings. They are capable of diving to 120 m depth, but mostly forage nearer the surface. They spend most of their lives at sea, only arriving ashore to reproduce. They are known to consume Krill, Sprat (Sprattus sprattus), Sandeels (Ammondytes spp.) and Capelin amongst other prey (Nettleship 1996).

threats:
This species is threatened by the current and future impacts of climate change, including temperature extremes, sea temperature rises and shifts and reductions in prey availability (Sandvik et al. 2005). The species is vulnerable to extreme weather, with severe winter storms causing large scale mortality across north-western Europe in the past (Underwood & Stowe 1984). As a pursuit diver the species is at risk from being caught in gillnets and driftnets, with gillnet fisheries in the North and Baltic Seas known to catch significant numbers (Zydelis et al. 2009, 2013; Skov et al. 2011). As the species spends much of its life at sea, including at and below the sea surface, it is vulnerable to both chronic oil pollution and oil spill events. Offshore renewable energy, such as wind farms are also likely to pose a threat to this species, including through habitat displacement (Furness et al. 2013) and collision, although collision risk is currently considered low (Bradbury et al. 2014). Disturbance from shipping lanes and marine constructions occurs in coastal and offshore areas with high human presence, and habitat degradation at sea from mining and aggregate extraction also threatens this species. On land during its breeding season this species is exposed to invasive mammalian predators (e.g. rats, cats, mink), which could increase in severity as climate change allows their northward movement. The species is also vulnerable to disturbance from recreational and tourism activities. It is hunted in the Faroe Islands (Thorup et al. 2014).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed on the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement. There are 91 Important Bird Areas across the region for this species. Within the EU there are 91 Special Protected Areas for this species, recognised as a regularly occurring migratory species. The species is considered in the Nordic Action Plan for seabirds in Western-Nordic areas.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Further identification of important sites for this species, particularly in offshore regions and designation as marine protected areas; Identify the risks of different activities on seabirds, and locations sensitive to seabirds. Continue eradication of invasive predators from breeding colonies. Management of fisheries to ensure long term sustainability of key stocks (e.g. sand eels). Establish observer schemes for bycatch and prepare National/European Community plans of action on seabird bycatch. Develop codes-of-conduct for more organised activities (e.g. tourism). Ensure that appropriate protection (national laws and international agreements) applies to new areas and times in case of changes in seabird migration routes and times.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Evaluated (NE)

The range size has not been quantified, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

The species is Not Evaluated (NE) for the EU27 region as winter (non-breeding season) data were not available.

population:
The European population is estimated at 9,200,000-82,000,000 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is migratory, expanding its range in winter to include the North Atlantic Ocean as far south as the U.K. This species feeds mainly on small invertebrates such as amphipods and euphausiids and on fish larvae. The precise timing of its spring arrival at breeding colonies is variable from late February to early May. Immense colonies are formed on sea coasts in the high Arctic, usually nesting in crevices in rock scree of maritime slopes and on coastal cliffs. Colonies are abandoned in August with individuals seeking waters in the low Arctic and boreal zones, rarely further south, often associated with the edge of packice (Nettleship et al. 2015).

threats:
This species is threatened by the current and future impacts of climate change, including temperature extremes, sea temperature rises and shifts and reductions in prey availability (Stempniewicz et al. 2007, Hovin et al. 2014). As a pursuit diver the species is at risk from being caught in gillnets and driftnets (Zydelis et al. 2013), with the lumpsucker fisheries in Greenland estimated to catch significant numbers (Merkel et al. 2011). As the species spends much of its life at sea, including at and below the sea surface, it is vulnerable to both chronic oil pollution and oil spill events. Recent tracking research has indicated that important foraging grounds for the species overlap with expanding oil and gas extraction activities and shipping, which could lead to habitat degradation and displacement (Fort et al. 2013). On land during its breeding season this species is exposed to predation from invasive alien predators, which could increase in severity as climate change allows the northward movement of predators.

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed under the African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement. It is one of the species considered within the Action Plan for Seabirds in Western-Nordic Areas (Nordiska Ministerrådet 2010). There are 18 marine Important Bird Areas across the European region for this species. Within the EU there are three Special Protection Areas which include this species. 

Conservation Actions Proposed
Further identification of important sites for this species, particularly in offshore regions and designation as marine protected areas; Identify the risks of different activities on seabirds, and locations sensitive to seabirds. Management of fisheries to ensure long term sustainability of key stocks. Establish observer schemes for bycatch& prepare National plans of action on seabird bycatch. Develop codes-of-conduct for more organised activities (e.g. tourism). Ensure that appropriate protection (national laws and international agreements) applies to new areas and times in case of changes in seabird migration routes and times.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)

In Europe the range size has not been quantified, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be>10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population size is very large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

In the EU27 the species is undergoing rapid declines, and it is therefore classified as Vulnerable (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde). Since the wider European population is also decreasing, there is not considered to be significant potential for rescue from outside the EU27 and the final category is unchanged.

range:
The species can be found throughout Arctic waters on the northern coasts of Russia and Norway, in the Atlantic Ocean off Greenland (to Denmark), and as far south as the United Kingdom including the North and Baltic Sea (Nettleship and de Juana 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 304,000-742,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 73,200-86,900 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species breeds along cliffs and rocky shores. The species is exclusively marine and is a pursuit diver that propels itself through the water using its wings. The species is probably primarily a benthic forager, since much of the prey consists of benthic fish and invertebrates, including crustaceans (Bradstreet and Brown 1985, Cairns 1987a). Various studies find sandeels (Ammodytes spp.) (Harris and Riddiford 1989, Ewins 1990) and blennies (particularly butterfish Pholis gunnellus) (Harris and Riddiford 1989, Ewins 1990) to be the most important prey species of fish, although the relative contributions of each of these to the overall diet differs. Flatfish (Harris and Riddiford 1989) and gadoids (Ewins 1990) are also sometimes important. Adults tend to consume a higher proportion of invertebrates than the chicks do (Ewins 1990). The few data on winter food suggest that invertebrates are of greater importance during the winter than during the summer (Ewins 1990).

threats:
This species is likely to be susceptible to the impacts of climate change, such as sea temperature rise and shifts in prey distribution and abundance. The species is vulnerable to oil spills and other marine pollution (HELCOM 2013, Nettleship et al 2014). At the breeding colonies the species is vulnerable to invasive predators, such as rats, cats, and American Mink (Neovison vison) (HELCOM 2013). The species is susceptible to being caught in gillnets (Fangel et al. 2011, Zydelis et al. 2013), although other fishing gears may also catch significant numbers. Increasing numbers of offshore wind farms may result in displacement from habitat, and a low risk of collision (Bradbury et al. 2014). It is hunted for consumption in parts of Scandinavia (Mendel et al. 2008).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed within the African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement. There are 91 marine Important Bird Areas which include this species. Within the EU the species is listed within 29 Special Protection Areas. It is listed as Near Threatened by the HELCOM Convention. 

Conservation Actions Proposed
Further identification of important sites for this species, particularly in offshore regions and designation as marine protected areas; Identify the risks of different activities on seabirds, and locations sensitive to seabirds. Continue eradication of invasive predators from breeding colonies. Management of fisheries to ensure long term sustainability of key stocks (e.g. sandeels). Establish observer schemes for bycatch and prepare National/European Community plans of action on seabird bycatch. Develop codes-of-conduct for more organised activities (e.g. tourism). Ensure that appropriate protection (national laws and international agreements) applies to new areas and times in cases of changes in seabird migration routes and times.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Endangered (EN)
EU27 regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)

This species began undergoing rapid declines across the majority of its European breeding range during the 2000s. Extrapolated over a three generation length period (65 years), allowing for considerable uncertainty given the long trend period (and even assuming current rates of decline do not continue), the species warrants classification as Endangered (A4abcde) in Europe, and Near Threatened in the EU27 (where declines have apparently been less rapid, although uncertainty remains over the post-2000 trend in the key range state, the UK).

range:
The species can be found throughout the North Atlantic Ocean. In Europe it occurs in north-west Greenland (to Denmark), and from north Norway down to the Canary Islands, Spain in the east (Nettleship et al. 2014).

population:
The European population is estimated at 4,770,000-5,780,000 pairs, which equates to 9,550,000-11,600,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 601,000 pairs, which equates to 1,200,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The breeding range is restricted to colder parts of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans, with its southernmost colonies in Brittany (France).  Breeding colonies are located in Iceland, Norway, Faroe Islands, the U.K., Ireland and France on islands or high cliffs.

The species nests on grassy maritime slopes, sea cliffs and rocky slopes (Nettleship et al. 2014). During the winter the species is highly pelagic and is dispersed widely across the sea from the Azores to the western Mediterranean and Canary Islands. When feeding chicks, birds generally forage within 10 km of their colony, but may range as far as 50 to 100 km or more (Harris 1984, Rodway and Montevecchi 1996). Birds of this species are pursuit-divers that catch most of their prey within 30 m of the water surface (Piatt& Nettleship 1985). They prey on 'forage' species, including juvenile pelagic fishes, such as herring (Clupea harengus), juvenile and adult capelin (Mallotus villosus), and sand eel (Ammodytes spp.) (Barrett et al. 1987). At times, they also prey on juvenile demersal fishes, such as gadids (Harris and Hislop 1978, Martin 1989, Rodway and Montevecchi 1996). Sand eels usually form the majority of the prey fed to chicks (Corkhill 1973, Hislop and Harris 1985, Harris and Wanless 1986, Harris and Riddiford 1989, Martin 1989), and many chicks starve during periods of low sand eel abundance (Martin 1989).

threats:
This species is highly susceptible to the impacts of climate change, such as sea temperature rise and shifts in prey distribution and abundance (Durant et al. 2003, Sandvik et al. 2005). This is a particularly important threat when prey species are exploited unsustainably, leading to prey reductions and subsequent unsuccessful breeding. The species is vulnerable to oil spills and other marine pollution. The species is also vulnerable to extreme weather events and storms, with large wrecks recorded following severe winter storms at sea. At the breeding colonies the species is vulnerable to invasive predators, such as rats, cats, and American Mink (Neovison vison). The species is susceptible to being caught in gillnets, although other fishing gears may also catch significant numbers. Increasing numbers of offshore wind farms may result in displacement from habitat, although the risk of collision is considered very low (Bradbury et al. 2014). The species is hunted for human consumption in Iceland, and in the Faroe Islands (Thorup et al. 2014).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed under the African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement. The species is included in the Action plan for seabirds in Western-Nordic areas (2010). There are 76 marine Important Bird Areas identified across the European region. Within the EU there are 40 Special Protection Areas which list this species as occurring within its boundaries.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Further identification of important sites for this species, particularly in offshore regions and designation as marine protected areas; Identify the risks of different activities on seabirds, and locations sensitive to seabirds. Continue eradication of invasive predators from breeding colonies. Management of fisheries to ensure long term sustainability of key stocks (e.g. sand eels). Establish observer schemes for bycatch and prepare National/European Community plans of action on seabird bycatch. Continue AMAP monitoring of seabird contaminants; include new contaminants and secure communication between seabird and contaminants research. Increase the level of understanding among the public of introducing hunting restrictions. Develop codes-of-conduct for more organised activities (e.g. tourism). Ensure that appropriate protection (national laws and international agreements) applies to new areas and times in cases of changes in seabird migration routes and times.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Extinct (EX)
EU27 regional assessment: Extinct (EX)

This species was formerly distributed across the north Atlantic, but is now globally Extinct as a result of hunting pressure. The last live bird was seen in 1852.

range:
The species occurred in naturally scattered colonies (Bengtson 1984) across the North Atlantic until the 19thcentury, breeding in Greenland (to Denmark), the Faeroe Islands (to Denmark) and Iceland, across to Ireland and the UK, with archeological records from the western coast of Europe from European Russia south to France (Bourne 1993). The last known pair were killed on Eldey Island, Iceland, in 1844, and the last live bird was seen off the Newfoundland Banks in 1852 (Halliday 1979).

population:
The European and EU27 population is estimated to be extinct.

habitat:
Historically, birds bred only on remote, rocky islands, probably due to early extirpation in more accessible sites (Lyngs 1994). Birds were flightless (Livezey 1988). Immatures probably fed on plankton (Hobson and Montevecchi 1991) while adults dived for fish (Olson et al. 1979).

threats:
Details of how it was driven to extinction by hunting for its feathers, meat, fat and oil are well known (Grieve 1885). As birds became scarcer, specimen collecting became the proximate cause of their extinction (Birkhead 1994).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
None

Conservation Actions Proposed
No conservation measures needed


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Near Threatened (NT)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

This auk began undergoing rapid declines in its European breeding range during the 2000s. Extrapolated over a three generation period (45 years) these declines result in its classification as Near Threatened in Europe.

Within the EU27 the range size has not been quantified, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be>10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend appears to be increasing, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern within the EU27.

range:
The species is the most widespread of all the auks and has a circumpolar distribution, occurring in the low-arctic and boreal waters of the north Atlantic. In Europe its southern limit reaches the Berlengas Islands (Portugal) (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997) and in the north its range is determined by the ice conditions. A small breeding population is present in Greenland (Nettleship et al. 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 2,350,000-3,060,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 1,590,000-1,600,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species is exclusively marine, occurring along sea coasts on rocky cliffs and offshore islands. It breeds mainly on steep sea cliffs and low, flat islands. During the winter it is mostly found offshore, along the edge of continental shelf and shallow banks, marine coasts and bays, usually in boreal waters but some birds occur in the cool subtropical zone. The time of breeding is variable and is largely determined by water temperature and ice. Generally egg-laying takes place mid-May to early June and fledging mostly by late July to mid-August. It lays on a broad or narrow cliff ledge and on low, flat islands; occasionally also in crevices, under boulders and in caves. It does not build a nest and lays a single egg on bare rock. It is a pursuit-diving marine bird which forages primarily during daylight (Wanless et al. 1988). During the breeding season, schooling pelagic fish species are the most important prey for adults, though benthic species can also be important. In Labrador, Canada, Shannies (Sicheaidae) were the main source of food, comprising 84% of the diet in 1996 and 52.9% in 1997 (Bryant and Jones 1999). Capelin (Mallotus villosus) were also important, forming 44.7% of the diet in 1997 (Bryant and Jones 1999). In the U.K., the main prey taxa are sandeel (Ammodytes spp.) and clupeids. Small gadoids are also important at some colonies. The species winters mostly within its breeding range with some birds remaining relatively sedentary (Nettleship et al. 2013).

threats:
This species is highly vulnerable to human disturbance as it is found in high concentrations outside the breeding season. Throughout the 19th and early 20thcenturies, egg collection and shooting at colonies, as well as introduced alien predators caused severe declines in the world population and unregulated hunting in Greenland is still a major threat.  As human populations increased and expanded the species was extirpated in many regions, particularly in the south of its range.

Other important threats are overfishing of important forage species (e.g. capelin, herring, cod and sandeels) in the North Atlantic (Barents Sea, Iceland), uncontrolled gill-net fisheries in the north-east Atlantic and oil pollution and offshore petroleum developments in areas such as the Barents and North Seas and Greenland (Nettleship et al. 2013). The species is susceptible to avian cholera (Österblom et al. 2004) so is threatened by future outbreaks of this disease. Wind farm development has a negative impact on this species as well (Vanermen et al. 2014). The species is also likely threatened by future climate change (Sandvik 2005, Frederiksen et al. 2013).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
Uria aalge ibericus is found on Annex I of the EU Birds Directive. With the implementation of bird protection laws, a slow recovery occurred over much of the Atlantic breeding range up to early 1970s except in north Norway and probably Iceland (Nettleship et al. 2013).

Conservation Actions Proposed
At major colonies, detailed monitoring is needed, particularly in Iceland, where the status of the largest Atlantic population is poorly known (Nettleship et al. 2013). The impact of bycatch in fish nets can be reduced in several ways: Protecting areas on a seasonal and/or diurnal scale; concentrating salmon fisheries when salmon densities are high to improve fishing efficiency and catch to bycatch ratios; changing to an alternative fishing technique may reduce seabird mortality; and gear modification (Österblom et al 2002).


population:
The European population is estimated at 1,920,000-2,840,000 mature individuals. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species is exclusively marine, occurring offshore and along sea coasts. It breeds on coastal cliffs and islands, and is almost completely restricted to high and low Arctic zones with open water and adequate summer food supply (Nettleship and Christie 2013). It avoids extensive permanent pack-ice, breeding only in areas where vigorous vertical circulation creates open water supporting rich planktonic biomass near cliffed coasts (Snow and Perrins 1998). It winters mostly offshore to the edge of the continental shelf, and along sea coasts and in bays where concentrations of fish and invertebrates occur. At sea it is found in flocks which are often large, likely related to the non-random distribution of winter prey. Colony locations are usually associated with dynamic water systems, for example fronts, upwellings and converging currents where primary and secondary productivity is high. Arrival at breeding colonies and start of laying are variable and usually related to sea temperatures; towards the southern limit of low Arctic water and in northern boreal waters laying takes place late May to early June, in more northerly locations laying later in June or July. The species is highly colonial, usually in immense aggregations and at high densities on steep sea cliffs. The single egg is laid directly onto bare rock on narrow cliff ledges. It feeds on fish, squid and crustaceans throughout the year, supplemented by polychaetes and molluscs (Nettleship and Christie 2013). In low-Arctic Greenland and in the European sector of the polar basin, part of the population is present year round though some birds, notably immatures, move away in autumn (Snow and Perrins 1998). Birds from west Greenland move south to east Newfoundland (shelf and Grand Banks) and Nova Scotia. Birds from the European Arctic move south-west towards west Greenland, including Spitsbergen birds that reach both south-west Greenland and Newfoundland waters (Nettleship and Christie 2013).

threats:
The species suffers from incidental kills in fishing nets, competition with commercial fisheries, notably in Barents Sea, Iceland and oil pollution and offshore oil developments in many areas (e.g,. Barents Sea, North Sea) (Nettleship and Christie 2013). It is also likely to be affected by climate change (Gaston et al. 2005).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
There are no known current conservation measures for this species.

Conservation Actions Proposed
There are a number of immediate conservation requirements for this species. Enhanced monitoring of major colonies is needed, particularly in Iceland, Spitsbergen and the Russian Arctic, where population size and status are inadequately known. Detailed assessment of impacts of overfishing by commercial fisheries is required, particularly of capelin, cod, herring and sand eels in the Barents Sea and Iceland. Continue and expand assessments of by-catch in gill-net fisheries, particularly in the NE Atlantic. Tighter legislation and penalties (national and international) associated with oil pollution from offshore developments and transport, as well as expansion and refinement of monitoring schemes to assess bird mortality should be developed. The eradication of alien predators, especially foxes at Russian colonies should be undertaken (Nettleship and Christie 2013).


taxonomicNotes:
Burhinus oedicnemus and B. indicus (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) was previously lumped as B. oedicnemus following Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

population:
The European population is estimated at 53,400-88,200 pairs, which equates to 107,000-176,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 47,600-77,600 pairs, which equates to 95,300-155,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The species inhabits lowland heath, semi-natural dry grassland, infertile agricultural grassland, steppe on poor soil, desert and extensive sand-dunes (Tucker and Heath 1994). It breeds on open, bare ground or areas with little vegetation (Batten et al. 1990), and has adapted to arable land but only where crops are short or have an open structure during the breeding season, such as maize, carrots, sugar beet and sunflowers (Green 1988); intensively grown cereals are normally too tall and dense in spring to be used (Tucker and Heath 1994). Communal daytime roosts in autumn and winter in Spain occupy traditional sites which have some cover (e.g. shrubland, gravel pits, vineyards) and include both local birds and winter visitors (Barros 1995). It breeds in spring in most of its range (Hume and Kirwan 2013), with egg-laying from early April to June or early July (Snow and Perrins 1998). Breeding occurs between February and June in the Canary Islands and from April in U.K.. The nest is a scrape on the ground, lined with a little grass or unlined, but often with a ring of stones or shells and pieces of vegetation around rim. It usually lays two eggs (Hume and Kirwan 2013). Northern and eastern European populations migrate in autumn to southern Europe, the Middle East and Africa (Snow and Perrins 1998, Hume and Kirwan 2013). Populations in Iberia are resident whilst the Canary Islands population remain within the island group, but sometimes move from island to island (Hume and Kirwan 2013).

threats:
Pressures from habitat loss and disturbance have affected this species, particularly those associated with forestry, agricultural intensification, decline in sheep rearing in places, and human recreational pressure on coasts. Many birds are shot and trapped on migration in Mediterranean region but numbers and effects on populations uncertain; collisions with overhead wires and fences, and predation by foxes also cause numerous losses (Hume and Kirwan 2013).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. EU Birds Directive Annex I. Bern Convention Appendix II. In the U.K. this is a Biodiversity Action Plan species and is the subject of a Species Recovery Programme carried out by English Nature and the RSPB, under which nests on arable farmland have been located and protected with the help of farmers and landowners. Agri-environment schemes such as the Countryside Stewardship Scheme are creating nesting areas for the species. Most important sites for the species are protected as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), National Nature Reserves (NNRs) or Ministry of Defence training areas (Batten et al. 1990).

Conservation Actions Proposed
Careful management of important sites, including grazing by sheep or rabbits is needed. Continuation and expansion of agri-environment schemes and management would benefit this species (Batten et al. 1990). Conservation in Europe largely depends on future modifications of land-use policies and also on mutual understanding with farmers (Hume and Kirwan 2013). International legislation on hunting should be enforced. Make overhead wires and fences more visible. The impacts of predation and hunting should be assessed and suitable responses developed.


taxonomicNotes:
Charadrius alexandrinus, C. dealbatus and C. nivosus (del Hoyo and Collar 2014) were previously lumped as C. alexandrinus following Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 21,500-34,800 pairs, which equates to 43,100-69,600 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 10,200-16,700 pairs, which equates to 20,300-33,400 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
Although some populations of this species are sedentary or only disperse short distances (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), most inland and northern coastal populations (Hayman et al. 1986) are fully migratory and have distinct separate breeding and wintering ranges (Wiersma and Boesman 2013). The species occupies its breeding grounds chiefly from March to October (Hayman et al. 1986); dispersing from late-June immediately after the young fledge, with the southward migration peaking in September (Wiersma and Boesman 2013). During all seasons the species is predominantly coastal (Johnsgard 1981, Hayman et al. 1986, Wiersma and Boesman 2013) and is usually found on sand, silt or dry mud surfaces (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), generally avoiding very exposed oceanic coastlines (Snow and Perrins 1998) and rocky or broken ground (Wiersma and Boesman 2013). It also shows a preference for sparsely vegetated and sandy areas when breeding (Johnsgard 1981). Typical habitats include sandy, pebbly or muddy shores (Johnsgard 1981, Hayman et al. 1986, Grimmett et al. 1998), dunes (Johnsgard 1981), coastal lagoons (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), estuaries and tidal mudflats (Urban et al. 1986). It is uncommon on freshwater, even when migrating (Hayman et al. 1986), but frequently occurs on inland habitats not far from the coast such as seasonal watercourses (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), open flats near brackish or saline lakes (Hayman et al. 1986, Wiersma and Boesman 2013), salt-pans (Grimmett et al. 1998, Wiersma and Boesman 2013), salty steppes with scattered grasses (Johnsgard 1981), sandy deserts (Johnsgard 1981), pebbly or muddy plains (Johnsgard 1981), gravel pits (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), and less frequently sandy riverbanks (Johnsgard 1981, Urban et al. 1986, Grimmett et al. 1998), sandy pond margins (Grimmett et al. 1998) and barren reservoir shores (Johnsgard 1981, Wiersma and Boesman 2013). Its diet consists mainly of insects and their larvae (Johnsgard 1981, Wiersma and Boesman 2013), gammarids (Johnsgard 1981), crabs (Urban et al. 1986), other crustaceans (Wiersma and Boesman 2013) and brine shrimps, bivalve and univalve molluscs, polychaete worms (Johnsgard 1981), spiders (Wiersma and Boesman 2013) and small pieces of seaweed (Urban et al. 1986).

The nest is a shallow scrape (Wiersma and Boesman 2013) positioned near water on bare earth or in sparse vegetation (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), often on slightly raised ground and partly sheltered by plants (Snow and Perrins 1998) or near conspicuous objects such as grass clumps or shrubs (Johnsgard 1981). The species nests in semicolonial groups, with nests spaced between two and five metres (Snow and Perrins 1998).

threats:
The species is threatened by the disturbance of coastal habitats (e.g. tourists trampling nests and disturbing roosts on beaches) (Lafferty et al. 2006). It is also threatened by the degradation and loss of wetland habitat through environmental pollution (Barter 2006, Kelin and Qiang 2006), land reclamation (Barter 2006, Wiersma and Boesman 2013), declining river flows (Barter 2006, Kelin and Qiang 2006) (from water abstraction), unsustainable harvesting of benthic fauna (Barter 2006, Kelin and Qiang 2006), urbanisation (Wiersma and Boesman 2013) and a reduction in the amount of sediment being carried into coastal areas by rivers (Barter 2006). The species is susceptible to avian botulism, so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the disease (Blaker 1967).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed on Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and Annex II of the Bern Convention.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Recreation at breeding sites needs to be controlled. Pollution of wetland habitats, land reclamation, infrastructure development and human disturbance at breeding sites needs to be stopped. Abandonment of salt pans should be reversed.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Regionally Extinct (RE)
EU27 regional assessment: Not Applicable (NA)

This species formerly bred in European Russia, where it numbered 100-500 pairs but apparently declined to extinction sometime after 1980, with only occasional records during the 1990s and 2000s (none of breeding birds). It is therefore classified as Regionally Extinct in Europe.

Not Applicable (NA) for the EU27 region.

range:
The species has a predominantly central Asian breeding distribution, which just extends into Europe in southern Russia (Wiersma and Boesman 2013). It is found between the Volga and Ural Rivers, in the Caspian lowlands and the Manych River Valley (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997).

population:
The European population is considered to be extinct. The species does not occur in the EU27. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species breeds in desert and desert steppe near water amongst sparse shrub vegetation (Wiersma and Boesman 2013) up to about 800 m (Snow and Perrins 1998). It is primarily associated with saline habitats such as saltpans, saline soils subject to seasonal flooding (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), inland saltmarshes (Johnsgard 1981) and alkali flats (Flint et al. 1984). The species concentrates in flocks after breeding ready for migration on the banks of lakes, rivers, water-holes trampled by cattle (Wiersma and Boesman 2013) and cultivated land (Hayman et al. 1986). During migration the species has been recorded on damp sandbanks and pebble beds (Hockey et al. 2005). The birds arrive on their breeding grounds from late-March to early-May and egg-laying begins in April. The nest of this species is a shallow scrape, sparsely lined with vegetation and debris, on open ground or amongst low vegetation. Clutch size is three eggs (Wiersma and Boesman 2013). The species is primarily carnivorous throughout both the breeding and non-breeding seasons. Whilst breeding the species takes mainly adult and larval insects (Johnsgard 1981, Wiersma and Boesman 2013), although it will occasionally take plant material. During the non-breeding season beetles, termites, grasshoppers and small snails are the main contributors to this species's diet, and it is often observed hunting for insects in town refuse heaps and cattle dung. This species is fully migratory. It winters in Africa between August and October (Wiersma and Boesman 2013).

threats:
The main threat to this species is the destruction of natural steppe and grassland though overgrazing and conversion to intensive agricultural practices, especially within the European (breeding) part of its range (Wiersma and Boesman 2013). The European population is on the edge of its world range, conditions may well be suboptimal for the species within the region, making it particularly vulnerable to habitat change (Tucker and Heath 1994).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. There are currently no conservation actions known to be in place for this species.  

Conservation Actions Proposed
The maintenance of large areas of suitable habitat and establishing areas of desert steppe reserves would ensure population viability. In addition there is a need to moderate agricultural intensification and avoid overgrazing within areas of breeding birds. Research should be conducted into population ecology, distribution and the habitat and feeding requirements of the species (Tucker and Heath 1994).


population:
The European population is estimated at 134,000-262,000 pairs, which equates to 269,000-524,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 74,500-108,000 pairs, which equates to 149,000-217,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
This species is fully migratory in much of its range. The European population migrates across the Sahara Desert between late-July and early September (leaving breeding grounds June to mid-July) to reach wintering grounds in tropical Africa from late-August onwards. These populations return to their breeding grounds from mid-March, where they breed April-June (Europe) (Wiersma et al. 2013). This species is mainly solitary throughout the non-breeding season and on migration, occasionally occurring in flocks of not more than 10 individuals (Cramp and Simmons 1983, Hayman et al. 1986, Wiersma et al. 2013). It also breeds singly or in loose neighbourhood groups spaced 7–200 m apart (Wiersma et al. 2013). During the breeding season this species shows a preference for bare or sparsely vegetated sandy and pebbly shores of shallow standing freshwater pools, lakes or slow-flowing rivers (Johnsgard, 1981, Cramp and Simmons 1983, Grimmett et al. 1998, Wiersma et al. 2013), including river islands, dry, stony riverbeds, sand and shingle or silt flats (Johnsgard 1981, Wiersma et al. 2013). This species may also utilise temporary artificial habitats such as gravel pits (Ratcliffe 1974, Cramp and Simmons 1983, Wiersma et al. 2013), sewage works, industrial wastelands (Cramp and Simmons 1983, Wiersma et al. 2013) and refuse tips (Cramp and Simmons 1983, Hayman et al. 1986), and may use open arable land on clay soil in exceptional circumstances (Johnsgard, 1981). The species prefers lowland habitats and is rarely found above 800 m in Europe (Cramp and Simmons 1983, Wiersma et al. 2013). The species is carnivorous, its diet consisting mainly of insects such as beetles, flies (especially larvae and pupae), ants, bugs, mayfly and dragonfly larvae, caddisflies, crickets and larval Lepidoptera, as well as spiders, freshwater shrimps and other small crustaceans, mussels, worms and snails (Johnsgard, 1981, Cramp and Simmons 1983, Urban et al. 1986, Wiersma et al. 2013). Vegetation (such as the seeds of grasses, sedges, Polygonum and Compositae) is taken rarely and is likely to be ingested incidentally along with animal matter (Cramp and Simmons 1983). The nest is a shallow scrape on loose sand, dry mud or on flat, bare rocks surrounded by mud or sand (Johnsgard, 1981, Urban et al. 1986), sometimes amongst sparse vegetation (Grimmett et al. 1998, Wiersma et al. 2013) in the vicinity of water, and often on small islands (Wiersma et al. 2013) or adjacent farmland (Hayman et al. 1986). Nesting pairs have also been recorded on flat gravelled roofs (Cramp and Simmons 1983).

threats:
This species is threatened primarily by the degradation and loss of its preferred habitats (Barter 2002, Wiersma et al. 2013). Many of the species's breeding sites are also disturbed by human recreational activities (Wiersma et al. 2013). Increased flood regulation and pollution from oil and tar along the Mediterranean coast has resulted in the degradation of the breeding sites in those areas (Wiersma et al. 2013). The species may also be susceptible to outbreaks of avian botulism (Hubalek et al. 2005).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed on Annex II of the Bern Convention.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Recreation at breeding sites needs to be controlled.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)
EU27 regional assessment: Least Concern (LC)

In Europe this species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in Europe.

Within the EU27 this species has a very large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence 10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (30% decline over ten years or three generations). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern in the EU27.

population:
The European population is estimated at 140,000-213,000 pairs, which equates to 280,000-426,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 24,600-37,400 pairs, which equates to 49,300-74,800 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
The majority of this species is fully migratory (Hockey et al. 2005, Wiersma and Boesman 2013) and travels either on a broad or narrow front depending on the location of each population's breeding and wintering grounds. The species starts to breed from April until June, nesting in solitary pairs or loose semi-colonial groups (especially in undisturbed areas) (Wiersma and Boesman 2013). It is a gregarious species (Hayman et al. 1986) and often roosts communally in flocks of several hundred close to its feeding areas (Hayman et al. 1986, Wiersma and Boesman 2013), occurring singly, in small (up to 50 individuals) or large flocks (up to 1,200–1,500 individuals) during the non-breeding season (Urban et al. 1986). The species breeds primarily on sand or shingle beaches either along the Arctic coast (Hayman et al. 1986, Snow and Perrins 1998, Wiersma and Boesman 2013) or around coastal tundra pools or lakes (Johnsgard 1981). In the south of its range it may also breed inland on the Arctic tundra (Hayman et al. 1986, Wiersma and Boesman 2013) on muddy plains with stones or pebbles (Johnsgard 1981), on shores and sandbars of inland rivers, lakes, gravel pits or reservoirs (Hayman et al. 1986, Wiersma and Boesman 2013, Snow and Perrins 1998), or on short grassland, farmland (Snow and Perrins 1998, Wiersma and Boesman 2013) and other well-drained sites (Snow and Perrins 1998). Outside of the breeding season the species inhabits muddy, sandy or pebbly coasts in the tropics and subtropics (Johnsgard 1981) including estuaries (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), tidal mudflats and sandflats. It also frequents mudbanks or sandbanks along rivers and lakes (Urban et al. 1986), lagoons, saltmarshes, short grassland, farmland, flooded fields, gravel pits, reservoirs (Wiersma and Boesman 2013), sewage works and saltpans during this season (Hockey et al. 2005). Its diet consists of small crustaceans, molluscs, polychaete worms, isopods, amphipods, insects (e.g., ants, beetles, flies and fly larvae) and millipedes. The nest is a shallow scrape (Wiersma and Boesman 2013) positioned near the high-water mark on shingle or sandy beaches (Johnsgard 1981, Hayman et al. 1986). The species is a solitary nester although it may breed at quite high densities in undisturbed areas, neighbouring nests spaced between 5 and 100 m apart (Wiersma and Boesman 2013).

threats:
Important migratory stop-over habitats for this species on the Baltic Sea coastline are threatened by petroleum pollution, wetland drainage for irrigation, land abandonment and changing land management practices leading to scrub overgrowth (Grishanov et al. 2006). The species is also susceptible to avian botulism (so may be threatened by future outbreaks of the disease) (Blaker 1967), and suffers predation from feral American Mink (Neovison vison) in some regions (Nordstrom et al. 2003).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed on Annex II of the Bern Convention.

Conservation Actions Proposed
Removing feral American Mink (Neovison vison) from a large archipelago with many small islands in the Baltic Sea resulted in an increase in the breeding density of this species in the area (Nordstrom et al. 2003). Pollution of wetland habitats, wetland drainage for irrigation, land abandonment and changing land management practices at breeding sites needs to be stopped.


redListCategoryRationale:
European regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)
EU27 regional assessment: Critically Endangered (CR)

This species has a small, declining population in easternmost Europe, and it is therefore classified as Vulnerable (C1).

It occurs in the EU27 only in winter where the small, increasing population meets the threshold for Critically Endangered (D). Since the population trend of the breeding population in Turkey is decreasing over the long term, there is not considered to be significant potential for rescue from outside the EU27 region and the final category is unchanged.

range:
The species has a predominantly Asian distribution, although it also occurs as a summer visitor to parts of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan and southern Russia. It is also known to winter in south-east Mediterranean (Wiersma et al. 2013).

population:
The European population is estimated at 600-1,000 pairs, which equates to 1,200-2,000 mature individuals. The species occurs in the EU27 only in winter and the minimum population is estimated at 25-60 individuals, which equates to 17-40 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see attached PDF.

habitat:
During the breeding season this species is predominantly found in open, dry, treeless, uncultivated areas up to 1,000 m (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997, Wiersma and Bonan 2013), including dried mud, silt and clay flats, hard salt-pans overgrown with halophytic plants (Johnsgard 1981, Snow and Perrins 1998), and rocky plains near mountains in desert or semi-desert (Johnsgard 1981, Flint et al. 1984, Wiersma and Bonan 2013). In Turkey the species frequents heavily grazed saline steppe. The species usually breeds near water (Wiersma and Bonan 2013). During the non-breeding season this species shows a preference for littoral habitats (Urban et al. 1986) with mixed sand and mud substrata (Hockey et al. 2005). It is generally found on sheltered sandy, shelly or muddy beaches, large intertidal mudflats, sandbanks, salt-marshes, estuaries, rocky islands (Wiersma and Bonan 2013), tidal lagoons (Hockey et al. 2005) and dunes near the coast (Urban et al. 1986). Whilst on migration the species will occasionally utilise inland habitats such as salt-lakes and brackish swamps, usually roosting on sandbanks and spits (Hayman et al. 1986, Wiersma and Bonan 2013). In Turkey, egg-laying occurs from late April to late May and in Armenia unfledged chicks have been recorded in late June. It is a solitary breeder. The nest is a shallow scrape in the ground, variably lined with plant fragments and situated in the open or among low vegetation. Clutch size is usually three eggs (Wiersma and Bonan 2013). This species is carnivorous: during the breeding season its diet consists mainly of terrestrial insects and their larvae (especially beetles, termites, midges and ants), and occasionally lizards. In the non-breeding season its diet contains mainly marine invertebrates such as molluscs (snails), worms and crustaceans (Johnsgard 1981). This species is fully migratory, wintering on the shores of Australasia and the Indian Ocean, but relation between breeding and non-breeding quarters poorly known. It is probable it migrates without stopping on a broad front between breeding and non-breeding areas (Wiersma and Bonan 2013).

threats:
In some parts of its breeding range this species is threatened by the destruction of wetlands and bordering fallow steppe through drainage and water extraction for irrigation (Turkey) (Snow and Perrins 1998, Wiersma and Bonan 2013). Favoured migration staging posts, such as the Çukurova delta in southern Turkey are under increasing pressure from hunting, tourism and industrial activities and are often polluted along the coast with oil (Tucker and Heath 1994).

conservationAction:
Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. There are currently no conservation actions known to be in place for this species.  

Conservation Actions Proposed
Preserve large areas of steppe habitat bordering wetlands to maintain breeding populations as well as maintaining low-intensity sheep farming at some sites to preserve the optimum vegetation structure. Prevent the drainage of wetland sites frequented by the species, including IBAs, and give these sites national protection (Tucker and Heath 1994).


