October 19th, 2023
International Census Plots: a tool to fill the geographical gaps in bird monitoring in Europe
In order to
achieve better data on bird numbers and distribution, we need to develop
generic monitoring schemes in parts of Europe where they still do not exist.
Setting up and running schemes based on fieldwork by volunteers is a challenge
in many parts of the continent and that’s why EBCC started the International
Census Plots scheme. By taking part in the scheme, countries can provide their
monitoring data to the European dataset and develop comprehensive national
schemes in the future. However, this can only happen by providing further
support to national coordinators of the scheme.
We need to fill
in the gaps in coverage of Europe by bird monitoring
There is no doubt that standardised large-scale monitoring of bird
abundances together with distribution atlases provide valuable information for
research and conservation. Outputs of the Pan-European
Common Bird Monitoring Scheme (PECBMS) have been widely used in international
and national policies, and, furthermore, the data collected via PECBMS
helped to answer various
scientific questions. The first European Breeding Bird Atlas (EBBA1) was
used in 3,150 scientific
publications and we expect
that EBBA2 will also be widely used for
science and policy.
However, there are gaps in our picture of European population trends: large areas, mostly in eastern and southeastern part of the continent have not yet developed monitoring schemes which would cover the whole territory of individual countries.
Countries contributing to European trends and indices produced by PECBMS (2021)
There are multiple reasons for the gaps. Often, there are only a few field ornithologists and volunteer birdwatchers in these areas.
The number of
fieldworkers contributing to the second European Breeding Bird Atlas (EBBA2)
illustrates the geographical bias in capacities for monitoring in Europe. While
there were some 40 observers per one 50 km square in some western European
countries, there was only one observer per two 50 km squares in the east of the
continent
This is usually caused by complex reasons some of which may include less
wealthy economic situation and shorter tradition in volunteer field ornithology.
Further contributing factors can be poor infrastructure, difficult access to
some areas or difficult conditions for the development of NGOs and civic
society.
It is difficult,
but we can do it
Experience in EBBA2 shows, that despite the difficulties, colleagues in
eastern and southeastern Europe can deliver great results. Particularly when
their effort is supported by training, capacity building and decent funding.
Coverage of
Europe in EBBA1 and EBBA2 documents an increase in the quality of atlas data in
eastern and southeastern Europe between the two atlases.
Setting up a full scale national monitoring scheme in the near future is
however unrealistic. The capacity must be built up step by step. In the meantime,
we can start the monitoring with capacities that are already available and
contribute to PECBMS in a relatively short time period via the approach of the International
Census Plots (ICP). Such plots, if properly surveyed, can provide data for
European population indices and indicators, as well as planned updated
maps of distribution and serve as a basis for the full scale national
monitoring schemes in the future.
The approach of
International Census Plots should help
The approach was proposed within the EBCC in 2000s, but was never put
into practice. The idea is that instead of setting up large numbers of census
plots in each country individually; the census plots are set up in several
countries simultaneously having a lower number of plots in each country. Thus,
the overall set of plots will not produce data good enough to calculate
reliable national population indices, but should be good enough to generate
indices representative of the wider region. Later on, as the monitoring is
being conducted at the international census plots, capacity at the national
level will increase and once it becomes sufficient, the international census
plots will serve as a basis for developing of national schemes.
In ICP, where raw data from several countries will need to be combined
for calculation of the population index and trend, caution must be paid to compatibility
of the field method across the region where it is applied. While in combination
of national population indices as practiced in PECBMS, different field methods
don’t pose a problem because national indices instead of raw data are combined,
this would be different in ICP. Thus, the field method should be kept the same
across the countries participating in ICP as much as possible.
Line transect has been found to serve the purpose the best in ICP and is
therefore recommended as a field method in the countries taking part in the
scheme.
Raw data from the ICP should be shared in order to allow calculation of
regional and European population trends and indices, but the organisations
running the national parts of the ICP are the owners of the data. Running a
national database and potentially also mobile phone apps for field data
recordings poses a further challenge to organisations with limited capacities.
The LIFE EBP
Reinforcement will help expand the ICP network in SE Europe.
Some ICP pilot schemes have been developed in Serbia since 2021, where
around 30 plots have been surveyed annually since then, and in Moldova since 2022, and
these pilots have brough promising results. However, for the ICP to be making a
real difference the network of ICP sites had to be further extended and this is
exactly what is going to be done now thanks to the LIFE EBP Reinforcement.
Within the LIFE project, the main objective is to further develop the ICP
network in Serbia and Moldova but also implement the scheme in five other
countries: Bosnia & Herzegovina, Montenegro, Albania, North Macedonia and
Kosovo. The overall target is to have a network of at least 70 ICP sites in the
region by the end of 2026.
To do so, among other things, the LIFE project is going to improve the know-how
and capacities of the national ICP organizers through an specific training workshop and will
seek also for synergies with the online bird portals and their associated apps in
order to improve data collection.
We expect that once the ICP network is expanded and run for c. 3-5 years, the data produced will be good enough to contribute to European species trends and indices. Moreover, this data, together with the one already collected by PECBMS and the online bird portals, should also be used in the framework of the EBBA2 Live Farmland project. And in a longer term, hopefully, ICP will develop into fully independent national breeding bird monitoring schemes.
