Published August 24, 2012 | Version v1
Journal article Open

Bird-monitoring in Europe – a first overview of practices, motivations and aims

  • 1. Station d'Ecologie Experimentale du CNRS, Moulis, France
  • 2. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
  • 3. Station d'Ecologie Expérimentale du CNRS à Moulis, Saint Girons, France
  • 4. Centre d'Ecologie Evolutive et Fonctionnelle, UMR 5175, 1919 Route de Mende, F34293 Montpellier Cedex 5, France, France
  • 5. Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Brunoy, France

Description

Biodiversity monitoring is central to conservation biology, allowing the evaluation of the conservation status of species or the assessment of mechanisms of biodiversity change. Birds are the first taxonomic group to be used to build headline indicators of biodiversity due to their worldwide spatial and temporal coverage and their popularity. However, the landscape of bird-monitoring practices has never been characterized quantitatively. To objectively explore the strengths and weaknesses of the massive bird-monitoring effort in Europe we assessed the bird-monitoring practices, acquired with a questionnaire-based survey, in a sample of monitoring programs. We identify major correlates of among-program variability and compare monitoring practices from our database to recommendations of best monitoring practices. In total, we obtained responses from 144 bird-monitoring programs. We distinguish three types of monitoring programs according to the number of people that they involve: small, local-scale programs (56%), medium or regional programs (19%), and large-scale, national and international, programs (23%). In total, the programs in our sample involved 27941 persons, investing 79298 person days per year. Our survey illustrated that 65% of programs collected quantitative indices of abundance (count data). The monitoring design in a majority of the programs could be improved, notably in terms of unbiased spatial coverage, sampling effort optimization, replicated sampling to account for variations in detection probability, and more efficient statistical use of the data. We discuss the main avenues for improvement in bird-monitoring practices that emerge from this comparison of current practices and published methodological recommendations.

Files

NC_article_1331.pdf

Files (1.8 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:24f46ea2ecd0a1dd3f7ce83bcfeb62a2
1.7 MB Preview Download
md5:94875ec718cdaad4c91aaa3e1068bd47
90.3 kB Preview Download

Linked records