Declining Ruff Philomachus pugnax populationsa response to global warming?
CHRISTOPH ZOCKLER
UNEP-WCMC, 219 HuntingdonRoad, CambridgeCB3 0DL, UK, e-maih [email protected]
Z6ckler, C. Declining Ruff Philomachuspugnaxpopulations:a responseto global warming?Wader Study
Group Bull. 97: 19-29.
Ruff breedingpopulationshavedeclinedwidely andin all habitatsacrosstemperateEurasia.Of an estimated
populationof 2.2-2.8 millionbirds,98% arenow confinedto habitatsin theArctictundra.Only 8,000-14,000
femalesstill breedin wet grassland
habitatsin Europe.Althoughdrainageandagriculturalintensification
have
damagedor destroyedmanygrassland
habitats,theydo notexplainwhy Ruffshavecontinuedto declineeven
wherehabitatshavebeenimprovedand in placeswhereotherwet grasslandspeciesare stableor increasing.
The hypothesisthattheproblemis limitedto oneor a few flywaysis notfully supported
by the availabledata
thoughthereis somesuggestion
of a greaterdeclinein W Europe/WAfrica populations.For mostregions,
systematicmonitoringdataare lacking.Neverthelessthe emergingpictureis that the populationhasshifted
northwardsandeastwardsandhasretreatedfrom thewet grasslandhabitatsformerlyoccupiedalongthe southern edgesof its range.It is suggested
that the causesare probablyof a globalnatureand may be linked with
climate change.It is unclearwhetherthe total populationhas declinedor only shiftednorth and east.More
co-ordinatedandsystematic
monitoringof breedingandwinteringpopulationswill be necessary
beforea full
understanding
of thesechangescan be reached.
INTRODUCTION
AND METHODS
mainly in Central and EasternEurope. It shouldbe noted,
however,that althoughinformationfrom Europeansitesis
Despiterecentdeclines,the Ruff Philomachus
pugnaxis still fairly complete,few dataare availablefor many regionsof
widespreadand one of the commonestwader speciesof the tundraon eitherpopulationsize or trends.Nevertheless
Eurasia.The breedingpopulationhasrecentlybeenestimated someobservations
from theseregionsare discussed
below.
at 2.3-2.8 million birds (Z6ckler in prep.). This roughly
In Europe,theRuff wasformerlymuchmorewidespread
equatesto thelatestestimatefor thewinteringpopulationin thanit is today,rangingasfar southasAustria,Hungary,and
Africa of more than 2 million birds (Trolliet & Girard 2001,
Bavaria. Even in the 19th century,however, it was already
van Gils & Wiersma 1996). However,recentobservationsof
in seriousdecline.First it retreatedfrom its breedingsitesin
decliningnumbers,particularlyin wet grassland
habitats,are south-centralEurope.Then, by the 1940s,the oncecoherent
alarming.Thispaperpresentsanoverviewof thecurrentsitu- distributionbecamepatchyandrestrictedto coastalareasand
ationfor breedingRuff in Eurasiaas a baseline for future a few wet grasslandsitesinland (e.g. Glutz et al. 1975). The
decline continuedthroughthe 1970s and 1980s with conpopulationmonitoring.
Most datain this reportcomefrom two sources:recently centrationsin fewer andfewer sitesalongthe coastand even
publishedregionaloverviewsfor countriesor regionswithin fewer sitesinland(Melter 1995, van Dijk 2000, HOtkeret al.
countries(for sourcesseeTables 1 & 2), andthroughdirect 2001, Chylareckypers. comm.). Neverthelesssomecoastal
sitescontinuedto supportsubstantialpopulations;particupersonalcommunicationwith local and countryexpertsin
theInternational
WaderStudyGroup.The figuresdiffer sub- larly newly reclaimed salt marshes and mudflats in the
stantiallyfromthoseof Piersma(1986), andalsofrom those Waddensea.After a period of desalination,many of these
of Heathet al. (2000). It is thereforeimportantto providean polderswere newly colonisedand for someyearsheld sigupdatedoverview of current populationstatus,including nificant populations,but later thesecrashedas the habitat
breedingareasoutsideEurope,whereverpossible.The dis- changed.ExamplesincludetheLauwersmeer(van Dijk pers.
cussion section draws international, national and local attencomm.), the Hauke Haien Koog andotherpoldersalongthe
coastline(H6tker et al. 2001)(Figs 1-2).
tion to a speciesthatis apparentlydecliningall overEurope, Schleswig-Holstein
The recentdeclinein the specieswas first notedamong
and possiblyalsoin many partsof Asia. It alsofocuseson
possiblereasonsfor the decline,particularlythe likely imthe small populationon the southernedge of the breeding
pact of climatechange.
range.The decreasein Belgium,FranceandBritain led to its
currentextinctionin thesecountriesduring the 1980s and
1990s.Also, furthereastalongthe southernboundaryof the
RESULTS
range in the stepperegion of Bashkortostan,Tomkovich
In wet grasslandsitesandin naturalhabitatsacrossEurasia, (1992) describedthe Ruff asextinct.The declineover the last
thepredominanttrendin the breedingruff populationin re- 20 yearsin theNetherlandsfrom 1,500to a maximumof 150
centyearshasbeenoneof decline(Tables1 & 2). Sitesfor- femalesandin Germanyfrom 450-600 to a maximumof 100
merly occupiedaroundthe peripheryof the rangeare now (Tables 1 & 2) is alarmingandhasresultedin a lot of attenvacatedwith the remaining populationnow concentrated tion in thesecountrieswhich are on the edgeof the species'
19
Buffetin 97 April 2002
20
Wader Study Group Bulletin
Table 1. Population
size(females)andtrendsof the breedingRuffpopulation
incountriesandsub-national
regionswithmainlywetgrassland habitats.Data for countriesand sub-nationalregionare in bold;data for Landerin Germanyand specificsites in The Netherlands,
Polandand Estoniaare in regularfont.Trendsare basedon eitherdata in tableor listedreference(DEC = decline;INC = increase;STA
= stable; EXT = extinct).
WetJSaltgrassland
ca. 1980
ca. 1990
ca. 2000
Trend
Source
1-50
4 - 10
300-1,500
500-4,000
DEC
DEC
INC?
?
Glushenkov et al. (1999)
Grishanov (1998)
Tomkovich 1992, V. Sotnikov - estimate
Lebedeva - estimate,
populations
Russian
oblasts
ChuvashiaRepublic
Kaliningradskaya
Kirov region
Kostromaregion
DEC
Lebedeva
0-1
3,500-4,000
100-200
10-100
5-50
DEC
?
DEC
DEC
DEC
Zubakin et al. (1998)
Mischenko & Sukhanova(1998)
Ivanchev, Kotyukov (1999)
10,0007
2,000 - 2,400
2,0007
2,200
85-180
STA?
DEC
> 150
50
50
200
350-400
150-300
50
20-30
50
100-200
50-100
11
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
540
10-15
500
200-300
DEC
DEC
DEC
Nikiforov & Mongin (1998), Kozulin (pers.comm.)
Veromann 1980, Heath et al. (2000), L6hmus et al. (2001)
M•igi & Kaisel (1999)
Viksne (1983, 1997), Priedniks et al. (1989)
Tomkovich 1992, Heath et al. (2000)
Chylarecki P. & Winiecki (2001)
Witkowski, Dyrcz, Lontkowski& Stawarczyk(in prep.),
Nawrocky (pers. comm.)
Lebed & Knysh (1999), Gorban& Shidlovski(1999)
S6renssen(1999), Widemo (pers. comm.)
Thorup(pers.comm.),Frikke ( 1991), Koskimies(1992),
Grell (1998)
Z6ckler (1998a), H'filterleinet al. 2000, H6tker et a/.2001
Mordovia
1-10
Moscowregion
Novgorodregion
Ryazan'region
Smolenskregion
Vladimir region
Belarus
Estonia
Mats alu
Latvia
Lithuania
Poland
Biebrza
Ukraine
South Sweden
Denmark
150
500
Germany
500-600
Schleswig-Holstein
-200
Mecldenburg-Vorpommern
50-80
Brandenburg
~ 10
Niedersachsen
Bremen
Nordrhein-Westfalen
The Netherlands
50 -100
- estimate
Lebedeva
- estimate
Lebedeva
- estimate
300
200
30
75
50
10
1
DEC
DEC
DEC
DEC
~200
10
45
5-10
15
0
DEC
DEC
H•ilterlein
0-2
0-2
0
EXT
Nehls et al. 2001
1,250 -1,500
600
100-150
DEC
H•ilterlein
et al. 2000
Kube pers.comm.,H•ilterleinet al. 2000
Ryslavy 2001
et al. 2000
Seitz 2001
Osieck& Hustings1994, Crampet al. 1983 van Dijk
pers. comm.
Lauwersmeer
UK
France
350
3-21
Total
200
1-7
5-13
6
0
0
DEC
EXT
EXT
10,900-17,100
8,090-13,890
DEC
van Dijk pers. comm.
Sharrocket al. 1981, Ogilvie et al. 2001
Duboiset al. (1991), Trolliet (pers.comm.)
dueto the species'highlynomadicbehaviour.
distribution.In 1991, HOtkerestimatedthe Ruff population fluctuations
of thetwelvecountriesthatat thetimeformedtheEuropean However, at several sites Ruffs have declined when other
that some
Unionat 1,900breedingfemales.Now onlya quarterof that wadershave performedwell and this suggests
of ArcticRuff mayalsobe in decline.Declines
number,475, remain.Countrypopulations
listedasstableby populations
Hftker (1991), suchas thosein Britain and France,in fact arereportedfor most(10/14) of thefew tundrasitesthatare
becameextinctshortlyafterwards,
withnobreedingrecords regularlymonitored(Table3). Thesedatagiveanindication
of a widespread
declinebutthisneedsto be verified.A resince1996 and 1997 respectively.
Long-termmonitoring
in Finlandhasalsoshowna substan- cent Russian initiative of the International Wader Study
tialdeclineoverthepast20 years.However,withabout30,000 Grouphas addressedthe issueof trendinterpretationin
Breedbreeding
females,thatpopulation
is notendangered
(V'als'finen Arcticbreedingbirds,suchasRuff. A co-ordinated
approach
startedin
et al. 1998).No significantchanges
havebeennotedin other ingConditionSurveywith a circumpolar
partsof Scandinavia
or in mostof European
Russia,butthese 1997 to monitorbreedingperformancein connectionwith
(Solovievet al.
populations
havenotbeenintensively
studied.
Mostwetgrass- weatherconditionsandlemmingabundance
land areas with time series information confirm the decreas1998)andit ishopedthatthiswill leadto a betterunderstandto tundra-breeding
Ruffs.
ing trendnoticedin the restof Europe(Tables1 & 2). The ing of whatis happening
drastic decline in almost all non-tundra sites is in contrast to
thestableor evenincreasing
situationin somenorthernArctic DISCUSSION
populations
(Table3) andrequiresexplanation.
The Russiantundrasupportsby far the majorityof the Reasons for the decline
total Ruff population,about95%. Trend informationis
declineof almostall wet grassland
waders
scarceand is oftendisguisedby naturalannualfluctuations The widespread
resultingfrom coldweatherandpredationaswell asspatial in Europeandin manypartsin Asia urgentlyneedsto be
Bulletin 97 April 2002
Zbckler: Declining Ruff populations
21
Table 2, Populationsize (females)and trends of the breedingRuff populationin countriesand sub-nationalregionswith mainly natural
habitats.Trends are based on either data in table or listed reference (DEC = decline; INC = increase; STA = stable; EXT -- extinct).
Tundra/peatland
ca. 1980
ca. 1990
ca. 2000
Trend
15,000
80,000
196,000
15,000
57,000
39,000
15,000
50,0007
30,000
STA
DEC?
DEC
Source
habitats
Norway
Sweden
Finland
Russian
Koskimies 1992, Kalas (1994)
Koskimies(1992), Girard & Kirby (1997), Sfrenssen(1999)
Girard & Kirby (1997), V•iis•inenet al. (1998)
oblasts
Murmanskregion
8,000-20,000
DEC
Lebedeva,recalculatedfrom Bianki et al. (1993),
Tatarinkova (1998)
Mikhaleva, (1998), Lebedeva - estimate
Karelia
800-5000
Leningradregion
Tver region (peatlands)
Novgorod region
Vologda region
Arkhangelsk
(exc. Nenetsk AO)
Nenetsky Autonomous
Region
Komi Republic
Pskov region (peatland?)
500-5000
Lebedeva
500-5000
- estimate
1,000-10,000
1,500-10,000
STA
Nikolaev (1998), Lebedeva - estimate
Mischenko & Sukhanova(1998)
Butiev, Shitikov, Lebedeva, (1998)
Butiev, Shitikov (1998), Morozov (1998), Lebedeva- estimate
1,600 -5,000
STA
Morozov (1998) (Vaigachonly) + Lebedeva- estimate
3500-4000
Lebedeva - estimate
1,000-10,000
3,000-4,000
Lebedeva - estimate
Yamal
INC
Gydan
Taimyr
INC?
Yakutia
?
Ryabitsev& Alekseeva (1998)
?
Chukotka
STA
Koryak Mountains
?
Sachalin
?
Soloviev et al. (200lb)
Steppe habitats
Hungary
Kasakhstan
8-10
1-5
Bashkortostan
Baikal
area
Mongolia
0-1
EXT?
Heath et al. (2000)
0-1
EXT?
Khrokov
0-1
EXT?
Ilyichev & Fomin 1979, Tomkovich (pers.comm.)
Sumja& Skryabin(1989)
Skryabin & Toopitsyn (1998)
10-1007
107
1998
understood
as a basisfor conservation
action.Severalexplanationshave beenproposed.Often, however,the mostobvious site-specificfactor has been identified as the prime
Melter 1995, van Dijk et al. 2000, Tomkovich& Lebedeva
1998, 1999).The breedingpopulationsthatremain,whether
in naturalhabitatsor in wet grasslands,
rely entirelyon wet
cause and conservation action has been taken without conor very wet conditions.All nestsfoundthroughoutthe entire
sideringwhat is known aboutwhole populations.Possible rangehavebeenin suchlocations,usuallyin the immediate
reasons for the decline of Ruff are listed below and then dissurroundings
of smallponds,puddlesor undrainedsurface
cussedbriefly.
wateronpermafrostor peatgrounds(Ztckler in press).High
waterlevelsthereforeappearto be essential,
thoughprobably
not
the
only
factor,
for
maintaining
wet
grassland
bird comLocal, site-related factors:
munities, such as Ruff, Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa
[]
[]
[]
[]
Drainage
Agriculturalintensification
Abandonment
of land-usepracticesandsuccession
Predation(by foxes,weasels,crowsandbirdsof prey)
andotherwet grasslandbirdsat healthypopulationlevels.
By itself, however,drainageno longerexplainsthe continueddeclineof wet grasslandwadersfor they have also
declinedin well-managed,wet and deliberatelyfloodedreserves, such as the WQmmewiesen reserve near Bremen,
Global factors:
Germany(Fig. 3), theAlte Sorgeschleife
reservein Schleswig-
[] Changesalongflyways
[] Globalchange,includingclimatechange
Holstein, Germany, and the Biebrza marshes in Poland.
Ruffshaveevendeclinedat extremelywet coastalsites,such
asthe Matsa!ureservein Estonia(Fig. 4) wheredunlinhave
beenincreasing(M•igi & Kaisel 1999).This demonstrates
the
Drainage
The declinein wet grasslandbirds, particularlyRuff, has
mostfrequentlybeenconnectedwith drainageandimprovement of land for agriculture.Withoutdoubtthiswasresponsiblefor thelarge-scaledeclineoverthepastcenturyin many
areasof Western and Central Europe, and also in parts of
Eastern Europe (e.g. Glutz et al. 1975, Beintema 1986,
need to look for other reasons. The decline of Ruff in Finn-
ish peatlandreservesis alsonot necessarilyconnectedwith
drainageor wet conditions.Certainlythe lossof peatlandin
the 1950s and 1960s (J•irvinen& Sammalisto1976) caused
a hugelossof habitatfor Ruff and otherpeatlandspecies.
This cannot,however,explainthecontinuation
of thedecline
in the 1980sand 1990s,afterlarge-scalepeatdestructionhad
ceased.
Buffetin 97 April 2002
22
Wader Study Group Bulletin
1000
........................................................................................
100
10
1968
1973
1978
1983
1988
1993
1998
Fig. 1. Populationtrendof Ruffsat the Lauwersmeerpoldernaturereserve,the Netherlands(basedon van Dijk et al. 2000 and pers. comm.).
Agricultural intensification
Poland(Table 1, Figs 1 & 2)). Secondlyand more significantly,the declineof Ruff in EasternEuropestartedbefore
The useof land for agriculturehasintensifiedfor centuries thelarge-scaleintensification
of agriculturebegan,asshown
andat an increasing
rateduringthe last50 years,especially for examplein EstoniaandPoland(Table 1). For thesereain Western and Central Europe, with a generally adverse sonsit is importantto look for other explanationsfor the
effect on birdlife (Donald et al. 2001). Grasslandbirdshave declinewithoutdenyingthesevereimpactthatintensiveland
declinedas fertiliseruse,grazingandthe frequencyof me- usehashad on wet grasslandbird communities.
chanical treatment have increased. Two observations,how-
ever, indicatethat additionalexplanationsare needed.
First,thereverseprocess,theextensification
andde-nitri-
Abandonment of land-use practices and succession
ficationby zero-application
of fertilisers,hasnotalwaysled
WhenRuff breedonfarmland,outsideprimarynaturalhabitat, moderategrazingor mowingis requiredfor it to remain
to a re-colonisationby grasslandbird communities(e.g.
Nehls 2001). Moreover, the few sitesthat never faced the
intensificationprocessand remainedmostlyuntouchedexperienceda declinein wet grassland
birds,particularlyRuff
(see examples in North Germany, the Netherlands and
suitable.If thisstops,it is destroyed
asbreedinghabitatby
successional
changes
thatleadto a higheranddenservegetation structure.Severaltimesthe declineor disappearance
of
Ruff and other waders has been attributed to the abandonment
;••i;
tkr•.•l•
IredrilKøl•og
! ••
_•!.•11c•••
wHa••
rK;•irv
o
rla
! •'Katlnger•
••
Fig. 2. Populationchanges of Ruff at selected breedingsites in recentlyenclosedpolders(K6ge) along the North Sea coast of Germany
during the past 20-30 years (based on H6tker et al. 2001).
Bulletin 97 April 2002
Z0ckler: DecliningRuff populations
23
2O
•
12
•
8
4
Fig. 3. Populationchangesof Ruffat an inlandsite:the naturereserveat WOmmewiesen,on a floodplainnear Bremen,Germany(based
on Eikhorst & Mauruschat 2000 and the author's own observations).
of land-usepractices.Soikkeli & Salo (1979), for example,
demonstrated
that a declinein populationsalongthe south
coastof Finlandwasdueto the abandonment
of lessproductive farmland. Moreover, the decline in the Netherlands has
beenattributedlargelyto the succession
of vegetation(van
Eerdenet al. 1979,Altenburget al. 1985,vanDijk et al. 1999).
of the decline. Moreover, the decline has also been observed
on Dutch islandswheremostof thesepredatorsare absent
(van Dijk pers.comm.).The well-beingof somespeciesat
particularsitesandthedeclineof others,aswith theDunlins
andRuffs at Matsalu (Fig. 4), suggests
that predationis not
an importantreasonfor the large-scaledeclinein wet grassland birds.
Predation
Global
Predatorsplay an importantrole in wet grassland
bird communities(Lugert 1994, Schoppenhorst
1996, Hase & Ryslavy 1998 & Seitz 2001). Most commonlyrecordedin Europe are Red Fox Vulpesvulpes,Weasel Mustela nivalis,
Mink Lutreola lutreola and domesticdog. Among avian
predatorsare crows Corvus spp., Marsh Harriers Circus
aeruginosus
andPeregrines
Falco peregrinus.However,it
seemsunlikelythatconditionsfor predatorshavesimultaneouslychangedin their favourall over the Ruff's breeding
range,to the extentthatthattheyhavebeenthemajorcause
factors
Global factorsare thosethat impacton a speciesat the global or flyway level andflyway factorsarethosethat impact
alongan entiremigrationroute.Global factorsincludeclimatechangeandpollutionand alsothe assemblage
of multiple humanactivitiesthatimpacttheEarthat a globalscale.
Severalrecentstudieshaveindicatedtheimportanceof such
mattersin explainingdistributionchangesand population
trendsin a varietyof taxa (e.g.butterflies(Parmesan1996)).
Thesefactorsmay be workingtogether.For example,wader
1000
100
10
1962
i
i
1972
1982
1992
2002
Fig. 4. Populationtrend of Ruff in the Matsalu nature reserve, Estonia (based on E. M•.gi pers. comm.).
Bulletin 97 April 2002
24
Wader Study Group Bulletin
Flyway
Aewa boundary
Countries/Russian
oblast
I1[111I!
[__.____j Extinct
•
Stable
I
Declining
No data
Fig. 5. Trends in the Ruff populationon the breedingand winteringgroundsin the contextof three recognisedflywaysI-III; based on Boere
(1991 ), Syroechkovski& Rogacheva (1996), Rogacheva (1992), Underhillet al. (1999) (sourcesof trend data: Tables 1 & 2, Triplet & Yesou
(1998) and unpublisheddata from the IWC for Africa, courtesy Wetlands International).
habitatsare likely to be changingnot only becausecarbon The flyway hypothesis
dioxide and other greenhousegasesare leading to global
climatechange,but alsobecauseof the impactof increasing This assumes
thatthedeclineis particularlyprominentin one
amounts of air- and waterborne nutrients.
flyway populationcomparedwith othershaving different
that the causelies somewhere
Two broadhypotheses
areproposed
astheexplanation
for migratingroutes,suggesting
thewidespread
declineof theRuff andmanyotherwet grass- alongthat particularflyway. There appearsto be someeviland waders:
dence for different flyway trends in the case of the Ruff
(Fig. 5), but winter count data are too sparsefor any firm
1) The flyway hypothesis:Somethinghashappenedto the conclusion.In particular,datafor Africa are insufficientto
birdsalongtheflywaysof thepopulationin theirwinter- determinelong-termtrends(Trolllet & Girard 2001). However, the fact that thereis alsoa decliningtrendin the rather
ing or staginggrounds
2) The globalchangehypothesis:
The gradualalterationof separateSouthAsian populationsuggestsa more general
wet grasslandhabitats,due to direct and indirecthuman declineoverall flyways.Similarlythe declineof mostwader
activities, has caused the decline.
populationsin theAmericas(Morrisonet al. 2001) notonly
Bulletin 97 April 2002
ZOckler:Declining Ruff populations
25
indicatesthat the problemis moreglobalthanlocal, but also ing species,suchas Curlew SandpiperCalidrisferruginea,
suggests
that it is largerthansomethingthathasoccurredin Temminck's Stint C. temminickii, Little Ringed Plover
just oneor two flyways.However,a varietyof localchanges Charadrius dubius, Lesser Sand Plover Ch. mongolus,
havedevelopeda globalcharacter,which include:
PacificGoldenPloverPluvialisfulva,GreyPloverPluvialis
squatarola,Black-tailedGodwit, Bar-tailedGodwit Limosa
[] Desertification,droughtsandthe lossof wetlands,
lapponica,Whimbrel Numeniusphaeopus,EurasianCurlew
[] Eutrophicationof stagingandwinteringwetlands,
N. arquata,CommonRedshank,CommonSandpiperActitis
[] Generalchangesin land-useandapplicationof chemicals hypoleucos,Terek SandpiperXenus cinereus and Blackand nutrientson winteringgrounds,leadingto changes winged Stilt Himantopushimantopus(Lopez & Mundkur
in vegetationandchangesin growthrate andbiomass. 1997). The Ruff is declining, whereas Common Snipe,
PintailSnipeGallinagostenuraandWoodSandpiperTringa
The impactof habitatlossanddesertificationon winter- glareola, recognisedwidely over Siberia as frequent coing wadershas been particularlynoticedin West Africa breederswith Ruff (Z6ckler in prep.),showa stableor only
whereRuff andBlack-tailedGodwit arehighly nomadicand slightlydecliningtrend.Only Little StintC. minuta,the speoften changetheir wintering site from year to year (Altencieswith the secondlargestwaderpopulationin the region,
burg& van der Kamp 1986, Yesou& Triplet 1996, Triplet alsoshowsa cleardecliningtrendsimilarto the Ruff. There
& Yesou 1998). Thesetwo specieshave becomemore and is little information available either on the use of fertilisers
more dependanton inundatedrice fields after the loss of or on land-usechangesor the impactof huntingin the winmany naturalwetlands(Altenburg& van der Kamp 1986). tering areas.
Dependinglargely on rainfall, rice productionvariesfrom
year to year, so bird countsfrom one areamight not reveal The global change hypothesis
the full picture.Only aerialsurveyscoveringseveralregions
reveal a picture that is closeto reality (Trolliet & Girard Global change comprises all natural and human-driven
2001). Even so, countsfrom differentregionsoften derive changeson our planet, including climate changeby the
from differentyears,sotrendscannotreadilybe identified. accumulationof greenhousegases,and also eutrophication
In someregions,however,numbersseemedto havedeclined throughfertilisersand nutrientreleasethroughfossilburnconsiderably,particularlyin Senegaland NorthernNigeria ing. The impactof thesechangesis complexandfew factors
(Glutz et al. 1975, OAG MQnster 1991, Triplett & Yesou are traceable and identifiable as responsiblefor what we
1998, Trolliet & Girard 2001).
observein wet grasslandandits birds.The main featuresof
The nominatesubspeciesof the Black-tailed Godwit in
globalchangerelevantto wet grasslandandtundrabirdscan
Europe,L. I. limosa,moreor lesssharesthe sameflyway and be summarised as:
winteringgroundsasthe Ruff (Glutz et al. 1975, Crampet
al. 1983) andmostlikely facesthe samethreats.Both are de- [] Changesin climate,
clining stronglyand persistentlyall over Europe, whereas
ß generally more rain in temperate regions, warmer
other species with different flyways, such as Common
annualmean temperature
RedshankTringa totanus and Common Snipe Gallinago
ß drier andhotterclimatein winteringareaswith losses
of wetlands
gallinago,haveonly declinedin thoseareaswheretherehave
beenhabitatlosses.Similarly,theIcelandicsubspecies
of the [] Extendedgrowingseasonandearly startof vegetation
Black-tailed Godwit, L. I. islandica, which winters in the
growth
BritishIslesandsouthwestEurope,hasan increasingpopu- [] Increase of biomass
lation (Gill et al. 2001).
[] Changeof vegetationheightanddensity
When each Ruff flyway is consideredseparately,it ap- [] Impoverishment
of vegetationin structureanddiversity
pearsthatwesternpopulationshavedeclinedmostandthose [] Increaseof naturalforestationin themainbreedingarea
breedingand wintering further easthave remainedmore
in the tundraregion.
stable.Thereforethe declinein Europe,includingthe western partsof Russia,is matchedby similarfalls in the main
Climatechangeis a complexprocessthatmay affectwet
winteringgroundsof the samepopulationsin West Africa grasslandbirds, and Ruff in particular, in three different
(Fig. 5). In Siberia, Tomkovich (1992) consideredthat the areas.First,theymaybe affectedin theirprimeArcticbreedRuff had extendedits rangeinto Chukotka,Kamtchatkaand ing range.Habitat conditionswill changedue to warming.
otherpartsof CentralYakutia.However,it is quitepossible Most of theopentundrahabitatscurrentlyoccupiedby Ruff,
that the specieshad previouslybeen overlookedin those for example,will changeinto foresttundraandforesttundra
areas.Indeed, in Chukotka, ancientRuff skeletonshave been
may becomedenselyforested, a processthat has already
foundin Chukchisettlementsindicatingthe species'pres- started, as observed in Alaska (Scott et al. 1996, see also
encetherein historicaltimes (P. Tomkovichpers.comm.). Z6ckler & Lysenko 2000).
Stableor increasingwinteringpopulationsin East Africa
Second,climatechangealsoaffectsthetemperateregion,
may reflect more healthy populationsin Eastern Russia thoughnot so fundamentallyasin the Arctic, andits effects
(Fig. 5). The Central Asian flyway may be similar, though arealreadyevidentin the growingseasonof Europeantrees
therearenotenoughdatafromthebreedinggroundsto prove (Menzel & Fabian 1999). The combinationof global warmthis conclusively.Broadly thereforeit seemsthat there is ing and eutrophicationfrom both airborne nutrients and
someevidenceto supportthe flyway hypothesis,but there fertiliserrun-offhasbeenidentifiedasresponsible
for boostaretoo manygapsin the datafor confidence.
ing vegetationgrowthin mostpartsof Europe.It is estimated
In Southern Asia, the Ruff is the seventhmost numerous that about50 kg of nitrogenper hectareis appliedannually
wintering wader species.The highest count in 1995 was by rainfall alone.In additionnutrientsarrive via floodwater
11,400 with a decliningtrend comparedto severalincreas- on wet grassland.In combinationwith globalwarming,this
Bulletin 97 April 2002
26
Wader Study Group Bulletin
Table 3. Populationtrends of Ruff at various breedinglocationsin the Arctic(DEC = decliningor low numberscomparedto year before,
INC= increasing,S = southern tundra, N = Northerntundra).
Location
Trend
Years, comments
Fenno-ScandinaviaS
DEC
Last 20 years
Northern Murmansk coast S
DEC
1989, 1990, 1994,
1998, 1999, 2000
MalazemelskayaTundra $
DEC
1998
Kanin Peninsula S
DEC
1996
Russki Zavarot, Pechora S
DEC
1997, 1998, 1999
Russki Zavarot, Pechora S
INC
1994
Central Yamal N
DEC
1993
INC
1982-1991
Southern Yamal $
DEC
1993
Southern Yamal
DEC
1998
Lower Ob valley S
EasternTaimyr N
DEC
INC
1999
1995-2001
Yana Delta N
INC
1998
Western Taimyr,
LowerKolymaN
DEC
1988 compared
to yearbefore
Southern Yamal
S
S
Sources
V•iis•inen et al. (1998)
Tatarinkova(1998) and in Tomkovich & Lebedeva(1996),
Soloviev & Tomkovich (1999, 2000, 2001)
Mineev cit. in Soloviev & Tomkovich (1999)
Filchagov in Tomkovich & Zharikov 1997
Shchadlikov& Belousovain Tomkovich & Zharikov (1998), Soloviev &
Tomkovich (1999, 2000)
Shchadlikov& Belousovain Tomkovich & Lebedeva (1996),
Shtro in Tomkovich (1998b)
Ryabitsev& Alekseeva(1998)
Paskhalnycit. in Tomkovich (1998b)
Morozov in Soloviev & Tomkovich (1999)
Paskhalnyin Soloviev& Tomkovich(2000)
Soloviev et al. (2001)
Keremyasov& Turakhovin Soloviev& Tomkovich(1999)
Tomkovich (1998a)
hasresultedin the growing seasonstartingfour weeksear-
befound
inthetundra
andpeat•bogs
where
future
changes
in
lier, and in an increaseof biomasswith a more lush and dense
vegetationareunlikelyto affectRuff. In fact,there,changes
aremorelikely to be beneficialto Ruff thanmostotherspecies (ZiSckler& Lysenko2000) becauseRuff canbe found
at moderatelyhighdensitiesin foresttundra.It hasalsobeen
observedthat Ruff will toleratea certainamountof change
in the vegetationstructure,includingbushesand scattered
trees,as long as the basevegetationlayer doesnot get too
denseandthe waterconditionsremainunchanged
andsuitableto provideenoughfoodresources
(Z/3cklerin prep.).
IndicationsthatRuff havedeclinedin southern
regionsof
vegetation comparedto the 1950s in northwestEurope
(Beintemaet al. 1995). Of all thewet grassland
birdsof central Europe,theRuff hasbeenrecognised
asthe speciesthat
is the mostsensitiveto thesechangesandoneof the first to
reactto drainageand eutrophication(Beintema& MQskens
1987). The Ruff, however, is not the only one affected.
Otherslike CommonSnipe,CommonRedshankandBlacktailed Godwit are following.
Vegetationsamplestakenat onesitewithoutanyfertiliser
applicationin the WQmmewiesenreserve,Germany,betweentheearly1980sand1995showedanincrease
in biomass
after a shortperiod of decrease(Warnken 1994, Rosenthal
in prep). Anotherindicationof earlier growth with more
biomassis the dateon whichthe first cutof harvestedgrass
the tundra and increased in the north and east (Table 3,
Tomkovich& Sorokin 1983, Tulp et al. 1997) supportthe
ideathatthedistributionhasshiftedbecause
of thewarming
climate.Similarly,in Europethe declinestartedfirst in the
south,in AustriaandBavaria,earlyin the20thcentury,then
is taken. In all areas without conservation restrictions, this
in FranceandBelgiumin the 1980sandin the UK, southern
hasbeentakenearlierandearliereveryyear andit hasnow RussiaandKaskhstan
in the 1990s(Glutzetal. 1975,Ogilvie
movedto earlyMay (Nehlset al. 2001). In 2000, the first cut et al. 2001, Morozov pers.comm.).Recently,it hascontinuedin westEuropeandin north-centralEurope,asfar north
in the vicinity of WQmmewiesenwas as early as 1st May
(Warnken,pers.comm.)comparedwith the endof May in asArcticFinland.Today,thedeclinemayevenextendto the
the early 1980s. Drainagetendsto enhancebiomasseven southernpartsof the Russiantundra.
furtherbecausedrainedmeadowswarmupfasterandwarmth
The emergingpictureis thereforethat the Ruff is being
forcedto retreatto its corenorthernhabitatsthroughglobal
increasesgrowth.
Third, thewarmingclimatewill alsochangeconditionsin climatechangeandthe effectof thaton thequalityof its wet
the winteringareas.Wetlandswill decreaseasa directresult grasslandhabitats.The declineis steepestin the southof the
of the increasingdrynessof the climate.Moreover,second- breedingrange, particularly in Finland (V•iis•inenet al.
ary processes,suchas the increasingdemandfor water to 1998), but alsoover the last ten yearsin Denmark(50%),
irrigatepreviouslyrain-fedcrops,will reinforcethis effect. Germany(75%) and The Netherlands(80%) (Table 1). As
Accordingto a studyby Universityof Wisconsin-Madison thedeclinehasoccurredall overEurope,includingEuropean
researchers
usingsatelliteimages,Lake Chadis now only a Russiaandin all habitats,includingsometundraareas(but
twentiethof the sizeit was 35 yearsago.The regionhassuf- not stronglyif at all in Siberia),it canbe concludedthatthe
fered from an increasinglydry climate, with a significant impactof globalchangeon Ruff breedingin wet grassland
declinein rainfallsincetheearly 1960s(Coe& Foley2001). habitatsis greaterthanon thosebreedingin tundrahabitats.
In addition, the lake has become the source of water for
This patternwould seemto be consistentwith changes
massiveirrigation projects. In the winter of 1999/2000, apparentfrom the fossilrecordwhich showssequences
of
339,000 Ruff were countedin the Lake Chad area (Trolliet
colonisation,
disappearance
andre-colonisation
in cooling
& Girard 2001). However, becauseof changesin survey and warmingperiodsbetweenthe ice ages.Evidencefrom
methodsandthe areacovered,it is notpossibleto determine Pleistocene
fossilRuffsin Denmark,Finland,Azerbaijanand
any populationtrend.
Hungary(van Rhijn 1991) might indicatebreedingfurther
In the Arctic, plenty of suitablebreedinghabitatcan still southduringcolderperiods,but it is equallypossiblethatthe
Bulletin 97 April 2002
ZOckler: Declining Ruff populations
fossilsare from migrants.The tundrabiome during recent
glaciationswasmuchfurthersouththanit is todayandcould
well haveenabledRuff to breedin thoseareas.Undoubtedly
Ruffs musthave accompaniedthe cyclic shift of the tundra
and its adjacentbiomesthroughthe ice-agesand it is quite
possiblethat this processcontinuesto this day with the
currentretreat northwardsas the globe warms.
This coincideswith therecentnorthernexpansionof other
wet grasslandwaders,suchas Common Snipe in the Bolshemelzkayatundra(Morozov 1998), Black-tailedGodwit
andNorthernLapwing Vanellusvanellusin NorthernRussia concomitantwith a northwardexpansionof agriculture
includingsownmeadows(Morozov 1987, Lebedeva1998).
Several other bird specieshave recentlyrecordedin more
northernlocationsin the Arctic (Z6ckler et al. 1997) and this
confirmsa generaltrendof speciesshiftingtheirdistributions
in responseto changingclimate.
There seemto be a variety of factorsresponsiblefor the
increaseof vegetationbiomass.The mostobviousare linked
with the generalintensificationof landuse.But evenin those
naturereserveswhere no fertilisershave been applied and
water quality protected,the Ruff and severalother species
havedeclined.In theseplaces,subtlechangesassociated
with
global climate change, particularly earlier and warmer
springs,have boostedvegetationbiomass,often aided by
drainageas well as by airborneand waterbornenutrients.
27
from the background"noise" of natural variation. The observedtrendsalong the flyways (Fig. 5) are not basedon
systematicmonitoring.This needsto be remediedas a matter of urgency.Futuremonitoringshouldtake accountof all
thesefactorsand be designedto coverall flyways from the
breeding groundsto the wintering groundsas well as all
stopoversitesin between.
The plightof the Ruff in Europeis alarming.Althoughit
is only understandable
in the contextof changesthat are of
global application,otherfactorshave undoubtedlyexacerbated the situation. These include large-scale land-use
changes, drainage and the general increase of nutrients.
Theseaddto the eutrophication
of the landscapeandglobal
warmingwith a synergeticeffect on the species.Similarly,
althoughthe impactof predatorsis usuallyquite local, this
may be quite devastatingwhere it causesthe final extinction
of a vulnerablepopulationat a degradedsite.
This studydemonstrates
thatthe declineof the Ruff needs
to be considered
in the contextof entireflywaysandthe global situation. All conservation
action should take this into
account.However, despitethe well-documenteddeclineof
the breedingpopulationacrosstemperateEurasia,evennow
we cannotbe sureexactlywhathashappened.Has the populationmerelyshiftedor hasit declinedglobally?To answer
thisquestion,moresystematicmonitoringin the wintering
groundsof Africa andsouthernAsia is vital. Also, although
we may have confidencein the connectionbetweenthe decline of the Ruff and globalchange,we haveyet to cometo
CONCLUSIONS
gripswith a real understanding
of the proximatefactorsinThe Ruff is still a commonspeciesin the Eurasiantundranor volved. For example, vegetationbiomassin the breeding
is it globallythreatened.The recentdeclinein wet grassland habitatsmayhaveincreased,
buthowdoesthisimpactonthe
habitats,however,hasbeensowidespreadthat it shouldbe ability of Ruffs to surviveand/orreproduce?
consideredin a global context. Most other wet grassland
wadershave declining populations.Sometimesthis is the ACKNOWLEDG
EM ENTS
resultof local changesin land-useor the impactof predators,
but for certain species,especially Ruff and Black-tailed Among thosewho have supportedthis study,I would like to
Godwit, it seems that the causes must be of a nature that is
thank many members of the International Wader Study
global.Unlike speciesthat are largely confinedto wet grass- Group.Without their enthusiasticcontributionsthe extensive
land,Ruff differ in that they maintaina strongpopulationin coveragethat thisprojecthasachievedwould not havebeen
tundra habitats. Available data show a shift in distribution,
possible.
I wouldalsolike to thankGillianBunting,Hermann
but it is not possibleto determineto what extent lossesin H6tker and Hartmut Andretzke for comments on an earlier
southernpartsof the rangeare compensated
by gainsin the draft, CorinnaRaviliousand Igor Lysenkofor GIS support
north and east. Similar changesmay apply in the Icelandic and particularlyPeter Boye for many encouragingdiscusandNorwegianpopulationsof the Black-tailedGodwit. It is sionsand support.The GermanFederalAgency for Nature
thereforeimportantthat thesebe monitoredclosely(which Conservationsupportedpart of the work financially.
is currentlynot being done).
The Ruff appearsto be very sensitiveto changingclimate
REFERENCES
as well as to changingwater tables and faster vegetation
growth.Thereforeit might be an ideal indicator-species
for Altenburg, W., N. Beemster, K. Van Dijk, P. Esselink, D. Prop & H.
monitoringglobal change.In wet grasslandareas,however,
Visser 1985. De ontwikkeling van de broedvogelbevolkingvan het
Lauwersmeer in 1978-1983.
Limosa 58: 149-161.
it may be already too scarce to provide adequate data.
Altenburg, W. & J. van der Kamp 1986.Importancedeszoneshumides
Climate seems to be the overriding factor with similar,
de la Mauretanie du sud, du Senegal,de la Gambie et de la Guineethough not everywhere pronouncedchangesoccurring all
Bissaupour la Barge a QueueNoire (Limosa I. limosa). Leersum: RIN
over the temperate parts of the Palearctic. Together with
contributionsto researchon managementof naturalresources1986-1.
eutrophication,
it is probablythe mainreasonfor the changes Asbrik, S., L. Berg, G. Hardeng, P. Koskimies. & A. Petersen 1997.
Population sizes and trends of birds in the nordic countries 1978documentedhere. It is a factor that might drive a cold-tem1994. Copenhagen:Tema Nord. Nordic Council of ministers.
peratespeciesfurther north.
It is unfortunate
that trend data are scarce and scattered
randomly. Particularly in the Arctic there is lack of wellorganisedlong-termmonitoring.This is vitally importantfor
understandingthe major outstandingquestions:the retreat
from southernbreedingsites,the northwardextensionand
the decline in natural habitats.An increasein monitoring
sitesin the Arctic will alsohelp to disentanglesuchtrends
Azombo, R., E. Battakok, A. Bodekamp, P. Edelaar,, P. Scholten,
P. Spierenberg& J.C.J. van Wetten 1998. Wadersand waterfowlin
the floodplains of the Logone, Cameroun, January, 1993. WIWO
Report 67.32 pagesplus annexes.
Beintema, A.J. 1986. Nistplatzwahl im GrQnland: Wahnsinn oder
Weisheit?
Corax
11: 301-311.
Beintema,A.J. & G.J. & D.M. Milskens 1987. Nestingsuccess
of birds
breedingin Dutch agriculturalgrasslands.
J. Appl. Ecol. 24: 743-758.
Beintema,A.J., O. Moedt & D. Ellinger 1995. Ecologische
Atlas van de
Bulletin 97 April 2002
28
Wader Study Group Bulletin
Nederlandse Weidevogels.Schuyt, Haarlem.
Belik, V.P. 1998. Currentpopulationstatusof rare and protectedwaders
in South Russia. International
Wader
Studies 10: 273-280.
Corax 18, Sonderheft 2: 39-46.
Boere, G. 1991. TheBonn Conventionand the Conservationof migratory
birds. ICBP Technical
Publication
No. 12: 345-360.
Butiev, V.T.D., A. Shitikov & E.A. Lebedeva 1998. On the numbersof
breedingwadersin the Vologda region.In: Breedingwadersin Eastern Europe - 2000 Vol. 1. Moscow 18-23 p. [in Russian]
Christoleit, F. 1924. Zum Balzspiel des Kampfl•iufers. Zoologica
Palaearctica (Pallasia) 1:181-197
Chylarecki, P. & A. Winiecki. 2001. Philomachuspugnax- Batalion.
pp. 201-205 in: GlowacinskiZ (ed), Polskaczerwonaksiegazwierzat
-kregowce. Warszawa: PWRiL
Coe, M.T. & J.A. Foley 2001. Human and Natural Impactson the Water
Resources
of theLakeChadBasin.Journalof Geophysical
Research106.
Cramp, S. & K.E.L. Simmons 1983. The Birds of the WesternPalaearctic. Vol. III Waders-Gulls. Oxford. 913 p.
Dementiev, G.P. & N.A. G!adkov 1951. Birds of the Soviet Union.
Vol. 3. Moscow. 756 p.
van Dijk, A.J., A. Boele,D. Zoetebier & R. Meijer 1999. Kolonievogels
en zeldzamebroedvogelsin Nederlandin 1996. Limosa72: 23-36.
van Dijk, A.J., Kleefstra, R., Zoetebier, D. & R. Meijer 2000. Kolonievogelsen zeldzamebroedvogelsin Nederlandin 1997.Limosa73: 5366.
Donald, P.F., R.E. Green & M.F. Heath 2001. Agricultural intensification and the collapseof Europe's farmlandbird populations.Proc. R.
Soc. Lond. B 268: 25-29.
Dubois, P.J., R. Maheo & H. H6tker 1991. Waders breeding on wet
grasslandin France. Wader StudyGroup Bull. 61: 4249.
van Eerden, M.R., J. Prop & K. Veenstra 1979. De ontwikkelingvan
de broedvogel-bevolking
in het lauwersmeergebied
sindsde afsluiting
in 1969 t/m 1976. Limosa 52: 176-190.
Eikhorst, W. & I. Mauruschat 2000. Die Brutv•igeldesNSG Borgfelder
Wiimmewiesenim Jahre 1999. Brutbestandund Bruterfolg. Unpubl.
Rep. for WWF Germany.
Frikke, J. 1991. Breeding waders in wet grasslandhabitatsin Denmark.
Wader Study Group Bull. 61: 42•[9.
Frolov, V.V. & S.A. Korkina 1998. Breedingwadersof the Penzaregion.
In: Breeding waders in Eastern Europe - 2000 Vol. 1. Moscow.
pp. 42-51 [in Russian].
Gibbson, D.D. 1977. First North American nest and eggsof the Ruff.
Western Birds 8: 25-26.
Gill, J.A., K. Norris, P.M. Potts, T.G. Gunnarsson, P.W. Atkinson &
W.J. Sutherland 2001. The buffer effect and large-scalepopulation
regulationin migratory birds. Nature 412:436-438.
van Gils, J. & P. Wiersma 1996. Scolopacidae.In: del Hoyo, J., A. Elliot
& J. Sargatal (eds.). Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 3
Hoatzinsto Auks. Lynx, Barcelona.
Girard, F. & J. Kirby 1997. Ruff. In: Hagemeijer,W.J.M. & M.J. Blair
(eds.)(1997): TheEBCCAtlasof EuropeanBreedingBirds:TheirDistribution and Abundance.Poyser.London p. 284-285.
Glushenkov, O.V., I.A. Koscheev, A.A. Yakovlev & V.A. Yakovlev
1999. Breedingwadersof the Chuvashregion.In Tomkovich,P. & E.
Lebedeva(eds.) Breeding wadersin EasternEurope - 2000. Vol. 2:
42-44.
Glutz yon Blotzheim, U., K. Bauer, M. & E. Bezzel 1975. Handbuch
der V•igel Mitteleuropas. Vol 6, Charadriiformes 1. Teil. Wiesbaden
840 S.
Gotban, I.M. & I.V. Shidlovski 1999. Numbers of breedingwaders in
the West of Ukraine. In Tomkovich, P. & E. Lebedeva(eds.) Breeding waders in Eastern Europe - 2000. Vol. 2: 93-105.
Grishanov, G.V. 1998. Breeding waders of the Kaliningrad region. In:
Breedingwadersin Eastern Europe - 2000, Vol. 1. Moscow 7-11 p.
[in Russian].
H/ilterlein, B., P. Siidbeck, W. Knief & U. KSppen 2000. Brutbestandsentwicklungder Ktistenv6gelan Nord- und Ostseeunter besonderer
Berticksichtigungder 1990er Jahre. Vogelwelt 121: 241-267.
Hase, P. & T. Ryslavy 1998. Das Europ•iischeVogelschutzgebiet
(SPA)
Niederung der Unteren Havel. Naturschutz u. Landschaftspfiege
Brandenburg 7: 172-175.
Heath, M., C. Broggreve & N. Peet 2000. EuropeanBird Populations:
Estimatesand trends. BirdLife ConservationSeries 10. 160 p.
HStker, H. 1991. Waders breedingin wet grasslandsin the countriesof
the EuropeanCommunity- a brief summaryof currentknowledgeon
populationsizesand populationtrends.Wader StudyGroup Bull. 61:
50-55.
H6tker, H., J. Blew, H.A. Bruns, S. Gruber, B. H•ilterlein
Bulletin 97 April 2002
Petersen-Andresen2001. Die Bedeutungder Naturschutzk6ge
an der
Westktiste Schleswig-Holsteins ftir brtitende Wiesen-Limikolen.
& W.
Ilyichev, V.D. & V.E. Fomin 1979. The bird fauna of bashkiriyaand its
changesin the 20th century.Ornithologiya 14:83-96
Ivanehev, V.P. & Yu. V. Kotyukov 1999. Numbers and distributionof
Breeding waders in the Ryazan' Region. In: Tomkovich, P. & E.
Lebedeva (eds.) Breeding waders in Eastern Europe - 2000. Vol. 2:
35-41.
Kalas, J.A. 1994. BrushanePhilomachuspugnax S. 183 In: Gjershaug,
J.O., P.G. Thingstad,S. Eldoy & S. Byrkjeland (eds.):Norsk Fugleatlas. Norsk OrnithologiskForening, Klaebu.
Khrokov, V. 1988. Breeding record of Ruff Philomachuspugnax in
Northern Kazakhstan.Ornitologiya 23:224-225 [in Russian].
Kondrat'ev, A.Y. 1998. Breedingconditionsfor wadersin the tundrasof
the USSR
in 1989. International
Wader
Studies 10: 101-104.
Konstantinov,V.M., E.V. Lysenkov,A.S. Lapshin & S.N. Spiridonov
2001. New data on nesting of the Ruff Philomachus pugnax in
Mordovia.Russ.J. Ornithol.Express-issue148:511-514. [in Russian]
Koskimies, P. 1992. Populationsizesand recenttrendsof breedingbirds
in the Nordic countries.Bird CensusNews 5 (3): 41-79.
Kreutzkamp, I. & U. Helbing 1999. Die avifaunistischeEntwicklungim
Grtinlandbereich des NSG "Haseldorfer
von 1979 bis 1998.
Binnenelbe
mit Elbvorland"
Lebed, E.A. & N.P. Knysh 1999. Distributionand Numbersof breeding
wadersin the Sumy region. In: Tomkovich, P. & E. Lebedeva(eds.)
Breeding waders in Eastern Europe - 2000. Vol. 2: 83-92.
Lebedeva, E. 1998. Waders in agriculturalhabitatsof EuropeanRussia.
International
Wader Studies 10: 315-324.
LShmus, A., A. Kuresoo, E. Leibak, A. Leito, V. Lilleleht, M. Kose, A.
Leivits, L. LuigujSe & U. Sellis. 1998. Statusand numbersof Estonian birds. Hirundo 11 (2) 1998:63-83 [in Estonian].
L•hmus, A., A. Kalamees, A. Kuus, A. Kuresoo, A. Leito, A. Leivits,
L. Luiguj•e, I. Ojaste & V. Volke. 2001. Bird speciesof conservation concernin the Estonianprotectedareasand ImportantBird Areas.
Hirundo Suppl. 4: 37-167.
Lopez, A. & T. Mundkur 1997. The Asian Waterfowl Census19941996. WetlandsInternational,Kuala Lumpur. 118 p.
Lugeft, J. 1994. Wiesenv6gelzwischenNaturschutzund Landwirtschaft
- Erfassung der Wiesenv6gel im Naturschutzgebiet "Alte Sorgeschleife"und in angrenzenden
Bereichen1993. Unp. Rep. Ministry of
environmentSchleswig-Holstein.
M/igi, E. & K. Kaisel 1999. How many birds live in the meadowsof
Matsalu. [in Estonian]. Loodusevaatlusi 1997-1999: 88-104.
Melter, J. 1995. Kampfl•iufer-Philomachus pugnax. In: Zang, H., G.
Grosskopf & H. Heckenroth: Die V•igel Niedersachsens,Austernfischer bis Schnepfen.
NatruschutzLandschaftspfl.
Niedersachsen.
B,
H. 2.5: 177-189.
Menzel, A. & P. Fabian 1999. Growing seasonextendedin Europe.
Nature
397: 659.
Mikhaleva, E.V. 1998. Breeding waders of the northern part of the
LadogaLake, Karelia. In: Tomkovich,P. & E. Lebedeva(eds.)Breeding waders in Eastern Europe - 2000. Vol. 1: 24-27.
Mischenko, A.L. & O.V. Sukhanova 1998. Waders of the Novgord
region:peculiaritiesof their distributionandimportantbreedingareas.
International
Wader Studies 10: 285-290.
Morozov, V.V. 1987. Materials on the ornithofauna of the Bolshemelskayatundra. Ornithology12:186-189 [in Russian]
Morozov, V.V. 1998. Distribution of breedingwadersin the north-east
EuropeanRussiantundras.InternationalWaderStudies10:186-194.
Morozov, V.V. 2000. Ornithological investigationsin the tundraswest
of the Ural Mountains.In: Ebbinge, B, Yu. L.Mazourov & P.S. Tomkovich(eds.)Heritageof the RussianArctic: Research,Conservation
and International Cooperation.Moscow, pp. 294-300.
Morrison, G.R.I., Y. Aubry, R.W. Butler, G.W. Beyresbergen, G.M
Donaldson, C.L. Gratto-Trevor, P.W. Hicklin, V.H. Johnston &
R.K. Ross.2001. Declinesin North Americanshorebirdpopulations.
Wader StudyGroup Bull. 94: 34-38.
Nechaev, V.A. 1998. Distributionof wadersduringmigrationat Sakhalin
Island. International
Wader Studies 10: 225-232.
Nehls, G., B. Beckets, H. Belting, J. Blew, J. Melter, M. Rode & C.
Sudfeldt 2001. SituationundPerspektivedesWiesenvogelschutzes
im
Nordwestdeutschen
Tiefland.
Corax
18: 1-26.
Nikiforov, M.E. & E.A. Mongin 1998. Breedingwadersof Belarus:numbers, estimatesand recentpopulationtrends.In: Breedingwadersin
Eastern Europe - 2000 Vol. 1. Moscow pp. 7-11. [in Russian]
Nikolaev, V.I. 1998.The importanceof the peatlandsof the UpperVolga
Z6ckler: DecliningRuff populations
areaas habitatsfor breedingwadres.InternationalWaderStudies10:
291-298.
OAG Miinster 1991.Reportof the ornithologicalexpeditionto northern
Cameroon.Report40 p.
Ogilvie, M. and the Rare Breeding Birds Panel 2001. Rare breeding
birdsin the United Kingdomin 1999.Brit. Birds 94: 344-381.
Okolelov, A. Yu. 1999. Breeding waders of the Tambov region. In:
Tomkovich, P. & E. Lebedeva (eds.) Breeding waders in Eastern
Europe- 2000. Vol. 2: 45-53.
Okrusko, H. 1990 Wetlandsof theBiebrzaValley:their valueandfuture
management.
PolishAcademyof Sciences.Warsaw107 p.
Osieck, E.R. & F. Hustings 1994. Rode lijst van de bedreigde en
kwetsbarevoogelsoorten
in Nederland.TechnicalReport12 [in Dutch
with English summary].
Parmesan, C. 1996. Climate & species'range.Nature 382: 765-766.
Pearson, D.G. 1981. The wintering and moult of Ruff, Philomachus
pugnax,in the Kenyanrift valley.Ibis 123: 158-182.
P6rennou, C. 1991. Les recensements
internationauxd'oiseauxd'eau en
Afrique tropicale.IWRB. Spec.Pub. 15:140 pp.
Pierstoa, T. (ed.) 1986. Breedingwadersin Europe. A review of population sizeestimatesanda bibliographyof informationsources.Wader
Study Group Bull. 48 (Suppl.).
van Rhijn, J.G. 1991. The Ruff. Poyser.London. 209 p.
Rogacheva,H. 1992. The Birds of CentralSiberia. Husum.737 p.
Rosenthal, G., J. Hildebrandt, C. Z•ickler, M. Hengstenberg, D.
Mossakowski, W. Lakomy & I. Burfeindt (1998). Feuchtgrtinland
29
WaderStudyGroup Bull. 87: 43-47.
Sumja, D. & N.G. Skrjabin 1989.BirdsofSSRPrikhubcuguliyaIrkutsk.
200 p. [in Russian].
Strazds, M., Priednieks, J. & V•iverins, G. 1994. Bird numbers in
Latvia. Putni daba 4:3-18 [in Latvian].
Syroechkovski, E.E. Sr. & H. Rogacheva 1996. The new Working
Groupon MigratoryBirdsof The CentralPalaearcticin theframework
of the Commissionon Migratory birds,internationalCouncilfor Game
and Wildlife Conservation, Vienna 1996. Casarca 2: 31-37.
Tatarinkova, I.P. 1998. Variation in numberso,fmigrating waders on
Bol'shoy Ainov Island, WesternMurman during 1963-1991. International
Wader Studies 10: 176-179.
Thorup, O. 1991. Populationtrendsand studieson BreedingWadersat
the Nature reserveTipperne. Wader StudyGroup Bull. 61: 78-81.
Tomkovich, P. 1992. Waders in the Soviet Union. Brit. Birds 85: 344365.
Tomkovich, P. 1998a. Breedingconditionsfor wadersin the tundrasof
the USSR in 1988. International
Wader Studies 10.' 97-100.
Tomkovich, P. 1998b.Breedingconditionsfor wadersin Russiantundras
in 1992. International
Wader Studies 10:117-123.
Tomkovich, P. 1998c:Breedingconditionsfor wadersin Russiantundras
in 1993. International
Wader Studies 10: 124-131.
Tomkovich, P. & E. Lebedeva 1996. Breedingconditionsfor wadersin
Russiantundrasin 1994. Wader Study Group Bull. 79: 71-81.
Tomkovich, P. & E. Lebedeva 1998.Breedingwadersin EasternEurope
- 2000 Vol. 1. Moscow. 124 p. [in Russian]
in Norddeutschland.
0kologie,Zustand,
Schutzkonzepte.
Angewandte Tomkovich, P. & E. Lebedeva 1999.Breedingwadersin EasternEurope
- 2000 Vol.2. Moscow. 124 p. [in Russian]
Landschafts6kologie
15:291 Seiten+ Anhang.
Ryabitsev, V.K. 1998. Breedingconditionsfor wadersin the Russian Tomkovich, P.S. & A.G. Sorokin 1983. The bird fauna of Eastern
tundras in 1991. International Wader Studies 10:111-116.
Chukotka. In: RasprostranienieI systematikaptic. Issledovanijapo
faune Sovetskogo
Sojuza.Arch. Zool. Mus. Moscow 21: 77-159.
Ryabitsev,V.K. & N.S. Alekseeva1998.Nestingdensitydynamicsand
sitefidelityof wadersonthemiddleandnorthernYamal.International Tomkovich,P. & Y.V. Zharikov 1997.Waderbreedingconditionsin the
Wader Studies 10: 195-200.
Russiantundrasin 1996. Wader StudyGroup Bull. 83: 26-36.
Tomkovich,P. & Y.V. Zharikov 1998.Waderbreedingconditionsin the
Ryslavy, T. 2001. Zur Bestandssituationausgew•ihlterVogelarten in
Russiantundrasin 1997. Wader StudyGroup Bull. 87: 30-42.
Brandenburg- Jahresbericht1999. Natursch.u. Landschaftspfl.in
Triplet, P. & P. Yesou 1998. Mid winter countsin the Senegal delta,
Brandenburg10: 4-16.
West Africa, 1993-1997. Wader StudyGroup Bull. 85: 66-73.
Sarychev,V.S. & S.M. Klimov 1999.Currentdistributionandnumbers
Trolliet, B. & O. Girard 2001. Numbersin winteringRuff, Philomachus
of breedingwadersin theLipetskregion.In: Breedingwadersin Eastpugnax,in WestandCentralAfrica. WaderStudyGroupBull. 96: 74ern Europe- 2000 Vol. 2 Moscow.pp. 54-61. [in Russian]
78.
Scheufler, H. & A. Stiefel 1985. Der Kampfl•iufer.Wittenberg-LutherTulp, I., L. Bruinzeel, J. Jukema. & O. Stepanova 1997. Breeding
stadt.211 pp.
waders at Medusa Bay, WesternTaimyr, in 1996, WIWO report 57.
Schoppenhorst,A. 1996. AuswirkungenderNutzungsextensivierung
auf
92 p.
den Bruterfolg von Wiesenv6geln im Bremer Becken. - Bremer
Underhill, L.G., A.J. Tree, H.D. Oschadleus & V. Parker 1999. Review
Beitr•igefar Naturkundeund Naturschutz1.' 117-124.
of ring recoveriesof waterbirdsin SouthernAfrica. CapeTown. 119 p.
Schoppenhorst, A. 1999. Projektbericht 1998 tiber die populationsV•iis•inen, R.A., E. Lammi & P. Koskomies 1998. Muuttuva Pesimiilin6kologischeAnalyseder Wachtelkbnigvorkommen
in den Wtimmewiesen als Teil des F&E-Vorhabens mit dem Titel ,,Bewertungdes
nusto.Otava, Helsinki. 567 p.
Veromann, Kh. 1980. Novoe v izucenii biologii I rasprostranenii
Beitrags nationaler und internationalerNaturschutzvorhabens
in
Kulikov. Moscow 85-86.
Deutschlandzur Erhaltung stark gef•ihrdeterVogelarten auf landViksne, J. 1983. Birds of Latvia. Riga [in Russian].
wirtschaftlichextensivgenutztenFl•ichen- Zielkonflikte und LbsViksne, J. 1997. The bird lake Engure.Janaseta,Riga. 108 p.
ungswege"im Auftrag Landesverbandf. Vogelschutzin Bayern.
Warnken, T. 1994. Ertragsveriinderungen
unterextensivenBedingungen
Hilpoltstein 120 S.
Schuster,H-W. & K. Handke (2001). Beobachtungen
am Brutplatzdes
in denBorgfelderWiimmewiesen.
Unpublishedreportfor WWF Germany. 16 p.
Steppenstrandl•iufers
Limnodromussemipalmatusam Baikalsee.
Limicola 15: 105-115.
Wymenga, E. 1999.MigratingRuffsthroughEurope,spring1998. Wader
Scott, P.A., C. Lavoie, G.M. MacDonald, B. Sveinbj•irnsson& R.W.
StudyGroup Bull. 88: 43-48.
Yesou, P. & P. Triplet 1996. Un Site d'importanceinternationalepour
Wein (1996). Climate changeand futurepositionof Arctic tree line.
L'avifaune risquede disparaitre:Le lac d'aleg (Mauretanie).Alauda
In: Oechel,W.C., T. Callaghan,T. Gilmanov,J.I.. Holten,B. Maxwell,
64(4): 455-457.
U. Molau & B. Sveinbjbrnsson
(eds.)Global Changeand Arctic TerZ•ickler, C. 1998a. Avifauna. In: Rosenthalet al. Feuchtgriinlandin
restrial Ecosystems.
Springer-Verlag,New York. pp. 245-265.
$eitz, J. 2001. Zur Situationder Wiesenv6gelim Bremer Raum. Corax
Norddeutschland.
Okologie,
Zustand,
Schutzkonzepte.
Angewandte
18, Sonderheft 2: 55-66.
Landschaftsbkologie15:291 Seiten + Anhang.
Z•ickler, C. 1998b. Patternsin Biodiversity in Arctic Birds. WCMC
Skryabin, N.G. & I.I. Toopytsin 1998. Wadersof the KhubsugulLake,
BiodiversityBull. 3: 1- 15.
Mongolia. International WaderStudies10: 358.
Ziickler, C., J.H. Mooij, I.O. Kostin, K. Glinther & R. Br•isecke 1997.
S•irenssen,$. 1999. Svenskfaegelatlas.Vaer Faegelelwaerld.Suppl. 31.
Notes on the distributionof somebird specieson the Taimyr Penin551 p.
Soloviev, M.Y., V.V. Golovnyuk, T.V. Sviridova & E.N. Rakhimbersula. Vogelwelt118: 329-338.
diev 2001. Breedingconditionsand numbersof birds on Southeast- Z•ickler, C. & I. Lysenko 2000. Water birdson the edge:First circumpolar assessment
of climate changeimpacton Arctic BreedingWater
ern Taimyr, 2000. Unpublishedreport.Moscow.37 pp.
$oloviev, M.Y & P. Tomkovich 1999. Arctic breedingconditions1998.
Birds. WCMC BiodiversitySeriesNo. 11.20 p. plus Annex.
Arctic Birds Newsletter 1: 3-16.
Ziickler, C. in press.Tundraand wet grasslandwaders.Similaritiesand
differencesandits implicationsfor natureconservation.Schriftenreihe
Soloviev, M.Y & P. Tomkovich 2000. Arctic breedingconditions1999.
Arctic Birds Newsletter 2: 3-16.
f. Landschpfl.u. Natursch.
Zubakin, V.A., T.V. Sviridova, V.V. Kontorschikov, O.S. Grinchenko,
$oloviev, M.Y & P. Tomkovich 2001. Arctic breedingconditions2000.
Arctic Birds Newsletter 3: 3-22.
E.V. Smirnova, S.V. Volokov, E.D. Krasnova & M.L. Kreindlin
Soloviev, M.Y, P. Tomkovich & N. Davidson 1998. An International
1998. Rare breedingwadersof the Moscow region: distributionand
numbers. International
Wader Studies 10: 303-308.
BreedingConditionSurveyof Arctic Waterfowl: ProgressReport.
Bulletin 97 April 2002