Deposition of atmospheric N (nitrogen) is assumed to be a major cause of biodiversity decline in Europe. To date, few studies on the direct or indirect effects of N on bird species have been conducted. Using Swiss bird count data and habitat data, we analyzed the correlation of N deposition with numbers of territories of 112 breeding bird species. Fifty-five species had a negative correlation with N, and 21 had a positive correlation. Thirty-six species showed no clear linear relationship. Insectivorous and herbivorous species were more negatively associated with N deposition (insectivores: 23 species with well-supported negative correlation vs. 9 species with well-supported positive correlation; herbivores: 6 vs. 1) than omnivorous birds or birds feeding on vertebrates (2 with negative correlation vs. 2 with positive correlation and 1 with negative correlation vs. 1 with positive correlation, respectively). Species associated with forest (23 negative vs. 3 positive), human settlement and wetland (each 3 negative vs. 0 positive), and birds that could not be attributed to a single guild (3 negative vs. 1 positive) showed mainly a negative relationship with N deposition, whereas more positive than negative correlations were found for alpine (0 negative vs. 2 positive) and common farmland species (0 negative vs. 7 positive). Ground-nesting species were more negatively associated with N deposition (8 negative vs. 2 positive) than species that nest high aboveground (24 negative vs. 11 positive). The negative correlation of N deposition with territory numbers was slightly more pronounced in long-distance migrant species (9 negative vs. 3 positive) than in resident or short-distance migrants (23 negative vs. 10 positive). Rare species were excluded, likely biasing farmland bird results positively. We assumed that differences in the vegetation due to higher N inputs were the main cause for our results. Reduced plant diversity, altered vegetation structure, and more frequent mowing affect breeding habitat and availability of food (invertebrates and seeds) for birds. In Switzerland, airborne N deposition exceeds by far the critical loads for most ecosystems. Our results highlight the urgent need to reduce N deposition to protect a wide range of Swiss bird species.

Various measures are being implemented to preserve and promote the diversity of living organisms in the agricultural landscape. One of these is biodiversity promotion areas. A distinction is made between three categories of biodiversity promotion areas (BFF): BFF QI are managed with specific conditions to promote biodiversity. BFF QII also contain certain indicator plants and/or small structures. BPAs in networking projects are BPA QI or BPA QII, but are specifically created by several managers and other experts with a view to the entire landscape. How effective are these three different categories in promoting biodiversity? Data from the national monitoring program "Species and Habitats in Agriculture - Especes Milieux Agricoles" (ALL-EMA) showed that the diversity of plant species was significantly higher on all BPAs than on normally managed areas; it was particularly high in BPA QII and in BPAs in connectivity projects. Viewed on a large scale, i.e. in landscapes of 1 km(2), the species diversity of plants up to a certain total BFF area benefited in particular from a high proportion of BFF QII in the total BFF area, and above that from the largest possible total area of all BFF categories. The species diversity of butterflies and breeding birds was highest when a high proportion of the largest possible total BFF area was created in connectivity projects. The effort for BFF QII and the implementation of connectivity projects clearly had an effect on biodiversity in the agricultural landscape.

Top predators are often used as sentinel species in contaminant monitoring due to their exposure and vulnerability to persistent, bioaccumulative and, in some cases, biomagnificable contaminants. Some of their ecological traits can vary in space and time, and are known to influence the contamination levels and therefore information on ecological traits should be used as contextual data for correct interpretation of large-scale contaminant spatial patterns. These traits can explain spatiotemporal variation in contaminant exposure (traits such as diet and dispersal distances) or contaminant impacts (traits such as population trend and clutch size). The aim of our research was to review the spatial variation in selected contextual parameters in the Tawny Owl (Strix aluco), a species identified by the COST Action European Raptor Biomonitoring Facility as one of the most suitable candidates for pan-European biomonitoring. A considerable variation in availability of published and unpublished contextual data across Europe was found, with diet being the most extensively studied trait. We demonstrate that the Tawny Owl is a suitable biomonitor at local scale but also that taking spatial variation of other contextual data (e.g. diet) into account is necessary. We found spatial gaps in knowledge about the species ecology and biology in Southern Europe, along with gaps in certain population parameters (e.g. population trends) in several countries. Based on our findings, we proposed a minimal recommended scheme for monitoring of population contextual data as one of the first steps towards a pan-European monitoring scheme using the Tawny Owl.

Abstract In winter 2013/2014 a roost of long-eared owls in Bojnice Spa (central Slovakia) was formed by two subgroups situated 12 meters apart from each other. The diets of both subgroups and the direction of the owls’ departure from the roost were studied at monthly intervals. Owls of the Pinus-subgroup left the roost in a significantly different direction compared with the owls in the Picea-subgroup. The common vole was the most hunted prey in both subgroups. However, comparing the alternative prey of the two subgroups, the wood mouse and other mammals were found significantly more often in pellets of the Picea-sub-group, whereas birds were more frequent in pellets of the Pinus-subgroup. Our results suggest that the different prey hunted by the two subgroups may be a consequence of diverging hunting areas with different availability of alternative prey species.

Abstract Across Europe, patches of un‐cropped land (field margins, fallows, etc.) have been established and managed as part of agri‐environment schemes (AES) to counteract the decrease in farmland biodiversity. Various studies demonstrate a positive impact of such un‐cropped land on different taxa. However, there is potential to further improve the efficiency of fallow options for farmland birds. In a long‐term monitoring, 12 breeding farmland bird species and sizes of perennial fallows were recorded from 1992 to 2015 in a 6.1 km2 area in Switzerland. Furthermore, habitat composition and fallow characteristics were mapped in 2012. We calculated population trends, analyzed habitat associations and revealed the impact of fallow habitat characteristics on territory density. The proportion of fallows in the study site increased from 1.4% (1992) to 8.5% (2012). Population trends of six of 12 censused species increased significantly over the same time, four species showed no trend and trends of two species decreased. Seven species were analyzed in more detail, for five of them fallows were overrepresented around their territory center points compared to arable fields and grassland. The overall territory density of these five species was higher in small fallows which were not placed next to a wood and which held bramble rubus spp., shrubs and the tall‐growing forb goldenrod (Solidago canadensis and S. gigantea). Our study confirms that perennial fallows are a highly suitable option to support different farmland birds in arable landscapes. Yet, we recommend optimizing fallows through careful site selection and management, such that they are not established on shady locations and are structurally diverse by allowing brambles, shrubs, and tall‐growing forbs to occur. We suggest adapting the Swiss AES in this regard. Biodiversity‐related advisory services available for farmers could increase the probability that fallow options are implemented and managed properly for targeted species.

•There is a relationship between beliefs, motivations and implemented ECA on farms.•There are differences between beliefs of organic farmers non-organic farmers.•Financial incentives are independent from beliefs.

Purpose: Farmers hold a key to reaching biodiversity targets, but will only carry out this service to society if they are sufficiently motivated to do so. The aim of this study is to evaluate the potential of on-farm advice as a tool for motivating farmers to take action to preserve or even to enhance biodiversity on their farms. Design/methodology/approach: To address this aim, we surveyed 133 farmers (response rate 43.9%), of whom 23 had received on-farm advice about farmland biodiversity conservation over a period of six years. Findings: The results showed that key beliefs and motivations were positively influenced by farmer advisory services. Farmers who had received advice agreed significantly more strongly in the compatibility of biodiversity conservation and production; that biodiversity is important; and that nature conservation on farms is appreciated by society. Practical Implications: These results allow the conclusion that on-farm biodiversity advice might be a useful way of positively influencing the beliefs and enhancing motivations of farmers to contribute to biodiversity conservation on their farms. Theoretical implications: Although several papers have examined the influence of agricultural extension on farmer behaviour, the results of this study contribute to explaining some of the contradictions in the literature about the effectiveness of advisory services. Furthermore, this study addresses [Batary, P., L. V. Dicks, D. Kleijn, and W. J. Sutherland. 2015. "The Role of Agri-Environment Schemes in Conservation and Environmental Management." Conservation Biology 29: 1006-1016.] challenge that there has been insufficient research on the link between farmer advice and the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes. Originality/value: This paper is among the first to address these research gaps and is the first to examine the influence of advice on farmer conservation behaviour in the Swiss context.

Capsule: Farmers can influence species richness and abundance of typical farmland birds positively, even on rather small farms (20-50ha) within intensively farmed areas.Aims: To assess the impact of farm settings, farm characteristics and heterogeneity of habitats on bird species richness and abundance, and to indicate which actions and measures farmers can take to promote farmland birds at a farm level.Methods: Farmland bird species richness and abundance were modelled as a function of farm settings, farm characteristics and semi-natural habitats on 133 farms. The data were analysed at the farm scale, as this is the operating range' of a farmer, but also at the territory scale, which represents the range birds (mainly passerines) use during the breeding season. Additionally, effects of the farm variables on species abundance/occurrence were investigated for nine widespread species.Results: Farmland bird species abundance (but not richness) was elevated on organic compared to non-organic farms. Farmland bird species richness and abundance increased with decreasing mean field size. Crop diversity had positive effects on five species at the territory scale. Several semi-natural habitats, especially hedgerows, were associated with higher bird species richness and abundance at both farm and territory scales. Settlement revealed rather negative effects at the farm scale, but several positive relations at the territory scale.Conclusion: Birds, especially passerines, are restricted to a small area during the breeding season, and so even small farms can contribute to their protection by growing diverse crops, reducing field size and managing a diversity of semi-natural, uncropped habitats. These measures should ideally be accessible within the relatively small scale of a bird territory.

Breeding bird fauna in a coniferous forest in the northern Prealps after storm Lothar In a 70-hectare large coniferous forest located on the northern edge of the Alps in central Switzerland, Canton of Obwalden, at an altitude of 1260 to 1550 metres above sea level, we surveyed the local breeding bird fauna in 2002 and 2013 by means of point counts as well as additional area searches for rare species. In December 1999, hurricane Lothar caused two large windthrow areas and several smaller areas with scattered throws in the survey range. We found a total of 48 breeding bird species, which is a very diverse species composition for a mountain forest. In the eleven years between surveys, a decline in distribution or abundance was recorded for four species, while seven species showed an increase; a further four species showed no change. For the remaining species, the data sets were too small to reliably estimate changes. A comparison with forest structure data provided by the Swiss Federal Institute of Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL revealed that for five bird species, the changes in distribution or abundance could be explained at least partially by forest succession. In order to obtain realistic distribution and abundance values in this kind of breeding bird survey, it is essential to collect large enough samples and to consider the detection probability of each individual species using appropriate statistical methods.

Le manque de surfaces de promotion de la biodiversite (SPB) de haute qualite explique en partie la baisse continue de la biodiversite dans le paysage cultive. De tres nombreuses exploitations agricoles pourraient ameliorer la qualite de leur SPB. Dans le but d’exploiter ce potentiel, une nouvelle approche, a savoir le conseil d’exploitation global, prend en compte non seulement les parametres ecologiques, mais aussi les parametres economiques de l’entreprise. En comparant apres six ans les exploitations avec et sans conseil, on constate que les SPB des exploitations ayant beneficie d’un conseil sont plus nombreuses et de meilleure qualite que celles du groupe temoin. En effet, la proportion des SPB atteint 15,1 % dans les exploitations avec conseil et leur niveau de qualite II 6,1 % de la SAU, contre respectivement 10,7 % et 2,6 % dans le groupe temoin. Les exploitations conseillees possedent en outre des types de SPB plus diversifies et dix fois plus de SPB de haute qualite dans les terres arables. En outre, une comparaison des contributions a la biodiversite demontre les avantages economiques du conseil. Les couts pour un conseil avec une approche globale peuvent etre couverts en quelques annees par les contributions supplementaires obtenues.

The shortage of high-quality Biodiversity Priority Areas (BPAs) is one reason for the ongoing decline in biodiversity in the cultural landscape. Many farm holdings have the potential to increase the quality of their BPAs. One approach to leveraging this potential is whole-farm extension, which takes into account both the ecological and economic parameters of the farm. A comparison between farms that availed themselves of extension services and those that did not has shown that after six years, the former have established and manage a greater proportion of their land as BPAs, and that these BPAs are of higher quality. On farms that availed themselves of extension services, BPAs accounted for as much as 15,1 % of the total utilised agricultural area (UAA) and BPAs of Quality Grade II constituted 6,1 % of the UAA, whilst the figures for the control group stood at 10,7 % and 2,6 %, respectively. Moreover, farms that made use of extension services established BPA types of greater diversity, and the BPAs they created on arable land were ten times as valuable as those of the control group. Additionally, a comparison of the biodiversity premiums paid has shown that extension yields economic benefits: the higher premiums achieved can amortise the cost of whole-farm extension within just a few years.

Despite the introduction of agri-environmental schemes, no general increase of farmland biodiversity in Europe has been observed. Farmers take decisions about the implementation of agri-environmental schemes at the farm scale, and it is thus highly relevant to assess the relationship between farm management and biodiversity at this scale to increase the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes. The present study quantifies to what extent and with which practices farmers can influence biodiversity on their farm and to what extent conditions outside farmers' control may mediate biodiversity.We grouped 27 variables into four variable sets: (1) ecological compensation (mainly semi-natural habitats), (2) in-field options (e.g. no growth regulator, insecticide and herbicide treatment), and (3) farm characteristics, which can be influenced by farmers (e.g. land-use types) as well as (4) farm settings, which cannot be influenced by farmers (e.g. altitude). As biodiversity metrics, plant, grasshopper, butterfly and bird richness and abundance of farmland target species were assessed on 133 farms of the Swiss Central Plateau from 2009 to 2011. Variance partitioning and generalised linear mixed models were used to analyse the impact of each variable set on farmland species diversity.Our results provide evidence that farmers can indeed positively influence biodiversity by ecological compensation and in-field options. The variables of the ecological compensation set explained the highest proportion in the variation of plant richness and butterfly abundance. We found a significant positive relationship between in-field options and plant abundance. Our study illustrated that the effects of biodiversity-related farming practices differ between species and biodiversity metrics. Conditions outside farmers' control explained a high variation in grasshopper and bird diversity. One variable within the set of farm settings, the degree of consolidation, had a significant negative impact on five out of eight biodiversity metrics (plant, butterfly and bird richness; plant and bird abundance). We demonstrate that farmers can substantially enhance biodiversity on their farms and provide knowledge on how such biodiversity improvements can be achieved by farmers. Further, we highlight the value of new biodiversity-related management practices such as in-field options. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

The population of Brown Hares in the Swiss lowland has been declining for years. In the St. Galler Rhine valley farmland has been ecologically improved with biodiversity promoting areas (BFF) since 1994 with the aim to promote the Brown Hare amongst other species. In this study, we compared the population trend of the Brown Hare with the increase of the BFFs, and also analysed the correlation of Brown Hare density with the proportions of BFF-types and semi-natural areas by means of a habitat model. Therefore a raster with 65 cells was laid over the study site. Since 1998, mainly extensively used meadows showing high ecological quality or including structures (bushes, uncut grass) were implemented and their percentage increased from 1,9 % in 2003 to 5,6 % in 2012. At the same time the Brown Hare population has grown significantly. The habitat model showed that the Brown Hare density in early spring nights was significantly positively correlated with the proportion of extensively used meadows with high ecological quality per cell. The improvement of meadows in the Swiss lowland towards high ecological quality and structural richness is thus a valuable starting point when promoting the Brown Hare.

Assessing biodiversity at the farm scale using a credit point system There has been a drastic decline in farmland biodiversity in recent decades. In spite of direct payments for ecological compensation areas (ECA), specifically for their connectivity and ecological quality, there has been no general recovery in the populations of many species of farmland flora and fauna. While discernibly positive effects of agricultural biodiversity measures have largely been demonstrated at field level, practicable methods for the assessment of biodiversity at the farm scale have largely been lacking, despite the fact that ultimately it is the farm-level implementation of measures that determines their success or failure. In order to assess farm-level biodiversity measures, a credit point system (CPS) was developed. Applying the CPS to 133 farms in the Swiss Central Plateau region, we have shown that the CPS scores correlate with a number of biodiversity indicators (species richness and abundance of plants, butterflies, grasshoppers and breeding birds) and that the point score is therefore reflective of farm-level biodiversity. Meanwhile, the farming organisation IP-SUISSE has passed a biodiversity directive according to which farmers producing under the IP-Suisse label must now reach a minimum point score. Bio Suisse has similarly amended its standards, so that organic farmers must now undertake biodiversity measures. We expect that, in their totality, the additional biodiversity measures undertaken by farmers producing under these labels will result in a substantial enhancement of farmland biodiversity in Switzerland.

2016 war das letzte Jahr im Projekt „Mit Vielfalt punkten“ (MVP). Der Hohepunkt war sicher die Publikation des Handbuches „Biodiversitat auf dem Landwirtschaftsbetrieb“. Dieses Werk liefert Bauernfamilien und Beratenden verstandliche und wertvolle Informationen zur Forderung der Biodiversitat. Ein grosser Teil des Inhalts beruht auf Erfahrungen aus dem Projekt MVP. Das Handbuch fand in Presse und Offentlichkeit eine grosse Beachtung. Die 8500 deutschen Bucher waren bald ausverkauft und eine zweite Auflage wurde gedruckt. Die Auswertungen derjenigen Betriebe, die 2009 eine gesamtbetriebliche Beratung erfahren haben, zeigt, dass die beratenen Betriebe heute deutlich mehr Biodiversitatsforderflachen (BFF) und vor allem mehr BFF der Qualitatsstufe II aufweisen als die Vergleichsbetriebe. Auch die Zahl der Arten und Individuen von Pflanzen und Tagfalter sind heute auf den beratenen Betrieben tendenziell hoher, allerdings ist der Unterschied zu nichtberatenen Betrieben nicht signifikant. Insgesamt hat sich das Projekt MVP als sehr erfolgreich erwiesen, konnten doch alle Ziele erreicht oder gar ubertroffen werden.

Au cours des dernieres decennies, la biodiversite sur les surfaces cultivees a diminue, parfois de maniere drastique. Malgre les paiements directs pour les surfaces de promotion de la biodiversite (SPB), leur mise en reseau et l’amelioration de la qualite ecologique, les populations de nombreuses especes animales et vegetales n’ont pas pu se retablir. Les effets positifs mesurables des mesures de SPB ont ete generalement prouves sur le terrain. Pour l’heure, il n’existe cependant pas de methode utilisable en pratique pour evaluer la biodiversite au niveau des exploitations, bien que ce soit a ce niveau que le succes ou l’echec des mesures doit etre evalue. Un systeme a points a ete elabore pour pouvoir evaluer les effets de mesures en faveur de la biodiversite sur une exploitation agricole. Les auteurs ont montre qu’il existe une correlation entre le systeme a points et une serie de mesures en faveur de la biodiversite (nombre et densite d’especes de plantes, de papillons diurnes, de sauterelles et criquets ainsi que d’oiseaux nicheurs) sur 133 exploitations reparties sur le plateau suisse. Le nombre de points peut donc etre utilise comme indicateur de la biodiversite sur une exploitation. L’association des producteurs IP-Suisse a, depuis, etabli un cahier des charges «Biodiversite ». Pour obtenir le label, les exploitations doivent desormais obtenir un nombre de points minimal. Bio Suisse a egalement adapte son cahier des charges dans ce contexte et les exploitations bio doivent a present prendre des mesures pour favoriser la biodiversite. Ces labels devraient favoriser davantage la biodiversite et contribuer a une amelioration significative a l’echelle nationale des surfaces cultivees en Suisse.

Im Jahr 2015 hat das Projekt Mit Vielfalt punkten – Bauern beleben die Natur (kurz MVP) wesentliche Meilensteine erreicht: Zwei Publikationen konnten in renommierten wissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften veroffentlicht werden: In der einen Veroffentlichung (Birrer et al. 2014) haben wir nachgewiesen, dass die Zahl der Punkte aus dem Punktesystem ein gutes Mass fur die Biodiversitat auf den Betrieben darstellt. Die andere Arbeit (Home et al. 2014) zeigt auf, was die Schweizer Landwirte dazu bewegt, Biodiversitatsfordermassnahmen auf ihren Betrieben umzusetzen. Grosse Schritte wurden auch beim Handbuch moglich. Grundlagen, Vorgehensweisen sowie Massnahmen zur Forderung der Biodiversitat auf Landwirtschaftsbetrieben werden darin fur Praktiker vorgestellt. Eine erste Version des Handbuchs steht kurz vor der Fertigstellung und auch die ersten drei Filme fur die dazugehorende Internetseite sind online abrufbar. Selbstverstandlich erhielten die beteiligten Landwirte weiterhin Beratung und es wurden Kurse zur Verbreitung des bestehenden Wissens gegeben. Weiter wurden die Ergebnisse aus dem Projekt in verschiedensten Kanalen, von Presseberichten bis zu Vortragen an wissenschaftlichen Tagungen weitergeben. Die fur das Jahr 2015 vorgesehenen letzten Feldaufnahmen sind bereits gut vorbereitet. Auf den in den Jahren 2009 und 2012 bearbeiteten Betrieben soll nun zum dritten Mal Daten zur Biodiversitat sowie sozio-okonomische Daten erhoben werden. Diese werden zeigen, ob die im Jahr 2009 getroffene Beratung dazu fuhrte, dass vereinbarten Massnahmen auf den Betrieben umgesetzt wurden und ob davon auch die Biodiversitat profitierte.