DOI - Mendel University Press

DOI identifiers

DOI: 10.11118/978-80-7701-025-2-0044

BIRD OCCURRENCE IN SELECTED ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORS IN AUSTRIA: COMPLEMENTARY MONITORING WITH PHOTO TRAPS

Mořic Jurečka1, Florian Danzinger2,3, Christoph Plutzar4, Jitka Fialová1, Richard Andrášik5, Petr Čermák1
1 Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 3, 613 00 Brno, Czechia
2 Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, 1030 Vienna, Austria
3 Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria
4 Kommunalkredit Public Consulting GmbH, Türkenstraße 9, 1090, Vienna, Austria
5 CDV – Transport Research Centre, Líšeňská 33a, Brno, 636 00, Czechia


Landscapes in Central Europe are currently facing many challenges related to human activities. Among the most serious impacts are the negative consequences of habitat conversion, resulting in habitat fragmentation, loss of connectivity between populations and decline in biodiversity. To mitigate these effects, a number of measures, such as supporting ecological corridors by implementing wildlife crossing structures across critical sections of linear transport, have already been realised or planned. Mitigation measures are mostly designed for umbrella species (usually mammal species). In two pilot areas in Austria, monitoring using photo traps was carried out for a period of more than a year, focussing primarily on mammals, but also providing a unique overview of the occurrence of bird species. A total of 28 bird species were recorded during these monitoring activities. The most common bird species recorded in the cultural landscape include common pheasant (32.55 %), followed by mallard (29.52 %) and pigeon (9.05 %). The majority of bird records were taken on ecological corridor sites in the cultural landscape (95.12 %) compared to sites located at wildlife crossings structures (4.88 %) across expressways and motorways. The highest bird activity was registered during June and July. The data obtained can be useful for nature and landscape conservation and for a better understanding of bird interactions in human-modified landscapes.

Keywords: avian species, biodiversity, cultural landscape, habitat connectivity, wildlife crossings structures, temporal patterns

pages: 44-49, Published: 2025, online: 2025



References

  1. Bart J (2005). Monitoring the Abundance of Bird Populations. The Auk 122: 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1093/auk/122.1.15 Go to original source...
  2. Haslem A, Bennett AF (2008). BIRDS IN AGRICULTURAL MOSAICS: THE INFLUENCE OF LANDSCAPE PATTERN AND COUNTRYSIDE HETEROGENEITY. Ecological Applications 18: 185-196. https://doi.org/10.1890/07-0692.1 Go to original source...
  3. Jurečka M, Andrášik R, Čermák P, Danzinger F, Plutzar C, Grillmayer R, Mikita T, Bartonička T (2024). Influence of land use intensity on ecological corridors and wildlife crossings' effectiveness: comparison of 2 pilot areas in Austria. Nature Conservation 57: 143-171. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.57.117154 Go to original source...
  4. Pérez-Granados C, Traba J (2021). Estimating bird density using passive acoustic monitoring: a review of methods and suggestions for further research. Ibis 163: 765-783. https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.12944 Go to original source...
  5. Pokrovsky I, Kölzsch A, Sherub S, Fiedler W, Glazov P, Kulikova O, Wikelski M, Flack A (2021). Longer days enable higher diurnal activity for migratory birds. Journal of Animal Ecology 90: 2161-2171. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13484 Go to original source...
  6. Randler C, Kalb N (2018). Distance and size matters: A comparison of six wildlife camera traps and their usefulness for wild birds. Ecology and Evolution 8: 7151-7163. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4240 Go to original source...
  7. Reif J, Vermouzek Z, Voříšek P, Romportl D, Rivas-Salvador J, Morelli F (2022). Habitat-specific diversity in Central European birds. Bird Study 69: 72-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063657.2022.2156979 Go to original source...
  8. Šálek M, Kalinová K, Daňková R, Grill S, Żmihorski M (2021). Reduced diversity of farmland birds in homogenized agricultural landscape: A cross-border comparison over the former Iron Curtain. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 321: 107628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107628 Go to original source...
  9. Sauter A, Korner P, Fiedler W, Jenni L (2012). Individual behavioural variability of an ecological generalist: activity patterns and local movements of Mallards Anas platyrhynchos in winter. Journal of Ornithology 153: 713-726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-011-0788-9 Go to original source...
  10. Statistik Austria (2024). Jagdstatistik: Jagdjahr 2023/2024. STATISTIK AUSTRIA Bundesanstalt Statistik Österreich, Wien
  11. Viviano A, Lazzeri L, Vitale A, Mori E (2024). Preliminary data on the activity of male and female common pheasants Phasianus colchicus during the breeding period in a Mediterranean area. Avocetta 48. https://doi.org/10.30456/avo.2024115 Go to original source...
  12. Wix N, Reich M (2019). Time-triggered camera traps versus line transects - advantages and limitations of multi-method studies for bird surveys. Bird Study 66: 207-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063657.2019.1654975 Go to original source...
  13. Wrbka T, Schindler S, Pollheimer M, Schmitzberger I, Peterseil J (2008). Impact of the Austrian Agri-environmental scheme on diversity of landscapes, plants and birds. Community Ecology 9: 217-227. https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.9.2008.2.11 Go to original source...