Distribution in Poland
Breeding grounds of great snipe in Poland are located along the southwestern border of the European range of the species (Kålås et al. 1997b). It nests very rarely in the eastern part of the country - in Podlasie region (mainly the northern part) and the Lublin region, extremely few in the northern part of Mazovia in Wielkopolska regions and ephemerally in West Pomerania (Chodkiewicz et al. 2013). Thanks to the national monitoring scheme and numerous bird inventories as part of developing Natura 2000 management plans and other projects, the abundance and distribution of the species in Poland are well known. In Podlasie region, where more than 70% of the national population of the great snipe occurs, the most important breeding grounds are: Biebrza river valley with 190-220 males (Świętochowski et al. 2016), Narew river valley - 60-85 males (M. Korniluk – unpublished data) and river valleys of Knyszyńska Forest - 25-37 males (Tumiel et al. 2013). In the Lublin region, the number of mating males in 2014 was estimated at 100–120, with the most important breeding grounds in the Zamość region (in river valleys of Zamość Dale and Bełska Plain), where 62-68 males were recorded, the Łęczyńsko-Włodawskie Lake District - 20-30 males and in the middle valley of Bug river - 30-40 males (LTO - unpublished data).
|
Abundance and trends of the Polish population
The main reason for the decline of the great snipe population in Poland and the reduction of its range in relation to the 1980s and 1990s is the loss of breeding habitats due to adverse environmental changes, mainly caused by anthropogenic factors. In the 1990s, the national population of the great snipe was estimated at 750-900 mating males (Pugacewicz 2002). Currently, its number is estimated at 400-550 males (Chodkiewicz et al. 2015). In relation to the 1990s, we can therefore talk about a drastic decrease in the abundance of the species reaching over 40%. Its main cause is the loss of habitats as a result of ceasing extensive use of meadows - overgrowing of open habitats and lowering the groundwater table leading to desiccation of habitats. On some sites, the reason for the species decline was also the intensive use of meadows (Dyrcz 2004, Kålås 2004, Pugacewicz 2002).
Currently, there are still many factors negatively affecting the breeding population of the great snipe in Poland. Based on the national monitoring data from 2010-2014, it was noted that in 2014 the number of mating males was 30% lower than in the reference year of 2010 (Neubauer et al. 2015). The abundance rate increased slightly in 2015-16 compared to 2013, but it might have been related to the natural fluctuations of the species (Kölzsch et al. 2007), all the more so as this increase was insignificant. Disturbing from the point of view of the condition of the population is also the small average size of leks, which in 2015 was on average only 7 males/ lek (MDU). For comparison, in the last decades of the twentieth century leks, e.g. in the Biebrza Marshes were much larger and so in the 1970s they usually had 9-18 males (Dyrcz et al. 1984), and in the 1990s their average size was 15 males (Pugacewicz 2002). |
Great snipe sites in Poland
Great snipe occurs in the area of 40 sites of international significance (IBA) and for 11 it is a qualifying species according to IBA criteria (Wilk et al. 2010). In 29 Natura 2000 sites, the great snipe was listed as a conservation feature and for 18 it is a qualifying species, thus being a subject of protection for these areas. Of the 55 leks found in 2015, only 5 were located outside the Special Protection Areas (SPAs). In terms of numbers, this includes about 5% of males found in that year (according to MDU 2015). In the three already approved management plans for the Natura 2000 (PZO), the great snipe has been recognized as a key species, which means that when planning conservation measures, maintaining the population of the great snipe and its habitats in proper conservation status should take precedence over other conservation objects in these areas.
Conservation measures should first be directed to areas of permanent occurrence of the species, the so-called key sites. Such sites were considered to be those in which the great snipes are subject to protection of the Natura 2000 and where in the last five years at least two leks have been found. This approach will allow to exclude sites with an uncertain breeding status of the species, i.e. ephemeral sites, where found mating birds may be a fraction of passing or dispersing individuals. Based on this criterion, 21 key sites have been selected, of which 19 overlap with the borders of Special Protection Areas, while two sites are not covered by any form of designation.
The table below lists the key sites. The number of great snipes in the column according to the Standard Data Forms (SDF) of individual Natura 2000 areas is not comparable between different areas, as it relates to different periods. Some numbers are also out of date, such as in Biebrza Refuge. The numbers resulting from the MDU also do not necessarily reflect the actual numbers, as the monitoring is carried out only at known sites of the species. Therefore, in the case of the largest refuges (where the abundance estimate is an expert judgment), the abundance from SDF is not consistent with the abundance resulting from the MDU.
Conservation measures should first be directed to areas of permanent occurrence of the species, the so-called key sites. Such sites were considered to be those in which the great snipes are subject to protection of the Natura 2000 and where in the last five years at least two leks have been found. This approach will allow to exclude sites with an uncertain breeding status of the species, i.e. ephemeral sites, where found mating birds may be a fraction of passing or dispersing individuals. Based on this criterion, 21 key sites have been selected, of which 19 overlap with the borders of Special Protection Areas, while two sites are not covered by any form of designation.
The table below lists the key sites. The number of great snipes in the column according to the Standard Data Forms (SDF) of individual Natura 2000 areas is not comparable between different areas, as it relates to different periods. Some numbers are also out of date, such as in Biebrza Refuge. The numbers resulting from the MDU also do not necessarily reflect the actual numbers, as the monitoring is carried out only at known sites of the species. Therefore, in the case of the largest refuges (where the abundance estimate is an expert judgment), the abundance from SDF is not consistent with the abundance resulting from the MDU.