4.7 Article

Post-Soviet agricultural change predicts future declines after recent recovery in Eurasian steppe bird populations

Journal

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
Volume 144, Issue 11, Pages 2607-2614

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2011.07.010

Keywords

Kazakhstan; Land-use change; Grassland; Distance sampling; Grazing

Funding

  1. UK government's Darwin Initiative [18004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The socioeconomic impacts of the break-up of the Soviet Union after 1991 have resulted in massive changes in agriculture on the Eurasian (Pontian) steppe, most of which is now confined to Kazakhstan. Recent trends in agriculture are well documented but their impacts on the characteristic bird community of this vast region, which contains over 10% of the world's remaining grasslands, are poorly understood. We modelled bird population density in a representative region in central Kazakhstan along a land-use gradient ranging from pristine steppe to arable fields and heavily grazed pastures. Long-abandoned arable fields and ungrazed pristine steppe were the most important habitats for most species, and post-1991 abandonment of arable agriculture suggests that many species have enjoyed a period of significant population growth. Livestock concentration effects, leading to high grazing pressure in small areas, are also likely to have benefitted several species of high conservation concern. However, analysis of land-use statistics and socioeconomic surveys among land managers suggest that recent and predicted future trends in agriculture in the steppe zone, particularly the reclamation of abandoned cereal fields and reduced grazing pressure, may cause populations of most species, including a number of biome-restricted species, to decline in the near future. We discuss possible conservation solutions, including improvements in the protected area system and land-sparing options. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available