Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 1 - 2, 2005 Nagovor novega urednika The new editor’s address Najprej si nalijmo ~istega vina. Te`ko bo dose~i naravovarstveno in strokovno pronicljivost, ki je odlikovala moje predhodnike na uredni{kem mestu. Tudi odli~ni uvodniki, ki so jih napisali denimo Davorin Tome ({t. 101), Janez Gregori ({t. 121) in Borut Rubini~ ({t. 122), so tako reko~ neponovljivi. Pri prebiranju teh uvodnikov (priznam, le redko sem jih res zavzeto prebral ob prihodu revije) sem bil obenem navdu{en in tudi nekoliko ganjen. Pravi poudarki, prave besede. Ob jubilejih in spominih se namre~ {e prerado zgodi, da sve~ane besede poniknejo v plehkosti. Vse to pa seveda ne pomeni (~e se znova nave`em na prvi stavek), da ne bom naredil vsega, kar je v moji mo~i, da bo revija {e bolj{a kot doslej in da nimam vizije, ki jo imam namen {e oblikovati skupaj s souredniki in uredni{kim odborom. Mislim, da bo debata tekla pribli`no v tejle smeri: na prvem mestu, delo z mladimi avtorji, na drugem, nadaljnja {iritev odli~nega sodelovanja z na{imi partnerji v jugovzhodni Evropi. In na tretjem, nekatere tehni~ne podrobnosti, kot so uvr{~anje v sistem baz Biosis in izdelava doma~e strani. Na ~etrtem, spodbosti prehod objavljanja od ~iste favnistike v ekologijo in varstveno biologijo. Na petem, dvigniti raven statisti~ne kulture v ~lankih. Nemalokrat namre~ trditve sicer dobrih raziskav niso podkrepljene z ustrezno analizo. Glavne smernice programa so sicer `e bile izdelane in sprejete na uredni{kem odboru (Vrezec & [tumberger 2002). Moja poglavitna kratkoro~na vizija pa je, ~e se malce po{alim, da se na naslednji skup{~ini, ko bom stopil v sve~ano dvorano, ne bodo zasli{ali `vi`gi, pa tudi razjarjeni ~lani mi ne bodo metali zvezkov revije v glavo. Torej, ohraniti sedanji nivo revije, kar je `e samo po sebi te`avna naloga glede na odli~no delo prej{njih urednikov. Na vsakem koraku in pri vsakem stiku kot novope~eni urednik sem bil dele`en spo{tovanja do tega, kar stoji za Acrocephalusom in kar je delo mnogih ljudi. Dejstvo je, da je revija `e sedaj in v tem obsegu in dosegu mednarodno priznana, {e posebno veljavo pa ima v regiji, ki jo pokrivamo. Torej, ~e ste pri~akovali sve~an uvodnik, ste verjetno `e dodobra razo~arani. Besede tak{nega kova mi gredo nekoliko te`je z jezika. Druga moja naloga pa je vendarle bolj formalne narave, a toliko bolj prijetna, saj bi vam rad predstavil tri nove ~lane uredni{kega odbora. @e doslej so izdatno pripomogli k nastajanju revije. To so dr. Franc Jan`ekovi~, dr. Nikolai Petkov in Marko Tucakov. Francija slovenskim ornitologom verjetno ni treba posebej predstavljati, trenutno pa pou~uje splo{no in sistematsko zoologijo na Univerzi v Mariboru. Nadaljuje svoje uspe{no udejstvovanje na podro~ju morfometrije in ekomorfologije `ivali, zooarheologije ptic, prehrane sov, favnistike in biodiverzitete vreten~arjev. Nikolai je varstveni direktor na partnerski organizaciji BSPB v Bolgariji in se ukvarja predvsem s preu~evanjem rac ter varstvom vodnih ptic. Med drugim je BirdLifov koordinator skupine za varstvo kostanjevke Aythya nyroca. Nanj ra~unamo kot na nujno okrepitev, saj {tevilo prispevkov iz Bolgarije neprestano nara{~a, prihajajo pa tudi ~edalje bolj kakovostni materiali. Marko je eden najaktivnej{ih ornitologov v Srbiji in ^rni gori, kljub mladosti ima `e sedaj impresivno bibliografijo. Tudi on se ukvarja predvsem s preu~evanjem in varstvom vodnih ptic. Tako kot iz Bolgarije tudi iz Srbije in ^rne gore I Uvodnik / Editorial dobivamo ~edalje ve~ in ~edalje kvalitetnej{e prispevke. Marko in Nikolai sta `e pri pripravi te {tevilke odlo~ilno pomagala in skoraj si ne znam ve~ predstavljati uredni{kega dela brez njunih dragocenih nasvetov. Ekipa sourednikov je ostala ista, k sodelovanju sem povabil tudi dosedanjega urednika dr. Ala Vrezca, kar je z veseljem sprejel. Drugi ~lani uredni{kega odbora so me s svojimi spodbudnimi besedami dobrohotno pahnili v delo, za kar sem jim zelo hvale`en. Od starih ~lanov uredni{kega odbora se je zaradi dru`inskih obveznosti poslovil dr. Kajetan Kravos, za dolgoletno sodelovanje v uredni{kem odboru se mu ob tej prilo`nosti toplo zahvaljujem. Na mojo veliko sre~o je tudi tehni~na ekipa ostala ista, kar je pomenilo pri pripravi prve {tevilke hitro in ute~eno delo. Ne smem pozabiti tudi gladke predaje poslov z dosedanjim urednikom, kar bi lahko strnil v ugotovitev, da je bila revija odli~no urejena in vodena. Al mi je pri za~etnih kr~ih pomagal tudi z mnogoterimi dragocenimi nasveti. Na koncu pa bi rad {e nagovoril bodo~e mlade avtorje, ki morda {ele razmi{ljajo, da bodo rezultate svoje raziskave prvi~ prelili na papir in objavili v Acrocephalusu. Dele`ni boste najbolj{e mo`ne obravnave, vrhunskih recenzentov in vsak va{ prispevek bomo vzeli zelo resno. Citirani boste v vseh pomembnej{ih bazah literature in ~e bo materija prava, bo o va{em ~lanku govorila vsa Evropa. Na misel mi sicer prihajajo besede Winstona Churchilla, po katerih vam lahko obljubim le »kri, pot in solze« in seveda kon~no zmago. Vendar ni druge poti, vsi, ki smo objavljali, smo {li po njej. Le pogum in na delo! Primo` Kmecl Literatura: Vrezec, A. & [tumberger, B. (2002): Acrocephalus – short term journal program. – Acrocephalus 23 (113/114): 113. 2 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih travnikov The population of Corncrake Crex crex at Ljubljansko barje (Central Slovenia) is declining due to early mowing and destruction of the extensively farmed meadows Luka Bo`i~ Dru{tvo za opazovanje in prou~evanje ptic Slovenije (DOPPS – BirdLife Slovenia), Kamen{kova 18, SI-2000 Maribor, Slovenija, e-mail: luka.bozic@dopps-drustvo.si During the regular monitoring of SPAs, the population of Corncrake Crex crex was surveyed in a 140 km2 area at Ljubljansko barje (Central Slovenia) in 2002 and 2003. The census was carried out by 40 volunteers. In 2003, the proportion of meadows, fields and other areas unsuitable for the Corncrake was surveyed in a total area of 4,882.5 ha. The author compared these data with those from 1999. Additionally, the proportion of meadows cut before mid June was established in a 1,600 ha area. The author transferred the data on surveyed Corncrakes into a kilometre grid and compared the results with the censuses from 1992 and 1999. The total numbers of singing Corncrakes counted were 170 and 137 for 2002 and 2003, respectively, i.e. a good 40% less than in the 1992 - 99 period. The Corncrake declined or disappeared from 16 of a total of 91 squares, 32 squares were occupied temporarily, in 42 squares the number was stable or fluctuating, while only in a single square its number increased. A comparison between the censuses showed that the number of squares with more than two birds has decreased and that the number of squares with one or no birds has increased. Squares with a larger proportion of meadows hosted a statistically significantly greater number of singing Corncrakes in 2003. In the years 1999 - 2003, the total area of meadows decreased by 7.8%. Two thirds of these losses are due to the increased field areas, one third due to overgrowing and new buildings built in the area. The decrease of intensively farmed meadows was minor, while the extensively farmed meadows decreased by almost 30%. In the squares where Corncrake was in decline or disappeared, the area of fields did not increase, while the area of extensively farmed meadows decreased by 40%. The decline in its numbers is thus due to the decrease of extensively farmed meadows. A statistically significant positive correlation exists between the area of extensive meadows and the number of Corncrakes in these squares. In 2003, 38% of Corncrakes were recorded in the meadows, which do not enable successful breeding as they were mown before mid June. Early mowing is the cause of probably very low Corncrake’s productivity and its population is probably a sink population. The increased early mowing is probably the main cause for the substantial and rapid decline of this species’ population at Ljubljansko barje. Key words: Corncrake, Crex crex, population decline, extensive meadows, early mowing, Ljubljansko barje, Slovenia Klju~ne besede: kosec, Crex crex, upad populacije, ekstenzivni travniki, zgodnja ko{nja, Ljubljansko barje, Slovenija 3 L. Boži~: Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju travnikov 1. Uvod Raz{irjenost in velikost nacionalne gnezde~e populacije kosca sta v primerjavi z raz{irjenostjo in velikostjo populacij ve~ine drugih gnezdilk v Sloveniji dobro znani (BirdLife International 2002, Polak 2000, DOPPS neobjavljeni podatki). Popisa, ki sta zajela vsa potencialna bivali{~a kosca v Sloveniji, sta bila opravljena v letih 1992/93 in 1999. Populacijski oceni, izdelani na podlagi rezultatov popisov, navajata 510 teritorialnih samcev kosca v letih 1992/93 in 590 leta 1999. Najve~ koscev je bilo v obeh popisnih letih pre{tetih na Ljubljanskem barju (Trontelj 1995 & 2001). Slovenska populacija kosca je bila na podlagi primerjave {tevila koscev na posameznih lokalitetah v tem obdobju ocenjena kot stabilna z velikimi lokalnimi nihanji (Trontelj 2001). Kljub navedeni domnevi pa v Sloveniji do nedavna ni bilo dovolj podatkov, ki bi omogo~ali natan~nej{i vpogled v populacijske trende kosca na najpomembnej{ih lokalitetah. Razvoj in redno opravljanje ustreznega monitoringa kosca je ena izmed nalog z najvi{jo prioriteto v evropskem akcijskem na~rtu za kosca (Crockford et al. 1996) in tudi zakonska obveznost dr`av ~lanic Evropske unije (Direktiva o pticah 79/409/EGS). Posebna obmo~ja varstva (SPA), ki so ob vstopu Slovenije v Evropsko unijo postala del mre`e obmo~ij Natura 2000, so `e bila opredeljena in na podlagi Uredbe o posebnih varstvenih obmo~jih (obmo~jih Natura 2000) tudi uradno sprejeta (Uradni list RS 2004). Med njimi je osem obmo~ij, na katerih je bilo v letih 1992/93 oziroma 1999 pre{tetih vsaj 20 teritorialnih samcev kosca (Bo`i~ 2003). Koscu je bila v minulem poldrugem desetletju namenjena velika pozornost ornitologov, ki je bila predvsem posledica uvrstitve kosca med globalno ogro`ene vrste (Collar & Andrew 1988, Collar et al. 1994, Tucker & Heath 1994). Rezultat na~rtnih popisov v ve~ini evropskih dr`av in Rusiji je bilo tudi mo~no pove~anje ko{~eve populacijske ocene (zbrano v Schäffer & Mammen 1999). Trenutna ocena velikosti svetovne populacije je 1,7 - 3 milijone teritorialnih samcev, od katerih jih 60 - 70% `ivi v Evropi (BirdLife International 2004), ve~ina (1 -1,54 milijona) v evropskem delu Rusije (Mischenko & Sukhanova 1999, BirdLife International 2004). Kosec je status globalno ogro`ene vrste izgubil po zadnji reviziji statusov ogro`enih vrst. Na podlagi ocene, da njegova populacija v naslednjih desetih letih v evropskem delu Rusije ne bo upadla za ve~ kot 10%, je bil kosec na podlagi kriterijev IUCN uvr{~en v kategorijo vrst blizu ogro`enosti (NT – near 4 upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih threatened; BirdLife International 2004). Zgodovina ve~ kot stoletnega upadanja {tevil~nosti kosca in kr~enja njegovega gnezditvenega areala ter vzroki za tako dramati~en upad so najbolje dokumentirani v Veliki Britaniji (Norris 1945 & 1947, Cadbury 1980, Hudson et al. 1990, Stowe et al. 1993, Green & Stowe 1993, Green 1995 & 1996). Green (1995) navaja kot najpomembnej{i razlog za upadanje populacije kosca spremembe v gospodarjenju s travniki, ki je v prej{njem stoletju prehodilo pot od ekstenzivne ro~ne ko{nje, ko{nje s pomo~jo konjskih vpreg, prek vse bolj zgodnje ko{nje, ki jo je omogo~al ve~ji vnos gnojil, do ko{nje s sodobno kmetijsko mehanizacijo. Razvoj slednje omogo~a ~edalje hitrej{o ko{njo, s tem pa se pove~uje dele` gnezd kosca, ki jih ko{nja neposredno ogro`a. V raziskavi, ki je primerjala nekatere kazalce splo{ne intenzitete kmetijske proizvodnje v vseh evropskih dr`avah, je bilo ugotovljeno, da je populacijska gostota kosca v Evropi v zna~ilni negativni korelaciji s stopnjo intenzitete kmetijstva (Green & Rayment 1996). To velja za {tevilne vrste ptic, vezane na kmetijski prostor (Schifferli 1999, Donald et al. 2001). Drugi najpogosteje omenjani vzroki ogro`anja kosca na gnezdi{~ih so spreminjanje ekstenzivnih travnikov v njive, izguba mokri{~ in opu{~anje gospodarjenja (Green et al. 1997). Najve~ja gro`nja koscu na selitvi so najrazli~ej{e oblike lova, raz{irjene predvsem v Egiptu, vendar je njihov vpliv na upad populacije kosca verjetno zelo majhen (Baha el Din et al. 1996). V ~lanku predstavljam rezultate dveh zaporednih popisov kosca na Ljubljanskem barju v letih 2002 in 2003 ter jih primerjam z rezultati prej{njih dveh popisov. Raz~lenjeni so nekateri vzroki za upad populacije na Ljubljanskem barju v zadnjih desetih letih. Ocenjen je tudi vpliv ko{nje travnikov na gnezditveno uspe{nost kosca in trend populacije. 2. Opis obmo~ja in metode 2.1. Opis obmo~ja Oba popisa kosca sta zajela celoten uravnani osrednji del Ljubljanskega barja med Krimskim hribovjem in Meni{ijo na jugu, avtocesto E - 70 in ljubljansko obvoznico na severu ter magistralno cesto Ljubljana -[kofljica - Pijava Gorica na vzhodu. Leta 2003 je bil poleg tega popisan {e del Ljubljanskega barja SZ od avtoceste med Vrhniko, Veliko Ligojno in Drenovim Gri~em, v obeh popisnih letih pa tudi predel med Pijavo Gorico in Gorenjim Blatom. V oba popisa smo vklju~ili tudi del doline @elimelj{~ice med zaselkoma ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 Rogovila in Trnje, ki geografsko gledano sicer ni del Ljubljanskega barja (Perko & Oro`en Adami~ 1999). Povr{ina v letu 2003 popisanega obmo~ja je bila pribli`no 140 km2. Prvi popis kosca na Ljubljanskem barju v letih 1992/93 je zajel samo osrednji del Barja, popis leta 1999 pa tudi vse prej na{tete predele ( P. Trontelj pisno). 2.2. Metode 2.2.1. Popis V letih 2002 in 2003 uporabljena metoda popisa je bila podobna tisti iz let 1992/93 in 1999 (Trontelj 1995 & 2001). Ta metoda je bila razvita v Veliki Britaniji na osnovi {tudije gnezde~ih koscev, ozna~enih z oddajnikom (Hudson et al. 1990). Nekatere podrobnosti v metodi smo prilagodili terenskim razmeram v Sloveniji in razpolo`ljivemu {tevilu popisovalcev. Najpomembnej{a razlika je bila, da smo popisa v letih 2002 in 2003 opravili v dveh ponovitvah. Enkratna ponovitev popisa v roku najve~ 14 dni po prvem popisu je najugodnej{a varianta metode glede na razmerje med vlo`enim trudom in natan~nostjo rezultatov, saj se z njo bistveno pove~a verjetnost registracije samca. Z nadaljnjim pove~evanjem {tevila ponovitev se ta verjetnost le minimalno pove~a (Peake & McGregor 2001). S ponovitvijo popisa smo se sku{ali tudi izogniti kratkemu obdobju, ko so samci skupaj s samicami in se ne ogla{ajo (Tyler & Green 1996, Schäffer 1999). Na terenski delavnici, organizirani pred popisom leta 2002, smo ve~ino manj izku{enih popisovalcev opozorili na dosledno spo{tovanje popisnih navodil. Popisovalci so bili seznanjeni z vsemi mo`nimi dejavniki, ki jih omenja Trontelj (1995) in lahko vodijo v precenitev ali podcenitev dejanskega {tevila koscev. Celotno popisno obmo~je je bilo arbitrarno razdeljeno na 43 popisnih ploskev. Povr{ina posamezne popisne ploskve je bila med 1,48 in 5,95 km2 (povpre~je 3,25 ± 1,05 km2). Leta 2002 je sodelovalo 35, leta 2003 pa 30 popisovalcev. Popisov se je v obeh letih udele`ilo skupno 40 popisovalcev. Vsak je v enem popisnem letu obdelal 1 – 4 popisne ploskve. Leta 2002 smo popis koscev opravili med 15.5. in 30.6., leta 2003 pa med 15.5. in 8.6. S skraj{anjem popisnega obdobja na dobre tri tedne smo se sku{ali izogniti obdobju valjenja (v prvi polovici junija), ko samci zapustijo gnezde~o samico in njen doma~i okoli{ ter zasedejo novo pevsko mesto drugje (Schäffer 1995 & 1999). Prav tako smo `eleli popis koscev opraviti v obdobju, ko ve~ji del ekstenzivnih eno- in dvokosnih travnikov {e ni poko{en (do 10 oziroma 30% poko{enega; Tome 2001). Na rezultate popisa leta 2002 je na nekaterih delih Ljubljanskega barja domnevno pomembno vplivala zgodnja ko{nja, za katero je znano, da lahko povzro~i prekinitev ogla{anja in pred~asen odhod koscev (Green et al. 1997, Tome et al. v tisku). ^eprav prvi kosci na Ljubljansko barje priletijo okoli 1.5. poteka selitev vse do srede maja (Grobelnik & Trontelj 1999), kar smo tudi upo{tevali pri izbiri obdobja popisa. Popisovali smo med 23. in 3. uro. V tem ~asu se samci najbolj konstantno ogla{ajo in so tudi najbolj stacionarni na svojih pevskih mestih (Stowe & Hudson 1991). Izjemoma smo se lotili dela nekoliko prej, vendar nikakor ne pred 22. uro, kar je v skladu z za~etkom teritorialnega ogla{anja samcev kosca v izbranem obdobju popisa (Schäffer 1999). Popisovali nismo v no~eh z de`jem ali mo~nim vetrom, saj lahko ob neugodnih vremenskih razmerah {tevilo koscev mo~no podcenimo (Peake & McGregor 2001). Pred samim popisom so si popisovalci popisne ploskve ogledali podnevi in na~rtovali poti, po katerih so nato opravili terenske obhode. Popisne poti so bile speljane tako, da se je popisovalec vsakemu delu popisne ploskve, kjer bi kosci utegnili bivati, pribli`al najmanj na 300 metrov. Kot potencialna ko{~eva bivali{~a so bili v grobem dolo~eni vsi tipi travnikov, visoka {a{ja Magnocaricion, povr{ine z brestovolistnim osladom Filipendula ulmaria in razli~ne zara{~ajo~e povr{ine. Za kosce neprimernih delov popisnih ploskev (strnjen gozd, intenzivne kmetijske povr{ine in naselja) v no~nem ~asu nismo obiskali. Po popisnih poteh smo hodili po~asi s pogostimi postanki. ^e koscev na nekem zanje potencialno primernem delu popisne ploskve nismo sli{ali takoj, smo po~akali 5 do 10 minut in {ele nato nadaljevali pot. Polo`aje registriranih teritorialnih samcev kosca smo vrisali na ortofoto posnetke. 2.2.2. Popis rabe zemlji{~ in poko{enosti travnikov Popis rabe zemlji{~ smo opravili podnevi, pred prvim no~nim {tetjem koscev. Med popisom smo vrisovali polo`aj in velikost aktivnih njivskih povr{in, pa{nikov in travnikov na ortofoto posnetke v merilu 1:6000, ne glede na vrsto kulturne rastline oziroma pa{ne `ivali ali na~in rabe. Med 9. in 15.6.2003 je vsak popisovalec podnevi popisal {e poko{enost travnikov. Ve~ina popisov je bila opravljena 14. ali 15.6.2003. Tudi tu je bilo treba na ortofoto posnetku ozna~iti natan~en polo`aj in velikost poko{enega dela travnikov na celotni popisni ploskvi. Popis poko{enosti je bil opravljen v obdobju, ko se v 5 L. Boži~: Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih travnikov povpre~ni gnezditveni sezoni izlegajo mladi~i prvega legla (izra~unano po Schäffer 1999 in Grobelnik & Trontelj 1999). Cilj tega popisa je bil evidentirati dele` travnikov, ki jih za ohranjanje ko{~eve populacije kosijo v povsem nesprejemljivem ~asu. 2.2.3. Obdelava in analiza podatkov Pri dolo~itvi skupnega {tevila pre{tetih koscev na Ljubljanskem barju v posameznem letu sem upo{teval podatke obeh {tetij. Kadar sta bili lokaciji koscev, registriranih v dveh lo~enih {tetjih popisa, glede na oznako na ortofoto posnetku medsebojno oddaljeni ve~ kot 300 metrov, sem to {tel kot dva razli~na teritorialna samca. V primeru razdalje, manj{e od 300 m, sem registraciji pripisal enemu samcu. Podatke o lokacijah koscev sem prenesel v 1 x 1 km mre`o Ornitolo{kega atlasa Ljubljanskega barja, tako da sem lahko dolo~il {tevilo koscev za vsak 1 km2 velik kvadrat. ^e sta lokaciji registriranih koscev, ki sta bili pri obdelavi pripisani enemu samcu, le`ali v razli~nih kvadratih, sem podatek uvrstil v kvadrat, v katerem je le`alo razpolovi{~e daljice, ki povezuje lokaciji. Na podlagi rezultatov {tirih popisov (1992/93, 1999, 2002, 2003) sem za vsak kvadrat posebej opredelil trend {tevil~nosti kosca na Ljubljanskem barju v letih 1992 - 2003. Pri tem sem upo{teval le kvadrate, ki so bili popisani v vsaj treh letih. Prav tako nisem upo{teval kvadratov, za katere je manjkal podatek iz prvega popisa, v enem izmed naslednjih popisov pa kosec ni bil ugotovljen. Kadar je manjkal eden izmed podatkov iz zadnjih dveh zaporednih popisov (v letih 2002 in 2003), sem v eni sezoni neobdelanim kvadratom namesto manjkajo~ega podatka pripisal vrednost, pridobljeno s pomo~jo podatkov iz druge sezone. V teh primerih sem podatke pred pripisom korigiral s sezonsko specifi~nim faktorjem, ki upo{teva prispevek posameznega kvadrata k skupnemu {tevilu koscev v eni sezoni. Pri opredelitvi trenda {tevil~nosti kosca sem predvidel naslednje mo`nosti: (1) kosec je v kvadratu izginil oziroma njegova {tevil~nost upada: • kosec, ugotovljen v letih 1992/93 (vsaj 3 osebki) ali 1992 in 1999, v letih 2002 in 2003 pa ne, • v letih 2002 in 2003 najmanj 50% koscev manj kot leta 1999, leta 1992 pa {tevilo koscev ni manj{e za 50%, • ob vsakem popisu pre{tetih najmanj 25% koscev manj kot ob prej{njem popisu; (2) kosec se v kvadratu pojavlja ob~asno (kosec v {tirih popisih v kvadratu zabele`en najve~ dvakrat, izjema je vzorec pojavljanja, pri katerem je bil 6 kosec ugotovljen v letih 1992 in 1999, v letih 2002 in 2003 pa ne); (3) številčnost kosca narašča: • v letih 2002 in 2003 število zabeleženih koscev za najmanj 50% večje kot leta 1999, leta 1992 pa število koscev ni manjše za 50%, • ob vsakem naslednjem popisu od leta 1992 naprej preštetih najmanj za 25% koscev več kot ob prejšnjem popisu; (4) številčnost kosca niha oziroma je stabilna (kadar ni izpolnjen nobeden od gornjih kriterijev). Na oceno velikosti populacije kosca ima pomemben vpliv število ponovitev štetja, saj se s povečevanjem števila ponovitev povečuje verjetnost registracije vseh samcev na popisnem območju (Hudson et al. 1990, Schäffer & Mammen 2003). Zato sem pri primerjavi števila ugotovljenih koscev v posameznih popisih skupnemu številu preštetih koscev iz let 1992/93 in 1999 (eno štetje) prištel 20%, številu preštetih koscev iz popisov v letih 2002 in 2003 (dve štetji) pa 4%. S tem sem odpravil razlike, ki so nastale zaradi neenakega števila štetij pri popisih v posameznih letih. Podatki o travnikih, njivah in pašnikih so bili digitalizirani s pomočjo Geografskega informacijskega sistema (GIS) in preneseni v 1 x 1 km mrežo Ornitološkega atlasa Ljubljanskega barja. Za vsak kvadrat po lkm sem izračunal površino travnikov, njiv, pašnikov in drugih za kosca neprimernih površin (gozd, urbane površine). Travnike in pašnike sem združil v enotno kategorijo. Dvomljivo označenih površin pri analizi nisem upošteval. Pri ugotavljanju sprememb v površinah posameznih kategorij rabe zemljišč sem kot referenco uporabil podatke kartiranja habitatnih tipov Ljubljanskega barja (Kotarac 1999). Za vsako skupino kvadratov z enakim trendom kosca sem posebej izračunal delež travnikov, delež njiv in drugih za kosca neprimernih površin (drugo) v letih 1999 in 2OO3. V nadaljevanju sem za vsako skupino kvadratov z enakim trendom populacije kosca posebej izračunal delež travnikov glede na način rabe (intenzivni ali ekstenzivni). Travniških površin, za katere način rabe ni bil opredeljen, pri analizi nisem upošteval. Na podlagi rezultatov popisa leta 2003 sem kot intenzivne travnike obravnaval tiste, ki so bili sredi junija pokošeni, druge sem obravnaval kot ekstenzivne. Pašnike sem obravnaval kot intenzivne travnike. Pri ugotavljanju sprememb v deležih travnikov glede na način rabe sem kot referenco uporabil podatke kartiranja habitatnih tipov Ljubljanskega barja (Kotarac 1999). Habitatni tip “gojeni travniki” sem obravnaval kot intenzivne travnike, druge traviščne ali podobne habitne tipe (mokrotni ekstenzivni travniki, ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 ¦ Št. preštetih koscev/No. of counted Corncrakes ? Ocena dejanskega št. koscev/Est. of actual numbers 300, 285 270 S250J (0 |200j u "5 ol50j |iooj o •CO 50 236 238 183 160 165 137 1992/93 1999 2002 Leto popisa / Year of census 2003 Slika 1: Število pre{tetih koscev Crex crex in ocenjeno dejansko {tevilo pojo~ih samcev med {tirimi popisi na Ljubljanskem barju. Pri oceni je upo{tevan korekcijski faktor 20% (eno {tetje) ali 4% (dve {tetji). Figure 1: The number of counted Corncrakes Crex crex and number of singing males estimated during the four censuses carried out at Ljubljansko barje. The estimates are corrected by 20% (one count) or 4% (two counts). mokrotni travniki s sto`ko, nitrofilna vegetacija visokih steblik, nizkobarjanske povr{ine, zara{~ajo~e se povr{ine, sestoji z brestovolistnim osladom in visoko {a{je) pa kot ekstenzivne travnike. Za ugotavljanje statisti~ne zna~ilnosti povezav med {tevil~nostjo kosca, trendi in spremembami v rabi zemlji{~ sem uporabil ?2 test ter neparametri~na Mann - Whitneyev test U in Kruskal - Wallisov test, za ugotavljanje korelacij med {tevil~nostjo koscev in povr{ino travnikov v kvadratih po 1 km2 pa Kendallovo korelacijo rangov ?. 3. Rezultati 3.1. [tevilo koscev in trend populacije V popisu leta 2002 je bilo na Ljubljanskem barju pre{tetih 160, leta 2003 pa 137 koscev. Ob korigiranem {tevilu zaradi neenakega {tevila {tetij pri popisih v posameznih letih je populacija kosca v obdobju 1992 - 2003 upadla za 42,1%, v obdobju 1999 - 2003 pa za 38,9% (slika 1). Od skupno 105 kvadratov po 1 km2, v katerih je bil kosec v {tirih popisih ugotovljen vsaj enkrat, sem opredelil trend {tevil~nosti kosca v obdobju 1992 -2003 za 88 kvadratov. Za 17 kvadratov na podlagi zastavljenih kriterijev trenda {tevil~nosti ni bilo mogo~e opredeliti. Kosec je v 16 kvadratih izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo, v 41 kvadratih pa je to {tevilo nihalo oziroma je bilo stabilno. Nadalje je bilo 31 kvadratov zasedenih ob~asno, medtem ko se je {tevilo koscev pove~alo v enem samem kvadratu (slika 2). [tevilo koscev, pre{tetih v vseh {tirih popisih v vsakem izmed 105 kvadratov, je podano v prilogi (tabela 5). Primerjava {tevila kvadratov po 1 km2 z dolo~enim velikostnim razredom {tevila koscev ka`e, da je bilo leta 2003 ve~ kvadratov brez koscev ali z enim samim koscem kot v letih 1992 in 1999. Nasprotno je bilo leta 2003 manj kvadratov z ve~ kot dvema koscema (slika 3). Razlike v {tevilu kvadratov po 1 km2 z dolo~enim velikostnim razredom {tevila koscev med letoma 1999 in 2003 so statisti~no zna~ilne (?2 = 9,75, df = 4, p < 0,05), med letoma 1992 in 1999 pa ne (?2 = 1,08, NS; vsi velikostni razredi skupaj). 3.2. Raba zemlji{~ Analiza rabe zemlji{~ je zajela 58 kvadratov po 1 km2 na Ljubljanskem barju, skupna povr{ina obravnavanih zemlji{~ pa zna{a 4882,5 ha. Leta 2003 je bilo tu 2956,1 ha (60,5%) travnikov, 1196,6 ha (24,5%) njiv in 729,8 ha (14, 9%) drugih za kosca neprimernih povr{in. Analiza podatkov iz kartiranja habitatnih tipov leta 1999 je pokazala, da so bile pet let prej te povr{ine naslednje: 3206,5 ha (65,7%) travnikov, 1091,1 ha (22,3%) njiv in 584,9 ha (12,0%) drugih povr{in. Povr{ina travnikov se je v obdobju 1999 -2003 zmanj{ala za 7,8%, povr{ina njiv pove~ala za 8,8%, povr{ina drugih za kosca neprimernih povr{in pa pove~ala za 19,9%. Razlike med povr{inami vseh treh tipov rabe tal skupaj med letoma 1999 in 2003 so statisti~no zelo zna~ilne (?2 = 31, df = 2, p < 0,001). Primerjava skupin kvadratov z enakim trendom {tevil~nosti kosca v letih 1999 - 2003 ka`e na razli~ne spremembe v odstotkih travnikov, njiv in drugih povr{in. V ob~asno zasedenih kvadratih je bilo zmanj{anje odstotka travnikov najve~je (– 16,3%) in hkrati najve~je pove~anje odstotka njiv (+ 26,1%). V kvadratih, kjer je {tevilo koscev nihalo oziroma je bilo stabilno, je bilo zmanj{anje odstotka travnikov najmanj{e (– 2,8%), v kvadratih, kjer je kosec izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo, pa srednje veliko (– 7,2%). V slednjih dveh skupinah kvadratov se je v obdobju 1999 - 2003 nekoliko zmanj{al tudi odstotek njiv (tabela 1). Razlika v spremembah povr{ine travnikov, njiv in drugih zemlji{~ v obdobju 1999 - 7 L. Boži~: Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih travnikov Slika 2: Raz{irjenost kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju. Vsak izmed prikazanih 105 kvadratov po 1 km2 je bil v ~asu {tirih popisov (1992/93, 1999, 2002 in 2003) zaseden vsaj enkrat. Trenda za prazne kvadrate zaradi manjkajo~ih podatkov ni bilo mogo~e opredeliti. Figure 2: The distribution of Corncrake Crex crex at Ljubljansko barje. Each of the 105 kilometre squares was occupied at least once during the four counts (1992/93, 1999, 2002 and 2003). The squares, where trends could not be determined due to missing data, are empty. 2003 (vsi tipi rabe tal skupaj) v kvadratih, kjer je kosec izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo, in v ob~asno zasedenih kvadratih je statisti~no zna~ilna (Kruskal -Wallisov test, K = 6,98, df = 2, p < 0,05 in K = 14,45, df = 2, p < 0,01). V 20 kvadratih po 1 km2 se je dele` travnikov v obdobju 1999 - 2003 zmanj{al za ve~ kot 10% na posamezen kvadrat (ne glede na trend), in sicer skupno kar za 30% na posamezen kvadrat. Slika 4 prikazuje povr{ino tipov rabe tal na teh 20 kvadratih. Razvidno je, da gre 2/3 izgube travnikov na ra~un pove~anja povr{ine njiv, 1/3 pa na ra~un pove~anja povr{ine drugih za kosca neprimernih zemlji{~. [tevilo koscev v posameznem kvadratu po 1 km2 je odvisno od povr{ine travnikov v kvadratu. Kvadrati z ve~jo povr{ino travnikov so imeli v letih 1999 in 2003 tudi ve~je {tevilo koscev. Leta 2003 je med tema dvema parametroma obstajala statisti~no zna~ilna korelacija (slika 5). Analizo rabe travnikov sem opravil za 43 kvadratov po 1 km2. Leta 1999 je bilo v teh kvadratih 1283,2 ha (65,2%) intenzivnih in 684,4 ha (34,8%) ekstenzivnih travnikov. Leta 2003 sta bili povr{ini 1265,2 ha (72,4%) oziroma 483,5 ha (27,6%) v korist intenzivnih travnikov. Povr{ini obeh tipov travnikov sta se zmanj{ali; povr{ina intenzivnih travnikov za 1,4%, ekstenzivnih travnikov pa za 29,4%. Razlika v povr{ini ekstenzivnih travnikov med letoma 1999 in 2003 je bila statisti~no zna~ilna (Mann - Whitneyev test U, U = 1191, p = 0,01). Primerjava skupin kvadratov z enakim trendom {tevil~nosti kosca ka`e, da se je odstotek ekstenzivnih travnikov najbolj zmanj{al v kvadratih, kjer je kosec izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo (– 40,4%), in ob~asno zasedenih kvadratih (– 54,8%). Zmanj{anje povr{ine ekstenzivnih travnikov v kvadratih, kjer je {tevilo koscev nihalo oziroma bilo stabilno, je bilo manj{e (– 13,1%). V kvadratih, kjer je kosec izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo, se je povr{ina intenzivnih travnikov pove~ala, drugod pa zmanj{ala (tabela 2). Med {tevilom koscev v posameznem kvadratu in povr{ino ekstenzivnih travnikov je v letu 2003 obstajala statisti~no zna~ilna pozitivna korelacija, med {tevilom koscev in povr{ino intenzivnih travnikov pa {ibka negativna povezava, ki ni statisti~no zna~ilna (slika 6). 8 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 „40 a> S 35 §30 115 (a 10 37 26 23 28 29 ¦ 1992/93 34 ? 1999 D 2003 22 23 18 11 Drugo/ Other ___________320,1 2l7,5 Njive/ Fields 593,0 399,0 Travniki/ Meadows ^917 D 2003 1999 3 3 MJL 0 1 2-5 6-10 >10 Št. koscev /No. of Corncrakes Slika 3: Število kvadratov po 1 km2 z dolo~enim velikostnim razredom {tevila koscev Crex crex v treh popisih na Ljubljanskem barju Figure 3: The number of km2 squares in separate classes of the number of singing Corncrakes Crex crex during the three censuses carried out at Ljubljansko barje 3.3. Košnja travnikov Popis pokošenosti travnikov sredi junija 2003 je bil v celoti opravljen na 9 popisnih površinah (skupaj 2647,9 ha), s skupno površino travišč 1600 ha. Sredi junija je bilo na teh popisnih površinah 59,7% travnikov pokošenih, nepokošenih je bilo 34,1% travnikov, 6,2% pa je bilo pašnikov. Odstotek za kosca neprimernih travišč (pokošenih travnikov in pašnikov) je bil 65,9% (tabela 3). Razlika med odstotki pokošenih travnikov, nepokošenih travnikov in pašnikov na devetih površinah s pokošenostjo, popisano v celoti, in njihovimi odstotki glede na podatke o rabi travnikov na vseh 43 obravnavanih kvadratih po 1 km2 je statistično zelo značilna (j(2 = 9,86, p<0,007; vsi tipi travišč skupaj). Rezultatov z devetih popisnih površin torej ni mogoče neposredno posploševati na celotno Ljubljansko barje. Na devetih popisnih površinah je bilo med predhodnim štetjem koscev zabeleženih 111 registracij koscev ali 61% vseh registracij na Ljubljanskem barju v letu 2003. 43 oziroma 37,8% vseh registracij je bilo zabeleženih na travniških površinah, ki v letu 2003 niso omogočale uspešnega gnezdenja kosca (tabela 4). 4. Diskusija 4.1. Število koscev in trend populacije Trontelj (2001) je na podlagi rezultatov dveh nacionalnih popisov kosca zaključil, da je slovenska populacija kosca stabilna z velikimi lokalnimi nihanji. Kljub nekaterim lokalnim spremembam je v tem 987,6 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Površina / Surface area (ha) Slika 4: Primerjava povr{in travnikov, njiv in drugih za kosca Crex crex neprimernih povr{in v 20 kvadratih po 1 km2 na Ljubljanskem barju, kjer se je v obdobju 1999 - 2003 delež travnikov zmanj{al za več kot 10% Figure 4: A comparison between total areas of meadows, fields and other habitats (unsuitable for breeding) in 20 one km2 squares at Ljubljansko barje, where the proportion of meadows dropped by more than 10% during the 1999 - 2003 period ~asu ostala skoraj enaka tudi velikost populacije na Ljubljanskem barju. Tome (2002) je na izbranem transektu na eni izmed ko{~evih zgostitev na Ljubljanskem barju pri Bevkah {tel vsako leto v obdobju 1998 - 2002. Po {tetju leta 1999 je vsako naslednje leto pre{tel ob~utno manj koscev. Isti avtor ocenjuje, da petletni trend na tako majhnem obmo~ju ni dokaz za upadanje populacije na celotnem Barju. Vendar je zanimivo, da se upad, ki ga je ugotovil Tome 20 40 60 80 100 Površina travnikov / Surface area of the meadows (ha) Slika 5: Korelacija med skupno povr{ino travnikov in {tevilom pre{tetih koscev Crex crex v kvadratih po 1 km2 na Ljubljanskem barju v letu 2003 (Kendallova korelacija rangov T, T = 0,3, z = 2,9, n = 44, p = 0,002) Figure 5: Correlation between the total area of meadows and the number of counted Corncrakes Crex crex in 1 km2 squares at Ljubljansko barje in 2003 (Kendall rank correlation T, x = 0.3, z = 2.9, n = 44, p = 0.002) 9 L. Boži~: Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih travnikov a] 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 S 0 >(/> 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Površina ekstenzivnih travnikov/ Surface area of the extensively farmed meadows (ha) b) » 15 -* 14 g 13 2 12 o H O 10 ¦S 9 . 8 5 7 ^ 6 ^ 5 4 3 2 1 0 I •to 0 20 40 60 80 100 Površina intenzivnih travnikov/ Surface area of the intensively farmed meadows (ha) Slika 6: Korelacija med povr{ino ekstenzivnih travnikov (a) (Kendallova korelacija rangov x, x = 0,31, z = 1,88, n = 19, p = 0,03) oziroma povr{ino intenzivnih travnikov (b) (Kendallova korelacija rangov x, x = - 0,13, NS) in {tevilom pre{tetih koscev Crex crex v kvadratih po 1 km2 na Ljubljanskem barju v letu 2003 Figure 6: The correlation between the surface area of the extensively farmed meadows (a) (Kendall rank correlation x, x = 0.31, z = 1.88, n = 19, p = 0.03) and the surface area of the intensively farmed meadows (b) (Kendall rank correlation x, x = - 0.13, NS) and the number of counted Corncrakes Crex crex in km2 squares at Ljubljansko barje in 2003 (2002) pri Bevkah, časovno ujema z zmanjšanjem števila koscev na celotnem Barju (slika 1). Očitno je, da se je število koscev močno zmanjšalo med letoma 1999 in 2002. Zastavlja se vprašanje, ali gre za dejanski negativni trend populacije kosca ali pa le za naravno populacijsko nihanje. Nihanja velikosti populacij so pri pticah nekaj povsem običajnega (Gill 1995). V stabilnem okolju se pri manjših vrstah normalno pojavljajo nihanja do 100%, pri večjih pa so navadno manjša (Newton 1998). Na Cerkniškem jezeru so bila v trinajstih letih rednega {tetja zabele`ena nihanja v {tevil~nosti koscev med posameznimi leti, ki presegajo 50% (Polak et al. 2004). Vendar podatkov s Cerkni{kega jezera nikakor ne gre posplo{evati, saj primernost tega obmo~ja za kosce v najve~ji meri dolo~a spomladanski nivo poplavne vode, kar ugotavlja `e Trontelj (2001). Polak et al. (2004) so to tudi dokazali s statisti~no analizo. Morda bolj{i primer obmo~ja z malo spremembami v zadnjem desetletju je Planinsko polje, kjer je bilo v treh popisih {tevilo koscev precej podobno (1992 – 31 samcev, 1999 – 29 samcev, 2002 – 26 samcev). Menim, da je ve~ kot 40 - odstotno zmanj{anje {tevila pre{tetih koscev odsev dejanskega negativnega populacijskega trenda. Domnevo potrjujejo tudi podatki iz leta 2004, ko je bilo {tevilo pre{tetih koscev {e ni`je. Povpre~en upad populacije v obdobju 1999 - 2003 je bil 10% na leto, kar je zelo veliko. Za Veliko Britanijo na primer Green (1995) navaja povpre~en upad za 3,5% na leto v obdobju najve~jega upada. Najve~ji upad, in sicer 80% v petih letih, je bil zabele`en na Irskem (Sheppard & Green 1994). Podoben upad kot na Barju, vendar v enkrat dalj{em obdobju, je bil ugotovljen v Franciji (Broyer 1994). Na posameznih obmo~jih v Veliki Britaniji in na Irskem, po velikosti primerljivih z Ljubljanskim barjem, je populacija v podobnem ~asovnem obdobju upadla za 70% (O’Meara 1986, Green & Stowe 1993). Upad {tevil~nosti kosca na Ljubljanskem barju se ka`e na dva na~ina. Prvi je splo{no zmanj{anje {tevil~nosti, ki je najbolj vidno pri 40 - 50% manj{em {tevilu kvadratov z 2 - 5 kosci v letu 2003. Drugi je mo~no pove~anje {tevila kvadratov brez koscev v omenjenem letu (slika 3). 4.2. Spremembe v rabi zemlji{~ V obdobju 1999 - 2003 se je na Ljubljanskem barju precej spremenila raba zemlji{~. Za kosca najpomembnej{e spremembe so gotovo povezane z zmanj{evanjem povr{ine travnikov. Prva pomembna ugotovitev v zvezi s tem je, da je ve~je {tevilo koscev v posameznem kilometrskem kvadratu povezano z ve~jo povr{ino travnikov. Podobne ugotovitve navaja Green (1996) za Veliko Britanijo in Irsko leta 1993. Korelacija med povr{ino travnikov in {tevilom koscev ka`e, da le kvadrati z vsaj cca. 20 ha travnikov omogo~ajo naselitev kosca. Stowe & Hudson (1991) navajata v svoji raziskavi mediano velikosti doma~ega okoli{a samca kosca 15,7 ha, kar pribli`no ustreza tej vrednosti. Vendar za kosce ni pomembna samo skupna povr{ina travnikov, temve~ predvsem povr{ina ekstenzivnih ic Tabela 1: Primerjava površin ter odstotkov travnikov, njiv in drugih za kosca Crex crex neprimernih površin med letoma 1999 in 2003 v kvadratih po 1 km2 z različnim trendom številčnosti kosca Table 1: A comparison of the areas and percentages of meadows, fields and other habitats (unsuitable for breeding) between 1999 - 2003 in km2 squares with their respective trends of abundance of Corncrake Crex crex Trend številčnosti kosca/ Izginil oz. upada/ Stabilna oz. niha/ Občasno pojavlja nje/ Corncrake's abundance trend Disappeared or declining Stable or fluctuating Occurring irregularly Površina/ % Trend Površina/ % Trend Površina/ % Trend Surface area (%) Surface area (%) Surface area (%) (ha) (ha) (ha) Število kvadratov/ No. of squares 10 29 18 Travniki / Meadows 533.2 68,5 1681,1 67,2 909,0 60,4 1999 Njive / Fields 170,9 22,0 550,4 22,0 358,3 23,8 Drugo / Other 74.2 9,5 268,7 10,7 236,9 15,7 Skupaj / Total 778,3 100,0 2500,2 99,9 1504,2 99,9 Travniki / Meadows 493,5 63,3 -7,4 1634,4 65,4 -2,8 761,1 50,6 -16,3 2003 Njive / Fields 166,5 21,4 -2,6 535,9 21,4 -2,6 484,7 32,2 + 26,1 Drugo / Other 119,8 15,4 + 38,1 328,2 I3,i + 18,1 259,2 17,2 + 8,6 Skupaj / Total 779,8 100,1 2498,5 99,9 1505,0 100,0 Tabela 2: Primerjava površin ter odstotkov intenzivnih in ekstenzivnih travnikov med letoma 1999 in 2003 v kvadratih po 1 km2 z različnim trendom številčnosti kosca Crex crex Table 2: The comparison of areas and percentages of intensively and extensively farmed meadows between 1999 - 2003 in km2 squares with different trends of abundance of Corncrake Crex crex Trend številčnosti kosca/ Corncrake's abundance trend Izginil oz Disappeared < . upada/ ar declining Stabilna oz. niha/ Stable or fluctuating Občasno Occurrin pojavljanje/ g irregularly Površina/ Surface area (ha) % Trend (%) Površina/ Surface area (ha) % Trend (%) Površina/ Surface area (ha) % Trend (%) Število kvadratov/ No. of squares 8 24 n Intenzivni travniki/ 161,2 53,8 663,2 64,8 448,0 79,9 Intens, farmed meadows Ekstenzivni travniki/ 138,6 46,2 360,6 35,2 112,8 20,1 Extens. farmed meadows Skupaj/Total 299,8 100,0 1023,8 100,0 560,8 100,0 Intenzivni travniki/ 183,8 69,0 +12,3 629,9 66,8 -5,0 421,0 89,2 -6,0 Intens, farmed meadows Ekstenzivni travniki/ 82,6 31,0 -40,4 313,3 33,2 - 13,1 51,0 10,8 -54,8 Extens. farmed meadows Skupaj/Total 266,4 100,0 943.2 100,0 472,0 100,0 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 travnikov. Z ve~anjem povr{ine ekstenzivnih travnikov v kvadratih {tevilo koscev nara{~a, kar je potrdila tudi statisti~na analiza. Vendar pa pri tem ne vemo, kolik{en del intenzivnih travnikov uporabljajo kosci na Ljubljanskem barju. Povezanost med {tevilom koscev in povr{ino travnikov se ka`e tudi v primerjavi skupin kvadratov z enakim trendom. Zmanj{anje povr{ine travnikov je bilo manj{e v kvadratih, kjer je {tevilo koscev nihalo oziroma je bilo stabilno, kot pa v kvadratih, kjer je kosec izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo. Analiza kvadratov z najve~jim zmanj{anjem povr{ine travnikov (ne glede na na~in rabe) je pokazala, da gre 2/3 tega zmanj{anja pripisati {irjenju njiv, ki je tako najpomembnej{i dejavnik pri zmanj{evanju povr{ine potencialnega habitata kosca (slika 4). [e ve~ja razlika se poka`e, ~e pogledamo samo zmanj{anje povr{ine ekstenzivnih travnikov, klju~nega dela ko{~evega habitata. Ta razlika jasno ka`e, da je negativni ko{~ev trend povezan predvsem z zmanj{evanjem povr{ine ekstenzivnih travnikov. Zaskrbljujo~e dejstvo je, vsaj glede na podatke iz obdobja 1999 - 2003, da se skupna povr{ina travnikov zmanj{uje skoraj izklju~no na ra~un ekstenzivnih travnikov. Ker pove~anja povr{ine njiv v kvadratih, kjer je kosec izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo, v obdobju 1999 - 2003 ni bilo, sklepam, da sta pri spremembah rabe zemlji{~ najpomembnej{a razloga za upad {tevil~nosti kosca spreminjanje ekstenzivnih travnikov v intenzivne in pove~anje dele`a drugih za kosca neprimernih povr{in (zara{~ene in pozidane povr{ine). Ocenjujem sicer, da je pomen zara{~anja in pozidave zaradi napake pri digitalizaciji podatkov pri primerjavi stanja med letoma 1999 in 2003 pretiran. Najve~je zmanj{anje povr{ine travnikov (tako vseh travnikov kot samo ekstenzivnih) je bilo zabele`eno v ob~asno zasedenih kvadratih, ki pa so imeli v vseh popisnih letih relativno nizko {tevilo koscev (skupaj 7 - 13 koscev). Spremembe v teh kvadratih torej le malo vplivajo na zmanj{anje {tevil~nosti koscev na Ljubljanskem barju. Pogled na karto raz{irjenosti vseh zasedenih kvadratov v {tirih dosedanjih {tetjih ka`e, da ob~asno zasedeni kvadrati le`ijo na robu raz{irjenosti kosca na Barju in bli`je naseljem. Pa{nike, za katere so bili v letu 2003 podatki zbrani lo~eno, sem uvrstil v kategorijo intenzivnih travnikov. Menim, da je z vidika neustreznosti za uspe{no gnezdenje kosca tak{na uvrstitev pa{nikov pravilna. Nekateri pa{niki na Ljubljanskem barju pa so celo tako intenzivni, da so za kosca povsem neprimeren habitat in bi bila zanje primernej{a uvrstitev med druge za kosca neprimerne povr{ine. Negativni vpliv pa{nikov je znan iz Velike Britanije, kjer je pove~anje povr{ine pa{nikov z nizko vegetacijo prispevalo k upadu ko{~eve {tevil~nosti v triletnem obdobju (Green & Stowe 1993). 4.3. Ko{nja travnikov Mehanizacija ko{nje in zgodnja ko{nja sta najpomembnej{a vira ogro`anja kosca v Evropi (Green et al. 1997). V podrobni raziskavi, opravljeni v Veliki Britaniji, je bilo ugotovljeno, da je ~as ko{nje najpomembnej{i dejavnik, ki dolo~a produktivnost ko{~evih lokalnih populacij oziroma njihov trend (Tyler et al. 1998). Na izbranih popisnih povr{inah na Ljubljanskem barju je bilo v letu 2003 uni~enih vsaj 40% vseh prvih legel kosca, kar je sicer precej manj, kot je bil odstotek vseh za kosca neprimernih travi{~ (65%). ^eprav izbrane popisne povr{ine niso reprezentativne za celotno Ljubljansko barje in jih ne ka`e posplo{evati, pa lahko ocenim, da je bil dele` uni~enih legel na celotnem Barju kve~jemu {e ve~ji, saj je odstotek zgodaj ko{enih intenzivnih travnikov v povpre~ju nekoliko vi{ji. Glede na znani potek ko{~evega gnezdenja (npr. Niemann 1995, Schäffer 1999), opazovanja zmanj{ane aktivnosti ogla{anja samcev na Ljubljanskem barju (Grobelnik & Trontelj 1999) in redka opazovanja samic z mladi~i (Polak 2003, Trontelj v tisku) lahko ocenimo, da se begavci prvega legla koscev v Sloveniji v povpre~ju izlegajo okoli srede junija. Na travnikih, poko{enih pred sredo junija, je ve~ina prvih legel kosca uni~enih {e v fazi valjenja ali zelo majhnih mladi~ev, tako da lahko koscem, gnezde~im na teh travnikih, z veliko verjetnostjo pripi{emo popoln gnezditveni neuspeh. Schäffer & Weisser (1996) celo ugotavljata, da je med ko{njo pokon~an dolo~en dele` odraslih samic, ki valijo in do zadnjega trenutka vztrajajo na gnezdih. Seveda pa sta tako ~as izvalitve mladi~ev kot ~as ko{nje med leti posredno odvisna od vremenskih razmer. Tako obstaja z Ljubljanskega barja celo podatek o opazovanju samice z mladi~i konec maja (Grobelnik 2000), kar pa je verjetno prej izjema kot pravilo. Leto 2003 je bilo precej su{no, ko{nja pa zaradi tega zgodnej{a. Dele` poko{enih travnikov sredi junija je bil v tem letu nekoliko nad povpre~jem. Na podlagi modela, ki ga je razvil Tome (2001), lahko ocenimo dele` poko{enih ekstenzivnih travnikov v tem ~asu v povpre~no vla`nem letu na 20 - 50%. Ob izra~unu dele`a uni~enih ko{~evih legel niso upo{tevane izgube, ki nastanejo kot posledica ko{nje po izvalitvi mladi~ev. Mladi~i kosca {e pribli`no 14 dni po izvalitvi zlahka postnejo `rtve ko{nje (Niemann 1995). Pre`ivetje mladi~ev v tem obdobju je mo~no odvisno od na~ina ko{nje (Deceuninck et al. 1997, Tyler et al. 13 Tabela 3: Podatki o površini posameznih tipov rabe travišč na devetih popisnih ploskvah Ljubljanskega barja, ki so bile v letu 2003 vsaj delno pokošene pred ocenjeno speljavo mladičev kosca Crex crex iz prvega legla Table 3: Surface areas of differently used meadows in nine census areas of Ljubljansko barje, which were mown at least partially in 2003, before chicks from the first Corncrake's Crex crex brood were fledged Popisna ploskev/ Census plot Površina popisne ploskve/ Census unit's surface area (ha) Skupna površina travišč/ Total surface area of the meadows (ha) i 382,3 193.1 12 396,6 284,7 13 332.7 128,2 22 286,3 174.9 V 288,1 159.7 36 248,1 143,0 38 183,8 137.7 40 178,6 162,8 43 351.4 216,3 Površina travišč/ surface area of the meadows (ha) Nekošeni travniki/ Unmown meadows 0,0 205,5 54.7 50,0 94,0 32,8 1.3 30,1 76,7 Košeni travniki/ Mown meadows 120,4 63,0 73.5 124,9 65.7 109,9 136,4 132.7 128,9 Pašniki/ Pastures 7^7 16,2 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,3 0,0 0,0 10,7 % travišč, primernih za uspešno gnezdenje kosca/ Datum popisa/ % of meadows Date of census unsuitable for successful breeding 100,0% 21.6.2003 27,8% 16.6.2003 57.3% 16.6.2003 71,4% 16.6.2003 41,1% 14.6.2003 77,1% 15.6.2003 99,1% 12.6.2003 81,5% 11.6.2003 64,5% 14.6.2003 Skupaj/ Total 2647,9 1600,4 545.1 955,4 99,9 65,9% Table 4: Podatki o številu koscev Crex crex na devetih popisnih ploskvah Ljubljanskega barja, ki so bile v letu 2003 vsaj delno pokošene pred ocenjeno speljavo mladičev iz prvega legla šr Table 4: The number of Corncrakes Crex crex in nine census areas at Ljubljansko barje, which were mown at least partially in 2003, before chicks from the first brood were fledged Popisna ploskev/ Census plot i 12 13 22 V 36 38 40 43 Število No. 0 registracij/ f records % registracij na traviščih :primernih za uspešno Datum popisa/ Date of census Skupno število nc koscev/ Nekošeni gnezdenje kosca/ Total No. of travniki/ Košen i travniki/ Pašniki/ % of records in meadows 1. obisk/ 2. obisk/ Corncrakes Unmown Mown meadows Pastures unsuitable for successful 1st visit 2nd visit meadows breeding 8 0 n 5 100,0% 24.5.2003 30.5.2003 18 22 5 0 18,5% 18.5.2003 29.5.2003 3 3 2 0 40,0% 31.5.2003 8.6.2003 14 12 11 0 33,3% 29.5.2003 4.6.2003 14 19 2 0 9,5% 24.5.2003 8.6.2003 1 2 0 0 0,0% 20.5.2003 25.5.2003 6 0 7 0 100,0% 30.5.2003 8.6.2003 1 2 0 0 0,0% Ni podatka/No data 4.6.2003 5 8 0 0 0,0% 18.5.2003 2.6.2003 Skupaj/ Total 70 68 38,7% L. Boži~: Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih travnikov 1998). Po lastnih opazovanjih na Ljubljanskem barju obrazcev in zemljevidov se zahvaljujem naslednjim kosijo travnike skoraj izklju~no od roba parcele proti popisovalcem (abc): Andreju Figlju, Andreji Dremelj, notranjosti v obliki spirale, kar glede na podatke Borutu Mozeti~u, Bo{tjanu Gromu, Bo`i Majstorovi~, razli~nih avtorjev (Broyer 1996, Tyler et al. 1998) Branki Tavzes, Cvetki Marhold, Damijanu Denacu, pomeni 55 do 86 - odstotno izgubo izvaljenih Daretu Fekonji, Daretu [eretu, Darji Hüzimec, mladi~ev. Mo`nosti za oblikovanje drugih legel in Davorinu Tometu, Dejanu Bordjanu, Du{anu Sovi, njihova gnezditvena uspe{nost so zaradi napredovanja Evi Vukeli~, Gorazdu Urbani~u, Igorju Kov{etu, ko{nje nedvomno {e veliko slab{e kot pri prvih leglih. Ivanu Kogov{ku, Ivici Kogov{ku, Jo{tu Stergar{ku, Tu se zastavlja vpra{anje, kak{en vpliv ima ko{nja Jo`efu Osredkarju, Katarini Ale{, Leonu Kebetu, Luki pod zgoraj opisanimi pogoji na ko{~evo populacijo Koro{cu, Maji Cipot, Martinu De Grootu, Mateji na Ljubljanskem barju. V Veliki Britaniji so ocenili, Nose, Metki [tok, Mihi Podlogarju, Milanu Kosiju, da mora vsaka samica kosca uspe{no speljati vsaj tri Nadi Labus, Tanji Benko, Tatjani [krabec, Toma`u mladi~e iz prvega in {tiri iz drugega legla za vzdr`evanje Jan~arju, Ur{i Koce, Valeriji Zak{ek, Vojku Havli~ku, velikosti populacije (Niemann 1995). Ob 8 - 12 @eljku [alamunu, @igi Iztoku Remcu in @ivi Pipan. jajcih v leglu in upo{tevanju zgornjih ocen vidimo, Brez njih popis ne bi bil popoln. Vojku Havli~ku gre da ta pogoj na Ljubljanskem barju vsaj v letu 2003, posebna zahvala za skrbno organizacijo obeh popisov verjetno pa `e vrsto let prej, ni bil izpolnjen. V novej{i in spodbujanje sodelujo~ih. Za pomo~ pri tiskanju {tudiji je bila letna stopnja pre`ivetja odraslih koscev digitalnih ortofoto posnetkov in delu z orodjem ocenjena na samo 0,2 - 0,3, zaradi ~esar je stopnja GIS se zahvaljujem Toma`u Miheli~u. Dr. Davorin rasti ko{~evih populacij {e posebej ob~utljiva za Tome je s svojimi predlogi in kriti~nimi pripombami vplive upravljanja s travniki (Green 2004). Obmo~ja pripomogel k izbolj{anju ~lanka v zgodnjih fazah s habitatom, navidez primernim za gnezdenje, ki njegovega nastajanja. Za natan~no opravljeno delo in pa zaradi dolo~enega dejavnika, na katerega ptice {tevilne koristne nasvete se zahvaljujem recenzentoma. ne reagirajo oziroma {e niso reagirale, ni ustrezen, Vsem najlep{a hvala. so zanje t.i. pasti. Tak{na obmo~ja delujejo kot populacijski ponori, kjer je produktivnost zelo nizka 5. Povzetek (Newton 1998). Primer populacijskega ponora kosca je znan s Poljske, kjer je populacija 700 - 900 samcev V letih 2002 in 2003 je bila v okviru rednega 30 let vztrajala na travnikih kmetijskega kombinata, monitoringa izbranih vrst na posebnih obmo~jih ~eprav so bila v ve~ini let vsa gnezda uni~ena med varstva (SPA) pre{teta populacija kosca Crex crex ko{njo (Schäffer 1995, Schäffer & Weisser 1996). na 140 km2 velikem obmo~ju Ljubljanskega Za odrasle samce kosca je zna~ilna velika zvestoba barja (osrednja Slovenija). Popis je opravilo 40 {ir{i okolici gnezdi{~ (Alnas 1974, Green 1999), kar prostovoljnih popisovalcev. Popis je bil opravljen z vpliv populacijskega ponora {e pove~a. Na Poljskem je uporabo standardizirane metode za popis kosca, ki zaradi velike nacionalne populacije kosca (Gromadzki je bila na podlagi predhodnih izku{enj v letu 2003 1999) najverjetneje mo`no dolgotrajno vzdr`evanje nekoliko modificirana. V letu 2003 je bil na skupno stabilnega {tevila koscev v ponornih populacijah na 4882,5 ha velikem delu povr{ine Barja popisan ra~un prvotnih populacij, kako pa je s tem v Sloveniji, dele` travnikov, njiv in drugih za kosca neprimernih ni jasno. Trontelj (1997) sicer dopu{~a mo`nost, povr{in. Ti podatki so bili primerjani s stanjem v letu da je produktivnost ko{~evih gorskih populacij v 1999. Prav tako je bil na skupno 1600 ha povr{ine Sloveniji visoka in da obstajajo dolo~ene povezave popisan dele` travnikov, poko{enih pred sredo junija. med ni`inskimi in gorskimi populacijami. Dejstvo Podatki o koscih so bili prene{eni v kilometrsko mre`o je, da se prav {tevil~nost koscev na ju`nem obrobju in primerjani s prej{njima popisoma, opravljenima Julijskih Alp zadnja leta pove~uje (Bo`i~, v pripravi), v letih 1992/93 in 1999. Skupno {tevilo pre{tetih vpra{anje pa je, ~e to zadostuje za napajanje domnevno pojo~ih samcev kosca na Ljubljanskem barju v ponornih populacij v ni`inah. Glede na obseg za kosca letih 2002 in 2003 je bilo 170 oziroma 137, kar je ~asovno neugodne ko{nje je verjetno prav ko{nja in z dobrih 40% manj kot ob prvih dveh popisih. Kosec njo povezani nizki gnezditveni uspeh najpomembnej{i je izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo v 16 razlog za tako velik in hiter upad populacije te vrste na med 91 kvadrati po 1 km2 z opredeljenim trendom Ljubljanskem barju. {tevil~nosti, 32 kvadratov je bilo zasedenih ob~asno, v 42 je bilo {tevilo koscev stabilno ali je nihalo, in Zahvala: Za prostovoljno opravljeno terensko delo v le v enem kvadratu je bila zabele`ena rast njihovega letih 2002 in 2003 ter posredovanje skrbno izpolnjenih {tevila. Pri primerjavi posameznih popisov je opazno 16 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 zmanj{evanje {tevila kvadratov z ve~ kot dvema koscema in nara{~anja {tevila kvadratov z enim koscem ali brez njih. Kvadrati z ve~jo povr{ino travnikov so imeli tako v letu 2003 ve~ koscev. Med povr{ino travnikov v kvadratih po 1 km2 in {tevilom pre{tetih koscev obstaja statisti~no zna~ilna pozitivna korelacija. Skupna povr{ina travnikov se je v letih 1999 - 2003 zmanj{ala za 7,8%. Na splo{no gre 2/3 izgub vseh travnikov na ra~un pove~anja povr{ine njiv, 1/3 pa na ra~un pove~anja povr{ine drugih za kosca neprimernih zemlji{~ (zara{~anje, pozidava itd.). Medtem ko je bilo zmanj{anje povr{ine intenzivnih travnikov majhno, pa se je povr{ina ekstenzivnih travnikov zmanj{ala skoraj za 30%. V kvadratih, kjer je kosec izginil oziroma je njegovo {tevilo upadlo, porasta povr{ine njiv ni bilo, povr{ina ekstenzivnih travnikov pa se je zmanj{ala za 40%. Upad ko{~eve {tevil~nosti je torej povezan z zmanj{evanjem dele`a ekstenzivnih travnikov oziroma njihovim spreminjanjem v intenzivne travnike. Med povr{ino ekstenzivnih travnikov v kvadratih po 1 km2 in {tevilom koscev je bila v letu 2003 ugotovljena statisti~no zna~ilna pozitivna korelacija. V letu 2003 je bilo 38% vseh koscev registriranih na travnikih, ki ne omogo~ajo uspe{nega razmno`evanja, saj so bili poko{eni pred sredo junija. Zaradi zgodnje ko{nje je produktivnost populacije kosca na Ljubljanskem barju verjetno zelo nizka in predstavlja tako imenovano ponorno populacijo. Obse`na zgodnja ko{nja je verjetno glavni razlog za veliki in hitri upad ko{~eve populacije na Ljubljanskem barju. 6. Literatura Alnas, I. (1974): Die Ortstreue der gotländischen Wachtelkönige. – Ornis Scandinavica 5: 123 - 129. Baha el Din, S.M., W. Salama, A. Grieve & R.E. Green (1996): Trapping and shooting of Corncrakes on the Mediterranean coast of Egypt. – Bird Conservation International 6: 213 - 227. BirdLife International (2002): European bird populations. Estimates and trends. – BirdLife Conservation Series no. 10, Information press, Oxford. BirdLife International (2004): Threatened Birds of the World 2004. – CD-ROM, BirdLife International, Cambridge. Bo`i~, L. (2003): Mednarodno pomembna obmo~ja za ptice v Sloveniji 2. Predlogi Posebnih za{~itenih obmo~ij (SPA) v Sloveniji. – DOPPS, Monografija DOPPS {t. 2, Ljubljana. Broyer, J. (1994): La régression du râle de genets Crex crex en France et la gestion des milieux prairiaux. – Alauda 62 (1): 1–7. Broyer, J. (1996): »Outward mowing«, as a way of reducing losses of young Corncrakes Crex crex and quails Coturnix coturnix. – Revue d ecologie - la terre et la vie 51 (3): 269 - 276. Cadbury, C.J. (1980): The status and habitats of the Corncrake Crex crex in Britain 1978 - 79. – Bird Study 27 (4): 203 - 218. Collar, N.J. & Andrew A. (1988): Birds to watch: the ICBP world check - list of threatened birds. – International Council for Bird Preservation (Techn. Publ. 8), Cambridge. Collar, N.J., Crosby M.J. & Stattersfield A.J. (1994): Birds to watch 2: the world list of threatened birds. – BirdLife Conservation Series no. 4. BirdLife International, Cambridge. Crockford, N., Green R., Rocamora G., Schäffer N., Stowe T. & Williams G. (1996): Action plan for the Corncrake (Crex crex) in Europe. V: Heredia, B., Rose L. & Painter M. (eds.): Globally threatened birds in Europe – Action plans. – Council of Europe Publishing. Deceuninck, B., Fantin P. , Jolivet C., Loir O., Hermant D., Morel F. & Salamolard M. (1997): Chronologie de la reproduction du râle de genets Crex crex en France. Particularités régionales et évaluation des mesures de conservation. – Alauda 65 (1): 91 - 104. Donald, P.F., Green R.E. & Heath M.F. (2001): Agricultural intensification and the collapse of Europe’s farmland bird populations. – Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 25 - 29. Gill, F.B. (1995): Ornithology. – W.H. Freeman and Company, New York. Green, R.E. (1995): The decline of the Corncrake Crex crex in Britain continues. – Bird Study 42: 66 - 75. Green, R.E. (1996): Factors affecting the population density of the Corncrake Crex crex in Britain and Ireland. – Journal of Applied Ecology 33 (2): 237 - 248. Green, R.E. (1999): Survival and dispersal of male Corncrakes Crex crex in a threatened population. – Bird Study 46 (suppl.): 218 - 229. Green, R.E. (2004): A new method for estimating the adult survival rate of the Corncrake Crex crex and comparison with estimates from ring - recovery and ring - recapture data. – Ibis 146: 501 - 508. Green, R.E. & Stowe T.J. (1993): The decline of the Corncrake Crex crex in Britain and Ireland in relation to habitat change. – Journal of Applied Ecology 30 (4): 689 - 695. Green, R.E. & Rayment M.D. (1996): Geographical variation in the abundance of the Corncrake Crex crex in Europe in relation to the intensity of agriculture. – Bird Conservation International 6: 201 - 211. Green, R.E., Rocamora G. & Schäffer N. (1997): Populations, ecology and threats to the Corncrake Crex crex in Europe. – Vogelwelt 118: 117 - 134. Green, R.E., Tyler G.A., Stowe T.J. & Newton A.V. (1997): Asimulation model of the effect of mowing of agricultural grassland on the breeding success of the Corncrake (Crex crex). – Journal of Zoology 243: 81 - 115. Grobelnik, V. (2000): Ogla{anje, ocena {tevil~nosti in izbira mikrohabitata koscev (Crex crex, L.1758) na dveh lokacijah Ljubljanskega barja. – Diplomska naloga, Biotehni{ka fakulteta, Oddelek za biologijo, Ljubljana. Grobelnik, V. & Trontelj P. (1999): The Corncrake Crex crex in Slovenia. V: Schäffer, N. & Mammen, U. (eds.): Proceedings of the International Corncrake Workshop, Hilpoltstein, Germany. [www.Corncrake.net] 17 L. Boži~: Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih travnikov Gromadzki, M. (1999): The Corncrake Crex crex in Poland. V: Schäffer, N. & Mammen, U. (eds.): Proceedings of the International Corncrake Workshop, Hilpoltstein, Germany. [www.Corncrake.net] Hudson, A.V., Stowe T.J. & Aspinall S.J. (1990): Status and distribution of Corncrakes in Britain in 1988. – British Birds 83 (5): 173 - 187. Kotarac, M. (1999): Kartiranje habitatnih tipov na Ljubljanskem barju. Poro~ilo za MOP UVN Ljubljana & MOL. – Center za kartografijo favne in flore , Miklav` na Dravskem polju. Mischenko, A.L. & Sukhanova O.V. (1999): Corncrake Crex crex in European Russia: methods and results of a large - scale census. – Vogelwelt 120, (suppl.): 323 - 327. Newton, I. (1998): Population Limitation in Birds. – Academic press, London. Niemann, S. (1995): Habitat Management for Corncrakes. A Working Draft. – RSPB Scotland. Norris, C.A. (1945): Summary of a report on the distribution and status of the Corncrake (Crex crex). – British Birds 38: 142 - 148, 162 - 168. Norris, C.A. (1947): Report on the distribution and status of the Corncrake. – British Birds 40: 226 - 224. O’Meara, M. (1986): Corncrake declines in seven areas, 1978 - 85. – Irish Birds 3: 237 - 244. Peake, T.M. & McGregor P.K. (2001): Corncrake Crex crex census estimates: a conservation application of vocal individuality. – Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 24 (1): 81 - 90. Perko, D. & Oro`en Adami~, M. (1999): Slovenija. Pokrajine in ljudje. – Mladinska knjiga, Ljubljana. Polak, S., ed. (2000): Mednarodno pomembna obmo~ja za ptice v Sloveniji. Important Bird Areas (IBA) in Slovenia. – DOPPS, Monografija DOPPS {t. 1, Ljubljana. Polak, S. (2003): Mlada kosca Sre~ko in @ivko pripovedujeta... – Svet ptic 9 (2): 18 - 19. Polak, S., Kebe L. & Koren B. (2004): Trinajst let popisov kosca Crex crex na Cerkni{kem jezeru (Slovenija). – Acrocephalus 25 (121): 59 - 70. Schäffer, N. (1995): Rufverhalten und Funktion des Rufens beim Wachtelkönig Crex crex. –Vogelwelt 116: 141 - 151. Schäffer, N. (1999): Habitatwahl und Partnerschaftssystem von Tüpfelralle Porzana porzana und Wachtelkönig Crex crex. – Ökologie der Vögel 21 (1): 1 - 267. Schäffer, N. & Weisser W.W. (1996): Modell für den Schutz des Wachtelkönigs Crex crex. – Journal für Ornithologie 137: 53 - 75. Schäffer, N. & Mammen U. (1999): Proceedings of the International Corncrake Workshop, Hilpoltstein, Germany. [www.Corncrake.net] Schäffer, N. & Mammen U. (2003): International Corncrake monitoring. Ornis Hungarica 12 - 13: 129 - 133. Schifferli, L. (1999): Changes in agriculture and the status of birds breeding in European farmland. V: Aebischer, N.J., Evans A.D., Grice P. V. & Vickery J.A. (eds.): Ecology and Conservation of Lowland Farmland Birds. – Proceedings of the 1999 British Ornithologist’s Union Spring Conference. 18 Sheppard, R. & Green R.E. (1994): Status of the Corncrake in Ireland in 1993. – Irish Birds 5 (2). Stowe, T.J. & Hudson A.V. (1991): Radio telemetry studies of Corncrake in Great Britain. – Die Vogelwelt 112 (1 - 2): 10 - 16. Stowe, T.J., Newton A.V., Green R.E. & Mayes E. (1993): The decline of the Corncrake Crex crex in Britain and Ireland in relation to habitat. – Journal of Applied Ecology 30 (1): 53 - 62. Tome, D. (2001): Pogoji naravovarstveno in/ali ekonomsko sprejemljive ko{nje travnikov na Ljubljanskem barju. – Nacionalni in{titut za biologijo, Ljubljana. Tome, D. (2002): Ali je populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju ({e) stabilna? – Acrocephalus 23 (113 - 114): 141 - 143. Tome, D., Trontelj P. & Sovinc A. (v tisku): Ornitolo{ki atlas Ljubljanskega barja. – DOPPS, Monografija DOPPS {t. 3, Ljubljana. Trontelj, P. (1995): Popis kosca Crex crex v Sloveniji v letih 1992 - 93. – Acrocephalus 16 (73): 174 - 180. Trontelj, P. (1997): Distribution and habitat of the Corncrake (Crex crex) at the Upper So~a basin (Julian Alps, Slovenia). – Annales 11: 65 - 72. Trontelj, P. (2001): Popis kosca Crex crex v Sloveniji leta 1999 ka`e na kratkoro~no stabilno populacijo. – Acrocephalus 22 (108): 139 - 147. Tucker, G.M. & Heath M.F. (1994): Birds in Europe: their conservation status. – BirdLife Conservation Series no. 3. BirdLife International, Cambridge. Tyler, G.A. & Green R.E. (1996): The incidence of nocturnal song by male Corncrakes Crex crex is reduced during pairing. – Bird Study 43: 214 - 219. Tyler, G.A., Green R.E. & Casey C. (1998): Survival and behaviour of Corncrake Crex crex chicks during the mowing of agricultural grassland. – Bird Study 45: 35 - 50. Uradni list RS (2004): Uredba o posebnih varstvenih obmo~jih (obmo~jih Natura 2000), {t. 49/04. Prispelo / Arrived: 19.7.2004 Sprejeto / Accepted: 19.9.2005 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 PRILOGA / APPENDIX Tabela 5: Števil~ni podatki zabeleženih pojočih koscev Crex crex po letih, kvadratih po 1 km2 in z ocenjenim trendom na Ljubljanskem barju Table 5: Numerical data of singing Corncrakes Crex crex recorded at Ljubljansko barje per year and per km2 squares UTM 1 km 1992 1999 2003 Trend 09/44 08/44 09/45 G4 1 0 H4 3 0 H5 5 4 H6 2 1 H7 0 3 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly H9 0 2 1 I5 4 0 I7 1 4 1 1 niha / fluctuating 18 0 0 1 ob~asno / irregularly I9 7 4 2 upad / declining J6 1 7 1 4 niha / fluctuating J7 2 12 2 1 niha / fluctuating J8 8 3 0 0 izginil / disappeared J9 6 3 1 2 niha / fluctuating A7 1 0 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly A8 2 1 3 2 niha / fluctuating A9 1 0 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly B9 1 0 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly C8 0 0 1 ob~asno / irregularly C9 2 3 1 niha / fluctuating D6 0 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly D8 1 0 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly D9 2 0 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly E3 0 0 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly E7 1 1 0 0 izginil / disappeared E8 4 3 1 1 upad / declining E9 2 3 2 0 niha / fluctuating F6 5 0 0 0 izginil / disappeared F? 0 0 0 1 ob~asno / irregularly F8 3 2 2 2 niha / fluctuating F9 0 2 2 1 niha / fluctuating Go 5 2 2 0 upad / declining Gi 7 6 3 3 upad / declining G2 0 1 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly G4 1 2 0 0 izginil / disappeared G5 1 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly 2002 19 L. Boži~: Populacija kosca Crex crex na Ljubljanskem barju upada zaradi zgodnje ko{nje in uni~evanja ekstenzivnih travnikov 1 km 1992 1999 2002 2003 Trend G6 5 3 2 4 niha / fluctuating G7 6 3 1 2 niha / fluctuating G8 9 5 4 6 niha / fluctuating G9 n 6 9 4 niha / fluctuating Ho 10 2 6 3 niha / fluctuating Hi 11 14 7 9 niha / fluctuating H2 13 11 3 2 upad / declining H3 0 2 2 0 ob~asno / irregularly H4 0 2 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly H5 0 2 3 1 niha / fluctuating H6 0 4 4 1 niha / fluctuating H7 5 5 3 4 niha / fluctuating H8 7 8 2 7 niha / fluctuating H9 4 2 8 14 porast / increasing Io 10 8 10 niha / fluctuating Ii 8 10 8 niha / fluctuating I2 10 5 1 1 upad / declining I4 0 2 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly 16 2 1 1 2 niha / fluctuating I7 0 1 1 18 0 0 0 1 ob~asno / irregularly I9 1 2 5 1 niha / fluctuating Jo 4 1 1 2 niha / fluctuating Ji 3 4 3 3 niha / fluctuating J2 1 1 1 0 niha / fluctuating Ao 2 0 1 Ai 1 3 3 1 niha / fluctuating Bo 1 0 6 Co 0 1 1 Do 3 1 2 1 niha / fluctuating D2 1 0 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly D3 1 0 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly Eo 0 1 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly Ei 0 0 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly E2 3 0 0 0 izginil / disappeared E3 3 1 0 0 izginil / disappeared E4 0 2 0 ob~asno / irregularly Fo 3 1 2 1 niha / fluctuating Fi 2 1 3 1 niha / fluctuating F2 1 0 3 1 niha / fluctuating F3 3 1 2 1 niha / fluctuating 2C ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 3 — 21, 2OO5 UTM 1 km 1992 1999 2002 2003 Trend F4 0 1 2 0 ob~asno / irregularly Go 3 2 0 1 upad / declining Gi 4 1 2 0 niha / fluctuating G2 3 1 1 0 niha / fluctuating G3 3 2 2 1 niha / fluctuating G4 0 3 1 Ho 1 1 1 3 niha / fluctuating Hi 0 1 0 0 ob~asno / irregularly H2 1 1 0 0 izginil / disappeared H3 2 0 0 1 ob~asno / irregularly H4 0 2 4 0 ob~asno / irregularly H5 1 1 0 0 izginil / disappeared H6 1 2 0 li 0 0 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly I3 2 1 1 3 niha / fluctuating I4 1 3 2 6 niha / fluctuating I5 5 9 2 1 upad / declining 16 0 4 0 1 ob~asno / irregularly J4 1 6 3 6 niha / fluctuating J5 0 0 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly J6 0 0 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly J7 1 0 08/46 A4 0 1 1 0 ob~asno / irregularly B6 1 0 2 1 niha / fluctuating C6 4 2 3 niha / fluctuating D6 2 0 0 E6 1 0 F7 2 Skupno / Total 236 238 160 137 21 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 23 — 31, 2OO5 frequency, density and numbers of some breeding birds in the south part of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria) Frekvenca, gostota in {tevil~nost nekaterih gnezdilk ju`nega dela soteske Kresna (JZ Bolgarija) Stoyan Ch. Nikolov1 & Svetoslav D. Spasov2 1 Central Laboratory of General Ecology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Gagarin 2, Sofia 1113, Bulgaria, e-mail: snikolov@ecolab.bas.bg 2 Bulgarian Society for the Protection of Birds / BirdLife Bulgaria, Sofia 1111, P.O. Box 50, Bulgaria, e-mail: svetoslav.spasov@bspb.org A rapid assessment of the frequency, density and numbers of breeding birds was accomplished in the south part of the Kresna Gorge, SW Bulgaria. It was based on 218 counts in 142 point transects during the breeding season of 2003. 74 species were recorded during the study. Most of the species registered have limited distribution within the area. They occupy different types of mosaic habitat where they are abundant (about 90% with relatively low frequency but almost 60% with relatively high or medium density). Local conservation status was established on the basis of frequency and numbers. Lesser Grey Shrike Lanius minor and Honey Buzzard Pernis apivorus, previously unrecorded in the Tissata natural reserve during the breeding season, were recorded, but Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus appears to have been lost since the previous survey. Tw o species are apparently in decline (Rock Thrush and Olive-tree Warbler Hippolais olivetorum) and three (Black-headed Bunting Emberiza melanocephala, Rock Partridge Alectoris graeca and Blue Rock Thrush Monticola solitarius) are increasing in number. Key words: breeding birds, frequency, density, number, point transect, Kresna Gorge, south-west Bulgaria Klju~ne besede: gnezdilke, frekvenca, gostota, {tevil~nost, to~kovni transekt, soteska Kresna, jugozahodna Bolgarija 1. Introduction Nankinov 2001, Stoyanov 2001, Stoyanov et al. 2001). So far there are two papers concerning the The Kresna Gorge is one of the regions with the breeding bird density in some parts of the study area most expressive Mediterranean climatic influence in (Simeonov 1970b, Nanev 1988), but both were made Bulgaria. The presence of Mediterranean elements on the basis of research carried out more than 15 years in the avifauna of this region has excited the interest ago. In addition, the studies of Simeonov (1970b) and of ornithologists and there are a lot of papers dealing Nanev (1988) are more extended or more restricted, with particular observations, separate species or species respectively, with respect to the study area – a study composition and status (Pateff 1938, Balat 1962, with recent data of breeding bird frequency, density, Boev & Paspaleva – Andonova 1964, Michev 1968, numbers and an assessment of their conservation status Simeonov 1970a, Vatev & Simeonov 1978, Vatev et are missing. The results from such study could be very al. 1980, Simeonov & Michev 1980 & 1985, Vatev useful as a basis for future comparisons, for studying 1981, Michev & Petrov 1985, Michev et al. 1986 & bird population trends and for nature conservation 1988, Spiridonov & Simeonov 1988, Kouzmanov et management on a local scale. al. 1995, Obuch & Benda 1996, Spiridonov 1997, The goal of the present study is therefore to 23 S.Ch. Nikolov & S.D. Spasov: Frequency, density and numbers of some breeding birds in the south part of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria) determine the frequency, density, number and current conservation status of the diurnal breeding birds in the south part of Kresna Gorge. 2. Study area The Kresna Gorge is situated in south–west Bulgaria between the mountains Malashevska and Pirin in the Struma River valley (Figure 1). The gorge belongs to the Continental – Mediterranean climatic zone and covers two areas. The lower parts (up to 350 m elevation) belong to the Petrich – Sandanski area and the higher parts to the Malashevski – Pirin low– mountain climatic area (Dimitrov 1966, Stanev Figure 1: Location of the Kresna Gorge in Bulgaria Slika 1: Lega soteske Kresna v Bolgariji 1991). The average annual temperature is 12 to 13°C with warm winters (the mean January temperature is 1 to 2°C and the minimal winter temperature is – 20°C) and very dry summers (the mean July temperature is 24°C and the maximal summer temperature is up to 38°C; Hubenov 2001). The total annual rainfall is 550 mm with a maximum at the end of autumn and the beginning of winter and a minimum at the end of summer. The duration of snow cover is usually 5 – 6 days (with depth 10 – 12 cm), but sometimes up to 15 – 20 days (with depth up to 30 – 40 cm). The rock basis is granite and the soil types are maroon, alluvial, erosive, shallow and skeletal (Hubenov 2001). The vegetation cover of Kresna Gorge falls into the Eastern–Mediterranean province, with vegetation predominantly of the Mediterranean type, and into the xerothermal oak forest belt (Stoyanov 1966, Bondev 1982, 1991 & 1997, Velchev 1982, Velchev & Bondev 1982, Velchev & Tonkov 1986, Stoyanov D. et al. 2001), consisting of plant species such as Greek Juniper Juniperus excelsa forests and evergreen shrubs such as Prickly Juniper Juniperus oxycedrus, 24 Phillyrea Phillyrea latifolia and other southern species such as Christ’s Thorn Paliurus spina–christi, Almond– leafed Pear Pyrus amygdaliformis, Terebinth Pistacia terebinthus and Wild Jasmine Jasminum fruticans. There are also Downy Oak forests Quercus pubescens, plantations of Austrian Pine Pinus nigra, areas under cultivation, with Oriental Plane Platanus orientalis and White Poplar Populus alba along the rivers; see colour appendix. Communities of tree types with high conservation value and included in Annex I of Directive 92/43/EEC are widely presented in the area: Helleno – Balkanic riparian forests, Grecian juniper woods and Greek juniper arborescent matorrals. The Kresna Gorge is one of the most abundant regions in Bulgaria in terms of total number of bird species registered (232) and the relative abundance of breeding bird species (135; Stoyanov et al. 2001). This fact is partly due to the migrating route Via Aristotelis on which the gorge lays. The Kresna Gorge belongs to the Strumsko – Mestenski zoogeographic region (Georgiev 1982 & 2002, Georgiev & Simeonov 1992). The impact of the Mediterranean climate is much more evident in this area and the percentage of Mediterranean bird species (26.5%) is higher than in the other zoogeographical regions in Bulgaria (Georgiev 2002). It is extremely high in the Tissata Natural Reserve (up to 30%; Spiridonov & Simeonov 1988). The region is also the northern limit of distribution, on the national level, of some Mediterranean bird species – Blue Rock Thrush Monticola solitarius, Sardinian Warbler Sylvia melanocephala and Rock Nuthatch Sitta neumayer (Hagemeijer & Blair 1997). According to Borisov & Mihailov (1965) and Sandanski (1978) the Kresna Gorge can be divided into two parts: northern part – narrower, steep and difficult to access – and the southern part – wider and low–pitched. The latter is the subject of the present study. The study area covers 17 km2, extending 7 km to the north of the outflow of the Vlahinska River and 1 – 2 km to the west and to the east of the Struma River (Figure 2). The altitude ranges from 188 to 880 m a.s.l. The study area includes the Tissata Nature Reserve (574.5 ha), the Tissata Important Bird Area (Kostadinova 1997) and the Tissata CORINE subsite (Spiridonov 1997). 3. Methods The study was carried out during the breeding season of 2003 by five experienced observers, for a period of nine days fieldwork, from 15 May to 19 Jun. Days for the fieldwork were selected on the basis of the observers’ availability and weather conditions – they were not ACROCEPHALUS 20 (124): 23 — 31, 2OO5 Figure 2: Location of the study area in the southern part of the Kresna Gorge Slika 2: Lega raziskovanega obmo~ja v ju`nem delu soteske Kresna chosen randomly. For the purpose of the study the method of point transects with full distance estimation was used (Bibby et al. 1992 & 1998, Buckland et al. 1998), a method previously applied in Bulgaria only by Barov (1999) and Sichanov (2002). We chose it because of three main reasons according to Bibby et al. (1992 & 1998) and Buckland et al. (1993): (1) it is often the preferred one in more fine – grained habitats; (2) in shrub habitats point transects are preferred for allowing concentration on birds without noise and the distraction of avoiding obstacles while walking; (3) it is recommended for areas with difficult access. A total of 218 counts were made in 142 point transects. Point transect locations were selected at random in different habitat types within the area. The minimal distance between two adjacent point transects was 200 m. Counts were made 3 minutes after reaching the point at 10 minute intervals, between 6.00 and 11.00 local time in good weather conditions only. For a counting unit in the estimation of breeding bird density we chose one breeding pair, considering each of the following as its equivalent: (1) adult bird observed in a habitat suitable for breeding; (2) singing male; (3) male and female located closely; (4) flock of fledged young birds moving together with or without parents; (5) occupied nest or hollow. Flying birds were not counted. The distance to each counting unit seen or heard was recorded. 76 (53.1%) point transects were visited twice. For each species the higher number of individuals registered from the two counts was used for the density estimation. Data were analyzed by Distance 4.1 Release 2 (Thomas et al. 2003). Multiple covariate distance sampling analysis was applied because in our case the probability of detection was not solely a function of distance from the point, but varied by habitat and we had no stratification by habitat types (Thomas et al. 2003). On the basis of Akaike’s Information Criterion (Akaike 1973) for minimum value selection the model of half – normal key function with cosine series expansion was used. Right truncation at the largest observed distance was made. Numbers of breeding birds were obtained by extrapolation to the total surface of the studied area. We assessed separately and directly (without extrapolation) 21 species with limited distribution inhabiting rocks, riverside habitats and settlements. The formula F = N x 100 / S (Djakov 1971) was applied to calculate the frequency of observed species (F – frequency; N – number of point transects where the species was registered; S – the total number of point transects). We described the breeding frequency using the scale of Petrov & Michev (1986) with some modifications: (1) extremely low frequency (ELF): under 4.99%; (2) rather low frequency (RLF): 5.00 – 14.99%; (3) low frequency (LF): 15.00 – 34.99%; (4) intermediate frequency (IF): 35.00 – 64.99%; (5) high frequency (HF): 65.00 – 84.99%; (6) rather high frequency (RHF): 85.00 – 94.99%; (7) extremely high frequency (EHF): 95.00 – 100%. Frequency was not calculated for those species for which direct assessment of numbers was made. The local conservation status of birds was defined on the basis of juxtaposition of frequency and number. Species with higher frequency and number are considered as having lower conservation status than those with low frequency and number. On the basis of this juxtaposition, the bird species were classified into three groups. The first group consists of species with relatively high frequency and number, the second with intermediate frequency and medium to high number, and the third group with low frequency and number. The present study does not consider Corncrakes Crex 25 S.Ch. Nikolov & S.D. Spasov: Frequency, density and numbers of some breeding birds in the south part of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria) crex, Owls Strigiformes and Nightjar Caprimulgus europaeus, which involve special methods of count because of their night activity, or certain species with very low abundance, for which special research is required. 4. Results We registered 74 species in the study area during the breeding season of 2003, constituting 55% of the previously determined breeding avifauna of the Kresna Gorge (Stoyanov et al. 2001). Regarding the breeding bird diversity, we registered more than 4 breeding species per square kilometre for the studied area. During the point counts 47 species were recorded and their frequency determined (Table 1). 18 species have extremely low frequency, 11 rather low frequency, 13 low frequency, 5 intermediate frequency and none with high frequency. The most frequent species were Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs and Golden Oriole Oriolus oriolus, followed by Nightingale Luscinia megarhynchos, Blackbird Turdus merula, Great Tit Parus major and Ortolan Bunting Emberiza hortulana (Table 1). We estimated the breeding density for 26 species; there was insufficient data for the rest. The numbers of these species were calculated on the basis of the calculated density. Although there was insufficient data for the rest, we made a rough direct assessment of numbers for some of them. The most abundant species (density above 20 pairs/ km2) were the Olivaceous Warbler Hippolais pallida, and Chaffinch followed by Great Tit, Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis and Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes (Table 1). 5 more species were observed at comparatively high density (15 – 20 pairs/km2): Rock Bunting Emberiza cia, Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur, Nightingale, Sombre Tit Parus lugubris and Long–tailed Tit Aegithalos caudatus. There were 5 species with intermediate density (10 – 15 pairs/ km2), 6 with low density (5 – 10 pairs/km2) and 5 with rather low density (D < 5 pairs/km2). We registered a further 28 bird species out of point transects or flying above them. For 17 of these we made a reliable direct estimation of numbers (Table 2). We could not estimate the density or number of breeding pairs for the Alpine Swift Tachymarptis melba, Middle Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos medius, Crested Lark Galerida cristata, Short–toed Lark Calandrella brachydactyla, Black Redstart Phoenicurus ochruros, Lesser Whitethroat Sylvia curruca, Sardinian Warbler ( P. Iankov pers. comm.), Willow Tit Parus montanus, Rock Nuthatch or Tree Sparrow Passer montanus because they were observed only once or twice during 26 our survey, insufficient for reliable estimations. Regarding European conservation status, we observed 14 species (Honey Buzzard Pernis apivorus, Short–toed Eagle Circaetus gallicus, Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos, Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus, Kingfisher Alcedo atthis, Middle – spotted Woodpecker, Syrian Woodpecker Dendrocopos syriacus, Woodlark Lullula arborea, Tawny Pipit Anthus campestris, Olive– tree Warbler Hippolais olivetorum, Red–backed Shrike Lanius collurio, Lesser Grey Shrike L. minor, Masked Shrike L. nubicus, Ortolan Bunting) included in Annex I of Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Regarding local conservation status, three groups of birds were defined using data from breeding frequency and number. The first group consists of Chaffinch, Great Tit and Nightingale. These species inhabit different types of habitats and they are common and abundant, not only in the study area but also on the national level and are not a conservation priority (Hagemeijer & Blair 1997, BirdLife International 2004). The second group comprises Turtle Dove, Olivaceus Warbler, Blackbird, Woodchat Shrike Lanius senator, Hawfinch, Rock Bunting, Ortolan Bunting, Black–headed Bunting Emberiza melanocephala and Corn Bunting Miliaria calandra. Some of these species (Olivaceous Warbler, Woodchat Shrike, Rock and Black–headed Buntings) are important from a conservation point of view because they are not so widespread and numerous on the national level although they are present in high numbers in the studied area. They are also included in Annex II of the Bern Convention. The third group includes the majority of the species observed. This group is of higher conservation importance, particularly regarding some species with limited distribution – the Rock Partridge Alectoris graeca, Black–eared Wheatear Oenanthe hispanica, Orphean Warbler Sylvia hortensis and Blue Rock Thrush, which are included in the Bern Convention. Other species – Chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita, Willow Tit Parus palustris and Lesser Grey Shrike are common on the national scale and are important only regarding the local biodiversity because of their low number in the area. 5. Discussion This study is a rapid assessment of the current status of the local breeding populations and does not claim to be exhaustive, because it does not consider all the breeding bird species in the study area. The results show that all the species registered belong only to the Table 1: Frequency, density and numbers of some breeding birds in the south part of the Kresna Gorge. Frequency (F) was estimated using the formula of Djakov (1971). Frequency categories are described following Petrov & Michev (1986) with some modifications. Density and number of breeding pairs with their coefficient of variation and confidence intervals are computed using the program Distance (Thomas et a/. 2003). Tabela 1: Frekvenca, gostota in števičnost nekaterih gnezdilk v južnem delu soteske Kresna. Frekvenca (F) je bila ocenjena z uporabo formule po Djakovu (1971). Kategorije frekvence so z nekaterimi modifikacijami uporabljene po Petrovu & Michevu (1986). Gostota in število gnezdečih parov s koeficienti variacije in intervalom gotovosti sta bila izračunana z uporabo programa Distance (Thomas et a/. 2003) Frequency / Frekvenca Density / Gostota Species / Vrsta No. of breeding pairs/ St. gnezdečih parov F [%] Category/ Kategorija Breeding pairs/ Gnezdečih parov / km Coef. of var. [%]/ Koef. var. [%1 95% Conf. Int./ 95% interval gotovosti 95% Conf. Int./ 95% interval gotovosti Estimated / Ocena Alectoris graeca Columba palumbus Streptopelia turtur Cuculus canorus Upupa epops Picus viridis Dendrocopos syriacus Lullula arborea Anthus campestris Motacilla alba Erithacus rubecuhi Luscinia megarhynchos Oenanthe hispanica Monticola saxatilis M. solitarius Turdus merula T. viscivorus Hippolais pallida Sylvia cantilhins S. hortensis S. communis 4-9 ELF 20 - 30 2.8 ELF 25 -35 29.6 LF 17.6 17.7 12.4 - 24.9 212 - 423 299 12.7 LF 20 - 25 8.5 RLF 60- 80 2.8 ELF 25 -35 15-5 LF 100 - 150 9.2 RLF 5-7 40.1 2.6 - 12.4 45 - 210 97 1.4 ELF 10 - 20 3-5 ELF 2.1 ELF 30-40 53-5 IF 16.7 10.6 13.5-20.5 230 - 349 283 10.6 RLF 4.4 30.9 2.4 - 8.0 41 - 136 75 1.4 ELF 5.6 RLF 1.1 49.0 0.4 - 2.8 8-48 19 40.8 IF 6-3 14.0 4.8 - 8.2 81 - 140 107 2.1 ELF 50-70 23.9 LF 49-7 20.1 33.6-73.6 571 - 1250 845 4.2 ELF 4-9 ELF 6.1 47.0 2.5 - 14.9 42 - 253 103 14.1 RLF 12.2 24.7 7-5 - 19-7 128 - 335 207 6771 oo Continuation of Table 1 / nadaljevanje tabele 1 Frequency / Frekvenca Density / Gostota No. of breeding pairs/ St. gnezdečih parov Species / Vrsta F [%] Category/ Kategorija breeding pairs km /Gnezdečih parov km Coef. of var. [%]/ Koef. var. [%] 95% Conf. Int./ 95% interval gotovosti 95% Conf. Int./ 95% interval Estimated / Ocena gotovosti S. atricapilla Phylloscopus colly bita Musciaipa striata Parus palustris P. lugubris P. caeruleus P. major Aegithalos caudatus Sitta europaea Oriolus oriolus Lanius collurio L. minor L. senator L. nubicus Garrulus glandarius Sturnus vulgaris Fringilla coelebs Carduelis Moris C carduelis C cannabina Coccothraustes coccothraustes Emberiza cirlus E. cia E. hortulana E. mehinocephahi Miliaria cahindra 12.7 RLF 2.90 29.1 1.7 - 5.1 28- 87 50 2.1 ELF 13-23 2.8 ELF 50-70 1.4 ELF 15-25 15-5 LF 15.36 23.8 9.7 - 24.4 164 - 415 261 3-5 ELF 40 - 60 40.1 IF 23.86 13.1 18.4 - 30.9 313 - 525 406 12.7 RLF 15.20 25.5 9-3 - 25 158 - 425 260 7.0 RLF 60- 80 61.3 IF 11.05 10.3 9.0 - 13.5 153 - 230 188 13.4 RLF 8.50 26.6 5.1 - 14,2 86 - 242 144 1.4 ELF 2-4 20.4 LF 12.20 22.2 7.9 - 18.8 135 - 320 208 1.4 ELF 21.8 LF 5.00 20.6 3-3-74 56 - 126 84 4.2 ELF 64.8 IF 43.70 9.6 36.2- 52.7 615 - 896 743 13.4 RLF 4.00 26.7 2.4- 6.8 41 - 116 69 15-5 LF 23.10 22.3 H-9 - 35-7 254 - 606 392 2.8 ELF 20.4 LF 21.60 19.3 14.8 - 31.6 252 - 536 368 12.7 RLF 4.20 32.0 2.2 - 7.8 38 - 132 71 27.5 LF 19.50 17-3 13.9 - 27.3 236 - 464 331 31.0 LF 8.50 16.7 6.1- 11.8 104 - 201 H? 20.4 LF 14.20 20.6 9.5 - 21.3 161 - 361 242 26.8 LF 12.00 16.6 8.6- 16.6 147 - 281 203 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 23 — 31, 2OO5 categories of low and intermediate frequency (Table 1). This could be explained by the high diversity of fine–grained habitats and by the fact that point transects were not limited to separated habitats but dispersed randomly in different combinations of the habitats present in the study area. We could not compare our results for the breeding bird density with those of Simeonov (1970) because of the different methods applied. There are only fragmentary data concerning the number of certain rare or endangered species in the study area (Spiridonov 1997) so we could not compare all of our results. However we found some changes in the Table 2: Directly estimated numbers of bird species observed outside point transects. The number of pairs is the minimal number of breeding pairs found within the study area according to the definition of “breeding pair” (see Methods). The number of estimated pairs is the largest number of pairs that probably breed within the study area according to the authors’ estimate, made on the basis of all individuals observed. Tabela 2: Ocena {tevil~nosti vrst, najdenih zunaj to~kovnega popisa. [tevilo parov je minimalno {tevilo parov, najdenih med raziskavo, ki so ustrezali kriterijem za gnezditev. Avtorja sta optimalno {tevilo parov ocenila glede na {tevilo vseh opazovanih ptic. No. of breeding pairs/ Št. gnezdečih parov Observed/ Estimated/ Species / Vrsta Opazovani Ocena species composition and number in the Tissata Nature Reserve and Tissata Important Bird Area over the last seven years. We registered two breeding pairs of Lesser Grey Shrikes in the buffer zone of the Tissata natural reserve and one pair of Honey Buzzards, neither of which were reported by Spiridonov & Simeonov (1988). The Long– legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus, reported as breeding in the area, (Spiridonov 1997) was not observed during our study. We registered an increase in number of 3 species and decrease of 2 species. Spiridonov (1997) reported 20 breeding pairs of Black–headed Buntings and 4 – 5 breeding pairs of Rock Partridge and Blue Rock Thrush. According to our results the current number of these species is about 200 pairs of Black–headed Buntings and about 20 pairs of Rock Partridges and Blue Rock Thrushes. On the other hand Spiridonov (1997) estimated that the number of Rock Thrushes and Olive–tree Warblers was 10 and 50 pairs respectively, but our estimate indicates half that number at most. We conclude that most of breeding bird species registered have a limited distribution, inhabiting different types of mosaic habitats where they are relatively abundant. This makes them very sensitive to destruction of their habitat patches and makes the bird diversity of the region very vulnerable in the case of sudden landscape changes in the area. The present study is the first research to be published using the point count technique (Bibby et al. 1992 & 1998, Buckland et al. 1993) and Distance software (Thomas et al. 2003) in Bulgaria. It is also the only one showing quantitative data for the majority of the breeding avifauna in the Kresna gorge that could be used as a basis for tracking population trends in this Important Bird Area / IBA (Kostadinova 1997) and the Tissata nature reserve. We view with apprehension any realization of the idea for enlargement of the highway along the Kresna gorge, since this will have negative effects on the most of the bird species, mainly those belonging to the third group regarding local conservation status (see Results). We would like to recommend quantitative studies on nocturnal birds as Corncrake, Nightjar and Owls that were not estimated during the present study and also on some passerines with high nature conservation status (Hagemeijer & Blair 1997, BirdLife International 2004) and those with low frequency, such as Olive–tree Warbler, Sardinian Warbler and Masked Shrike for which special census methods have to be applied. Acknowledgements: This study was carried out thanks to the financial support from The Bulgarian Society for the Protection of Birds / BirdLife Bulgaria. 29 Pernis apivorus Circaetus gallicus Accipiter nisus Buteo buteo Aquila chrysaetos Falco tinnunculus F. peregrinus Actitis hypoleucos Alcedo atthis Hirundo rupestris H. rustica H. daurica Delichon urbica Motacilla cinerea Cinclus cinclus Corvus corone C. corax I I 2 3 I 2 I 4 1 15 13 50 25 2 1 2 1 1 0 - 1 2 - 4 2 - 4 1 1 - 3 0 - 1 4 - 6 1 - 2 15 - 20 13 - 25 50 - 70 25 - 50 1 - 2 1 - 3 1 S.Ch. Nikolov & S.D. Spasov: Frequency, density and numbers of some breeding birds in the south part of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria) We would like to thank Dr Ventzislav Delov, Atanas Grozdanov and Jordan Hristov for their participation in the data collection and Zoltan Waliczky for his guidance during the preparation of this paper. Povzetek Avtorja sta napravila oceno frekvence, gostote in {tevi~nosti gnezdilk v ju`nem delu soteske Kresna, JZ Bolgarija, in sicer na osnovi 218 {tetij v 142 to~kovnih transektih v gnezditvenem obdobju leta 2003. Popisala sta skupno 74 vrst, ki so na tem obmo~ju raz{irjene ve~inoma lokalno, a z visoko gostoto (90% vrst ima nizko frekvenco, 60% relativno visoko gostoto). Na podlagi podatkov sta ocenila tudi varstveni status obmo~ja. Najdena sta bila ~rno~eli srakoper Lanius minor in sr{enar Pernis apivorus, ki prej nista bila znana kot gnezdilca rezervata Tissata. Med raziskavo pa ni bila odkrita rjasta kanja Buteo rufinus, ki je bila v tem obmo~ju znana iz prej{njih raziskav. Dve vrsti {tevil~no o~itno upadata (slegur Monticola saxatilis in olj~ni vrtnik Hippolais olivetorum), tri pa se pove~ujejo (~rnoglavi strnad Emberiza melanocephala, kotorna Alectoris graeca in pu{~avec Monticola solitarius). References Akaike, H. (1973): Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. pp. 267–281 In: Petran, B. & Csaaki, F. (eds.) International Symposium on Information Theory, 2nd edn. Akadeemiai Kiadi, Budapest, Hungary. Balat, F. (1962): Contribution to the knowledge of the avifauna of Bulgaria. – Prace Brn. Zak. ^av. 34 (10): 445 – 459. Barov, B. (1999): Ecological characteristics of ornithocenosis, inhabiting xerotermous oak forests in the region of the Biala River, Eastern Rodopes. – Sofia Univ. “st. Kl. Ohridski”, Faculty of biology, Section “Ecology and environmental protection”, M. S. thesis. (in Bulgarian) Bibby, C. J., Burgess N.D. & Hill D.A. (1992): Bird Census Techniques. – Academic Press, London. Bibby, C., Jones, M. & Marsden, S. (1998): Expedition Field Techniques. Bird Surveys. - Expedition Advisory Centre, London. BirdLife International (2004): Birds in Europe: Population estimates, trends and conservation status. Cambridge. BirdLife Conservation Series No. 12. BirdLife International, Cambridge. Boev, N. & Paspaleva–Andonova, M. (1964): [Contribution for the survey of the Black Strok (Ciconia nigra L.) in Bulgaria]. – News of the Inst. of zool. with museum 16: 5 – 16 (in Bulgarian). Bondev, I. (1982): Fitogeographical regions in Bulgaria. pp. 443–451. In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol 1. Physical geography. – BAS, Sofia. Bondev, I. (1991): The vegetation of Bulgaria. Map 1 : 600 000 with explanatory text. – St Kliment Ohridski University Press, Sofia. Bondev, I. (1997): Geobotanical zoning. pp. 238–304 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol. 1. Physical geography. – BAS, Sofia. Borisov, Z. & Mihailov, Tz. (1965): Along the Sruma River. – Science and art, Sofia. Buckland, S.T. (1987): On the variable circular plot method of estimating density. – Biometrika 43: 363–384. Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P. & Laake, J.L. (1993): Distance Sampling: Estimating abundance of biological populations. – Chapman & Hall, London. Dimitrov, D. (1966): Climatic division of Bulgaria. pp. 262–293 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol 1. – BAS, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Djakov, J. (1971): About identificating bird species abundance according to their frequency. – Scientific Conference, Smolensk: 301–308. Georgiev, V. (1982): Zoogeographical regions on the basis of the terrestrial fauna. pp. 472–477 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol 1. – BAS, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Georgiev, V. (2002): Zoogeographic regioning. p.p 373– 375, In: Kopralev, I. (ed.) Geography of Bulgaria. – ForCom, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Georgiev, V. & Simeonov, S. (1992): [Zoogeographical characteristic of the breeding birds in Bulgaria] – Annual of Sofia Univ. “St. Kliment Ohridski”, Facuty Of Biology, Book 1 – Zoology, 80: 200–210. (in Bulgarian) Hagemeijer, E. & Blair, M. eds. (1997): The EBCC Atlas of European Breeding Birds: Their Distribution and Abundance. – T & A D Poyser, London. Hubenov, Z. (2001): Physicogeographical characteristic of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria). pp. 7-22. In: Beron, P. (ed.): Biodiversity of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria). – National Museum of Natural History, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Kostadinova, I. (1997): Important bird areas in Bulgaria. – BSPB, Conservation Series – Book 1, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Kouzmanov, G., Todorov, R. & Stoyanov G. (1995): Information sur la repartition et la situation des rapaces nocturnes en Bulgarie. Newsletter of the World Working Group on Birds of Prey and Owls (WWGBP) 21/22: 14–17. Michev, T. (1968): About the distribution and breeding biology of the Egiptian Vulture (Neophron percnopterus L.) in Bulgaria. – Bull. of the Inst. of zool. with museum 27: 65–79. (in Bulgarian) Michev, T. & Petrov, Tz. (1985): Distribution and number of the Saker Falcon, Falco cherrug Gray, 1834 in Bulgaria. – International symposium “Protection of natural areas and the genetic fund they contain”. Project No. 8 on the programme “Man And Biosphere” (MAB) of UNESCO, Collection of reports, BAS, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Michev, T., Petrov, Tz., Profirov, L. & Spiridonov, J. (1986): Contribution for the distribution and number of the Raven (Corvus corax (L.) in Bulgaria between 1950 and 1984. – Ecology 19: 27-35. (in Bulgarian) 3C ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 23 — 31, 2OO5 Michev, T., Petrov, Tz., Profirov, L. & Gavrailov, S. (1988): Distribution and nature defensive status of the Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos (L.), 1758 in Bulgaria. – Bull. of the museums of south Bulgaria 15: 79–87. (in Bulgarian) Milchev, B. (1991): Ornithocenological study in the Strandja mountains in Bulgaria. – Sofia University “St. Kl. Ochridski”, Faculty of biology, Section of zoology and antropology, dissertation. (in Bulgarian) Nanev, K. (1988): [About the number of some mediterrenian bird species in the south part of Kresna Gorge]. – Orn. Inf. Bull. 23/24: 106–108 (in Bulgarian) Nankinov, D. (1982): Ecological review of the birds of “Kastrakli” Natural reserve and Trigradsko – Yagodinski region of the Rodopes. – Ecology 10: 22–34. Nankinov, D. (1997): Composition of the avifauna of the Sylver Pine ecosystems. – Forest science 3/4: 84–95. Nankinov, D. N. (2001): About the first and following observations of the Masked shrike (Lanius nubicus Lichtenstein) in Bulgaria. V: Geoecological and bioecological problems of the North Black Sea Coast. Proceeding of International Conference. Tiraspol, March 28–30, 2001. – EPD DSU – ECODNIESTER, Tiraspol. Nikolov, S. & Vassilev, V. (2004): Census of breeding birds in the Ponor Mountains, western Bulgaria. – Bird Census News 16(2), in print. Obuch, J. & Benda, P. (1996): Contribution to the feeding ecology of Strix aluco and Bubo bubo (Aves: strigiformes) in southwestern Bulgaria. – Acta Soc. Zool. Bohem. 60 (1): 43–49. Pateff, P. (1938): Die geographische Verreitung der Vögel in Bulgarien. – IX Congres ornith. intern. Rouen 1983: 257–283. Petrov, T. & Michev, T. (1986): Upon defining the nature protective status of birds according to their frequency and abundance. – Bull. of the museums of South Bulgaria 12: 43–48. Sandanski, B. (1978): The Kresna Gorge. – Medcine & Sports, Sofia. Sichanov, D. (2002): Ornithocenological analysis of some habitats with conservational importance in the Rilski Monastery Natural Park. – Sofia Univ. “St. Kl. Ohridski”, Faculty of biology, Section “Ecology and environmental protection”, M.S. thesis. (in Bulgarian) Simeonov S. (1970a): Uber Verbreitung meditrraner Vogelarten in Bulgarien. – Die Vogelwelt 2: 59–67. Simeonov S. (1970b): Study of breeding avifauna in pseudomaquis plant communities in the Pirin Mountains. – Annual of Sofia Univ. “St. Kl. Ohridski”, Faculty of biology, Book 1 – Zoology, 63: 15–26. Simeonov, S. (1971): Ornithocenological research in Pirin Mountains. – Sofia University “St. Kl. Ochridski”, Faculty of biology, dissertation. (in Bulgarian) Simeonov, S. (1986): The birds of Pirin Mountains. pp. 7 – 22 In: Fauna of southwest Bulgaria, Vol 2. – BAS, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Simeonov, S. & Michev, T. (1980): Investigation of the distribution and number of the Red–rumped Swallow Hirundo daurica rufula (Temminck) in Bulgaria. – Ecology 7: 84–93. (in Bulgarian) Simeonov, S. & Michev, T. (1985): On the present distribution and abundance of the Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo (L.) in Bulgaria. – Ecology 15: 60–65. (in Bulgarian) Spiridonov Z. (1997): Tissata. pp. 49–50 V: Kostadinova, I. (ed.): Important Bird areas in Bulgaria, Conservation Series of BSPB, Vol 1. – BSPB, Sofia. Spiridonov, Z. & Simeonov, P. (1988): Studies on the nesting ornithofauna of the “Tisata” reserve. pp. 23–29 In: Fauna of Southwestern Bulgaria, Vol 2. – BAS, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Stanev, S. (1991): Climatic zones and areas in Bulgaria. pp. 53– 9 In: The climate of Bulgaria. – BAS, Sofia. Stoyanov, N. (1966): Vegetation cover. pp. 445–482 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol 1. Physical geography. – BAS, Sofia. Stoyanov, G. (2001): Die Maskengrasmücke – eine neue Art für die bulgarische Ornithofauna. – Orn. Mitt. 53 (10): 336-338. Stoyanov, G., Kotsakov, G., Todorov N. & Bojilov, V. (2001): Species composition, occurrence and conservation status of the ornithofauna in Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria). pp. 305–323. In: Beron, P. (ed.): Biodiversity of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria). – National Museum of Natural History, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Stoyanov, D., Petrova, S., Petrova, L. & Kovatchev, A. (2001): Flora and vegetation of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria). pp. 23–30 In: Beron, P. (ed.): Biodiversity of Kresna Gorge (SW Bulgaria). – National Museum of Natural History, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Thomas, L., Laake, J.L., Strindberg, S., Marques, F.F.C., Buckland, S.T., Borchers, D.L., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P., Hedley, S.L., Pollard, J.H. & Bishop, J.R.B. (2003): Distance 4.1. Release “2”. Research Unit for Wildlife Population Assessment, University of St. Andrews, UK. http://www.ruwpa.st – and.ac.uk/distance/ Vatev, I. (1981): [Rare birds in Kresna Gorge] . – Nature protection 7: 14–15. (in Bulgarian) Vatev, I. & Simeonov, P. (1978): [Notes for some birds found in the south part of Kresna Gorge]. – Orn. Inf. Bull. 4: 15–20. (in Bulgarian) Vatev, I., Simeonov P. , Michev, T. & Ivanov, B. (1980): The Masked shrike (Lanius nubicus Lichtenstein) – a breeding species in Bulgaria. – Acta zool. bulg. 15: 115 – 118. (in Bulgarian) Velchev, V. (1982): Mediterranean vegetation. Vegetation zones. pp. 434–439 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol. 1. Physical geography. – BAS, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Velchev, V. & Bondev, I. (1982): Xerothermous oak forests belth. pp. 439–440 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol. 1. Physical geography. – BAS, Sofia. (in Bulgarian) Velchev, V. & Tonkov, S. (1986): Vegetation and flora of Southwestern Bulgaria. pp. 20–43 In: Fauna of Southwestern Bulgaria, Vol 1. – BAS, Sofia. Prispelo / Arrived: 22.12.2004 Sprejeto / Accepted: 19.9.2005 3I Acrocephalus x6 (124): 33 - 35, 2005 A new breeding site of the Rook Corvus frugilegus in south–eastern Anatolia (Turkey) Novo gnezdi{~e poljske vrane Corvus frugilegus v JV Anatoliji (Tur~ija) Recep Karakas University of Dicle, Science & Art Faculty, Department of Biology, 21280 Diyarbakir, Turkey, e-mail: rkarakas@dicle.edu.tr 1. Introduction The Rook Corvus frugilegus is known as a breeding bird in some parts of Turkey, commonly in the east of the country and also in central Anatolia and Thrace (Kasparek 1989). It is chiefly resident in Turkey, though some birds from north and inner Anatolia probably migrate to the south of the country, especially in colder winters, and gather into large groups (for example, thousands of individuals could be seen in Nizip, Halfeti, §anhurfa, Viranşehir, etc. during winter season according to my personal observations from 2000 onwards). The share of the immigration from other areas outside Turkey to this area is not known. south-eastern Anatolia has steppe vegetation but the use of steppe for arable farming, that is not a suitable habitat for breeding of Rook, is increasing. According to the available literature, there are no breeding records for the Rook from the south-east of Turkey (e.g. Beaman 1986, Martins 1989, Eames 1990, Ayvaz 1993, Kirwan & Martins 1994, Biricik 1996, Kirwan & Martins 2000, Karakas & KiLig 2002, Kirwan et al. 2003). The Rook has not been known to breed in south-eastern Anatolia, which was originally a steppe region, probably due to the region’s greater aridity and extremely hot summers which give too short a period for breeding (Kasparek 1989). Kasparek & Bilgin (1996) did not include south-eastern Anatolia in the distribution area of the species. 2. Study Area and Methods Between 2002 and 2004 a breeding colony of Rook was found at Qöltepe, which is located 65 km east of Diyarbakir, in the Bismil district and Batman province (Figure 1). The area is a large plain with a dry and irrigated agricultural area with grain, tobacco and cotton crops. The colony is situated on trees in the garden of the railway station, which is located parallel to the Bismil - Batman main road (at the 20th km) at the north side, in the Qöltepe Village (UTM: 37S 658943 E / 4190687 N). Ornithological trips to the Hasankeyf region were conducted from October 2002 to July 2004, regularly once a week, within the scope of an avifaunistic research project. During the project, observations were made of differing duration and using standard ornithological equipment and identification methodology (Harrison 1975, Heinzel et al 1998 & Mullarney et al 1999). Figure 1: Location of the breeding site in south-eastern Anatolia Slika 1: Položaj gnezdišča v jugovzhodni Anatoliji Turčije 3. Results and Discussion There were 29 occupied nests on two trees - a Honey Locust Gleditsia triacanthos and a White Mulberry Morus alba. Most of the nests (26) were built on the Honey Locust tree. The nests were constructed on high branches in rather isolated groups. The apparently well-built nests consisted mainly of branches and twigs and were as large as 50 - 60 centimetres in diameter, and in the shape of a hemisphere. Both pasture and agricultural areas were used for feeding. Also, the road was frequently visited for feeding on insects, birds, and small mammals killed by traffic. This feeding behaviour (collecting on roads) has been already described (Cramp 1998). The main feeding grounds were the fields between Batman and Bismil. There are some seasonal scattered pools in the area that Rooks also visited. During the winter period 33 R. KarakAS: A new breeding site of the Rook Corpus fugilegus in South—eastern Anatolia (Turkey) they use these areas together with Jackdaws Corvus monedula, in large groups, until the end of March. We noted that, during the breeding season, Rooks do not go over the mountain pass between Batman and Hasankeyf. Jackdaws also do not pass to the west of the mountain pass during the breeding season. The numbers of breeding Rooks remained constant over the two years. Non-breeding birds formed 15 - 35% of the population. The total number of birds was around 100. Breeding started in mid April. On 28 June 2003, young individuals were observed in a group, with adults, on the ground of pasture area near Çöltepe village. Young individuals were determined by a white fleck at the back of the bill and dark brownish feathers, and were also smaller than adults. The same colony was observed in the study area during 2004. Kasparek (1989), in his study, noted 60 - 65 known breeding sites of Rook in Turkey but did not mention any from south-eastern Anatolia. The breeding areas, eastern Anatolia, central Anatolia and Thrace, are isolated from one another. Turkey’s Rook population is virtually restricted to steppe and open cultivated valleys. The assumed population size in Turkey is 10.000 - 50.000 pairs (Kasparek & Bilgin 1996, Cramp 1998). Due to the climatic changes that occur in south-eastern Turkey, suitable habitats and conditions for this species are appearing. The region is undergoing climatic changes as a result of the developing South-east Anatolia Project (GAP) which is increasing the percentage of land under water. As a result, many parts of the steppe areas have been converted to arable land by irrigation, which presumably affects climate. There may thus be a relation between climatic change and breeding of the Rook in the region. The population size of Rook has decreased in parts of central Europe due to changing land-use and agricultural methods, including use of pesticides and probably other factors such as climate and food availability, that are capable of affecting the breeding success of the species (Cramp 1998). Acknowledgements: This work is a part of a research study supported by the Research Fund of Dicle -University (DÜAPK-02-FF-24). Summary The Rook Corvus frugilegus is known as a breeding species in Turkey, but the breeding area is not completely defined. The first known breeding site in south-eastern Anatolia is described in this paper and is situated at Çöltepe (UTM: 37S 658943 E / 4190687 34 N) near the city of Batman. The nests were located colonially on two trees. The size of colony was about 50 pairs (100 individuals). Some individuals were breeding (29 pairs) while others were non-breeding (approx. 15 - 35% of the population). A hypothesis is put forward that, due to climatic changes that are occurring in south-eastern Turkey, arising from the South-east Anatolia Project (GAP), suitable habitats and conditions are being created that account for the initiation of breeding of this species in the region. Povzetek Poljska vrana Corvus frugilegus je gnezdilka Tur~ije, vendar njen areal ni popolnoma znan. Avtor opisuje prvo gnezdi{~e v JV Anatoliji blizu mesta Batman (UTM: 37S 658943 E / 4190687 N). Gnezdi{~e je bilo odkrito na dveh drevesih, kjer vrane gnezdijo kolonijsko. Velikost kolonije je bila pribli`no 50 parov (100 osebkov). Gnezdilo je 29 parov, pribli`no 15 - 35% opa`enih ptic pa v koloniji ni gnezdilo. Avtor je predstavil hipotezo, po kateri naj bi zaradi klimatskih sprememb v tem delu Tur~ije, nastalih zaradi namakanja obse`nih povr{in, nastale ustrezne razmere za gnezdenje poljske vrane. References Ayvaz, Y. (1993): The Birds of Elazig Region. - Doga - Tr. J. Zool. 17: 1-10. Beaman, M. (1986): Turkey Bird Report 1976 - 81. - Sandgrouse 8:1-41. Biricik, M. (1996): Birds of Kabakli Reservoir, Diyarbakir. - Tr. J. Zool. 20: 155-160. Cramp, S. (1998): The Complete Birds of the Western Palearctic, on CD - ROM. - Oxford University Press, Oxford. Eames, J. (1990): Selected bird observations from Turkey: Spring and Summer 1987. - OSME Bulletin 23: 6-13. Harrison, C. (1975): Jungvögel Eier und Nester aller Vögel Europas, Nordafrikas und des Mittleren Ostens. —Verlag Paul Parey, Hamburg & Berlin. Heinzel, H., S. R. Fitter & J. Parslow (1998): Birds of Britain & Europe, with North Africa & The Middle East. — Harper Collins Publishers, London. Karakas, R. & Kilic A. (2002): Birds of Göksu Dam (Diyarbakir) and new records in south-east Turkey. - Sandgrouse 24 (1): 38-43. Kasparek, M. (1989) Breeding Distribution of the Rook (Corvus frugilegus) in Turkey. - Sandgrouse 11: 89-95. Kasparek, M. & Bilgin C.C. (1996): Kuşlar (Aves). - In: Kence, A. & Bilgin C.C. (eds.), Tiirkiye Omurgahlar Tür Listesi. - TÜBITAK, Ankara. Kirwan, G.M. & Martins RR (1994): Turkey Bird Report 1987 - 91. - Sandgrouse 16: 76-117. ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 33 — 35, 2OO5 Kirwan, G.M. & Martins R.P. (2000): Turkey Bird Report 1992 - 1996. - Sandgrouse 22: 13-35. Kirwan, G.M., Özen M., Kurt B. & Martins R.P. (2003): Turkey Bird Report 1997 - 2001. - Sandgrouse 25: 8-31. R.P. Martins, (1989): Turkey Bird Report 1982 - 86. - Sandgrouse 11: 1-41. Mullarney, K., L. Svensson, P. J. Grant & D. Zetterström. (1999): Collins Bird Guide. – HarperCollins, London. Prispelo / Arrived: 20.4.2005 Sprejeto / Accepted: 19.9.2005 35 Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 37 — 40, 2005 Size and distribution of breeding colonies of Grey Heron Ardea cinerea in lowland Croatia Velikost in razporeditev kolonij sive ~aplje Ardea cinerea v ni`inskih delih Hrva{ke Jozsef Mikuska1, Tomislav Bogdanovi}1, Tibor Mikuska2, Alma Mikuska1, Vlatka [ali}1 1 Department of Biology, University of Osijek, Lj. Gaja 6, HR-31000 Osijek, Croatia 2 Kopa~ki rit Nature Park Management Office, Ul. Petefi Sandora 33, HR-31327 Bilje, Croatia, e-mail: tmikuska@kopacki-rit.com 1. Introduction Grey Heron Ardea cinerea is the most abundant of the nine species of the Heron family Ardeidae recorded in Croatia (Mikuska 1992, Kralj 1997, Luka~ 1998). The first national census was carried out in 1991, when 1529 pairs were counted in eight colonies (Mikuska 1992). This survey was continued throughout the decade and resulted in the discovery of new colonies, with consequent increase in the national population (Mikuska et al. 1994, Dolenec 1997, Mikuska & Mikuska unpubl.). At the beginning of the 21st century the population was estimated at 1500 - 3000 pairs, which was the second largest of the neighbouring central European countries (Hungary 2500 - 3500, Serbia & Montenegro 2200 - 2500, Slovenia 500 -600, Bosnia & Herzegovina 7 - 10 pairs; BirdLife International 2004). 2. Methods During 2004 we attempted to visit all the known colonies and count the breeding pairs, in order to establish the total national breeding population. Data on Grey Heron colony locations were obtained through communication with other ornithologists and our previous fieldwork. The research area was limited to the lowland areas (below 300 m a.s.l.) of Pannonian and continental Croatia bordered by the rivers Drava on the north, Danube on the east and Kupa and Sava on the south. Of the 22 recently identified Grey Heron breeding sites, we failed to census three smaller colonies that are distributed in the continental part of Croatia south of our research area: at Cvijanovi} Brdo near Slunj (with 15 pairs in 1998), near Mili}i village on the Kupa river (with 12 pairs during 1990) and one possible colony in Plitvi~ka jezera national park (Luka~ 2004). Most censuses were made during the early breeding season in late March and early April and the numbers of Apparently Occupied Nests were counted (Bibby et al. 1992). At that time, most herons are incubating or their chicks are just hatching, so that the number of nests correlates with the number of breeding pairs (Bibby et al. 1992). One or two observers entered each colony, and nests on the trees were counted from the ground with the help of binoculars. Since these colonies are built on hardwood trees (predominantly Quercus robur or Fraxinus sp.) and 20 - 30 metres high, the observer’s view of the nests was not obstructed by leaves. From our experience, carrying out a census later in the season would give ambiguous results due to leaf cover on trees that would obstruct the view of nests. Slow and quiet movement through the colony did not create much disturbance to breeding birds who returned to the nest immediately after the observer had left the vicinity of the occupied tree. It took approximately half an hour to count a site holding up to 200 nests, and, even in the case of the largest colonies, the whole census took less than a 1.5 hour per site. In a few cases, namely colonies at fishponds Donji Miholjac, Grudnjak and Na{i~ka Breznica, counts were made later in the season (June), during the execution of a ringing programme. These colonies are built on willow bushes Salix sp. and reedbeds Phragmites communis and several heron species breed there. For these reasons we avoided entering the colonies during the incubation period of late nesting species – such as Little Egret Egretta garzetta, Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax, Great Egret Ardea alba and Purple Heron A. purpurea – in order to prevent unnecessary disturbance and possible nesting failure of breeding birds. During the census, observers walked through the colony and counted each nest with hatched chicks. At this time it was easy to distinguish between the Grey Heron nests with large or already fledged chicks and similar - sized nests of other heron species, namely Great Egrets and Purple Herons, which had eggs or up to two - week old chicks. The colony at Ko{utarica was also censused 37 J. Mikuska et al.: Size and distribution of breeding colonies of Grey Heron Ardea cinerea in lowland Croatia later in the season because it was not accessible, due to to be discovered along the Drava River, as well as exceptionally high flooding in March and April. along the Sava river floodplain east of Slavonski Brod. However, breeding of Grey Herons in the mountainous 3. Results and discussion or Mediterranean parts is unlikely. The only mixed species heron colony in the Mediterranean region During 2004 we recorded 3674 nests of Grey Herons is situated on Vransko lake near Biograd, but Grey in 19 colonies (Table 1). The number suggests that Herons are not breeding there (V. Dumbovi} - Ru`i} the Croatian national breeding population is currently pers. comm.). Further, heron colonies in the delta of higher than the latest estimates and that the breeding the Neretva River have not existed since the seventies population threshold should be set to 3000 - 4000 of the 20th century (Rucner (1970), D. Kitoni} pers. pairs. This result is in accordance with the overall comm.). trend of the European population, which is stable or The colonies are distributed primarily in lowland increasing (BirdLife International 2004). Despite Croatia bordered by the floodplains of large rivers - the fact that we lack recent population values for Danube, Drava, Sava and Kupa (Figure 1). Based on neighbouring countries, our data suggest that Croatia colony size we can distinguish three categories: has the largest proportion of breeding Grey Herons in the Pannonian plain. 1. Large colonies comprising over 200 pairs (Kopa~ki Given the lack of previous records, we cannot exclude rit - ]o{ak {ume, Mrsunjski lug, Berek, Piljenice the possibility that a few additional colonies remain and Ko{utarica) – these are situated along the large Table 1: Breeding of Grey Herons Ardea cinerea in lowland Croatia during 2004 Tabela 1: Gnezdenje sive ~aplje Ardea cinerea v ni`inski Hrva{ki leta 2004 Colonies on hardwood trees, nests 20 - 30 m above the ground/ Kolonije na listavcih, gnezda 20 - 30 m nad tlemi Locality / Lokaliteta UTM Date / Datum No. of nests / 1 Berek XL46 07.04. 412 2 ^epin CR14 05.04. 29 3 ^rnec WL91 01.04. 155 4 Jastrebarsko WL56 01.04. 168 5 Kopa~ki rit - ^o{ak {ume CR35 04.04. 885 6 Ko{utarica XL51 09.06. 243 7 Kravarsko WL84 01.04. 89 8 Mokrice WL69 07.04. 41 9 Mrsunjski Lug YL20 29.04. 479 10 Piljenice XL43 28.03. 383 11 Razljev XL25 01.04. 130 12 Slovinci XL21 01.04. 165 13 Topusko WL71 01.04. 26 14 Trebovec XL06 01.04. 157 15 Vrpolje BR91 07.04. 27 16 Veliki Strug 2 XL60 during April 2004 37 Colonies on willows Salix sp. and reedbeds, nests up to 5 m above the ground/ Kolonije na vrbah Salix sp. in trstju, gnezda do 5 m nad tlemi 17 Donji Miholjac fishpond BR77 16.06. 30 18 Grudnjak fishpond YL35 08.06. 83 19 Na{i~ka Breznica fishpond BR84 02.06. 135 Total / Skupno 3674 38 ACROCEPHALUS 20 (124): 37 - 40, 2005 Figure 1: The location of the colonies of Grey Heron Ardea cinerea in lowland Croatia in 2004: 1) Berek, 2) ^epin, 3) ^rnec, 4) Donji Miholjac fishponds, 5) Grudnjak fishponds, 6) Jastrebarsko, 7) Kopa~ki rit – ]o{ak {ume, 8) Ko{utarica, 9) Kravarsko, 10) Mokrice, 11) Mrsunjski lug, 12) Na{i~ka Breznica fishponds, 13) Piljenice, 14) Razljev, 15) Slovinci, 16) Topusko, 17) Trebovec, 18) Vrpolje, 19) Veliki Strug 2 Slika 1: Kolonije sive ~aplje Ardea cinerea v ni`inski Hrva{ki leta 2004 areas of the remaining floodplains of the Danube and Sava rivers. Commercial fishponds that were built on former wetlands (Podunavlje fishponds at Kopa~ki rit, Jelas fishponds near Mrsunjski lug, and Lipovljani fishponds near Piljenice) have helped to sustain these colonies, or even increase the number of breeding pairs after part of the wetland was drained and converted to agricultural land. For example, the number of breeding pairs in Kopa~ki rit - ]o{ak {ume increased from 400 during 1991 to over 1000 pairs during 2002. This increase is probably related to the abandoning of fish production on a large 200 ha pond that resulted in decrease in the water level, making a larger area suitable for foraging. An exception to this rule is the colony at Berek, that is situated in a remote forested area, exactly halfway between two commercial fishponds – Narta and Kon~anica – from where herons make daily foraging flights. 2. Medium sized colonies comprising 50 - 200 pairs – these are situated along the remaining, but much smaller, floodplain areas along the Sava and Kupa rivers (e.g. ^rnec, Trebovec, Razljev and Slovinci along Sava, as well as Kravarsko along the Kupa) or are attached to one of the existing commercial fishponds (e.g. Grudnjak, Jastrebarsko or Na{i~ka Breznica). The size of the colonies on these fishponds is influenced by the disturbance accompanying the execution of Cormorant culling programmes (mainly by shooting throughout the year) or by water and vegetation management (e.g. the pond with a colony at Grudnjak fishponds was drained and burnt during 2004). 3. Small colonies comprising less than 50 pairs – these are situated at the edge of the Croatian breeding population and in less suitable habitats without larger wetlands (Mokrice in Zagorje or Topusko in the hilly part of the Croatia). As a curiosity, colonies 39 J. Mikuska et al.: Size and distribution of breeding colonies of Grey Heron Ardea cinerea in lowland Croatia at ^epin and Vrpolje are situated near large pig -farms. The wetland areas along these colonies are limited to several large melioration ditches, suggesting that the birds take advantage of the large rodent populations that are common at these sites rather than feeding on the aquatic food source. However, further studies are needed to explore this hypothesis. Summary Grey Heron Ardea cinerea is the most abundant heron species in Croatia, with an estimated population of 1500 - 3000 pairs. We conducted a survey of existing colonies during the 2004 breeding season and counted 3674 pairs in 19 colonies. Based on this data the Grey Heron breeding population thresholds should be increased and set to 3000 - 4000 pairs. The colonies are distributed primarily along the remaining floodplains of the Danube, Drava, Sava and Kupa rivers as well as on commercial cyprinid fishponds. Povzetek Siva ~aplja Ardea cinerea je naj{tevil~nej{a med vsemi vrstami ~apelj na Hrva{kem, saj je bila populacija ocenjena na 1500 do 3000 parov. Avtorji so napravili pregled obstoje~ih kolonij v gnezdilni sezoni leta 2004 in na{teli 3674 parov v 19 kolonijah. Na osnovi teh podatkov pa se je ocena populacije te vrste povi{ala na 3000 - 4000 parov. Kolonije so bile razporejene predvsem na poplavnih ravnicah Donave, Drave, Save in Kolpe ter na ribnikih s krapovci. References Bibby, C.J., Burgess, N.D. & Hill, D.A. (1992): Bird Census Techniques. – Academic Press Ltd., London. BirdLife International (2004): Birds in Europe: Population estimates, trends and conservation status. – BirdLife International, Cambridge. Dolenec, Z. (1997): Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea L.), new breeding species of Hrvatsko Zagorje. – Larus 46: 128. Kralj, J. (1997): Croatian ornithofauna in the last 200 years. – Larus 46: 1-112. Luka~, G. (1998): List of Croatian Birds. Spatial and temporal distribution. – Natura Croatica Vol. 7, Suppl. 3: 1- 60. Luka~, G. (2004): Ptice nacionalnog parka Plitvi~ka jezera. – Plitvi~ki bilten 6: 29-70. Mikuska, T. (1992): Gnije`|enje ~aplji (Ardeidae) u Hrvatskoj. - Diplomski rad – Prirodoslovno - matemati~ki fakultet Sveu~ili{ta u Zagrebu, Zagreb. Mikuska, T., Mikuska, J. & [etina, M. (1994): Stanje ~aplji (Ardeidae) u Hrvatskoj u periodu 1990 - 1993. – Zbornik sa`etaka priop}enja Petog kongresa biologa Hrvatske, pp. 379-380. Hrvatsko biolo{ko dru{tvo, Zagreb. Rucner, D. (1970): Nadopuna poznavanju ptica doline Neretve III. – Larus 21/22: 99-114. Prispelo / Arrived: 24.3.2005 Sprejeto / Accepted: 19.9.2005 4C Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 41 – 44, 2005 The presence of the Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus on Ulcinj saltpans (Montenegro) Pojavljanje kodrastega pelikana Pelecanus crispus v Ulcinjskih solinah (^rna gora) Darko Savelji} 1 &Borut Rubini} 2 1 National Institute for Nature Conservation, Tr g Be}ir bega Osmanagi}a 16, P.O. Box 2, 81000 Podgorica, Montenegro, e-mail: dasav@cg.yu 2DOPPS-BirdLife International, P.O. box 2990, SI-1001 Ljubljana, Slovenia, e-mail: borut.rubinic@dopps-drustvo.si 1. Introduction In this work, the literature and field data on the presence of Dalmatian Pelicans in Ulcinj saltpans and Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus is classified as a Zoganj Mud for the period between 1999 and 2004 globally threatened species by BirdLife International. are reviewed. The historical data are also presented. It is also classified as vulnerable even though the population has increased due to active preservation, 2. Study Area and Methods particularly at its largest colony of 500 pairs on Mikri Prespa lake in Greece (Crivelli et al. 2000, BirdLife 2.1 Study Area International 2001 & 2004a). The species’ nesting population is local and confined to SE Europe, the The Ulcinj saltpans are one of the largest saltpans on Middle East and Central Asia. The world population the Adriatic coast. They are situated at the very SW end of Dalmatian Pelican is estimated to be stabilised of Montenegro, east of the town of Ulcinj. Together between 15,000 and 20,000 individuals. (BirdLife with its surroundings, the Bojana / Buna river mouth International 2004b). Latest estimates of the complex, the Ulcinj saltpans are, ornithologically, one nesting population are between 4031 and 5196 pairs of the most important areas in Montenegro (Puzovi} (Crivelli et al. 2000, Wetlands International & Gruba~ 2000). Its value is enhanced by the marshy 2002). Only about 15% of the population breeds in habitats and the vicinity of the sea. It is a completely the Mediterranean region: 15 - 20 pairs in Albania, anthropogenically guided ecosystem, in which all 7 - 11 pairs in Montenegro, 500 pairs in Greece and factors significant for the birds are controlled by 120 pairs in Turkey (Hoffman et al. 1996, Wetlands man. The area has no legal conservation status, but is International 2002, Bino 2004, Savelji} et al. classified as an IBA (Important Bird Area) by BirdLife 2004). The Mediterranean population is however International (Heath & Evans 2000). considered to be stable (Perennou et al. 2000). The saltpans originated in the area of the former The first comprehensive data on Dalmatian Zoganj Mud, a 25 km2 marshy area with brackish Pelicans in Montenegro date from the late 19th century water. The oldest saltpan basins were built between (Brusina 1891) and further observations were made 1926 and 1934. From the mid 20th century they were in the same period (Führer 1894 & 1895, Reiser & gradually extended and in the beginning of the 1980s Führer 1896). After a gap of more than 70 years, during they were enlarged by 60% and today cover 14.5 km2. which there was hardly any ornithological research Of the total area some 10 km2 are currently active. The on Montenegrin water bodies, intensive studies were average depth of the pans’ basins is 30 cm (Gazivoda begun in the 70s by Ondrej Vizi (Vizi 1975, 1979a, b, 1998). c, 1981a, b, 1991, 1995a, b & 2002). Nevertheless, he was occupied only with the Pelicans of the Skadar Lake. 2.2 Methods The Ulcinj coastal area thus remained ornithologically unresearched, with the exception of rare and sporadic Literature and field data from 1999 to 2004 have been visits (Vasi} 1979, Ham 1986). Dalmatian Pelican is used in this study. During our field research (1999 - a protected species in Montenegro (Vizi 1982) and 2004) we were visiting the saltpans at irregular intervals Skadar Lake is nowadays the species’ only nesting area for one to three days per month. The fieldwork was (Savelji} et al. 2004). carried out mostly during the whole day but, during 4I D. Savelji} & B. Rubini}.: The presence of the Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus on Ulcinj saltpans (Montenegro) Table 1: Historical data on the presence of Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus at Ulcinj saltpans Tabela 1: Histori~ni podatki o pojavljanju kodrastega pelikana Pelecanus crispus v Ulcinjskih solinah Date / Datum No. individuals/ [t. osebkov Behaviour/ Obna{anje Locality / Lokaliteta Source / Vir 1.02.1895 6 Swimming Zogaj Mud Führer (1895) 29.03.1895 39 pairs Nesting Zogaj Mud Führer (1895) 1895 20 pairs Nesting Zogaj Mud Reiser & Führer (1896) 24.07.1975 “few” Saltpans Va si } ( 19 79 ) 15.07.1984 1 Resting Saltpans Ham (1986) 20.09.1998 1 Flying Saltpans Simi} (2003) the summer months, between 5.00 and 10.00h and from 17.00h until dawn. 3. Results and Discussion The first data concerning the Dalmatian Pelicans from the Ulcinj saltpans date from the end of the 19th century (Führer 1895). Führer (1895) found 39 Pelican nests, mostly with one egg, in the area of the former Zogaj Mud during March 1894. Two years later more than 20 nesting pairs were found in the same area (Reiser & Führer 1896). From 1924 until 1936 hydro-melioration works were carried out and part of the swamp was transformed into saltpans. There is no data in the literature covering the period from the end of the 19th century (Reiser & Führer 1896) to the late seventies (Vasi} 1979), when, in July of 1975, a 'few’ Dalmatian Pelicans were recorded. A further, single young Dalmatian Pelican was observed resting on one of the salt pan basins in 1984 (Ham 1986; Table 1). The number of Dalmatian Pelicans recently observed in the Ulcinj saltpans has varied from 1 to 56 individuals. They were present mainly from August to February, during the non-breeding period (Figure 1). When feeding in the saltpans, they were observed exclusively in the basins with a salinity equal to that of the sea — around 3.8%o . Saltpans provide an ideal feeding place for ichthyophagic birds, due to the large, shallow water surface and to the fact that strong pumps (3000 lit/sec) bring large amounts of food, predominantly fish (A. Hegedi{ pers. comm.), from the sea into the saltpans (Gazivoda 1998). This process starts from the first half of April and lasts until the middle of May. The 29 fish species observed in the salt pan basins (A. Hegedi{ pers. comm.) cannot survive later than the first half of June, when the water starts to warm up to over 40°C, with the salinity rising above 12%o . It is interesting that, in the period from April to June when saltpans are full of food, appearances of the Dalmatian Pelicans are least and the Pelicans were not observed to be actually feeding in the saltpans during this period. This is not the case with the other ichthyophagic species, such as Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo, Pygmy Cormorant Phalacrocorax pygmeus, Grey Heron Ardea cinerea, and Little Egret Egretta garzetta, which are commonly observed feeding in saltpans at this time of year (personal observations). The Dalmatian Pelicans in Montenegro (Skadar lake) start nesting in the second half of February (Vizi 1975), and the period of hatching thus overlaps with the process of water inflow in the saltpans. During this period the Pelicans are not usually far from their colonies (Vizi 1975), explaining their absence from the saltpans, which are not the species’ breeding site. The largest numbers of pelicans in the Ulcinj saltpans have been observed in the postbreeding period, between August and November (Figure 1). These are presumably adult and semi - adult birds that have finished nesting in nearby breeding areas and are foraging in the vicinity of these areas. The nearest Dalmatian Pelican breeding area is Skadar Lake, some 40 km away, where the pelicans, with a break from 1993 to 2000, have been regularly observed to breed (Savelji} et al. 2004). Presumably, individuals from the same breeding area are commonly seen also in Velipoja lagunas, on the Albanian side of the Bojana/ Buna river mouth complex (T. Bino pers. comm.). The closest Albanian nesting area, Karavasta lagunas (up to 62 pairs; Heath & Evans 2000) lies about 110 km to the South. The origin of the birds seen in the Ulcinj saltpans should be investigated. During the winter months Dalmatian Pelicans have been observed mainly in the empty basins, mostly resting. They were also seen in smaller numbers a few 42 Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 41 – 44, 2005 g 60" 56 * "S 50 - 48 (O 0 44 IS 40- V 32 30 J2 30- (B | 20- 20 "5 10 ¦S 10-0 Z n . - 3 1 ¦ C - JFMAMJ JASOND Months / meseci Figure 1: Maximum monthly counts of Dalmatian Pelicans Pelecanus crispus observed from 1999 to 2004 in Ulcinj saltpans (authors’ data and from Simi} 2003) Slika 1: Maksimalno {tevilo osebkov kodrstega pelikana Pelecanus crispus po posameznih mesecih med leti 1999 -2004 v Ulcinjskih solinah (avtorjevi podatki in Simi} 2003) kilometres from Skadar Lake, at the river Drim delta, Albania (Bego et al. 1998). Ulcinj saltpans are an important post-breeding area which the Dalmatian Pelicans from the nearby colony at Skadar lake use frequently as a feeding and resting area between August and November. The importance of this area for Dalmatian Pelican, and for many other waterbirds, thus clearly indicates an urgent need for its legal protection. The need for efficient protection is even greater because of constant heavy pressure by local hunters. Acknowledgements: We thank the EURONATUR research team, with whom we participated in the research on the Ulcinj coastal region during 2003: Dr Martin Schneider - Jacoby, Borut [tumberger, Jakob Smole and Dr Peter Sackl. Meto Zenka contributed to the observation of Dalmatian Pelican from 2002 onwards. We thank Aleksandar Hegedi{ for observations on fish in the salinas. Summary Before the melioration works were carried out, between 1924 and 1936, Dalmatian Pelicans Pelecanus crispus were nesting in the Zogaj Mud marshy area, the location of the present Ulcinj saltpans. In this large, marshy area 39 pairs of Dalmatian Pelican were recorded during the nesting period. Since Reiser & Führer (1896), there are no data on the birds until the mid–seventies, when “a few” Dalmatian Pelicans were recorded in the saltpan areas. During the last two decades of the 20th century only two records of Pelicans’ presence on the saltpans could be found. As a result of intensified research activity since 1999, significant data have been gathered on the presence of Pelicans on the saltpans. Between 1999 and 2004, Dalmatian Pelicans have been observed in the Ulcinj saltpans throughout the year. The largest numbers are present in the postbreeding period, when birds from the nearby Skadar lake colony are regularly resting and feeding in the saltpans. The area is important for resting and, to a lesser extent, for feeding of the species. Being an IBA and an area of regular presence for Dalmatian Pelican, as well as many other Annex 1 and SPEC 1, SPEC 2 species, and still under extreme hunting pressure, it is our firm belief that the Ulcinj saltpans are in urgent need of effective protection. Povzetek Pred melioracijskimi deli v letih 1924 in 1936 so kodrasti pelikani Pelecanus crispus gnezdili v mo~virnem obmo~ju Zogaj, kjer se danes raztezajo Ulcinjske soline. Na tem velikem mo~virnem obmo~ju je bilo pre{tetih 39 parov kodrastih pelikanov. Po Reiser & Führer (1896) ni podatkov o pticah tega obmo~ja vse do sredine 70 - ih let 20. stoletja, ko je bilo opa`enih nekaj teh ptic. Iz zadnjih dveh dekad 20. stoletja pa obstajata le dva podatka o pojavljanju kodrastih pelikanov v obravnavanem obmo~ju. Pri~ujo~e delo temelji na bolj intenzivnih raziskavah avifavne obmo~ja med letoma 1999 in 2004. Kodrasti pelikani so bili opazovani v Ulcinjskih solinah prek celega leta, najve~ v pognezditvenem obdobju, ko se ptice iz kolonije na Skadarskem jezeru hranijo in klatijo po solinah. Obmo~je je pod hudim pritiskom lova, kljub temu da gre za IBA in se tu poleg pelikanov zadržuje `e veliko drugih vrst glede na Annex 1, SPEC 1 in SPEC 2. Avtorja priporo~ata takoj{njo in u~inkovito za{~ito Ulcinjskih solin. References Bego, F. , Bino, T & Jorgo, G. (1998): Faunistic values of the delta of Drini. – Technical Report, Albania, Medwet. Bino, T. (2004): Action plan for the Dalmatian pelican in Albania. – Museum of Natural Sciences, Tirana. BirdLife International (2001): Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data Book. – BirdLife International, Cambridge. BirdLife International (2004a): Threatened Birds of the World 2004. – CD-ROM, BirdLife International, Cambridge. BirdLife International (2004b): Species factsheet: Pelecanus crispus. Downloaded from http:// www.birdlife. org on 10/15/2004. 43 D. Savelji} & B. Rubini}.: The presence of the Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus on Ulcinj saltpans (Montenegro) Brusina, S. (1891): Beitrag zur Ornis von Cattaro und Montenegro. – Ornithol. Jahrb. 2 (1): 1-27. Crivelli, A., Catsadorakis, G., Hatzilacou, D., Hulea, D., Malakou, M., Marinov, M., Michev, T., Nazirides, D., Peja, N., Sarigul, G. & Siki, M. (2000): Status and population development of Great White Pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus and Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus breeding in the Palearctic. – Monitoring and Conservation of Birds, Mammals and Sea Turtles of the Mediterranean and Black Sea, Proceedings of the 5th Medvaravis Symposium Gozo, Environement Protection Department Malta, Malta. Gazivoda, L. (1998): Proizvodnja kuhinjske soli solarnim putem u Solani Bajo Sekuli}. Okrugli sto - Pravci i prioriteti razvoja proizvodnje i prerade morske soli. – Solana “Bajo Sekuli}”, Ulcinj. Führer, L. (1894): Jedna godina ornitolo{kog izu~avanja u Crnoj Gori. – Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Bosni i Hercegovini 6: 543-608. Führer, L. (1895): Produ`ena posmatranja na ornitolo{kom polju u Crnoj Gori godine 1895. – Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Bosni i Hercegovini 7: 241-258. Ham, I. (1986): Naselja ptica Ulcinjske solane u drugoj dekadi jula. – Larus 36/37: 125-142. Heath, M.F. & M.I. Evans, eds. (2000): Important Bird Areas in Europe, Priority sites for conservation, Volume 2: Southern Europe. – BirdLife Conservation Series No. 8., BirdLife International, Cambridge. Hoffmann, L., Hafner, H. & Salathe, T. (1996): The Contribution of Colonial Waterbird Research to Wetland Conservation in the Mediterranean Region. In: Ecology, Conservation and Management of colonial waterbirds in the Mediterranean region. – Colonial Waterbirds (special publication) 19: 12-30. Perennou, C., Sadoul, N., Pineau, O., Johnskon, A. & Hafner, H. (2000): Management of nest sites for colonial waterbirds. – Conservation of Mediterranean Wetlands, 4. Tour du Valat, Arles. Puzovi}, S. & Gruba~, B. (2000): Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. pp. 725-745 In: Heath, M.F. &. Evans, M.I. (eds.): Important Bird Areas in Europe: Priority sites for conservation. 2: Southern Europe. – Birdlife International, Cambridge. Reiser, O. & Führer, L. (1896): Materialen zu einer Ornis Balcanica. IV Montenegro. – Bosnisch Hercegovinischen Landesmuseum in Sarajevo, Carl Gerold’s Sohn, Wien. Savelji}, D., Rubini~ B., Schneider –Jacoby, M. & Vizi, O. (2004): Breeding of Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus on Skadar Lake. – Acrocephalus 25 (122): 111-118. Simi}, D. (2003): Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus. – Acrocephalus 24 (118): 116. Vasi}, V. (1979): Popis faune ptica podru~ja Ulcinja (Ju`na Crna Gora). – Biosistematika 5 (1): 71-111. Vizi, O. (1975): O gnezdjenju pelikana kudravog (Pelecanus crispus Bruch 1832) na Skadarskom jezeru i problem njegove za{tite. – Glasnik Republi~kog zavoda za za{titu prirode Prirodnja~kog muzeja 8: 5-13. Vizi, O. (1979a): New data on breeding of Dalmatian Pelican (Pelecanus crispus Bruch, 1832) on Skadar Lake. – Glasnik Republi~kog zavoda za za{titu prirode Prirodnja~kog muzeja 12: 125-139. Vizi, O. (1979b): New data on breeding of Dalmatian Pelican (Pelecanus crispus Bruch, 1832) on Lake Skadar. – Glasnik Republi~kog zavoda za za{titu prirode Prirodnja~kog muzeja 12: 125-139. Vizi, O. (1979c): Ishrana pelikana kudravog (Pelecanus crispus Bruch, 1832) na Skadarskom jezeru i njegov zna~aj za ribarstvo. – Poljoprivreda i {umarstvo 25 (4): 45-57. Vizi, O. (1981a): Ornithology of Skadar Lake. pp. 390-424 – The biota and limnology of Skadar Lake, Titograd. Vizi, O. (1981b): The Dalmatian Pelican of Skadar Lake. pp. 419-424 – The biota and limnology of Skadar Lake, Titograd. Vizi, O. (1982): Rje{enje o stavljanju pod za{titu rijetkih, prorije|enih, endemi~nih i ugro`enih biljnih i `ivotinjskih vrsta. – Slu`beni list SRCG br. 36/82. Vizi, O. (1991): Ornitolo{ke odlike ostrvceta Grmo`ur na Skadarskom jezeru. – Glasnik Republi~kog zavoda za za{titu prirode Prirodnja~kog muzeja 24: 13-28. Vizi, O. (1995a): Za{tita Skadarskog jezera od zaga|enja. pp. 31 - 37 – Nau~ni skup “Prirodne vrijednosti i za{tita Skadarskog jezera, CANU 44, Podgorica. Vizi, O. (1995b): Uticaj pove}anog uznemiravanja na neke ugro`ene vrste ptica na Skadarskom jezeru. pp. 321-330 – Nau~ni skup “Prirodne vrijednosti i za{tita Skadarskog jezera, CANU 44, Podgorica. Vizi, O. (2002): O pelikanima Skadarskog jezera. – Natura montenegrina I, I - XI: CD izdanje. Wetlands International (2002): Waterbird Population Estimates - Third Edition. – Wetlands International Global series 12, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Prispelo / Arrived: 2.4.2002 Sprejeto / Accepted: 19.9.2005 44 Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 45 — 46, 2005 Povzetki diplomskih, magistrskih in doktorskih del Thesis Summaries Petkov, N. (2004): Comparative ecological studies on the Ferruginous Duck (Aythya nyroca Guldenstaedt, 1879) and Pochard (Aythya ferina Linnaeus, 1758) during breeding season in Bulgaria – PhD thesis, Central Laboratory of General Ecology (CLGE), Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia. Consists of 219 pages, 140 figures, 37 tables and 7 appendixes. Mentor / Supervisor: Ass. Prof. Tanyu Michev, CLGE Znanstveni svetovalec / Scientific consultant: Ass. Prof. Dr. Andy J. Green, Donana Biological Station Avtorjev elektronski naslov / Author’s e-mail: nicky.petkov@bspb.org The Pochard Aythya ferina and the Ferruginous Duck A. nyroca are the only diving ducks of tribe Aythyni regularly breeding in Bulgaria. Both of them are included in the National Red Data Book of 1985 and so far have been poorly studied. In general there are very few complete UTM censuses of breeding birds in Bulgaria, while studies on habitat selection and behaviour are practically lacking in Bulgarian ornithological literature. The aim of the study was to study the characteristics of the current breeding distribution, numbers and status of the two diving ducks in Bulgaria and to make a comparative analysis of the habitat requirements and ecology of the species within the breeding sites. For this the research study had the following objectives: 1. To study the breeding numbers of the ducks in 10 km UTM grid of the country, to evaluate the short term changes in the distribution and habitats and to evaluate their national conservation status. 2. To describe the main characteristics of the breeding sites and the main types of wetlands they utilize. 3. To study the habitat selection in the two species in two model wetlands using the vegetation and other physical characteristics of the wetlands. 4. To investigate the microhabitat selection of the two diving ducks and how they differ from each other in a selected wetland. 5. To investigate the diurnal activity of the two species to reveal their survival strategy through elaboration of time-activity budgets based on three model wetlands. Data have been gathered from 2001 to 2003 during the breeding season from April till July. The main detailed research on habitat selection and behavior was done in three wetlands – Srebarna reserve (a wetland on the Danube river) where both species breed, Durankulak lake (wetland on the Black Sea coast) where only Ferruginous Duck breeds, and Poda Lagoon (a wetland on the Black Sea coast) where only Pochard breeds. The national breeding census was conducted in 2002 between 15 May and 20 Jun, when pairs are most conspicuous. Altogether, over 120 wetlands were visited and assigned to the following categories: lakes, marshes, river mouths, canals, fishponds, ricefields, micro reservoirs and reservoirs. Vegetation coverage, altitude, water depth measurement and surface size were taken. The habitat selection study was done following Nue et al. (1974) and Green (1998). Srebarna reserve was characterized by the following habitat zones: open water, emergent vegetation fringe, dead reed stem area and small pools. Characteristic of the Durankulak Lake complex were open water, mixed Scirpus area, reed mosaic area and small pools. In addition a long-term data on the numbers of the Ferruginous Duck in Srebarna and data on wetland limnology were processed to study the possibility of the Ferruginous Duck to serve as indicator species for ecological changes in the wetland. The statistical analysis of the data was done using Sigma Stat 1.0 Jundel Stat. Package and Statistics for Windows ver. 4.0. During the breeding mapping of the species, changes in the numbers and distribution of the two species were registered. The Ferruginous duck was registered breeding in 32 wetlands in 2002, 8 of which are new compared to data from 1997, and became extinct at 13 sites in the same period. At some of the main breeding sites a significant reduction of breeding numbers was registered. The data collected during this census and previous mapping data allows evaluating the national population between 150 and 230 pairs. The Pochard has more limited distribution – along the Danube River and Black Sea coast (Burgas wetlands complex). The species was found breeding in 11 wetlands. The national population is evaluated at 100 – 125 breeding pairs. 45 Povzetki diplomskih, magistrskih in doktorskih del / Thesis Summaries The predominant part of the breeding Ferruginous Ducks (over 50%) is found in artificial wetlands – fishponds and micro reservoirs, but single most important wetlands are natural marshes. This is a significant change compared to 1997 when fishponds were the single most important wetlands. However, in recent years the breeding populations in fishponds have deteriorated significantly. On the contrary, Pochard is found mostly in natural wetlands – over 65% of the breeding pairs. The average altitude of the breeding sites of the Pochard are well bellow the average for Europe because most of them are found along the Black Sea and along the Danube River. The statistical analysis of the data confirmed the preferences of the Ferruginous Duck for well structured more shallow wetlands with rich mosaic vegetation coverage and the presence of some specific microhabitats like floating vegetation, shallow areas with vegetation and shallow mudflats. At the same time, the Pochard does not reveal significant preferences for specific habitat characteristics, beside some weak correlation with availability of flooded mudflats and more open wetlands. Though it is more restricted in its distribution in Bulgaria, which is mostly due to the fact that Bulgaria is on the periphery of the breeding range, the Pochard is on a global scale, more generalist in the wetlands selection and respectively more numerous and widespread than the Ferruginous Duck. The habitat selection study showed that the Ferruginous Duck selects certain habitats within the Durankulak and Srebarna wetlands. In Srebarna reserve, the Ferruginous Duck selects the “emergent vegetation fringe” zone and the “small pools”. Some changes were observed during the study period, but they were caused by changes in the specific conditions within the habitat zones. Within the Durankulak Lake complex most often selected by the Ferruginous Duck was the “mixed Scirpus” zone. In this wetland complex the species was selecting the more shallow marshy areas. On Srebarna Lake, the Pochard was selecting mostly the “dead reed stem” zone and the “small pool” zone and variably throughout the study period the rest of the habitat zones. The j(2 test revealed highly significant differences in the habitat selection between the two species. The data analysis revealed that the distribution of the two species among the habitat zones within the wetland depends on the type of the habitat zone, the year of the study and is species specific. Hence due to the succession changes within the habitat zones that occurred during the three years of the study there were some differences between years 46 and within the year related mostly to the changes in the emergent vegetation and availability of zoobenthic forage resources. The forage availability seems to be important for the Ferruginous Duck distribution as well. The microhabitat selection by the two species is also species specific. The Ferruginous Duck stays in the close vicinity of emergent vegetation in the more shallow water and closer to the bank. At the same time the Pochard prefers to keep more in–water, further from the bank and emergent vegetation in deeper waters. However, the Pochard shows much more flexibility with the occurring changes in the microhabitats and adapts to them well, while the Ferruginous Duck seems to be more stenotype one and does not adapt to the changes in the microhabitats. This is another specifics of the species ecology, which probably influences the decrease in numbers, and disappearance of the species from certain areas within the breeding range. The time–activity budgets of the two species are dominated by inactive behaviour and foraging. Both species show tendency of increasing the inactive bahaviour towards the second half of the breeding season and decrease of the locomotion. The Ferruginous Duck slightly increases its foraging activity in the second half of the breeding season, while the Pochard decreases its foraging activity. This suggests that perhaps the Ferruginous Duck is more dependent on exogenous energy resources, while the Pochard, which is a larger species, may rely on more endogenous resources. The cluster analysis between the sites shows species specific clustering of the time–activity budgets and show reciprocal similarity between the two species time–activity budgets; the budgets of the Ferruginous Duck of the first half of the breeding season cluster together with the budgets of the Pochard from the second half of the breeding season. In general, the analysis suggests different life strategy for coping with energy demand during breeding season and also shows clearly the existence, in time activity terms, of two separate parts of the breeding season. Finally, the analysis of correlation of the changes in the numbers of Ferruginous Duck and the limnology parameters of Srebarna Lake revealed that the species as a very good indicator species for ecological changes in the wetlands. A very high correlation was established with the water level, turbidity and chlorophyll level (Petkov in print). It seems that in wetlands with good breeding population of Ferruginous Duck it is quite suitable to correlate changes in the numbers of the species to ecological changes in the wetlands and incorporate data in monitoring schemes. Acrocephalus 26 (124): 47 — 62, 2005 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice From the ornithological notebook Slovenija / Slovenia Pygmy Cormorant Phalacrocorax pygmeus Pritiklavi kormoran — 1 osebek opa`en na Cerkni{kem jezeru (UTM VL56, osrednja Slovenia) dne 30.5.2005 On 30 May 2005, whilst leading a group of 15 visiting British birdwatchers, I saw a Pygmy Cormorant at Cerkni{ko jezero (UTM VL56, Central Slovenia) amongst the more common birds. The bird was seen from the east side close to the village of @erovnica. It was sitting on a stick, apparently beside the river. It was in classic Cormorant pose with wings outstretched but with a long tail. The bird was extremely distant (>1 km) but seen in very good light with a telescope. This kind of news would not cause much of a stir in north — east Italy in this time of year where the bird is ever more common and breeding at many sites, one less than 90 kilometres from the Slovene border. The first record for the karst lake at Doberdob was in April 2005. Paul Tout, Malchina / Mavhinje 5/A, I—34013 Duino—Aurisina / Devin— Nabre`ina, Italy, e—mail: paul_tout@hotmail.com Plevica Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis—one adult individual inhabiting Medvedce reservoir between 5 Aug and 28 Sep 2003 (UTM WM53, NE Slovenia), feeding mostly separately from other water birds and partly moulting Dne 5.8.2003 sva se z o~etom Ivanom odpravila na vodni zadr`evalnik Medvedce jugovzhodno od Pragerskega, SV Slovenija. Tam sva med drugim {tela rjave lunje Circus aeruginosus, ki jih je tega dne bilo dvanajst. Z ve~jim zanimanjem sem opazoval pobre`nike, ki so zaradi nizke vode, kot posledica su{e, mno`i~neje obiskovali ta kraj. Ve~ pozornosti sem namenil velikim {kurhom Numenius arquata. Bilo jih je dvajset, kar je bila ena ve~jih jat te vrste na zadr`evalniku do tistega trenutka, in spreletavali so se od enega blatnega poloja do drugega. Ob jati sem opazil {e en osebek plevice. Ob kasnej{ih obiskih zadr`evalnika sem ob bolj{i svetlobi prepoznal odrasel osebek. Plevica se je v ~asu, ko se je zadr`evala na tem mestu, delno pregolila iz poletnega perja v zimsko. Zanimivo se mi zdi, da je bila plevica v skupini z drugo vrsto ptic le ob prvem opazovanju. V vseh preostalih opazovanjih se je prehranjevala neodvisno od drugih vodnih ptic. Nazadnje sem jo opazoval 28.9.2003. Po pregledu Acrocephalusov 2000 – 2004 sem opazil, da ni zabele`enega poletnega opazovanja te vrste, prav tako ni podatka o dalj{em zadr`evanju. V mojem primeru se je osebek zadr`eval skoraj dva meseca. Plevica je do leta 1998 veljala za redkost [Bo`i~, L. (2001): Poro~ilo nacionalne komisije za redkosti o opazovanjih redkih vrst ptic za obdobje 1997 – 2000. – Acrocephalus 22 (106/107): 109 – 113]. Dejan Bordjan, Ulica 8. februarja 50, SI–2204 Miklav`, Slovenija, e–mail: dejanonih@email.si Plevica Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis – 3 individuals observed between 10 and 14 Apr 2005 near the church at ^rna vas, Ljubljansko barje (UTM VL69, central Slovenia); Glossy Ibis is rare but regular spring and autumn guest in central Slovenia; see colour appendix Dne 10.4.2005 sem iz avtomobila opazil 3 plevice, ki so se prehranjevale kakih 100 m vzhodno od Ple~nikove cerkve Sv. Mihaela v ^rni vasi na Ljubljanskem barju. Vreme je bilo slabo, rahlo je tudi rosilo. Kasneje sem se vrnil in si ptice podrobneje ogledal. Glede na obarvanost perja sem sklepal, da opazujem tri odrasle osebke, pri ~emer se eden {e ni popolnoma pregolil iz zimskega perja; lahko pa je seveda {lo tudi za drugoletni osebek, ~esar ne morem z gotovostjo izklju~iti. Plevice so se na tem mestu zadr`evale {e najmanj do 14.4.2005, ko so `e nemirno dvigovale peruti in se pripravljale na odlet (D. [ere pisno). Plevica je v osrednji Sloveniji sicer redek, a reden gost, predvsem aprila, maja in septembra. Primerjaj npr.: [[ere, D. (1990): Plevica Plegadis falcinellus. – Acrocephalus 11 (43/44): 29; Sovinc, A. (1997): Redke vrste ptic v Sloveniji v letu 1995. – Acrocephalus 18 (84): 151 – 156; Kebe, L. (1999): Plevica Plegadis falcinellus. – Acrocephalus 20 (92): 31; Smole, J. (2002): Plevica Plegadis falcinellus. – Acrocephalus 23 (110/111): 50]. Primo` Kmecl, Mala ~olnarska 4b, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e–mail: primoz.kmecl@guest.arnes.si 47 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook Veliki `agar Mergus merganser Goosander – a male observed at Lake Ormo` (UTM WM94, NE Slovenia) on 28 May 2005, which is quite a late date indicating possible breeding in the near vicinity Pozimi je veliki `agar pri nas razmeroma {tevil~en. Sovinc [Sovinc, A. (1994): Zimski ornitolo{ki atlas. – Tehni{ka zalo`ba Slovenije, Ljubljana] ocenjuje prezimovajo~o populacijo na 50 – 100 osebkov, kasnej{a opazovanja pa so pokazala, da jih je danes toliko verjetno samo na Dravi [[tumberger, B. (2002): Rezultati {tetja vodnih ptic v januarju 2002 v Sloveniji. – Acrocephalus 23(110/111): 43 – 47]. V ~asu gnezdenja je v Sloveniji le tu in tam kak{en par. V literaturi ve~krat opisano je gnezdi{~e na Trbojskem in Zbiljskem jezeru, samica z mladi~i pa je bila opazovana tudi v [turmovcih [[tumberger, B. (1996): Veliki `agar Mergus merganser. – Acrocephalus 17(77): 129]. Z Ormo{kega jezera je poznano nekaj poznospomladanskih opazovanj odraslih osebkov [Geister, I. (1995): Ornitolo{ki atlas Slovenije. – DZS, Ljubljana], ki namigujejo na mo`nost gnezdenja v bli`ini. Nekaj podobnega sem na Ormo{kem jezeru opazoval dne 28.5.2005. Na deblu podrtega drevesa sredi vode je brezbri`no po~ival samec. Davorin Tome, Trnovska 8, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e–mail: davorin.tome@nib.si Ka~ar Circaetus gallicus Short–toed Eagle – 1 individual observed on 25 Jun 2005 above the [marje ridge (UTM UL93, SW Slovenia) holding prey (Western Whip Snake Hierophis viridiflavus) in its claws and eventually moving to a couple of other spots above Slovene Istria Dne 25.6.2005 sem nad [marskim grebenom v Slovenski Istri ob 15.50 uri opazoval ka~arja v letu s plenom. S pomo~jo teleskopa sem ugotovil, da je bil plen ~rnica Hierophis viridiflavus. Ka~ar je s plenom najprej preletel [marski greben v predelu Zabreg – Kandelca z ju`ne proti severni strani v smeri proti Kopru in v kro`ni liniji proti vzhodu zavil nazaj na ju`ne, prete`no odprte kmetijske predele [marij. Po desetih minutah sem ka~arja ponovno opazil nad ju`nimi predeli ^rte`e in Prelne skupaj z dvema kanjama Buteo buteo, kjer je kro`il brez plena in se po pribli`no dvajsetih minutah vnovi~ prestavil nad travi{~a v obmo~je Rete pri Kri`i{~u Pu~e, kjer je znano lovi{~e ujed (T. Miheli~ ustno). Po meni znanih podatkih [Geister, I. (1995): Ornitolo{ki atlas Slovenije. – DZS, Ljubljana] ka~ar ni prav pogosta vrsta na obmo~ju pore~ja reke Dragonje, zato je bilo opazovanje {e toliko bolj zanimivo. Andrej Medved, [marje 13/b, SI– 6274 [marje pri Kopru, Slovenija, e– mail: andrej.medved@dopps–drustvo.si Rjavi {karnik Milvus milvus Red Kite – 1 individual observed on 19 Jun 2005, circling above the highway near Postojna in the Nano{~ica river basin (UTM VL36, S Slovenia); possibly breeding in the vicinity Rjavi {karnik velja v Sloveniji za zelo skrivnostno mo`no gnezdilko, saj kljub celi vrsti gnezditveno sumljivih opazovanj v SV Sloveniji gnezditev ni bila nikoli potrjena [Geister, I. (1995): Ornitolo{ki atlas Slovenije. – DZS, Ljubljana]. V sosednji Italiji gnezdi kar nekaj parov [Burfield, I. & van Bommel, F., eds. (2004): Birds in Europe: population estimates, trends and conservation status. – BirdLife Conservation Series No. 12, BirdLife International, Cambridge], na Hrva{kem pa velja za regionalno izumrlo vrsto [Radovi}, D., Kralj, J., Tuti{, V. & ]ikovi}, D. (2003): Crvena knjiga ugro`enih ptica Hrvatske. – Ministarstvo za{tite okoli{a i prostornog ure|enja, Zagreb]. V zadnjem ~asu se je {tevilo opazovanj klate{kih ptic v Sloveniji znatno pove~alo [za podrobnosti glej npr. Bordjan, D. (2003): Rjavi {karnik Milvus milvus. – Acrocephalus 24 (116): 31]. Ve~ina podatkov se nana{a na obmo~je SV Slovenije, manj pa na ju`no Slovenijo. Sam sem opazoval odrasel osebek, ki je kro`il nad avtocesto blizu izvoza za Postojno 19.6.2005 v dolini Nano{~ice (UTM VL36). Ali je bil osebek gnezdilno ali zgolj klate{ko razpolo`en, bodo verjetno pokazale nadaljnje ornitolo{ke raziskave na tem zanimivem mednarodno pomembnem obmo~ju za ptice (IBA). Al Vrezec, Pra`akova 11, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e– mail: al.vrezec@nib.si Sr{enar Pernis apivorus Honey Buzzard – late observation of a single individual on 24 Oct 2004 at Gori~ko near the village of Neradnovci (UTM WM99, NE Slovenia) Dne 24.10.2004 smo na Gori~kem v Neradnovcih opazovali sr{enarja, ki je kakih 5 minut nizko kro`il nad dolinico Male Krke. Podatek je zanimiv zaradi kasnega datuma opazovanja, saj je sr{enar tipi~na selivka, ki se seli v ekvatorialno in ju`no Afriko. Iz srednje Evrope 48 Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 47 – 62, 2005 se glavnina populacije odseli ob koncu avgusta, po 15. oktobru je mo~ v Evropi opazovati le zelo zapoznele ptice, opazovanja v novembru pa so `e izjemno redka [Glutz von Blotzheim, U.N. & Bauer, K.M. (1989): Handbuch der Vögel Mitteleuropas. Band 4: Falconiformes. – Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft, Wiesbaden]. Sr{enar je na Gori~kem sicer razmeroma pogosta gnezdilka [Denac, D. (2000): Gori~ko. pp. 173–182 In: Polak, S. (ed.), Mednarodno pomembna obmo~ja za ptice v Sloveniji; Important Bird Areas (IBA) in Slovenia. – DOPPS, Ljubljana] in je za obmo~je naravovarstveno pomembna vrsta, uvr{~ena na Prilogo I Direktive o pticah. Damijan Denac, Gorki~eva 14, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e–mail: damijan.denac@nib.si Kragulj Accipiter gentilis & Koza~a Strix uralensis Goshawk & Ural Owl – observation of a female Goshawk feeding on carrion at the Meni{ija plateau feeding site on (UTM VL48, Central Slovenia) on 17 Dec 2004 and 25 Mar 2005. On 1 Apr 2005, one Ural Owl was observed at a Roedeer Capreolus capreolus cadaver on Meni{ija plateau, although no actual feeding was confirmed. Prehranjevanje ujed z mrhovino ni ravno redkost, pa vendar o tem vsaj pri nas ni dosti objavljenih podatkov. Izjema so tipi~ni mrhovinarji, kakr{en je beloglavi jastreb Gyps fulvus [npr. [ere, D. (1998): Beloglavi jastreb Gyps fulvus. – Acrocephalus 19 (87/88): 67]. Med drugimi ujedami ob mrhovini najpogosteje opazimo kanjo Buteo buteo [Bordjan, D. (2003): Kanja Buteo buteo. – Acrocephalus 24 (117): 75], kar gre verjetno predvsem na ra~un njene pogostosti in pojavljanja v kulturni krajini. Kot primer navajam kanjo, ki se je dne 10.3.2005 na Loga{ki planoti prehranjevala na truplu srne Capreolus capreolus, ki jo je pet dni prej uplenil ris Lynx lynx. Bolj zanimivo je opazovanje z dne 17.12.2004, ko je zve~er na mrhovi{~e na Meni{iji priletela samica kragulja. Nekaj ~asa je brskala po mrhovini, potem pa odletela, verjetno zaradi giba moje roke proti fotoaparatu. Kasneje se je sicer vrnila, vendar v meso ni zagrizla. Nemara isto samico sem na mrhovi{~u opazoval tudi dne 25.3.2005. Tokrat je ostala dalj ~asa in se dodobra najedla, zatem pa si o~istila kljun z drgnjenjem ob kos mokrega debla. Najve~je presene~enje pa sem do`ivel, ko se je prav tako na Meni{iji dne 1.4.2005 ob ogledu risovega plena s srninega kadavra dvignila koza~a. Ker sem sovo zagledal {ele v zraku, ne morem zanesljivo trditi, da se je z mrhovino tudi dejansko prehranjevala. Upamo, da bomo prehranjevanje sov z mrhovino lahko potrdili v prihodnje, ko bomo ob plenih name{~ali kamere. Iz literature sta doslej o prehranjevanju sov z mrhovino znana podatka za lesno sovo Strix aluco [Selva, N. (2004): Life after death – scavenging on ungulate carcasses. In: Jedrzejewska, B. & Wojcik, J. M. (eds.): Essays on Mammals of Bialowieza Forest. – Polish Academy of Sciences, Bialowieza] in ribjo uharico Bubo zeylonensis, ki so jo opazovali pri hranjenju na kadavru krokodila [König, C, Weick, F. & Becking, J. H. (1999): Owls. A Guide to the Owls of the World. – Pica Press, Sussex]. Miha Krofel, Zavrh pri Borovnici 2, SI–1353 Borovnica, Slovenija, e-mail: mk_lynx@yahoo.co.uk Navadna ~igra Sterna hirundo Common Tern – aggressive behaviour (mobbing) against Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus and Kestrel Falco tinnunculus, flying 300 and 1000 m respectively from the breeding colony, observed at Lake Ptuj on 3 Jul 2004 (UTM WM74, NE Slovenia) Med popisovanjem prehranjevalne dinamike navadne ~igre v koloniji na Ptujskem jezeru dne 3.7.2004 smo velik del pozornosti posvetili znotrajvrstnim interakcijam [Denac, D. (2004): Prehranjevalna dinamika in pojav znotrajvrstnega kleptoparazitizma v koloniji navadne ~igre na Ptujskem jezeru (SV Slovenija). – Acrocephalus 25(123): 201–205]. Medvrstne interakcije so bile redkej{e od znotrajvrstnih, mednje pa sodita dve opazovanji preganjanja ujed. Ob 5.58 zjutraj je skobec Accipiter nisus preletel Ptujsko jezero na razdalji 300 m od kolonije in ni kazal namena, da bi napadel ~igre v koloniji. Kljub temu se je ena izmed ~iger bliskovito pognala proti njemu in ga silovito napadla ter odgnala. Podoben pregon je do`ivela postovka Falco tinnunculus, ki je ob 8.20 »lebdela« pri Ranci, oddaljena 1000 m od kolonije. Pribli`no 30 sekund kasneje se je ~igra dvignila iz kolonije in jo napadla podobno kot skobca. V obeh primerih je bil napad tako silovit, da sta se ujedi nemudoma umaknili. U~inkovita obramba pred plenilci bi naj bila ena izmed prednosti kolonijskega gnezdenja, vendar je ta teorija `e precej ~asa dele`na kritikam [Rodgers, JA. (1987): On the antipredator advantages of coloniality: a word of caution. – Wilson Bull. 99(2): 269–71], saj je po drugi strani ravno za kolonije zna~ilno mo~no plenjenje, ki se neredko kon~a s popolnim neuspehom celotne kolonije. Damijan Denac, Gorki~eva 14, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e–mail: damijan.denac@nib.si 49 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook Mala uharica Asio otus Long–eared Owl – eggshells, feathers and pellets found on 31 Jul 2004 in Pohorje Mts. along the trail leading from Osankarica to Crno jezero (1200 m a.s.l., UTM WM34, NE Slovenia); the highest altitude breeding record for Slovenia so far Na poti od Osankarice proti Črnemu jezeru smo 31.7.2004 naleteli na jajčne lupine, večje število izbljuvkov in peresa male uharice. Našteto je ležalo pod bukvijo, ob kateri je rasla smreka v precej strnjenem smrekovem sestoju. Po stanju jajčne lupine smo sklepali, da se je iz jajca izvalil mladič. Kljub pozornemu pregledu drevesa nismo našli gnezda ali njegovih ostankov, zato smo sklepali, da je že razpadlo. Za malo uharico je znano, da gnezdi tudi v opuščenih gnezdih, ki so v zelo slabem stanju. Potrjeno gnezdenje male uharice na nadmorski višini 1200 m je zanimivo, saj je, upoštevajoč dosedanje podatke [Božič, L. & Vrezec, A. (2000): Sove Pohorja. – Acrocephalus 21 (98/99): 47–53], to najvišje potrjeno gnezdenje pri nas, ki pa je bilo glede na posamezne prejšnje podatke s podobnih nadmorskih višin in podatke iz sosednjih držav [Sackl, P. & Samwald, O. (1997): Atlas der Brutvogel der Steiermark. – Austria medien service, Graz] pričakovano. Damijan Denac, Gorkičeva 14, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e–mail: damijan.denac@nib.si Belohrbti detel Dendrocopos leucotos White–backed Woodpecker – a male observed in Javorniki Mts. (1140 m a.s.l., UTM VL46, Notranjska, S Slovenia) on 3 Feb 2005; first record for the Notranjska region Dne 3.2.2005 sem na Javornikih v snegu iskal sledi živali. Potem ko že nekaj časa nisem videl nobene ptice, sem na južnem pobočju, približno 500 m zahodno od vrha Velikega Javornika na nadmorski višini 1140 m opazil detla, ki se je prehranjeval ob bazi debla. K sreči se je tam zadrževal dovolj dolgo, da sem si ga lahko dobro ogledal z daljnogledom. Bil je samec belohrbtega detla balkanske podvrste D. L lilfordi. Belohrbti detel spada med najredkejše vrste žoln pri nas. Za zimsko obdobje je v Zimskem ornitološkem atlasu Slovenije kot edina lokacija naveden Maribor [Sovinc, A. (1994): Zimski ornitološki atlas Slovenije. – Tehniška založba Slovenije, Ljubljana]. Nekoliko pogostejši so podatki za gnezditveno obdobje, ko so ga na{li okoli La{kega, na Goteni{ki gori [Geister, I. (1995): Ornitolo{ki atlas Slovenije. – DZS, Ljubljana], v Ko~evskem rogu [Peru{ek, M. (1991): Balkanski detel Dendrocopos lilfordi gnezdi tudi v Sloveniji. – Acrocephalus 12 (47): 14–18], na Gorjancih [Gregori, J. (1996): Belohrbti detel Dendrocopos leucotos gnezdi na Gorjancih. – Acrocephalus 17 (78/ 79): 153–155], Pohorju [[ere, D. (1985): Belohrbti detel Dendrocopos leucotos. – Acrocephalus 6 (23): 11], Kozjaku [Mlakar, G. (1996): Belohrbti detel Dendrocopos leucotos. – Acrocephalus 18 (75/76): 85–86], Menini (H. Poto~nik ustno) in ob Blejskem jezeru [Rubini~, B. (1993): Belohrbti detel Dendrocopos leucotos. – Acrocephalus 14 (60): 168]. Opa`anje na Javornikih je tako prvi podatek za Notranjsko. Glede na to, da se belohrbti detel vse leto zadr`uje v okolici svojega gnezdilnega obmo~ja [Peru{ek, M. (2004): @olne Slovenije. – Svet ptic 10(1): 6– 9 ], ni izklju~eno, da na Javornikih tudi gnezdi. Detla sem opazoval v razmeroma mladem bukovem sestoju, kar je nekoliko nenavadno za to vrsto, ki daje prednost gozdovom z obilico starega in trohne~ega drevja (Geister 1995). Da to ni osamljen primer, ka`ejo podatki iz [vice, kjer je Bühler prav tako opazoval belohrbtega detla v mlaj{ih bukovih gozdovih [Bühler, U. (2001): Brutvorkommen des Weissrückenspechts Dendrocopos leucotos in Nordbünden. – Der Ornithologische Beobachter 98 (1): 1–11]. Miha Krofel, Zavrh pri Borovnici 2, SI–1353 Borovnica, Slovenija, e–mail: mk_lynx@yahoo.co.uk Triprsti detel Picoides tridactylus Three–toed Woodpecker – a female observed on 7 Feb 2005 on Meni{ija plateau (713 m a.s.l., UTM VL48, Central Slovenia) Med sledenjem risa Lynx lynx dne 7.2.2005 sem na Tolstem vrhu na severozahodnem delu Meni{ije v me{anem gozdu zasli{al potrkavanje. Odpravil sem se za zvokom in kmalu opazil samico triprstega detla, ki se je prehranjevala na posu{eni jelki Abies alba na nadmorski vi{ini 713 m. Vnovi~ se je izkazal neboje~i zna~aj te vrste, kar mi je omogo~ilo, da sem si jo dodobra ogledal. Glede na literaturo je to tretji podatek za pokrajino Krimskega hribovja in Meni{ije ter prvi zimski podatek za osrednjo Slovenijo. V gnezditvenem obdobju je bil opa`en `e na Ljubljanskem vrhu [Vrezec, A. (2001): Triprsti detel Picoides tridactylus. 5C ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 47 — 62, 2OO5 – Acrocephalus 22 (104/105): 60], v okolici Sne`nika pa celo par s speljanim mladi~em [Kebe, L. (2001): Triprsti detel Picoides tridactylus. – Acrocephalus 22 (104/105): 60]. Miha Krofel, Zavrh pri Borovnici 2, SI–1353 Borovnica, Slovenija, e–mail: mk_lynx@yahoo.co.uk Planinska pevka Prunella collaris Alpine Accentor – a flock of 15 individuals feeding on 18 Dec 2004 on the peak of Mt. Kucelj (1237 m a.s.l., UTM VL08, W Slovenia); first winter observation for the forest complex of Trnovski gozd Planinska pevka pri nas gnezdi nad drevesno mejo v Julijskih Alpah, Karavankah in Kamni{ko – Savinjskih Alpah [Geister, I. (1995): Ornitolo{ki atlas Slovenije. – DZS, Ljubljana]. Pozimi lahko ostane v gnezditvenem okoli{u ali pa se pomakne na ni`ja pobo~ja. Doslej so bila za to vrsto pri nas znana tri prezimovalna obmo~ja: skalnate stene kra{kega roba z Matarskim podoljem in pe~inami v dolini Zgornje Pivke, {ir{e gnezditveno obmo~je Alp in tretje v Zasavju [Sovinc, A. (1994): Zimski ornitolo{ki atlas Slovenije. – Tehni{ka zalo`ba Slovenije, Ljubljana]. Zato je dokaj zanimivo moje opazovanje jate 15 planinskih pevk dne 18.12.2004 na vrhu Kuclja (1237 m n.v.). Kucelj sodi v kompleks Trnovskega gozda in doslej {e nisem zasledil podatkov o pojavljanju planinske pevke na tem obmo~ju. Planinske pevke so intenzivno brskale med skalami in travno ru{o ter iskale hrano, pri tem pa niso bile prav ni~ pla{ne. Kot se za ornitolo{ki izlet na visoki dinarski Kras spodobi, sem malo naprej od ko~e na ^avnu uzrl koza~o Strix uralensis, v daljavi z vrha Kuclja pa {e planinskega orla Aquila chrisaetos, oba tukaj{nja znana gnezdilca. Damijan Denac, Gorki~eva 14, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e–mail: damijan.denac@nib.si Pogorel~ek Phoenicurus phoenicurus Redstart – probable breeding on 28 and 30 Jun 2005 approx. 250 m and 350 m outside the villages of Kamno (UTM UM92) and Kozar{~e (UTM VM01) respectively in the So~a valley (W Slovenia), where breeding inside villages is common; orchards were used as a breeding ground Na ornitolo{kem taboru Most na So~i smo z na{o skupino pri popisovanju rjavega srakoperja Lanius collurio na dveh obmo~jih potrdili gnezditev pogorel~ka zunaj vasi. Prvi primer je bil zabele`en 28.6.2005 v bližini vasi Kamno. Opazovali smo samca, ki je s hrano v kljunu sedel na enem izmed dreves visokodebelnega sadovnjaka, obdanega z omejki in ekstenzivnimi travniki. Na podlagi tega sklepamo, da je krmil mladiče v gnezdu. Sadovnjak je bil od vasi oddaljen 250 m. Drugi primer gnezditve je bil potrjen 3O.6.2OO5. Tudi tega dne smo opazovali samca s hrano v kljunu, in sicer v manjšem sadovnjaku kakih 350 m od vasi Kozaršče. V sadovnjaku se je pasla živina, ob njem pa je stal tudi manjši hlev. Drugih stavb v bližini ni bilo. Z navedenima podatkoma dopolnjujemo navedbe A. Figlja [Figelj, A. (2004): Pogorelček Phoenicurus phoenicurus. — Acrocephalus 25 (120): 36— 37] o razširjenosti in gnezditvenih navadah pogorelčka v Posočju. Figelj (2004) navaja, da pogorelček gnezdi v domala vsaki vasi v dolini Soče, očitno pa posamezni pari gnezdijo tudi v sadovnjakih zunaj vasi. Simon Komar, Zrkovska cesta 132, SI—2000 Maribor, Slovenija, e—mail: simon.komar@email.si Repaljščica Saxicola rubetra Whinchat — probable breeding recorded on 29 Jun 2005 at Podljubinj in the Soča valley (1000 m a.s.L, UTM VM01, W Slovenia) Na ornitološkem taboru v Mostu na Soči smo v kulturni krajini v dolini Soče popisovali rjave srakoperje Lantus collurio. Dne 29.6.2005 smo v Poljubinju med pretežno intenzivnimi kmetijskimi površinami okoli 7. ure zjutraj na fižolovkah, na višini približno 1,5 metra od tal, opazili samca in samico repaljščice. Obe ptici sta se svarilno oglašali, samica pa je imela v kljunu hrano, zato domnevamo, da sta tam gnezdili. Travnik, na katerem se je zadrževal par repaljščic, je bil dokaj izoliran in edini takega tipa, razprostirajoč se sredi bolj intenzivnih travnikov in koruznih polj. Naše opazovanje potrjuje gnezdenje repaljščice v nižinah alpskega sveta. Repaljščica naj bi po dosedanjih podatkih v tem predelu Slovenije gnezdila le na visokogorskih travnikih in pašnikih na nadmorski višini nad 1000 m. Maja Slak, Trnovski pristan 10, SI—1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e—mail: maja.slak@email.si Čopasta sinica Parus cristatus Crested Tit — a pair observed on 29 Mar 2004 in a lowland Oak—Hornbeam forest Querco—Carpinetum (known as Orlovšček) near Dolnja Bistrica (UTM XM05, NE Slovenia), while building a nest in a Bird Cherry Prunus padus hollow, which was probably 51 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook enabled by approx. 0.2 ha large Norway Spruce Picea abies plantation in the middle of the forest. This is the second nesting record for this species in the lowland part of Prekmurje. Med popisom ptic za Novi ornitolo{ki atlas gnezdilk Slovenije sem 29.3.2004 v gozdu Orlov{~ek pri Dolnji Bistrici (Prekmurje, SV Slovenija) naletel na gnezde~i par ~opastih sinic. Na naselitev te vrste v sicer tipi~nem ni`inskem, hrastovo-gabrovem gozdu Querco-Carpinetum je verjetno odlo~ilno vplival 0,2 ha velik gost nasad smreke Picea abies, ki le`i sredi omenjenega gozda. Par si je v ~asu mojega opazovanja vneto spletal gnezdo v duplu manj{e ~remse Prunus padus, od smrekovega sestoja oddaljene pribli`no 50 metrov. Kljub dokaj kratkemu ~asu opazovanja je bilo o~itno, da sinici gnezditveni material zbirata le v smrekovem nasadu. Podatek je zanimiv zaradi netipi~nega gnezditvenega habitata ~opaste sinice in potrjenega gnezdenja vrste v Prekmurju. Iz ravninskega dela Prekmurja je bil doslej znan le en podatek iz gnezditvenega obdobja, in sicer iz ^rnega loga [Geister, I. (1995): Ornitolo{ki atlas Slovenije. – DZS, Ljubljana]. Luka Bo`i~, Kamen{kova 18, SI–2000 Maribor, Slovenija, e–mail: luka.bozic@dopps–drustvo.si [~inkavec Fringilla coelebs Chaffinch – almost complete leucistic individual observed on 19 Apr 2005 on Mt. Krim near the village of I{ka (UTM VL68, central Slovenia) in a Beech forest with Fir Omphalodo–Fagetum s.lat.; in Slovenia, albinistic and leucistic individuals have also been found in Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo, Mute Swan Cygnus olor, Coot Fulica atra, Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto, Scops Owl Otus scops, Barn Swallow Hirudno rustica, Blackbird Turdus merula, Marsh Warbler Acrocephalus palustris, Long–tailed Tit Aegithalos caudatus, Jackdaw Corvus monedula, Raven Corvus corax, and House Sparrow Passer domesticus Med redkej{e pojave pri prosto`ive~ih pticah gotovo sodi albinizem in leucizem, torej belo ali rumenkasto obarvani osebki s pomanjkanjem melanina. ^eprav pojav v obliki delnega albinizma, kjer je belo le posamezno pero, ni tako redek, pa so osebki s popolnim ali ve~inskim albinizmom oziroma leucizmom velika redkost. Eno tak{nih redkosti sva opazovala 19.4.2005 na Krimu pri Ljubljani, nekoliko vi{je nad vasjo I{ka (VL68) v dinarskem bukovem gozdu z jelko Omphalodo–Fagetum s.lat., na primeru na{e najpogostej{e gozdne ptice, {~inkavca. Na gozdni cesti nama je pot prekri`al rumenkasto obarvan pti~, podoben kanar~ku. Telo je imel rumenkasto, peruti so bile bele, le na glavi je imel nekaj rjavih peres. Po ogla{anju in obliki telesa sva ugotovila, da gre za leucisti~ni primerek {~inkavca. Ptica je bila v zelenih kro{njah dreves dobro opazna, a se po vedenju ni kaj dosti razlikovala od drugih istovrstnih osebkov, ki so v raztreseni skupini obirali liste. Tu in tam so se po {~inkav~je tudi malce preganjali, toda ni bilo opaziti, da bi bil bledi~ni osebek kaj bolj preganjan od drugih. Avtorjema tega prispevka ni znano, da bi bil pri nas skoraj popolnoma leucisti~ni {~inkavec `e opazovan, bledi~ni osebki pa so bili v Sloveniji ugotovljeni denimo `e pri kormoranu Phalacrocorax carbo [[orgo, A. (1997): Veliki kormoran Phalacrocorax carbo. – Acrocephalus 18(80/81): 40; A. Vrezec v Senega~nik, K., Sovinc, A. & [ere, D. (1998): Ornitolo{ka kronika 1994, 1995. – Acrocephalus 19(87/88): 77–91], labodu grbcu Cygnus olor [Vrezec, A. & Hönigsfeld Adami~, M. (2003): Labod grbec Cygnus olor. – Acrocephalus 24(119): 147–148], liski Fulica atra [Lipej, L. & Makovec, T. (1997): Prezimovanje ~rnih lisk Fulica atra v Strunjanski laguni. – Acrocephalus 18(80/81): 23–26], tur{ki grlici Streptopelia decaocto [Vrezec, A. (1999): Tur{ka grlica Streptopelia decaocto. – Acrocephalus 20(93): 61], kme~ki lastovki Hirundo rustica [Lenar~i~, L. (1981): Paberki (kme~ka lastovka). – Acrocephalus 2(7): 15; Gobec, M. (1996): Kme~ka lastovka Hirundo rustica. – Acrocephalus 17(74): 36–37], kosu Turdus merula [Kurillo, A. (1986): Kos Turdus merula. – Acrocephalus 7(30): 62; L. Osterman, M. Bratu{ v Sovinc, A. (1992): Ornitolo{ka kronika 1990. – Acrocephalus 13(50): 29–32], dolgorepki Aegithalos caudatus [F. Bra~ko v Sovinc, A. & [ere, D. (1993): Ornitolo{ka kronika za leto 1991. – Acrocephalus 14(58/59): 140–144], kavki Corvus monedula (I.A. Bo`i~ v Sovinc & [ere 1993), krokarju Corvus corax [Gro{elj, P. (1991): Krokar Corvus corax. – Acrocephalus 12 (49): 165] in doma~em vrabcu Passer domesticus [Kljun, I. (2003): Doma~i vrabec Passer domesticus. – Acrocephalus 24(117): 78–79]. Poleg tega so nama iz Slovenije beli~ni osebki znani tudi pri velikem skoviku Otus scops in mo~virski trstnici Acrocephalus palustris (lastni podatki). Sicer pa so denimo v Bolgariji beli~nost ugotovili {e pri mlakarici Anas platyrhynchos, mestni lastovki Delichon urbica, kup~arju Oenanthe oenanthe, srpi~ni trstnici Acrocephalus scirpaceus, rjavoglavem srakoperju Lanius senator, poljskem vrabcu Passer montanus in velikem strnadu Miliaria calandra 52 ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 47 – ć>2, 2OO5 [NiKOLOv, S.C, Spasov, S.D. & Meeus, T. (2004): Northern Wheater Oenanthe oenanthe. — Acrocephalus 25 (122): 175—176]. Al Vrezec, Pra`akova 11, SI—1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e—mail: al.vrezec@nib.si Petra Vrh, Gri~ C. IX/1, SI—1310 Ribnica, Slovenija, e—mail: petravrh@yahoo.com Croatia / Hrvaška Crna štorklja Ciconia nigra Black Stork — one individual seen soaring on 29 May 2004 in particularly strong winds over Bakarski Bay near Rijeka (UTM VL61, W Croatia) Dne 29.5.2004 sem se mudil v majhnem naselju ob cesti v Bakarskem zalivu pri Reki, ko je pihala izredno mo~na burja. Med opazovanjem, kako se dviguje voda z morske gladine, sem zagledal jadrajo~o ~rno {torkljo, le da ta v nasprotju z mano ni imela te`av z burjo. Podatki za to ptico so za Hrva{ko primorje redki in vklju~ujejo predvsem klate`e zunaj gnezdilnega obdobja [Rucner, D. (1998): Ptice hrvatske obale Jadrana. — Hrvatski prirodoslovni muzej, Ministrstvo razvitka i obnove, Zagreb]. Ker gre za podatek iz gnezdilnega obdobja, lahko domnevamo, da je ta osebek nekje v bli`ini tudi gnezdil. Dejan Bordjan, Ulica 8. februarja 50, 2204 Milklav`, Slovenija, e—mail: dejanonih@email.si Red–footed Falcon Falco vespertinus Rdečenoga postovka — avtorja navajata podatke o opazovanju 3 osebkov na Vranskem jezeru (UTM WJ46) v dneh 2.5.2005 in 3.5.2005 Between 1 and 8 May 2005, several survey walks were made in the northern part of Lake Vransko (UTM WJ46). Our observations were focused particularly on areas with intensive horticultural activity, with vegetable gardens neighbouring hay meadows reaching out almost to the immediate waterside, i.e. down to the reedbed. Our observation of birds of prey included 3 Marsh Harriers Circus aeruginosus seen on 1 May. There were in fact a number of them (1 — 5) flying above the reeds almost during every survey walk. At about 11.00 h on 2 May, 1 female Red-footed Falcon was spotted hunting above the meadow. About 5 — 10 minutes, later a male also showed up above the reedbed, and at 11.20 h yet another male joined the birds already hunting there. At 11.20 h on 3 May, while surveying the same area, the two male and one female Red—footed Falcons were still there. Red—footed Falcons in the Croatian seaside region are seen most commonly at the time of spring migration, i.e. around late April, early May [Rucner, D. (1998): Ptice hrvatske obale Jadrana. — Hrvatski prirodoslovni muzej, Ministarstvo razvitka i obnove, Zagreb]. The Red—footed Falcon is listed in the avifauna of Lake Vransko as a migrating species [LukaČ, G. (2002): Fauna ptica (Aves). pp. In: Prirodoslovne podloge za izradu prostornog plana Parka prirode Vransko jezero, Zagreb.]. However, no exact observation data are known to have been published so far. On 4 May, no birds of prey other than Marsh Harriers were seen. On 5 May, one female and one male Kestrel Falco tinnunculus were seen. The female was hunting above a mown area, whereas the male was circling higher up in the air. On 8 May, another male Kestrel, and a male Montagu’s Harrier Circus pygargus were observed. Jenö J. Purger, University of Pécs, Institute of Biology, Ifjúság ú tja 6, H—7624 Pécs, Hungary, e—mail: purger@ttk.pte.hu Jasmina Mu`ini}, Institute for Ornithology CASA, Gunduli}eva 24, HR— 10000 Zagreb, Croatia, e—mail: jasmina@hazu.hr Zalivski galeb Larus genei Slender–billed Gull — 2 adults resting on 18 May 2005 at Mlinica Bay (UTM WK11, Pag Island, N Dalmatia) after heavy rainfall Dne 18.5.2005 sem s {vicarskimi ornitologi v zalivu Mlinica nasproti Malega blata na J delu otoka Pag (S Dalmacija) opazoval dva (2) odrasla zalivska galeba. Ptici sta ob 18.30 h po~ivali tesno druga ob drugi v bibavi~nem pasu kar tik ob cesti. ^eprav smo v tednu poprej prekri`arili Pag po dolgem in po~ez, zlasti vsa mokri{~a, zalivskega galeba nismo opazili. Verjetno je, da sta ptici prileteli s ciklonom; {e popoldan je mo~no de`evalo, zve~er pa se je povsem zjasnilo. Pojavljanje zalivskega galeba na Hrva{kem je dokumentirano presenetljivo redko, primerjaj npr.: [Rubinič, B., Božič, L. & Sackl, P. (2002): The actual status of Slender—billed Gull Larus genei on the southern Dalmatian coast. — Acrocephalus 23 (110/111): 35—37]. Borut [tumberger, SI—2282 Cirkulane 41, Slovenija, e—mail: stumberger@siol.net 53 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook Gull–billed Tern Gelochelidon nilotica Crnonoga čigra – dne 3.5.2005 opa`en en osebek na Vranskem jezeru (UTM WJ46), kar je ~etrti podatek za to obmo~je Several observations were made at Lake Vransko (UTM WJ46) between 1– 8 May 2005. Agricultural areas at the northern part of the lake adjoin wet meadows and reedbeds. The lower sections of agricultural fields were inundated. Almost each day, we could observe 3 – 6 individuals of Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides, 2 – 20 Little Egrets Egretta garzetta, 2 – 8 Glossy Ibises Plegadis falcinellus, 2 – 4 Wigeons Anas penelope, 2 – 16 Mallards Anas platyrhynchos, 4 – 6 Garganeys Anas querquedula, 2 – 50 Coots Fulica atra, 1 – 4 Black – winged Stilts Himantopus himantopus, 1 – 3 Lapwings Vanellus vanellus, 3 – 7 Curlew Sandpipers Calidris ferruginea, 1 – 2 Black–tailed Godwits Limosa limosa, 1 – 2 Curlews Numenius arquata, 1 – 3 Spotted Redshanks Tringa erythropus, 1 – 2 Redshanks Tringa totanus, 1 – 5 Greenshanks Tringa nebularia, 1 – 3 Wood Sandpipers Tringa glareola, and 4 – 10 Common Sandpipers Actitys hypoleucos. Usually there were 4 – 12 Black–headed Gulls Larus ridibundus and 4 – 5 Yellow–legged Gulls Larus cachinnans resting in ploughed up areas. Some (1 – 5) Ringed Plovers Charadrius hiaticula often ran past them. On 2 May, four Whiskered Terns Chlidonias hybridus and one Black Tern Chlidonias niger were noticed in the same place. On 3 May, a Gull–billed Tern was seen sitting in the company of Black–headed Gulls and Yellow–legged Gulls. It took wing several times, but soon returned to the ploughland. However, it was no longer seen during the ensuing days. We have found three records on Gull–billed Tern sightings at Lake Vransko: on 10 July 1972 [Kralj, J. (1997): Ornitofauna Hrvatske tijekom poslednjih dvjesto godina. – Larus 46: 1–112], on 27 April 1995, 3 individuals [Radovic, D., Tutiš, V. & Kralj, J. (2004): Inventarizacija i valorizacija ornitofaune Parka prirode Vransko Jezero. – Zavod za Ornitologiju HAZU, Zagreb] and 6 May 1995, 1 specimen [Stipčevic, M. (1996): A contribution to the Croatian list of rare and scarce birds recorded from 1985 – 1995. – Natura Croatica 5 (1): 53–81]. Jasmina Mu`ini}, Institute for Ornithology CASA, Gunduli}eva 24, HR– 10000 Zagreb, Croatia, e-mail: jasmina@hazu.hr Jenö J. Purger, University of Pécs, Institute of Biology, Ifjúság útja 6, HR– 7624 Pécs, Hungary, e–mail: purger@ttk.pte.hu 54 Long–eared Owl Asio otus Mala uharica – 2 mladi~a, stara nekaj manj kot mesec dni, najdena 16.1.2005 v vasi Novo Selo Palanje~ko v bli`ini Siska (UTM XL03, osrednja Hrva{ka) On 16 Jan 2005, a friend told me about two young Long–eared Owls he had just found at Novo Selo Palanje~ko near Sisak. I visited the area and found them along the road leading through the village. They were still fully covered with down. As the chicks’ primaries were incomplete, I estimated the two young to be 3 to 4 weeks old. Considering that these owls incubate the eggs for about 25 to 30 days [Mikkola, H. (1983): Owls of Europe. – T & A D Poyser, Calton], I concluded that they had been laid at the end of November or in early December. In the gardens of the local houses (in a circle with about 100 m in diameter), ten high and thick spruce trees are standing in which the owl’s nest was most probably built. This recovery seems interesting to me owing to the highly unusual date of nesting. In the town of Sisak and its vicinity, the Long–eared Owl is a fairly common and regular summer breeder (March – May), where it uses the abandoned magpies’ and crows’ nests. In the winter months, these owls gather in flocks at few places in the town itself, such as in the central park, on private plots along the town skating rink, and in a group of spruce trees at Bada{evo. @eljko Vasilik, S. Bereka 11, HR–44202 Topolovac, Croatia, e–mail: zeljko.vasilik@ina.hr Čebelar Merops apiaster Bee–eater – pair observed during its nesting between 27 Jul and 2 Aug 2005 on the east side of Pa{man Island (UTM WJ36, N Dalmatia) Od 27.7. do 2.8.2005 sem na hrva{kem otoku Pa{manu pre`ivljala dopust. V kampu Sovinje na vzhodnem delu otoka se nad pe{~eno pla`o dviguje pribli`no 7 m visoka pe{~eno ilovnata stena, v kateri me je `e prvi dan pritegnilo ve~je {tevilo lukenj, podobnih vhodom v pti~ja gnezda. Naslednji dan (28.7.) sem res opazila par ~ebelarjev, ki se je spreletaval nad nanosom. Ptici sta izmeni~no pristajali pri eni izmed lukenj, izginili vanjo in se v ~asu dveh minut vrnili ter spet poleteli na lov. Vsaki~ sta se tik pred vstopom oglasili s kratkim ~ivkom. Druge luknje so ostajale brez obiskovalcev, omenjena ~ebelarja pa smo lahko opazovali vsak dan v njuni skrbi za zarod. ^ebelarje so na hrva{kih otokih `e opazovali, vendar so se pojavljali v ve~jih skupinah [Bordjan, D. (2003): ^ebelar Merops apiaster. Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 47 – 62, 2005 – Acrocephalus 24 (119): 154; Bordjan, D. (2004): ^ebelar Merops apiaster. – Acrocephalus 25 (120): 40]. [pela [krajnar, Privoz 4, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e–mail: spela2xs@yahoo.com Mestna lastovka Delichon urbica House Martin – three chicks observed in the same nest with substantial age difference of approx. 5 – 6 days at Stari grad on the island of Hvar between 1 and 5 Aug 2005 Letos sem prvi teden v avgustu pre`ivel poletni dopust na otoku Hvaru v mestecu Stari grad. V starem mestnem jedru gnezdi ve~ sto parov mestnih lastovk. Eno izmed gnezd je bilo pripeto pod kamnit balkon samo pribli`no 3 m visoko, tako da je bilo opazovanje krmljenja mladi~ev zelo preprosto. Toda potem sem presene~en opazil, da se na vhodni odprtini gnezda izmeni~no pojavljajo trije mladi~i razli~nih starosti! Najstarej{i je bil le nekaj dni pred tem, da zapusti gnezdo. Drugi najve~ji je bil 5 – 6 dni mlaj{i, tretji pa {e 5 – 6 dni mlaj{i od drugega. Iz gnezda je ve~ino ~asa zvedavo gledal najstarej{i, druga dva mladi~a pa sta se ob njem pojavljala izmeni~no. Kar nekajkrat sem mlaj{a mladi~a opazil skupaj na vhodni odprtini; najstarej{i je bil takrat v ozadju. Med njimi ni bilo videti rivalstva. Vhodna odprtina gnezda je bila dovolj velika, da sta se na vhodu lahko pojavljala dva mladi~a. Nad tem svojim odkritjem sem bil tako presene~en in navdu{en, da sem gnezdo hodil opazovat 5 dni zapored (1. – 5.8.2005). V meni dostopni literaturi [npr. Turner, A. & Rose, C. (1989): A Handbook to the Swallows and Martins of the World. – Christopher Helm, London] {e nikoli nisem sli{al ali prebral, da ima mestna lastovka mladi~e tako velikih starostnih razlik. Starost mladi~ev sem ocenil glede na njihovo velikost in operjenost. Imam zelo veliko izku{enj s kme~kimi lastovkami Hirundo rustica. Veliko mladi~ev kme~kih lastovk sem obro~kal na gnezdu, tako da lahko z gotovostjo podajam oceno o njihovi starosti. Po analogiji sem dolo~il tudi starost mladi~ev mestne lastovke. Aleksander Pritekelj, Ulica Ivanke Ko`uh 6, SI–1210 Ljubljana–[entvid, Slovenija, e–mail: aleksander.pritekelj@mobitel.si ^rno~eli srakoper Lantus minor Lesser Grey Shrike — 1 individual observed in mid July 2000 near the village of Grama~e (44° 40' N, 14° 50' E; island Pag, N Dalmatia) Med 15. in 22.7.2000 sem pre`ivljal dopust na hrva{kem otoku Pagu. Med enim izmed {tevilnih izletov sem sredi dopusta obiskal tudi polotok Lun na severnem delu otoka. Tu sem ob glavni cesti pri vasi Grama~e opazoval en osebek ~rno~elega srakoperja. Opazoval sem ga samo enkrat in {e takrat ~isto na kratko, morda kak{no minuto. To je bilo doslej moje edino opazovanje ~rno~elega srakoperja na hrva{kem Jadranu, ~eprav tam pre`ivljam dopust `e desetletja, vsako leto po 1 — 4 tedne. Na samem Pagu sem dopustoval pet let, med letoma 2000 in 2004. Toma` Jan~ar, DOPPS—BirdLife Slovenija, p.p. 2990, SI—1001 Ljubljana, Slovenija, e—mail: tomaz.jancar@dopps—drustvo.si Srbija (Srbija in Črna gora) / Serbia (Serbia and Montenegro) Short–toed Eagle Circaetus gallicus Kačar — opazovan na selitvi blizu vasi Rti (UTM DP44, Z Srbija); prvi podatek za Draga~evsko obmo~je On 14 Aug 2002, accompanied by Jovan Pantovi}, we visited Rti village (UTM DP44) in the Draga~evo region (W Serbia). The village is famous for its R}anska cave, the cliffs above it, and the unique Plato (plateau) on top of the cliffs. As the entire area was ornithologically unknown, we decided to spend an afternoon researching birds around the cliffs. On that perfect summer day we observed, for several times, a family of Peregrine Falcons Falco peregrinus in flight around the cliffs, three Goshawks Accipiter gentilis and a Common Buzzard Buteo buteo in territorial flight, several families of Red—backed Shrikes Lantus collurio, Common Swifts Apus apus on migration, and a Lesser-spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos minor. We left the cliffs and proceeded to the main road, from where we had a splendid view of the huge limestone blocks. At about 17.10 h, a large raptor showed up gliding at the top of the cliffs and soon landed on a dead tree on the very edge of the cliffs. We clearly saw the brown head, back and wings and whitish belly of an adult Short-toed Eagle. The eagle gave us a wonderful opportunity to look at it for about 10 minutes when it disappeared in low flight over the Plato. This is the first record for the Draga~evo region. The same locality was again surveyed in 2003, 2004, and 2005, but as no data 55 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook about the presence of Short–toed Eagles during the breeding season were obtained, we believe that the observed bird was on migration. Milan Ru`i}, Ul. 8/8 N. N. Atenica, 32000 ^a~ak, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: milruzic@yahoo.com Uro{ Pantovi}, Takovska 5, 3200 ^a~ak, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: pantovic_uros@yahoo.co.uk Red Kite Milvus milvus Rjavi {karnik – opazovanje v gnezditvenem obdobju dne 26.6.2004 v vzhodnem Banatu (UTM DR58, V Banat, Vojvodina) ob reki Tami{ pri vasi Opovo On 26 Jun 2004, I inspected riverside habitats along both banks of the river Tami{ between Opovo and Sefkerin (E Banat, Voivodina). I walked from Opovo through the alluvial forest towards the south, and after crossing the bridge over the river at Sefkerin I started my way back towards Opovo on the embankment. At this section river is canalized and indigenous forests in remaining narrow inundation area have been mainly replaced by fast-growing poplars. However, the stands are quite old with White Willows Salix alba in some places and patches of old White Populus alba and Black Poplars P . nigra, or just solitary trees. On the opposite side of the embankment, spacious and intensively managed agricultural landscape spreads, intersected by groups of trees or bushes and melioration canals. I did not observe many birds of prey on that day: a Hobby Falco subbuteo at Opovo, several Common Buzzards Buteo buteo throughout the day, a female Goshawk Accipiter gentilis near Opovo and one near Sefkerin, and an adult White–tailed Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla in its suspected breeding territory. The only unexpected raptor was an adult Red Kite standing very still on the branch of a large Black Poplar near the left bank of the river, but outside the inundation zone, near the Dunavac Canal, which connects the Tami{ with the Danube (UTM DR58). Immediately next to the bird I noticed an empty crow–type nest. I was able to observe the bird and the nest for almost 15 minutes, but noticed no movements or other Red Kites around the site. After it almost disappeared from the country in the second half of 20th century, observations of this species on migration, wintering and even in the breeding period in Serbia have become more frequent after 1997. It is interesting that all new observations within the breeding period in Voivodina originate form the forested wetlands along the Danube, Bosut and Begej rivers [Puzovi}, S. (2002): Nova posmatranja crvene lunje Milvus milvus u Srbiji tokom reproduktivnog perioda. – Ciconia 11: 136–139]. My 56 observation may suggest that the species breeds there, although I have not visited this place again. Marko Tucakov, Marka Ore{kovi}a 9, 25275 Ba~ki Breg, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: mtucakov@eunet.yu Pintail Anas acuta Dolgorepa raca – dne 9.3.2003 je bila opa`ena velika jata pribl. 100 osebkov na reki Tisi v bli`ini Ba~kega Gradi{ta (UTM DR34, V Ba~ka, Vojvodina); v prvi polovici marca je vi{ek preleta za raco dolgorepko v Vojvodini On 9 Mar 2003, I observed a flock of around 100 very vocal Pintails flying upstream the Tisa river on Biserno ostrvo near Ba~ko Gradi{te (UTM DR34, E Ba~ka, Voivodina). Eventually, one part of the flock landed on the river surface, while a smaller part flew back downstream. The birds appeared at 11.38 h and were present on or above the river until 12.05 h, when they continued to fly upstream. In this particular locality only a few Pintails have been recorded several times in late winter during the 2000 – 2005 period. Although such numerous flocks are rare (and only present during spring migration) in Voivodina [[oti, J. & Dimitrijevi}, S. (1974): Prilog poznavanju ornitofaune Vojvodine (Gaviiformes, Podicipediformes, Pelecaniformes, Ciconiformes i Anseriformes zapadnog dela Banata). – Zbornik Matice srpske za prirodne nauke 46: 127–160], a flock was observed on the nearby Be~ej fishpond on 1 Mar 1991, when 99 birds were counted [Luka~, [. & Luka~, A. (1992): Ornitofauna ribnjaka Be~ej. – Ciconia 4: 4–17], and more recently on Lake Mezgarica near the village of Kru{evlje, where 150 – 200 individuals were observed on 13 Mar 2004 [\api}, D. (2004): Pintail Anas acuta. – Acrocephalus 25 (122): 169]. This makes the first half of March the peak for Pintail migration in northern Serbia. Marko [}iban, Bate Brki}a 18, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: sciban@eunet.yu Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca Kostanjevka – dne 24.3.2003 opazovan par na jezeru Petnica pri Valjevu (UTM DQ11, Z Srbija), dva samca opa`ena tudi 20. in 21.3.2005; vrsta je redek preletnik v okolici Valjeva On 24 Mar 2003, a pair of Ferruginous Ducks was observed on artificial Lake Petnica near Petnica Research Centre in the vicinity of Valjevo (UTM Acrocephalus 2.6 (124): 47 — 62, 2005 DQ11, W Serbia). The birds were seen feeding and hiding in a small belt of reeds in the lake’s western part, together with 3 pairs of Garganey Anas querquedula. On 20 and 21 Mar 2005, two males together with a male Wigeon Anas penelope were observed in the same part of the lake. In spite of the regular research throughout the years and seasons, the species has not been recorded in other months between 2001 and 2005, which so far makes March the only month for the occurrence of this species on Lake Petnica. Ferruginous Duck is a very rare migrant on the nearby Dokmir fishpond, which at the same time happens to be the only breeding place of the species in west Serbia [Rakovi}, M. & Novakovi}, B. (2003): Avifauna of Dokmir fishpond. – Ciconia 12: 121–129]. Marko [}iban, Bate Brki}a 18, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: sciban@eunet.yu Dimitrije Radi{i}, Mom~ila Tapavice 12, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: becko@ib.ns.ac.yu Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius Mali de`evnik – potrjeno gnezdenje na reki Zapadna Morava, 20 km SZ od Kraljeva (UTM DP74, Z Srbija); prvo potrjeno gnezdenje za okolico Kraljeva On 1 Jul 2005, the Little Ringed Plover’s nest containing 3 eggs was found on the gravel bank of the Zapadna Morava river about 20 km NW from Kraljevo, near the village of Bapsko Polje (UTM DP74). On this particular occasion, the eggs were also photographed. On 15 Jul 2005, during our next visit to the Zapadna Morava river, we found 3 nestlings from the same nest running and feeding together with the adults on the same part of the sandbank. This is so far the first evidence of the Little Ringed Plover’s successful breeding around Kraljevo. This species has been proved to breed upstream, in the vicinity of ^a~ak [[}iban, M. & Ru`i}, M. (2002): Findings of Little Ringed Plover in breeding period in valley of Zapadna Morava. – Ciconia 11: 161 – 162]. Milo{ Radakovi}, Drak~i}i, 36000 Kraljevo, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: maxkv@ptt.yu Marko [}iban, Bate Brki}a 18, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: sciban@eunet.yu Wren Troglodytes troglodytes Str`ek – dne 5.5.2005 v skladi{~u pri Ba~u (UTM CR53, SV Ba~ka, Vojvodina) najdeno gnezdo v starem gnezdu kme~ke lastovke Hirundo rustica On 25 May 2005, during my inspection of the “Ristova~a” pheasant farm and hunting grounds with forest habitats surrounded by agricultural fields and saline meadows situated near Ba~ (UTM CR53, SE Ba~ka, Voivodina), I entered the room used as a storehouse for pheasant — transportation boxes. In previous years, I had already found active Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica nests in it. This time, three were active. I noticed a pair of Wrens bringing material inside an old Barn Swallow nest, which had been active in 2004. The nest was situated on a wall, supported by electricity cables, some 2.5 m high (see photo). Ten days later, on 6 Jun 2005, when I had a look at the nest for the last time, I found 7 Wren eggs in it. Nemanja Risti}, Balzakova 67, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia and montenegro, e-mail: rile_87@yahoo.com Bluethroat Luscinia svetica Modra taščica — avtor je med 12.8. in 18.9.2004 opazoval jesensko selitev na evtrofnem »Jezeru«, severno od vasi Stani{i} (UTM CR59, SZ Ba~ka, Vojvodina) In autumn 2004, during the intensive bird ringing at the euthrophic pond “Jezero” situated to the north of Stani{i} (UTM CR59, NW Ba~ka, Voivodina), I was able to follow the intensive migration of Bluethroats. On 12 Aug, I ringed one young (1y) individual, on 17 Aug three (out of which two were adult males), on 18 57 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook Aug 1 ind., on 1 Sep 3 ind., on 2 Sep seven ind. (three young among them), on 6 Sep five ind. (including one adult male), on 11 Sep one and on 18 Sep two, including one 1y individual. This 20 ha large pond, overgrown by reed throughout the year (contrary to some previous years, when reedbed was dry) was filled with water. Since the area is the only site covered by reed in otherwise agricultural local landscape with just solitary trees or tree – lines, it is possible that “Jezero” is an important stopover site for this species during its migration in northern Serbia. Bluethroat is a breeder at the same site [@uljevi}, A. & \api}, D. (2002): Prvi podaci o fauni ptica bare «Jezero» kod Stani{i}a. – Ciconia 11: 123–126], and has been observed during the spring migration as well. Dejan \api}, Vuka Karad`i}a 134, 25284 Stani{i}, Serbia and Montenegro, e–mail: cbraaa@tippnet.co.yu Red–breasted Flycatcher Ficedula parva Mali muhar – dne 27.9.2003 ujeta samica v okolici Valjeva (UTM DQ11, Z Srbija); drugi podatek za ni`avje v okolici Valjeva On 27 Sep 2003, a female Red–breasted Flycatcher was caught during the bird ringing camp held in Petnica Research Centre near Valjevo (UTM DQ11, W Serbia; see picture). The bird, which flew into our mist net set in hedges next to the corn field, was identified and photographed in the company of Nikola Stojni}, Vesna Obradovi}, ^aba Matovi} and Dimitrije Radi{i}. So far, this is only the second record of the species in the lowlands surrounding the town of Valjevo. Previously, three birds had been observed and video–taped (on 13 Aug 2001) near the swimming pool about 1 km north of the Centre. Red–breasted Flycatcher is a possible breeder of the neighbouring Maljen Mt. [Gruba~, B. (2001): First recorded nest of Red—breasted Flycatcher in Serbia. — Ciconia 10: 150 - 152; Novakovi}, B. & Rakovi}, M. (2004): Status and analyse of the bird fauna of Mt. Maljen. — Ciconia 13: 99—104]. Marko [}iban, Bate Brki}a 18, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia and Montenegro, e-mail: sciban@eunet.yu Marko Rakovi}, Radni~ka 8, 14000 Valjevo, Serbia and Montenegro, e-mail: markorakovic@mail.com Rock Bunting Emberiza cia Skalni strnad — dva osebka opa`ena dne 16.11.2003 v predmestju ^a~ka (UTM DP55 Srbija); prvi podatek za dolino zahodne Morave Rock Bunting is a rare breeder of the mountainous area surrounding the town of ^a~ak [Gruba~, B. (2003): Ptice podru~ja Ov~arsko—Kablarske klisure. — Bele`nik Ov~arsko—Kablarske klisure lit. 2: 81 — 95; own data\. There are few data on the local population’s winter movements and habits. Around 7.00 on 16 Nov 2003, I stepped out of our family house in Atenica (UTM DP55) in the suburb of ^a~ak. The temperature was about 0°C and thick fog covered the entire town. I heard an unusual and quiet call from my neighbour's garden. Because of the fog I had to approach the site very close to see what bird was calling, and to my surprise there were two Rock Buntings sitting in a Cultivated Apple Malus domestica tree. They let me to approach them to about 3 m and showed no fear at all. One of them, probably 1st year male, was calling quietly virtually in front of me. The other bird was an adult female. I visited the same spot at 9.00 on the same day, but found no sign of them. This is the first record of this species in the Zapadna Morava valley. It is known that in Serbia Rock Buntings spent the winter or migrate through its lowlands [Matvejev, S. (1976): Pregled faune ptica Balkanskog poluostrva. I: detli}i i ptice peva~ice. — SANU, Beograd]. Rare records are also known even from Voivodina [Purger, J.J. (1990): Pitanje statusa planinske strnadice, Emberiza cia cia L., 1766 u Vojvodini. — Glasnik Prirodnja~kog muzeja u Beogradu B45: 169—170]. Milan Ru`i} Ul. 8/8 N. N. Atenica, 32000 ^a~ak, Serbia and Montenegro, e—mail: milruzic@yahoo.com 58 Acrocephalus 26 (124): 47 — 62, 2005 Bolgarija / Bulgaria Booted Eagle Hieraaetus pennatus Mali orel – dva para opa`ena v primernem okolju med gnezditvenim obdobjem na zahodni Stari Planini (UTM FP32 in 14, Z Bolgarija), prvi 10.7.2005, drugi 28.7.2005 During the 2005 breeding season, Booted Eagles were recorded within two areas of Zapadna Stara Planina Mountain. On 10 Jul 2005, a pair (dark phase) was observed in UTM square FP32. On 28.07.2005, another pair of Booted Eagles (light phase) was observed in UTM square FP14. For the first region we have unconfirmed data that the pair had nested there for a period of about 10 years. The two regions, in which the Booted Eagles were recorded, are rather similar in their natural characteristics. Namely, these are deciduous forest massifs at the foot of Zapadna Stara Mountain, which are in immediate proximity of vast open grasslands. The slopes are mainly facing east, the altitude of the region is about 350 – 500 m a.s.l. For the described regions of Zapadna Stara Planina Mountain, there are some old data regarding the observation of the species during the breeding season [Donchev, S. (1970): The Birds of Zapadna Stara Planina Mountain. pp. 45–92 In: Donchev, S. (1970): The Birds of Zapadna Stara Planina Mountain. – Periodical of the Museum of Zoology, BAS 21: 45–92]. Puzovi} [Puzovi}, S. (2000): Atlas ptica grabljivica Srbije. – Zavod za za{titu prirode Srbije, Beograd] also states that he observed single birds of this species during the breeding season, twice in two regions of the Serbian part of Stara Planina Mountain, one of which is adjacent to both Bulgarian zones, where the species was observed. Georgi P. Stoyanov, Centre for Conservation and Support of the Wild Fauna “Durrell”, Golyam Bratan Str. No. 23, BG–1618 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: g.p.stoyanov@mail.bg, georgips@abv.bg Emil Djuninski, Assen Balkanski Str. No 43, v. Chuprene 3950, Region Vidin, Bulgaria, e–mail: chuprene@abv.bg Eleonora’s Falcon Falco eleonorae Sredozemski sokol – trije osebki opa`eni v gnezditvenem obdobju v vzhodnih Rodopih (UTM LF48, JV Bolgarija); opazovanja sredozemskega sokola so v Bolgariji v zadnjih letih redna, gnezdenje pa {e ni potrjeno On 25 Aug 2005, I observed three Eleonora’s Falcons (dark morph) near Dobromirtsi village in the Eastern Rhodopes (UTM LF48, SE Bulgaria). The observation took place between 16.00 and 17.00 hrs. The birds were seen flying over the rocky formations near (1 km) the Vurbitsa River. The landscape is an open country with separate rocks and fields. One of the birds made a successful attack, catching some prey and consuming it. In the Eastern Rhodopes, the species had been previously observed near the villages of Silen (UTM LG91) and Dolna Kula (UTM LF89) in 1984, Egrek (UTM LF87) and Strazhets (UTM MF08) in 1987 [Iankov, P. (1991): The birds of the Eastern Rhodopes. Time of presence and dynamics of the ornithofauna. – Ecology, Sofia 24: 26 – 43]. It has still not been proved that the species actually breeds in Bulgaria. The observed birds are possibly vagrants, feeding in the area. In recent years, observations of this species have become more regular in Bulgaria. Nevena Trifonova Kambourova, Central Laboratory of General Ecology–BAS, Gagarin Street no. 2, BG–1113 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: nevena@ecolab.bas.bg, larus@abv.bg Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus Sabljasti martinec – opa`en dvakrat v SV Bolgariji: v Shabla Tuzli (UTM PJ22) dne 2.6.2001 in na jezeru Durankulak (UTM PJ23) dne 27.6.2002 During the census carried out at Shabla Tuzla, a small brackish to hypersaline wetland on the coast in northeastern Bulgaria (part of IBA BG049; UTM PJ22), an adult Terek Sandpiper was observed on 2 Jun 2001. The bird, which was in breeding plumage, was identified using a telescope. Other observers present there were the BSPB members Viktor Vassilev and Christo Gurdov. Another observation of the species took place on 27 Jun 2002 at the Eagle Marsh of the Lake Durankulak complex (IBA BG050; UTM PJ23; for the map of the area see [Petkov, N. (2003): Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca breeding population development and habitat selection at Durankulak lake, Bulgaria. – Acrocephalus 24 (118): 87–96]) on the west bank when I and Valentin Katrandgiev observed a bird in breeding plumage foraging along the shallow grassy bank of the marsh. The bird was observed with binoculars from a distance of 30 m through the car window. Subsequently we approached the bird by the car to a distance of 15 – 20m. The species had been recorded in the 1980s in both wetlands [Nankinov, D., Simeonov, S. & Ivanov, B. (1997): Fauna of Bulgaria, Vol. 26 Aves – part II. – “Prof. M. Drinov” publishing house, Sofia]. In recent years, there have 59 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook been more regular observations of the species in Bulgaria mostly around the Burgas wetlands. Nikolai Petkov, BSPB/BirdLife Bulgaria, PO Box 50, BG–1111 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: nicky.petkov@bspb.org Red–necked Phalarope Phalaropus lobatus Ozkokljuni liskono`ec – dne 15.5.2002 opa`en 1 osebek v zimskem perju; gre za redek podatek za notranjost Bolgarije (UTM FN74) On 15 May 2002, during the national breeding distribution mapping of Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca, me and Boris Krustanov observed a Red– necked Phalarope in non–breeding plumage at Peturch fishponds (UTM FN74) to the northwest of Sofia. The species is known to migrate through Bulgaria, mostly along the Black Sea coast [Nankinov, D., Simeonov, S. & Ivanov, B. (1997): Fauna of Bulgaria, Vol. 26 Aves – part II. – “Prof. M. Drinov” publishing house, Sofia]. However, records from inland areas are scarce, and till that day the species had not been recorded in this particular wetland. Nikolai Petkov, BSPB/BirdLife Bulgaria, PO Box 50, BG–1111 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: nicky.petkov@bspb.org Syrian Woodpecker Dendrocopos syriacus Sirijski detel – dne 21.5.2001 opa`en osebek v rezervatu Srebarna (UTM NJ08, SV Bolgarija) med nenavadnim prehranjevanjem z `u`elkami, ki jih je nabiral s starega trsti~ja, le 50 – 60 cm nad vodo Unusual foraging behaviour of Syrian Woodpecker was observed on 21 May 2001 in Srebarna Managed Reserve, northeastern Bulgaria (UTM NJ08). The bird was picking insects from the old and dead reed stems (50 – 60 cm above the water). Syrian Woodpecker is more mobile than the Great Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos major [Cramp, S., ed. (1985): Birds of Europe the Middle East and North Africa. Vol. 4. – Oxford University Press, Oxford]. This perhaps enables it to search for food not only in trees but also in more unstable substrates such as old reed stems. This may be a single individual behaviour utilizing the new foraging microhabitat. Nevena Trifonova Kambourova, Central Laboratory of General Ecology–BAS, Gagarin Street no. 2, BG–1113 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: nevena@ecolab.bas.bg, larus@abv.bg 6c Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica Kme~ka lastovka – opazovana med nenavadno igro lovljenja peresa, ki je sicer `e opisano v literaturi, pri samostanu Lopu{anski, dne 16. in 17.6.2005 (UTM FP60, SZ Bolgarija) On 16 and 17 Jun 2005, an adult Barn Swallow was observed during its aerial play with feathers in the yard of Lopushanski monastery, Montana region, NW Bulgaria (UTM FP60). This unusual behaviour was recorded on two occasions, the second time involving a larger – sized white feather. The bird was continuously circling around, dropping the feather and catching it at lower height after making 1 or 2 circles around it. During the first observation, it was repeated 6 – 7 times (16 Jun), on the next day only 3 – 4 times. The second feather was finally carried away by a male House Sparrow Passer domesticus. This Barn Swallow was from a pair having a nest with six 7 – 9 days old young. Although some other Barn Swallow pairs also bred in the monastery, none of them was seen performing the above mentioned tricks. The behaviour of dropping and catching feathers is widely known for the Barn Swallow [Brown, C.R. & Brown, M.B. (1999): Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica). In: Poole, A. & Gill, F. (eds.): The Birds of North America, No. 452. – The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA] and for the Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor [Lincoln, C.W. (1956): Tree Swallows playing with a feather. – Wilson Bull. 68 (2): 156–57; Robertson, R.J., Stutchbury, B.J. & Cohen, R. R. (1992): Tree Swallow. In: Poole, A., Stettenheim, P. & Gill, F. (eds.): The Birds of North America, No. 11. – The Academy of Natural Sciences, The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington]. Observation of Brown–throated Sand Martin Riparia paludicola, which took place in South Africa on 3 Jul 2005, involved about 30 birds fighting for the possession of a relatively large (6 – 8 cm long) white feather, (A. Welz unpubl.). Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Adam Welz for sharing his unpublished observations (posted in South African Bird Net on 10 Aug 2005). Boris P. Nikolov, Bulgarian Ornithological Centre, Institute of Zoology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1 Tsar Osvoboditel Blvd., BG–1000 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: bnikolov@poshta.net Iva P. Hristova, Climatech Engineering Ltd., 51 Prof. Kiril Popov Str., BG– 1700 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: fotobiota@abv.bg Rosen L. Aleksov, Regional Inspectorate of the Ministry of Environment and Water–Blagoevgrad, 1 Svoboda Str., BG–2700 Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria, e–mail: rioskata@yahoo.com Radoslav H. Stanchev, Executive Environmental Agency, 136 Tsar Boris III Blvd., Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: radoslav_stanchev@hotmail.com ACROCEPHALUS 2.6 (124): 47 — 62, 2OO5 Waxwing Bombycilla garrulus Pegam – ve~ opazovanj med februarjem in aprilom 2005 v Z Bolgariji (Vratza, UTM GN08; Sofia, FN82/92; Komshtitza, UTM FN67) On 4 Feb 2005, two Waxwings were registered in a park of Vratza (UTM GN08), the town situated close to the north slopes of Vrachanska Mountain, feeding on seeds from the nuts of Oriental Plane Platanus orientalis (I. Petkov pers. comm.). At about the same time, 5 birds were observed in Sofia near its Festival Hall (UTM FN 82/92), foraging on fruits of Guelder Rose Viburnum opulus (D. Dimitrov pers. comm.). On 4 Mar 2005, a flock of about 45 birds was registered 3 km north of Komshtitza town (UTM FN67). On 1 Apr 2005, a flock of 17 waxwings was observed in the park next to the National Palace of Culture in the very centre of Sofia (NDK; UTM FN 82/92). The birds stayed there till 26 Apr 2005. During this period, the maximum number of birds reached 28. The Waxwings in this park fed mainly on the Juniper Juniperus sabina fruits (D. Dimitrov pers. comm.). They also pecked blossoms in different decorative orchards, as well as fresh leaves of Canadian Poplar Populus deltoides, Ash Fraxinus excelsior, Sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus, and Lime Tilia sp. On separate days, the birds were also seen drinking sap from bark of the Common Silver Birch Betula pendula. The birds drank water and bathed in the park’s small pool or in puddles formed by rain. A few times during the sunny days, 2 – 4 males were singing, and separate formed couples were observed with males feeding the females. The Waxwings were tame and ignored the huge number of pedestrians passing by. On 17 Apr 2005, an unsuccessful attack by a Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus on a flock of Waxwings near NDK took place. On 17 Apr 2005, about 10 Waxwings were observed in the area of Sofia’s “Vassil Levski” National Stadium (UTM FN 82/92) (T. Lazarova pers. comm.). Acknowledgements: We would like to express our gratitude to Dimitar Dimitrov, Tamara Lazarova and Ivaylo Petkov. Georgi P. Stoyanov, Centre for Conservation and Support of the Wild Fauna Durrell, Golyam Bratan Str No 23, BG–1618 Sofia, e–mail: g.p.stoyanov@mail.bg, georgips@abv.bg Andrey Ralev, Mila Rodina Str 22 B, BG–1408 Sofia, e–mail: andrey@tradel.net Lachezar Spasov, Benkovski neighbourhood, Edinstvo Str. No 8, BG–1278 Sofia, e–mail: ares1@abv.bg Woodchat Shrike Lanius senator Rjavoglavi srakoper – dne 15.5.2003 je bilo v rezervatu Tissata v soteski Kresna (UTM FM72, SZ Bolgarija) kakih 15 – 17 m visoko najdeno gnezdo v rogovili debla topola Populus sp.; gnezdi{~e je neobi~ajno, {e posebno za sredozemsko regijo, ki ji obmo~je pripada On 15 May 2003, a female Woodchat Shrike was found lying in its nest situated in a Poplar Populus sp., in the trunks fork near the top of the tree at a height of about 15 – 17 m, in the buffer zone of Tissata Nature Reserve in the Kresna Gorge (UTM FM72, SW Bulgaria). The tree was located near the riverbank and next to the highway. A week later we found that the nest was destroyed and abandoned. In Europe, this species breeds in trees, especially fruit and olive trees [Snow, D. & Perrins, C. (1998): The birds of the Western Palearctic. Vol. II. – Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, New York], most often between 3 and 10 m above the ground [Hagemeijer, E.J.W. & Blair, M.J., eds. (1997): The EBCC Atlas of European breeding birds: their distribution and abundance. – T & AD Poyser, London; Makatsch, W (1976): Die Eier der Vögel Europas. II. – Radebeul]. In Georgia, the nests are situated lower than at 2.,35 m, as 75% of them are made in Pistachio Pistacia sp. and Christ’s Thorn Paliurus spina — christi [Gusev, V. & Bednyi, S. (1961); Trudy Inst. Zool. Akad. Nauk Gruzinskoy SSR, 18: 41–51]. In Europe, their nests are most often situated on thick horizontal branches and only 9% in the trunks’ forks [Ullrich, B. (1971): Untersuchungen zur Ethologie und Ökologie des Rotkopfwurers (Lanius senator) und Neuntoter (L. collurio). – Vogelwarte 26: 1–77]. The Woodchat Shrike’s nest we found was not typical of the Mediterranean region to which the Tissata Reserve belongs [Dimitrov, D. (1966): Climatic division of Bulgaria. pp. 262–293 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol 1. – BAS, Sofia; Stanev, S. (1991): Climatic zones and areas in Bulgaria. pp. 53–89 In: The climate of Bulgaria. – BAS, Sofia; Bondev, I. (1997): Geobotanical zoning. pp. 238–304 In: Geography of Bulgaria, Vol. 1. Physical geography. – BAS, Sofia]. Actually, it looked more like the Lesser Grey Shrike’s L. minor nest that is often situated in fork and generally at good height above the ground (3 – 20 m) and not so rarely in Poplars Populus sp. [Cramp, S. & Perrins, CM. eds. (1993): Handbook of the Birds of Europe the Middle East and North Africa. Vol. 7 61 Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice / From the ornithological notebook – Oxford University Press, Oxford]. In the study area, all Woodchat Shrike’s nests were in Christ’s Thorn or in short Oaks Quercus sp. not higher than 7 m above the ground. So far, no similar Woodchat Shrike’s nest site has been described in Bulgarian literature. Stoyan Ch. Nikolov, Central Laboratory of General Ecology (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences), Str. Gagarin 2, BG–1113 Sofia, Bulgaria, e–mail: snikolov@ecolab.bas.bg Svetoslav D. Spasov, Bulgarian Society for the Protection of Birds / BirdLife Bulgaria, BG–1111 Sofia, P.O. Box 50, Bulgaria, e–mail: svetoslav.spasov@bspb.org Ventzislav Delov, Faculty of Biology (Sofia University “St. Kl. Ohridski”), e–mail: ventzi@biofac.uni–sofia.bg 6l Acrocephalus 20 (124): 63 - 65, 2005 Nove knjige New books Puzovi}, S. (2000): Atlas ptica grabljivica Srbije - mape rasprostranjenja i procene populacija 1977 - 1996. [Atlas of birds of prey of Serbia — their breeding distribution and abundance]. Institute for Protection of Nature of Serbia, Belgrade. 262 pages. ISBN 86-80877-02-6, price: 35 €. Orders: Slobodan Puzovi}, Institute for the Nature Conservation of Serbia — Working Unit in Novi Sad, Radni~ka 20A, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia and Montenegro Finally! It is now easy to find, in one place, all the relevant information on the status, distribution and numbers of breeding raptors in Serbia that ornithologists could require. It follows a long period of basic surveys and 20 years of intensive mapping made by the author, his main co-workers (Bratislav Gruba~, I{tvan Ham, Sa{a Marinkovi} and Javor Ra{ajski) and 54 volunteers. Slobodan Puzovi}, the editor of this first Serbian bird atlas, explains in the foreword to this book its main function: “It is known that nature in Serbia is very rich and diverse; it is hard to find any other country in Europe with a similar diversity of ecosystems and species. This book is one of the best confirmations of these statements. Birds of prey are definitely among the most important and the most attractive representatives of wildlife in Serbia. By their appearance, strength, speed and other characteristics, birds of prey incite noble emotions and inspiration. Knowledge of species, their distribution and numbers, as well as spatial and temporal dynamics of these parameters is the basis for proper management of their populations.” This can be also the most complete dedication of this atlas. The book comprises four main chapters, excluding bibliography and two indexes. In the introduction, the author explains the significance of the Atlas, describes the history of raptor research in Serbia and presents information on their current legal protection at the national level. Puzovi} also describes the history of bird mapping work in Serbia from the very start, stating that the unusually long period of data collection is due to the lack of consistent human resources in the Serbian field of ornithology. For this reason, data collection has been made mainly in the frame of institutional work on the study and protection of birds in Serbia, led by the Institute for Nature Conservation of Serbia and the Natural History Museum in Belgrade. Mapping on a grid of 10x10 km UTM squares was used. In order to determine population sizes as precisely as possible, and even calculate breeding densities, the author has chosen to define nine regions within the country: Ba~ka, Banat, Srem, west, central, east, south, south-west Serbia and Kosovo, and Metohija. In its main chapter the book gives a concise biology, data on historical and recent distributions, and numbers (with distribution map), population and range trends, and describes conservation needs for the 25 raptor species breeding in Serbia in the given period. The mapping technique includes twofold marking of the distribution data – for “confirmed breeding” and for “probable/possible breeding”. Population size for each breeder is given by region and by country for three different periods: 1977 - 1979, 1986 - 1988 and 1994 - 1996, which allows a better insight into variations of population level. Distribution data are cumulative. An additional 12 raptors that did not breed in the mapping period are also presented, with data on their status. Particular attention is paid to three former breeders; the majority of the data on their occurrence in the second half of the 20th century is presented and analyzed. Finally, six regular migrants, 63 Nove knjige / New Books winter guests and vagrants are noted, as well as three inadequately documented species. The author also presents a thorough analysis of the mapping results, discussing in particular species richness, spatial and temporal abundance, species density and diversity, degree of rareness, range size, population and range trends, importance of raptor populations in Serbia on the European level and specific features of raptor life conditions in Serbia. The Atlas is certainly a milestone in the development of Serbian ornithology, and its value on the national level, as well as the quality of the presented data is very high. Bird study in this country has finally started to answer the key (but never-ending) questions, very often repeated by the author: which (birds live in Serbia?), where (do they live?), when (do they appear during the year?) and how many (pairs or individuals of particular species live in Serbia?). Serbian bird researchers have clear guidelines now how to proceed with answering these questions. Thanks to the somewhat easier methodology of raptor population research and to the dedicated work of national raptor experts, this bird group is expected to benefit as a result of the better understanding of its needs achieved by this book. However, the book's practical value must be proved through its adequate use by managers of protected areas in Serbia and by development planners, who should have in mind the very clear interpretation of the mapping results, and even identification of “important raptor areas”. Even more, it should be an obligatory guide for governmental institutions in the current transitional period in Serbia, faced with numerous environmental and nature conservation challenges. After the lack of Serbian bird data in most European accounts and monographs published in the late 1990s, the Atlas appears as the first bird book from Serbia which has the capacity to satisfy the needs of international readers, whether they be raptor experts or birders travelling or spending time in Serbia. Although written in Serbian, the Atlas is readily useable by international readers, having in mind that all the chapters (and, in particular, all species mapping data) are summarized in English. International conservation efforts can now be precisely directed to those raptors in Serbia that are in crisis (especially Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca and all vultures) via careful design of species action plans and projects for active protection. Amateurs and birders would, however, be more satisfied if the quality of the drawings and photos were better. Raptor experts, paying attention to calculations of breeding densities, can ask the author about the accuracy of calculated densities in 64 areas that include UTM squares with zero breeding raptors, having in mind the author’s explanation that this is due to the difficulties in field coverage. Nevertheless, this is a valuable and recommendable book which will, hopefully, inspire systematic work on mapping other birds in Serbia, which is urgently required! If you want to know more about Serbian natural heritage, Puzovi}’s Atlas of breeding birds of prey of Serbia must be the first choice. Marko Tucakov ACROCEPHALUS 20 (124): 63 — 65, 2OO5 Ciconia – ornithological journal published by Bird Protection and Study Society of Vojvodina Ciconia, first published in 1989, is the only ornithological journal issued in Serbia and Montenegro. Within its 13 volumes published to date, 130 authors have contributed the results of their ornithological research carried out in Serbia and Montenegro and other countries in the region. Once a year, the journal publishes papers on all aspects of ornithology, with topics from Serbia and Montenegro (very high publishing priority) and other countries of south-east Europe (limited number of articles per volume). Scientific studies and short notes, interesting faunistic observations of wild birds, bird lists of localities and areas, invitations for cooperation, information on ornithological literature, reviews of published ornithological articles and books, as well as relevant news on ornithology are welcome for submission for publication in Ciconia. The editorial board of Ciconia accepts articles written in Serbian and English. All articles written in Serbian are thoroughly abstracted and summarized in English. Regular journal exchange programme assures fast information exchange. Our partners are predominantly publishers of ornithological journals in Europe and Asia. Ciconia has proved to be a valuable source of information about birds in the poorly researched countries from which the majority of papers come. Since these countries contain a very rich and well preserved natural heritage and biodiversity, the Editorial board invites all ornithologists and birders who travel through or spend time in south-eastern Europe (especially in Serbia and Montenegro) to share their observations with the ornithological public by publishing them in Ciconia. Marko Tucakov, Assistant Editor Marka Ore{kovi}a 9 25275 Ba~ki Breg Serbia and Montenegro e-mail: mtucakov@eunet.yu 65 Popravek Corrigendum V kratkem prispevku za rubriko Iz ornitolo{ke bele`nice za Hrva{ko: [Mikuska, J. et al. (2004): Bewick’s Swan Cygnus columbianus. - Acrocephalus 25(122): 164-165] je pri{lo do napa~nega navajanja meseca prvega pojavljanja te vrste. Namesto “4.11.2004” mora biti “4.12.2004”. In the short contribution (From the ornithological notebook) for Croatia: [Mikuska, J. et al. (2004): Bewick’s Swan Cygnus columbianus. - Acrocephalus 25(122): 164-165], the stated month of the first occurence of this species in Kopa~ki rit is incorrect: “4 Nov 2004” should read “4 Dec 2004”. 66 barvna priloga / colour appendix Figure 1: Typical habitats of the southern part of the Kresna Gorge: rocky slopes and formations of Greek Juniper Juniperus excelsa and Christ’s Thorn Paliurus spina–christi situated above riparian forests of Oriental plane Platanus orientalis and White poplar Populus alba (photo: S. Spasov) – see page 23–31 Slika 1: Zna~ilni habitati v ju`nem delu Soteske Kresna: kamnita pobo~ja in sestoji gr{kega brina Juniperus excelsa in kristusovega trna Paliurus spina–christi nad obre`nimi gozdovi vzhodne platane Platanus orientalis in belega topola Populus alba (foto: S. Spasov) – glej stran 23–31 Figure 2: Glossy Ibises Plegadis falcinellus on 14 Apr 2005 near the church at ^rna vas, Ljubljansko barje, central Slovenia (photo: D. Šere) – see page 47 Slika 2: Plevica Plegadis falcinellus dne 14.4.2005 blizu cerkve v ^rni vasi na Ljubljanskem barju (foto: D. Šere) – glej stran 47 67 Uporabniki Mobitel GSM/UMTS, nastavite tistim, ki vas kličejo na mobilca, zvočne efekte ali glasbo iz nabora storitve Uvertura. Odslej se lahko ob različnih urah v dnevu (časovna uvertura) ali različnim klicalcem (uverture skupin) predstavljate različno. Za več možnosti (nabor uvertur in pripadajočih kod, nastavitev časovne uverture in uverture skupin) vabljeni na mobilni portal Planet/Krnekl/Uvertura ali na spletni portal www.planet.sl, zavihek KrnekI. Nastavitev/ iz bor posamezne uverture stane 300 SIT in velja za obdobje 30 dni. Nastavitev -samo zvonjenje- je brezplačna. Brez preklica ali spremembe uverture se obdobje uporabe nastavljene uverture samodejno podaljša za nadaljnjih 30 dni, kar znaša prav tako 300 SIT. Izbor uvertur/e lahko spreminjate večkrat in kadarkoli. Vsaka nastavitev stane 300 SIT in je veljavna 30 dni. Če nastavitve ne boste spremenili, boste pred iztekom obdobja (29. dan] prejeli SMS opomnik, ki vas bo spomnil na možnost podaljšanja, novega izbora ali preklica. Informacije: naročniki Mobitel GSM/UMTS: 031/041/051 700 700, Mobiuporabniki: 031/041/051121, ostali: 080 70 70. @ ŽIVLJENJE NISO LE BESEDE WWW.MOBITEL.SI