101
Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Slovenia 
between 1999 and 2010
Populacijska dinamika bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia v Sloveniji med letoma 1999 in 
2010
Damijan Denac
 DOPPS - BirdLife Slovenia, P.O. Box: 2990, SI−1001 Ljubljana, Slovenia & National Institute of Biology, Ve~na pot 
111, SI−1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia, e−mail: damijan.denac@dopps.si, damijan.denac@nib.si
Between 1999 and 2010, an annual census of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia 
breeding population was carried out in Slovenia using standardised methods. 
The Stork’s population was concentrated in the NE and SE parts of Slovenia. 
In the 1999−2010 period, the breeding range of its population in Slovenia 
expanded in NW direction (the Savska ravan region), in SW direction (the 
Notranjsko podolje and Piv{ko podolje regions), but the species also colonized 
a part between Central and SE Slovenia (Dolenjsko podolje). Between 193 and 
240 pairs were breeding during the study period, 209 pairs on average (HPa). 
The largest number of breeding pairs was recorded in 2004, the smallest in 
2005. During the study period, breeding pairs (HPa) occupied 350 discrete 
nests in total. Average number of breeding pairs that raised juveniles (HPm) was 
161. The highest fecundity was recorded in 2004, when 534 juveniles (JZG) 
fledged, the lowest in 2006, with only 219 fledged juveniles. On average, 414 
juveniles fledged per year. The breeding pairs’ (JZa) average breeding success in 
these 12 years was 2.02, the highest in 2000 (2.41), the lowest in 2006 (1.09). 
Average breeding success for the successful breeding pairs (JZm) was 2.57. The 
highest was in 2007 (2.94), the lowest in 2006 (2.07). The largest number of 
breeding pairs in 2004 and 2008 can be explained by the favourable fecundity 
in the population in 2000 and 2004, as juveniles become sexually mature at the 
age of 3−5 years, and at that age they generally return to the breeding grounds 
for the first time. The lowest number of breeding pairs and poor breeding 
success in 2005 and 2006 was caused by late arrival of White Storks to the 
breeding grounds and by unfavourable weather conditions during the breeding 
period. The pattern of nests placement did not change generally during the 
last 12 years. The largest proportion of nests was positioned on various kinds 
of poles (81%) and on chimneys (18%). In total, 27 area surveyors and 239 
assistants helped in census realisation.
Key words: White Stork, Ciconia ciconia, breeding population, census, 
Slovenia
Klju~ne besede: bela {torklja, Ciconia ciconia, gnezditvena populacija, cenzus, 
Slovenija
1. Introduction
At irregular intervals, the White Stork Ciconia ciconia 
populations have been counted all over the world 
since 1934. There is no other bird for which statistics 
on its population trends exist for such a comparably 
long period of time. Up till now, six international 
censuses of the White Stork breeding population have 
been carried out in the years 1934, 1958, 1974, 1984, 
1994/1995 and 2004/2005. The data resulting from 
theses censuses provide an overview of the long term 
population trend of the White Stork in its overall 
Acrocephalus 31 (145/146): 101−114, 2010
doi: 10.2478/v10100-010-0007-4
102
breeding range. The dramatic decline of the population 
registered up until 1984, when it even became 
extinct in some countries, was followed by a positive 
population development in the following 20 years. 
The world population, which in 1984 was ca. 135,000 
breeding pairs (HPa), was estimated to be around 
166,000 (HPa) in 1994/1995 (Schulz 1999a & 
1999b). The most prominent increases were noticed 
for the western population, like Spain, with reasons 
for the strong increase of the western population 
mostly attributed to better climatic conditions − less 
severe droughts − in the wintering areas within western 
Sahel after the mid-1980s and to development of a 
wintering population in southern Spain, together 
with the suite of other factors (Tortosa et al. 1995, 
Schulz 1999b, Zwarts et al. 2009). However, in 
some SE European countries populations were stable 
or continued declining (Schulz 1999b). For the 6th 
International census 2004/2005, only preliminary 
results exist, but reveal a further population increase, 
as the world population was estimated at 230,000 
pairs (K.-M. Thomsen pers. comm.).
The first national White Stork census in Slovenia 
was carried out in 1965 (Šo{tari~ 1965). It was 
repeated in 1979 (Jež 1987) and 1984. In 1984, 
Slovenia participated in the International White Stork 
Census (Schulz 1999b) for the first time, and for 
the second time in the 6th census 2004/2005. Since 
1999, the national breeding population has been 
surveyed annually (Denac 2001), using standardized 
census method and parameters (Schulz 1999a, 
Denac 2001). On a regional scale, two censuses 
have been carried out annually in Slovenia: the first 
in NE Slovenia in part of the Drava river lowland, 
the second in SE Slovenia in the Krka river lowland. 
Both started in 1989 (Štumberger 1990, Hudoklin 
1991) and were integrated into the national census 
in 1999. In addition, two autecological studies were 
carried out on the White Stork population in Slovenia 
using census data. With the first one, we explained 
density dependent breeding success with intraspecific 
exploitation competition (Denac 2006a), whereas 
the second study showed that weather effect in the 
reproduction of the White Stork is resource-dependent 
(Denac 2006b). In this work we present results of the 
White Stork censuses carried out between 1999 and 
2010.
2. Study area and methods
Census method was the same as used during the 
first annual census in 1999 (Denac 2001). The 
White Storks’ breeding range was divided into 
regions (mesoregions) according to physiographic 
regionalisation of Slovenia (Perko 1998). Each region 
was an independent census unit. In the preparation 
phase of the census, all surveyors received the regions’ 
maps with marked positions of all known White 
Storks’ nests in their census areas and forms printed 
for each nest from the central White Stork database 
for Slovenia. Surveyors were ornithologists and 
volunteers of DOPPS - BirdLife Slovenia. Generally, 
the same surveyors carried out the censuses in their 
corresponding census areas in successive years.
Fieldwork effort was equal in all years. All known 
nests were visited each year. Besides, villages without 
nests but with suitable surrounding breeding habitat 
for the White Stork were thoroughly checked for 
new nests regularly. Cars were used for transport and 
binoculars for surveying the breeding parameters. 
Fieldwork was carried out between 20 Jun and 15 Jul 
in all years. This is the period just before juvenile White 
Storks fledge and can be most easily counted from the 
ground. At each nest, the following breeding parameters 
were registered: status of the nest or pair (HPa, HPx, 
HB2, HB1, HO; see Table 1 for explanation) (Schulz 
1999a), number of fledged chicks (chicks in the nest 
during the census were considered as fledged), and 
nest placement. For new nests, address of the nearest 
building or location obtained by GPS was recorded. 
Ground and vegetation under the nests were checked 
for dead, thrown out chicks. Breeding parameters 
were obtained by direct observations. As a supporting 
method, surveyors used interviews with local people 
to obtain additional data. Data on the number of eggs, 
number of hatched chicks, ejected chicks and remarks 
were recorded. Furthermore, in 2004 and 2005 a 
wider public was informed about the 6th International 
census and asked through different media to provide 
us with any data on White Stork nests.
Data were entered in the central White Stork 
database and processed. If not obtained with GPS, 
nest coordinates were gained from database of 
house centroids using addresses of the nests’ nearest 
buildings. Population parameters were analyzed 
following recommendations by Schulz (1999b). 
Single nest visitors (HB1) and pairs visiting nests 
(HB2) were joined into a single category, nest visitors 
(HB). The HB1 : HB2 ratio was approximately 1 : 1 
in all years. In the breeding success calculation (JZa), 
we excluded breeding pairs with unknown breeding 
success: JZa = JZG / (HPa − HPx) (Schulz 1999a, 
Martí 1999), despite the fact that the number of pairs 
with unknown breeding success was relatively low. 
We calculated standard deviation for the breeding 
success (JZa and JZm) (Schulz 1999a; see Table 2 
D. Denac: Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
103
Acrocephalus 31 (145/146): 101−114, 2010
for explanation). We used the surface area of Slovenia 
(20,272 km2) for the calculation of surface-based 
population density (StD), whereas the surface area 
of potential feeding habitats (5,517 km2) was used to 
calculate biological population density (StDBiol). We 
selected the following land use categories from land 
use map of Slovenia (MKGP 2005) as potential feeding 
habitats: fields and gardens (code 1100), temporary 
meadows (code 1130), permanent meadows and 
pastures (code 1300) and wet meadows (code 1321). 
Selection of potential feeding habitats was based on 
our own observations and current knowledge about 
the White Stork feeding habitat’s characteristics 
(Sackl 1987, Alonso et al. 1991, Pinowski et al. 1986, 
Dziewiaty 1992, Ożgo & Bogucki 1999, Moritzi 
et al. 2001). Population densities (StD and StDBiol) 
were calculated as the number of breeding pairs (HPa) 
per 100 km2 surface.
3. Results
3.1. Population distribution and parameters
A total of 193 to 240 breeding pairs (HPa) were 
counted in the 1999−2010 breeding seasons, (± SD) 
209 ± 15 pairs on average. The lowest number of 
breeding pairs was recorded in 2005 and the highest 
Figure 1: Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia 
ciconia in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
Slika 1: Populacijska dinamika bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia 
v Sloveniji med letoma 1999 in 2010
Table 1: The White Stork Ciconia ciconia population parameters in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
Tabela 1: Populacijski parametri bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia v Sloveniji med letoma 1999 in 2010
Year / Leto HPa HPm HPo %HPo HPx HB StD StDBiol
1999 203 151 50 24.6 2 19 1.00 3.68
2000 197 168 19 9.6 10 15 0.97 3.57
2001 206 154 44 21.4 8 16 1.01 3.73
2002 199 153 38 19.1 8 21 0.98 3.61
2003 203 162 29 14.3 12 21 1.00 3.68
2004 240 206 33 13.8 1 14 1.18 4.35
2005 193 128 64 33.2 1 48 0.95 3.50
2006 201 106 95 47.3 0 51 0.99 3.64
2007 218 177 40 18.3 1 42 1.07 3.95
2008 237 194 43 18.1 0 17 1.16 4.30
2009 204 161 43 21.1 0 31 1.00 3.70
2010 201 172 29 14.4 0 37 0.99 3.64
Abbreviations after Schulz (1999a) / Okraj{ave po Schulzu (1999a):
HPa −  Pair that occupied a nest for at least 4 weeks during the first half of the breeding season, “breeding pair” / Par, ki je zasedal gnezdo najmanj 4 tedne 
v prvi polovici gnezditvene sezone, “gnezde~i par” (HPm + HPo + HPx)
HPm −  Pair with fledged young / Par s poletelimi mladi~i
HPo −  Pair without fledged young that occupied a nest for at least 4 weeks during the first half of the breeding season / Par brez poletelih mladi~ev, ki je 
zasedal gnezdo najmanj 4 tedne v prvi polovici gnezditvene sezone
HPx −  Pair with unknown breeding success that occupied a nest for at least 4 weeks during the first half of the breeding season / Par z neznanim 
gnezditvenim uspehom, ki je zasedal gnezdo najmanj 4 tedne v prvi polovici gnezditvene sezone
HB −  Single or two birds (pair) visiting the nest, no ties to the nest / Posamezen osebek ali par obiskuje gnezdo, ni vezi z gnezdom
StD −  “Stork density”, population density, No. of pairs (HPa) per 100 km2 of a defined surface area (i.e. area of the country) / “Gostota {torkelj”, 
populacijska gostota; {t. parov (HPa) na 100 km2 dolo~ene povr{ine (= povr{ina dr`ave)
StDBiol −  “Biological” population density, No. of pairs (HPa) per 100 km2 of potential feeding habitat / “Biolo{ka” populacijska gostota; {t. parov (HPa) na 
100 km2 potencialnega prehranjevalnega habitata 
104
D. Denac: Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
Figure 2: Distribution of all White Stork Ciconia ciconia breeding pairs (HPa) in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010 (N = 350)
Slika 2: Raz{irjenost vseh gnezde~ih parov (HPa) bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia v Sloveniji med letoma 1999 in 2010 (N = 350)
Table 2: Breeding success of the Slovenian White Stork 
Ciconia ciconia population between 1999 and 2010 (SD = 
Standard Deviation)
Tabela 2: Gnezditveni uspeh populacije bele {torklje 
Ciconia ciconia v Sloveniji med letoma 1999 in 2010 (SD = 
standardna deviacija)
Year / Leto JZG JZa ± SD JZm ± SD
1999 363 1.81 ± 1.33 2.40 ± 0.95
2000 451 2.41 ± 1.10 2.68 ± 0.78
2001 397 2.01 ± 1.34 2.58 ± 0.91
2002 417 2.18 ± 1.35 2.73 ± 0.88
2003 458 2.40 ± 1.30 2.83 ± 0.88
2004 534 2.23 ± 1.27 2.59 ± 0.97
2005 285 1.48 ± 1.30 2.23 ± 0.93
2006 219 1.09 ± 1.23 2.07 ± 0.93
2007 520 2.40 ± 1.42 2.94 ± 0.94
2008 527 2.22 ± 1.34 2.72 ± 0.91
2009 391 1.92 ± 1.35 2.43 ± 1.04
2010 401 2.00 ± 1.15 2.33 ± 0.87
Abbreviations after Schulz (1999a) / Okraj{ave po Schulzu (1999a):
JZG − Total no. of fledged young / Skupno {t. poletelih mladi~ev
JZa − Average no. of fledged young per all breeding pairs / Povpre~no {t. 
poletelih mladi~ev vseh gnezde~ih parov (JZG / HPa)
JZm − Average no. of fledged young per all breeding pairs with fledged young/ 
Povpre~no {t. poletelih mladi~ev vseh gnezde~ih parov s poletelimi mladi~i 
(JZG / HPm)
in 2004 (Table 1, Figure 1, Appendix 1). During 
the study period, White Stork breeding pairs (HPa) 
occupied 350 discrete nests in total (Figure 2). On 
average, (± SD) 161 ± 27 pairs raised juveniles (HPm) 
in the last 12 years. The largest number of breeding 
pairs raised their juveniles in 2004, the smallest in 
2006. Consequently, the largest number of breeding 
pairs failed to raise a single juvenile in 2006 (Table 1, 
Figure 1). The highest fecundity (JZG) was recorded 
in 2004, when 534 juveniles fledged, the lowest in 
2006 with 219 fledged, on average (± SD) 414 ± 
95 juveniles fledged per year (Table 2, Appendix 2). 
Average breeding success (± SD) for breeding pairs 
(JZa) in 12 years was 2.02 ± 1.35. It was highest in the 
year 2000 (2.41 ± 1.10), and lowest (1.09 ± 1.23) in 
2006 (Table 2, Appendix 3). Average breeding success 
(± SD) for successful breeding pairs (JZm) in 12 years 
was 2.57 ± 0.94. It was highest (2.94 ± 0.94) in 2007, 
and lowest in 2006 (2.07 ± 0.93) (Table 2). Number 
of nest visitors (HB) was in the 15−59 range. The 
largest number of nest visitors was recorded in 2005 
and 2006, the smallest in 2004 (Table 1, Figure 1).
Population was concentrated in the NE part of 
Slovenia (the Murska and Dravska ravan regions 
in the Pannonian plains, and the Slovenske gorice, 
Dravinjske gorice and Gori~ko regions in the 
105
Acrocephalus 31 (145/146): 101−114, 2010
Pannonian hills) with considerable numbers in the 
Pannonian plains in the SE part of Slovenia (the Kr{ka 
ravan region) and in the Bela krajina and Dolenjsko 
podolje regions in Dinaric plains (Figure 2, Appendix 
1). Smaller disjunct populations were recorded in 
NW Slovenia in the Savska ravan region, in central 
Slovenia at Ljubljansko barje, and in SW Slovenia in 
the Notranjsko podolje and Piv{ko podolje regions. 
Altogether, White Storks were recorded to breed in 18 
different regions of Slovenia (Appendix 4).
Nests of breeding pairs in 1999−2010 (N = 201) 
were placed at an average altitude (± SD) of 226 ± 77 
m a.s.l. Lowest nest was at 140 m, and highest at 752 
m a.s.l. (Figure 3).
3.2. Population dynamics in time and space
The size of the Slovenian White Stork breeding 
population has increased in the last 40 years. A 
population growth of 15% was recorded in 1979, 
compared to 1965 (Šo{tari~ 1965, Jež 1987). Between 
1979 and 1984, the population decreased by 18%. 
From 1984 to 1999, the population increased again 
by 47%. In the 1999−2010 period, the population 
size was generally stable, but with the maximum in 
2004, when the highest number of breeding White 
Storks was recorded so far.
Besides population size increase, the population’s 
breeding range expanded, too. In 1965, it was 
confined to a part of the Pannonian region (Murska 
and Dravska ravan, Slovenske and Dravinjske Gorice) 
in NE only. This part can be considered the bird’s 
Figure 3: Altitudinal distribution of all White Stork Ciconia 
ciconia breeding pairs’ (HPa) nests in Slovenia between 1999 
and 2010 (N = 350) (100 = 0−100 m, 150 = 101−150 m, 
200 = 151−200, etc.)
Slika 3: Vi{inska razporeditev gnezd vseh gnezde~ih parov 
(HPa) bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia v Sloveniji med letoma 
1999 in 2010 (N = 350) (100 = 0−100 m, 150 = 101−150 
m, 200 = 151−200 itd.)
traditional breeding range. From 1965 to 1999, it 
extended firstly in the SE direction to the almost entire 
Pannonian region of Slovenia (the Murska, Dravska 
and Kr{ka ravan regions and the Gori~ko, Slovenske 
and Dravinjske Gorice regions) as well as to the Bela 
krajina region, and secondly in the NW direction to 
Ljubljansko barje and to the Alpine plains in NW 
Slovenia (the Savska and Savinjska ravan regions). 
After 1999, it expanded its breeding range further in 
the NW (the Savska ravan region) and SW directions 
(the Notranjsko podolje, Piv{ko podolje regions), and 
colonized a part between Central and SE Slovenia (the 
Dolenjsko podolje region) (Figure 4).
3.3. Nest placement
Nest placements changed during the last 40 years. 
Proportion of nests on chimneys and trees decreased, 
while the proportion of nests on different power line 
poles increased (Figure 5). In 2008, the last breeding 
in a tree was recorded.
4. Discussion
The White Stork population in Slovenia has increased 
considerably during the last decades. Its population 
growth from 1984 to 1999 is in agreement with 
that found for the world population during the 5th 
international White Stork census (Schulz 1999b). 
However, the growth of its Slovenian population was 
higher (47%) compared to the overall trend for the 
1984−1994/1995 period (23%). Similarly, population 
growth was the highest compared to the neighbouring 
countries: Croatia, Hungary, Austria and Italy (Schulz 
1999b), assuming that the Slovenian population in 
1999 was representative for 1994/1995.
Between 1999 and 2010, the population was 
generally stable or slightly increasing but with 
considerable peaks recorded in years 2004 and 2008. 
Population growth is generally possible either through 
immigration or through the population’s fecundity, 
which should be higher than mortality (Begon et al. 
2006, Tome 2006). As we do not have any data on 
the annual mortality of White Storks in the Slovene 
population, we cannot reliably infer which of the 
two population processes in fact caused the growth. 
Assuming that the annual adult survival probability 
is 0.7, and that the survival of young birds until the 
adult age is 0.5 (Kanyamibwa et al. 1993), the fecundity 
of ca. 240 juveniles fledged (JZG) or ca. 1.2 fledged 
chicks per pair (JZa) would be sufficient to maintain 
200 breeding pair population. However, this expert 
estimate does not account for all the parameters that 
106
D. Denac: Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
Figure 4: Expansion of the White Stork's Ciconia ciconia breeding range in Slovenia between 1965 and 2010. Distribution 
in 1965, 1979 and 1999 after Šo{tari~ (1965), Je` (1987) and Denac (2001), respectively. Grey cell = at least one breeding 
pair (HPa) within the corresponding 10 km UTM square.
Slika 4: Širjenje gnezditvenega obmo~ja bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia v Sloveniji med letoma 1965 in 2010. Raz{irjenost v 
letih 1965, 1979 in 1999 je povzeta po Šo{tari~ (1965), Je` (1987) in Denac (2001). Siva polja = najmanj en gnezde~i par 
(HPa) znotraj ustreznega 10 km UTM-kvadrata. 
should be included in the Population Vulnerability 
Analysis (PVA). But as the fecundity in 2000 and 
2004 was considerably better, and most individuals 
start breeding 3−5 years old (Cramp 1977), it is likely 
that the growth in 2004 and 2008 was caused by 
particularly good fecundity four years earlier (i.e. in 
2000 and 2004). However, in reality open population 
dynamics is very complex: survival depends on weather 
(Kanyamibwa et al. 1993) and on primary production 
at the staging areas in Sahel (Schaub et al. 2005), 
and individuals constantly immigrate and emigrate 
between populations. In addition, from the findings 
of ringed birds, evidence exists that individuals from 
France, Croatia, Germany and Switzerland recently 
bred in Slovenia (unpublished data of the Slovene 
Museum of Natural History), confirming immigration 
to the Slovenian population, although to an unknown 
extent.
In 2005, the number of breeding pairs considerably 
decreased. In 2005, storks’ arrival was delayed for 
almost one month on average (median 21 Apr 2005 vs. 
27−31 Mar 1999 period in Denac 2001). As a result 
Figure 5: White Stork’s Ciconia ciconia nest placements in 
Slovenia; 1965, 1979 and 1999 data after Šo{tari~ (1965), 
Je` (1987) and Denac (2001), respectively
Slika 5: Mesta gnezd bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia v 
Sloveniji; podatki za 1965, 1979 in 1999 so povzeti po 
Šo{tari~ (1965), Je` (1987) in Denac (2001)
1965
1979
1999
2010
107
Acrocephalus 31 (145/146): 101−114, 2010
of their late arrival, a significantly higher proportion 
of storks did not breed and behaved like nest visitors. 
Because of the late start of the breeding, the fecundity 
in that year was dramatically low too, as there is a clear 
relationship between the breeding onset and breeding 
success. Earlier the breeding onset, the higher the 
breeding success, and the underlying mechanism for 
the phenomenon is age-dependent breeding success 
− older birds return in general earlier and are more 
successful (Vergara et al. 2007) − and condition-
related parental quality − heavier females laying more 
eggs than lighter females (Sasvári & Hegyi 2001). The 
late arrival in 2005 was recorded through the entire 
breeding range in Europe and was probably caused by 
severe weather conditions during the spring migration 
followed by weakened individuals of the breeding 
population (K.-M. Thomsen pers. comm.). On the 
contrary, the lowest breeding success recorded during 
the study, i.e. in 2006, was caused by conditions at 
the breeding grounds. White Storks returned to the 
breeding grounds normally. In the second half of May, 
a week of heavy rains was followed by unusually low 
temperatures for this period (Cegnar 2006a & 2006b). 
Such conditions occurred in the period of greatest 
susceptibility of juveniles to the outer conditions as 
they do not develop thermoregulatory ability till 
the age of ca. 20 days (Tortosa & Castro 2003, 
Jovani & Tella 2004). After this period, we recorded 
dramatically larger numbers of dead juveniles thrown 
out of nests than in previous years (84 in 2006 vs. 
24−54 in years 1999−2010 without 2006), which is 
otherwise a normal phenomenon in life-history of the 
White Stork in such conditions (Tortosa & Redondo 
1992). Furthermore, in 2006 several heavy hail storms 
occurred in NE Slovenia, killing a great number 
of chicks that survived low temperatures in May. 
Combination of these two weather effects thus caused 
the lowest breeding success in the study period.
Full carrying capacity of the traditional breeding 
range in NE Slovenia was probably achieved, which 
could explain the expansion of the White Stork’s 
breeding range. As a result of less favourable foraging 
habitats and higher breeding density in the traditional 
breeding range, the population’s breeding success there 
is the lowest. In contrast, breeding success is the highest 
in recently occupied regions in SE Slovenia with more 
favourable foraging habitats and characteristically 
lower breeding densities. The representative habitat 
of the White Stork population in the NE part of 
Slovenia is composed of large, intensively used arable 
fields. Storks of the SE population have larger areas of 
food-rich meadows available. Variability of breeding 
success between the regions is caused by differences 
in available food resources. The variability of breeding 
success between years was explained by weather, 
specifically by the amount of rainfall in May and 
temperatures in June. The less the amount of rainfall 
in May and the higher the temperatures in June, the 
higher the breeding success. Moreover, weather effect 
was significant only in the population in the traditional 
breeding range, which is poorer in the terms of food 
resources. Food was generally a more important 
reproductive predictor than weather (Denac 2006b).
In traditional breeding range with poorer food 
resources, ecological density influenced the Storks’ 
breeding success. Pairs breeding alone and pairs 
with one neighbour within their home range most 
frequently reared three chicks, pairs with two 
neighbours reared two, whereas pairs with three or 
four neighbours most frequently failed to raise even 
a single chick. Intraspecific exploitation competition 
was the cause for density-dependent breeding success 
(Denac 2006a).
The trends in nest site selection − reduction of the 
number of nests in trees and on buildings and the 
increase of the number of nests on poles − are similar 
to the trends found elsewhere in Europe (Guziak & 
Jakubiec 1999, Fulín 1999, Lovászi 1999, Rubacha & 
Jerzak 2006, Tryanowski et al. 2009). In Slovenia, the 
trends were mainly caused by changes in architecture 
and by destruction of traditionally built houses with 
huge chimneys’ platforms commonly used by White 
Storks. In addition, poles are the only suitable place for 
nests in the regions where Storks expanded recently.
Acknowledgements: In the first place, I wish to 
thank all the surveyors for their regular and systematic 
censusing of a large number of nests − they contributed 
the core data, and without them the census would 
not have been possible. They are: Danica Barovi~, 
Dominik Bombek, Luka Boži~, Franc Bra~ko, Katarina 
Denac, Gregor Domanjko, Dare Fekonja, Andrej 
Hudoklin, Matjaž Ker~ek, Du{an Klenov{ek, Ur{ka 
Koce, Janez Kolenko, Tatjana Koren, Branko Koren, 
Cvetka Marhold, Janez Maro{a, Tomaž Miheli~, 
Bernarda Novak, Matjaž Premzl, Janez Senega~nik, 
Jakob Smole, Željko Šalamun, Borut Štumberger, Ale{ 
Tomaži~, Tadej Trstenjak.
Next, I would like to thank all the surveyors’ 
assistants and all other people who provided us with 
important data on White Stork breeding: Nata{a 
Adle{i~, Ernst Albegger, Mojca Anderli~, Marjeta Arnu{, 
Janez Balaži~, Tilen Basle, Nata{a Bavec, Herta Bertalani~, 
Branka Bezjak, Dejan Bordjan, Marija Bra~i~, Jožefa Brglez, 
Marjeta Bukovec, Jurij Cerkveni~, Henrik Cigli~, Tanja 
Cimerman, Sonja Cvelbar, Rudi ^arni, Barbara ^erna~, 
108
D. Denac: Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
Nastja ^repinko, Nastja ^rmožnik, Marjan ^uk, Ervin 
^ukl, Benjamin Denac, Mitja Denac, Jurij Dog{a, Gabrijela 
Dolami~, Smiljana Dove~ar, Marjana Farasin, Alojz Fekonja, 
Elvis Felső, Marko Ferlan, Irena Ferlin, Andrej Figelj, Jernej 
Figelj, Marija Fi{travec, Branko Flisar, Patricija Flisar, 
Angelca Fras, Franc Fridau, Stane Gabrijel, Ma{a Ga{perin, 
Anka Glogov{ek, Jožef Godec, Tatjana Gregorc, Roza Greif, 
Jurij Guli~, Helena Gyuran, Mirjana Halas, Franc Hamer{ak, 
Jurij Hanžel, Anita Hari, Mateja Hari, Vojko Havli~ek, Mira 
Hergan, Anica Hlebec, Štefan Holcman, Dejan Horvat, 
Ga{per Horvat, Sre~ko Horvat, Teodor Horvat, Peter Idzig, 
Anica Ilar, Mira Ivanovi~, Silva Izlakar, Ana Jakli~, Jože 
Jan~ar, Žan Janeži~, Manca Jereb, Nada Jesenko Kiauta, Lara 
Jogan, Andreja Jur{a, Andreja Juter{a, Andrej Kapla, Sani 
Katani, Ale{ Kav~i~, Marija Kav~i~, Leon Kebe, Edina Kepe, 
Tja{a Ker~ek, Mojca Klemen~i~, Ivan Kljun, Boris Ko~evar, 
Jure Ko~evar, Jože Ko~i{, Miran Kolednik, Matej Kolenko, 
Simon Komar, Jurij Koren, Bernarda Koro{a, Luka Koro{ec, 
Marija Kos, Klavdija Kosec, Alojz Kova~, Matej Kova~, 
Alenka Kramar, Darko Kramar, Katka Kranjc, Zvonko 
Križani~, Natalija Kru{i~, Andrej Kržan, Anita K{ela, Tadej 
Kugler, Benjamin Kuhar, Alojz Kurbus, Jana Kus Veenvliet, 
Danica Ku{ter, Vesna Lamot, Nikolaj Lapuh, Jože Leskovar, 
Terezija Leskovar, Jurij Leskov{ek, Katja Lovrenko, Martina 
Luzar, Monika Ma~ek, Roman Magu{a, Nevenka Maltari~, 
Ivanka Malus, Maja Mar~i~, Jurij Marhold, Rado Marhold, 
Aljo{a Markovi~, Janko Markovi~, Katja Markovi~, Ambrož 
Maro{a, [tefanija Masten, Klara Megla, Borut Mekinda, 
Marija Meki{, Andreja Mes, Barbara Miheli~, Liza Mraz, 
Matej Mur{ec, Boris Nabergoj, Brigita Nahberger, Jure 
Novak, Nina Orehar, Leon Pavalec, Andreja Pavlinjek, 
Petra Pavlov~i~, Rok Pernat, Milena Pernek, Mirko Peru{ek, 
Anton Petovar, Alenka Petrinjak, Franc Pihler, Tadej Pipan, 
Barbara Pislak, Borut Pittner, Alen Ploj, Miha Podlogar, 
Slavko Polak, Mateja Polutnik, Janja Potr~, Robert Potr~, 
Marija Primoži~, Aleksander Pritekelj, Franc Puklavec, 
Cirila Purg, Andreja Radeti~, Petra Radoli~, Tina Rastar, 
Petra Rems, Žiga Repoto~nik, Ivan Resnik, Rok Rozman, 
Ksenja Rudolf, Jože Sagadin, Franc Sarka, Primož Sedminek, 
Evgen Sever, Ludvik Sever, Marta Sever, Terezija Sever, 
Mirko Silan, Janja Simon~i~, Jože Sinic, Klarisa Sipo{, Maja 
Slak, Vojko Stolnik, Marjana Strajnar, Slavko Strman, Denis 
Strnad, Tom Strojnik, Renata Šadl, Nata{a Šalaja, Gregor 
Šalamun, Dominik Šandor, Valentina Šandor, Blaž Šegula, 
Dare Šere, Anton Še{erko, Franc Še{ko, Katja Šinko, Nadja 
Škafar, Mojca Škrget, Ljubica Šmit, Anja Šolar Levar, Katja 
Štraus, Greta Štumberger, Tanja Šumrada, Mimica Šu{tari~, 
Michael Tifenbach, Petra Topolnik, Mirko Tramser, Marjan 
Trobec, Peter Trontelj, Vladka Tucovi~, Ana Turku{, Rok 
Tu{, Sandra Ulen, Janko Urbanek, Rozalija Vajdi~, Dragica 
Vek, Denis Vengust, Jani Vidmar, Vlado Vindar, Erik 
Vodenik, Jan Vodovnik, Ivanka Voga, Ana Vogrin~i~, Janez 
Vor{i~, Al Vrezec, Petra Vrh Vrezec, Davorin Vrhovnik, 
Simon Vugrinec, David Vujinovi~, Ivan Zadravec, Matej 
Zadravec, Barbara Zak{ek, Roman Zavratnik, Karel Zeli~, 
Janez Zelnik, Simona Zver, Branko Žel, Julija Železen, Jan 
Žibert, Feliks Žitek, Leopold Župan~i~.
All the surveyors, assistants and other people 
collaborated in the White Stork census as volunteers. 
The greater part of the censuses in the years 2000 
(Velika Polana), 2003 (Trnovska vas) and 2004 (Ptuj) 
was carried out within the scope of DOPPS - BirdLife 
Slovenia ornithological research camps for young 
ornithologists. Since 2004, the census in IBAs/SPAs 
is part of a National Monitoring Scheme of qualifying 
bird species and is supported by the Slovenian Ministry 
of the Environment and Spatial Planning. During 
the last 12 years, several endangered nests have been 
protected and saved by colleagues from the Institute 
of the Republic of Slovenia for Nature Conservation 
(ZRSVN), and therefore I dedicate the article to them, 
especially to Mr. Janko Urbanek.
5. Povzetek
Med letoma 1999 in 2010 smo na obmo~ju Slovenije 
opravili vsakoletni cenzus gnezditvene populacije 
bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia. Vse cenzuse smo izvedli 
skladno z mednarodno metodo popisovanja. Jedro 
populacije bele {torklje je v SV in JV Sloveniji. Od 
leta 1999 do leta 2010 se je gnezditveno obmo~je 
bele {torklje v Sloveniji iz tradicionalnih gnezdi{~ 
raz{irilo v SZ (Savska ravan) in JZ smeri (Notranjsko 
in Piv{ko podolje), bela {torklja pa je kolonizirala tudi 
del Dolenjskega podolja med osrednjo in JV Slovenijo. 
V popisnem obdobju je gnezdilo med 193 in 240 
parov (HPa), v povpre~ju 209. Najve~je {tevilo parov 
je gnezdilo leta 2004, najmanj{e leta 2005. Skupno 
so v tem obdobju gnezde~i pari (HPa) zasedli 350 
razli~nih gnezd. Povpre~no {tevilo uspe{nih parov 
− parov, ki so speljali mladi~e (HPm) − je bilo 161. 
Najve~jo rodnost populacije (JZG) smo ugotovili v 
letu 2004, ko je poletelo 534 mladi~ev, najmanj{o pa 
leta 2006, takrat je poletelo 219 mladi~ev. V povpre~ju 
je poletelo 414 mladi~ev letno. Povpre~ni gnezditveni 
uspeh gnezde~ih parov (JZa) je bil 2,02, najve~ji je bil 
leta 2000 (2,41), najmanj{i leta 2006 (1,09). Povpre~ni 
gnezditveni uspeh uspe{nih parov (JZm) je bil 2,57, 
najve~ji je bil leta 2007 (2,94), najmanj{i pa leta 2006 
(2,07). Veliko {tevilo gnezde~ih parov leta 2004 in 
2008 lahko razlo`imo z dobro rodnostjo v letih 2000 
in 2004, saj mladi~i spolno dozorijo med 3−5 leti in se 
v tej starosti praviloma prvi~ vrnejo s prezimovali{~ na 
obmo~ja gnezdenja. Mesta gnezd se v zadnjih 12 letih v 
glavnem niso spremenila. Najve~ gnezd (81 %) je bilo 
na razli~nih drogovih, ve~inoma elektri~ne napeljave, 
109
Acrocephalus 31 (145/146): 101−114, 2010
sledila so gnezda na dimnikih (18 %). Pri izvedbi 
cenzusa je sodelovalo 27 obmo~nih popisovalcev in 
239 pomo~nikov oziroma informatorjev. 
6. References
Alonso, J.C., Alonso, J.A. & Carrascal, L.M. (1991): 
Habitat selection by foraging White Storks, Ciconia 
ciconia, during the breeding period. − Canadian Journal 
of Zoology 69: 1957−1962.
Begon, M., Townsend, C.R. & Harper, J.L. (2006): 
Ecology. From Individuals to Ecosystems. − Blackwell 
Publishing, Oxford.
Cegnar, T. (2006a): Podnebne razmere v maju 2006. − 
Mese~ni bilten Agencije RS za okolje 8 (5): 3−20.
Cegnar, T. (2006b): Podnebne razmere v juniju 2006. − 
Mese~ni bilten Agencije RS za okolje 8 (6): 3−22.
Cramp, S. (ed.) (1977): Handbook of the birds of Europe, 
the Middle East and North Africa. The birds of the 
eastern Palearctic. Vol. 1. Ostrich to Ducks. − Oxford 
University Press, Oxford.
Denac, D. (2001): Gnezditvena biologija, fenologija in 
raz{irjenost bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia v Sloveniji. − 
Acrocephalus 22 (106/107): 89−103.
Denac, D. (2006a): Intraspecific Exploitation Competition 
as Cause for Density Dependent Breeding Success in the 
White Stork. − Waterbirds 29 (3): 391−394.
Denac, D. (2006b): Resource-dependent weather effect in 
the reproduction of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia. − 
Ardea 94 (2): 232−240.
Dziewiaty, K. (1992): Nahrungsökologische Unter-
suchungen am Weißstorch Ciconia ciconia in der 
Dannenberger Elbmarsch (Niedersachsen). − Vogelwelt 
113 (3): 133−144.
Fulín, M. (1999): The White Stork in Slovakia in 1994 and 
1995. pp. 199−202 In: Schulz, H. (ed.): Weißstorch 
im Aufwind? − White Storks on the up? Proceedings 
International Symposium on the White Stork, 26−29 
September 1996, Hamburg. − NABU (Naturschutzbund 
Deutschland), Bonn.
Guziak, R. & Jakubiec, Z. (1999): Der Weißstorch Ciconia 
ciconia in Polen im Jahr 1995 − Verbreitung, Bestand 
und Schutzstatus. pp. 171−187 In: Schulz, H. (ed.): 
Weißstorch im Aufwind? − White Storks on the up? 
Proceedings International Symposium on the White 
Stork, 26−29 September 1996, Hamburg. − NABU 
(Naturschutzbund Deutschland), Bonn.
Hudoklin, A. (1991): Bela {torklja Ciconia ciconia na 
jugovzhodnem Dolenjskem. − Acrocephalus 12 (47): 
24−27.
Jež, M. (1987): Bela {torklja (Ciconia ciconia L.) v Sloveniji v 
letu 1979. − Varstvo narave 13: 79−92.
Jovani, R. & Tella, J.L. (2004): Age-related environmental 
sensitivity and weather mediated nestling mortality 
in white storks Ciconia ciconia. − Ecography 27 (5): 
611−618.
Kanyamibwa, S., Bairlein, F. & Schierer, A. (1993): 
Comparison of survival rates between populations of the 
White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Central Europe. − Ornis 
Scandinavica 24: 297−302.
Lovászi, P. (1999): Conservation status of the White Stork in 
Hungary. pp. 203−211 In: Schulz, H. (ed.): Weißstorch 
im Aufwind? − White Storks on the up? Proceedings 
International Symposium on the White Stork, 26−29 
September 1996, Hamburg. − NABU (Naturschutzbund 
Deutschland), Bonn.
Martí, R. (1999): Results of the 5th International White 
Stork Census (1994) in Spain. pp. 61−68 In: Schulz, 
H. (ed.): Weißstorch im Aufwind? − White Storks on the 
up? Proceedings International Symposium on the White 
Stork, 26−29 September 1996, Hamburg. − NABU 
(Naturschutzbund Deutschland), Bonn.
MKGP (2005): Land-use map. − Ministry of Agriculture, 
Forestry and Food, Ljubljana.
Moritzi, M., Maumary, L., Schmid, D., Steiner, I., 
Vallotton, L., Spaar, R. & Biber, O. (2001): Time 
budget, habitat use and breeding success of White 
Storks Ciconia ciconia under variable foraging conditions 
during the breeding season in Switzerland. − Ardea 89 
(3): 457−470.
Ożgo, M. & Bogucki, Z. (1999): Home range and 
intersexual differences in the foraging habitat use of a 
White Stork (Ciconia ciconia) breeding pair. pp. 481−492 
In: Schulz, H. (ed.): Weißstorch im Aufwind? − White 
Storks on the up? Proceedings International Symposium 
on the White Stork, 26−29 September 1996, Hamburg. 
− NABU (Naturschutzbund Deutschland), Bonn.
Perko, D. (1998): Pokrajine. pp. 120−125 In: Fridl, J., 
Kladnik, D., Orožen Adami~, M. & Perko, D. (eds.): 
Geografski atlas Slovenije: Država v prostoru in ~asu. − 
DZS, Ljubljana.
Pinowski, J., Pinowska, B., de Graaf, R. & Visser, J. 
(1986): Der Einfluß des Milieus auf die Nahrungs-
Effektivität des Weißstorchs (Ciconia ciconia L.). − 
Beihefte zu den Veröffentlichungen für Naturschutz und 
Landschaftspflege in Baden-Württemberg 43: 243−252.
Rubacha, S. & Jerzak, L. (2006): Changes in the White 
Stork Ciconia ciconia population number, density and 
breeding places in Zielona Góra region 1926−2004. pp. 
47−54 In: Tryanowski, P., Sparks, T.H. & Jerzak, L. 
(eds.): The White Stork in Poland: studies in biology, 
ecology and conservation. − Bogucki Wydawnictwo 
Naukowe, Poznań.
Sackl, P. (1987): Über saisonale und regionale Unterscheide 
in der Ernährung und Nahrungswahl des Weißstorches 
(Ciconia c. ciconia) im Verlauf der Brutperiode. − Egretta 
30 (2): 49−79.
Sasvári, L. & Hegyi, Z. (2001): Condition-dependent 
parental effort and reproductive performance in the 
White Stork Ciconia ciconia. − Ardea 89 (2): 281−291.
Schaub, M., Kania, W. & Köppen, U. (2005): Variation of 
primary production during winter induces synchrony in 
survival rates in migratory white storks Ciconia ciconia. − 
Journal of Animal Ecology 74: 656−666.
Schulz, H. (1999a): The 5th International White Stork 
Census 1994/95 − Preparation, realisation and methods. 
pp. 39−48 In: Schulz, H. (ed.): Weißstorch im Aufwind? 
− White Storks on the up? Proceedings International 
Symposium on the White Stork, 26−29 September 1996, 
Hamburg. − NABU (Naturschutzbund Deutschland), 
Bonn.
110
D. Denac: Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
Schulz, H. (1999b): The world population of the White 
Stork (Ciconia ciconia) − Results of the 5th International 
White Stork Census 1994/95. pp. 351−365 In: Schulz, 
H. (ed.): Weißstorch im Aufwind? − White Storks on the 
up? Proceedings International Symposium on the White 
Stork, 26−29 September 1996, Hamburg. − NABU 
(Naturschutzbund Deutschland), Bonn.
Šo{tari~, M. (1965): Štorklje v slovenskem Podravju in 
Pomurju. − Varstvo narave 4: 81−89.
Štumberger, B. (1990): Popis gnezdi{~ bele {torklje Ciconia 
ciconia v ob~ini Ptuj v letu 1989. − Acrocephalus 11 
(43/44): 11−18.
Tome, D. (2006): Ekologija. Organizmi v prostoru in ~asu. 
− Tehni{ka založba Slovenije, Ljubljana.
Tortosa, F.S. & Castro, F. (2003): Development of 
thermoregulatory ability during ontogeny in the White 
Stork Ciconia ciconia. − Ardeola 50 (1): 39−45.
Tortosa, F.S. & Redondo, T. (1992): Motives for parental 
infanticide in White Storks Ciconia ciconia. − Ornis 
Scandinavica 23 (2): 185−189.
Tortosa, F.S., Máñez, M. & Barcell, M. (1995): Wintering 
White Storks (Ciconia ciconia) in South West Spain in 
the years 1991 and 1992. − Vogelwarte 38: 41−45.
Tryanowsky, P., Kosicki, J.Z., Kuźniak, S. & Sparks, 
T.H. (2009): Long-term changes and breeding success 
in relation to nesting structures used by the white stork, 
Ciconia ciconia. − Annales Zoologici Fennici 46: 34−38.
Vergara, P., Aguirre, J.I. & Fernández-Cruz, M. 
(2007): Arrival date, age and breeding success in white 
stork Ciconia ciconia. − Journal of Avian Biology 38: 
573−579.
Zwarts, L., Bijlsma, R.G., van der Kamp, J.& Wymenga, 
E. (2009): Living on the Edge: Wetlands and Birds in a 
changing Sahel. − KNNV Publishing, Zeist.
Arrived / Prispelo: 7.12.2010
Accepted / Sprejeto: 22.6.2011
111
Acrocephalus 31 (145/146): 101−114, 2010
A
PP
E
N
D
IX
 1
 /
 D
O
D
AT
E
K
 1
  
N
um
be
rs
 o
f t
he
 b
re
ed
in
g 
W
hi
te
 S
to
rk
s 
C
ic
on
ia
 c
ic
on
ia
 (H
Pa
) i
n 
Sl
ov
en
ia
n 
m
es
or
eg
io
ns
 b
et
w
ee
n 
19
99
 a
nd
 2
01
0 
/ 
Št
ev
ila
 g
ne
zd
e~
ih
 p
ar
ov
 (H
Pa
) b
el
e 
�t
or
kl
je
 C
ic
on
ia
 c
ic
on
ia
 p
o 
sl
ov
en
sk
ih
 m
ez
or
eg
ija
h 
 m
ed
 le
to
m
a 
19
99
 in
 2
01
0
M
es
or
eg
io
n 
/ 
M
ez
or
eg
ija
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
To
ta
l/
 
Sk
up
aj
Pe
rc
en
ta
ge
/
O
ds
to
te
k 
(%
)
1.
3  
Sa
vs
ka
 r
av
an
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
4
31
1.
2
1.
8 
 St
ro
jn
a,
 K
oz
ja
k 
in
 P
oh
or
je
1
1
0.
0
1.
10
 
Sa
vi
nj
sk
a 
ra
va
n
3
3
3
4
6
4
1
1
1
3
29
1.
2
3.
5 
 N
ot
ra
nj
sk
o 
po
do
lje
1
1
3
4
4
4
4
21
0.
8
3.
6 
 Pi
v{
ko
 p
od
ol
je
 in
 V
re
m
{~
ic
a
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
14
0.
6
3.
7 
 Lj
ub
lja
ns
ko
 b
ar
je
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
2
18
0.
7
3.
10
 
 M
al
a 
go
ra
, K
o~
ev
sk
i r
og
 in
 P
ol
ja
ns
ka
 g
or
a
1
1
0.
0
3.
11
 
 V
el
ik
a 
go
ra
, S
to
jn
a 
in
 G
ot
en
i{
ka
 g
or
a
1
1
0.
0
3.
14
 
 D
ol
en
js
ko
 p
od
ol
je
2
4
4
4
5
8
8
8
43
1.7
3.
16
 
 B
el
a 
kr
aj
in
a
5
6
6
6
7
11
10
11
12
15
13
11
11
3
4.
5
4.
1 
 G
or
i~
ko
11
12
12
12
14
17
11
13
12
12
9
11
14
6
5.
8
4.
3 
 M
ur
sk
a 
ra
va
n
87
78
83
84
74
82
71
69
75
76
66
62
90
7
36
.3
4.
4 
 Sl
ov
en
sk
e 
go
ri
ce
29
29
31
29
31
37
25
28
26
30
26
25
34
6
13
.8
4.
5 
 D
ra
vs
ka
 r
av
an
36
37
37
31
35
44
36
36
43
41
31
31
43
8
17
.5
4.
6 
 D
ra
vi
nj
sk
e 
go
ri
ce
18
16
18
15
15
17
18
19
17
19
17
15
20
4
8.
2
4.
9 
 V
og
la
jn
sk
o 
in
 Z
go
rn
je
so
te
ls
ko
 g
ri
~e
vj
e
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
20
0.
8
4.
10
 
 Sr
ed
nj
es
ot
el
sk
o 
gr
i~
ev
je
1
1
1
1
1
5
0.
2
4.
12
 
 K
r{
ka
 r
av
an
10
11
11
12
13
17
11
9
12
19
19
20
16
4
6.
6
To
ta
l /
 S
ku
pa
j
20
3
19
7
20
6
19
9
20
3
24
0
19
3
20
1
21
8
23
7
20
4
20
1
2,
50
2
10
0.
0
M
es
or
eg
io
ns
 a
ft
er
 P
er
ko
 (
19
98
) 
/ 
M
ez
or
eg
ije
 p
o 
Pe
rk
u 
(1
99
8)
112
D. Denac: Population dynamics of the White Stork Ciconia ciconia in Slovenia between 1999 and 2010
A
PP
E
N
D
IX
 2
 /
 D
O
D
AT
E
K
 2
  
N
um
be
rs
 o
f W
hi
te
 S
to
rk
’s
 C
ic
on
ia
 c
ic
on
ia
 fl
ed
ge
d 
ju
ve
ni
le
s 
(J
ZG
) i
n 
Sl
ov
en
ia
n 
m
es
or
eg
io
ns
 b
et
w
ee
n 
19
99
 a
nd
 2
01
0 
/ 
Št
ev
ila
 p
ol
et
el
ih
 m
la
di
~e
v 
(J
ZG
) b
el
e 
{t
or
kl
je
 C
ic
on
ia
 c
ic
on
ia
 
po
 m
ez
or
eg
ija
h 
Sl
ov
en
ije
 m
ed
 le
to
m
a 
19
99
 in
 2
01
0
M
es
or
eg
io
n 
/ 
M
ez
or
eg
ija
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
To
ta
l/
 
Sk
up
aj
Pe
rc
en
ta
ge
/
O
ds
to
te
k 
(%
)
1.
3  
Sa
vs
ka
 r
av
an
3
4
3
4
1
10
13
9
8
9
64
1.
3
1.
8 
 St
ro
jn
a,
 K
oz
ja
k 
in
 P
oh
or
je
0
0
0.
0
1.
10
 
Sa
vi
nj
sk
a 
ra
va
n
3
3
4
5
5
9
2
0
0
3
34
0.
7
3.
5 
 N
ot
ra
nj
sk
o 
po
do
lje
2
3
7
11
9
11
10
53
1.
1
3.
6 
 Pi
v{
ko
 p
od
ol
je
 in
 V
re
m
{~
ic
a
2
2
0
0
2
2
2
6
3
4
0
23
0.
5
3.
7 
 Lj
ub
lja
ns
ko
 b
ar
je
2
3
5
2
3
3
2
4
7
9
8
5
53
1.
1
3.
10
 
 M
al
a 
go
ra
, K
o~
ev
sk
i r
og
 in
 P
ol
ja
ns
ka
 g
or
a
2
2
0.
0
3.
11
 
 V
el
ik
a 
go
ra
, S
to
jn
a 
in
 G
ot
en
i{
ka
 g
or
a
0
0
0.
0
3.
14
 
 D
ol
en
js
ko
 p
od
ol
je
4
9
5
10
16
15
24
15
98
2.
0
3.
16
 
 B
el
a 
kr
aj
in
a
10
11
15
15
16
32
23
17
28
35
23
24
24
9
5.
0
4.
1 
 G
or
i~
ko
19
25
15
26
25
27
17
7
22
24
20
20
24
7
5.
0
4.
3 
 M
ur
sk
a 
ra
va
n
13
4
16
7
16
7
17
3
17
1
18
2
95
60
18
6
18
2
86
12
4
1,7
27
34
.8
4.
4 
 Sl
ov
en
sk
e 
go
ri
ce
70
80
56
70
76
86
40
17
63
60
44
52
71
4
14
.4
4.
5 
 D
ra
vs
ka
 r
av
an
58
93
68
69
78
91
46
31
89
90
70
51
83
4
16
.8
4.
6 
 D
ra
vi
nj
sk
e 
go
ri
ce
25
28
27
28
34
34
26
23
34
31
39
36
36
5
7.
4
4.
9 
 V
og
la
jn
sk
o 
in
 Z
go
rn
je
so
te
ls
ko
 g
ri
~e
vj
e
4
5
6
4
3
5
5
7
3
2
6
50
1.
0
4.
10
 
 Sr
ed
nj
es
ot
el
sk
o 
gr
i~
ev
je
2
5
0
5
3
15
0.
3
4.
12
 
 K
r{
ka
 r
av
an
35
34
32
21
40
48
23
24
33
55
47
43
43
5
8.
8
To
ta
l /
 S
ku
pa
j
36
3
45
1
39
7
41
7
45
8
53
4
28
5
21
9
52
0
52
7
39
1
40
1
4,
96
3
10
0.
0
M
es
or
eg
io
ns
 a
ft
er
 P
er
ko
 (
19
98
) 
/ 
M
ez
or
eg
ije
 p
o 
Pe
rk
u 
(1
99
8)
113
Acrocephalus 31 (145/146): 101−114, 2010
A
PP
E
N
D
IX
 3
 /
 D
O
D
AT
E
K
 3
  
Br
ee
di
ng
 s
uc
ce
ss
 o
f W
hi
te
 S
to
rk
s 
C
ic
on
ia
 c
ic
on
ia
 (J
Za
) i
n 
Sl
ov
en
ia
n 
m
es
or
eg
io
ns
 b
et
w
ee
n 
19
99
 a
nd
 2
01
0 
/ 
G
ne
zd
itv
en
i u
sp
eh
 (J
Za
) b
el
e 
{t
or
kl
je
 C
ic
on
ia
 c
ic
on
ia
 p
o 
sl
ov
en
sk
ih
 
m
ez
or
eg
ija
h 
m
ed
 le
to
m
a 
19
99
 in
 2
01
0
M
es
or
eg
io
n 
/ 
M
ez
or
eg
ija
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
To
ta
l/
 
Sk
up
aj
1.
3  
Sa
vs
ka
 r
av
an
3.
00
4.
00
1.5
0
2.
00
0.
33
3.
33
3.
25
2.
25
2.
00
2.
25
2.
29
1.
8 
 St
ro
jn
a,
 K
oz
ja
k 
in
 P
oh
or
je
0.
00
0.
00
1.
10
 
Sa
vi
nj
sk
a 
ra
va
n
1.
00
3.
00
4.
00
1.
67
1.
00
2.
25
2.
00
0.
00
0.
00
1.
00
1.
48
3.
5 
 N
ot
ra
nj
sk
o 
po
do
lje
2.
00
3.
00
2.
33
2.
75
2.
25
2.
75
2.
50
2.
52
3.
6 
 Pi
v{
ko
 p
od
ol
je
 in
 V
re
m
{~
ic
a
2.
00
2.
00
0.
00
0.
00
2.
00
2.
00
1.
00
3.
00
1.5
0
4.
00
0.
00
1.
64
3.
7 
 Lj
ub
lja
ns
ko
 b
ar
je
2.
00
3.
00
5.
00
2.
00
3.
00
3.
00
2.
00
4.
00
3.
50
3.
00
2.
67
2.
50
2.
94
3.
10
 
 M
al
a 
go
ra
, K
o~
ev
sk
i r
og
 in
 P
ol
ja
ns
ka
 g
or
a
2.
00
2.
00
3.
11
 
 V
el
ik
a 
go
ra
, S
to
jn
a 
in
 G
ot
en
i{
ka
 g
or
a
0.
00
0.
00
3.
14
 
 D
ol
en
js
ko
 p
od
ol
je
4.
00
2.
25
1.
25
2.
50
3.
20
1.
88
3.
00
1.
88
2.
33
3.
16
 
 B
el
a 
kr
aj
in
a
2.
00
2.
20
2.
50
2.
50
2.
67
2.
91
2.
30
1.5
5
2.
33
2.
33
1.7
7
2.
18
2.
24
4.
1 
 G
or
i~
ko
1.
90
2.
78
1.
67
2.
36
1.
92
1.
69
1.7
0
0.
54
1.
83
2.
00
2.
22
1.
82
1.
83
4.
3 
 M
ur
sk
a 
ra
va
n
1.5
4
2.
17
2.
01
2.
08
2.
38
2.
22
1.
34
0.
87
2.
48
2.
39
1.
30
2.
00
1.
91
4.
4 
 Sl
ov
en
sk
e 
go
ri
ce
2.
41
2.
76
1.
81
2.
59
2.
45
2.
32
1.
60
0.
61
2.
42
2.
00
1.
69
2.
08
2.
08
4.
5 
 D
ra
vs
ka
 r
av
an
1.
61
2.
51
1.
84
2.
23
2.
36
2.
07
1.
28
0.
86
2.
12
2.
20
2.
26
1.
65
1.
92
4.
6 
 D
ra
vi
nj
sk
e 
go
ri
ce
1.
47
2.
00
1.
69
2.
15
2.
83
2.
00
1.
44
1.
21
2.
00
1.
63
2.
29
2.
40
1.
88
4.
9 
 V
og
la
jn
sk
o 
in
 Z
go
rn
je
so
te
ls
ko
 g
ri
~e
vj
e
2.
00
2.
50
3.
00
2.
00
3.
00
2.
50
2.
50
3.
50
3.
00
2.
00
3.
00
2.
63
4.
10
 
 Sr
ed
nj
es
ot
el
sk
o 
gr
i~
ev
je
2.
00
5.
00
0.
00
5.
00
3.
00
3.
00
4.
12
 
 K
r{
ka
 r
av
an
3.
50
3.
09
2.
91
1.7
5
3.
08
2.
82
2.
09
2.
67
2.
75
2.
89
2.
47
2.
15
2.
65
To
ta
l /
 S
ku
pa
j
1.
81
2.
41
2.
01
2.
18
2.
40
2.
23
1.
48
1.
09
2.
40
2.
22
1.
92
2.
00
2.
02
M
es
or
eg
io
ns
 a
ft
er
 P
er
ko
 (
19
98
) 
/ 
M
ez
or
eg
ije
 p
o 
Pe
rk
u 
(1
99
8)
114
APPENDIX 4 / DODATEK 4
Mesoregions in Slovenia where White Stork Ciconia ciconia breeding pairs (HPa) were recorded between 1999 and 2010; 
mesoregions after Perko (1998). For mesoregions names see Appendices 1, 2 & 3. / Mezoregije Slovenije z gnezde~imi 
pari (HPa) bele {torklje Ciconia ciconia med letoma 1999 in 2010; meje mezoregij po Perku (1998). Za imena mezoregij glej 
dodatke 1, 2 in 3.