Action Plan for the Conservation of the Danube …
Action Plan for the
Conservation of the European Ground Squirrel Spermophilus citellus in the European Union
third draft
(27/02/2013)
[pic]
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2013
1. Compilers:
Milan Janák (Daphne/N2K Group, Slovakia), Pavel Marhoul (Daphne/N2K Group, Czech Republic) & Jan Matějů (Czech Republic).
2. List of contributors
Michal Adamec, State Nature Conservancy of the Slovak Republic, Slovakia
Michal Ambros, State Nature Conservancy of the Slovak Republic, Slovakia
Alexandru Iftime, Natural History Museum „Grigore Antipa”, Romania
Barbara Herzig, Säugetiersammlung, Naturhistorisches Museum Vienna, Austria
Ilse Hoffmann, University of Vienna, Austria
Andrzej Kepel, Polish Society for Nature Conservation ”Salamandra”, Poland
Yordan Koshev, Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research, Bulgarian Academy of Science, Bulgaria
Denisa Lőbbová, Poznaj a chráň, Slovakia
Mirna Mazija, Oikon d.o.o.Institut za primijenjenu ekologiju, Croatia
Olivér Váczi, Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Nature Conservation, Hungary
Jitka Větrovcová, Nature Conservation Agency of the Czech Republic, Czech Republic
Dionisios Youlatos, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
3. Lifespan of plan/Reviews
2013 - 2023
4. Recommended citation including ISBN
Janák M., Marhoul P., Matějů J. 2013. Action Plan for the Conservation of the European Ground Squirrel Spermophilus citellus in the European Union. European Commission.
©2013 European Communities
ISBN 978-92-79-08328-0
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged
Cover photo: Michal Ambros
Acknowledgements for help and support:
Ervín Hapl (Slovakia), Rastislav Lasák (Slovakia), Peter Lindtner (Slovakia)
Polish Society for Nature Conservation “Salamandra” – for organizing a workshop on the Action Plan during the IV. European Ground Squirrel Meeting in Poland 2012.
CONTENTS
Preface/Introduction 7
Summary 7
Species’ functions and values 8
Action plan geographical scope and target audience 8
1. Biological information and status review 10
1.1 Description of the species 10
1.2 Species life history, ecology and habitat requirements 12
1.3 Distribution, populations size and trends 18
1. 4 Threats 27
2. Species conservation and legal status across its geographic range 31
2.1 International status 32
2.2 National status 34
2.3 Existing conservation actions and identified priorities 35
2.4 Gaps in knowledge 38
3. Framework for action 39
3.1 Goal 39
3.2 Objectives 39
3.3 Actions 41
3.4 Monitoring and review 46
3.5 Other species that may benefit from the SAP 46
References: 47
ANNEXES 54
Preface/Introduction
The European Ground Squirrel, Spermophilus citellus is endemic to Europe. Its populations became increasingly fragmented and are facing serious declines across most of its range throughout last decades. Only a coordinated conservation effort at the European level may sustain the species viability. With this respect this European Species Action Plan has been prepared with the support of the European Commission.
The aim of this action plan is to support the development of national or local action plans and conservation measures as appropriate[1]. The purposes of this action plan are as follows:
• To provide up-to date baseline information about species ecology, status and threats
• To provide scientifically-based recommendations to those who can promote and support species conservation
• To establish priorities in species conservation
• To provide a common framework and focus for a wide range of stakeholders
The information and solutions presented within this action plan have been prepared in consultation with a group of species experts from majority of the countries in the European Ground Squirrel’s distribution range, as well as through a review of available literature. The proposed action plan therefore represents the best available up-to-date collective knowledge on the species.
Within the frame of this action plan, an expert workshop has taken place during the IV. European Ground Squirrel Meeting in Poland 2012, where the analysis of information on the species, including threats and possible conservation priorities were discussed with the experts in order to define a conservation strategy and identify the most important actions.
Summary
The European Ground Squirrel, Spermophilus citellus is a ground dwelling rodent associated with open non-forest steppe grassland habitats including the ‘cultural’ steppe of nowadays - the short-stalked grasslands on field airports, golf courses, playgrounds etc.
The distribution range of S. citellus consists of two distinct parts divided by Carpathian Mountains. The western part extends from southern Poland, through Czech Republic, east of Austria, through Slovakia and Hungary into Pannonian part of Serbia and Croatia. The eastern part of the range includes Transcarpathian region of Ukraine, Romania, part of Moldova, Bulgaria, south-east of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), north-east of Greece and European part of Turkey.
According to the 2008 IUCN Red List vers. 3.1, the species is considered Vulnerable, with a decreasing population trend. In 2007 reporting to the Habitats Directive 92/43/EC the species has been evaluated in unfavourable-bad status for Alpine and Continental biogeographical regions and in unfavourable-inadequate status for Mediterranean and Pannonic regions. International group of experts on research and conservation of S. citellus declared in 2006 that the species is threatened over most of its range, so coordinated conservation effort is needed for its survival. Dominant part of distribution area of S. citellus belongs to the European Union, so concerned member states have high responsibility for the survival of the world’s population of S. citellus.
The most serious threats to the species reported include habitat loss and fragmentation especially in connection with land use changes which in synergy with adverse natural factors such as long winters, floods etc. increase mortality in the populations of this obligatory hibernant and in small isolated populations quickly leed to extinction.
The overall goal of this action plan is to improve conservation status of Spermophilus citellus to a favourable level within the European Union. The objectives include stopping the decline in S. citellus populations by ensuring necessary management of habitats at existing localities, restoring metapopulations by adding new/restored habitats, creating corridors and stepping stones, supporting populations by repatriation of animals. It is also necessary to fill in the identified gaps in knowledge and to support the species conservation by public awareness activities.
In order to achieve these objectives, a list of recommended actions has been prepared taking into account the specific situation and threats in each country. The actions are divided into six categories: habitat management and land use, species recovery, mapping and monitoring, scientific research, coordination and funding of the Action Plan implementation, and public awareness, education and information.
Species’ functions and values
European Ground Squirrel, Spermophilus citellus is endemic to Europe. It is undoubtedly an important natural element of the steppic grassland ecosystem. In the short grass steppe habitat S. citellus represents one of the main prey for several top predators listed in Annex I of the Birds Directive, such as the Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca, Lesser Spotted Eagle Aquila pomarina, Saker Falcon Falco cherrug etc. and also other species of community importance such as the Steppe Polecat Mustela eversmanii or Marbled Polecat Vormela peregusna. Some rare invertebrates are specialized to co-existence with S. citellus, such as the coprofagous beetles Ontophagus vitulus, Aphodius citellorum feeding on excrements of S. citellus. Old burrows of S. citellus are used by other protected species, such as Green Toad Bufo viridis or smooth snake Coronella austriaca. In some habitats it might be also an important consumer of primary production able to limit spreading of some plant species, including invasive plants, such as the Silver-leaved Nightshade Solanum elaeagnifolium. In line with these, keystone species function is probable though still not proven in the case of S. citellus. However, at least in some countries S. citellus can serve as an umbrella species for extensively used grassland habitats and associated species. Its usefulness as an umbrella species is supported by the fact that it is a species which can be brought to the attention of people through its attractive appearance and social diurnal activities above the ground.
Action plan geographical scope and target audience
Within the EU this plan is intended for implementation in: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia.
Outside of the EU this plan is recommended for implementation in: Croatia, F.Y.R. of Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Turkey, Ukraine.
Information has also been compiled for Germany.
Biological information and status review
1.1 Description of the species
Taxonomy
The European Ground Squirrel Spermophilus citellus has been first described as a species by Linné as Mus citellus in 1766 (Linnaeus, 1766). The valid genus name Spermophilus was introduced by Cuvier, F. in 1825.
The name Citellus Oken, 1816 was in routine use for the genus throughout the world until Hershkovitz (1949) argued that Oken’s work was invalid, and that Spermophilus Cuvier, 1825 was the oldest available name for the genus. The opinion was supported by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1956; Opinion 417), and has been generally adopted by American authors. However, some European, and especially Russian authors, continued to use Citellus until as recently as 1995, although others adopted Spermophilus (Harrison et al. 2003).
Altogether nine subspecies of European Ground Squirrel were recognized within its distribution area (overview according to Matějů et al. 2010):
The nominotypical subspecies Spermophilus citellus citellus (Linnaeus, 1766) is distributed in the Czech Republic, Austria, Slovakia and Hungary (Ružić 1978).
The occurrence of S. c. gradojevici (Martino & Martino, 1929) is limited to lowlands in the surroundings of Vardar River and Dojran Lake in Macedonia (Kryštufek 1993).
The subspecies S. c. karamani (Martino & Martino, 1940) is also found only in Macedonia, namely in the area of Karadžica Mountains, at altitudes of approximately 2,000 m, on meadows and pastures in the Patiška River basin (Kryštufek 1993, 1996).
The subspecies S. c. istricus (Calinescu, 1934) from Romania has been described, distributed in the Muntenia area on the left bank of Danube River (Ružić 1978).
Another subspecies, S. c. laskarevi (Martino & Martino, 1940) has been described in Serbia, specifically in the southeast part of the Pannonian Lowlands, in the Banat and Syrmien areas (Ružić 1978). Pešev (1955) also classifies some Bulgarian populations as belonging to this subspecies. Compared to S. c. citellus, S. c. laskarevi differs in its smaller size and shorter tail.
The validity of the following two subspecies, S. c. martinoi (Pešev, 1955) and S. c. balcanicus (Markov, 1957) described in the Bulgarian Mountains has been called into question. Ondrias (1966) synonymizes both these subspecies with the subspecies S. c. karamani. Ružić (1978) considers S. c. balcanicus and S. c. martinoi as a single subspecies.
Based on different physical size and length of the lower jawbone, the subspecies S. c. thracius (Mursaloglu, 1964) has been described in the easternmost part of its area, the European part of Turkey.
The subspecies S. c. macedonicus (Fraguedakis-Tsolis et Ondrias, 1985) has been recognized based on immunological research into ground squirrel populations found in the Pontokomi area, in Greek Macedonia (Fraguedakis-Tsolis 1977). A subsequent detailed study led to the discovery of morphological differences and to the description of this subspecies (Fraguedakis-Tsolis & Ondrias 1985).
Nowadays only 4 subspecies are considered to be valid: S. c. citellus, S. c. gradojevici, S. c. istricus and S. c. martinoi (Wilson & Reeder 2005; Helgen et al. 2009). However existence of subspecies needs further revision according to published information on the genetic diversity of the species (Kryštufek et al. 2009). For instance Kryštufek et al. (2009) described only three separate S.citellus phylogeographical lineages (south, north and Jakupica) and suggest treating them as independent conservation units. Kryštufek (1996) found no diagnostic differences in skull characters, ratios and colouration to support formal division of S. citellus into subspecies.
Hybridization with other species has not been studied yet in S. citellus.
Description
As its name suggests the European Ground Squirrel Spermophilus citellus is a ground dwelling (living in burrows) rodent resembling the squirrel but with the tail far shorter and thinner and the body colour of mottled ochre-yellow. The body length of full grown wild animal is about 18 - 24 cm (Grulich 1960, Ružić 1978) and the weight of adults is highly variable, being lowest after the hibernation and highest in the late summer prior to onset of hibernation – 145 to 520g (Matějů 2008), 150 to >400g (Millesi et al. 1999). Males are significantly heavier than females (Millesi et al. 1999, Matějů 2008).
S. citellus forms colonies of various sizes. It is a mammal with diurnal activity and an obligatory (true) hibernant.
1.2 Species life history, ecology and habitat requirements
Habitat requirements
S. citellus is originally associated with open non-forest steppe grassland habitats, though it is less adapted to typical steppe conditions than the more East-distributed S. suslicus. S. citellus nowadays inhabits different types of grassland habitats, both semi-natural and artificial, though with strong preference to grasslands with permanent short-stalk vegetation (10-20 cm) developed on different soil types, from light, fine-grained soils (such as those developed on sand) to heavy soils and both on deep as on shallow soils with presence of soil skeleton, but usually with good water retention and medium aeration (Janderková et al. 2011). Vegetation height around 20 cm provides cover while not obstructing sight (Straschil 1972, cf. Hoffmann et al. 2008).
Current localities represent mainly different types of mown grassland and pastures, artificial habitats include lawns, playgrounds, golf courses, river embankments (dykes), etc. For nowadays, grassy airports are important refuge areas of the species (Váczi & Altbäcker 1999, Matějů et al. 2008). In periods of population gradation it pervades also to sub-optimal habitats such as mesophile, humid or temporarily flooded grasslands, grasslands with scrubs etc. In the past it often occupied grassy stripes along roads, railway ramparts, field balks and also perennial fodder crops – clovers, lucerne (Grulich 1960; Ružić 1978; Hulová 2001). Apart from grasslands S. citellus usually avoids intensively cultivated land, although it occurs also in vineyards, orchards and gardens in some parts of its range (Spitzenberger 2001; Enzinger et al. 2006, Herzig-Straschil 2007; Hoffmann et al. 2008, Matějů et al. 2008, 2010; Youlatos in litt.).
The analysis of the Natura 2000 database (end 2011 version) does not show a representative result in terms of habitat classes cover on 427 S. citellus sites (sites where S. citellus is listed among conservation targets or among non-target species) – in total 21.57% of the overall area is covered by broad-leaved deciduous woodland. This is obviously because of the character of Sites of Community Importance listed in the database, which are often multi-purpose, with many conservation targets and thus covering a variety of different habitat types. In any case some approximation can be derived for these sites – 19.07% of the total area of all sites is formed by dry grasslands and steppes, other arable land covers 8.85%, salt marshes, salt pastures and salt steppes cover 6,43%, both humid grasslands and mesophile grasslands and improved grasslands cover 5,4% of the total area of SCIs with S. citellus.
The relation of S. citellus to Habitats Directive Annex I habitat types as estimated by local experts is summarized below (S – significant, IS – insignificant, UN – unknown/uncertain):
|Habitat type |Country |
| |
|Austria |
|Croatia |Continental |Probably extinct |
| | |Range |Population |Habitat |Future prospects |Overall |
|AT |ALP | | | |
| | |Range |
|Austria | |EN (Spitzenberger 2005) |
| |NÖ Artenschutzverordnung, LGBl. 5500/2, Wiener | |
| |Naturschutzgesetz LGBl. 45/1998 amend. LGBl. 29/2012; | |
| |Bgld. Naturschutzgesetz LGBl. 36/2001, amend. LGBl. | |
| |7/2010, Bgld. Artenschutzverordnung LGBl 36/2001 amend. | |
| |LGBl 24/2008 | |
|Bulgaria |Bulgarian Biodiversity Act (State gazzete, бр.77, 2002) –|VU A1c (Stefanov – in press) |
| |Appendix II | |
|Czech Republic |critically endangered species (Decree Nr. 395/1992 to Act|CR (Anděra et Červený 2003) |
| |Nr. 114/1992) | |
|Greece |protected species according to national law (citation) |VU (citation) |
|Hungary |strictly protected species according to national law (Act|- |
| |Nr. 13/2001) | |
|Poland |Strictly protected according to the Minister of |EX in Poland (Profus 2001) – requires update |
| |Environment regulation from 12 October 2011 on animal | |
| |species protection | |
|Romania |strictly protected species (Act Nr. 49/2011) |VU (citation) |
|Slovakia |protected species (of European importance) according to |EN (Žiak et Urban 2001) |
| |Annexes 4b and 6b of the Regulation Nr. 24/2003 to the | |
| |Act Nr. 543/2002 | |
2.3 Existing conservation actions and identified priorities
Protected areas
Except protection within Natura 2000 network some localities of S. citellus are located within nationally protected areas and thus are subject to special protection – such as in Bulgaria in National parks Rila and Central Balkan and Nature parks Vitosha, Strandzha, Sinite kamani, Rusenski lom, etc. Part of recent localities of S. citellus however are found outside protected areas, similarly as in the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary or Slovakia. This is no doubt caused by the fact that these localities often represent man-made habitats, such as airports, gardens, playgrounds, etc. In Hungary measures for protection of S. citellus are included among conservation priorities for a number of protected areas and Natura 2000 sites.
Action plans at national level
A national action plan for S. citellus exists in Czech Republic and Poland.
Action Plan for the European Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) in the Czech Republic (Matějů et al. 2010) was developed in 2006 and approved by the Ministry of Environment in 2008. Conservation goals of this Action Plan include: 1. Ensure the existence of the European ground squirrel in the highest possible number of existing localities, while focusing on Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) and more numerous populations with a positive development perspective and with the possibility of enlarging the area of the colony; 2. Create a total of 5 metapopulation systems of European ground squirrel occurrence in the Czech Republic, with a total number of at least 2,500 individuals in each of the 5 metapopulations for at least 10 years). The Action Plan also contains specific conservation measures grouped along major topics such as habitat management, species management, monitoring, research, education and other measures. A major review of the action plan is after 10 years therefore the evaluation of the plan’s effectiveness is not available yet.
In Poland the “National management plan for the species – European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus)” (Kepel & Kala 2007) was developed in 2006-2007 with the participation of all interested stakeholders and published by the Polish Ministry of Environment. However it is not legally binding in any way. Main goal of the plan is the implementation of the S. citellus reintroduction program in Poland. As a minimum, the program assumes reestablishment of 6 metapopulations of this species in the four regions (voivodeships) of Poland, within the historical range of the species. It also anticipates educational activities in the local communities and the use of the S. citellus as an umbrella species for conservation of rare and protected grassland habitats and associated species.
In Austria an action plan for S. citellus exists for the province of Lower Austria (Gross et al. 2006). It is funded by Provincial and Austrian Government (Ministry of Agriculture and Environment) and the European Union. It consists of management of habitats, mediation of conflicts, monitoring by volunteers and raising of public awareness. A similar project of the Burgenland league for Nature Conservation (Naturschutzbund Burgenland) also funded by Provincial and Austrian Government (Ministry of Agriculture and Environment) and the European Union is mainly focused on a scientific monitoring of all S. citellus colonies within the province, but includes also management of habitats, mediation of conflicts and raising of public awareness. An action plan for localities in Vienna is in preparation.
No specific action plan at national level exists yet for Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece and Romania. In Slovakia, such action plan is in preparation.
Translocation and repatriation actions
Repatriations (Reintroductions) and translocations seem to be one of the most common conservation activities implemented for S. citellus during the last 20 years. Some repatriations were done in order to save populations at localities where some development/construction was planned to take place or there was other conflict with planned or ongoing use of the area (such as at airports – risk of collisions with raptor birds). In Slovakia and in Hungary as a part of a LIFE project on conservation of Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) specific guidelines for species reintroductions were prepared (Hapl et al. 2006) as a result of experience from reintroduction actions.
Matějů et al. (2010) summarized and evaluated a number of reintroduction and repatriation (rescue transfer) projects implemented in the Czech Republic and Slovakia in the last 20 years. In the 1990s, mapping of the occurrence of European S. citellus took place in Slovakia (Baláž et al. 2008). Based on the data obtained, several regions were chosen which should become part of a network of species’ gene pool localities in Slovakia used for future reintroductions. In 1992 – 1993 reintroduction of 200 specimens to 3 historical localities in Košická Basin in Eastern Slovakia took place. The project delivered important experience with reintroduction methods, released animals populated the localities and their numbers increased in the following years (except for one locality which was destroyed). In 2000 – 2004 release of S. citellus to several localities in National Park Muránska Planina took place and in 2005 – 2006 similar activity took place in the western part of Slovakia – locality Kuchyňa. The released animals originated from airports of Košice and Bratislava, and included relatively high number of released individuals – 444 in case of Muránska Planina NP and 350 in case of Kuchyňa locality. In 2007 during a survey made at Kuchyňa locality however only 30 individuals were found out of which one half were juveniles (Ambros & Hapl 2008).
Several reintroduction projects were implemented in the Czech Republic, most of them, however, not successful. This was due to several reasons, mainly because of low number of released individuals, but also due to low or not existent support for the newly established populations in the years subsequent to release (by releasing more individuals), isolation of new populations from the existing ones, parasites and increased predation of captive-bred animals. However, these projects also delivered important experience for the future reintroduction programmes, such as the positive experience with using a release cage for adapting the released animal to new environment on a locality of release.
Since 2005 a successful project of reintroduction of S. citellus after their extinction in 1970ies is taking place in Poland. To the locality near Kamień Śląski (near the town Opole) altogether 250 individuals were released in the course of 2005 to 2007. Animals originated from Hungary and Slovakia from where they were transported to ZOO in Poznań for captive breeding. At the locality of release the animals were put into acclimatization cages, from which they dug themselves out (soft release, cf. Truett et al. 2001). Based on an estimate from 2012, about 770 individuals are found at this locality. In 2008-2012 S. citellus reintroduction in two other localities was started (in Głębowice and Jakubowo Lubińskie, both in the Lower Silesia region). In both of these localities the estimated number of animals starting the hibernation in 2012 is still much lower than in Kamień Śląski (probably doesn’t exceed 100 individuals on any of these sites).
In Hungary, many reintroduction and translocation actions were implemented in last decades as well (Váczi in litt). Around 2002 approximately 700 individuals of S. citellus were transferred to a new locality due to the abolishment of a field airport. The animals were released individually into pre-drilled holes, the openings of which were then closed with a bottle. This forced the released individuals to stay under the ground and dig a new entrance, allowed them to calm down and thus prevented them to leave quickly the new locality. In the following year more than 300 individuals were observed and reproduction was successful as well (Váczi in verb.; Gedeon et al. 2011).
In Bulgaria reintroduction projects for S. citellus exist in Nature parks Vitosha, Sinite kamani, Bulgarka and Vrachanski Balkan (Koshev in litt.).
In Austria there are no reintroduction projects existing or planned at present and reintroductions are regarded only as an exceptional measure in Lower Austria.
Considering that the vast majority of reintroduction events have been unsuccessful or their results are uncertain or unknown, EU legislation (Art. 12 of the Habitats Directive 92/42/EC) should be thoroughly applied to verify whether future translocations are de facto expedient or necessary. To this, a strict set of rules is required to be developed and agreed among experts before executing any further translocation, repatriation or reintroduction. This set of rules should be based on a critical review of the experience and unconditionally include monitoring of the released animals (at least until the next reproductive season after release).
Species inventory and monitoring
In many countries, such as Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary or Slovakia a country-wide inventory of S. citellus took place in the past 20-30 years. However, in other countries a coordinated inventory is still missing and only results of regional-based surveys are available (Bulgaria, Greece). Results of such surveys however may get quickly outdated as numerous examples show. When the agricultural activities – grazing or mowing – ceases, especially small and isolated populations become vulnerable to extinction. As the species is in decrease in its entire range except for Hungary, monitoring of remaining S. citellus localities is necessary.
Programmes for monitoring of S. citellus exist for example for most of Austria, in Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland.
In Austria the monitoring of S. citellus is carried out in Lower Austria and Burgenland, but it is not yet implemented in Vienna. The Lower Austrian League for Nature Conservation (Naturschutzbund NÖ) created the “Ground Squirrel Network” in 2009. A team of volunteers, like friends of nature, farmers, winegrowers, huntsmen and biologists, provide surveillance of “their” S. citellus colonies. Animals and their burrow entrances are counted – following one and the same method – each year in April. The Lower Austrian League for Nature Conservation (Naturschutzbund NÖ) makes an analysis and derives conservation measures from the results. In Burgenland all colonies of S. citellus are being monitored by scientists as part of a project run by the Burgenland League for Nature Conservation (Naturschutzbund Burgenland).
In the Czech Republic detailed monitoring of S. citellus has been going on since 2000 and since 2006 it is being implemented as part of the national species action plan. Besides surveillance of known localities it also revealed new localities of the species.
In Hungary, S. citellus is being monitored as part of the Hungarian Biodiversity Monitoring System since 2000[5] at 63 permanent sample localities representing both natural sites and grassy airports visited at least once a year in mid April. A method of active burrow holes counting on a 1000 m long and 1m wide belt transect is being used. Except the number of active burrow holes a set of additional information is being collected as well.
In Poland the exact monitoring of all existing S. citellus sites is part of the approved national reintroduction program. Census of the population is done in April and August.
In Bulgaria S. citellus is included in the National System for Monitoring of Biological Diversity (Stefanov – in press). In Slovakia, monitoring programme for S. citellus is in preparation (Ambros pers. com.).
Conservation of habitats and implications of the Common Agriculture Policy
Protection of the S. citellus habitats mainly involves preservation/support or establishment of grazing or mowing on S. citellus sites. According to current knowledge the most favourable seems to be grazing of mixed herds of sheep and goats though grazing of cattle is also possible and quite common. Occasional overgrazing by cattle, however, causes trampling and degradation of soil and it can destroy burrow systems of S. citellus and therefore is not welcome. Number of grazing animals must therefore be supervised. In some localities, such as on Kamień Śląski in Poland grazing of horses is practiced.
In Bulgaria local activities concerning conservation of habitats (mowing, support or establishment of grazing, creating suitable habitats etc.) are implemented in Nature parks Vitosha, Bulgarka and Vrachanski Balkan and in the National park Centralen Balkan.
In some countries, such as Bulgaria, Hungary or Slovakia the local populations of S. citellus and their habitats were subject to actions of conservation projects targeting other species, such as birds of prey – Imperial Eagle or Saker Falcon.
Protection of S. citellus habitats in Lower Austrian is being ensured through the Austrian agri-environment programme (ÖPUL) of the Rural Development Policy 2007 – 2013. Farmers taking part on the scheme have to preserve and cultivate fallow land like meadows till 2013, which includes cutting them appropriately (2x or 4x/year), to get funded. Till today at least 150 farmers take part in the programme conserving and managing about 200 ha of non cultivated land for S. citellus in Lower Austria. Therefore from S. citellus conservation point of view, it makes a difference, if European Agricultural Policy obliges farmers to keep 10% set-asides in their farming area (most of them mown regularly 2-3 times/year) or if it is only 2% of set-asides, which are cut once in August. It is estimated, that in the period of 2007 – 2013 in Lower Austria S. citellus have lost about 80% of actual or potential fallow land habitat at once, because of the change in European Agricultural Policy (Zulka in prep.).
Vineyards turned out to be the most important habitat for S. citellus in Lower Austria at present. One third of the colonies are situated in vineyards. The suitability of vineyards for S. citellus largely depends on the presence of short grassland stripes between the grapevine rows. This permanent green space protects the ground from soil erosion. Since this type of soil conservation has been promoted by the Lower Austrian Chamber of Agriculture several years ago, nowadays it's often to be found. In years with low precipitation the portion of vineyards with short grassland between the grape wine rows declines, which may be unfavourable for the S. citellus colonisation. As there is no possibility for winegrowers to get ÖPUL-funds to protect habitats of S. citellus in their vineyards, the Lower Austrian League of Nature Conservation (Naturschutzbund NÖ) launched a marketing campaign for them. Wine growers, who have "ground squirrel vineyards" and who cultivate their vineyards while keeping short grassland striped between the grapevine rows, will be allowed to use a badge to mark these souslik-friendly vineyards, which signalizes, that the winegrower protects habitat for S. citellus in his vineyards. Moreover the winemaker is allowed to label his respective wine bottles with Naturschutzbund NÖ label, if he accepts additional sponsorship conditions.
Similarly in the province of Burgenland, the appropriate measures on fallow land and vineyards are financed through “ÖPUL” and directly from funds of the conservation department of the provincial government.
Moreover, for establishing large scale S. citellus habitats, decisions of EU Common Agricultural Policy (e.g. 2014 – 2020) as a whole are very important.
2.4 Gaps in knowledge
The current state of knowledge is considered sufficient to start with actions aimed at conservation of the species. Despite the increased scientific attention some gaps remain in specific topics connected to S. citellus biology, ecology etc. The most important gaps in knowledge are listed below. Some are specifically relevant for only some of the range countries (indicated by country code). If not indicated otherwise the identified gap is relevant for all range countries:
Mapping and monitoring:
- country-wide species inventory (update) – species distribution and size/state of the populations – BG, EL
- launching of regular monitoring programme in EL, RO, SK
- update of the knowledge on species range, distribution and population status in non-EU range countries
- mapping of the habitats potentially suitable for S. citellus (for sake of reintroduction or translocation) – PL, SK
Biology of S. citellus
- parasitism - EL
- feeding habits - EL
Ecology of S. citellus:
- minimal viable population sizes and minimum size of habitat
- reproductive and mortality rates, demography of the populations – population models
- ecology of (meta)populations – dispersal potential of the species and movements between habitat patches, habitat connectivity
- adaptation, orientation in the new environment (for emergency transfers)
- effects of climate change on species biology, behaviour, etc.
- intra- and inter-specific effects
Habitat structure and management:
- effects of climate change on habitat (availability) for S. citellus (changes in range and density) as well as effects on the species itself (biology, ethology, etc.)
- habitat preference – BG
- impact of threats / human activities, e.g. different grazing/mowing regimes, effects of mulching, using of biocides in vineyards, etc.
- response to conservation-driven management
- best practice parameters of translocation, reintroduction actions – PL
Framework for action
3.1 Overall Goal
The overall goal of this EU species Action Plan is:
To improve conservation status of Spermophilus citellus to a favourable level within the European Union
The European Ground Squirrel Spermophilus citellus is endemic to Europe. It is undoubtedly an important natural element of the steppic grassland ecosystem in Europe. Thus the EU certainly has a special responsibility for the conservation of this highly endangered species. Therefore steps for the survival of S. citellus need to be taken immediately. It has already disappeared from many localities of its former European distribution – especially at the western edge of its range. Most of the remaining colonies throughout the European Union went down in numbers so if actions are not taken immediately, the species will continue declining, maybe to a degree from which it cannot recover anymore. The longer we wait, the harder it will get to achieve the survival of the species.
3.2 Objectives
Objective 1: Stop further decline of S. citellus populations by ensuring of necessary habitat management at existing localities (colonies).
Management of S. citellus habitat can be based on the present knowledge of habitat requirements. Habitat conservation measures of already existing national and regional action plans for S. citellus could be evaluated for fine-tuning of the EU Action Plan in subsequent years.
Habitat conservation measures can only be implemented by reflecting S. citellus needs in agri-environmental programmes as by convincing farmers – the most important stakeholders for nature conservation – to take part in proper management of S. citellus localities (mowing, grazing). Through these programmes farmers may get funded and so as get rewarded for nature conservation activities. The priority is to develop and support agricultural systems that maintain habitats with a certain amount of short grasslands. Actions are needed at EU level to support appropriate systems of High Nature Value farming. Flexible agri-environment schemes are necessary. Such measures have to go on also when the present programming period ends (i.e. after 2013). Where agri-environmental measures for S. citellus already exist, these should be renewed starting from 2014 and farmers should be encouraged to take part.
Objective 2: Restore metapopulations of S. citellus in parts of the range where its distribution is fragmented.
Individual populations have to be stabilized by restoring source populations within metapopulations and providing adequate habitat size and quality at a landscape scale. This includes directly adjacent areas as well as habitat patches that may be reached by the ground squirrel. Within the next CAP programming period (2014-2020), the suitable habitat should increase considerably in all defined localities (e.g. two source populations in each metapopulation unit).
Individuals from different populations should be able to move between populations. Populations should be able to grow and to spread. Habitats and colonies should be prevented from fragmentation and isolation. Dispersal routes need to be detected, stepping stone habitats between colonies of S. citellus should be preserved or restored. Changes in land use should be avoided and if necessary mitigated (e.g. by means of spatial planning).
Objective 3: Ensure recovery of S. citellus populations in areas where it became extinct.
If habitat connectivity is irreversibly interrupted or next vital metapopulation is too far away for successful recolonisation, reintroduction of S. citellus could be considered. This reintroduction should only take place in regions within the natural range of the species, where it has become extinct in recent years. Habitat quality and size as well as source populations should be considered carefully in advance: only if the current quality and the size of habitat is sufficient (for reintroduction) and its proper management is secured from a long-term perspective and the source population is not negatively affected, reintroduction could take place. The reintroduction actions should reflect situation and priorities on a level of the species range and therefore cooperate of all range countries is necessary.
Objective 4: Fill in the identified gaps in knowledge.
Good quality data are needed on the actual range of the species, on the size of colonies, populations and on the size and quality of habitats, which are used. As the size of populations changes over years and the species may disperse to as well as disappear from certain localities, data has to be updated regularly (e.g. every 3 years). In countries or regions with outdated or no data basic surveys should start immediately and has to be updated at least once in 6 years period (as required by Art. 17 reporting). This should be a baseline for continuous monitoring of the species status to be established over large parts of its range. In order to get comparable results, common standards for monitoring need to be developed and agreed among countries. An advisory/working group for Spermophilus citellus based on the informal European Ground Squirrel Meeting platform may serve as a scientific panel for developing and discussing such standards as well as standards/programme for reintroductions etc.
Good quality data are needed on certain aspects of the species’ ecology and its environment e.g. to improve the management on existing localities (e.g. response of the species to different management options, response to translocations, effects of climate change, etc.). These data are also crucial for the restoration of the sites from which the species has disappeared. Research must include management experiments to learn more about real-time reactions of the species. Results have to be implemented in the management of the localities immediately.
Objective 5: Increase public awareness and involve key stakeholders in S. citellus conservation.
Stakeholders – national, regional and local authorities, land owners, farmers and other land users of S. citellus localities – are key players in the species conservation. They need to be provided with all relevant information concerning the species ecology and the required management of its habitat. Training workshops, informative seminars, factsheets, etc. may be relevant means for disseminating information. Information) shall go on or shall s be started.
It is also very important to provide information to general public and to improve the public relation towards the species using different kinds of media, e.g. local and provincial press. Folders, reports and information desks at certain local events help to raise public awareness on the species, its needs and on nature conservation in general. Involving volunteers into conservation work (e.g. into monitoring of S. citellus colonies) helps to build positive relation and local ownership for the species.
To support populations of S. citellus living in vineyards and orchards a special information campaign for vineyard and orchard operators may be considered. The public relation activities may involve local branding.
3.3 Actions
|No. |
|1. |Ensure proper management (regular mowing, extensive |Number of appropriately managed sites with|all MS |essential |permanent |Conservation agencies,|
| |grazing, removal of bushes on overgrown pastures) on |regular occurrence of S. citellus versus | | | |site managers, land |
| |all sites with regular S. citellus occurrence. |total number of sites | | | |owners and users |
|2. |Where appropriate enlarge existing localities of S. |Area of restored habitats for S. citellus |all MS |essential |medium-long |Conservation agencies,|
| |citellus by restoring habitats on border and adjacent | | | | |site managers, land |
| |areas. | | | | |owners and users |
|3. |Enhance connectivity between S. citellus populations by|Number and area of new corridors and |all MS |high |permanent |Conservation agencies,|
| |creating line corridors and stepping stones with |stepping stone habitats | | | |site managers, land |
| |appropriate habitat and its management, especially in | | | | |owners and users |
| |areas with fragmented populations. | | | | | |
|4. |Restore metapopulation structure of S. citellus |Number and area of new habitats, estimated|all MS |essential |medium-long |Conservation agencies,|
| |populations by creating and maintaining new suitable |metapopulations benefiting from new | | | |site managers, land |
| |habitat patches in the vicinity of source populations |habitats | | | |owners and users |
| |in areas with highly fragmented distribution. | | | | | |
|5. |Support suitable management in vineyards, extensive |Area of vineyards and orchards with |all MS |high |permanent |Conservation agencies,|
| |orchards and set-aside patches to become suitable |management adapted according to needs of | | | |site managers, land |
| |habitat for S. citellus |S. citellus | | | |owners and users |
|6. |Halt the fragmentation of S. citellus populations by |Number of S. citellus populations |BG, EL, HU, |essential |permanent |National/regional |
| |avoiding of habitat conversion. |influenced by habitat conversion reported |RO, SK | | |authorities, |
| | |in 2013 and 2019 | | | |conservation agencies |
|7. |Promote reduction of fertilisation (including manure) |Number of S. citellus populations |all MS |medium |permanent |National/regional |
| |and application of chemicals in areas with S. citellus |influenced by fertilisation and chemicals | | | |conservation and |
| |occurrence. |reported in 2013 and 2019 | | | |agricultural |
| | | | | | |authorities, |
| | | | | | |conservation agencies |
|8. |Support management of overabundant allochtonous |Management actions reported |all MS |high |permanent |National/regional |
| |predators (stray dogs, cats etc.) and prevent human | | | | |authorities, |
| |hunting for S. citellus where appropriate. | | | | |conservation agencies |
|2. Species recovery |
|9. |Prepare S. citellus reintroduction plan common for all |Reintroduction plan prepared and adopted |all MS |high |medium-long |European Commission, |
| |MS considering entire species range and assessing | | | | |European S. citellus |
| |reintroduction priorities. Taking of S. citellus from | | | | |advisory/working |
| |the wild, captive breeding and reintroduction must be | | | | |group, national |
| |based on IUCN reintroduction guidelines. | | | | |authorities, |
| | | | | | |Conservation agencies,|
| | | | | | |research institutions,|
| | | | | | |NGOs |
|10. |Coordinate reintroduction programmes on national level |Number of coordinated national |all MS |high |medium-long |National/regional |
| |applying common reintroduction plan. |reintroduction programmes reported | | | |authorities, |
| | | | | | |conservation agencies |
|3. Mapping and monitoring |
|11. |Conduct detailed mapping of the S. citellus |Number/area of mapped localities of S. |BG, EL, RO, |high |short-medium |Research institutions,|
| |distribution in areas where data is lacking. |citellus; size of total mapped (checked) |SK | | |conservation agencies,|
| | |area (eventually number of map sheets | | | |NGOs |
| | |checked) | | | | |
|12. |Conduct mapping/identification of potential habitats |Number/area of potential S. citellus |PL, SK |high |short-medium |Research institutions,|
| |for S. citellus for the sake of reintroductions or |habitats mapped; size of total mapped | | | |conservation agencies,|
| |translocations |(checked) area (eventually number of map | | | |NGOs |
| | |sheets checked) | | | | |
|13. |Work out and adopt minimal monitoring standards for |Minimal monitoring standards developed and|all MS |essential |short-medium |European Commission, |
| |natural and translocated S. citellus populations. |adopted by Habitats Committee | | | |research institutions,|
| | | | | | |conservation |
| | | | | | |authorities, |
| | | | | | |conservation agencies |
|14. |Establish new or maintain existing monitoring |Number of monitoring programmes |all MS |high, |permanent |National/regional |
| |programmes in each MS based on common standards. |functioning | |essential: EL, | |conservation |
| | | | |RO, SK | |authorities, |
| | | | | | |conservation agencies |
|15. |Specify the species range by supporting the mapping of |Number/area of mapped localities of S. |EU |medium |short-medium |European Commission, |
| |S. citellus distribution in non EU states. |citellus; size of total mapped (checked) | | | |research institutions,|
| | |area (eventually number of map sheets | | | |conservation agencies,|
| | |checked) in non EU states | | | |NGOs |
|4. Scientific research |
|16. |Promote research on the ecology of S. citellus |Number of new researches executed. |all MS |essential |short-medium |Research institutions,|
| |metapopulations, mainly on minimum viable populations |Population viability analysis prepared. | | | |conservation agencies,|
| |and habitat, reproduction and mortality rates, | | | | |foundations, NGOs |
| |dispersal potentials, habitat preferences and movements| | | | | |
| |of S. citellus between habitat patches. Population | | | | | |
| |viability analysis. | | | | | |
|17. |Promote research on impact of human activities |Number of new researches executed. |all MS |essential |short-medium |Research institutions,|
| |affecting S. citellus habitat including | | | | |conservation agencies,|
| |conservation-driven management practice. | | | | |foundations, NGOs |
|18. |Describe environmental conditions and other factors |Research on factors affecting occurrence |AT, CZ |high |short-medium |Research institutions,|
| |affecting occurence of S. citellus in vineyards and |of S. citellus in vineyards and orchards | | | |conservation agencies,|
| |orchards. |executed. | | | |foundations, NGOs |
|19. |Promote research on best practice parameters of S. |Research on best practice parameters of S.|all MS |essential |short-medium |Research institutions,|
| |citellus translocations and releasing of reared |citellus translocations executed. | | | |conservation agencies,|
| |individuals including research on adaptations of S. | | | | |foundations, NGOs |
| |citellus to new environment on release sites. | | | | | |
|20. |Promote survey on effects of the climate change on |Number of surveys on climate change |all MS |medium |short-medium |Research institutions,|
| |habitat availability and ecology of S. citellus. |effects on S. citellus executed. | | | |conservation agencies,|
| | | | | | |foundations, NGOs |
|5. Coordination and funding of the Action Plan implementation |
|21. |Distribute S. citellus EU SAP and ensure its |Number of national action plans or similar|all MS |essential |permanent |European Commission, |
| |implementation through national action plans and |instruments established | | | |national/regional |
| |programmes. | | | | |nature conservation |
| | | | | | |authorities |
|22. |Ensure legal protection of S. citellus core localities |Number of S. citellus core localities |all MS |essential |permanent |European Commission, |
| |through their inclusion into Natura 2000 network. |include in /population covered by Natura | | | |national/regional |
| | |2000 network | | | |nature conservation |
| | | | | | |authorities |
|23. |Establish European S. citellus advisory/working group |European S. citellus advisory/working |all MS |high |short-medium |European Commission, |
| |based on the European Ground Squirrel Meeting platform,|group functional | | | |national/regional |
| |which may supervise EU SAP implementation and will be a| | | | |nature conservation |
| |partner for governments, authorities and stakeholders | | | | |authorities |
| |in EU SAP implementation. | | | | | |
|24. |Prepare and implement S. citellus specific |Number of ha included under specific AES, |all MS |essential |permanent |Conservation agencies,|
| |agri-environmental schemes (AES). Ensure compatibility |population number included under specific | | | |site managers, land |
| |of other AES implemented on S. citellus localities. |AES | | | |owners and users |
|25. |Identify appropriate funding resources for the actions |Proposal for financing of S. citellus SAP/|all MS |high |short-medium |European Commission, |
| |outlined in the SAP and inform all potential |analysis of funding possibilities | | | |national/regional |
| |beneficiaries. Systemic solution for SAP funding. |developed and adopted by Habitats | | | |nature conservation |
| | |Committee | | | |authorities, S. |
| | | | | | |citellus working group|
|6. Public awareness, education and information |
|26. |Promote S. citellus as flagship species and implement |Awareness raising campaign on stakeholders|all MS |high |permanent |National/regional |
| |awareness raising campaign targeted on both |and general public implemented | | | |nature conservation |
| |stakeholders and general public. | | | | |agencies, NGOs |
|27. |Implement awareness raising campaign for farmers to |Awareness raising campaign on farmers and |all MS |high |permanent |National/regional |
| |reduce chemical inputs close to S. citellus colonies. |chemicals implemented | | | |nature conservation |
| | | | | | |agencies, NGOs |
|28. |Implement awareness raising campaign among wine and |Awareness raising campaign on wine and |all MS |high |permanent |National/regional |
| |fruit producers on habitat requirements and ecology of |fruit producers implemented | | | |nature conservation |
| |S. citellus and possibilities for its conservations in | | | | |agencies, NGOs |
| |vineyards and orchards. | | | | | |
3.4 Monitoring and review
This plan should be reviewed, at the latest, ten years after publication (2023). Nevertheless, a continuous review of data on the species should allow for adjustments and adaptations in areas where the Plan would been found ineffective or outdated.
3.5 Other species and habitats that may benefit from the SAP
From keeping the population of Spermophilus citellus in a favourable conservation status, many other species of conservation interest will benefit. S. citellus represents an important prey for many predators - birds of prey such as the Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca, Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos, Lesser Spotted Eagle Aquila pomarina, Saker Falcon Falco cherrug, Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus and other raptors; small carnivores such as Steppe Polecat Mustela eversmanii, Marbled Polecat Vormela peregusna and possibly even reptiles such as Four-lined Snake Elaphe quatuorlineata. Other species sharing the same habitat may also benefit from the conservation of S. citellus and its habitats such as Romanian Hamster Mesocricetus newtoni, European Hamster Cricetus cricetus, Grey Hamster Cricetulus migratorius, invertebrate species e.g. Stenobothrus eurasius, Eresus cinnaberinus, Xysticus marmoratus, Sisyphus schaefferi, Plagiolepis vindobonensis, Zygaena laeta, many species of gossamer-winged butterflies Lycaenidae, bees Apidae, etc. Some species are directly dependent on S. cittelus occurrence, such as the rare coprophagous (dung) beetles Ontophagus vitulus, Aphodius citellorum feeding on excrements of S. citellus. Old burrows of S. citellus serve as a refuge for Green Toad Bufo viridis and perhaps also Adder Vipera berus, the Hungarian Meadow Viper Vipera ursinii rakosiensis, smooth snake Coronella austriaca or other amphibians and reptiles. Also many plant species can benefit from the protection of S. citellus. For instance Gentiana cruciata, Stachys germanica, Inula conyza and many other.
Keeping the habitat of S. citellus in a good condition may also help to protect several priority natural habitats of Community importance listed in the Annex I of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EC – such as 6110* Rupicolous calcareous or basophilic grasslands of the Alysso-Sedion albi, 6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) (* important orchid sites), 6240* Sub-Pannonic steppic grasslands, 6250 * Pannonic loess steppic grasslands, 6260* Pannonic sand steppes - the habitats which similarly as S. citellus benefit from regular grazing of domestic animals (mainly sheep and goats). Moreover, since S. citellus feeds on shoots of Solanum elaeagnifolium increased populations may regulate the spread of this invasive plant species in natural habitats (Youlatos in litt).
References:
Ambros M., 1998: Poznámky k rozšíreniu a výskytu sysľa pasienkového (Spermophilus citellus Linnaeus, 1758) na Slovensku a perspektívy jeho ochrany. pp.: 133–142. In: Urban P. (ed.): Výskum a ochrana cicavcov na Slovensku III. Zborník referátov z konferencie, Zvolen 10.–11. 10. 1997. Slovenská agentúra životného prostredia, Banská Bystrica, 156 pp. (in Slovak).
Ambros M., 2008: Stav poznania rozšírenia sysľa pasienkového (Spermophilus citellus) na Slovensku v rokoch 1996 až 2008. Lynx n.s., Praha, 39, 2: 219-233 (in Slovak).
Ambros M., Hapl E., 2008: Výsledky transferu sysľa pasienkového (Spermophilus citellus) z letiska v Bratislave na vybrané lokality na západnom Slovensku., pp: 72-85. In: Adamec M., Urban P. & Adamcová M. (eds.), Výskum a ochrana cicavcov na Slovensku 8. Zborník referátov z konferencie (Zvolen 12.-13.10.2007), Banská Bystrica, 248 p (in Slovak).
Anděra M., Červený J., 2003: Červený seznam savců České republiky [The Red List of Mammals of
the Czech Republic]. Příroda, 22: 121–129 (in Czech, with summaries in English and German).
Anděra M., Hanzal V., 1995: Projekt “Sysel”. Podúkol A: Mapování výskytu sysla obecného (Spermophilus citellus) na území České republiky. Zpráva o řešení I. a II. etapy, 1994-1995. AOPK ČR Prague, 41 pp (in Czech).
Andjus, R.K., Živadinović D., Marjanović M., 2000: Hypometabolism and longevity: a 9-year study in laboratory-born ground squirrels. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part B 126: S1-S108.
Aschauer A, Hoffmann I.E., Millesi E., 2006: Endocrine profiles and reproductive output in European ground squirrels after unilateral ovariectomy. Animal Reproduction Science 92, 392–400.
Baláž I., Jančová A., & Ambros M., 2008: Reštitúcia sysľa pasienkového (Spermophilus citellus) na Slovensku. Lynx n.s., Praha, 39, 2: 235-240 (in Slovak).
Bashta A.T., Potish L., 2007: Mammals of the Transcarpathian Region (Ukraine). Spermophilus citellus (Linnaeus, 1766). Lviv: 106–107.
Brinkmann M., 1951: Über die Zieselkolonien in Oberschlesien. Bonner Zoologische Beiträge 3-4: 191-216 (in German).
Coroiu C., Kryštufek B., Vohralík V., Zagorodnyuk I., 2008: Spermophilus citellus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.1. . Downloaded on 30th August 2012. ()
Cyprich D., 1986: Rozšírenie a revízia špecifických bĺch (Siphonaptera) sysľa obyčajného (Citellus citellus L.) s dôrazom na územie Slovenska, Ctenophtalmus orientalis (WAGNER, 1898). Acta Facultatis Rerum Naturalium Universitatis Comenianae, Zoologia , 12: 3-21. (in Slovak).
Ćirović D., Ćosić N., Penezić A., 2008: Population monitoring of the European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) in Serbia. Lynx n.s. - 39(2): 343-344.
Ćosić N., Říčanová Š., Bryja J., Penezić A., 2013: Do rivers and human-induced habitat fragmentation affect genetic diversity and population structure of the European ground squirrel at the edge of its Pannonian range? Conservation Genetics February 2013. Abstract available at:
Danila I., 1984: La composition de la nourriture de nature végétale chez la spermophile (Citellus citellus L.) en Roumanie. Travaux du Museum d’histoire naturelle “Grigore Antipa”, 25 : 347-360 (in French, with an abstract in English).
Danila I., 1989: Food of animal nature in the ground squirrel (Citellus citellus L.) in Romania. Analele stiintifice ale Universitatii “Al. I. Cuza” dis Iasi, Ser. II, 35:68-70.
Enzinger K., Walder Ch., Gross M., Berg H-M., Moser D., Herzig B., 2006: Vorkommen und Schutz des Ziesels (Spermophilus citellus) in Niederösterreich. Final project report. Lower Austrian League of Nature Conservation (Naturschutzbund NÖ). 125 pp. (in German)
Feiler A., 1988: Über das ehemalige Zieselvorkommen in der DDR (Rodentia, Sciuridae, Spermophilus citellus L. 1766). Rudolfstädter Naturhistorischen Schriften, 1: 115–118. (in German)
Fraguedakis-Tsolis S.E., 1977: An immunological study of the Ground squirrel Citellus citellus in Greece. Mammalia 41: 62-66.
Fraguedakis-Tsolis S.E., Ondrias J.C., 1985: Geographic variation of the ground squirrel Citellus citellus (Mammalia: Rodentia) in Greece with a description of a new subspecies. Säugetierkundliche Mitteilungen, 32: 185-198.
Gedeon C. I., Markó G., Németh I., Nyitrai V., Altbäcker V., 2010: Nest material selection affects nest insulation quality for the European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus). Journal of Mammalogy: June 2010, Vol. 91, No. 3, pp. 636-641.
Gedeon C. I., Váczi O., Koósz B., Altbäcker V., 2011: Morning release into artificial burrows with retention caps facilitates success of European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) translocations. Eur J Wildl Res. 57 (5): 1101-1105.
Gedeon C. I., Boross G., Németh A., Altbäcker V., 2011: Release site manipulation to favour European ground squirrel Spermophilus citellus translocations: translocation and habitat manipulation. Wildl. Biol. 17: 97-104.
Genov T. 1984. Helminths of insectivores and rodents in Bulgaria. Sofia: Publishing House of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 348 pp. (in Bulgarian).
Golemansky V., Koshev Y., 2007: Coccidian parasites (Eucoccidia: Eimeriidae) of European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus L., 1766) (Rodentia: Sciuridae) from Bulgaria. – Acta Zoologica Bulgarica, 59 (1): 81-85.
Golemansky V., Koshev Y., 2009: Systematic and ecological survey on coccidians (Apicomplexa: Eucoccidida) in European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus L.) (Rodentia: Sciuridae) from Bulgaria. – Acta Zoologica Bulgarica, 61 (2): 141-148.
Gross M., Berg H.-M., Walder Ch., 2006: Aktionsplan Ziesel. Naturschutzbund NÖ. noe.naturschutzbund.at. (in German).
Grulich I., 1960: Sysel obecný Citellus citellus L. v ČSSR. Práce Brněnské základny ČSAV, 32(11): 473-563 (in Czech, with a summary in English).
Haberl W., Petkovski S., Hoffmann I.E., 2012: Distribution and assessment of endangered European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus gradojevici) populations in south-eastern Macedonia (FYROM). Oral presentation abstract. IV. European Ground Squirrel Meeting. Polish Society for Nature Conservation Salamandra, Poland: 15.
Hapl E., Ambros M., Olekšák M., Adamec M., 2006: Reštitúcia sysla pasienkového (Spermohilus citellus) v podmienkach Slovenska. Metodická príručka, Štátna ochrana prírody SR, Banská Bystrica, 40 pp (in Slovak).
Harrison, R. G., Bogdanowicz S. M., Hoffmann R. S., Yensen E., Sherman P. W., 2003: Phylogeny and evolutionary history of the ground squirrels (Rodentia: Marmotinae). Journal of Mammalian Evolution 10:249-275.
Hauer S., Ansorge H., Zöphel U., 2009: Atlas der Säugetiere Sachsens. Sächsischen Landesamt für Umwelt, Landwirtschaft und Geologie, Dresden, 416 pp. (in German).
Hegyeli Z., Nagy A., Daróczi S.J., Kecskés A., Latková H., 2012: Current distribution and status of the European ground squirrel in Romania. Oral presentation abstract. IV. European Ground Squirrel Meeting. Polish Society for Nature Conservation Salamandra, Poland: 14.
Heither H., Blomenkamp S., 2012: European Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) conservation: a potential distribution approach. Bachelor thesis, Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Helgen K.M., Cole R.F., Helgen L.E., Wilson D.E. 2009: Generic Revision in the Holarctic Ground Squirrel Genus Spermophilus. J. Mammal. 90: 270–305.
Hershkovitz P., 1949: Status of names credited to Oken (1816): Journal of Mammalogy 30:289–301.
Herzig-Straschil B., 1976: Nahrung und Nahrungserwerb des Ziesels. Acta Theriol. 21, 131-139.
Herzig-Straschil B., 2007: Zieselschutz – Erhaltung der notwendigen landestypischen Natur- und Kulturlandschaft . Nöhrer Verlag, Wolfau. 90 pp. ISBN978-3-902632-04-3
Hoffmann I.E., 2002: Wiener Arten- und Lebensraumschutzprogramm Netzwerk Natur,Grundlagenerhebung zum Artenschutzprojekt Ziesel. MA22-3827/2002. Vienna
Hoffmann I.E., 2005: Wiener Arten- und Lebensraumschutzprogramm Netzwerk Natur,Grundlagenerhebung zum Artenschutzprojekt Ziesel. MA22-1691/2005. Vienna
Hoffmann I.E., 2011: Artenkartierung Europäisches Ziesel und Heldhamster in Wien 21 – Heeresspital und Umgebung östlich Brünner Straße. MA22 – 1422/2010. Vienna
Hoffmann I.E., Millesi, E., Brenner, M., 2012: European ground squirrels on land zoned for urbanisation: mediating conflicting demands of conservation, public interest and construction industry. Oral presentation, IV. European Ground Squirrel Meeting. Polish Society for Nature Conservation „Salamandra”, Poland, abstract:16.
Hoffmann I.E., Millesi E., Huber S., Everts L. G., Dittami J.P., 2003: Population dynamics of European ground squirrels (Spermophilus citellus) in a suburban area. Journal of Mammalogy 84:615–626.
Hoffmann I.E., Muck E., Millesi E., 2004: Why males incur a greater predation risk than females in juvenile European sousliks (Spermophilus citellus). Lutra 47:85–94.
Hoffmann I. E., Turrini T., Brenner M., 2008: Do European Ground Squirrels (Spermophilus citellus) in Austria adjust their life history to anthropogenic influence?. Lynx, n.s., 39 (2), 241-250.
Huber S., 1996: Lebensraumnutzung, Verhalten und ihre Bedeutung für die Fortpflanzungsbiologie beim Europäischen Ziesel (Spermophilus citellus citellus). Ph.D. thesis. University of Vienna (in German with English summary).
Huber S., Hoffmann I. E., Millesi E., Dittami J., Arnold W., 2001: Explaining the seasonal decline in litter size in European ground squirrels. Ecography 24, 205 – 211.
Huber S., Millesi E., Dittami J., 2002: Paternal effort and its relation to mating success in the European ground squirrel. Animal Behaviour 63, 157 – 164.
Hulová Š., 2001: Rozšíření a biotop sysla obecného (Spermophilus citellus) v současných podmínkách na území Čech. Bakalářská práce, Biologická fakulta JČU, České Budějovice, 29 pp (in Czech)
Hulová Š., Sedláček F., 2008: Population genetic structure of the European Ground squirrel in the Czech Republic. Conservation Genetics 9:615-625.
Hut R.A., Scharff A., 1998: Endoscopic observations on tunnel blocking behaviour in the European ground squirrel. Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 63: 377-380.
Jacobi A., 1902: Der Ziesel in Deutschland. Arbeiten aus der Biologischen Abteilung für Land- und Forstwirtschaft am Kaiserlichen Gesundheitsamte, 2(4): 506–511.
Janderková J., Matějů J., Schnitzerová P., Petruš J., Sedláček J., Uhlíková J., 2011: Soil characteristics at Spermophilus citellus localities in the Czech Republic (Rodentia, Sciuridae). Lynx n. s. (Praha), 42: 99-111.
Kepel A., Kala B., 2007: Krajowy plan zarządzania gatunkiem – suseł moręgowany (Spermophilus citellus). Ministerstwo Środowiska, Warszawa: 36 pp.
Kis J., Váczi O., Katona K., Altbacker V., 1998: A növényzet magasságának hatása a cinegési ürgék élőhelyválasztására. [The effect of vegetation height on the density of European ground squirrels (Spermophilus citellus) in a Hungarian reintroduced population.] TermészetvédelmKi özlemények7 : 117-123. (In Hungarian with English summary).
Kończak, J., Wojtaszyn G., Hebda G., 2012: Conservation of the European ground squirrel as a chance for rare species of plants and animals. Poster, IV EGSM, Poland.
Koshev Y. 2008. Distribution and status of European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) in Bulgaria. – Lynx (Praha), n.s., 39 (2): 251-261.
Koshev Y. 2009. Distribution, isolation and recent status of European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus L.) in Pazardzhik district, Bulgaria. – Annual of Shumen University “Konstantin Preslavsky”, Shumen, Faculty of Natural Science, Vol. XIX B6: 97-109.
Koshev Y., Kocheva M., 2007: Environmental factors and distribution of European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) in Bulgaria. Journal "Ecology. & Safety. International Scientific Publications", 1: 276-287.
Koósz, B. 2002. Food choice of the European ground squirrel in three habitats treated by different ways., University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary (In Hungarian with English summary).
Kratochvíl J., 1964: K poznání teritorií sysla obecného (Citellus citellus). Zoologické listy, 13: 99-106 (in Czech, with a summary in German).
Kryštufek B., 1993: European Sousliks (Spermophilus citellus, Rodentia, Mammalia) of Macedonia. Scopolia, 30: 1-39.
Kryštufek B., 1996: Phenetic variation in the European souslik, Spermophilus citellus (Mammalia: Rodentia). Bonner zoologische Beiträge, 46: 93-109.
Kryštufek B., 1999: Spermophilus citellus. In: A. J. Mitchell-Jones, G. Amori, W. Bogdanowicz, B. Kryštufek, P. J. H. Reijnders, F. Spitzenberger, M. Stubbe, J. B. M. Thissen, V. Vohralík and J. Zima (eds), The Atlas of European Mammals, pp. 190–191. Academic Press, London, UK.
Kryštufek B., Bryja J., Bužan E. V., 2009: Mitochondrial phylogeography of the European ground squirrel, Spermophilus citellus, yields evidence on refugia for steppic taxa in the southern Balkans, Heredity 103 (2009): 129-135.
Kryštufek B., Glasnović P., Petkovski S., 2012: The status of a rare phylogeographic lineage of the Vulnerable European souslik Spermophilus citellus, endemic to central Macedonia. – Oryx, 46 (3): 442-445.
Kryštufek B., Vohralík V., 2005: Mammals of Turkey and Cyprus. Rodentia I: Sciuridae, Dipodidae, Gliridae, Arvicolinae. Knjiznica Annales Majora, Koper, Slovenia.
Leššová H., 2010: Potravní ekologie a prostorová struktura populace sysla obecného na Vyškovsku. Diplomová práca, Přírodovědecká fakulty Univerzity Palackého, Kateda ekologie a životního prostředí, Olomouc, 84 pp.
Markov G., 1957: Izsledvanija varchu systematikata na Citellus citellus L. Izvestija na Zoologičeskija Institut, Sofia, 6: 453-490 (in Bulgarian, with summaries in German and Russian).
Matějů J., 2004: Ekologická studie zbytkové populace sysla obecného (Spermophilus citellus). Unpublished MSc. thesis, Přírodovědecká fakulta UK, Praha, 98 pp (in Czech).
Matějů J., 2008: Ecology and space use in a relict population of the European Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) at the north-western edge of its distribution range. Lynx n. s. (Praha), 39: 263-276.
Matějů J., Nová P., Uhlíková J., Hulová Š., Cepáková E., 2008: Distribution of the European Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) in the Czech Republic in 2002-2008. Lynx n. s. (Praha), 39: 277-294.
Matějů J., Hulová Š., Nová P., Cepáková E., Marhoul P., Uhlíková J., 2010: Action plan for the European Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) in the Czech Republic. Charles University and Agency for Nature and Landscape Protection of the Czech Republic, Prague: 80 pp.
Matějů J., Říčanová Š., Ambros M., Kala B., Hapl E., Matějů K., 2010: Reintroductions of the European Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) in Central Europe (Rodentia, Sciuridae). Lynx n. s. (Praha), 41: 175-191.
Matějů J., Šašek J., Vojta J., Poláková S., 2011: Vegetation of Spermophilus citellus localities in the Czech Republic (Rodentia, Sciuridae). Lynx n. s. (Praha), 42: 133-143.
Matějů J., Schnitzerová P., 2011: Monitoring sysla obecného (Spermophilus citellus) v ČR v roce 2011 – závěrečná zpráva. AOPK ČR, 10 pp, (in Czech).
Męcziński S., 1985: Czy susel moregowany, Spermophilus citellus Linnaeus, 1766, wystepuje jeszcze w Polsce? Przeglad Zoologiczny, 29: 521–526.
Millesi E., Hoffmann I. E., 2008: Body mass and timing of the ctive season in European Ground Squirrels (Spermophilus citellus) at high and low population density. Lynx, n.s., 39 (2), 305-315.
Millesi E., Huber S., Dittami J. P., Hoffmann I. E., Daan S., 1998: Parameters of mating effort and success in male European Ground Squirrels Spermophilus citellus Ethology 104, 298-313.
Millesi E., Strijkstra A. M., Hoffmann I. E., Dittami J. P., Daan S., 1999a: Sex and age differences in mass, morphology and annual cycle in European ground squirrels, Spermophilus citellus. Journal of Mammalogy 80:218–231.
Millesi E., Huber S., Everts L. G., Dittami J. P., 1999b: Reproductive decisions in female European ground squirrels: factors affecting reproductive output and maternal investment. Ethology 105:163–175.
Mrlíková Z., 1999: Etoekologické a sociobiologické vztahy v populaci sysla obecného (Spermohilus citellus L.) na lokalite Mimoň – hřebčín v letech 1996 a 1997. Sborník Bezděz, 8: 227 – 241 (in Czech).
Németh I., 2010: Factors Affecting the Hibernation in European Ground Squirrel Spermophilus citellus. Physiological, Behavioral and Ecological Aspects. Készült az Eötvös Loránd Tudomány Egyetem. PhD thesis: 133 pp.
Németh, I., Nyitrai V., Altbäcker V., 2009: Ambient temperature and annual timing affect torpor bouts and euthermic phases of hibernating European ground squirrels (Spermophilus citellus). Can. J. Zool. 87(3), 204-210.
Ondrias J.C., 1966: The taxonomy and geographical distribution of the rodents of Greece. Säugetierkundliche Mitteilungen, 14 (Sonderheft): 1-136.
Özkurt Ş., Yigit N., Colak E., Sözen M., Gharkheloo M. M., 2005 : Observations on the ecology, reproduction and behavior of Spermophilus Bennet, 1835 (Mammalia: Rodentia) in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 29: 91-99.
Paspalev G., Peshev Tz., 1957: Prinos varhu ecologiata na Citellus citellus L. v Bulgaria [Beitrag zur Okologie des Citellus citellus L. in Bulgarien]. Izv. Poch. Inst., BAS, 4:175-189. (in Bulgarian with summary in German and Russian).
Peshev C., 1955 : Sistematični i biologični izsledvanija varchu Citellus citellus L. v Balgarija. Izvestija na Zoologičeskija Institut, Sofia, 4-5 : 277-325 (in Bulgarian, with summaries in Russian and English).
Profus P., 2001: Spermophilus citellus (Linné, 1766) Suseł moręgowany [W:] Z. Głowaciński (red). Polska Czerwona Księga Zwierząt. Kręgowce. PWRiL. Warszawa: 62–64.
Ružić A., 1978: Citellus citellus (Linnaeus, 1766) – Der oder das Europäische Ziesel. Pp. 123-144. In: Niethammer J. & Krapp F. (eds.): Handbuch der Säugetiere Europas. Band 1. Rodentia I (Sciuridae, Castoridae, Gliridae, Muridae). Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft, Wiesbaden, 476 pp.
Sládek J., 1963: K výškovému rozšíreniu sysla obyčajného (Citellus citellus L.) na Slovensku. Lynx, n. s., 2: 17-19 (in Slovak, with a summary in German).
Spitzenberger F., 2001: Die Säugetierfauna Österreichs. Grüne Reihe des BMLFUW Band 13, 895 pp.
Spitzenberger F., 2005: Rote Liste der Säugetiere Österreichs. 45 -62 in: Rote Listen gefährdeter Tiere Österreichs. Grüne Reihe des BMLFUW Band 14/1, 406 pp.
Stefanov V. 2012 (in press). European souslik, Spermophilus citellus Linnaeus 1766. In: Golemansky V. (Ed): Red data book of the Republic of Bulgaria. Volume – 2: Animals. Downloaded on 06 July 2012 from: .
Stefanov V., Georgiev B., Genov T., Chipev N., 2001: New data on the species composition and distribution of heminth parasites of Spermophilus citellus L. (Rodentia, Sciuridae) in Bulgaria. In: Program and abstracts of Sixth National Conference of Parasitology, 5-7.10.2001, Sofia, Bulgaria, Sofia-Moskva Pensoft Publishers, 31.
Stefanov V., Markova E. 2009: Distribution and current status of the European souslik (Spermophilus citellus L.) in Sofia valley and the adjacent areas. – Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment, 23 (2) Special edition: 381- 384.
Straka F., 1961: Prinos varhu bioekologijata i borbata s evropejskija laluger (Citellus citellus L.) v Balgarija. Izvestija na centralnija naučnoizsledovatelski institut za zaščita na rastenijata, Sofia, 1: 25-63. (in Bulgarian, with summaries in German and Russian).
Straschil B., 1972: Citellus citellus L. (Europäisches Ziesel) in Österreich (Zur Biologie und Ökologie eines terrestrischen Säugetieres an der Grenze seines Verbreitungsgebietes). Diss. Univ. Wien. 159 pp.
Strauss A., Hoffmann I. E., Millesi E., 2007: Effects of nutritional factors on juvenile development in male European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus). Mammalian Biology 72:354-363.
Strijkstra A.M., 1999: Causes and Consequences of Periodic Euthermy during Hibernation. [W:] A.M. Strijkstra (red.). Periodic Euthermy during Hibernation in the European Ground Squirrel: Causes and Consequences. University of Groningen, Netherlands: 146–148.
Strijkstra A.M., Hut R., Millesi E., 2006: Hibernation energetics in European susliks: negative effects of global warming. 1st European Ground Squirrel Meeting 2006, Felsotarkany, Hungary
Sutherland G.D., Harestad A.S., Price K., Lertzman K. P., 2000: Scaling of natal dispersal distances in terrestrial birds and mammals. Conservation Ecology 4: 16.
Thallwitz, J. 1898: Über das Vorkommen des Ziesels in Sachsen. – Sitz. Ber. Naturw. Ges. ISIS Dresden: 95 – 96.
Truett J.C., Dullum J.A.L.D., Matchett M.R., Owens E., Seery D., 2001: Translocating Prairie dogs: a review. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29, 863-872.
Turrini T. A., Brenner M., Millesi E., Hoffmann I.E., 2008: Home ranges of European Ground Squirrels (Spermophilus citellus) in two habitats exposed to different degrees of human impact. Lynx 39:323-332.
Váczi O., 2005: The effects of abiotic environmental factors on spatio-temporal activity pattern of the European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus). PhD thesis, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest.
Váczi O., Altbäcker V., 1999: Füves repülőterek ürgeállományának felmérése. Természetvédelmi Közlemények, 8: 205-214 (In Hungarian with English summary).
Váczi O., Koósz B., Altbäcker V., 2006: Modified ambient temperature perception affects daily activity patterns in the European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus). Journal of Mammalogy 87, 54-59.
Werth E., 1932: Zur Verbreitung und Geschichte des Ziesels. Arbeiten aus der Biologischen Reichsanstalt für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, 21: 255-267; 637.
Willson, D. E., Reeder, D. M., 2005: Mammal species of the World. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 2142 pp.
Wojtaszyn G., Kończak J., Kepel A., Kala B., 2012: Susł moręgowany. PTOP "Salamandra", Poznań: 111 pp. (in Polish).
Žiak D., Urban P., 2001: Červený (ekosozologický) zoznam cicavcov (Mammalia) Slovenska. pp.: 154–156. In: Baláž D., Marhold K. & Urban P. (eds.): Červený zoznam rastlín a živočíchov Slovenska. Ochrana Prírody, 20, Supplement, 160 pp. (in Slovak).
Živadinović D., Andjus, R.K., 1996: Life span of the European ground squirrel Spermophilus citellus under free-running conditions and entrainment. In: Adaptations to the cold (Geiser F., Hulbert A.J., Nicol S.C. (eds.)). University of New England Press, Armidale, pp 103–108.
ANNEXES
Annex 1 – Map of SCIs where Spermophilus citellus is a target species[8].
[pic]
Annex 2 – List of SCIs where Spermophilus citellus is a target species[9].
Country |Site code |Site name |Site area (ha) |Population |Conservation |Isolation |Global Importance |Resident |Map code | |AUSTRIA |AT1110137 |Neusiedler See – Nordöstliches Leithagebirge |57124,56 |B |B |B |A |C | | | |AT1106218 |Siegendorfer Pußta und Heide |27,86 |C |C |B |C |R | | | |AT1103112 |Parndorfer Heide |7,38 |C |B |B |B |C | | | |AT1220000 |Feuchte Ebene-Leithaauen |5086,32 |C |A |B |B |R | | | |AT1216000 |Tullnerfelder Donau-Auen |17533,32 |D | | | |P | | | |AT1215000 |Bisamberg |360,5 |C |C |C |C |P | | | |AT1214000 |Hundsheimer Berge |2135,10 |C |B |B |B |P | | | |AT1213000 |Pannonische Sanddünen |2523,63 |C |B |B |B |P | | | |AT1212A00 |Nordöstliche Randalpen: Hohe Wand-Schneeberg-Rax |64084,57 |C |C |B |B |R | | | |AT1211A00 |Wienerwald-Thermenregion |52168,59 |B |C |B |A |R | | | |AT1202000 |March-Thaya-Auen |8879,95 |C |C |B |C |R | | | |AT1204000 |Donau-Auen östlich von Wien |9516,26 |C |C |B |C |R | | | |AT1205A00 |Wachau |18063,42 |C |B |B |B |R | | | |AT1206A00 |Weinviertler Klippenzone |3144,97 |C |C |B |C |R | | | |AT1207A00 |Kamp- und Kremstal |14495,27 |B |B |B |B |P | | | |AT1209A00 |Westliches Weinviertel |2982,32 |B |B |B |C |R | | | |AT1210A00 |Steinfeld |3018,33 |B |B |B |B | | | | |AT1304000 |Bisamberg (Wiener Teil) |340 |B |B |B |B |C | | |BULGARIA |BG0000102 |Dolinata na reka Batova |18459,24 |C |B |C |B |C | | | |BG0000103 |Galata |1623,72 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000104 |Provadiysko - Royaksko plato |50158,59 |C |B |C |B |C | | | |BG0000106 |Harsovska reka |36756,7 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000107 |Suha reka |62528,73 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000113 |Vitosha |27102,11 |C |B |C |A |V | | | |BG0000116 |Kamchia |12919,94 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000117 |Kotlenska planina |69058,92 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000119 |Trite bratya |1021,99 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000130 |Kraymorska Dobrudzha |6520,74 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000132 |Pobitite kamani |231,35 |C |A |C |C |C | | | |BG0000133 |Kamchiyska i Emenska planina |63678,47 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000136 |Reka Gorna Luda Kamchia |2276,93 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000137 |Reka Dolna Luda Kamchia |2460,7 |C |B |C |B |V | | | |BG0000138 |Kamenitsa |1455,71 |C |B |C |B |C | | | |BG0000139 |Luda Kamchia |6111,06 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000141 |Reka Kamchia |158,84 |D | | | |V | | | |BG0000151 |Aytoska planina |29379,4 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000154 |Ezero Durankulak |5050,79 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000164 |Sinite kamani |12288,91 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000166 |Vrachanski Balkan |35981,25 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000168 |Ludogorie |59447,46 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000169 |Ludogorie - Srebarna |5223,8 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000171 |Ludogorie - Boblata |4836,45 |C |A |C |C |C | | | |BG0000173 |Ostrovche |6749,19 |C |B |C |B |V | | | |BG0000180 |Boblata |3216,87 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000181 |Reka Vit |5717,17 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000182 |Orsoya |2949,41 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000190 |Vitata stena |2630,19 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000192 |Reka Tundzha 1 |9503 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000194 |Reka Chaya |650,62 |C |B |C |B |V | | | |BG0000195 |Reka Tundzha 2 |5953,32 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000196 |Reka Mochuritsa |8702,83 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000198 |Sredetska reka |707,78 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000199 |Tsibar |2971,73 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000205 |Straldzha |882,02 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000206 |Sadievo |516,67 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000211 |Tvardishka planina |38649,53 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000212 |Sakar |132117,76 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000213 |Tarnovski visochini |4434,61 |C |B |C |B |V | | | |BG0000216 |Emen |490,37 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000217 |Zhdreloto na reka Tundzha |7856,99 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000218 |Derventski vazvishenia 1 |38696,5 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000219 |Derventski vazvishenia 2 |55036,13 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000230 |Fakiyska reka |4104,72 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000233 |Studena reka |5301,57 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000239 |Obnova - Karaman dol |10750,81 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000240 |Studenets |27946,08 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000241 |Srebarna |1448,22 |D | | | |R | | | |BG0000242 |Zaliv Chengene skele |190,02 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000247 |Nikopolsko plato |18503,18 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000254 |Besaparski vazvishenia |6743,06 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000255 |Gradinska gora |439,9 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000261 |Yazovir Koprinka |876,33 |C |B |C |C |C | | | |BG0000263 |Skalsko |2189,47 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000270 |Atanasovsko ezero |7210,02 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000275 |Yazovir Stamboliyski |9355,55 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000279 |Stara reka |146,17 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000280 |Zlatarishka reka |67,69 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000282 |Dryanovska reka |183,16 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000287 |Merichlerska reka |509,9 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000289 |Trilistnik |616,95 |C |B |C |A |V | | | |BG0000298 |Konyavska planina |9671,95 |C |B |A |A |R | | | |BG0000322 |Dragoman |21357,18 |C |B |C |A |V | | | |BG0000334 |Ostrov |3918,6 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000335 |Karaboaz |13659,86 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000336 |Zlatia |3194,78 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000340 |Tsar Petrovo |1908,74 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000365 |Ovchi halmove |1309,66 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000377 |Kalimok - Brashlen |7550,18 |C |B |C |C |R | | | |BG0000382 |Shumensko plato |4490,62 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000396 |Persina |25684,2 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000399 |Bulgarka |23996,75 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000401 |Sveti Iliyski vazvishenia |8464,27 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000402 |Bakadzhitsite |4504,87 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000418 |Kermenski vazvishenia |2107,81 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000420 |Grebenets |9884,53 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000421 |Preslavska planina |14060,01 |C |A |C |C |C | | | |BG0000424 |Reka Vacha - Trakia |550,32 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000425 |Reka Sazliyka |991,77 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000426 |Reka Luda Yana |474,08 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000427 |Reka Ovcharitsa |1163,72 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000429 |Reka Stryama |4078,38 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000432 |Golyama reka |7451,74 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000434 |Banska reka |77,3 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000435 |Reka Kayaliyka |71,4 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000437 |Reka Cherkezitsa |144,75 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000440 |Reka Sokolitsa |141,54 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000441 |Reka Blatnitsa |1079,1 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000442 |Reka Martinka |722,68 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000443 |Reka Omurovska |532,31 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000444 |Reka Pyasachnik |1879,97 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0000494 |Tsentralen Balkan |72021,07 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000495 |Rila |77927,17 |C |B |A |A |C | | | |BG0000497 |Archar |808,65 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000498 |Vidbol |1305,14 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000500 |Voynitsa |3107,14 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000501 |Golyama Kamchia |216,69 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000503 |Reka Lom |1441,13 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000507 |Deleyna |2257,54 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000509 |Tsibritsa |962,68 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000517 |Portitovtsi - Vladimirovo |664,38 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000518 |Vartopski dol |987,42 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000521 |Makresh |2061,25 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000523 |Shishentsi |572,85 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000524 |Orizishteto |475,74 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000528 |Ostrovska step - Vadin |301,29 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000529 |Marten - Ryahovo |1172,74 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000530 |Pozharevo - Garvan |6304,92 |C |A |C |B |R | | | |BG0000569 |Kardam |918,92 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000570 |Izvorovo - Kraishte |1082,27 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000572 |Rositsa - Loznitsa |1811,98 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000573 |Kompleks Kaliakra |44128,26 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000574 |Aheloy - Ravda - Nesebar |3928,38 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000578 |Reka Maritsa |14693,1 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000608 |Lomovete |32488,93 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000609 |Reka Rositsa |1440,86 |C |B |C |B |C | | | |BG0000610 |Reka Yantra |13900,41 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000611 |Yazovir Gorni Dabnik |2539,29 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000612 |Reka Blyagornitsa |1522,94 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0000613 |Reka Iskar |9458 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000614 |Reka Ogosta |1365,74 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000615 |Devetashko plato |14997,07 |C |A |C |A |C | | | |BG0000616 |Mikre |15447,16 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000620 |Pomorie |2085,15 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0000621 |Ezero Shabla - Ezerets |2623,53 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0000627 |Konunski dol |779,06 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0000628 |Chirpanski vazvishenia |12321,42 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0001004 |Emine - Irakli |11282,8 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |BG0001007 |Strandzha |118225,03 |C |B |C |A |V | | | |BG0001014 |Karlukovo |28841,93 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0001030 |Rodopi - Zapadni |272851,41 |D | | | |V | | | |BG0001031 |Rodopi - Sredni |155107,68 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0001032 |Rodopi - Iztochni |217446,89 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0001033 |Brestovitsa |2670,58 |C |B |C |B |V | | | |BG0001034 |Ostar kamak |15994,31 |C |B |C |B |R | | | |BG0001036 |Balgarski izvor |2618,99 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0001037 |Pastrina |3551,58 |C |B |C |A |R | | | |BG0001039 |Popintsi |20906,72 |C |B |C |B |V | | | |BG0001040 |Zapadna Stara planina i Predbalkan |219753,26 |C |B |B |A |R | | | |BG0001043 |Etropole - Baylovo |27448,25 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0001375 |Ostritsa |4429,5 |D | | | |P | | | |BG0001389 |Sredna gora |110373,64 |C |B |C |A |C | | | |BG0001493 |Tsentralen Balkan - bufer |138363,82 |C |B |C |A |C | | |CZECH REPUBLIC |CZ0113774 |Praha - Letnany |75,17 |A |B |C |A |400 | | | |CZ0213078 |Trhovky |17,7 |B |B |C |B |100 | | | |CZ0213776 |Bezdecin |81,18 |B |B |C |B |100 | | | |CZ0213796 |Kolin - letiste |22,36 |B |B |C |B |50 | | | |CZ0413188 |Olsova vrata |46,13 |A |B |B |A |P | | | |CZ0424033 |Rana - Hradek |168,94 |B |B |B |A |70-100 | | | |CZ0623018 |Milotice - letiste |26,96 |A |B |C |A |101-250i | | | |CZ0623370 |Letiste Marchanice |20,88 |A |A |C |A |300 | | |GREECE |GR1110002 |DASOS DADIAS - SOUFLI |41111,58 |A |A |A |A |P | | | |GR1110003 |TREIS VRYSES |9912,62 |C |A |A |A |R | | | |GR1110005 |VOUNA EVROU |42372,5 |C |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1110006 |DELTA EVROU |12557,92 |B |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1110007 |DELTA EVROU KAI DYTIKOS VRACHIONAS |9857,56 |B |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1120003 |OROS CHAINTOU - KOULA KAI GYRO KORYFES |3491,99 |C |A |A |A |R | | | |GR1210001 |OROS VERMIO |25555,14 |C |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1210002 |STENA ALIAKMONA |3623,73 |B |C |A |B |P | | | |GR1220002 |DELTA AXIOU - LOUDIA - ALIAKMONA - EVRYTERI PERIOCHI - AXIOUPOLI |33676,35 |B |C |A |B |P | | | |GR1220009 |LIMNES KORONEIAS - VOLVIS, STENA RENTINAS KAI EVRYTERI PERIOCHI |161631,33 |C |B |C |C |R | | | |GR1220010 |DELTA AXIOU - LOUDIA - ALIAKMONA - ALYKI KITROUS |29647,09 |A |C |A |A |P | | | |GR1230005 |PERIOCHI ELOUS ARTZAN |1717,78 | | | | |P | | | |GR1240004 |LIMNI AGRA |1249,75 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1240006 |LIMNI KAI FRAGMA AGRA |1385,76 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1250001 |OROS OLYMPOS |19139,59 |C |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1250002 |PIERIA ORI |16640,29 |C |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1250004 |ALYKI KITROUS - EVRYTERI PERIOCHI |1440,56 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1260001 |LIMNI KERKINI - KROUSIA - KORYFES OROUS BELES, ANGISTRO - CHAROPO |78303,96 |C |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1260004 |KORYFES OROUS MENOIKION - OROS KOUSKOURAS - YPSOMA |23288,69 |C |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1260005 |KORYFES OROUS ORVILOS |4871,04 |D | | | |R | | | |GR1260007 |ORI VRONTOUS - LAILIAS - EPIMIKES |6799,47 |C |B |A |B |R | | | |GR1260009 |KOILADA TIMIOU PRODROMOU-MENOIKION |29650,86 |D | | | |P | | | |GR1320001 |LIMNI KASTORIAS |4732,5 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1320002 |KORYFES OROUS GRAMMOS |34357,03 |C |A |A |A |R | | | |GR1330001 |OROS VOURINOS (KORYFI ASPROVOUNI) |764,05 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1340003 |ORI VARNOUNTA |6076,62 |C |A |A |A |R | | | |GR1340004 |LIMNES VEGORITIDA - PETRON |12569,02 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1340005 |LIMNES CHEIMADITIDA - ZAZARI |4064,39 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1340006 |OROS VERNON - KORYFI VITSI |8202,13 |C |A |A |A |R | | | |GR1340008 |LIMNES ChEIMADITIDA KAI ZAZARI |5193,17 |C |C |A |C |R | | | |GR1420001 |KATO OLYMPOS - KALLIPEFKI |12437,76 |D | | | |P | | |HUNGARY |HUAN10001 |Aggteleki-karszt |23619,6 |D | | | |R | | | |HUAN10002 |Putnoki-dombság |7115,98 |C |C |C |C |R | | | |HUAN20001 |Aggteleki-karszt és peremterületei |23103,73 |D | | | |R | | | |HUAN20002 |Rakaca-völgy és oldalvölgyei |2082,23 |C |B |C |C |V | | | |HUAN20004 |Hernád-völgy és Sajóládi-erdõ |5038,17 |C |C |C |B |R | | | |HUBF20001 |Keleti-Bakony |22650,16 |C |A |C |A |5000 | | | |HUBF20002 |Papod és Miklád |7734,76 |C |B |B |B |1000 | | | |HUBF20003 |Kab-hegy |8075,84 |B |A |C |A |9000 | | | |HUBF20006 |Tihanyi-félsziget |773,72 |D | | | |300 | | | |HUBF20008 |Csatár-hegy és Miklós Pál hegy |1607,02 |C |B |C |B |500 | | | |HUBF20012 |Sásdi-rét |393,45 |D | | | |1000-2000 | | | |HUBF20017 |Kádártai dolomitmezõk |793,45 |D | | | |500 | | | |HUBF20018 |Megye-hegy |242,83 |D | | | |300 | | | |HUBF20021 |Péti-hegy |363,52 |C |B |C |B |1000 | | | |HUBF20023 |Hajmáskéri Törökcsapás |901,16 |D | | | |500 | | | |HUBF20026 |Tótvázsonyi Bogaras |235,6 |C |B |C |B |1000 | | | |HUBF20031 |Szentkirályszabadja |493,01 |B |A |C |A |15000 | | | |HUBF20033 |Dörögdi-medence |899,96 |D | | | |300 | | | |HUBF30003 |Kis-Balaton |13344,2 |D | | | |250 | | | |HUBN10001 |Bodrogzug–Kopasz-hegy–Taktaköz |19911,88 |D | | | |P | | | |HUBN10002 |Borsodi-sík |36239,85 |D | | | | 100i | | | |SKUEV0784 |Mašianské sysľovisko |19,83 |B |B |B |B |100-200i | | |
Legend (taken from EU Standard Data Form)
Population: Size and density of the population of the species present on the site in relation to the populations present within national territory.
A: 100 % ≥ p > 15 %,
B: 15 % ≥ p > 2 %,
C: 2 % ≥ p > 0 %.
Conservation: Degree of conservation of the features of the habitat which are important for the species concerned and possibilities for restoration.
A. conservation excellent:
• elements in an excellent condition, independent of the grading of the possibility of restoration,
B: good conservation
• elements well conserved independent of the grading of the possibility of restoration,
• elements in average or partially degraded condition and easy to restore,
C: average or reduced conservation
• all other combinations.
Isolation: Degree of isolation of the population present on the site in relation to the natural range of the species.
A: population (almost) isolated,
B: population not-isolated, but on margins of area of distribution,
C: population not-isolated within extended distribution range.
Global Importance: Global assessment of the value of the site for conservation of the species concerned.
A: excellent value,
B: good value,
C: significant value.
Resident :
V: very rare
R: Rare
C: Common
P: Present
-----------------------
[1] The EU Species Action Plans are not of a®PPP`PbP¾PÀPBQDQªQ¬QRR~R€RæRèRFSHS”S–SöSøS~T€TêTìTPURU¢U¤UVVrVtVÂVÄV"W$WˆWŠWìWîWLXNX¢X¤XüXþXrYtYxY„YÊYÌYýäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑäÑÀ¬˜¬&h |+hTh |+h°gþ5?CJOJ[2]QJ[3]\?^J[4]aJ h!"”5?CJOJQJ\?^J[5]aJ$h?DÙh?DÙCJaJmHnHsHtH0h?DÙh?DÙC binding nature; species action plans are drafted and implemented at the discretion of Member States.
[6] IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 2008. Spermophilus citellus. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.1 ()
[7] Daphne (2012),
[8] update of the national red list is considered necessary (Váczi in verb.)
[9]
[10] Priority: Essential, High, Medium, Low.
[11] Time scale: Immediate: action should be completed in 1 year; Short: action completed in 3 years; Medium: completed in 5 years; Long: completed in 10 years; Ongoing: currently being implemented and should continue, Permanent: need to be repeated, e.g. monitoring.
[12] Prepared based on Natura 2000 End 2011 Shapefile.
[13] Prepared based on Natura 2000 End 2011 database, except for Austria – data provided by Austrian authorities
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
Related searches
- action plan for employee improvement
- action plan for customer service
- action plan for communication improvement
- action plan for service improvement
- action plan for administrative assistant
- action plan for sales goals
- action plan for quality improvement
- action plan for supervisor improvement
- action plan for customer satisfaction
- action plan for employee
- action plan for employee growth
- corrective action plan for employee