European Red List

of Birds
Compiled by BirdLife International

European Red List

of Birds
Compiled by BirdLife International

Published by the European Commission.

opinion whatsoever on the part of the European Commission or BirdLife International concerning the legal status of any country,

Citation:
Publications of the European Communities.
Design and layout by:

Imre Sebestyn jr. / UNITgraphics.com

Printed by:

Pannnia Nyomda
Fratercula arctica

Picture credits on cover page:

to continue into the future. Ondrej Pelnek

All photographs used in this publication remain the property of the original copyright holder
(see individual captions for details). Photographs should not be reproduced or used in other
contexts without written permission from the copyright holder.
Available from:

to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed

Published by the European Commission.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa
server (http://europa.eu).
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

ISBN: 978-92-79-47450-7
DOI: 10.2779/975810
European Union, 2015
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission
from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial
purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder.
Printed in Hungary.

European Red List of Birds Consortium

iii

Table of contents
Acknowledgements.................................................................................................................................................... 1
Executive summary.................................................................................................................................................... 5
1. Background........................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.1 The European context..................................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 European birds, distribution and threat status................................................................................................. 6
1.3 Objectives of the assessment............................................................................................................................ 9
2. Assessment Methodology.................................................................................................................................. 10
2.1 Global and regional assessment..................................................................................................................... 10
2.2 Data sources.................................................................................................................................................. 10
2.3 Geographic scope.......................................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 Preliminary assessments................................................................................................................................. 11
2.5 Production of population sizes and trends..................................................................................................... 12
3. Results.................................................................................................................................................................. 13
3.1 Threatened status of birds.............................................................................................................................. 13
3.2 Status by taxonomic group............................................................................................................................ 19
3.3 Spatial distribution of species........................................................................................................................ 20
3.4 Major threats to birds in Europe................................................................................................................... 24
3.5 Demographic trends...................................................................................................................................... 25
3.6 Gaps in Knowledge....................................................................................................................................... 26
4. Biodiversity protection in Europe and the EU................................................................................................... 27
4.1 European protection of bird species............................................................................................................... 27
4.2 Natura 2000 network.................................................................................................................................... 28
4.3 Conservation management of birds in the EU............................................................................................... 31
4.4 Extinction risk versus conservation status in the EU...................................................................................... 32
4.5 Red List versus priority for conservation action............................................................................................. 33
5. Recommendations and future work.................................................................................................................... 34
5.1 Policy recommendations............................................................................................................................... 34
5.2 Application of project outputs....................................................................................................................... 35
5.3 Future work.................................................................................................................................................. 35
References................................................................................................................................................................ 36
Appendix 1............................................................................................................................................................... 38
Appendix 2............................................................................................................................................................... 59
Appendix 3............................................................................................................................................................... 60

iv

Introduction
We would like to say we are happy to be introducing the
European Red List of Birds, an exhaustive compendium
of threatened species, but we are not happy. There should
not have to be a Red List. One of the reasons for having
one is to make future Red Lists unnecessary by saving
and protecting the species involved.

3. The psychological and emotional value to humans. As

more work is done on the negative effect of nature
deficit disorder and the positive effects of exposure
to nature even on blood pressure, heart rate, and
white cell count someone may put a value on this
role soon. Meanwhile, we know that birds have been
around for at least 150 million years, and that, for us,
they are symbols of hope and of our connection to
the numinous. Imagine a world without birdsong,
without birdflight, without the return of the birds in
spring. Now calculate the cost of the depression and
hopelessness that would ensue.

But why should WE bother to do that? you might ask.

Here are a few reasons.
1. Obvious economic value. For forest industries, avian
pest control is estimated at billions of dollars annually.
Fruit farmers and crop farmers also benefit: such pests
as codling moths and rats and mice are effectively
controlled by birds. Restoring seabird colonies adds
markedly to the supply of fish, as bird excrement
feeds the phytoplankton necessary for small fish. The
removal of birds from economic systems would have a
catastrophic impact.

Perhaps it is time to rewrite John Donnes famous sermon:

No bird is an island, entire of itself; every bird is a piece
of nature, a part of the ecosystem; if a single species be
extinguished, mankind is the less, as well as if a whole family
were, as well as any manner of thy friends were; any bird
species death diminishes me, because I am involved in the
natural world. And therefore never send to know for whom
the Red List is compiled; it is compiled for thee.

2. Hidden economic value. Many, many bird species replant forests by distributing nuts and seeds, hiding
them in the ground and then failing to collect. Regrowing forests is one of the crucial elements in any
overall carbon-uptake plan; here the role of birds is
essential. The jay and the nutcracker are veteran forestplanters.

First the birds, then us. Unless we pay attention, well be

on the Red List next. Take note.

Margaret Atwood

and Graeme Gibson.

Honourary Presidents, Rare Bird Club,

BirdLife International.

Foreword
This has been achieved through very important collaboration
between Member States authorities, BirdLife partners and other
ornithological experts.

Wild birds, many of which

are migratory, represent an
extraordinary shared natural
heritage of Europeans. Our
continent is home to more
than 530 regularly occurring
wild bird species, with a total
estimated breeding population
of more than two billion pairs.
Millions more pass through on migration to Africa or arrive from
the Arctic or Russia to spend the winter in Europe.

Whereas this new study confirms that over half the bird species
in Europe are secure and not at risk of extinction it also reveals
that 13% of Europes regularly occurring wild bird species are
threatened, a figure comparable to that recorded in 2004. A
further 6% of species are Near Threatened in Europe.
Species that were formerly considered to be of Least Concern but
are now threatened or Near Threatened include the European
Turtle-dove Streptopelia turtur, the Common Kingfisher Alcedo
atthis, the Eurasian Oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus and the
Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis. Many species that were identified
as being in trouble a decade ago have still not improved. Examples
include the Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus, the Aquatic
Warbler Acrocephalus paludicola and the Northern Lapwing
Vanellus vanellus.

As a highly visible and colourful part of our wildlife birds have

long been used as important key indicators of the health of our
natural environment. It is therefore no coincidence that the Birds
Directive was the first major piece of EU environmental law to
address the issue of biodiversity conservation. Europes birds
are also protected under the Bern Convention, the Convention
on Migratory Species and the African Eurasian Waterbird
Agreement. The EU Biodiversity Strategy, which aims to achieve
the political objective of halting the loss of biodiversity and the
degradation of ecosystem services in the EU and restoring them in
so far as feasible by 2020, includes an objective of achieving a
significant improvement in the status of birds in the EU.

Yet there is still important progress to report, giving hope for

the future. This is particularly the case for some of the species
listed in Annex I of the Birds Directive that have been the focus
of targeted conservation measures including the designation of
Special Protection Areas as part of the Natura 2000 network. For
example, while still threatened, the Spanish Imperial Eagle Aquila
adalberti, the Zinos Petrel Pretodroma madeira and the Azores
Bullfinch Pyrrhula murina all have improved in status thanks to
conservation effort. There are also a number of species that were
previously considered threatened in Europe and whose status has
improved to Least Concern, including the Dalmatian Pelican
Pelecanus crispus, the Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca, and the
Great Bustard Otis tarda. Many of these species have benefitted
from EU funded international species action plans and have also
been a priority for funding under the EU LIFE programme.

Good quality monitoring is essential to assess progress towards

meeting these commitments to protect Europes birds, as well
as for other species and habitats. Within the EU there are now
established reporting systems under the Habitats and Birds
Directives. While highlighting important progress in halting
the loss of species and habitats the latest 2015 State of Nature in
the European Union report underlines the serious situation that
nature continues to face in the EU.
The IUCN Red Data lists assess the risk of extinction and as such
are another important and complementary tool to scientifically
assess and communicate the status of species and habitats. Since
2005 the European Commission has been financially supporting
the development of Red Data lists for many taxa, including all
terrestrial vertebrate groups, except birds. During 20122014,
a Commission-funded project led by BirdLife International,
and involving a consortium including the European Bird Census
Council, Wetlands International, IUCN, BTO, Sovon, RSPB,
the Czech Society for Ornithology and BirdLife Europe filled
this important gap.

These scientific findings are a vital input to help evaluate the

effectiveness of legislation and policies for bird protection in
Europe and will underpin future conservation action for birds and
their habitats. They demonstrate that much stronger conservation
efforts, including better integration with agricultural and other
land use policies, will be needed to achieve the target of halting
and reversing the loss of biodiversity in Europe by 2020.
Birds are an important and highly valued part of our natural
heritage. European citizens will therefore want us to succeed in
achieving this ambitious goal.

The European Red List of Birds builds on two earlier valuable

assessments of the population status of all species at European
level the Birds in Europe volumes. For EU Member States the
information in this new publication is for the first time almost
fully based on official reporting under the Birds Directive.

Micheal OBriain
Deputy Head of the Nature Unit
DG Environment
European Commission

vi

Acknowledgements
The European Red List of Birds was overseen by the
European Red List of Birds Consortium Steering
Committee: Ian Burfield (BirdLife International),
Craig Hilton-Taylor (IUCN), Paul Donald (RSPB),
Richard Gregory (RSPB), David Noble (British Trust
for Ornithology, BTO, and the European Bird Census
Council, EBCC), Ruud Foppen (Sovon Vogelonderzoek
Nederland, and EBCC), Petr Voek (Czech Society
for Ornithology, SO, and EBCC) and Szabolcs Nagy
(Wetlands International). Coordination was carried
out by Rob Pople and Christina Ieronymidou from the
European and Central Asian (ECA) Division of BirdLife
International.

and Sarah Harris (BTO) were instrumental in sourcing

photos of all bird species in Europe. Laura Formoy
provided important support for recruitment and human
resources management, Sarah Stokes, Adriana Gawrysiak,
Sarah Jones and Colette Sotrines provided substantial
assistance with financial management of the project, and
Tracy Spraggon provided legal and contracting advice.
Additional support was provided by many other colleagues
at BirdLife, including Gilly Banks, Beverley Childs,
Kandi Lawrence, Irene Lorenzo, Alison Morris and Sue
Patterson. Special thanks go to Angelo Caserta, Director
for Europe & Central Asia, and Stuart Butchart, Head of
Science, for their continuous support and encouragement
during this process.

Joscelyne Ashpole and Laura Wright, from the BirdLife

ECA Division, provided excellent support and compiled
species-specific information. Expert advice on applying the
IUCN Red List categories, criteria and regional guidelines
was provided by Andy Symes, Global Species Officer. Ivn
Ramrez, Head of Conservation for ECA, coordinated
the writing and delivery of this report. Wouter Langhout,
Ariel Brunner, Willem Van den Bossche, Marguerite
Tarzia and other colleagues at the ECA division, as well as
Andr van Kleunen and Henk Sierdsema of Sovon, Ana
Nieto, Melanie Bilz and Rebecca Miller of IUCN, Jana
Skorpilov of SO and EBCC, Stuart Newson of BTO,
and Stephan Flink and Tom Langendoen of Wetlands
International, provided additional help, encouragement,
and good advice throughout the project. We would like
to thank Jan Plesnk, Chair of the Standing Committee to
the Bern Convention, for chairing the European Red List
of Birds kick-off meeting in Mikulov, Czech Republic, in
2012, as well as everyone who participated and helped
make the meeting a success. The EBCC Board deserve
special thanks for their help at the kick-off meeting and
for support throughout the project.

We would like to thank the European Commission,

and especially Angelika Rubin, Frank Vassen, Micheal
OBriain and Franoise Lambillotte at DG Environment,
as well as Carlos De Oliveira Romao of the European
Environment Agency, Zelmira pkov-Gaudillat, Jrme
Bailly Maitre, Doug Evans, Dominique Richard, Marita
Arvela, Brian Mac Sharry and others at the European
Topic Centre on Biological Diversity.
The European Red List of Birds assessments and
consequently this report were produced in the frame of a
service contract with the European Commission (Service
Contract No. 070307/2011/604476/SER/B3).
The European Union (EU) Red List assessments were
based largely on the official data reported by EU Member
States to the European Commission under Article 12 of
the Birds Directive in 2013-141. To complete the dataset
for the pan-European Red List assessments, similar
data were sourced from BirdLife Partners and other
collaborating experts in most other European countries.
The European Red List of Birds was heavily dependent on
the collaboration of hundreds of experts and thousands of
volunteers in more than 50 countries and territories, who
generously gave of their time, data and knowledge. The
enthusiasm and commitment of these people has enabled

Ian May of the BirdLife Global Information Management

team, Ackbar Joolia of IUCN and Carl Scott of Solertium
provided essential support and assistance with entering data
in the IUCN Species Information Service (SIS) Toolkit.
Mark Balman and Mike Evans of BirdLife International
provided high-quality support on GIS and database issues
and Hannah Wheatley and Rob Martin of the BirdLife
Global Science team and Jemma Able of IUCN produced
the species distribution maps. Alena Klvaov (SO)

1 No Article 12 data were received for Greece and the Czech Republic only
reported on breeding birds listed on Annex I of the Birds Directive. With
the agreement of the European Commission, surrogate data were sourced
and used for these countries. Croatia did not join the EU until 2013 and
so did not report under Article 12 for the period 2008-12.

us to generate a comprehensive and detailed picture of

bird status and trends in Europe. Whilst acknowledging
in general the efforts made by everyone in EU Member
States who contributed to the Article 12 reporting, we
record below our particular thanks to the following
people, who have contributed and provided species
data included within this report, asking for forgiveness
from anyone whose name is inadvertently omitted or
misspelled:

Georgia: Brecht Verhelst (Bird Conservation Georgia,

BCG), Mary Kate Ugrekhelidze (BCG), Zura
Javakhishvili (Institute of Zoology, Ilia State University),
Aleksandre Gavashelishvili (Institute of Zoology, Ilia
State University), Aleksandre Abuladze (Institute of
Zoology, Ilia State University)
Greece: Thanos Kastritis (Hellenic Ornithological
Society, HOS), Aris Manolopoulos (HOS), Danae
Portolou (HOS), Jakob Fric (HOS), Giorgos Handrinos
(HOS), Giorgos Catsadorakis (Society for the Protection
of Prespa), Savvas Kazantzidis (Forest Research Institute),
Stavros Xirouchakis (Natural History Museum of Crete),
Lavrentis Sidiropoulos (HOS), Dora Skartsi (WWF
Greece), Tasos Bounas (HOS), Christos Barboutis
(HOS), Sergi Herrando (Catalan Ornithological
Institute), Filios Akriotis (University of Aegean)

Andorra: Albert Ruzafa (Associaci per a la Defensa de

la Natura, ADN), Clara Pladevall (Centre dEstudis de la
Neu i la Muntanya dAndorra, CENMA)
Albania: Taulant Bino (Albanian Society for the
Protection of Birds and Mammals, ASPBM)
Armenia: Luba Balyan (Armenian Society for the
Protection of Birds, ASPB) Mamikon Ghasabyan
(ASPB), Tsovinar Hovhannisyan (ASPB), Nshan
Margaryan (Institute of Zoology NAS Armenia), Vardges
Hakobyan, Shaqro Ghazaryan (Lake Arpi IBA), Artak
Sargsyan (Lake Sevan IBA; Lake Sevan National Park),
Rudik Tatoyan (Tashir IBA), Mikhail Voskanov

Greenland: David Boertmann (Aarhus University),

Anthony David Fox (Aarhus University)
Iceland: Ellen Magnsdttir (Fuglavernd), Hlmfrur
Arnardttir (Fuglavernd), Gudmundur A. Gudmundsson
(Icelandic Institute of Natural History)

Azerbaijan: Elchin Sultanov (Azerbaijan Ornithological

Society, AOS)

Kosovo: Nexhmedin Ramadani (NGO FINCH

for protection of birds, Kosovo), Myzafer Arifi (NGO
FINCH)

Belarus: Nikiforov M.E. (Belarus Bird Ringing Centre,

BBRC; BirdLife Belarus, APB), Pavlushchick T.E.
(BBRC; APB), Kozulin A.V. (BBRC; APB), Karlionova
N.V. (BBRC; APB), Pinchuk P.V. (BBRC; APB),
Samusenko I.E., Bogdanovich I.A. (BBRC; APB),
Zhuravliev D.V. (BBRC; APB), Koloskov M.N., and
Yakovets N.N. (BBRC; APB)

Liechtenstein: Georg Willi (Botanisch-Zoologische

Gesellschaft, BZG)
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Metodija
Velevski (Macedonian Museum of Natural History), Ana
and Borce Arsovski (Macedonian Owl Trust), Emanuel
and Tome Lisicanec (Nature Conservation Association
Aquila), Bratislav Grubac (Institute of Nature
Conservation of Serbia), Oliver Avramoski (National
Park Galicica), Vlasta Skorpikova (Czech Society
for Ornithology, CSO), Vaclav Prasek (CSO), Mojmir
Dostal (CSO), Petr Vorisek (CSO), Borut Stumberger,
Danka Uzunova (Macedonian Ecological Society,
MES), Ksenija Putilin (MES), Zarko Brajanoski (MES),
Elizabeta Dimitrovska (MES), Bobi Delov (MES)

Bosnia
&
Herzegovina:
Draen
Kotroan
(Ornithological Society Nae Ptice), Goran Topi (Nae
Ptice), Ilhan Dervovi (Nae Ptice), Branislav Gai
(Museum of Republic of Srpska,), Jovica Sjenii (Society
for Research and Protection of Biodiversity)
Croatia: Vlatka Dumbovi Mazal (State Institute
for Nature Protection, Croatia), Kreimir Mikuli
(Association BIOM, Croatia), Ivan Budinski (Association
BIOM), Luka Jurinovi, Tibor Mikuka

Moldova: Larisa Bogdea (Institute of Zoology, Academy

of Sciences of Moldova, ASM), Nicolai Zubcov (Institute
of Zoology, ASM), Andrei Munteanu (Institute of
Zoology, ASM), Constantin Cojan (Institute of Zoology,
ASM), Vitalie Ajder (Institute of Ecology and Geography,

Czech Republic: Lucie mejdov (Czech Society for

Ornithology, CSO), Zdenk Vermouzek (CSO)

ASM), Serghei Jurminschi (Biotica Ecological Society),

Oleg Mantorov.

Institutt for biovitenskap, IBV), Morten Ree, Odd

Frydenlund Steen (County Governor of Buskerud,
Environment Department/Fylkesmannen i Buskerud,
miljvernavdeling), Oddvar Heggy (NOF; LRSK
Hordaland), Ole Andreas Forseth, Ole Petter Blestad
(NOF, Hedmark branch), Paul Eric Aspholm (Bioforsk
Nord), Per Inge Vrnesbranden (LRSK Sr-Trndelag;
NOF, Nord-Trndelag branch), Per Jan Hagevik (LRSK
Hedmark), Per Kristian Slagsvold (LRSK Vestfold),
Per Ole Syvertsen (Helgeland Museum), Per Willy Be
(NOF, Sr-Trndelag branch), Peter Sjolte Ranke (LRSK
stfold; NOF, Sr-Trndelag branch), Preben Clausen
(University of Aarhus, Denmark), Rab Rae (Grampian
Ringing Group; NINA), Roald Bengtson (NOF, AustAgder branch), Roar Solheim (Agder Natural History
Museum and Botanical Garden/Agder naturmuseum
og botanisk hage), Rolf Terje Kroglund (HiNT), Runar
Jacobsson, Runar Jbekk (NOF), Rune Aae (LRSK
stfold), Rune Solvang (LRSK Telemark), Simon Rix,
Stein Byrkjeland (County Governor of Hordaland,
Environment Department /Fylkesmannen i Hordaland,
miljvernavdeling), Steinar Stueflotten (LRSK Buskerud),
Steve Baines (LRSK Nordland), Stuart Rae (Grampian
Ringing Group; NINA), Svein Dale (NMBU; LRSK
Oslo & Akershus), Svein-Hkon Lorentsen (NINA),
Sven Rislaa (NOF, Vest-Agder branch), T.V. Johnsen,
Terje Bhler, Terje Lislevand (Bergen Museum), Tom
Roger sters (NOF, Nord-Trndelag branch), Tomas
Aarvak (NOF), Tor Audun Olsen (LRSK Vest-Agder),
Tore Reinsborg (NOF, Nord-Trndelag branch), Torgeir
Nygrd (NINA), Vidar Sels, .N. Larsen, yvind
Wathne Johannesen

Montenegro: Darko Saveljic (Centre for Protection

and Research of birds of Montenegro, CZIP), Budimir
Raovi, (CZIP)
Norway and Svalbard: Adriaan de Jong (University of
Ume, Sweden), Agnar Mlsnes, Andreas Meyer Winnem
(BirdLife Norway, NOF, Sr-Trndelag branch), Arne
Follestad (Norwegian Institute for Nature Research,
NINA), Arnfinn Trsen (NOF, Hedmark branch), Arve
stlyngen, Atle Ivar Olsen (LRSK Nordland), Bjrn
Harald Larsen (LRSK Oppland), Carl Knoff (NOF,
Hedmark branch), Carsten Lome (Oslo & Akershus
Ringing Group/Oslo og Akershus ringmerkingsgruppe),
Egil Soglo (State Nature Inspectorate/Statens naturoppsyn,
SNO), Frantz Sortland (NOF, Nordland branch), Frode
Falkenberg (NOF; LRSK Hordaland), Geir Hitomt
(NOF, Oppland branch), Georg Bangjord (SNO; NOF,
Sr-Trndelag branch), Gunnar Gundersen (LRSK VestAgder), Gunnar Skjrpe, Hallvard Strm (Norwegian
Polar Institutt/Norsk Polarinstitutt), Hans Christian
Pedersen (NINA), Ingar Jostein ien (NOF), Ingvar
Stenberg (NOF, Mre og Romsdal branch), Jan Eivind
stnes (Nord-Trndelag University College/Hyskolen
i Nord-Trndelag, HiNT), Jan Helge Kjstvedt (LRSK
Aust-Agder), Jan Ove Gjershaug (NINA), Jan Ove Sagery
(LRSK Sogn og Fjordane), Jepser Madsen (University of
Aarhus, Denmark), John Grnning (LRSK Rogaland),
John Stenersen (LRSK Nordland), Jon Atle Kls
(NINA), Jon Bekken (LRSK Hedmark; County Governor
of Hedmark, Environment Department/Fylkesmannen
i Hedmark, miljvernavdelingen), Jon Lurs (NOF,
Hedmark branch), Jon Opheim (LRSK Oppland), Jon
Swenson (NINA), Jostein Sandvik pers. comm. (State
Nature Inspectorate), Karl-Birger Strann (NINA), KarlOtto Jakobsen (NINA), Kjell Aadne Solbakken (NOF),
Kjell Isaksen (Strix Miljutredning), Kjell R. Mjlsnes
(Mangfold/Kartlegging av artsmangfold), Kjetil Hansen
(Norwegian University of Life Sciences/Norges miljog biovitenskapsuniversitet, NMBU), Knut Sigbjrn
Olsen (LRSK Vest-Agder), Knut Totland (NOF, Hemne
local branch), Larry Griffin (The Wildfowl & Wetlands
Trust, UK), Lars Frelsy, Lorentz Noteng (SNO), Magne
Myklebust (NOF), Magnus Johan Steinvg (County
Governor of Hordaland, Environment Department/
Fylkesmannen i Hordaland, miljvernavdeling), Martin
Dagsland, Morten Gnther (Bioforsk Nord; LRSK
Finnmark), Morten Helberg (Department of Biosciences/

Russia: Alexander Mischenko (Russian Society for Bird

Conservation and Study), Victor Belik (Southern Federal
University), Vladimir Morozov (All-Russian Research
Institute for Nature Protection), Lyubov Malovichko
(Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Agricultural
Academy), Yuri Krasnov (Murmansk Marine Biological
Institute Russian Academy of Sciences), Vladimir
Sarychev (Nature Reserve Galichya Gora of the
Voronezh State University), Oleg Borodin (Ecological
Centre of Ulyanovsk Region), Sergei Volkov (Severtsovs
Institute of Ecology and Evolution Russian Academy
of Sciences, Moscow), Ekaterina Preobrazhenskaya
(Russian Bird Conservation Union), Olga Sukhanova
(BirdsRussia, Russian Society for Bird Conservation and
Study)

Serbia: Slobodan Puzovi (Provincial Secretariat for

Urban Planning, Construction and Environmental
Protection), Milan Rui (Bird Protection and Study
Society of Serbia, BSPSS), Marko iban (BSPSS)

(Istanbul Birdwatching Society; birdwatchturkey.com),

mer Dndren (The Conservation and Development
Union for Izmir Bird Paradise), Riyat Gl, Soner Bekir
(birdwacthturkey.com), Shedan Karauz Er (Turkish
Ministry of Forest and Water Affairs), Tamer Albayrak
(Mehmet Akif Ersoy University- Biology Department),
Vedat Bekarde (Istanbul University- Forestry
Faculty),Zeynel Arslangndodu (Istanbul UniversityForestry Faculty)

Switzerland: Verena Keller (Swiss Ornithological

Institute), Hans Schmid (Swiss Ornithological Institute),
Jrme Gulat (Swiss Ornithological Institute), Marc
Kry (Swiss Ornithological Institute), Peter Knaus
(Swiss Ornithological Institute), Claudia Mller (Swiss
Ornithological Institute), Nikolai Orgland (Swiss
Ornithological Institute), Reto Spaar (Swiss Ornithological
Institute), Bernard Volet (Swiss Ornithological Institute),
Samuel Wechsler (Swiss Ornithological Institute),
Niklaus Zbinden (Swiss Ornithological Institute), Raffael
Ay (SVS/BirdLife Switzerland)

Ukraine: Yuliya Bondarenko (Ukrainian Society for the

Protection of Birds, USPB), Olga Yaremchenko (USPB),
Igor Gorban (Ivan Franko Lviv National University),
Volodymyr Domashlinets (Ministry of Ecology and
Natural Resources of Ukraine), Yuriy Kuzmenko (I.I.
Schmalhausen Institute of Zoology of National Academy
of Sciences of Ukraine), Petro Chegorka (Oles Honchar
Dnipropetrovsk National University), Gennadiy Molodan
(Regional Landscape Park Meotyda), Mykhaylo Banik
(Vasyl Karazin Kharkiv National University), Mykhaylo
Beskaravayniy (Karadazkiy Nature Reserve), Ivan
Rusev (I.I. Mechnikov Scientific Research Anti-plague
Institute), Zinoviy Petrovych (Regional Landscape Park
Kinburnska Kosa)

Turkey: Sreyya Isfendiyarolu (Doa Dernei, DD),

Engin Ylmaz (DD), Adem Yavuz (Beypazar Nature
House), Arzu Grsoy (Ondokuz Mays University,
Biology Department), Burak zkrl (DD), Can Yeniyurt
(DD), Cemil Gezgin (Istanbul Birdwacthing Society),
Cenk Durmuskahya (Nature Research Society), Dilara
Kzl (Ege University, Seferihisar Nature School), Dimitar
Demerchiev (Bulgarian Society for the Protection of
Birds), Emin Yourtcuoglu (birdwacthturkey.com),
Emrah oban (Kuzeydoga Society), Evrim Tabur (DD),
Ferdi Akarsu, Gven Eken (DD; Seferihisar Nature
School), lker zbahar (Nature Research Society),
Kerem Ali Boyla (Kusbank; Turkish Bird Atlas), Levent
Erkol (Nature Research Society), Murat Bozdogan

More than 100 ornithologists and stakeholders from 40 countries met in Mikulov, Czech Republic, in February 2012 to launch the European Red List of Birds project. BirdLife International

Executive summary
Aim

Results

The European Red List is a review of the conservation

status of all European species (mammals, birds, reptiles,
amphibians, freshwater fishes, butterflies, dragonflies,
bees, medicinal plants and selected groups of beetles,
molluscs, and vascular plants) according to IUCN
regional Red Listing guidelines. It identifies those species
that are threatened with extinction at the regional level
in order that appropriate conservation action can be
taken to improve their status. This Red List publication
summarises the results for European birds.

At the European regional level, 13% of bird species

are threatened, with 2% Critically Endangered, 3%
Endangered, and 7% Vulnerable. A further 6% are Near
Threatened. Within the EU 27, 18% of bird species
are threatened, with 2% Critically Endangered, 4%
Endangered, and 12% Vulnerable, and a further 6% are
Near Threatened.
The countries with the largest numbers of bird species
are Russia and Turkey. Russia and Eastern Europe, and
the Mediterranean, Black Sea and Caucasus regions
show a higher species richness than northwest Europe.
Russia and Turkey have the highest richness of threatened
species. Important numbers of threatened species can also
be found in the Caucasus region, the Iberian Peninsula
and France, as well as in some regions in the Baltic States
and Eastern Europe. Threatened species, mainly marine
birds, are found in north and northwest Europe.

Scope
The geographical scope is continent-wide, extending from
Greenland in the northwest to the Urals in the northeast,
and from the Canary Islands in the southwest to Cyprus
and the Caucasus in the southeast. Red List assessments
were carried out at two regional levels: for geographical
Europe as described above, and for the 272 countries that
were Member States of the European Union during the
period covered by the 2008-2012 round of reporting
under Article 12 of the Birds Directive.

There are 91 bird species endemic or near-endemic to

Europe, found mainly in temperate and central Europe.
The Mediterranean and Macaronesian islands have many
endemic bird species, as does the Caucasus region.

Status assessment

Biological resource use, and agriculture and aquaculture

are Europes top threats to bird species, followed by
climate change and severe weather, pollution, invasive
and other problematic species, genes and diseases and
natural system modifications.

The status of all species was assessed using the IUCN Red
List Categories and Criteria (Version 3.1; IUCN 2012a3),
which are the worlds most widely accepted system for
measuring extinction risk. All assessments followed the
latest Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories
and Criteria (IUCN 20144) and the latest Guidelines for
Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional and
National Levels (Version 4.0; IUCN 2012b5). Assessments
are available on the European Red List website and
data portal: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/
conservation/species/redlist, http://www.iucnredlist.org/
europe and www.birdlife.org/datazone.

Conclusions
Across Europe, many governments, NGOs and other
parties are showing increasing commitment to conserving
wild birds and their habitats and thanks to these efforts
some species are showing signs of recovery. However,
the proportion of threatened species in this assessment is
comparable to that in the previous assessment a decade
ago. Bird species continue to decline as a result of various
threats, including illegal hunting, changing agricultural
practices, invasive and alien species and habitat loss and
degradation. It is evident that much more needs to be done
to save threatened European bird species from extinction
and to safeguard the bird populations of Europe.

2 Croatia acceded to the EU in 2013 and so did not participate in the

current round of Article 12 reporting. Hence data from Croatia were not
included in the EU-level assessments.
3 http://cmsdocs.s3.amazonaws.com/keydocuments/Categories_and_
Criteria_en_web%2Bcover%2Bbckcover.pdf
4 http://jr.iucnredlist.org/documents/RedListGuidelines.pdf
5 http://cmsdocs.s3.amazonaws.com/keydocuments/Reg_Guidelines_en_
web%2Bcover%2Bbackcover.pdf

1. Background
1.1 The European context

biodiversity in 2010, measured as mean species abundance

(MSA), was just 68% of the level that potential natural
vegetation could support. In a business-as-usual scenario
for 2050, MSA is projected to decline further to around
60 %. In Europe, MSA is estimated to decline by 24%
(from an estimated 38% in 2010)7.

Europe is one of the seven continents of the world, and

comprises the westernmost peninsula of Eurasia. It is
divided from Asia by the Ural and Caucasus mountains,
the Ural river and the Caspian Sea to the east, bordered
by the Arctic Ocean to the north, the Atlantic Ocean to
the west and the Mediterranean Sea to the south. Europe
is the worlds second smallest continent by surface area,
with approximately 10,180,000 square kilometres,
covering just 7% of the worlds land. It is, however, the
third largest in terms of population (after Asia and Africa)
with an estimated population of 742 million people approximately 12% of the worlds population.

The EU 2020 Biodiversity strategy includes six targets

and 20 actions. Two of these targets (Target 1 Fully
Implement the Birds and Habitats Directives and Target
3 Increase the contribution of agriculture and forestry to
maintaining and enhancing biodiversity) make explicit
mention to the conservation of habitats and species.
With regards to Target 1 and according to the latest data
available, only 16% of habitats and 23% of species listed
under the Habitats Directive are assessed as Favourable,
while most Unfavourable assessments did not improve
or deteriorated (42% for habitats and 33% for species).
Concerning Target 3, habitats and species listed under
the Habitats Directive related to agricultural ecosystems
are doing worse than those related to other terrestrial and
freshwater ecosystems and there is no real improvement
in their conservation status: 11 % of habitat assessments
and 20 % of species assessments are favourable. Less than
half (48 %) of the bird species from the Birds Directive
associated with agricultural ecosystems have a Secure
status.

The European Union (EU), the worlds largest politicoeconomic union, is formed by 28 Member States, located
in Europe. It has a combined population of over 500
million inhabitants, which represent 7.3% of the world
population and generated in 2012 a nominal gross
domestic product (GDP) of 16,584 trillion US dollars,
which is approximately 23% of the global nominal GDP.
European biodiversity includes around 530 species of
birds, 138 species of dragonflies and damselflies (Kalkman
et al. 2010), 260 species of mammals (Temple and Terry
2007, 2009), 151 species of reptiles (Cox and Temple
2009), 85 species of amphibians (Temple and Cox 2009),
546 species of freshwater fishes (Kottelat and Freyhof
2007, Freyhof and Brooks 2011), around 1,200 species
of marine fishes (IUCN in prep. 2015), 20-25,000 species
of vascular plants (Euro+Med 2006- 2011) and well over
100,000 species of invertebrates (Fauna Europaea 2004).
The Mediterranean part of Europe, which is especially rich
in plant and animal species, has been recognised as a global
biodiversity hotspot (Mittermeier et al. 2004, Cuttelod et
al. 2008).

The rates of biodiversity loss in the EU are worrying.

According to the recent European Environment Agency
synthesis report on the state and outlook of the European
environment (EEA 2015), Europes natural capital is not
yet being protected, conserved and enhanced in line with
the ambitions of the 7th Environment Action Programme.
Already, climate change impacts are intensifying the
underlying drivers of biodiversity loss8.

1.2 European birds, distribution and

threat status

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD) consistently project a continued
decrease of global biodiversity. Towards the middle of the
21st century, habitat loss due to bioenergy-crop farming
and climate change is expected to gain in significance
as drivers of biodiversity decline6,. Global terrestrial

As of 2014, BirdLife has established that worldwide

1,373 bird species are threatened with extinction (13%
Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.
7 http://www.eea.europa.eu/soer-2015/global/ecosystems
8 CBD (2010), Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, Secretariat to the
Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

6 OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050, Organisation for Economic

Corys Shearwater, Calonectris borealis, is a seabird species endemic to the EU 27, where
it mainly breeds on the Azores and Madeira (nearly 90% of the global population) and
on the Canary Islands. Although a small decline was reported over the short term in
the Azores, the population is estimated and projected to be increasing, so the species is
classified as Least Concern. J. M. Arcos

Island Canary, Serinus canaria, is endemic to Europe, where it is confined to the Canary
Islands, Madeira and the Azores. Although the population trend is unknown, there was
no evidence that the status of the species has deteriorated and so it is classified as Least
Concern. Ivan Mikk

of the total, or roughly one in eight)9. These species have

small, fragmented or dwindling ranges, tiny populations,
or are declining rapidly. Of these, 213 species are
considered Critically Endangered and face an extremely
high risk of extinction in the immediate future. The Red
List Index for birds can be broken down biogeographically.
The results show that although species have deteriorated
in all major ecosystems and regions, these changes have
not occurred evenly across the globe. Birds associated with
Pacific islands, the open ocean and the lowland forests of
Asia have undergone particularly sharp declines.

At present, 53 (10%) of European species are considered

to be of global conservation concern, and are listed as
Threatened or Near Threatened on the IUCN Red List10.
These range from species endemic to single islands,
to widespread species occurring in many countries.
According to the last assessment of the conservation
status of birds in Europe (BirdLife International
2004a), 43% of the bird species occurring regularly in
Europe had an unfavourable conservation status and
therefore qualified as Species of European Conservation
Concern (SPECs). Of the species assessed, 40 (7.6%)
were classified as SPEC 1 (European species of global
conservation concern), 45 (8.6%) as SPEC 2 (species
with global population concentrated in Europe and
with unfavourable conservation status in Europe) and
141 (26.9%) as SPEC 3 (species not concentrated in
Europe, but with unfavourable conservation status in
Europe). The percentage of species in each of these three
categories was higher than in the preceding assessment
in 1994 (Tucker & Heath 1994), when 38% of species
were classified as SPEC 1, 2 or 3. At the EU level, 48% of
species had an unfavourable conservation status in 2004
(BirdLife International 2004b).

Europe is home to more than 530 regularly occurring

wild bird species, across 69 families (Table 1), with a total
estimated breeding population of around two billion pairs.
Millions more migrate through the continent on passage to
Africa, whilst millions of others from the Arctic or Russia
spend the winter in Europe. Around 17% of European
birds are endemic or near-endemic, i.e. are found only in
Europe or species whose global range is concentrated in
Europe. More than half the European endemic or nearendemic species are from six families: Columbidae (pigeons
and doves), Procellariidae (petrels and shearwaters), Laridae
(gulls and terns), Fringillidae (finches), Muscicapidae (chats
and flycatchers), and Sylviidae (warblers).
9

http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/spotthreatbirds

10 http://bit.ly/1I7sEFE

Table 1. Diversity and endemism in bird families in Europe.

Class Order

Aves

Europe
Number Number
of
of (near-)
species endemic
species
GALLIFORMES
Phasianidae
17
4
ANSERIFORMES
Anatidae
41
2
PODICIPEDIFORMES
Podicipedidae
5
0
PHOENICOPTERIFORMES Phoenicopteridae
1
0

COLUMBIFORMES
PTEROCLIFORMES
CAPRIMULGIFORMES

Family

% of
(near-)
endemic
species
24%
5%
0%
0%

EU 27
Number Number
% of
of
of (near-) (near-)
species endemic endemic
species
species
13
1
8%
36
0
0%
5
0
0%
1
0
0%

Columbidae
Pteroclidae
Apodidae

9
3
6

5
0
1

56%
0%
17%

8
2
6

3
0
1

38%
0%
17%

BUCEROTIFORMES
CORACIIFORMES

Caprimulgidae
Cuculidae
Gruidae
Rallidae
Otididae
Gaviidae
Hydrobatidae
Oceanitidae
Procellariidae
Ciconiidae
Ardeidae
Pelecanidae
Threskiornithidae
Anhingidae
Phalacrocoracidae
Sulidae
Alcidae
Burhinidae
Charadriidae
Glareolidae
Haematopodidae
Laridae
Recurvirostridae
Scolopacidae
Stercorariidae
Turnicidae
Strigidae
Tytonidae
Accipitridae
Pandionidae
Upupidae
Alcedinidae

2
3
2
9
4
4
4
1
10
2
9
2
3
1
3
1
7
1
13
3
2
29
2
31
4
1
14
1
29
1
1
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
7
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
0
0
0

0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
50%
0%
70%
50%
0%
0%
0%
0%
33%
100%
29%
0%
0%
0%
50%
17%
0%
0%
25%
0%
0%
0%
14%
0%
0%
0%

2
2
1
9
3
3
4
1
10
2
9
2
3
0
3
1
5
1
9
3
2
22
2
28
3
1
12
1
27
1
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0

0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
50%
0%
70%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
50%
5%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
7%
0%
0%
0%

PICIFORMES

Coraciidae
Meropidae
Picidae

1
2
11

0
0
3

0%
0%
27%

1
1
11

0
0
1

0%
0%
9%

CUCULIFORMES
GRUIFORMES
OTIDIFORMES
GAVIIFORMES
PROCELLARIIFORMES

CICONIIFORMES
PELECANIFORMES

SULIFORMES

CHARADRIIFORMES

STRIGIFORMES
ACCIPITRIFORMES

Class Order

FALCONIFORMES
PASSERIFORMES

Total

Family

Falconidae
Aegithalidae
Alaudidae
Bombycillidae
Certhiidae
Cinclidae
Cisticolidae
Corvidae
Emberizidae
Fringillidae
Hirundinidae
Laniidae
Motacillidae
Muscicapidae
Oriolidae
Paridae
Passeridae
Prunellidae
Pycnonotidae
Reguliidae
Remizidae
Sittidae
Sturnidae
Sylviidae
Timaliidae
Troglodytidae
Turdidae

Europe
Number Number
of
of (near-)
species endemic
species
10
1
1
0
13
1
1
0
2
1
1
0
2
0
11
0
18
3
28
9
5
0
5
0
13
3
31
7
1
0
9
3
8
0
5
1
1
0
3
1
1
0
6
3
3
0
46
17
2
0
1
0
8
1
533
91

1.3 Objectives of the assessment

% of
(near-)
endemic
species
10%
0%
8%
0%
50%
0%
0%
0%
17%
32%
0%
0%
23%
23%
0%
33%
0%
20%
0%
33%
0%
50%
0%
37%
0%
0%
13%
17%

EU 27
Number Number
% of
of
of (near-) (near-)
species endemic endemic
species
species
10
1
10%
1
0
0%
9
0
0%
1
0
0%
2
1
50%
1
0
0%
1
0
0%
11
0
0%
14
0
0%
23
7
30%
5
0
0%
5
0
0%
11
1
9%
24
2
8%
1
0
0%
8
0
0%
5
0
0%
2
0
0%
0
0
0%
3
1
33%
1
0
0%
5
1
20%
3
0
0%
39
6
15%
1
0
0%
1
0
0%
6
0
0%
451
39
9%

The assessment provides two main outputs:

This summary report on the status of European birds.
A website and data portal showcasing these data in the
form of species factsheets for all European birds, along
with background and other interpretative material11, 12, 13.

The European regional assessment has three main

objectives:
To assess the status of European bird species using
for the first time data reported by EU Member States
under Article 12 of the EU Birds Directive together
with comparable data reported by NGOs and other
collaborating experts from the rest of Europe.
To contribute to regional conservation planning
through provision of an up-to-date dataset reporting
the status of European birds.
To identify the major threats and to propose
mitigating measures and conservation actions to
address them.

The data presented in this report provides a snapshot

based on available knowledge at the time of writing.
BirdLife International will ensure wide dissemination
of these data to relevant decision makers, NGOs, and

11 http://www.iucnredlist.org
12 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/redlist/
13 www.birdlife.org/datazone

scientists to inform the implementation of conservation

actions on the ground.

2. Assessment Methodology
2.1 Global and regional assessment

the application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional

Level should be applied (IUCN 2012b).

The IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria are designed

to determine a taxons relative risk of extinction (IUCN
2012a). The IUCN Red List Categories (Figure 1) are
based on a set of quantitative criteria linked to population
trends, population size and structure, and geographic
range. There are nine Categories, and species classified
as Vulnerable (VU), Endangered (EN) and Critically
Endangered (CR) are considered as threatened.

2.2 Data sources

The extinction risk of a species can be assessed at global,

regional or national level. One species can have a
different category in the Global Red List and a Regional
Red List. Therefore, a species that is common worldwide
and classed as Least Concern (LC) in the Global Red List
could face a high level of threat and fit the Endangered
category (EN) in a particular region (see Figure 1 for the
explanation of the IUCN categories). To avoid under- or
over-estimation of a particular species, the Guidelines for

The EU assessments were based mainly on data reported

by EU Member States under Article 12 of the EU
Birds Directive. Article 12 requires that Member States
regularly prepare and submit reports on progress made
with the national implementation of the Birds Directive.
In 2011, the European Commission, in agreement with
Member States, revised the reporting procedure and
frequency in order to focus the reporting obligations
on information relating to the status and trend of bird

The present study is an assessment of the EU and panEuropean threat status of bird species. The methodology
for both the EU and Europe followed the Guidelines for
the application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional
Level (IUCN 2012b).

Figure 1. IUCN Red List Categories at regional scale.

Extinct (EX)
Extinct in the Wild (EW)
Regionally Extinct (RE)
Threatened categories
Critically Endangered (CR)
Adequate data

Endangered (EN)
Vulnerable (VU)

Evaluated
Eligible for Regional
Assessment

All species

Near Threatened (NT)

Least Concern (LC)
Data Deficient (DD)
Not Applicable (NA)
Not Evaluated (NE)

10

Extinction
risk

Figure 2. Regional assessments were made for two areas continental Europe and the EU 27.

populations, thereby streamlining the reporting under

Article 12 of the Birds Directive with the reporting on
conservation status under Article 17 of the Habitats
Directive. Article 12 reports covering the period 20082012 were submitted in 2013-2014. These reports include
information on the size and trend of populations and
distributions of individual bird taxa. Similar data were
sourced from non-EU countries, drawing heavily on the
expertise and data holdings of national bird monitoring
schemes and organisations across Europe, including
BirdLife International Partners and many others.

brachydactyla, on the Channel Islands), but populations

are not so large as to affect the assessments.
Red List assessments were carried out at two regional levels:
1) for geographical Europe (limits described above); and 2)
for the area of the 27 Member States of the EU14.

2.4 Preliminary assessments

For every bird species native to Europe, the following
data were compiled:
Species taxonomic classification
Geographic range and distribution map
Population and trend information (including trend
maps and national data tables)
Ecology and habitat preferences
Major threats
Conservation measures (in place, and needed)
Species utilization
Key literature references

2.3 Geographic scope

The geographical scope is continent-wide, extending
from Iceland in the west to the Urals in the east (including
European parts of the Russian Federation), and from the
Arctic in the north to the Mediterranean in the south (see
Figure 2). The Canary Islands, Madeira and the Azores
were also included. It was not possible to collate separate
data for Isle of Man or the Channel Islands, but in most
cases bird populations and trends will be reflected within
the UK and France totals. There are a few exceptions,
for example Hen Harrier, Circus cyaneus, and Red-billed
Chough, Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax, on the Isle of Man,
some seabird species and Short-toed Treecreeper, Certhia

14 Croatia acceded to the EU in 2013 and so did not participate in the

current round of Article 12 reporting. Hence data from Croatia were not
included in the EU-level assessments.

11

2.5 Production of population sizes and

trends

The assessments of species that do not breed (regularly)

within the EU and/or the European region were based
solely on winter data, while for species that occur in
both seasons and for which the reported dataset was
representative of the regional population, the assessment
process was carried out independently on data for both
the breeding and wintering populations. For some
species in winter, underlying population trends can
be obscured by demographic factors, often related to
inter- annual variation in weather conditions. In some
years, for example, birds that usually winter in the
region may be forced to move elsewhere by harsh winter
conditions, whilst in others, birds that usually winter
outside the region may show marked influxes into the
region. Consequently, assessments were carried out
principally on the basis of breeding data, provided that
the resulting status category was the same as or higher
(i.e. more threatened) than that obtained using winter
data.All terrestrial and marine bird species native to
Europe or naturalised in Europe were included in the
assessment. Species introduced to Europe by man after
AD 1500 were not considered by the assessment16.
Similarly, species that are of marginal occurrence in
Europe were not considered17. Assessments were carried
out at the species level, following BirdLife Internationals
current taxonomy18 (BirdLife International 2014) and
population size and trend data for any bird taxa for which
a country reported at the subspecific or flyway level19
were aggregated to the species level.

National data were combined to produce overall EU

and pan-European population sizes and trends for each
taxon. For population sizes, the reported minimum
and maximum population size data across countries
were summed to calculate the overall minimum and
maximum. All European countries were requested to use
the same population unit, which was breeding pairs for
most breeding birds with the exception of a minority
of taxa with unusual or complex breeding biology or
cryptic behaviour, for which other units, such as calling
or lekking males, were used and individuals for birds
in winter. For population trends, data from all countries
were combined, weighting each countrys contribution
according to the size of its population. Weightings were
based on the geometric mean of the countries minimum
and maximum population size compared to the geometric
mean of the equivalent totals for the overall EU or panEuropean population. This analysis was carried out
using a dedicated tool developed by IUCN to estimate
overall trends based on data from multiple (national)
subpopulations15.
Where it was not possible to allocate a trend category
with confidence, either because trend directions were
reported as unknown for a large proportion of the total
European population or in the case of conflicting trend
information or lack of trend magnitudes, the overall
European trend was classified as Unknown. Where
possible, the robustness of trend categories to the effects
of any missing data was tested using plausible good and
bad scenarios, based on other sources of information,
such as any other reported trend information, recent
national Red Lists, scientific literature, and other
publications and consultations with experts.

16 Some countries reported data for a number of non-native species

introduced, but these were not considered in the assessment. For species
such as Common Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) where both introduced
and native populations exist in the region, only the native populations
were assessed.
17 Data were reported by some countries for Surf Scoter (Melanitta
perspicillata), Thayers Gull (Larus thayeri), Sooty Tern (Onychoprion
fuscatus) and Oriental Skylark (Alauda gulgula), but as these are not regularly
occurring species in Europe, they were not considered in the assessment.
18 http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/info/taxonomy
19 Reporting under Article 12 was by subspecies or other subspecific units
where subspecies are listed in Annex I of the Birds Directive, for subspecies
for which international Species Action Plans (SAPs), Management Plans
(MPs) or Brief Management Statements (BMSs) have been prepared, for
subspecies or distinct flyway populations listed in Column A of Table 1
of the AEWA Status of the Populations of Migratory Waterbirds (20092012), and for subspecies or distinct populations of species classified as
globally Threatened or Near Threatened according to the 2010 IUCN
Red List.

For the majority of species, assessments were based on

data from the breeding season, but for a minority of
species, winter data were (also) used. Winter data were
only reported for a subset of species, mainly wintering
waterbirds, and especially migratory wildfowl and
waders, whose populations are often best monitored in
the winter, when they congregate in large numbers.

15 Available at http://goo.gl/yZLATv from http://www.iucnredlist.org/

technical-documents/red-list-documents

12

3. Results
3.1 Threatened status of birds

of medicinal plants are also threatened (IUCN 2011,

Allen et al. 2014).

The status of birds was assessed at two regional levels:

geographical Europe, and the EU 27. At the European
Two species are globally Extinct (Canarian Oystercatcher,
regional level, 13% of bird species (67 species) are
Haematopus meadewaldoi, and Great Auk, Pinguinus
threatened, with 2% (10 species) Critically Endangered,
impennis) and four are Regionally Extinct at the European
3% (18 species) Endangered, and 7% (39 species)
level: Northern Bald Ibis (Geronticus eremita), African
Vulnerable. A further 6% (32 species) are considered Near
Darter (Anhinga rufa), Caspian Plover (Charadrius
Threatened. Within the EU 27, 18% of bird species (82
asiaticus) and Desert Warbler (Sylvia nana). Of these,
species) are threatened, with 2% (11 species) Critically
African Darter, Caspian Plover and Desert Warbler are
Endangered, 4% (16 species) Endangered, and 12% (55
listed as Least Concern globally and Northern Bald
species) Vulnerable, and a further 6% (26 species) are
Ibis is globally Critically Endangered. Asian Houbara
Near Threatened (Table 2 and Figures 3 and 4 show the
(Chlamydotis macqueenii), Slender-billed Curlew
percentage of species in each IUCN Red List Category).
(Numenius tenuirostris) and Common Buttonquail
IUCN Red List Categories
No. species Europe
By comparison, 59% of freshwater molluscs, 40% of
(Turnix sylvaticus) are considered as Critically Endangered
EX/RE
1.1%
freshwater fishes, 23% of amphibians, 20% of reptiles,
and Possibly Extinct at the European level. Species classed
CR 17% of mammals, 16% of dragonflies, 9% of butterflies as Regionally Extinct,
1.9%
threatened (Critically Endangered,
and
8%
of
aquatic
plants
are
threatened
(IUCN
2011).
Endangered
or
Vulnerable)
EN
3.4% and Near Threatened at the
Additional European Red Lists assessing only a selection
European and EU 27 level are listed in Table 3. The
VU of species showed that 22% of terrestrial molluscs, 16% complete list of all species
7.3% assessed is in Appendix 1.
NT of crop wild relatives, 15% of saproxylic beetles and 2%
6.0%

LC

80.3%

Figure 3. IUCN Red List status of birds in Europe.

1.9%

1.1%
1.1%

1.9%

3.0%

3.4%

7.3%

7.7%
6.0%

6.0%
RE
CR
EN
VU
NT
LC

80.3%

80.3%

0.7%

2.2%
13

3.8%

Figure 4. IUCN Red List status of birds in the EU 27.

IUCN Red List Categories 0.7% 2.4% No. species EU 27

3.5%
EX/RE
0.7%
1.1%
1.9%
3.0%
CR
2.4%
EN
3.5%
7.7%
VU
12.2%
12.2%
NT
5.8%
6.0%
RE
LC
75.4%CR
5.8%

EN
VU

EN

NT

LC

LC

80.3%

75.4%

0.7%

2.2%

3.8%

Table 2. Summary of numbers of bird species within each category of threat.

12.2%

IUCN Red List Categories

Threatened categories

EX

No. species Europe

Extinct (EX)
Regionally Extinct (RE)
Critically Endangered (CR)
Endangered (EN)
Vulnerable (VU)
Near Threatened (NT)
75.4%
Least Concern (LC)

5.8% 4

10
18
39
32
428

Total number of species assessed

533

No. species
REEU 27
CR 2
EN 1

11
16
NT
55
LC 26
340
VU

451

Table 3. Regionally extinct, threatened or Near Threatened bird species at the European and EU 27 level. Species endemic or
near-endemic to Europe or to EU 27 are marked with an asterisk (*).

Family

Genus

Species

Common name

Threskiornithidae
Anhingidae
Charadriidae
Sylviidae

Geronticus
Anhinga
Charadrius
Sylvia

eremita
rufa
asiaticus
nana

Northern Bald Ibis

African Darter
Caspian Plover
Desert Warbler

14

Red List status

Europe EU 27
RE
RE
RE
NE
RE
NE
RE
NE

Family

Genus

Species

Common name

Procellariidae
Scolopacidae
Turnicidae
Emberizidae
Otididae
Charadriidae
Strigidae
Accipitridae
Alaudidae
Alaudidae
Anatidae
Accipitridae
Anatidae
Pteroclidae
Rallidae
Oceanitidae
Procellariidae
Fringillidae
Anatidae
Procellariidae
Accipitridae
Falconidae
Alcidae
Pteroclidae
Laridae
Strigidae
Alcedinidae
Muscicapidae
Anatidae
Charadriidae
Glareolidae
Anatidae
Scolopacidae
Laridae
Phasianidae
Anatidae
Anatidae
Anatidae
Anatidae
Apodidae
Otididae
Gaviidae
Hydrobatidae
Procellariidae
Haematopodidae
Charadriidae
Scolopacidae
Scolopacidae
Accipitridae
Accipitridae
Alcedinidae

Puffinus
Numenius
Turnix
Emberiza
Chlamydotis
Vanellus
Ketupa
Aquila
Melanocorypha
Ammomanes
Anser
Clanga
Cygnus
Pterocles
Fulica
Pelagodroma
Pterodroma
Pyrrhula
Oxyura
Fulmarus
Neophron
Falco
Fratercula
Syrrhaptes
Rhodostethia
Otus
Ceryle
Oenanthe
Marmaronetta
Charadrius
Glareola
Somateria
Limosa
Rissa
Lagopus
Clangula
Melanitta
Aythya
Aythya
Apus
Tetrax
Gavia
Hydrobates
Pterodroma
Haematopus
Vanellus
Numenius
Calidris
Gypaetus
Aquila
Alcedo

mauretanicus
tenuirostris
sylvaticus
aureola
macqueenii
gregarius
zeylonensis
nipalensis
yeltoniensis
deserti
erythropus
clanga
columbianus
orientalis
cristata
marina
madeira
murina
leucocephala
glacialis
percnopterus
biarmicus
arctica
paradoxus
rosea
brucei
rudis
chrysopygia
angustirostris
leschenaultii
nordmanni
mollissima
limosa
tridactyla
lagopus
hyemalis
fusca
ferina
marila
affinis
tetrax
immer
monteiroi
deserta
ostralegus
vanellus
arquata
ferruginea
barbatus
adalberti
atthis

Balearic Shearwater
Slender-billed Curlew
Common Buttonquail
Yellow-breasted Bunting
Asian Houbara
Sociable Lapwing
Brown Fish-owl
Steppe Eagle
Black Lark
Desert Lark
Lesser White-fronted Goose
Greater Spotted Eagle
Tundra Swan
Black-bellied Sandgrouse
Red-knobbed Coot
White-faced Storm-petrel
Zinos Petrel
Azores Bullfinch
White-headed Duck
Northern Fulmar
Egyptian Vulture
Lanner Falcon
Atlantic Puffin
Pallass Sandgrouse
Rosss Gull
Pallid Scops-owl
Pied Kingfisher
Red-tailed Wheatear
Marbled Teal
Greater Sandplover
Black-winged Pratincole
Common Eider
Black-tailed Godwit
Black-legged Kittiwake
Willow Grouse
Long-tailed Duck
Velvet Scoter
Common Pochard
Greater Scaup
Little Swift
Little Bustard
Common Loon
Monteiros Storm-petrel
Desertas Petrel
Eurasian Oystercatcher
Northern Lapwing
Eurasian Curlew
Curlew Sandpiper
Bearded Vulture
Spanish Imperial Eagle
Common Kingfisher

15

Red List status

Europe EU 27
CR*
CR*
CR
CR
CR
CR
CR
CR
CR
NE
CR
NE
CR
NE
CR
NE
CR
NE
CR
NE
EN
CR
EN
CR
EN
EN
EN
EN
EN
EN
EN
EN
EN*
EN*
EN*
EN*
EN
VU
EN
VU
EN
VU
EN
VU
EN*
NT
EN
NE
EN
NE
EN
NE
EN
NE
EN
NE
VU
CR
VU
CR
VU
CR
VU
EN
VU
EN
VU
EN
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU*
VU*
VU*
VU*
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU*
VU*
VU
VU

Family

Genus

Species

Common name

Falconidae
Laniidae
Alaudidae
Sylviidae
Sittidae
Muscicapidae
Emberizidae
Emberizidae
Columbidae
Gaviidae
Charadriidae
Accipitridae
Alcedinidae
Passeridae
Motacillidae
Emberizidae
Accipitridae
Phasianidae
Phasianidae
Anatidae
Podicipedidae
Laridae
Falconidae
Turdidae
Motacillidae
Anatidae
Columbidae
Apodidae
Otididae
Procellariidae
Glareolidae
Accipitridae
Accipitridae
Picidae
Sylviidae
Muscicapidae
Fringillidae
Phasianidae
Rallidae
Laridae
Alcidae
Alcidae
Accipitridae
Anatidae
Laridae
Timaliidae
Muscicapidae
Prunellidae
Scolopacidae
Strigidae
Anatidae

Falco
Lanius
Chersophilus
Acrocephalus
Sitta
Oenanthe
Emberiza
Emberiza
Streptopelia
Gavia
Vanellus
Accipiter
Halcyon
Passer
Anthus
Emberiza
Circus
Alectoris
Lagopus
Mergus
Podiceps
Larus
Falco
Turdus
Anthus
Branta
Columba
Apus
Chlamydotis
Puffinus
Cursorius
Aquila
Milvus
Picus
Sylvia
Saxicola
Fringilla
Alectoris
Fulica
Hydrocoloeus
Alca
Uria
Circus
Bucephala
Larus
Turdoides
Oenanthe
Prunella
Xenus
Bubo
Polysticta

cherrug
excubitor
duponti
paludicola
whiteheadi
leucura
cineracea
rustica
turtur
adamsii
indicus
badius
smyrnensis
moabiticus
gustavi
leucocephalos
macrourus
graeca
muta
serrator
auritus
argentatus
vespertinus
iliacus
pratensis
ruficollis
junoniae
caffer
undulata
lherminieri
cursor
fasciata
milvus
sharpei
undata
dacotiae
teydea
chukar
atra
minutus
torda
aalge
cyaneus
islandica
armenicus
altirostris
deserti
montanella
cinereus
scandiacus
stelleri

Saker Falcon
Great Grey Shrike
Duponts Lark
Aquatic Warbler
Corsican Nuthatch
Black Wheatear
Cinereous Bunting
Rustic Bunting
European Turtle-dove
Yellow-billed Loon
Red-wattled Lapwing
Shikra
White-breasted Kingfisher
Dead Sea Sparrow
Pechora Pipit
Pine Bunting
Pallid Harrier
Rock Partridge
Rock Ptarmigan
Red-breasted Merganser
Horned Grebe
European Herring Gull
Red-footed Falcon
Redwing
Meadow Pipit
Red-breasted Goose
White-tailed Laurel-pigeon
White-rumped Swift
African Houbara
Audubons Shearwater
Cream-coloured Courser
Bonellis Eagle
Red Kite
Iberian Green Woodpecker
Dartford Warbler
Fuerteventura Stonechat
Blue Chaffinch
Chukar
Common Coot
Little Gull
Razorbill
Common Murre
Hen Harrier
Barrows Goldeneye
Armenian Gull
Iraq Babbler
Desert Wheatear
Siberian Accentor
Terek Sandpiper
Snowy Owl
Stellers Eider

16

Red List status

Europe EU 27
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU
VU*
VU
VU*
VU*
VU
VU
VU*
VU
VU
VU
VU
NT
VU
NE
VU
NE
VU
NE
VU
NE
VU
NE
VU
NE
VU
NE
NT
EN
NT*
VU
NT
VU
NT
VU
NT
VU
NT*
VU
NT
VU
NT
VU
NT*
VU
NT
NT
NT*
NT*
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT*
NT*
NT*
NT*
NT*
NT
NT*
NT*
NT*
NT*
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT*
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
NE
NT*
NE
NT
NE
NT
NE
NT
NE
LC
CR
LC
CR
LC
EN

Family

Genus

Species

Common name

Scolopacidae
Scolopacidae
Scolopacidae
Stercorariidae
Accipitridae
Anatidae
Anatidae
Anatidae
Hydrobatidae
Charadriidae
Scolopacidae
Scolopacidae
Alcidae
Falconidae
Paridae
Paridae
Alaudidae
Sylviidae
Sylviidae
Turdidae
Fringillidae
Fringillidae
Fringillidae
Anatidae
Rallidae
Phalacrocoracidae
Scolopacidae
Scolopacidae
Scolopacidae
Laridae
Accipitridae
Alaudidae
Reguliidae
Sittidae
Emberizidae

Arenaria
Calidris
Tringa
Stercorarius
Buteo
Spatula
Mareca
Anas
Hydrobates
Vanellus
Gallinago
Tringa
Cepphus
Falco
Parus
Parus
Melanocorypha
Locustella
Phylloscopus
Turdus
Fringilla
Carduelis
Carpodacus
Tadorna
Zapornia
Phalacrocorax
Calidris
Actitis
Tringa
Hydroprogne
Aquila
Eremophila
Regulus
Sitta
Calcarius

interpres
pugnax
stagnatilis
parasiticus
lagopus
querquedula
penelope
acuta
leucorhous
spinosus
media
totanus
grylle
rusticolus
montanus
cinctus
calandra
fluviatilis
borealis
pilaris
montifringilla
flavirostris
erythrinus
ferruginea
pusilla
aristotelis
maritima
hypoleucos
erythropus
caspia
heliaca
alpestris
regulus
krueperi
lapponicus

Ruddy Turnstone
Ruff
Marsh Sandpiper
Arctic Jaeger
Rough-legged Buzzard
Garganey
Eurasian Wigeon
Northern Pintail
Leachs Storm-petrel
Spur-winged Lapwing
Great Snipe
Common Redshank
Black Guillemot
Gyrfalcon
Willow Tit
Siberian Tit
Calandra Lark
Eurasian River Warbler
Arctic Warbler
Fieldfare
Brambling
Twite
Common Rosefinch
Ruddy Shelduck
Baillons Crake
European Shag
Purple Sandpiper
Common Sandpiper
Spotted Redshank
Caspian Tern
Eastern Imperial Eagle
Horned Lark
Goldcrest
Kruepers Nuthatch
Lapland Longspur

17

Red List status

Europe EU 27
LC
EN
LC
EN
LC
EN
LC
EN
LC
EN
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC*
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC*
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC
NT
LC*
NT
LC
NT

Table 4. Red List Status (European Regional level) of birds by taxonomic family.

Family
Phasianidae
Anatidae
Podicipedidae
Phoenicopteridae
Columbidae
Pteroclidae
Caprimulgidae
Apodidae
Cuculidae
Rallidae
Gruidae
Otididae
Gaviidae
Oceanitidae
Hydrobatidae
Procellariidae
Ciconiidae
Threskiornithidae
Ardeidae
Pelecanidae
Sulidae
Phalacrocoracidae
Anhingidae
Burhinidae
Haematopodidae
Recurvirostridae
Charadriidae
Scolopacidae
Turnicidae
Glareolidae
Laridae
Stercorariidae
Alcidae
Tytonidae
Strigidae
Pandionidae
Accipitridae
Upupidae
Meropidae
Coraciidae
Alcedinidae
Picidae
Falconidae

Total
17
41
5
1
9
3
2
6
3
9
2
4
4
1
4
10
2
3
9
2
1
3
1
1
2
2
13
31
1
3
29
4
7
1
14
1
29
1
2
1
3
11
10

EX/RE

CR

EN
3

VU
1
6

NT
3
3
1

1
1

1
1
2

LC
13
29
4
1
7
1
2
4
3
7
2
1
2

1
1

1
1

3
5
2
2
9
2
1
3

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

3
3

1
1

2
8
27

1
1

18

1
3

1
1

1
24
4
3
1
12
1
19
1
2
1
10
7

% Threatened
5.9%
22.0%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
66.7%
0.0%
16.7%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
50.0%
50.0%
100.0%
25.0%
40.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
0.0%
30.8%
12.9%
100.0%
33.3%
6.9%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
20.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
0.0%
20.0%

Family
Laniidae
Oriolidae
Corvidae
Bombycillidae
Paridae
Remizidae
Hirundinidae
Aegithalidae
Alaudidae
Cisticolidae
Pycnonotidae
Sylviidae
Timaliidae
Reguliidae
Troglodytidae
Sittidae
Certhiidae
Sturnidae
Turdidae
Muscicapidae
Cinclidae
Passeridae
Prunellidae
Motacillidae
Fringillidae
Emberizidae
Total

Total
5
1
11
1
9
1
5
1
13
2
1
46
2
3
1
6
2
3
8
31
1
8
5
13
28
18
533

EX/RE

CR

EN

VU
1

NT

1
1

1
2

1
1
1
6

1
10

18

3.2 Status by taxonomic group

3
39

1
1
1
32

LC
4
1
11
1
9
1
5
1
10
2
1
43
1
3
1
5
2
3
7
27
1
7
4
11
26
14
428

% Threatened
20.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
23.1%
0.0%
0.0%
2.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
6.5%
0.0%
12.5%
0.0%
7.7%
3.6%
22.2%
12.6%

Common Loon, Gavia immer, breeds in the European Arctic and winters on sea coasts
or on larger lakes along the Atlantic coast of Europe and the western Mediterranean. The
estimated and projected rate of decline of the population in winter meets the threshold
under the population trend criterion and so the species is classified as Vulnerable. Petr
Podzemn

There are 69 bird families occurring in Europe and there

are considerable differences among them in both species
numbers and threatened status. As seen in Table 4, a
small number of families have all their species classified
as threatened: Alcedinidae (kingfishers, 3 species),
Oceanitidae (storm-petrel, 1 species), Turnicidae
(buttonquail, 1 species) while others (e.g. Corvidae,
crows and jays, 11 species; Paridae, tits, 9 species;
Sylvidae, warblers, 46 species) do not presently have any
of their species as Threatened. Other families with a high
proportion of their species classified as threatened are the
Gaviidae (loons or divers, 4 species), Haematopididae
(oystercatchers, 2 species), Otididae (bustards, 4 species),
Pteroclidae (sandgrouse, 3 species) and Procellaridae
(petrels and shearwaters).

19

Eurasian Jay, Garrulus glandarius, is a widespread resident forest species across most of
Europe. The species is stable or increasing across most countries and is classified as Least
Concern. Jan Veber

Black Woodpecker, Dryocopus martius, is a widespread resident forest species across much
of Europe. The species expanded its range in western and central Europe and showed
long-term population increases in most European countries. It is currently stable and
classified as Least Concern. Pemysl Vank

A detailed analysis of the results according to the

habitat associations of European bird species (Tucker &
Evans 1997, BirdLife International 2004a) shows some
interesting conclusions. Birds associated with marine
habitats have a relatively high proportion of threatened
species (20%). This highlights the impact that some
known pressures pose to these birds; namely predation
and disturbance at colonies, fisheries bycatch and marine
pollution. There is much variation between families
associated with terrestrial ecosystems. Birds associated
with grasslands and agricultural habitats (23%) and
with upland moorland habitats (18%) have the highest
proportion of threatened species, while birds associated
with forests have the lowest (3%).

Europe. Figure 5 shows the geographic distribution of

bird species in Europe (see Appendix 2 for method used).
3.3.2 Distribution of threatened species
The distribution of threatened birds in Europe (Figure
6) shows Russia and Turkey as the countries with the
highest richness of threatened species (38 and 35 species,
respectively, representing nearly 10 % of all species in
those countries). Spain and Portugal, together with the
Macaronesian islands, as well as France, also have high
proportions of threatened species (26, 22 and 21 species,
respectively). The Caucasus region also has high richness
of threatened species. In Azerbaijan, for example, 7%
of species (23 species) are threatened and in Georgia
6% (18 species). Some regions in the Baltic states and
Eastern Europe have higher threatened species richness.
For example 7% of species in both Ukraine and Estonia
are threatened (21 and 16 species, respectively). Norway,
parts of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland
have high numbers of threatened species, mainly marine
birds. In Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands more
than 10% of species are threatened.

3.3 Spatial distribution of species

3.3.1 Species richness
The highest absolute numbers of bird species are found
in Russia and Turkey. Russia, the Baltic states and eastern
Europe, the Mediterranean, Black Sea and Caucasus
regions show a higher species richness than northwest

Table 5. Total number of bird species and number and proportion of species threatened at the European level per country.

Country
Albania
Andorra
Armenia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Number of species

Number of threatened
species

% threatened species

270
113
271
223
308
232
211
249

16
1
15
9
23
15
12
10

5.9%
0.9%
5.5%
4.0%
7.5%
6.5%
5.7%
4.0%

20

Country
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Faroe Islands
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Greece
Greenland
Hungary
Iceland
Republic of Ireland
Italy
Kosovo
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
FYRO Macedonia
Malta
Moldova
Montenegro
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
Ukraine
United Kingdom

Number of threatened
species
20
9
6
9
14
16
11
17
21
18
17
15
7
10
10
16
15
5
13
3
13
5
9
0
13
10
15
20
14
22
16
38
16
9
10
26
16
12
35
21
18

Number of species
298
255
117
225
209
225
76
248
301
297
266
270
61
224
82
162
262
187
229
135
223
148
246
26
204
241
211
255
246
252
269
402
270
226
238
306
263
217
357
293
247

21

% threatened species
6.7%
3.5%
5.1%
4.0%
6.7%
7.1%
14.5%
6.9%
7.0%
6.1%
6.4%
5.6%
11.5%
4.5%
12.2%
9.9%
5.7%
2.7%
5.7%
2.2%
5.8%
3.4%
3.7%
0.0%
6.4%
4.1%
7.1%
7.8%
5.7%
8.7%
5.9%
9.5%
5.9%
4.0%
4.2%
8.5%
6.1%
5.5%
9.8%
7.2%
7.3%

Figure 5. Species richness of European birds.

Figure 6. Distribution of threatened birds in Europe

22

Dark-tailed Laurel-pigeon, Columba bollii, is endemic to the Canary Islands, where it is

found in dense laurel forest in mountainous areas. The species suffered historical declines
due to intensive exploitation of laurel forests in the past but has recovered since, thanks
to legal protection and habitat restoration efforts. The species has a European action plan
and has benefitted from LIFE funding. Recent trends are unknown, but the reported
long-term trend since 1980 was increasing, so the species is classified as Least Concern.
Jos Juan Hernndez

3.3.3 Endemic species richness

An endemic species is defined as having its global range
restricted to European political boundaries. Birds, as
is the case with other taxa, are not confined according
to administrative borders so this definition would not
capture all species whose global range is concentrated in
Europe. Figure 7 presents the current distribution of both
endemic and near-endemic species, the latter defined as
species whose global range is concentrated (more than
75%) in Europe.
There are 91 bird species endemic or near-endemic
to Europe, and their distribution shows the richest
areas located in temperate and central Europe. The
Mediterranean and Macaronesian islands have many
endemic bird species, such as the Madeira and Dark- and
White-tailed Laurel-pigeons (Columba trocaz, C. bollii
and C. junoniae), the Cyprus Wheatear and Warbler
(Oenanthe cypriaca and Sylvia melanothorax), and the
Corsican Nuthatch (Sitta whiteheadi). The Caucasus
region also has a number of species endemic or nearendemic restricted to the Caucasus mountains, such
as Caucasian Snowcock (Tetraogallus caucasicus) and
Caucasian Grouse (Lyrurus mlokosiewiczi).

Of the species endemic or near-endemic to Europe,

more than 10% (10 species) are threatened and 12% (11
species) are Near Threatened. Of the 39 species endemic
or near-endemic to the EU 27, nearly 20% (7 species)
are threatened and 13% (5 species) are Near Threatened.

Figure 7. Distribution of endemic and near-endemic bird species in Europe

23

3.4 Major threats to birds in Europe

herbicides, are a key threat under pollution, affecting 20

threatened species. Industrial effluents, mainly oil spills,
affect 19 threatened marine species.

Threats to bird species were assessed following the IUCN

Threats Classification Scheme20. By using this hierarchical
classification we ensure there are clearly identified categories
and that these can be compared with previous studies. A
summary of the relative importance of the different threats
recorded for birds in Europe is shown in Figure 8.

Balearic Shearwater, Puffinus mauretanicus, is a long-lived seabird species that breeds in the
Balearic Islands. It is classified as Critically Endangered because of predicted population
declines. The main threats to Balearic Shearwater are predation by introduced carnivores,
such as cats, martens and genets, in the breeding colonies, and fisheries by-catch at sea.
Cabrera Natura

Biological resource use, and agriculture and aquaculture

are Europes top threats to bird species, followed by
climate change and severe weather, pollution, invasive
and other problematic species, genes and diseases and
natural system modifications. Within biological
resource use, hunting and collecting of terrestrial
birds represents the largest threat, affecting a total of 42
threatened species. This threat category relates mainly to
illegal killing of birds, especially in the case of protected
species, such as birds of prey that suffer from persecution.
Within agriculture and aquaculture, threats relating to
annual and perennial non-timber crops and livestock
farming and ranching affect 27 and 13 threatened
species, respectively. Agricultural threats relate to changes
in land-use practices, including both intensification of
agriculture and land abandonment, which are behind
the dramatic declines in farmland bird species observed
since the 1970s (Donald et al. 2006, Sirami et al.. 2008,
Stoate et al. 2009) and continue to pose an important
threat today. Agricultural effluents, mainly pesticides and

Invasive species pose an important threat affecting

35 threatened species. Alien species are particularly
important and affect 21 threatened species. Invasive
species are a particular problem for colonial seabirds,
such as Balearic Shearwater and Zinos Petrel, which
are prone to mammal predation, as well as some other
species such as Azores Bullfinch, an island endemic
whose native habitat is threatened by invasive alien plant
species, and White-headed Duck, which is threatened by
hybridisation with the introduced Ruddy Duck.

Aquatic Warbler, Acrocephalus paludicola, is a formerly widespread summer visitor to northcentral and eastern Europe, which constitutes the majority of its global breeding range. It is
classified as Vulnerable owing to its small range and population size and owing to continuing
population decline and, in the EU27, also owing to its small range and population size. The
most important threats to Aquatic Warbler are loss and degradation of breeding habitat owing
to drainage of fen mires for agriculture and changes in grazing management. Duan Boucn

Natural system modifications mainly refer to changes in

hydrological conditions and other changes to ecosystems,
including land-use change. Habitat loss and degradation
also features as the main threat associated with climate
change and severe weather, while the threat category
residential and commercial development refers to
habitat loss and disturbance as result of residential and
tourism development. Recreational activities make up
most cases of human intrusions and disturbance.
The energy production and mining threat category
comprises mostly threats from renewable energy, namely
wind turbines, collision with which poses a threat to soaring
bird species, such as birds of prey, pelicans, storks, cranes and
seabirds. These species are also threatened by collision with
electricity pylons and utility lines, under Transportation
and service corridors. This threat category also encompasses
roads and railroads and hence habitat fragmentation.

20 http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes/
threats-classification-scheme

24

Figure 8. Threats to birds in Europe*

Biological resource use
Agriculture & aquaculture
Climate change & severe weather
Pollution
Invasive & other problematic species, genes & diseases
Natural system modifications
Human intrusions & disturbance

Threatened
Non-threatened

Energy production & mining

Residential & commercial development
Transportation & service corridors
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Number of species

* Note that a single species may be affected by multiple threats.

Increasing, 21.3%

Unknown, 22.1%

3.5 Demographic trends

Understanding and documenting population trends
provides fundamental information when assessing
the Red List status of a particular species. As part of
this process, the species current breeding and winter
population trends were assessed as decreasing, stable or
fluctuating, increasing, or unknown.

A total of 144 bird species (representing 28% of the total)

of Europes breeding bird species are decreasing, while
29% (152 species) are considered stable or fluctuating
and 21% (112 species) are increasing (Figure 9). Breeding
population trends were unknown for 22% of species
(114 species). Of the 92 species assessed in winter, 16%
are decreasing, 30% are stable or fluctuating, 35% are
Stable/Fluctuating,
Decreasing, 27.6%
increasing
and 19% have unknown trends (Figure
10).
29.0%

Figure 9. Breeding population trends of European birds.

Figure 10. Winter population trends of European birds.

Unknown, 22.1%

Unknown, 19.4%

Increasing, 21.3%

Increasing, 35.7%

Decreasing, 15.3%

Decreasing, 27.6%

Stable/Fluctuating,
29.0%

Stable/Fluctuating,
29.6%

Unknown, 19.4%

25

3.6 Gaps in knowledge

example. For other countries or territories, such as

Romania, Croatia, the Faroe Islands or the Azores, the
issue may be more related to lack of capacity.

The assessments of all European species were principally

based on data on species population size and trends.
For the majority of species and Red List categories the
assessments under the population size reduction criteria
(see IUCN 2012a) were based on the short-term (c. 20012012) population trends, as this was the period closest to
the IUCN Red List assessment period of three generation
lengths. Long-term trend (c. 1980-2012) information
was essential for longer-lived species. The figures for
population sizes and trends should ideally be calculated
by combining figures provided by each country and
this requires that the data do not have significant gaps.
While population size estimates were missing in a very
small number of cases (2% of breeding population size
estimates), reported information on trends was in many
cases incomplete, especially long-term trend information.

Bulwers Petrel, Bulweria bulwerii, is a marine and highly pelagic species that breeds in
the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands. Recent trends are unknown in Madeira, the
stronghold of the species, and the Canary Islands, but the reported long-term trend since
1980 was increasing and there was no evidence to suggest the status of the species has
deteriorated and it is classified as Least Concern. Ivn Ramrez

There were 13 countries for which 50% or more of the

short-term trends were reported as unknown and 19
countries for which 50% or more of the long-term trends
were reported as unknown. Bird monitoring efforts began
relatively recently for many countries, which explains the
lack of long-term trend data. In general, data were missing
from countries or territories where monitoring of bird
populations is difficult because large areas are difficult
to access; the Caucasus and Norway and Svalbard, for
The Black-tailed Godwit, Limosa limosa, is a species of wader that has been classified as Vulnerable in Europe and Endangered in the EU 27, because of ongoing declines owing to changes
in agricultural practices. Petr aj

26

4. Biodiversity protection in Europe

and the EU
Eurasian Spoonbill, Platalea leucorodia, is a widespread but patchily distributed breeder
across much of southern Europe. The species declined dramatically in the past as a
result of habitat loss caused mainly by drainage of wetlands. With the establishment of
international treaties and conventions for the protection of the species and its habitat,
including an international action plan under the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement
(AEWA), the majority of breeding sites are now protected across its range in Europe.
The species is now increasing and classified as Least Concern. Habitat protection and
management has been crucial in enabling the recovery of Eurasian Spoonbill in Europe.
Martin Mecnarowski

4.1 European protection of bird species

Most European countries and all EU member states
are signatories to a number of relevant international
conventions, including the 1979 Bern Convention on
the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural
Habitats, the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity
and the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird
Agreement (AEWA). International trade of a small
number of European bird species is regulated under
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species (CITES).
The Bern Convention is a binding international legal
instrument that aims to conserve wild flora and fauna
and their natural habitats and to promote European
cooperation towards that objective. It covers all
European countries and some African states. It aims to
increase cooperation between contracting parties and
to regulate the exploitation of those species (including
migratory species). Key provisions of the Convention
include establishment of protected areas (defined as the
Emerald network), protection of breeding and resting
sites and regulation of disturbance, capture, killing and
trade of wild species. The Bern Convention has played
a fundamental role when promoting the adoption
of International Species Action Plans on European
threatened or Near Threatened species.

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora22 (CITES), adopted
in 1973, has 178 countries that are Parties to the
Convention. The Convention aims to protect species
from the detrimental effects of international trade
by establishing an international legal framework for
preventing or controlling trade. Species listed on
Appendix I of the Convention are considered to be
threatened with extinction and are not allowed to
be traded commercially, while those on Appendix II
are only allowed to enter international trade under
specific controlled circumstances. Parties are obliged to
develop national legislation effectively implementing
the obligations of the Convention including setting
sustainable quotas for Appendix II species. Currently
161 bird species are listed on Appendix I and more than
1,300 on Appendix II.

The African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement

AEWA21 is an international treaty for the conservation
of migratory waterbirds developed under the auspices
of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS, or
Bonn Convention). Amongst other obligations, Parties
to the Agreement are called upon to adopt so called
International Single Species Action Plans (SSAPs) for
species of particular concern (i.e. species/populations
with an unfavourable conservation status). These Action
Plans, or SSAPs, cover all Range States relevant for the
species in an effort to ensure a coordinated conservation
approach along the entire flyway.

The European Union responded to global commitments

made in the context of the Convention on Biological
Diversity23 and its Strategic Plan for Biodiversity where
world leaders adopted a package of measures to address
global biodiversity loss over the coming decade. The EU
22 http://www.cites.org
23 http://www.cbd.int/sp/

21 http://www.unep-aewa.org

27

therefore adopted its own ambitious strategy to halt the

loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU by
2020. There are six main targets24, and 20 actions to help
Europe reach its goal. The strategy is in line with two
commitments made by EU leaders in 2010. The first is the
2020 headline target: Halting the loss of biodiversity and
the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020,
and restoring them in so far as feasible, while stepping up
the EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss;
the second is the 2050 vision: By 2050, European Union
biodiversity and the ecosystem services it provides its
natural capital are protected, valued and appropriately
restored for biodiversitys intrinsic value and for their
essential contribution to human wellbeing and economic
prosperity, and so that catastrophic changes caused by the
loss of biodiversity are avoided. A detailed analysis of
the current implementation of the EU Biodiversity 2020
targets was published by BirdLife International in 201225

marine habitats) on Annex I and species on Annex

II. As with the Birds Directive, important sites under
the Habitats Directive should be designated as Special
Areas of Conservation (SACs), which, together with the
SPAs under the Birds Directive form the Natura 2000
network.
Each Member State is required to identify sites of
European importance and is encouraged to put in place
a special management plan to protect them, combining
long-term conservation with economic and social
activities as part of a sustainable development strategy.
The Natura 2000 network has grown over the last 25
years and now includes more than 27,000 protected
areas in all Member States combined, with a total area of
around over 1,100,000 km2 this represents more than
18% of the EU land territory27.
Dalmatian Pelican, Pelecanus crispus, breed locally in south-eastern Europe. The
species suffered large declines in the last centuries due to habitat loss and degradation
and persecution. In Europe, the species has shown a remarkable recovery, especially
in Greece, where it has benefitted from targeted conservation efforts and the most
complete implementation of the European Species Action Plan, including protection and
management of breeding sites. The species is classified as Least Concern in Europe and
the EU 27. Arjan Haverkamp

4.2 Natura 2000 network

EU nature conservation policy is based on two main
pieces of legislation - the Birds Directive of 1979 and
the Habitats Directive of 199226. The Birds Directive
provides a legal framework, binding for all Member
States, for the protection of all wild birds in the EU,
including their eggs, nests and habitats. Under the Birds
Directive, EU Member States need to ensure that a
sufficient area and diversity of habitats is available for all
wild bird species, including those that live on farmland
and in urban environments. The most important areas
for the birds on Annex I of the Birds Directive and for
regularly occurring migratory birds should be designated
as Special Protection Areas (SPAs). These form part of
the Natura 2000 network, regulated by the Habitats
Directive.

The majority of threatened bird species are listed on

the Birds Directive Annexes and the Bern Convention
Appendices (Table 6). A full table containing all bird
species and their presence on the Birds Directive Annexes,
the Bern Convention Appendices, as well as the Emerald
Network Annexes, the CMS Appendices, AEWA and
CITES can be found in Appendix 1.

The Birds Directive also regulates the hunting of birds in

the EU, restricting the hunting seasons and methods, as
well as the species that can be hunted (listed in Annex II).
The Habitats Directive is Europes most powerful tool
to address habitat protection, listing the priority types
of habitats (e.g. specific types of wetlands, meadows,
24 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/comm2006/2020.
htm
25 http://www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/attachments/On-the-Road-toRecovery.pdf
26 Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and
of wild flora and fauna

27 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/info/pubs/docs/nat2000newsl/
nat37_en.pdf

28

Table 6. European threatened bird species and legal protection in Europe.

Genus

Species

Alectoris
Lagopus
Lagopus
Oxyura
Cygnus
Anser
Clangula
Somateria
Polysticta
Melanitta
Mergus
Marmaronetta
Aythya
Aythya
Spatula
Mareca
Anas
Podiceps
Streptopelia
Syrrhaptes
Pterocles
Apus
Fulica
Tetrax
Chlamydotis
Gavia
Gavia
Pelagodroma
Hydrobates
Hydrobates
Fulmarus
Pterodroma
Pterodroma
Puffinus
Haematopus
Charadrius
Vanellus
Vanellus
Vanellus
Vanellus
Numenius
Numenius

graeca
lagopus
muta
leucocephala
columbianus
erythropus
hyemalis
mollissima
stelleri
fusca
serrator
angustirostris
ferina
marila
querquedula
penelope
acuta
auritus
turtur
paradoxus
orientalis
affinis
cristata
tetrax
macqueenii
immer
adamsii
marina
monteiroi
leucorhous
glacialis
deserta
madeira
mauretanicus
ostralegus
leschenaultii
vanellus
spinosus
indicus
gregarius
tenuirostris
arquata

Red List status

Europe
EU 27
NT
VU
VU
VU
NT
VU
EN
VU
EN
EN
EN
CR
VU
VU
VU
EN
LC
EN
VU
VU
NT
VU
VU
CR
VU
VU
VU
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
NT
VU
VU
NT
EN
NE
EN
EN
VU
VU
EN
EN
VU
VU
CR
NE
VU
VU
VU
NE
EN
EN
VU
VU
LC
VU
EN
VU
VU
VU
EN
EN
CR
CR
VU
VU
VU
CR
VU
VU
LC
VU
VU
NE
CR
NE
CR
CR
VU
VU

29

Birds Directive
Annexes

Bern Convention
Appendices

I; IIA
IIA ; IIB2; IIIA3
I4; IIA; IIIB
I
I5
I
IIB
IIB; IIIB
I
IIB
IIB
I
IIA; IIIB
IIB; IIIB
IIA
IIA; IIIB
IIA; IIIB
I
IIB

III
III
III
II
5
II ; III
II
III
III
II
III
III
II
III
III
III
III
III
II
III
II
II
III
II
II
II
II
II
III
II
II
III
II
II
III
III
II
III
II
III
III
II
III

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IIB
IIB
I

I
IIB

Genus

Species

Limosa
Arenaria
Calidris
Calidris
Gallinago
Xenus
Tringa
Tringa
Turnix
Glareola
Rhodostethia
Rissa
Larus
Stercorarius
Fratercula
Cepphus
Otus
Bubo
Ketupa
Gypaetus
Neophron
Clanga
Aquila
Aquila
Circus
Accipiter
Buteo
Alcedo
Ceryle
Halcyon
Falco
Falco
Falco
Falco
Lanius
Parus
Parus
Melanocorypha
Melanocorypha
Ammomanes
Chersophilus
Locustella
Acrocephalus

limosa
interpres
pugnax
ferruginea
media
cinereus
totanus
stagnatilis
sylvaticus
nordmanni
rosea
tridactyla
argentatus
parasiticus
arctica
grylle
brucei
scandiacus
zeylonensis
barbatus
percnopterus
clanga
nipalensis
adalberti
macrourus
badius
lagopus
atthis
rudis
smyrnensis
vespertinus
biarmicus
cherrug
rusticolus
excubitor
montanus
cinctus
calandra
yeltoniensis
deserti
duponti
fluviatilis
paludicola

Red List status

Europe
EU 27
VU
EN
LC
EN
LC
EN
VU
VU
LC
VU
LC
CR
LC
VU
LC
EN
CR
CR
VU
CR
EN
NE
VU
EN
NT
VU
LC
EN
EN
NT
LC
VU
EN
NE
LC
CR
CR
NE
VU
VU
EN
VU
EN
CR
CR
NE
VU
VU
NT
EN
VU
NE
LC
EN
VU
VU
EN
NE
VU
NE
NT
VU
EN
VU
VU
VU
LC
VU
VU
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
CR
NE
CR
NE
VU
VU
LC
VU
VU
VU

30

Birds Directive
Annexes

Bern Convention
Appendices

IIB

III
II
III
II
II
II
III
II
II
II
III
III

I; IIB
I
I
IIB
I

IIB

I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I

I
I

III
III
III
II
II
II
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
III
II
II
II

Genus

Species

Phylloscopus
Sitta
Turdus
Turdus
Oenanthe
Oenanthe
Passer
Anthus
Anthus
Fringilla
Carduelis
Carpodacus
Pyrrhula
Emberiza
Emberiza
Emberiza
Emberiza

borealis
whiteheadi
pilaris
iliacus
leucura
chrysopygia
moabiticus
gustavi
pratensis
montifringilla
flavirostris
erythrinus
murina
leucocephalos
cineracea
rustica
aureola

Red List status

Europe
EU 27
LC
VU
VU
VU
LC
VU
NT
VU
VU
VU
EN
NE
VU
NE
VU
NE
NT
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
LC
VU
EN
EN
VU
NE
VU
VU
VU
VU
CR
CR

Birds Directive
Annexes
I
IIB
IIB
I

I
I

Bern Convention
Appendices
II
II
III
III
II
II
III
II
II
III
II
II
III
II
II
II
II

L. l. scoticus and hibernicus only

L. l. lagopus only
3
L. l. lagopus, scoticus and hibernicus only
4
L. m. pyrenaicus and helveticus only
5
C. c. bewickii only
1
2

4.3 Conservation management of birds

in the EU

across the European Union. LIFE has become one of

the most powerful sources of national and international
cooperation within the Union, providing not only
financial resources, but a sound administrative monitoring
framework that has allowed many different stakeholders
to become champions of many threatened species.

Addressing species conservation requires full coordination

of public and private resources, skills and capacities.
The Birds and Habitats Directives provide an excellent
framework for coordinated work with threatened species,
and within them, the financial support provided by the
LIFE Programme has been fundamental since 1992.
To date, LIFE has co-financed over 4,000 projects
with a total budget of approximately 3,4 billion.
Half of the total programme budget has addressed the
implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives
and the establishment of the Natura 2000 network.
Examples include habitat restoration, site purchases,
communication and awareness-raising, protected area
infrastructure and conservation planning.

Unlike the Habitats Directive, the Birds Directive does

not distinguish between priority and non priority species.
Nevertheless, for the purposes of LIFE funding, the Ornis
Committee has adopted a list of bird species listed in
Annex I of the Directive, which are considered as priority
for funding under the LIFE programme (meaning that
if the LIFE Project works directly with such species, the
level of EU co-funding could be increased from 60% to
75%) This priority list includes all globally threatened
species that regularly occur in the EU. A detailed analysis
of the use of LIFE funding resources yields 348 projects
directly targeting priority species for funding.

A detailed search on the LIFE project database28 yields

more than 500 projects focusing on bird conservation

28 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/

31

Table 7. LIFE projects that have addressed conservation of birds and their habitats.

LIFE projects related to bird conservation

Total
Related to species of funding priority
Theme
Bird species
Habitats
Habitats and bird species
Invasive species
Awareness raising, stakeholder participation or capacity building
High Nature Value farmland
Ecological coherence
Forest management
Climate change adaptation

The themes of LIFE projects for birds range from specific

species and habitats to issues such as climate change
adaptation, as well as awareness raising, stakeholder
participation or capacity building. Table 7 suggests
there is still room for improvement in terms of how
EU funds are being used. Most of the major threats to
birds in Europe (see section 3.4) are addressed, but not
equally. While illegal hunting, trapping, poisoning and
pressures arising from agricultural practices are relatively
well covered, others that rank highly, such as impacts of
climate change or forest habitat loss or degradation are
clearly underrepresented.

Number of projects
511
348
267
261
74
23
15
11
14
3
2

western and central Europe thanks to reintroductions

and active conservation efforts mostly funded through
the EU. Other species that are still threatened but have
improved in status thanks to conservation efforts funded
by EU LIFE include Spanish Imperial Eagle (Aquila
adalberti), Zinos Petrel (Pretodroma madeira) and Azores
Bullfinch (Pyrrhula murina).

4.4 Extinction risk versus conservation

status in the EU
The IUCN Red List categories and criteria are well
known and widely respected. They highlight species with
a relatively high risk of extinction, which is just one of
many ways of informing conservation priorities. This
concept is very relevant to the Birds Directive (e.g. Art.
4) and has been used to help prioritise species (e.g. for
Species Action Plans, LIFE funding, etc.).

Azores Bullfinch, Pyrrhyla murina, is endemic to the EU 27, where it has a very small range
on the island of So Miguel in the Azores. The quality of habitat for the species is thought
to be decreasing due to the spread of invasive plant species, so the species is classified as
Endangered. Thanks to EU LIFE-Nature project funding, the Azores Bullfinch has
benefitted from a management plan for its Special Protected Area, the clearance of invasive
plant species and replanting with native species. Mark Putney

Target 1 for birds under the EUs biodiversity strategy

for 2020 is expressed as follows: By 2020, 50% more
species assessed under the Birds Directive show a secure
or improved status. Species that meet the IUCN Red
List Criteria for Critically Endangered, Endangered
of Vulnerable at the regional level are considered to be
threatened in the EU. However, species that are not
threatened or Near Threatened, as defined by IUCN Red
List Criteria, do not necessarily have a secure or improved
status. Many bird species that would be classified as
Least Concern under the IUCN Red List Criteria have
undergone significant long-term declines as a result of
threats including land-use change and illegal hunting
(see Section 3.4) and therefore could not be regarded
as being secure or improved. In previous assessments of

LIFE funding has been extremely useful for many species

of conservation concern, giving hope for the future. For
example, although the Bearded Vulture (Gypaetus barbatus)
is still threatened in Europe, the species is recovering in

32

the conservation status of European bird species (Tucker

& Heath 1994, BirdLife International 2004a, BirdLife
International 2004b), additional criteria were applied
to identify species of European conservation concern
(SPECs). Although SPECs do not trigger or approach
the IUCN Red List Criteria, they are depleted or
declining over the long term and so cannot be considered
to contribute towards progress to Target 1 of the EUs
Biodiversity Strategy. For this reason, similar additional
criteria will be used in the frame of the current Article
12 assessment to identify secure, improved, declining or
depleted species and hence evaluate progress towards the
Target.

priorities, on the other hand, which normally includes

the assessment of extinction risk, also takes into account
other factors such as ecological, phylogenetic, historical,
or cultural preferences for some taxa over others, as well
as the probability of success of conservation actions,
availability of funds or personnel, cost-effectiveness, and
legal frameworks for conservation of threatened taxa. In the
context of regional risk assessments, a number of additional
pieces of information are valuable for setting conservation
priorities. For example, it is important to consider not
only conditions within the region but also the status of the
taxon from a global perspective and the proportion of the
global population that occurs within the region. Decisions
on how these three variables, as well as other factors, are
used for establishing conservation priorities are a matter
for the regional authorities to determine.

4.5 Red List versus priority for

conservation action
Assessment of extinction risk and setting conservation
priorities are two related but different processes.
Assessment of extinction risk, such as the assignment of
IUCN Red List Categories, generally precedes the setting
of conservation priorities. The purpose of the Red List
categorization is to produce a relative estimate of the
likelihood of extinction of a species. Setting conservation

The Northern Lapwing, Vanellus vanellus, is a species of wader that has been classified as Vulnerable in Europe and the EU 27, because of ongoing population declines owing to changes
in agricultural practices. Ivan Dudek

33

5. Recommendations and
future work
5.1 Policy recommendations
Across Europe, many governments, NGOs and other
parties are showing a major commitment to conserving
wild birds and their habitats. As a result, some bird
species have come back from the brink of extinction
during the last 30 years (Deinet et al.. 2013). Taking into
account the substantial declines of many widespread and
formerly common species, in particular those linked to
farmlands, it is clear that much more still needs to be
done to prevent further extinctions and keep populations
in favourable conditions.

BirdLife International believes there are a number of key

recommendations which, if implemented, would greatly
strengthen the long-term conservation of European birds.
Some of these recommendations are summarized below.

5.1.1 Species conservation

Ensure funding for the protection of threatened species.
Ensure that threats to migratory birds are tackled on a
flyway scale. This is likely to require boosting targeted
conservation efforts in the wintering grounds outside
the European region.
Ensure that legal hunting is sustainable and carried
out in line within the legal framework of AEWA, the
Bern Convention and, where relevant, the EU Birds
Directive.
Combat illegal killing of birds, such as poisoning
of birds of prey, through improving enforcement of
national legislation.
Ensure that energy infrastructures are developed in
harmony with nature and do not adversely impact
birds and their habitat.

areas, enforcement of site protection and through

improving site management.
Enhance cross-policy coordination to strengthen
protection and restoration efforts for the existing
protected area networks of national and international
importance (in particular Natura 2000 and Emerald
sites), but also on High Nature Value (HNV)
farmlands and other areas of outstanding importance
for bird conservation.
Ensure that agricultural policies, such as the EU
Common Agricultural Policy, safeguard farmland
biodiversity through incentives and legal obligations.
Ensure sustainable forest management and
ecologically compatible afforestation policies.
Improve the effectiveness of Agri-Environment
Schemes (AES) by setting specific long-term
objectives, including those for wild birds, at a range
of spatial scales and develop targeted measures to
support bird biodiversity in agro-ecosystems, and by
allocating sufficient funding resources.
Provide bundles of bird-friendly measures within
AES, which can be deployed together to provide
forage, nesting and other resources within local
landscapes.

5.1.3 Marine policy

Ensure that catch limits are set on strict scientific
grounds at or below the level of fishing that allows for
harvested species to be restored and maintained above
levels capable of producing maximum sustainable
yield.
Designate and properly manage a comprehensive
network of Marine Protected Areas.
Eliminate the bycatch of seabirds in fisheries through
the deployment of appropriate mitigation measures
and better management of fisheries.

5.1.2 Habitats conservation

5.1.4 Invasive alien species

Increase the protection of Important Bird and

Biodiversity Areas29, through designation as protected

Ensure that invasive alien species are detected early

and, where appropriate, rapidly eradicated. Widely
established invasive alien species should be managed
to reduce impacts and to prevent further spreading.

29 http://www.birdlife.org/worldwide/programmes/important-bird-andbiodiversity-areas-ibas

34

5.1.5 Knowledge base

5.3 Future work

Continue to support bird indicators, such as the

European Union agri-environmental indicator
population trends of farmland birds30 and promote
more targeted long-term monitoring schemes.
Invest in targeted research on threatened species,
especially those for which the threats are poorly
understood, such as seaducks.

Red Lists are a dynamic tool that will evolve with time as
species are re-assessed according to new information or
situations. They are aimed at stimulating and supporting
research, monitoring and conservation action at local,
regional and international levels, especially for threatened,
Near Threatened and Data Deficient species.
Through the process of compiling bird data for the
European Red List a number of knowledge gaps have
been identified. Across Europe there are significant
geographic, geopolitical and taxonomic biases in the
quality of data available on the distribution and status
of species. It is evident that for a number of countries,
capacity and probably funding is lacking for regular
monitoring of bird populations. Despite these issues, this
European Red List forms the third assessment of birds in
Europe since 1994. Periodical assessments can be used to
produce a Red List Index to track the changing status of
species (Butchart et al.. 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007). The
Red List Index for European birds based on a comparison
of the two previous assessments (Tucker & Heath 1994,
BirdLife International 2004a) was adopted as one of the
headline indicators to monitor progress towards halting
biodiversity loss in Europe by 2010 (EEA 2007). It is
envisaged that this European Red List will form the third
data point in the Red List Index. The European Red
List of Birds will also form the basis for identification of
species of European concern, following the methodology
developed in the previous assessments (Tucker & Heath
1994, BirdLife International 2004a).

5.2 Application of project outputs

This European Red List of birds is part of a wider
initiative aimed at assessing the status of European
species. It provides key resources for decision-makers,
policymakers, resources managers, environmental
planners and NGOs. It has gathered large amounts of
data on the population, ecology, habitats and threats of
each bird species. These data are freely available on the
IUCN Red List website (www.iucnredlist.org/initiatives/
europe), on the European Commissions website (http://
ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/
redlist) and through paper publications (see the list of
European Red Lists published at the end of this report).
The outputs of this project can be applied to inform
policy and identify priority species to include in research
and monitoring programmes.

30 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Agrienvironmental_indicator_-_population_trends_of_farmland_birds

35

References
Allen, D.J., Bilz, M., Leaman, D.J., Miller, R.M.,
Timoshyna, A. and Window, J. 2014. European Red
List of Medicinal Plants. Luxembourg: Publications
Office of the European Union.
BirdLife International 2004a. Birds in Europe: population
estimates, trends, and conservation status. Cambridge,
UK: BirdLife International.
BirdLife International 2004b Birds in the European Union:
a status assessment. Wageningen, The Netherlands:
BirdLife International.
BirdLife International 2014. The BirdLife checklist
of the birds of the world: Version 7. Downloaded
from http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/userfiles/file/
Species/Taxonomy/BirdLife_Checklist_Version_70.
zip [.xls zipped 1 MB].
Butchart, S.H.M, Stattersfield, A.J., Bennun, L.A.,
Shutes, S.M., Akcakaya, H.R., et al.. 2004. Measuring
global trends in the status of biodiversity: Red List
Indices for birds. PLoS Biology 2: e383.
Butchart, S.H.M., Stattersfield, A.J., Baillie, J.E.M.,
Bennun, L.A., Stuart, S.N., et al.. 2005. Using Red
List Indices to measure progress towards the 2010
target and beyond. Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society of London B 360: 255268.
Butchart, S.H.M., Akcakaya, H.R., Kennedy, E.,
HiltonTaylor, C. 2006. Biodiversity indicators based
on trends in conservation status: strengths of the
IUCN Red List Index. Conservation Biology 20: 579
581.
Butchart, S.H.M., Akcakaya, H.R., Chanson, J., Baillie,
J.E.M., Collen, B., et al.. 2007. Improvements to the
Red List Index. PLoS ONE 2(1): e140. doi:10.1371/
journal.pone.0000140.
Cox, N.A. and Temple, H.J. 2009. European Red List of
Reptiles. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications
of the European Communities.
Cuttelod, A., Garca, N., Abdul Malak, D., Temple,
H. and Katariya, V. 2008. The Mediterranean: a
biodiversity hotspot under threat. In: Vi, J.-C.,
Hilton-Taylor, C. and Stuart, S.N. (eds). The 2008
Review of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Deinet, S., Ieronymidou, C., McRae, L., Burfield, I.J.,

Foppen, R.P., Collen, B. and Bhm, M. (2013)
Wildlife comeback in Europe: The recovery of selected
mammal and bird species. Final report to Rewilding
Europe by ZSL, BirdLife International and the
European Bird Census Council. London, UK: ZSL.
Donald, P.F., Sanderson, F.J., Burfield, I.J. & van
Bommel, F.P.J. 2006. Further evidence of continentwide impacts of agricultural intensification on
European farmland birds, 1990-2000. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment 116: 189196.
EEA 2007. Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010: proposal
for a first set of indicators to monitor progress in Europe.
EEA Technical Report NO. 11/2007.
EEA 2015. The European environment state and
outlook 2015: synthesis report. European Environment
Agency, Copenhagen.
Euro+Med. 2006-2011. Euro+Med PlantBase - the
information resource for Euro-Mediterranean plant
diversity. Accessed on 12 August 2014: http://ww2.
bgbm.org/EuroPlusMed/.
Fauna Europaea 2004. Web Service 2004. Fauna
Europaea version 1.1. Available at www.faunaeur.org
Freyhof, J. and Brooks, E. 2011. European Red List of
Freshwater Fishes. Luxembourg: Publications Office
of the European Union.
IUCN 2011. European species under threat. Overview of
European Red Lists results.
IUCN 2012a. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria:
Version 3.1. Second edition. Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, UK: IUCN.
IUCN 2012b. Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red
List Criteria at Regional and National Levels. Version
4.0. IUCN Species Survival Commission. Gland:
IUCN.
IUCN 2014. Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red
List Categories and Criteria. Version 11. Prepared
by the Standards and Petitions Subcommittee.
Downloadable from http://www.iucnredlist.org/
documents/RedListGuidelines.pdf.
IUCN in prep. 2015. European Red List of Marine Fishes.
Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European
Union.

36

Kalkman, V.J., Boudot, J.-P., Bernard, R., Conze, K.-J.,

De Knijf, G., Dyatlova, E., Ferreira, S., Jovic, M.,
Ott, J., Riservato, E., and Sahln, G. 2010. European
Red List of Dragonflies. Luxembourg: Publications
Office of the European Union.
Kottelat, M. and Freyhof, J. 2007. Handbook of European
freshwater fishes. Cornol, Switzerland: Kottelat, and
Berlin, Germany: Freyhof.
Mittermeier, R.A., Robles Gil, P., Hoffmann, M.,
Pilgrim, J., Brooks, T., Mittermeier, C.G., Lamoreux,
J. and Fonseca, G.A.B. 2004. Hotspots Revisited:
Earths Biologically Richest and Most Endangered
Sirami, C., Brotons, L., Burfield, I., Fonderflick, J. &
Martin, J.-L. 2008. Is land abandonment having an
impact on biodiversity? A meta-analytical approach
to bird distribution changes in the north-western
Mediterranean. Biological Conservation 141: 450
459.
Stoate, C., Bldi, A., Beja, P., Boatman, N.D., Herzon,
I., van Doorn, A., de Snoo, G.R., Rakosy, L. &
Ramwell, C. 2009. Ecological impacts of early 21st
century agricultural change in Europe: a review.
Journal of Environmental Management 91: 2246.
Temple, H.J. and Terry, A. 2007. The status and
distribution of European mammals. Luxembourg:
Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities.
Temple, H.J. and Cox, N.A. 2009. European Red List
of Amphibians. Luxembourg: Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities.
Tucker, G.M., Evans, M.I., 1997. Habitats for Birds
in Europe: A Conservation Strategy for the Wider
Environment. BirdLife International, Cambridge,
UK.
Tucker, G.M. and Heath, M.F. 1994. Birds in Europe:
their conservation status. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife
International.

37

38

LC

LC

VU

Perdix perdix

Bonasa bonasia

Lagopus lagopus

LC

LC

LC

Alectoris rufa

Ammoperdix
griseogularis

LC

LC

Francolinus francolinus

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

NT

Alectoris chukar

Alectoris barbara

Phasianus colchicus

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

NT

Alectoris graeca

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

LC

LC

Tetraogallus caucasicus

Tetraogallus caspius

LC

Phasianidae

Coturnix coturnix

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

VU

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

VU

NE

NE

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

Assessments based on winter data are denoted with W

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

III

III

IIA*; IIB**;
IIIA***

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

I*

II*

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

I; IIB

I*; IIA; IIIA

IIA; IIIA

IIB

IIA; IIIA

I; IIB; IIIA

IIB

I; IIA

IIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

* L. l. scoticus and
hibernicus only. ** L.
l. lagopus only. ***
L. l. lagopus, scoticus
and hibernicus only

* P. p. italica and
hispaniensis only

* C. c. coturnix only

Notes

Appendix 1.
Red List status of all European bird species and
their protection status under international legislation,
conventions and agreements

39

LC

EN

VU

LC

VU

LC

VU W

Anser albifrons

Anser erythropus

Clangula hyemalis

Somateria spectabilis

Somateria mollissima

Polysticta stelleri

Melanitta fusca

LC

LC

NT

LC

LC

Melanitta nigra

Bucephala clangula

Bucephala islandica

Mergellus albellus

Mergus merganser

LC

Anser brachyrhynchus

VU

D2

EN
VU W

A2abcde

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

EN

NE

A4abcde

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde
W

CR

LC W

LC
W

LC

LC

NE

NE

C1

LC

LC

LC

Branta canadensis

NT W

B2ab(iii,v)

Anser fabalis

NT W

Branta ruficollis

LC

LC W

Anser anser

LC

Branta leucopsis

EN W

A4abcde

LC

LC

Branta bernicla

LC

LC

VU

NE

LC

LC

VU

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

Anser caerulescens

EN W

Cygnus columbianus

LC

EN

Anatidae

Oxyura leucocephala

LC

LC

Lyrurus mlokosiewiczi

Cygnus olor

C1

LC

Lyrurus tetrix

Cygnus cygnus

LC

Tetrao urogallus

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

NT

Lagopus muta

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

A2abcde

C1

A4abcde

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

B2a+b(iii,v)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

A4abcde

D1

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIB

IIB

IIB; IIIB

IIB

IIB; IIIB

IIB

III

II

II

III

III

III

II

III

II

III

II

III

I*; IIB;
IIIB**
I

III

III

III

III

III

II

II

III

II*; III**

II

III

II

IIB

IIA

IIA; IIIB

IIA

IIB

I*

IIB

III

III

I*; IIB;
IIIB**

II*; III**

III

I*

I*

I*

I*

II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

II

II

I; II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

II

II

II

II

I; II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

I; IIB; IIIB

I*; IIA; IIIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

AEWA

II

II

CITES
Appendices

* A. a. flavirostris
only. ** A. a.
ablifrons only

* C. c. bewickii only.
** all others

* L. m. pyrenaicus
and helveticus only
* T. u. cantabricus
only. ** all others
* T. t. tetrix only. **
T. t. britannicus only

Notes

40

C1; D1

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

VU

LC

VU

Marmaronetta
angustirostris

Netta rufina

Aythya ferina

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Spatula clypeata

Mareca strepera

Mareca penelope

Anas platyrhynchos

Anas acuta

Anas crecca

Podicipedidae

LC

Podiceps nigricollis

LC

LC

LC

LC

Columba livia

Columba oenas

Columba palumbus

Columba trocaz

Columba bollii

LC

Columbidae

LC

Phoenicopteridae

Phoenicopterus roseus

A2abce+3bce+4abce

LC

NT

Podiceps cristatus

Podiceps auritus

LC

LC

Tachybaptus ruficollis

Podiceps grisegena

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

LC

VU

LC

LC

VU

VU

LC

Spatula querquedula

A2abcde

VU

Aythya marila

LC

LC

VU

LC

CR

NT

LC

NE

VU

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

LC

LC

Aythya nyroca

Aythya fuligula

LC

LC

Tadorna tadorna

Tadorna ferruginea

LC

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

NT

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

Histrionicus histrionicus

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Mergus serrator

Taxonomy

A2abce+3bce+4abce; C1

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

C2a(ii)

D1

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

I*; IIA; IIIA

IIB

IIA

IIA; IIIB

IIA; IIIB

IIA; IIIA

IIA; IIIB

IIA

IIA; IIIB

IIA

IIB; IIIB

IIA; IIIB

IIA; IIIB

IIB

IIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

III

III

I*

III

III

II*; III**

II

III

II

II

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

II

II

II

II

III

II

II*

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

II

I; II

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

* C. p. azorica only

* P. n. caspicus only.
** all others

* P. g. grisegena

Notes

41

EN

LC

Pterocles orientalis

Pterocles alchata

D1

LC

LC

NT

VU

LC

LC

LC

Caprimulgus europaeus

Apodidae

Tachymarptis melba

Apus caffer

Apus affinis

Apus unicolor

Apus pallidus

Apus apus

Cuculidae

LC

LC

EN

Porphyrio porphyrio

Fulica cristata

LC

Zapornia pusilla

Gallinula chloropus

LC

Zapornia parva

LC

LC

Crex crex

LC

Rallidae

Rallus aquaticus

Porzana porzana

LC

Cuculus saturatus

LC

LC

Clamator glandarius

Cuculus canorus

C1

LC

Caprimulgidae

Caprimulgus ruficollis

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

EN

Syrrhaptes paradoxus

LC

LC

Streptopelia decaocto

Spilopelia senegalensis

Pteroclidae

VU

B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii)

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

NT

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

Columba junoniae

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Streptopelia turtur

Taxonomy

EN

LC

LC

NT

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

NT

LC

LC

LC

LC

EN

NE

NE

LC

NT

NT

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

D1

D1

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii)

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

III

II

III

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

III

II

II*

II*

II

II

II*

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

CITES
Appendices

AEWA

* Western Eurasia/
Africa population
only
* Z. p. intermedia
only

* S. t. turtur only

Notes

42

NT

Chlamydotis undulata

LC

LC

VU W

Gaviidae

Gavia stellata

Gavia arctica

Gavia immer

Gavia adamsii

VU

EN

LC

LC

LC

Pterodroma deserta

Pterodroma madeira

Calonectris diomedea

Calonectris borealis

Puffinus puffinus

EN

Fulmarus glacialis

LC

Hydrobates leucorhous

Procellariidae

VU

Hydrobates monteiroi

D1+2

A4abcde

D1+2

LC

B2ab(iii,v)

EN

Pelagodroma marina

Hydrobatidae

LC

Oceanitidae

Hydrobates pelagicus

NE

D1

VU W

Hydrobates castro

VU W

A4abce; C1

LC

LC

LC

EN

VU

VU

VU

VU

LC

LC

EN

LC

LC

NE

NT

LC

VU

LC

NE

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

C2a(i, ii); D

D1

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

CR (PE)

Chlamydotis
macqueenii

LC

Otis tarda

VU

Otididae

LC

LC

Anthropoides virgo

Grus grus

Tetrax tetrax

Gruidae

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

NT

Fulica atra

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

D1+2

A4abcde

B2ab(v)

D1+2

B2ab(iii,v)

A4abce; C1

D1

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIA; IIIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

III

II

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

II*

II*

II*

II*

II

I*

I; II

II

II

II*

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

II

II

II

II

CITES
Appendices

* Northwest
European population
only
* Western Palearctic
population only

* G. a. arctica only

* Western Palearctic
populations only

* only Northwest
African populations

* F. a. atra
(Mediterranean
and Black Sea
populations) only

Notes

43

NT

LC

LC

LC

LC

RE

LC

LC

Puffinus lherminieri

Bulweria bulwerii

Ciconiidae

Ciconia nigra

Ciconia ciconia

Threskiornithidae

Platalea leucorodia

Geronticus eremita

Plegadis falcinellus

Ardeidae

Botaurus stellaris

LC

LC

Nycticorax nycticorax

Ardeola ralloides

Phalacrocoracidae

LC

LC

Sulidae

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

RE

LC

LC

LC

LC

NT

CR

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

Morus bassanus

LC

Pelecanus onocrotalus

LC

LC

Egretta garzetta

Pelecanidae

LC

Ardea alba

Pelecanus crispus

LC

Ardea purpurea

LC

LC

Bubulcus ibis

Ardea cinerea

LC

Ixobrychus minutus

B2ab(v); C1+2a(i)

A4bcde

LC

CR

Puffinus yelkouan

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Puffinus mauretanicus

Taxonomy

B2ab(v); C1+2a(i)

A4bcde

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

Birds
Directive
Annexes

III

II

II

II

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

II

I*; II*

I; II

II*

II*

II*

II*

II

I; II

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

II

II

CITES
Appendices

* Western Palearctic
populations

* A. p. purpurea
(populations breeding
in the Western
Palearctic) only
* A.a. alba
(Western Palearctic
populations) only

* B. s. stellaris
(Western Palearctic
populations) only
* I. m. minutus
(Western Palearctic
populations) only

Notes

44

LC

RE

Phalacrocorax carbo

Anhingidae

Anhinga rufa

A2abc+3bc+4abc

RE

VU

Haematopodidae

Haematopus
meadewaldoi

Haematopus ostralegus

NE

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd;
C1+2a(i,ii); D

CR

LC

Vanellus gregarius

Vanellus leucurus

Scolopacidae

NE

NE

VU

LC

VU

NE
VU

Vanellus indicus

A2abce+3bce+4abce

CR W

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC W

LC

LC

VU

RE

LC

NE

LC

NT

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

Vanellus spinosus

RE

VU

C1

VU

Charadrius asiaticus

LC

Vanellus vanellus

Charadrius
alexandrinus
Charadrius
leschenaultii

LC

LC

Charadrius hiaticula

Charadrius dubius

LC

LC

Pluvialis apricaria

LC

Charadriidae

Pluvialis squatarola

Eudromias morinellus

LC

Himantopus
himantopus

LC

Recurvirostridae

Recurvirostra avosetta

LC

Burhinidae

Burhinus oedicnemus

LC

Phalacrocorax aristotelis

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Microcarbo pygmaeus

Taxonomy

A2abce+3bce+4abce

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIB

I; IIB; IIIB

IIB

IIB

I*

Birds
Directive
Annexes

III

III

III

II

III

III

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

II

II

III

III

II

III

III

II**; III***

II

I*

II

I; II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

* P. a. desmarestii
only. **
Mediterranean
population only. ***
all others

Notes

45

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Phalaropus lobatus

Phalaropus fulicarius

Xenus cinereus

Actitis hypoleucos

Tringa ochropus

Tringa erythropus

Tringa nebularia

Tringa totanus

Tringa glareola

Tringa stagnatilis

Turnicidae

D1

LC

LC

Scolopax rusticola

Lymnocryptes minimus

LC

Calidris minuta

D1

Gallinago gallinago

LC

Calidris bairdii

LC

LC

Calidris maritima

LC

LC

Calidris alpina

Gallinago stenura

LC

Calidris alba

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

Gallinago media

LC

Calidris temminckii

LC
VU W

D1

LC

VU W

LC

LC

Calidris canutus

Calidris pugnax

Calidris falcinellus

LC

Calidris ferruginea

VU

Arenaria interpres

EN

LC

VU

LC

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abc+3bc+4abc

C1+2a(i); D

C1

A2abc+3bc+4abc; C1

LC
NT

D1

A2abc+3bc+4abc

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

C1+2a(i); D

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

NT

CR

NE

LC

LC

LC

VU

NE

LC

LC W

NE

NT W

LC

LC
W

LC

EN

LC
W

EN

EN

LC

VU

Limosa limosa

LC

Limosa lapponica

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

VU

Numenius arquata

LC
CR (PE) W

C1+2a(i); D

LC

CR (PE) W

Numenius phaeopus

Numenius tenuirostris

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIA; IIIB

IIA; IIIB

IIA; IIIB

I*

I; IIB

IIB

IIB

I; IIB

IIB

IIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

III

III

III

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

II

III

III

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

II

III

III

III

II

III

I*

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

* C. a. schinzii only

Notes

46

D1

A2abce+3bce+4abce

NT

LC

VU

NT

EN

Cursorius cursor

Glareola pratincola

Glareola nordmanni

Laridae

Hydrocoloeus minutus

Rhodostethia rosea

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Larus hyperboreus

Larus marinus

Sternula albifrons

Gelochelidon nilotica

Hydroprogne caspia

Chlidonias hybrida

LC

LC

LC

Larus cachinnans

B2ab(iii,v)

NT

Larus armenicus

Larus michahellis

Larus glaucoides

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

NT

Larus argentatus

LC

LC

Larus canus

Larus fuscus

LC

LC

Larus melanocephalus

Larus audouinii

LC

Larus ichthyaetus

LC

LC

Larus genei

Larus ridibundus

A4abcd

VU

Rissa tridactyla

LC

LC

Xema sabini

Pagophila eburnea

A4abce

CR (PE)

Turnix sylvaticus

Glareolidae

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

LC

NT

LC

LC

LC

NE

NE

LC

LC

NE

VU

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

EN

NE

NE

NE

LC

CR

LC

NT

CR

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

C1

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

A4abcd

C2a(i); D

D1

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

II

II

III

III

III

III

III

III

II

II

III

III

II

III

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II*

II*

II

I
I

II

I; II

II

II*

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

* G. n. nilotica (West
Eurasian and African
populations) only
* West Eurasian and
African populations
only

* West Eurasian and

African population
only

Notes

47

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Sterna dougallii

Sterna hirundo

Sterna paradisaea

Thalasseus sandvicensis

Stercorariidae

Stercorarius longicaudus

LC

LC

LC

LC

EN

Glaucidium passerinum

Athene noctua

Aegolius funereus

Otus scops

Otus brucei

C2a(i); D

LC

Strigidae

Surnia ulula

LC

Tytonidae

Tyto alba

A4abcde

LC

NT

Uria lomvia

A4abcde

A4abcde

Uria aalge

RE

LC

Pinguinus impennis

Alle alle

LC

NT

EN

Fratercula arctica

Alca torda

Cepphus grylle

LC

Catharacta skua

Alcidae

LC

LC

Stercorarius parasiticus

Stercorarius pomarinus

LC

Chlidonias niger

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Chlidonias leucopterus

Taxonomy

NE

LC

LC

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

A4abcde

A2abc+3bc+4abc

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

NE

RE

LC

VU

NT

LC

NE

EN

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

I*

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

I*

II*

II*

II*

II*

II*

II*

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

CITES
Appendices

* U. a. ibericus only

* Atlantic population
only
* S. h. hirundo
(populations breeding
in the Western
Palearctic) only
* Atlantic
populations only
* T. s. sandvicensis
only

* C. n. niger only

* West Eurasian and

African population
only

Notes

48

LC

D1

NT

NT

Circus cyaneus

Circus macrourus

Accipiter brevipes

A4abcd

LC

Circus aeruginosus

LC

LC

VU

A2abcde

NT

Aquila fasciata

Hieraaetus pennatus

Circus pygargus

LC

LC

Aquila heliaca

Aquila chrysaetos

Accipiter badius

D1

CR

VU

Aquila nipalensis

Aquila adalberti

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

LC

NE

LC

EN

LC

LC

LC

NT

LC

NT

VU

NE

CR

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde;
C1

EN

Clanga clanga

LC
LC

LC

LC

VU

VU

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

CR

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

LC

LC

Aegypius monachus

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

C1+2a(i)

Clanga pomarina

LC

LC

EN

Neophron percnopterus

Circaetus gallicus

VU

Gypaetus barbatus

Gyps fulvus

LC

LC

Elanus caeruleus

Pernis apivorus

Accipitridae

C2a(i)

LC

CR

Bubo bubo

Ketupa zeylonensis

LC

LC

Strix nebulosa

Bubo scandiacus

LC

LC

LC

Strix aluco

Strix uralensis

Pandionidae

LC

LC

Asio otus

Asio flammeus

Pandion haliaetus

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

A2abcde

D1

D1

C1; D

A2abcde

D1

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

Birds
Directive
Annexes

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

AEWA

II

II

I; II

I; II

II

I; II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

CITES
Appendices

Notes

49

LC

LC

LC

LC

Milvus migrans

Buteo lagopus

Buteo buteo

Buteo rufinus

A2abc+3bc+4abc

LC

LC

NT

Picus canus

Picus viridis

Picus sharpei

LC

LC

Leiopicus medius

Dryobates minor

LC

Dendrocopos major

Falconidae

LC

LC

Dendrocopos leucotos

Dendrocopos syriacus

LC

LC

Dryocopus martius

Picoides tridactylus

LC

C1; D1

Picidae

C2a(i); D

EN

VU

Ceryle rudis

Halcyon smyrnensis

Jynx torquilla

A2abce+3bce+4abce

VU

Alcedinidae

Alcedo atthis

LC

LC

LC

Merops persicus

Merops apiaster

Coraciidae

Meropidae

Coracias garrulus

LC

Upupidae

Upupa epops

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

LC

NT

Haliaeetus albicilla

Milvus milvus

LC

LC

Accipiter nisus

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Accipiter gentilis

Taxonomy

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NT

LC

LC

LC

NE

NE

VU

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

EN

LC

NT

LC

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abce+3bce+4abce

A2abcd

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

I*

I*

I*

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

II

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

III

I*

I*

I*

I; II

II

II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

CITES
Appendices

AEWA

* D. m. canariensis
and thanneri only

* A. g. arrigonii only

* A. n. granti only

Notes

50

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde

NT

LC

LC

Falco vespertinus

Falco eleonorae

Falco columbarius

D1

A2abc+3bc+4abc

VU

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

LC

LC

Falco cherrug

Falco rusticolus

Falco peregrinus

Laniidae

Lanius collurio

Lanius minor

Lanius excubitor

Lanius senator

Lanius nubicus

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Pyrrhocorax graculus

Corvus monedula

Corvus frugilegus

Corvus corone

Corvus corax

LC

LC

Nucifraga caryocatactes

Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax

LC

LC

Cyanopica cyanus

Pica pica

LC

LC

Perisoreus infaustus

Corvidae

Garrulus glandarius

LC

Oriolidae

Oriolus oriolus

C1

LC

EN

Falco subbuteo

Falco biarmicus

LC

LC

Falco naumanni

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Falco tinnunculus

Taxonomy

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

LC

LC

LC

VU

VU

VU

LC

LC

LC

VU

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

D1

D1

D1

A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde;
C1

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

I*; II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

I; II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

CITES
Appendices

* except Mongolian
populations

Notes

51

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Parus caeruleus

Parus cyanus

Remizidae

Remiz pendulinus

Hirundinidae

Riparia riparia

Hirundo rupestris

LC

Aegithalos caudatus

LC

LC

Calandrella rufescens

A2abc+3bc+4abc; C1

CR

C2a(ii)

LC

CR

LC

Ammomanes deserti

LC

Calandrella
brachydactyla

Melanocorypha
calandra
Melanocorypha
bimaculata
Melanocorypha
leucoptera
Melanocorypha
yeltoniensis

Alaudidae

LC

Delichon urbicum

Aegithalidae

LC

LC

Hirundo rustica

Hirundo daurica

LC

LC

Parus cristatus

Parus major

LC

LC

Parus cinctus

Parus ater

LC

LC

LC

Paridae

Parus palustris

Parus lugubris

LC

Bombycillidae

Bombycilla garrulus

Parus montanus

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

LC

LC

NE

NE

NE

NE

VU

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

VU

LC

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abc+3bc+4abc

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

I*

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

III

II
II

I*

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

* P. a. cypriotes only

Notes

52

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Galerida theklae

Lullula arborea

Alauda arvensis

Eremophila alpestris

Cisticolidae

Cisticola juncidis

Prinia gracilis

Pycnonotidae

Pycnonotus xanthopygos

LC

LC

LC

LC

Acrocephalus palustris

Acrocephalus
arundinaceus

Hippolais caligata

Hippolais rama

LC

LC

Hippolais languida

LC

Acrocephalus scirpaceus

Acrocephalus
dumetorum

LC

LC

Acrocephalus agricola

LC

LC

Hippolais pallida

VU

Acrocephalus paludicola

Acrocephalus
schoenobaenus

Hippolais opaca

LC

Acrocephalus
melanopogon

LC

LC

Locustella fluviatilis

Locustella luscinioides

LC

LC

Locustella lanceolata

Locustella naevia

A2abc+3bc+4abc

LC

Sylviidae

Cettia cetti

LC

C1

VU

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

Chersophilus duponti

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Galerida cristata

Taxonomy

NE

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

LC

LC

VU

LC

NE

LC

NE

NE

LC

NT

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

D1

B1ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v); C1

A2abc+3bc+4abc

C1

C1

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

III

II

III

III

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

I; II

II

II

II

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

IIB

Birds
Directive
Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

Notes

53

LC

LC

RE

LC

Sylvia communis

Sylvia curruca

Sylvia nana

Sylvia nisoria

LC

LC

LC

Sylvia melanocephala

Sylvia melanothorax

Sylvia cantillans

LC

Sylvia sarda

NT

LC

Turdoides altirostris

Panurus biarmicus

Timaliidae

NT

Sylvia undata

A2abc+3bc+4abc

LC

LC

Sylvia mystacea

Sylvia conspicillata

LC

LC

Sylvia hortensis

Sylvia rueppelli

LC

LC

Sylvia atricapilla

Sylvia borin

LC

LC

Phylloscopus borealis

Phylloscopus trochiloides

LC

Phylloscopus inornatus

LC

LC

LC

LC

Phylloscopus ibericus

Phylloscopus sindianus

Phylloscopus bonelli

LC

LC

Phylloscopus collybita

Phylloscopus canariensis

Phylloscopus sibilatrix

LC

LC

Hippolais icterina

Phylloscopus trochilus

LC

LC

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

Hippolais olivetorum

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Hippolais polyglotta

Taxonomy

LC

NE

LC

NT

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

VU

NE

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

C1

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

CITES
Appendices

AEWA

Notes

54

LC

LC

Certhia familiaris

Certhia brachydactyla

LC

LC

LC

Turdus philomelos

Turdus viscivorus

Muscicapidae

Erithacus rubecula

A2abc+3bc+4abc

LC

NT

Turdus iliacus

Turdus pilaris

LC

LC

LC

Zoothera dauma

Turdus torquatus

LC

Turdus merula

LC

Sturnus unicolor

Turdidae

Turdus ruficollis

LC

Sturnus vulgaris

LC

Sturnidae

Sturnus roseus

Certhiidae

LC

LC

Sitta krueperi

Sitta neumayer

LC

C1+2a(ii)

LC

VU

Sitta europaea

Sitta whiteheadi

LC

Sittidae

Sitta tephronota

LC

Troglodytes troglodytes

Tichodroma muraria

Troglodytidae

LC

LC

Regulus ignicapilla

LC

Reguliidae

Regulus regulus

Regulus madeirensis

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

LC

LC

LC

VU

VU

NE

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

NT

VU

LC

LC

LC

LC

NT

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abc+3bc+4abc

D1

C1+2a(ii)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

IIB

I*

I*

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

III

III

III

III

III

III

II

III

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

I*

I*

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

* C. b. dorotheae
only

* T. t. fridariensis
only

Notes

55

LC

LC

LC

LC

Ficedula hypoleuca

Ficedula albicollis

Ficedula semitorquata

Ficedula parva

LC

LC

Monticola solitarius

Muscicapa striata

LC

NT

Oenanthe deserti

LC

EN

Oenanthe chrysopygia

Oenanthe isabellina

LC

Monticola saxatilis

LC

Oenanthe cypriaca

Oenanthe
xanthoprymna

LC

LC

Oenanthe hispanica

Oenanthe pleschanka

LC

LC

Oenanthe oenanthe

Oenanthe finschii

D1

A2abc+3bc+4abc

LC

VU

Saxicola torquatus

Oenanthe leucura

B1ab(ii,iii); C2a(ii)

LC

NT

Saxicola rubetra

LC

Saxicola dacotiae

LC

LC

LC

Erythropygia galactotes

Phoenicurus ochruros

Phoenicurus
phoenicurus
Phoenicurus
erythrogastrus

LC

LC

Tarsiger cyanurus

Irania gutturalis

LC

LC

Luscinia calliope

Luscinia svecica

LC

LC

Luscinia luscinia

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Luscinia megarhynchos

Taxonomy

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

NE

NE

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

VU

LC

NT

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

B1ab(ii,iii); C2a(ii)

D1

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

Notes

56

C1

LC

VU

LC

LC

Passer hispaniolensis

Passer moabiticus

Passer montanus

Petronia xanthocollis

LC

Montifringilla nivalis

LC

Anthus spinoletta

NT

LC

VU

Anthus gustavi

Anthus pratensis

LC

LC

LC

Anthus trivialis

Anthus hodgsoni

Anthus cervinus

LC

LC

Anthus campestris

Anthus berthelotii

Anthus petrosus

LC

Motacilla cinerea

A2abc+3bc+4abc

LC

LC

Motacilla citreola

D1

Motacilla flava

LC

LC

LC

Prunella atrogularis

Prunella modularis

Motacillidae

LC

Motacilla alba

NT

Prunella montanella

Prunella ocularis

LC

Prunellidae

Prunella collaris

LC

LC

Petronia petronia

Petronia brachydactyla

LC

Passeridae

LC

Cinclidae

Cinclus cinclus

Passer domesticus

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

LC

LC

LC

VU

NE

NE

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

NE

NE

LC

LC

NE

LC

NE

LC

NE

LC

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

D1

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

II

III

III

III

III

II

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

CITES
Appendices

AEWA

Notes

57

D2

LC

NT

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

Fringillidae

Fringilla coelebs

Fringilla teydea

Fringilla montifringilla

Serinus pusillus

Serinus serinus

Serinus canaria

Carduelis chloris

LC

LC

LC

Carduelis citrinella

Carduelis corsicana

Carduelis flammea

LC

LC

LC

EN

LC

Loxia curvirostra

Loxia leucoptera

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Pyrrhula murina

Coccothraustes
coccothraustes

LC

LC

Loxia pytyopsittacus

Loxia scotica

LC

LC

Carpodacus rubicilla

Pinicola enucleator

LC

LC

LC

Rhodopechys obsoletus

Bucanetes githagineus

LC

Carpodacus erythrinus

LC

Rhodopechys sanguineus

Eremopsaltria
mongolicus

B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii)

D1

LC

LC

Carduelis flavirostris

Carduelis cannabina

LC

LC

Carduelis spinus

Carduelis carduelis

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

LC

EN

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

VU

LC

NE

NE

NE

LC

VU

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

LC

NE

VU

NT

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abc+3bc+4abc

D2

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

I*

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

III

III

II

II

II

II

II

III

II

II

III

III

III

III

II

II

III

II

II

II

II

III

II

II

III

II

III

I*

AEWA

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

CITES
Appendices

* F. c. ombriosa only

Notes

58

LC

LC

LC

Emberiza schoeniclus

Calcarius lapponicus

Plectrophenax nivalis

LC

LC

Emberiza
melanocephala

LC

CR

Emberiza bruniceps

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

VU

Emberiza rustica

Emberiza aureola

Emberiza pallasi

LC

Emberiza pusilla

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd; C1

LC

LC

Emberiza hortulana

C1

Emberiza caesia

LC

VU

Emberiza buchanani

Emberiza cineracea

LC

LC

Emberiza cirlus

Emberiza cia

LC

VU

Emberiza citrinella

LC

Emberizidae

Miliaria calandra

Emberiza leucocephalos

IUCN Red List Criteria

(Europe)

IUCN
Red List
Category
(Europe)

Taxonomy

LC

NT

LC

NE

NE

LC

CR

VU

LC

LC

LC

VU

NE

LC

LC

NE

LC

LC

IUCN
Red List
Category
(EU 27)

A2abc+3bc+4abc

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd; C1

A2abcd+3bcd+4abcd

D1

IUCN Red List Criteria

(EU 27)

(Near-)
Endemic
to
Europe?

(Near-)
Endemic
to EU 27?

Birds
Directive
Annexes

II

II

II

III

III

II

II

II

II

II

III

II

III

II

II

II

II

III

Bern
Emerald
CMS
Convention Network Appendices
Appendices Annexes

AEWA

CITES
Appendices

Notes

Appendix 2.
Methodology for spatial analyses
Data were analysed using a geodesic discrete global grid
system, defined on an icosahedron and projected to the
sphere using the inverse Icosahedral Snyder Equal Area
(ISEA) Projection (S39). This corresponds to a hexagonal
grid composed of individual units (cells) that retain their
shape and area (~2,500 km2) throughout the globe. These
are more suitable for a range of ecological applications
than the most commonly used rectangular grids (S40).

coastline. Patterns of species richness (Fig. 5) were mapped

by counting the number of species in each cell (or cell
section, for species with a coastal distribution). Patterns
of threatened species richness (Fig. 6) were mapped by
counting the number of threatened species (categories CR,
EN, VU at the European regional level) in each cell or cell
section. Patterns of endemic and near-endemic species
richness were mapped by counting the number of species
in each cell (or cell section for coastal species) that were
flagged as being endemic or near-endemic to geographic
Europe as defined in this project (Fig. 7).

The range of each species was converted to the hexagonal

grid for analysis purposes. Coastal cells were clipped to the

59

Appendix 3.
Example species summary and
distribution map
The species summary gives all the information collated for each species during this assessment, including a distribution map.
You can search for and download all the summaries and distribution maps from the European Red List website and data
portal available online at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/ species/redlist and http://www.iucnredlist.
org/europe.

Milvus milvus (Linnaeus, 1758)

ANIMALIA CHORDATA AVES ACCIPITRIFORMES ACCIPITRIDAE

Common Names: Red Kite

Red List Assessment

Red List Status
NT Near Threatened, (IUCN version 3.1)

Assessment Information
Year published:

2015

Date assessed:

2014-12-01

Assessor(s):

BirdLife International

Reviewer(s):

Symes, A.

Compiler(s):

Ashpole, J., Burfield, I., Ieronymidou, C., Pople, R., & Wright, L.

Contributor(s):

The European Union (EU 27) Red List assessments were based principally on the official data
reported by all EU Member States to the European Commission under Article 12 of the Birds
Directive in 2013-14. For the European Red List assessments, similar data were sourced from
BirdLife Partners and other collaborating experts in most other European countries and territories.
For more information, see BirdLife International (2015).

Assessment Rationale
This species is listed as Near Threatened at both European and EU 27 scales, because it is experiencing a moderately rapid
population decline. Despite the current rapid declines in southern Europe, if population increases in northern range states are
sustained the species may qualify for downlisting in the future.

Distribution
Range Description
Milvus milvus is endemic to the western Palearctic, with Europe encompassing 95% of its global breeding range (Carter 2007,
Mammen 2007). It breeds from Spain and Portugal east through central Europe to Ukraine, north to southern Sweden, Latvia
and the U.K., and south to southern Italy. Populations winter within the western breeding range, and formerly in isolated
patches south and east to eastern Turkey.

60

 Occurrence
Countries of Occurrence
Countries of Occurrence
Native:
Albania; Andorra; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Czech Republic; Denmark;
France; Germany; Gibraltar; Hungary; Ireland; Italy; Kosovo; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the
former Yugoslav Republic of; Montenegro; Netherlands; Poland; Portugal; Russian Federation; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia;
Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; Ukraine; United Kingdom
Possibly extinct:
Greece; Moldova; Romania;
Vagrant:
Armenia; Cyprus; Estonia; Finland; Georgia; Iceland; Malta; Norway

Population
The population is estimated to number 50,400-66,800 mature individuals in Europe, 48,000-63,700 of which (95%) occur in
the EU 27. See supplementary material (see link below) for more details of national population sizes and trends.

Trend
At both European and EU 27 levels, the population is estimated to be decreasing overall at a moderately rapid rate (approaching
30% over three generations).
Although the Red Kite declined globally until the 1970s owing to persecution, many populations recovered or stabilised during
1970-1990 (Mionnet 2007) and its overall numbers were probably stable in Europe from 1970 to 1990 (Tucker & Heath
1994). Since 1990, declines documented within its core breeding areas - Spain, France and Germany - have been partly offset
by increases in countries like the UK, Sweden, Poland and Switzerland. The population declined over the past three generations
(34.5 years) by c. 25%. This three generation rate of decline is likely to increase in the short term as numbers continue to fall
in Iberia, but in the longer-term a reduction in the rate of decline, and even population increases are likely if current trends in
the northwest Europe are sustained. Therefore, a moderately rapid decline over three generations is retained for the present; this
will be reviewed in the future.

Habitats and Ecology

The species breeds in broadleaf woodlands and forests, mixed with farmland, pasture and heathland. In winter it also occupies
farmland without trees, wasteland, scrub and wetlands. Formerly an urban scavenger, it still visits the edges of towns and cities.
Eggs are laid between March and May. The nest is a platform of sticks, often with rags or plastic incorporated, and normally
lined with wool. It is built in a fork or on a wide side branch of a tree (coniferous or broadleaf ), in forests, woods or clump of
trees. Each pair normally has several nests, using the same one each year or alternating. Clutches range between one to four
eggs, normally two but sometimes three. It takes a wide range of food, but feeds mainly on carrion and small to mediumsized mammals and birds. Reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates are less important prey. Most birds in north-east Europe are
migratory, wintering mainly in southern France and Iberia, but with some travelling as far as Africa (Orta and Christie 2013).
Migrants travel south from their breeding grounds between August and November, returning between February and April
(Snow and Perrins 1998). Birds are usually seen singly or in pairs, but sometimes form small flocks, possibly family groups,
when soaring on migration (Ferguson-Lees and Christie 2001).

61

Habitats & Altitude

Habitat (level 1)

Habitat (level 2)

Importance

Occurrence

Artificial/Terrestrial

Arable Land

suitable

resident

Artificial/Terrestrial

Pastureland

suitable

resident

Artificial/Terrestrial

Urban Areas

suitable

breeding

Artificial/Terrestrial

Urban Areas

suitable

non-breeding

Forest

Temperate

major

breeding

Forest

Temperate

major

non-breeding

Grassland

Temperate

suitable

breeding

Grassland

Temperate

suitable

non-breeding

Shrubland

Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation

major

breeding

Shrubland

Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation

major

non-breeding

Altitude

0 - 800 m

Occasional altitudinal limits

(max) 2500 m

Threats
The most pertinent threat to this species is illegal direct poisoning to kill predators of livestock and game animals (targeting
foxes, wolves, corvids etc.) and indirect poisoning from pesticides and secondary poisoning from consumption of poisoned
rodents by rodenticides spread on farmland to control vole plagues, particularly in the wintering ranges in France and Spain,
where it is driving rapid population declines (A. Aebischer in litt. 2009); there is a strong correlation between rapid declines and
those populations that winter in Spain (Carter 2007). The Spanish government released more than 1,500 tons of rodenticidetreated baits over about 500,000 ha to fight against a common vole plague in agricultural lands between August 2007 and April
2008; records of Red Kites dying by secondary poisoning in treated areas resulted (J. Vinuela in litt. 2009). Illegal poisoning is
also a serious threat to the species in north Scotland, with 40% of birds found dead between 1989 and 2006 having been killed
by poisoning (Smart et al. 2010). In France populations disappeared at the same rate as conversion from grasslands to cereal
crops (P. Tourret in litt. 2009). The decline of grazing livestock and farming intensification leading to chemical pollution,
homogenization of landscapes and ecological impoverishment also threatens the species (Knott et al. 2009). Wind turbines are
a potentially serious future threat (Duchamp 2003, Mammen et al. 2009, P. Tourret in litt. 2009) and more research needs to
be conducted to assess the level of threat windfarms pose to the species. Other less significant threats include electrocution and
collision with powerlines (Mionnet 2007, P. Tourret in litt. 2009), hunting and trapping (Mionnet 2007, P. Tourret in litt.
2009), road-kills, deforestation, egg-collection (on a local scale) and possibly competition with the generally more successful
Black Kite (Milvus migrans) (Ferguson-Lees et al. 2001, Cardiel in litt. 2000, Mammen 2007, Cardiel and Viuela 2007).
Another factor implicated in the declines in France and Spain is a decrease in the number of rubbish dumps (Mionnet 2007,
Cardiel and Viuela 2007).

62

Threats & impacts

Threat (level 1)

Threat (level 2)

Impact and Stresses

Scope
Severity
Impact
Slow,
Minority
Ongoing
Significant
Low Impact
(<50%)
Decline
Stresses
Ecosystem degradation
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Slow,
Minority
Ongoing
Significant
Low Impact
(<50%)
Decline
Stresses
Ecosystem degradation
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Minority
Negligible
Ongoing
Low Impact
(<50%)
declines
Stresses
Reduced reproductive success, Species mortality
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Slow,
Majority (50Medium
Ongoing
Significant
90%)
Impact
Decline
Stresses
Species mortality
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Slow,
Majority (50Medium
Ongoing
Significant
90%)
Impact
Decline
Stresses
Ecosystem degradation, Ecosystem conversion
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Minority
Negligible
Ongoing
Low Impact
(<50%)
declines
Stresses
Species mortality
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Majority (50Ongoing
Unknown
Unknown
90%)
Stresses
Competition
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Slow,
Majority (50Medium
Ongoing
Significant
90%)
Impact
Decline
Stresses
Species mortality
Timing
Scope
Severity
Impact
Timing

Agriculture &
aquaculture

Annual & perennial non-timber crops /

Agro-industry farming

Agriculture &
aquaculture

Livestock farming & ranching / Agroindustry grazing, ranching or farming

Biological resource use

Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals

/ Intentional use (species is the target)

Biological resource use

Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals

/ Persecution/control

Biological resource use

Logging & wood harvesting /

Unintentional effects: (large scale)
[harvest]

Energy production &

mining

Renewable energy

Invasive and other

problematic species,
genes & diseases

Problematic native species/diseases

Pollution

Agricultural & forestry effluents /

Herbicides and pesticides

Transportation &
service corridors

Ongoing

Roads & railroads

Timing
Transportation &
service corridors

Ongoing

Utility & service lines

Majority (5090%)

Negligible
declines

Stresses
Species mortality
Scope
Severity
Majority (5090%)

Negligible
declines

Stresses
Species mortality

63

Low Impact

Impact
Low Impact

Utilisation
Purpose

Primary form used

Life stage used

Source

Scale

Level

Timing

Pets

Whole

Adults and juveniles

Wild

International

Non-trivial

Recent

Sport

Whole

Adults and juveniles

Wild

Subsistence, National

Non-trivial

Recent

Sport

Whole

Eggs

Wild

Subsistence, National

Non-trivial

Recent

Conservation
Conservation Actions Underway
The species is listed on CMS Appendix II, CITES Appendix II, Bern Convention Annex II and EU Birds Directive Annex I. It
is the focus of close monitoring and targeted conservation actions across most of its range, including reintroduction to parts of
the U.K. since 1989 (English Nature 1995, RSPB 2007). Since 2007, further reintroduction projects are aiming to re-establish
Red Kites in Tuscany and in the Marche (Italy), the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland - the first breeding attempt in
the Republic was recorded in 2009. An EU species action plan was published in 2009 (Knott et al. 2009). National species
action plans are in place in Germany, France, the Balearic Islands and Denmark, and a draft national action plan is in place in
Portugal. Ongoing research in Germany aims to examine further the impact of windfarms on the red kite breeding population.

Conservation Actions Proposed

Continue to monitor population trends and breeding productivity. Continue to manage reintroduction projects. Regulate the
use of pesticides, especially in France and Spain. Reduce persecution through law enforcement, prosecutions and awareness
campaigns. Carry out further studies into the impact of changing land-use practices. Lobby for changes in EU and national
agricultural policies. Increase the area of suitable woodland and forest with protected status. Work with land-owners to protect
habitat and prevent persecution. Consider extending supplementary feeding to more areas of low food availability. Ensure national
legislation on animal by-products takes into account the needs of scavengers. Promote control on feeding stations to be compliant
with sanitary regulations.

Bibliography
BirdLife International (2015) European Red List of Birds. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Cardiel, I.; Viuela, J. 2007. The Red Kite in Spain: distribution, recent population trends, and current threats.
Carter, N. 2007. The Red Kite. 2nd edition. Arlequin Press.
Duchamp, M. 2003. Birds and windfarms.
English Nature. 1995. Return of the red kite: The red kite reintroduction project in England.
Ferguson-Lees, J.; Christie, D. A. 2001. Raptors of the world. Christopher Helm, London.
Knott, J, P. Newbery, and B. Barov. 2009. Action plan for the red kite Milvus milvus in the European Union. BirdLife
International for the European Union.
Mammen, U. 2007. Der Rotmilan als prioritre Art des Vogelschutzes in Deutschland und Mitteleuropa.
Mammen, U., Mammen, K., Kratzsch, L. andr Resetaritz, A. 2009. Interactions of Red Kites and wind farms in Germany: results
of radio telemetry and field observations. In: David, F. (ed.), Red Kite International symposium, pp. 100-105. Montbliard, France.
Mionnet, A. 2007. Red Kite in France: distribution, population development, threats.
Orta, J. & Christie, D.A. (2013). Red Kite (Milvus milvus). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., Christie, D.A. & de Juana,
E. (eds.) (2013). Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. (retrieved from http://www.hbw.
com/node/52977 on 20 January 2015).
RSPB (2007) Birds of prey in the U.K.: on a wing and a prayer. RSPB, Sandy.
Smart, J.; Amar, A.; Sim, I. M. W.; Etheridge, B.; Cameron, D.; Christie, G.; Wilson, J. D. 2010. Illegal killing slows
population recovery of a re-introduced raptor of high conservation concern - the Red Kite Milvus milvus. Biological
Conservation 143(5): 1278-1286.
Snow, D. W.; Perrins, C. M. 1998. The Birds of the Western Palearctic vol. 1: Non-Passerines. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

64

65

IUCN Red List of Threatened

Species Regional Assessments
Europe

The Status and Distribution of European Mammals. Compiled by Helen J. Temple and Andrew Terry, 2007
European Red List of Reptiles. Compiled by Neil Cox and Helen J. Temple, 2009
European Red List of Amphibians. Compiled by Helen J. Temple and Neil Cox, 2009
European Red List of Dragonflies. Compiled by Vincent J. Kalkman, Jean-Pierre Boudot, R. Bernard, Klaus-Jurgen
Conze, Geert De Knijf, Elena Dyatlova, Sonia Ferreira, Milo Jovi, Jurgen Ott, Elisa Riservato and Goran Sahlen,
2010
European Red List of Saproxylic Beetles. Compiled by Ana Nieto and Keith Alexander, 2010
European Red List of Butterflies. Compiled by Chris van Swaay, Sue Collins, Annabelle Cuttelod, Dirk Maes, Miguel
Lopez Munguira, Martina ai, Josef Settele, Theo Verstrael, Rudi Verovnik, Martin Warren, Martin Wiemers and
Irma Wynhoff, 2010
European Red List of Non-marine Molluscs. Annabelle Cuttelod, Eike Neubert and Mary Seddon, 2011
European Red List of Freshwater Fishes. Jorg Freyhof and Emma Brooks, 2011
European Red List of Vascular Plants. Melanie Bilz, Shelagh P. Kell, Nigel Maxted and Richard V. Lansdown, 2011
European Red List of Medicinal Plants. David J. Allen, Melanie Bilz, Rebecca Miller, Jemma Window and Anastasiya
Timoshyna, 2014
European Red List of Bees. Nieto, A., Roberts, S.P.M., Kemp, J., Rasmont, P., Kuhlmann, M., Garca Criado, M.,
Biesmeijer, J.C., Bogusch, P., Dathe, H.H., De la Ra, P., De Meulemeester, T., Dehon, M., Dewulf, A., OrtizSnchez, F.J., Lhomme, P., Pauly, A., Potts, S.G., Praz, C., Quaranta, M., Radchenko, V.G., Scheuchl, E., Smit, J.,
Straka, J., Terzo, M., Tomozii, B., Window, J. and Michez, D. 2014.

Other regions
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in Eastern Africa. Compiled by William R.T. Darwall, Kevin
G. Smith, Thomas Lowe, Jean-Christophe Vi, 2005
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Fish Endemic to the Mediterranean Basin. Compiled by Kevin G. Smith and
William R.T. Darwall, 2006
The Status and Distribution of Reptiles and Amphibians of the Mediterranean Basin. Compiled by Neil Cox, Janice
Chanson and Simon Stuart, 2006
Overview of the Cartilaginous Fishes (Chondrichthyans) in the Mediterranean Sea. Compiled by Rachel D. Cavanagh
and Claudine Gibson, 2007
The Status and Distribution of Dragonflies of the Mediterranean Basin. Compiled by Elisa Riservato, Jean-Pierre
Boudot, Sonia Ferreira, Milo Jovi, Vincent J. Kalkman, Wolfgang Schneider, Boudjema Samraoui and Annabelle
Cuttelod, 2009
The Status and Distribution of Mediterranean Mammals. Compiled by Helen J. Temple and Annabelle Cuttelod,
2009
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in Southern Africa. Compiled by William R.T. Darwall, Kevin
G. Smith, Denis Tweddle and Paul Skelton, 2009
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in Western Africa. Compiled by Kevin Smith, Mame D. Diop
and Mamadou Niane, 2009
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in Northern Africa. Compiled by Nieves Garcia, Annabelle
Cuttelod and Dania Abdul Malak, 2010

66

 The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in the Eastern Himalaya. Compiled by David Allen, Sanjay
Molur and B.A. Daniel, 2010
Overview of the Conservation Status of the Marine Fishes of the Mediterranean Sea. Compiled by Dania Abdul Malak,
Suzanne R. Livingstone, David Pollard, Beth A. Polidoro, Annabelle Cuttelod, Michel Bariche, Murat Bilecenoglu,
Kent E. Carpenter, Bruce B. Collette, Patrice Francour, Menachem Goren, Mohamed Hichem Kara, Enric Massut,
Costas Papaconstantinou and Leonardo Tunesi, 2011
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in Central Africa. Compiled by Emma G.E. Brooks, David
Allen and William R.T. Darwall, 2011
The diversity of life in African freshwaters; Underwater, under threat. An analysis of the status and distribution of
freshwater species throughout mainland Africa. Edited by William Darwall, Kevin Smith, David Allen, Robert
Holland, Ian Harrison and Emma Brooks, 2011
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in the Western Ghats, India. Sanjay Molur, Kevin G. Smith,
B.A. Daniel and William Darwall, 2011
The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in Indo-Burma. David Allen, Kevin G. Smith, and William
Darwall, 2012

67

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Free publications:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
at the European Commissions representations or delegations.
You can obtain their contact details by linking http://ec.europa.eu,
or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.
Publications for sale:
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
Priced subscriptions (Official Journal of the EU, Legal cases of the Court of Justice as well
as certain periodicals edited by the European Commission) can be ordered from one of our
sales agents.
You can obtain their contact details by linking http://bookshop.europa.eu,
or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.

This publication summarises results for Europes 533 native species of birds. Approximately
13% of these species are threatened with extinction at the European level as a result of threats
including changing land-use practices, invasive and alien species and illegal killing of birds.
The European Red List was compiled by BirdLife International and is the product of a service
contract with the European Commission. It is available online at
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/redlist
and http://www.iucnredlist.org/europe.

DOI: 10.2779/975810

KH-01-15-258-EN-N

The European Red List is a review of the conservation status of European species according
to IUCN regional Red Listing guidelines. It identifies those species that are threatened with
extinction at the regional level in order that appropriate conservation action can be taken to
improve their status.