How effective are fallow plots for breeding lapwings?


Although lapwings will readily nest on fallow plots, there is very little information concerning fledging rates on these plots. © Andrew Hoodless/GWCT


BACKGROUND


The lapwing is an iconic bird of farmland, but the UK breeding population has declined by 65% since 1970, which has led to it being red-listed as a bird of conser- vation concern. Analysis of adult survival rates indicates no appreci- able change during the last 40 years, suggesting that poor breeding success is the main demographic driver of lapwing declines. On arable land, the main Government- funded agri-environment scheme option available in England and Wales to benefit lapwings is the fallow plot for ground-nesting birds. Fallow plots are among the most expensive arable agri-environment options in terms of payment per hectare and, hence, it is important that we evaluate their effectiveness in producing fledged chicks.


Nest survival was high on fallow plots. © Andrew Hoodless/GWCT


24 | GAME & WILDLIFE REVIEW 2016 www.gwct.org.uk


Following the widespread switch from spring- to autumn-sown crops from the late 1970s, the availability of suitable nesting habitat for lapwings has reduced dramati- cally. There has also been a shift away from mixed farming, so that grass (a favoured chick-rearing habitat) is less commonly found adjacent to arable land. Nevertheless, in the late 1990s, 39% of breeding lapwings in England and Wales were recorded on arable farmland. To provide nesting and foraging opportunities on arable land, fallow plot options were included in the Higher Level Stewardship (HF13, HF17) and Entry Level Stewardship (EF13) schemes. Fallow plots are now an option within Countryside Stewardship (AB5). However, although it is known that lapwings will readily nest on fallow plots, there is very little information concerning fledging rates on these plots. In a collaborative project with the RSPB, we monitored breeding lapwings on


fallow plots and on conventional crops in Wessex (Hampshire, Wiltshire, Berkshire) and East Anglia (Norfolk, Cambridgeshire) during 2012-2013. We assessed overall productivity via regular visits to sites and conducted more intensive monitoring of


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92