Was the environment somehow affected by Communism? What about the birds?
The aim of the study was to compare farmland bird communities in the agricultural landscape in two regions around the border that have a similar ratio of arable land and semi-natural habitats, but contrasting field sizes. Furthermore, these areas are similar in terms of soil composition, climate, and most landscape elements such as windbreaks or hedges. The difference between them is that while there is a mosaic of multiple biotopes in Austria, the Czech Republic has the biggest fields in the whole of Europe – 57% of arable land is in compact areas larger than 20 hectares! Such an arrangement was supposed to help with the cultivation of the land and its management, but regrettably resulted in homogenisation of the landscape. This, together with the modernisation of farming and agrochemical inputs, is also worsening the problems with biodiversity.
Over the course of a year, two types of measures were used to count the number of birds in these regions. First, in the point-counts of multiple quadrants, all birds within a 500 × 500 metre large agricultural area were counted. The second method involved transects – long roads or paths. When a bird appeared, it was counted as part of the total sum. Amongst the most frequent species were Skylarks, Yellowhammers, Pheasants, and Starlings.
Observations indicated that there were more bird species in the heterogeneous region, in this case Austria. In fact, there were 1.5 times more birds than in the Czech Republic! The fact that heterogeneity provides animals with a better living area is quite straightforward; what is shocking is how vast the difference is between these regions. A previous study on hares found that the disparity was even greater – their population density was 3.8–9.6 times larger in Austria than in many regions in the Czech Republic. This suggests that large-scale fields also affect other species.
The outcome of this study is a recommendation to support the division of homogeneous fields and the spreading of a variety of non-crop and semi-natural habitats on the edges of the fields. This is partially happening already: the production of one crop on a continuous area is limited and a minimal share of unproductive land is given by law. Regrettably, the regulations are not extensive enough to drastically increase biodiversity. We must not forget that the purpose of agricultural land is crop production, which is the focus of all state and European regulations. Nonetheless, by increasing biodiversity, the landscape will be able to withhold water better and be more sustainable in several respects. Segmenting the large-scale fields will therefore be appreciated by a great many people, not just the scientists.
Eliška Leštinová
Document Actions