An updated version of this dataset is available at: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations_in_england Overall breeding bird populations in England have changed little compared with 40 years ago. In 2010 they were just above what they were in 1970, following a small decline of 1.5 per cent in the most recent five years, from 2004 to 2009. However this masks considerable variation between individual bird species and groups of species that share the same broad habitats.

An updated version of this dataset is available at: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations_in_england

Provides figures for bird populations in the English regions, covering farmland, woodland and all native birds.

Source agency: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Designation: National Statistics Language: English Alternative title: Wild bird population indicators for the English Regions

UK wild bird populations is now available from here: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations

Index of the UK population of wild birds - Individual species indices

UK wild bird populations is now available from here: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations

UK wild bird populations is now available from here: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations

Trends in populations of selected species (wild birds)

This statistic shows the estimated number of indoor birds kept as pets in the United Kingdom (UK) from 2010/11 to 2021/22. The population of indoor birds in the UK was estimated to total *** million in 2021/22.

UK wild bird populations is now available from here: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations

population of wild birds - wintering waterbirds: 1975/76 to 2007/08.

An updated version of this release is available at: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations_in_england

UK wild bird populations is now available from here: https://data.gov.uk/dataset/wild_bird_populations A yearly update on national wild bird indicators.

Source agency: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Designation: National Statistics Language: English Alternative title: Wild bird national indicators

1. Land sparing has been proposed as a strategy to reconcile biodiversity conservation with agricultural production, with empirical studies on five continents indicating that most species would benefit if food demand was met through high-yield farming combined with the protection or restoration of natural habitat. 2. Most such studies come from landscapes covered by large areas of natural habitat and without a long history of intense human modification. However, much of Europe, consists of human-dominated landscapes, where biodiversity responses to land sparing may differ. To test this, we use estimates of bird population density in different (semi-)natural habitats, and forecasts of population density in farmland habitat, to assess the future consequences for birds of land-sparing scenarios in the United Kingdom. 3. Our scenarios predict that whilst up to 18 of the 156 species assessed (predominantly farmland associated species) might decline in UK conservation status under land sparing, up to 35 UK bird species (mainly woodland and wetland species) might improve in status. This contrasts with a maximum of 8 species likely to improve in conservation status without land sparing, with up to 7 species deteriorating. 4. Combining land sparing with demand management measures (reducing food waste and the consumption of animal products) led to more positive population changes under all scenarios. 5. Synthesis and applications. Land sparing has the potential to benefit UK bird populations in aggregate but would likely have negative impacts on farmland bird species. These findings are likely to be applicable across human-dominated landscapes beyond the UK, though effects on other taxa, implementation mechanisms, and the sustainability of higher yields all require careful consideration.

Vulnerability assessment to high pathogenicity avian influenza predicted mortality at the avian family, but not the species, level. To assess the vulnerability of UK birds to high pathogenicity avian influenza pre-2021/2022 and during the exceptional 2021/2022 season. Two trait-based approaches to vulnerability assessment were tested using surveillance data for the number of reported positive avian influenza detections in the UK. Species-level positive detections varied with population size, body size and colour. Although overall vulnerability assessment was not correlated with positive detections at the species level, components of vulnerability most likely to reflect mortality rates were positively correlated with positive detections pre-2021/2022, but not in 2021/2022. Vulnerability assessment scores were strongly correlated with mean positive detections at the family level (but not species level) in both time periods. Consistency in successfully identifying the most vulnerable avian families suggests predictability in vulnerability, even if species mortality rates vary among outbreaks. Waterfowl, seabirds, other waterbirds and raptors were ranked as most vulnerable. Components of vulnerability most linked to mortality may not be associated with aspects of vulnerability most linked to conservation impact.

This data supported prioritisation of England Woodland Grant Scheme (EWGS) Woodland Improvement Grant (WIG) from 2010 in three regions - East Midlands, West Midlands and Yorkshire and the Humber.

The data defines where applicants were eligible for grant aid in support of reversing the decline in woodland bird species in England.

· Woodland bird populations have been in steady decline since the 1970s with 33 species falling by 20% over the last 25 years

· Wild birds are considered a good indicator of the general state of the health of the wider environment

· The reasons for this decline are many but changes in woodland structure from long term under-management is thought to be a key factor.

Together with the RSPB, The Woodland Birds Project aimed to reverse this decline by providing financial support to landowners and managers to improve woodland habitat for birds. These new and innovative grants included the Woodland Birds WIG80 which funded 80% of the cost of eligible operations, and the Reversing Woodland Bird Decline Additional Contribution for woodland creation.

Attributes:

Descriptr = Name of the priority area

Life history characteristics, harvest data, population trends and conservation statuses of huntable waterbirds in the UK. Wintering bird populations for the UK were obtained from the latest published estimates (Frost et al. 2019). The estimate for mallard was increased by 2.6 million birds to account for the annual release of captive-raised birds for shooting purposes (Madden 2021). We estimated a standard deviation for the population estimates by averaging the Wetland Bird Survey (WeBS; Frost et al. 2021) index for each species for the winters 2012/13 – 2016/17, which corresponded to the period used to estimate duck populations. We treated this mean index as equal to the estimate from Frost et al. (2019) and then calculated population estimates for each year based on their WeBS indices and calculated the standard deviation of these estimates. Population estimates for greylag goose, pink-footed goose, golden plover, snipe and woodcock were based on single years, but the same time frame was applied to standard deviation estimates in order to account for any interannual differences. The latest (2016) harvest estimates and 95% confidence intervals were taken from Aebischer (2019). Species specific body mass was taken from Robinson (2005). Where sex-specific body mass was reported we averaged male and female masses. Methods We modelled the resident and migratory populations of greylag geese and woodcock separately. The resident woodcock population was estimated as three times the number of breeding males. This was subtracted from the total estimated overwintering woodcock population to provide an estimate of the migratory woodcock population. Resident woodcock harvest was estimated as equal to the proportion of breeding birds in the overwinter population (13%) The remaining 87% of total harvest was assigned to migratory woodcock. We recognise that further mortality of UK breeding woodcock will occur outside the UK in southern Europe, but we have no estimate of this mortality and can only consider the contribution of UK hunters to the harvest of birds that winter in the UK in this initial assessment. Population estimates for Icelandic and British greylag geese overwintering in the UK are reported separately and no adjustment is needed. An estimated harvest of migratory Icelandic greylag geese in the UK (Frederiksen 2002) was deducted from the total UK greylag goose harvest to provide an estimate of the harvest of British greylag geese. However, it should be noted that the estimate was from 1996-2000 and no new estimates have been made. Short-term (2008-2018) and long-term (1970-2018) wintering population trends were taken from Burns et al. (2020), except for common snipe and Eurasian woodcock. Common snipe trends were taken from Woodward et al. (2020), with caution advised due to the small sample size. Resident woodcock long-term and short-term population trends were estimated at -29% for both on the basis of reported declines in breeding woodcock (Balmer et al. 2013; Heward et al. 2015). Migratory woodcock short-term and long-term trends were estimated at -11% and -22% on the basis of a 4-18% decline from 2008-2018 and an 11-33% decline from 1980-2018 (BirdLife International 2021). Bird population status in the UK (Red/Amber/Green) was taken from Birds of Conservation Concern 5 (BoCC5; Stanbury et al. 2021). Estimates of adult survival were taken from Robinson (2005) with reported standard errors multiplied by 1.96 to give an approximate 95% confidence interval. The average standard error for all reported waterbirds (0.03) was used for species when no standard error was reported (e.g. wigeon, shoveler, greylag goose, woodcock and golden plover). We used the same survival estimates for both resident and migratory populations of woodcock and greylag geese. These adult survival estimates include mortality from hunting and so are likely to underestimate the maximum achievable survival rates under optimal conditions and so survival was also estimated using species mass. Age at first reproduction (alpha) was also taken from Robinson (2005).

The estimated number of ornamental birds owned by households in the United Kingdom has fluctuated each year since 2010. As of 2023, the number of ornamental birds stood at about *** million, the same as the previous year.

Threats to biodiversity resulting from habitat destruction and deterioration have been documented for many species, whilst climate change is regarded as increasingly impacting upon species' distribution and abundance. However, few studies have disentangled the relative importance of these two drivers in causing recent population declines. We quantify the relative importance of both processes by modelling annual variation in population growth of 18 farmland bird species in the UK as a function of measures of land-use intensity and weather. Modelled together, both had similar explanatory power in accounting for annual fluctuations in population growth. When these models were used to retrodict population trends for each species as a function of annual variation in land-use intensity and weather combined, and separately, retrodictions incorporating land-use intensity were more closely linked to observed population trends than retrodictions based only on weather, and closely matched the UK farmland bird index from 1970 onwards. Despite more stable land-use intensity in recent years, climate change (inferred from weather trends) has not overtaken land-use intensity as the dominant driver of bird populations.

🇬🇧 영국

The possible role of avian predators in limiting songbird populations has been largely discounted since the publication of findings showing a lack of statistical association in United Kingdom bird census data between changes in prey species populations and those of a range of predatory species, including raptors and corvids. I re-applied the methodology behind these findings, covering a wider range of prey species and using site-level modeling to estimate predator abundance instead of a mixture of spatial modeling and raw count data. A significant aggregate predator effect was found in 33 out of 40 prey species, compared to only 10 out of 27 in the original study, as well as a higher rate of significant individual predator effects, with 41 significantly negative and 84 significantly positive effects out of a total of 320. The greater explanatory power of predator variables estimated using site-level modeling suggests that this has significant advantages over the use of predator variables derived from spatial modeling, which may not capture variation in predator abundance at a local scale, or from raw count data, which may lead to attenuation of effect estimates. The prevalence of positive associations between predators and prey is consistent with a common response to local habitat variation, which may absorb negative covariance resulting from the impact of predators on prey populations. Both positive and negative predator-prey associations may also occur as a result of independent demographic processes that manifest as sequential habitat occupation or withdrawal. Analyses of census data cannot discriminate among these possible scenarios and may therefore have limited value in determining whether predators have been limiting prey populations. Inference to a lack of impact of avian predators on prey populations from such analyses may therefore be unsafe, and a role for increased predator numbers remains a viable hypothesis with respect to bird population declines. The recent neglect of this possibility should therefore be urgently reversed, with a particular need for field experiments that can support strong inference regarding population limitation of songbirds by avian predators.