Wintering Bird Diversity and Population Sizes at Obruk Dam Lake (Corum) in Turkey

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 4, 353 - 358, 31.12.2020

Kadir Ulusoy Şafak Bulut

https://doi.org/10.17350/HJSE19030000205

Cited By: 1

Abstract

In this study, species diversity of waterbirds, which are the indicator species of wetland quality were investigated at Obruk Dam Lake in Turkey, which was built in 1996 and started to operate in 2009. Obruk Dam built on River Kızılırmak within Çorum province has created a new habitat for waterbird with a lake surface area of 50 km2. As a result of the studies, 21 waterbird species belonging to 6 orders were identified. According to the results of the mid-winter waterbird census revealed in 2018 and 2019, 26.975 and 13.158 individuals of waterbirds were counted in Obruk Dam Lake respectively and it has been proved that the Obruk Dam Lake forms a new terrain especially for birds. Although the census for the year 2020 could not be done completely due to adverse conditions, short observations in 2020 show that the Obruk Dam Lake continues to be used intensively by waterbirds. During the research, intensive and off season hunting activities were observed in the field. In this context, studies have been initiated to keep the censuses continuous in order to monitor the status of the new wetland formed by the Obruk Dam Lake and the waterbirds which are using this wetland.

Keywords

Benefits of Dams, Wetlands, Biodiversity, Bird Census, Waterfowl

References

• 1. Süllü N. “Konya-Ereğli Akgöl’ün avifaunası” PhD Thesis, Selçuk Üniversitesi institute of science, 2006.
• 2. Weller MW. Wetland birds: habitat resources and conservation implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999.
• 3. DKMP, “Kış Ortası Su Kuşu Sayımları 2018”, Ankara, 2018.
• 4. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, 2013. The Ramsar Convention Manual: a guide to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), 6th ed. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland.
• 5. Tırıl A, Baylan E. Wetland management in Turkey: Problems, achievements and perspectives. African Journal of Agricultural Research, c. 4, sy 11, (2009) 1106–1119.
• 6. Keten A, Arslangündoğdu Z, Selmi E. Düzce-Efteni Gölü Kuş Türleri. Düzce Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Ormancılık Dergisi, c. 8, sy 1 (2012) 10–18.
• 7. Cruz T, Lima J, Luís A, Azeiteiro UM. Avifauna conservation and disturbance ecology in a coastal freshwater lagoon. Environmental monitoring and assessment, c. 190, sy 10 (2018) 592.
• 8. Czech HA, Parsons KC. Agricultural wetlands and waterbirds: a review. Waterbirds (2002) 56–65.
• 9. Perktaş U, Albayrak AB, Ayaş Z. The evaluation of some key wetlands for waterfowl in central Anatolia, Turkey, in: Hanson AR, Kerekes JJ (Eds.). Limnology and Aquatic Birds: Abstracts and Selected Papers from the Fourth Conference of Societas Internationalis Limnologiae (SIL) Aquatic Birds Working Group. Paper presented at Fourth Conference of Societas Internationalis Limnologiae (SIL) Aquatic Birds Working Group, Sackville, New Brunswick, Canada, 3–7 August. Springer. Netherlands, pp. 166, 2006.
• 10. DKMP, “Kış Ortası Su Kuşu Sayımları 2019”, Ankara, 2019. 11. Mori Y, Kawanishi S, Sodhi NS. Yamagishi S. The relationship between waterfowl assemblage and environmental properties in dam lakes in central Japan: implications for dam management practice. Ecology and Civil Engineering, c. 3, sy 1, (2000) 103–112.
• 12. Halil S. Oğurlu İ. Ertuğrul ET. Karacaören I baraj gölünün kuş faunası. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, c. 9, sy 1 (2018) 22–28.
• 13. Sönmez ME. Kılıç Z. Benefıts Of Dams For The Ecosystem: The Sample Of Karkamış Dam (Turkey), in: Gâştescu P, Marszelewski W, Brețcan P. (Eds.). 2nd International Conference - Water resources and wetlands Conference Proceedings. Paper presented at 2nd International Conference - Water resources and wetlands, Tulcea (Romania), 11-13 September. Romanian Limnogeographical Association, Dâmbovița, pp. 432-438, 2014.
• 14. Kılıç DT, Eken G. Türkiye’nin Önemli Kuş Alanları 2004 Güncellemesi, Doğa Derneği, Ankara, 2004.
• 15. Limak, “Obruk Barajı ve HES”. 2009. http://www.limak.com.tr/sektorler/insaat/projeler/tamamlanan-tum-projeler/barajlar/obruk-baraji-ve-hes (access date: August, 22, 2020).
• 16. Heinzel H, Fitter R, Parslow J, Boyla A. Türkiye’nin ve Avrupa’nın kuşları: Kuzey Afrika ve Ortadoğu dahil, Doğal Hayatı Koruma Derneği, İstanbul, 2002.
• 17. Porter RF, Christensen S, Schiermacker-Hansen P. Türkiye ve Ortadoğu’nun Kuşları, Uzerler Matbaası, Ankara, 2009.
• 18. Bibby CJ, Burgess ND, Hill DA, Mustoe S. Bird census techniques. Elsevier, 2000.
• 19. Gregory RD, Gibbons DW, Donald PF. Bird census and survey techniques, in: Sutherland WJ, Newton I, Green R (Eds.). Bird ecology and conservation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 17–56, 2004.
• 20. IUCN. “The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species”. Version 2020-3. https://www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on [28.12.2020]
• 21. Bern Convention, (1979): Bern Convention: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, 19/09/1979 https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/104 (06/01/2020)
• 22. Erciyas Yavuz K, Kartal E. Türkiye Kış Ortası Su Kuşu Sayımları 2011. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Yayınları, Samsun, 2012.
• 23. Erciyas Yavuz K, İsfendiyaroğlu S. 2012 Türkiye Kış Ortası Su Kuşu Sayımları. Doğa Derneği, İzmir, 2013.
• 24. Ugış A, Akkuzu E, Evcin Ö. Kastamonu Yöresi Beyler ve Karaçomak Baraji Gölü Sucul Kuşları. Kastamonu Univ., Journal of Forestry Faculty 16 (2016) (2): 447-462.
• 25. Saygili F, Yiğit N, Bulut Ş. The spatial and temporal distributions of waterbirds in Lakes Akşehir-Eber and Lake Köyceğiz in western Anatolia, Turkey-a comparative analysis. Turkish Journal of Zoology 35 (2011) 467–480.