Determination Conservation Priority Areas and Taxa in Terms of Birds: The Case of Aksaray

Year 2023, , 899 - 905, 01.06.2023

Emel Çakmak , Çiğdem Akın Pekşen

https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1207629

Abstract

Growing environmental challenges worldwide and the lack of resources to tackle them require conservationists to set priorities for action. As known; protected areas will be needed as species change their distribution over time due to global climate change, drought, and complete habitat destruction. Although; conservation targets have been met for most species, some conservation features remain unprotected, especially for threatened bird species. There are certain habitat types in Aksaray province where target species belonging to different bird groups are concentrated. Herein; we identify these priority areas for conservation for the current and future estimated distributions of bird species. For this purpose; field studies have been carried out for two years (2015-2017) to represent different habitat types besides bird species detected within the borders of the province. According to our findings; three different habitats (wetland, swamp, and steppe) rich in target species were determined as priority areas for protection. In addition, five different bird species (Vanellus vanellus, Limosa limosa, Numenius arquata, Circus macrourus, Streptopelia turtur) observed in these habitats are in the Vu (Vulnerable) and NT (Near Threatened) categories according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List. As a result;both the protection and monitoring of the identified habitats and taxa that directly reflect the health of the habitat will facilitate the ustainability of priority areas in future. This study could be a resource for future regulation of conservation strategies

Keywords

Protection, steppe, swamp, wetland

Thanks

This study was carried out within the scope of the National Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring Project of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Nature Conservation and National Parks Directorate, VIII Regional Directorate, Aksaray DKMP Provincial Branch Office. Endless thanks to Yavuz Selim Çakmak and Fahri Tunç for their contributions to the fieldwork.

References

• Anderson, S. H., Kelly, D., Ladley, J. J., Molloy, S., & Terry, J. (2011). Cascading effects of bird functional extinction reduce pollination and plant density. Science, 331(6020), 1068-1071.
• BirdLife International. (2008). State of the world's birds: indicators for our changing world. Birdlife International.
• BirdLife International. (2014). The BirdLife checklist of the birds of the world: Version 7.
• Internafional, B. (2015). European Red List of Birds. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publicafions of the European Communities.
• Biricik, M., & Karakas, R. (2012). Birds of Hasankeyf (south-eastern Anatolia, Turkey) under the threat of a big dam project. Natural Areas Journal, 32(1), 96-105.Çelik, E. (2018). Batman ili ornitofaunası. Doğu Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(2), 1-10.
• Danford, C. G. (1880). A further contribution to the ornithology of Asia Minor. Ibis, 4(4), 81-99.
• Dobinson, H. M. (1976). Bird count: a practical guide to bird surveys. Penguin Group.
• Eken, G. (Ed.). (2006). Türkiye'nin önemli doğa alanları.
• Erdoğdu, E. (2001). A study on the ornithofauna of Doğancı Pond in Alpu-Eskişehir. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 25(2), 105-109.
• Gill, F., Donsker, D., & Rasmussen, P. (2020). IOC World Bird List. Version 10.1. Website: www.worldbirdnames.org.
• Hagemeijer, W. J., & Blair, M. J. (1997). The EBCC atlas of European breeding birds. Poyser, London, 479. Kasparek, M., & Bilgin, C. C. (1996). Kuşlar (Aves). Türkiye omurgalilar tür listesi. TÜBITAK, Ankara, pp27‒87.
• Kirwan, G. M., Martins, R. P., Eken, G., & Davidson, P. (1998). Checklist of the Birds of Turkey: OSME Sandgrouse Supplement 1, 32p.
• Kiziroğlu, İ. (2008). Türkiye kuşları tür listesi ve Türkiye kuşları kırmızı listesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Çevre Eğitimi, Kuş Araştırmaları ve Halkalama Merkezi, Ankara.
• Kiziroğlu, İ, (2009). Türkiye kuşları, The pocket book for Birds of Turkiye. Ankamat Matbaacılık, Ankara,534.
• Kiziroğlu, İ., Erdoğan, A., & Turan, L. (2013). Biological diversity and its threats in Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 22(3), 770-778.
• Perktaş, U. (2017). Anadolu Bozkırları ve Bozkırların Kuşları. Kebikeç, 211.
• Sekercioglu, C. H. (2006). Increasing awareness of avian ecological function. Trends in ecology & evolution, 21(8), 464-471.
• Lott, C. A. (2002). [Review of Raptor Migration in Israel and the Middle East: A Summary of 30 Years of Field Research, by H. Shirihai, R. Yosef, D. Alon, G. M. Kirwan, & R. Spaar]. The Auk, 119(1), 284–288.
• Thomaidis, C., Papaspyropoulos, K. G., Karabatzakis, T., Logothetis, G., & Christophoridou, G. (2022). European Turtle Dove Population Trend in Greece Using Hunting Statistics of the Past 16-Year Period as Indices. Animals, 12(3), 368.https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12030368.
• Trakus, (2012). Türkiye’nin anonim kuşları. Retrieved from http://www.trakus.org/
• Xu, X., Xie, Y., Qi, K., Luo, Z., & Wang, X. (2018). Detecting the response of bird communities and biodiversity to habitat loss and fragmentation due to urbanization. Science of the total environment, 624, 1561-1576.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.143.
• Yavuz, N., Yavuz, K. E., & Karataş, A. (2021). Türkiye’nin küresel ölçekte soyu tehlike altındaki kuş türleri. Doğanın Sesi, (7), 19-39.