See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/227290715

Multifunctional use of a natural resource on farmland: Wild pheasant

(Phasianus colchicus) management and the conservation of farmland
passerines

Article  in  Biodiversity and Conservation · April 2002

DOI: 10.1023/A:1015564806990

CITATIONS READS

25 442

1 author:

Chris Stoate
Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust
91 PUBLICATIONS   4,244 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

SoilCare View project

Water Friendly Farming View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Chris Stoate on 13 February 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Biodiversity and Conservation 11: 561–573, 2002.
© 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Multifunctional use of a natural resource on farmland:

wild pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) management
and the conservation of farmland passerines

C. STOATE
The Allerton Research and Educational Trust, Loddington House, Loddington, Leicestershire LE7 9XE,
UK (e-mail: chris.stoate@ukonline.co.uk)

Received 26 October 2000; accepted in revised form 6 April 2001

Abstract. Current rural development policy encourages farmers to adopt multifunctional use of farmland.
Non-agricultural resources such as wildlife provide a focus for recreational activities such as shooting
and bird watching. This paper assesses the potential contribution of wild pheasant (Phasianus colchicus)
management for shooting to the conservation of farmland passerines. Bird numbers were monitored over
a 7-year period on farmland in Leicestershire (England), in relation to the introduction of a game manage-
ment system. Passerines were used as the indicator group as they are an official ‘quality of life’ indicator,
and include species that are the subject of government biodiversity action plans. Following introduction of
the game management package, there was little change in species diversity at the farm scale, but species
experiencing population declines nationally showed significant increases in numbers. The management of
wild pheasants for shooting may therefore have considerable potential for the conservation of nationally
declining farmland birds and for recreational activities such as bird watching.

Key words: bird conservation, game management, land use, landscape, rural development

Introduction

European agricultural systems have historically been multifunctional, incorporating

arable and livestock production, and often sylvicultural products, as continues to be
the case in the dehesas and montados of Spain and Portugal (Diaz et al. 1997). Wild-
life on farmland has also been regarded as a resource, and exploited for social, cultural
and economic reasons through various forms of hunting, and increasingly for other
recreational activities such as bird watching. The second half of the twentieth century
saw simplification of agricultural systems with a reduction in the diversity of resource
use on farmland (Meeus 1993). Wildlife associated with agricultural habitats declined
during this period of agricultural change (Stoate 1996).
Many European bird species have declined since the 1970s (Tucker and Heath
1994), as documented most comprehensively in Britain (Fuller et al. 1995). Long-
term monitoring of breeding bird abundance conducted by the British Trust for Or-
nithology (BTO) reveals that the greatest declines in bird numbers have occurred
on farmland where there has been an overall decrease of 40% since 1970 (Fuller
562

et al. 1995; Chamberlain et al. 2000). Such declines are not matched in other
habitats.
Birds are valued by a substantial proportion of the UK population, with the Royal
Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), the country’s largest bird conservation or-
ganisation, having more than one million members. Bird abundance has become one
of the UK Government’s official ‘quality of life’ indicators, additional to social and
economic indicators (Anon 1999). The diversity of bird species at the national level
is maintained by targeting for conservation action those species that are of greatest
conservation concern. This approach takes the form of ‘Biodiversity Action Plans’
(BAPs) for the conservation of species that have declined nationally by more than
50% since 1970 (Swash et al. 2000).
Declines in farmland bird numbers have been attributed to intensification and sim-
plification of agricultural systems (Potts 1991; Fuller 2000; Chamberlain et al. 2000).
These agricultural changes have also been associated with a wide range of other neg-
ative environmental consequences (Pretty et al. 2000; Stoate et al. 2002) and the res-
toration of bird numbers on farmland has become synonymous with the adoption of
more environmentally sustainable farming systems. Rural employment in agriculture
has also declined over the period of bird population declines, and most recently, farm
incomes have fallen dramatically owing to a combination of Common Agricultural
Policy (CAP) reform and changes in market forces and exchange rates.
Current agricultural policy is therefore shifting to a more integrated approach
towards the management of agricultural systems, to reduce economic and environ-
mental externalities, and to improve rural infrastructure and diversification under
Objective 5b of the EC structural funds. In particular, there is an increasing empha-
sis on diverse ‘multifunctional’ resource management and use on farmland. Such
measures are currently being introduced under the Rural Development Regulation
(EC/1257/99), including England’s Rural Enterprise Scheme, Countryside Steward-
ship Scheme and Organic Aid Scheme. Organic farming has been associated with
benefits to some farmland birds (Chamberlain and Wilson 2000), although farmers’
attitudes to conservation may have a greater conservation impact than the adoption of
the organic cropping system (Entec 1995).
Such economic incentives to farmers aim to diversify natural resource manage-
ment and use on farmland, improving the economic and environmental sustainability
of resource use. Farmers’ own interests and attitudes are also becoming more at-
tuned to public concern for environmental deterioration (Westmacott and Worthing-
ton 1997; MacDonald and Johnson 2000) and modification of their farming systems
to accommodate these interests may also contribute to reductions in negative exter-
nalities. The most sustainable way forward is likely to combine public and private ini-
tiatives to the benefit of rural employment and environmental improvement, including
the restoration of farmland bird numbers.
Game shooting represents the development of a natural resource system, addi-
tional to, and compatible with, the primary agricultural land-use. Cobham Resource
 563

Consultants (1997) estimate that game shooting in Britain involves 94 000 ‘providers’
(landowners and tenants), with 704 500 ‘participants’ spending at least £ 255 million
in 1996. It therefore has the potential to provide rural employment, while introducing
diversity to both resource use and the farmland landscape (MacDonald and Johnson
2000).
Management of wild gamebirds for shooting declined in the second half of the
twentieth century, in part owing to the declines in the productivity of farmland popu-
lations of the grey partridge (Perdix perdix), at one time the main game species (Potts
1986). This species declined by 82% between 1970 and 1998 and, from a common
and highly valued game species, has become a scarce species which is now the subject
of a BAP for its conservation (Potts 1997). The pheasant (P. colchicus) has become
the main game species (Hill and Robertson 1988). Although this species is usually
reared and released for shooting, localised wild populations can also be managed as
a natural resource within farming systems, following the principles adopted for grey
partridge in the past.
Many of the factors influencing the decline of grey partridges are also thought to
influence other farmland species in a similar way (Potts 1991, 1997). These factors
include the reduction of insect food available to chicks (following increasing use of
pesticides), the loss of non-cropped nesting habitats in field boundaries, and increased
predation associated with increases in predator numbers (Potts 1986). On light soils,
the loss of spring cultivations in favour of autumn-sown cereals has resulted in fewer
cereal stubbles surviving through the winter, and increased efficacy of herbicides has
removed the arable plants which support invertebrate food in summer and provide
seed food in winter (Potts 1986; Ewald and Aebischer 2001). Reduced crop diversity
has resulted from the loss of livestock from many eastern farms, reducing the range
of habitats available to individual birds and removing livestock feed sites as a source
of winter food for birds (Shrubb 1997).
This paper investigates the impact on passerine species diversity and abun-
dance of a game management system developed to meet the requirements of wild
pheasants (Boatman and Brockless, 1998). In winter pheasants require small shrub-
by woods and areas of dense cover in more open habitats (Hill and Robertson
1988). Supplementary feeding with grain improves pheasant body condition in
winter and early spring (Draycott et al. 1998). In the breeding season, pheasants
exploit farmland habitats where they require tall herbaceous vegetation in which
to nest and an abundance of ground-dwelling invertebrates close to the nest as
a source of food for chicks (Sotherton and Robertson 1990). As Tapper et al.
(1996) demonstrated for grey partridge, control of potential nest predators dur-
ing the nesting season increases the number of chicks hatching to exploit this
food source, increasing autumn gamebird numbers and those of breeding birds in
the subsequent spring. Figure 1 summarises the management practices associated
with the management of wild gamebirds and their potential benefits to farmland
passerines.
564

Figure 1. Conceptual model of the management system developed for wild gamebirds, and its potential
benefits to other bird species in terms of increased breeding abundance.

Methods

The study area

The study area comprises approximately 150 km2 of mixed arable and livestock farms
in Leicestershire (central England) with numerous small woods. Soils are mainly clay.
Within this area, transects (see below) were used to sample breeding abundance of
birds in four discrete zones (Figure 2). The main study area, at Loddington, is locat-
ed at the centre of the wider study area and covers an area of 3.33 km2 . The farm
at Loddington is owned and managed as a research and demonstration farm by the
Allerton Research and Educational Trust. The primary objective of the organization
is the practical integration of wildlife conservation into an economically viable farm
business (Boatman and Stoate 2000). Land-use at Loddington and in the four zones
in the surrounding area is described in Table 1.
The game management system at Loddington started in 1993, following a year
of baseline monitoring (described below). Because of the presence of woodland and
clay soils, the farm has little potential for grey partridges and the system is designed
to meet the ecological requirements of wild pheasants. No rearing and releasing of
pheasants or other game took place at Loddington. The management system includ-
ed thinning and replanting of woods, and active management of hedges, in order to
increase the area of shrubby vegetation. Gamecrops were planted on 20 m wide mid-
field and field edge set-aside strips in order to provide invertebrate-rich foraging areas
 565

Figure 2. Distribution of 1-km transects and four comparison areas (A–D) in relation to the main study
site at Loddington.
Table 1. Percentage land use cover at
Loddington and the four zones used to
assess bird abundance in the surrounding
area.

Site Arable Grass Wood

A 25 64 11
B 67 32 1
C 61 36 3
D 58 33 9
Loddington 78 13 9

for pheasant broods in summer, and cover and seed food in winter. Pesticide use in
cereal crops, especially on crop headlands, was restricted in order to increase arable
invertebrate abundance (Sotherton 1991).
Beetle banks were created in one-third of the fields, and herbaceous strips were
established in all field boundaries to provide nesting cover for gamebirds and suit-
able summer and winter habitat for beneficial invertebrates (Rands 1987; Thomas
et al. 1991). Legal control of potential nest predators was conducted from April to
July each year, and throughout the winter grain was provided by hand and from
hoppers, widely distributed across farmland and woodland habitats. This game man-
agement system was confined to Loddington and did not occur in the surrounding
area.
566

Bird monitoring

In the years 1992–1998, transect counts at Loddington were used to provide an index
of temporal changes in abundance of each species during the period of game manage-
ment. Transect counts were conducted on foot in fine weather in May and early June,
in the first 3 h after dawn, four counts being conducted each year at approximately
fortnightly intervals. The transect route totalled 11.5 km. It was selected to cover
the range of habitats present on the farm and was constant between visits and years.
Habitats covered by the transect included hedges with herbaceous field boundary
vegetation (45% of transect length), hedges with herbaceous vegetation and game-
crops (11%), field boundaries with herbaceous vegetation only (6%) and woodland
(38%). All adult passerines seen or heard were recorded in the adjacent field and field
boundary. The change in abundance of nationally declining species was compared
with longer term changes in abundance using the BTO’s common birds census data
for a farm 12 km to the west of Loddington.
In the years 1995–1997, separate transect counts were used to provide a measure of
spatial differences in bird abundance between Loddington (with game management)
and the surrounding area (without game management), 2–5 years after implementation
of the game management system. For this, five 1-km long transects were conducted at
0.5-km intervals within Loddington, and five transects were conducted at 1-km inter-
vals along each of four bearings radiating out from the centre of Loddington. The first
bearing was selected at random, with subsequent bearings at 90◦ , 180◦ , and 270◦ from
this. These formed four zones, with broadly similar arable, grassland and woodland fea-
tures to Loddington, but lacking wild game management (Figure 2). Each of the 25 tran-
sects was conducted once in May in the first 3 h after dawn.
Data from the five transects in each area were log-transformed and pooled for
analysis. Passerine species were divided into three categories: BAP species (Swash
et al. 2000), other nationally declining species (Crick et al. 1997), and nationally sta-
ble or increasing species (Crick et al. 1997). In addition, a Shannon–Wiener diversity
index was calculated as a measure of species diversity (Magurran 1988). The index
of total bird abundance, species richness (number of species), species diversity, and
abundance indices for nationally declining and stable/increasing species at Lodding-
ton were all compared with the equivalent values in the four zones in the surrounding
area using two-way ANOVA (zone × year) followed by contrast analysis (Loddington
vs. the average of zones A–D). Temporal changes in abundance at Loddington were
tested using Pearson correlation.

Results

At Loddington, numbers of birds in the ‘nationally declining species’ category rose

significantly over the 7-year period (r6 = 0.90, P < 0.01), with the main increase
 567

Figure 3. Abundance of nationally declining passerine species and nationally stable and increasing spe-
cies between May and June along the transect at Loddington during the period of game management
(1993–1998), and the Shannon index of species diversity over the same period.

occurring between 1992 and 1995, and were 102% higher in the 1995–1997 peri-
od than in 1992. Numbers of birds in the ‘nationally stable and increasing species’
category rose by 40% (r6 = 0.67, NS) (Figure 3). Excluding corvids, numbers of
which were deliberately controlled at Loddington, the increase recorded for national-
ly stable and increasing species was 47%. Annual percentage changes for individual
species in these two categories are given in Table 2. Figure 4 shows the historical
context of the increase in abundance of nationally declining species at Loddington
in relation to another local farm. The Shannon index of species diversity at Lodd-
ington increased from 1.10 in 1992 to an average of 1.16 in the 1995–1997 period,
although this increase over the 7-year period was not significant (r6 = 0.69, NS)
(Figure 3).
In the 1995–1997 period, there were no interactions between zone and year for
any of the variables examined. There was no difference in total bird abundance, bird
abundance of nationally stable species, species richness or species diversity between
Loddington and the average across the four zones in the surrounding area. There was a
significant difference in BAP species abundance between Loddington and the average
of zones A–D (contrast analysis F1, 9 = 7.52, P < 0.05; Figure 5). Other nationally
declining species were also significantly more abundant at Loddington than in the
surrounding area (F1, 9 = 16.77, P < 0.01; Figure 5).

Discussion

The change in species diversity at Loddington following the introduction of game

management and the subsequent difference between Loddington and the surrounding
568

Table 2. Annual percentage changes in abundance of nationally declining

and nationally stable and increasing species recorded on transects at Lodd-
ington (1992–1998).

Nationally declining species Nationally stable and increasing species

Species % Species %

Skylark Wren
Alauda arvensis −3 Troglodytes troglodytes −5
Dunnock Robin
Prunella modularis 8 Erithacus rubecula 1
Blackbird Whitethroat
Turdus merula 10 Sylvia communis 10
Song thrush Garden warbler
Turdus philomelos 16 Sylvia borin −9
Willow warbler Blackcap
Phylloscopus trochilus 16 Sylvia atricapilla 4
Linnet Blue tit
Carduelis cannabina 20 Parus caeruleus 11
Bullfinch Great tit
Pyrrhula pyrrhula 6 Parus major −4
Yellowhammer Magpie
Emberiza citrinella −1 Pica pica −8
Jackdaw
Corvus monedula 2
Chaffinch
Frigilla coelebs 1
Greenfinch
Carduelis chloris 68
Goldfinch
Carduelis carduelis 4

areas are both small. These results for species diversity suggest that the integration of
game management into an otherwise conventional farming system may have limited
potential for increasing bird species diversity at the farm scale. However, species
diversity has not been widely used as a measure of avian biodiversity on farmland in
Britain and the potential for a farm-scale increase may be low.
The poor response of local species diversity in relation to agricultural intensifi-
cation is consistent with the results of Burel et al. (1998), studying biodiversity in
relation to agricultural landscapes in western France, and those of Stoate et al. (in
press), studying bird abundance and species diversity in Portuguese farming systems.
In the Portuguese study, farming systems with highest abundance of nationally threat-
ened species were extensive arable-steppes with the lowest species diversity. While a
desirable goal in terms of conservation policy at the national level, species diversity
could be a misleading indicator of the contribution to that goal made by modified farm
management systems at the farm scale. In the Portuguese area, rare bird species and
the botanically diverse habitats on which they depend contribute to a tourist industry,
 569

Figure 4. Abundance of nationally declining species at Lodddington (1992–1998) and another local farm
(1965–1998), based on BTO common birds census data. The local farm index is corrected relative to a
value of 100 in 1965. The Loddington index is corrected relative to the local farm index in 1992.

Figure 5. Mean total abundance (±SE) of combined BAP species, other nationally declining species, and
nationally stable and increasing species at Loddington and the surrounding area in May and June for the
1995–1997 period.

farmers are encouraged to adapt their crop management under the agri-environment
regulation (1257/99), and private game management interests also contribute to bird
conservation (Stoate et al. 2000).
The slightly different ratio of grass to arable at Loddington, relative to the sur-
rounding area, may have influenced the initial abundance of some species in the
two areas, but the temporal changes recorded, concurrent with adoption of the game
management system, were positive for most species. For example, numbers of two
primarily arable species (skylark and yellowhammer) remained stable during the
study period, while numbers of linnet, song thrush and others less strongly associated
with arable land increased. Amongst the nationally stable and increasing species,
570

the increase in numbers at Loddington was strongly influenced by that recorded for
greenfinch, with other species remaining relatively stable.
Consistent temporal and spatial differences are recorded for the abundance of na-
tionally declining species which increased, and were then significantly more abundant
at Loddington than on surrounding farmland lacking game management. Compari-
son of the Loddington data for nationally declining species with data from another
local farm suggests that this increase completely reverses the longer term historical
decline in these species. Integration of wild game management into a convention-
al farming system is therefore having greatest overall benefit, in terms of increased
abundance, for the species of greatest national conservation concern. In this way,
game management on farmland can contribute to national biodiversity.
Some management practices that benefit pheasants and other birds on farmland
may have additional environmental benefits. Hedge removal, autumn cultivation and
application of pesticides are practices that have been associated with increased pol-
lution and sedimentation of watercourses, as well as with declines in farmland birds
(Skinner and Chambers 1996; Environment Agency 1999). While these environmen-
tal problems are associated with soil erosion, birds are affected by loss of breeding
habitat, loss of winter foraging habitat, and depletion of seed and invertebrate food
(Fuller 2000). Land-use systems that maintain hedges and their associated vegeta-
tion, reduce autumn cultivation, and minimise pesticide use are therefore likely to be
multifunctional in terms of their benefits. A primary motivation for such management
could be the management of game for shooting.
Management of wild gamebirds differs from that of artificially reared and released
gamebirds and the potential for conservation of farmland passerines may therefore
differ between farms with differing emphasis on these two management systems. This
study does not identify the role of individual components of the management system
in the conservation of farmland birds. This role is likely to differ between species,
according to their ecological requirements. For example, for the wild game man-
agement system at Loddington, Stoate and Szczur (2001) demonstrate that habitat
management in field boundaries is a strong determinant of whitethroat and yellow-
hammer abundance. Stoate and Thomson (2000) demonstrate a negative relationship
between crow and magpie abundance and nesting success of some species.
Management of both wild and reared gamebirds requires the provision of food
and cover during winter and this is known to be exploited by farmland passerines
(Stoate and Szczur 1997; Boatman et al. 2000). As increased winter mortality is
thought to be responsible for population declines of some farmland passerines (Peach
et al. 1999), gamecrops and supplementary feeding may contribute to the conser-
vation of seed-eating species such as linnet. Incorporation of a game management
system into farming systems, designed to increase diversification and sustainabili-
ty of natural resource use, could therefore have considerable conservation benefits
for bird communities on farmland, and for other recreational activities such as bird
watching.
 571

Acknowledgements

The farm at Loddington is owned and managed by the Allerton Research and Edu-
cational Trust and the work was funded by the Game Conservancy Trust, the Ernest
Cook Trust, the Habitat Research Trust and the Whitley Animal Protection Trust.
The British Trust for Ornithology provided historical bird abundance data for the
local farm. Malcolm Brockless conducted habitat management, predator control and
winter feeding for game. I am grateful to Nicholas Aebischer and Nigel Boatman for
discussions during the project, and for comments on this paper. Jeremy Wilson and
two anonymous reviewers also helped to improve the manuscript.

References

Anon (1999) A Better Quality of Life – A Strategy for Sustainable Development for the United Kingdom.
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
Boatman ND and Brockless MH (1998) The Allerton Project: farmland management for partridges (Perdix
perdix, Alectoris rufa) and pheasants (Phasianus colchicus). Gibier Faune Sauvage 15: 563–574
Boatman ND and Stoate C (2000) Integrating biodiversity conservation into arable agriculture. Aspects of
Applied Biology 62: 21–30
Boatman ND, Stoate C and Watts PN (2000) Practical management solutions for birds on lowland farm-
land. In: Aebischer NJ, Evans AD, Grice PV and Vickery JA (eds) Ecology and Conservation of Lowland
Farmland Birds, pp 105–114. British Ornithologists’ Union, Tring
Burel F, Baudry J, Buter A, Clergeau P, Delettre Y, Le Couer D, Dubs F, Morvan N, Paillat G, Petit S,
Thenail C, Brunel E and Lefeuvre J-C (1998) Comparative biodiversity along a gradient of agricultural
landscapes. Acta Oceologica 19: 47–60
Chamberlain DE and Wilson JD (2000) The contribution of hedgerow structure to the value of organic
farms to birds. In: Aebischer NJ, Evans AD, Grice PV and Vickery JA (eds) Ecology and Conservation
of Lowland Farmland Birds, pp 57–68. British Ornithologists’ Union, Tring
Chamberlain DE, Fuller RJ, Bunce RGH, Duckworth JC and Shrubb M (2000) Changes in the abundance
of farmland birds in relation to the timing of agricultural intensification in England and Wales. Journal
of Applied Ecology 37: 771–788
Cobham Resource Consultants (1997) Countryside Sports: Their Economic, Social and Conservation Sig-
nificance. The Standing Conference on Countryside Sports, Reading, UK
Crick HQP, Baillie SR, Balmer DE, Bashford RI, Dudley C, Glue DE, Gregory RD, Marchant JH, Peach
WJ and Wilson AM (1997) Breeding Birds in the Wider Countryside: Their Conservation Status (1971–
1995). British Trust for Ornithology, Thetford
Diaz M, Campos M and Pulido FJP (1997) The Spanish dehesa: a diversity in land-use and wildlife. In:
Pain D and Pienkowski M (eds) Farming and Birds in Europe. Academic Press, London
Draycott RAH, Hoodless AN, Ludiman MN and Robertson PA (1998) Effects of spring feeding on body
condition of captive-reared ring-necked pheasants in Great Britain. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:
557–563
Entec (1995) Effects of Organic Farming on the Landscape. Countryside Commission, Cheltenham
Environment Agency (1999) Sustainable Water Resources for the Future: Values and Challenges. Environ-
ment Agency, Bristol 16 pp
Ewald JA and Aebischer NJ (2002) Trends in pesticide use and efficacy during 26 years of changing
agriculture in southern England. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Fuller RJ (2000) Relationships between recent changes in lowland British agriculture and farmland bird
populations: an overview. In: Aebischer NJ, Evans AD, Grice PV and Vickery JA (eds) Ecology and
Conservation of Lowland Farmland Birds, pp 5–16. British Ornithologists’ Union, Tring
572

Fuller RJ, Gregory RD, Gibbons DW, Marchant JH, Wilson JD, Baillie SR and Carter N (1995) Popula-
tion declines and range contractions among lowland farmland birds in Britain. Conservation Biology 9:
1425–1441
Hill D and Robertson P (1988) The Pheasant: Ecology, Management and Conservation. BSP Professional
Books, Oxford
Magurran AE (1988) Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. Chapman & Hall, London
Macdonald DW and Johnson PJ (2000) Farmers and the custody of the countryside: trends in loss and
conservation of non-productive habitats 1981–1998. Biological Conservation 94: 221–234
Meeus JHA (1993) The transformation of agricultural landscapes in Western Europe. The Science of the
Total Environment 129: 171–190
Peach WJ, Siriwardena GM and Gregory RD (1999) Long-term changes in the abundance and demography
of British Reed Buntings Emberiza schoeniclus. Journal of Applied Ecology 36: 798–811
Potts GR (1986) The Partridge: Pesticides, Predation and Conservation. Collins, London
Potts GR (1991) The environmental and ecological importance of cereal fields. In: Firbank LG, Carter
N, Darbyshire JF and Potts GR (eds) The Ecology of Temperate Cereal Fields, pp 3–21. Blackwell
Scientific Publications, Oxford
Potts GR (1997) Cereal farming, pesticides and grey partridges. In: Pain D and Pienkowski M (eds) Farm-
ing and Birds in Europe, pp 150–177. Academic Press, London
Pretty JN, Brett C, Gee D, Hine RE, Mason CF, Morison JIL, Raven H, Rayment MD and van der Bijl
G (2000) An assessment of the total external costs of UK agriculture. Agricultural Systems 65: 113–
136
Rands MRW (1987) Hedgerow management for the conservation of partridges Perdix perdix and Alectoris
rufa. Biological Conservation 40: 127–139
Shrubb M (1997) Historical trends in British and Irish corn bunting Miliaria calandra populations – evi-
dence for the effects of agricultural change. In: Donald PF and Aebischer NJ (eds) The Ecology and Con-
servation of Corn Buntings Miliaria calandra. UK Nature Conservation 13. Joint Nature Conservation
Committee, Peterborough
Skinner RJ and Chambers BJ (1996) A survey to assess the extent of soil water erosion in lowland England
and Wales. Soil Use and Management 12: 214–220
Sotherton NW (1991) Conservation Headlands: a practical combination of intensive cereal farming and
conservation. In: Firbank LG, Carter N, Darbyshire JF and Potts GR (eds) The Ecology of Temperate
Cereal Fields, pp 373–397. Blackwell, Oxford
Sotherton NW and Robertson PA (1990) Indirect impacts of pesticides on the production of wild gamebirds
in Britain. In: Church KE, Warner RE and Brady SJ (eds) Perdix V. Gray Partridge and Ring-necked
Pheasant Workshop, pp 84–103. Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks. Emporia, Kansas
Stoate C (1996) The changing face of lowland farming and wildlife. Part 2: 1945–1995. British Wildlife 7:
162–172
Stoate C and Szczur J (1997) Seasonal changes in habitat use by yellowhammers (Emberiza citrinel-
la). Brighton Crop Protection Conference – Weeds, pp 1167–1172, Farnham: British Crop Protection
Council
Stoate C and Szczur J (2001) Whitethroat Sylvia communis and Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella nesting
success and breeding distribution in relation to field boundary vegetation. Bird Study 48: 229–235
Stoate C and Thomson DL (2000) Effects of predation on bird populations. In: Aebischer NJ, Evans AD,
Grice PV and Vickery JA (eds) Ecology and Conservation of Lowland Farmland Birds, pp 134–139.
Proceedings of the 1999 British Ornithologists’ Union Spring Conference. BOU, Tring
Stoate C, Borralho RJ and Araújo M (2000) Factors affecting corn bunting Miliaria calandra abundance
in a Portuguese agricultural landscape. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 77: 219–226
Stoate C, Boatman ND, Borralho R, Rio Carvalho C, de Snoo G and Eden P (2002) Ecological impacts of
arable intensification in Europe. Journal of Environmental Management 63
Stoate C, Araújo M and Borralho R (in press) Conservation of European Farmland Birds: Abundance and
Species Diversity. Bird Numbers: Monitoring for Nature Conservation. 15th International Conference
of the European Bird Census Council, Nyíregyháza, Hungary
Swash ARH, Grice PV and Smallshire D (2000) The contribution of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan and
agri-environment schemes to the conservation of farmland birds in England. In: Aebischer NJ, Evans
 573

AD, Grice PV and Vickery JA (eds) Ecology and Conservation of Lowland Farmland Birds, pp 36–42.
British Ornithologists’ Union, Tring
Tapper SC, Potts GR and Brockless MH (1996) The effect of an experimental reduction in predation
pressure on the breeding success and population density of grey partridges (Perdix perdix). Journal of
Applied Ecology 33: 965–978
Thomas MB, Wratten SD and Sotherton NW (1991) Creation of ‘island’ habitats in farmland to manipulate
populations of beneficial arthropods: predator densities and emigration. Journal of Applied Ecology 28:
906–918
Tucker GM and Heath MF (1994) Birds in Europe: Their Conservation Status. BirdLife International,
Cambridge.
Westmacott R and Worthington T (1997) Agricultural Landscapes: A Third Look, 12 pp. Countryside
Commission, Walgrave
View publication stats