ENVIRONMENT WORKSHOPS 2012 

 
“INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON
PROPER DESIGN OF AVIAN
REINTRODUCTION PROJECTS:
TRYING TO ESTABLISH GUIDELINES”

Baeza, Spain. 15th – 17th October 2012

                                               

                                                       

                                                        

           
            
                 
PROGRAM

Sunday, October 14th

16:30 Bus departure from Barajas Airport

(Meeting Point International arrivals at Terminal T1)

21:30 Arrival to Baeza. Registration. Dinner

Monday, October 15th

09:00-09:30 Breakfast

9:30- 10:00 Miguel Ferrer (CSIC): Workshop introduction and presentation of

participants.

Session 1: Criteria for deciding whether to start a reintroduction project

10:00-10:30 Inaugural talk: Ian Newton. Avian reintroductions: justification and

issues.
10:30-10:50 Francois Sarrazin. Definition of success criteria for conservation
translocations.
10:50-11:10 Rick Watson. Lessons learned from 40 years of raptor restoration by
The Peregrine Fund.

11:10-11:40 Coffee Break

11:40-12:00 Catherine Numa. Translocation of living organisms: the IUCN Position

Statement and guidelines for species reintroduction.
12:00-12:20 Mario Diaz. Too many reintroductions? A proposal for a decision-
making system.
12:20.12:40 Miguel Ferrer. Reintroductions: new tools in a changing World.

12:40-13:40 Round Table

13:40-15:40 Lunch

Session 2: Legal and societal issues.

15:40-16:00 Eladio Fernández-Galiano. Drafting, negociating, implementing and

monitoring avian reintroduction projects: the importance of ensuring the
appropriate legal and administrative arrangements and public support.
16:00-16:20 Rubén Moreno-Opo. Legal aspects for the development of avian
reintroduction projects in Spain.
16:20-16:40 Amara González. Impact Assessment As Another Tool In Avian Re-
Introduction Programmes.
16:40-17:00 Jemima Perry-Jones. Avian Reintroduction – In situ or Ex situ,
Expensive or Economic?.
17:00-17:20 Agustín Madero. Social and technical issues related to Spanish Imperial
Eagle reintroduction Project in South Spain.
17:20-18:20 Round Table

18:20-18:50 Coffee Break

18:50-19:50 Poster session

20:00 Guided tour to Baeza

21:00 Dinner

Tuesday, October 16th

9:00-9:30 Breakfast

Session 3. 1 Case Study

09:40-10:00 Ruth Tingay. Learning from history: when a reintroduction might not be
the best option (the critically endangered Madagascar Fish Eagle as a
case study)
10:00-10:20 B-U. Meyburg. Fostering and hacking: Nestling management and
translocations in support of a decreasing eagle population, the Lesser
Spotted Eagle (Aquila pomarina).
10:20-10:40 Phil Whitfield. Reintroduction of White-tailed eagles to Scotland.
10:40-11:00 Joan Mayol. Translocations as a tool for wildlife restoration in islands.

11:00-11:30 Coffee Break

11:40-12:00 Aitor Galarza. Reintroduction of non threatened species as a

conservation tool: the case of the Urdaibai Biosphere Reserve.
12:00-12:20 Roberto Muriel. Animal behaviour in reintroduction programs: post
fledging and dispersal period in translocated Spanish imperial eagles.
12:20-12:40 Emilio Laguna Lumbreras. Lights and shades in the reintroduction of
birds in the valencian region: 25 years of (re)building its avian fauna.

12:40-13:40 Round Table

13:40-15:30 Lunch

Session 3.2 Case Study

15:40-16:00 Rafael Arenas. Current status quebrantahuesos reintroduction

(Gypaetus Barbatus) in Andalusia.
16:00-16:20 Gerardo Baguena. Bearded Vulture reintroduction project in Picos de
Europa National Park.
16:20-16:40 Jose Manuel López. Ibis Eremita Project.
16:40-17:00 Eva Casado. The recovery of an extinct breeding species in the Iberian
Peninsula: the Osprey reintroduction project in Andalusia.
17:00-17:15 Adrián Alonso Corral. Reintroduction of Scarlet macaw in Costa Rica.
The ARA project.
.
17:15-18:15 Round Table

18:15-18:45 Coffee Break

18:45-20:00 Concluding Remarks lecture

21:00 Special Conference Dinner

Wednesday, October 17th

8:00 Visit to the Bearded Vulture captive breeding centre in Cazorla (Jaen).

21:00 Dinner

Thursday, October 18th

07:00 Bus departure to Barajas airport

12:30 Arrival at Madrid-Barajas airport Terminal T1
SPEAKERS agustin.madero@juntadeandalucia.es

Eva Casado Joan Mayol Serra.

Migres Fundation. Sevilla. Spain. Govern de les Illes Balears, Departament
casado@fundacionmigres.org de Medi Natural, Servei de Protecció
d'Espècies, Spain.
Miguel Ángel Ferrer Baena. Researcher. jmayol@dgcapea.caib.es
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Científicas, Estación Biológica de Doñana. Professor Dr. Bernd-U. Meyburg. World
Sevilla. Spain. Working Group on Birds of Prey and Owls
mferrer@ebd.csic.es (WWGBP), Germany.
BUMeyburg@aol.com
Rubén Moreno-Opo Díaz-Meco
Subdirección General de Medio Natural, Roberto Muriel Abad
DG de Calidad, Evaluación Ambiental y Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Medio Natural, Ministerio de Agricultura, Científicas, Estación Biológica de Doñana,
Alimentación y Medio Ambiente. Spain. Spain.
muriel@ebd.csic.es
Gerardo Báguena Sánchez.
Fundación para la Conservación el Professor Ian Newton
Quebrantahuesos, Spain. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, United
gerardo@quebrantahuesos.org Kingdom.
jpj@icbp.org
Eladio Fernández-Galiano. Biodiversity
Unit, Council of Europe, France. Jemima Parry-Jones
eladio.fernandez‐galiano@coe.int MBE. International Centre for Birds of
Prey, United Kingdom.
Aitor Galarza jpj@icbp.org
Diputación Foral de Bizkaia, Spain.
agalarza@telefonica.net François Sarrazin.
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle -
Amara González Martínez Centre National de la recherche
DG de Calidad y Evaluación Ambiental, scientifique . Université Pierre et Marie
Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Curie, Lab. Conservation des Espèces,
Medio Ambiente, Spain. Restauration et Suivi des Populations,
AGMARTINEZ@magrama.es France.
sarrazin@mnhn.fr
Emilio Laguna Lumbreras 
laguna_emi@gva.es.   Dr Ruth Tingay
Servicio de Espacios Naturales y Wildlife International Network, United
Biodiversidad, Consellería de Kingdom.
Infraestructuras, Territorio y Medio dimlylit100@hotmail.com
Ambiente, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain.
Catherine Numa
Agustín Madero Montero. Departamento Rresponsable del Programa de Especies en
de Geodiversidad y Biodiversidad UICN-Med
Delegación Provincial Consejería de Mediterráneo de UICN, Spain.
Medio Ambiente. Jaén. Spain. Catherine.numa@iucn.org 
Richard Watson Ph.D
The Peregrine Fund, USA.
rwatson@peregrinefund.org
Phil Whitfield
Natural Research, United Kingdom.
phil.whitfield@natural‐research.org
 
Mario Díaz
Comité Científico de la SEO
SEO/BirdLife, Spain.
Mario.Diaz@ccma.csic.es 
Rafael Arenas González
Consejería de Medio Ambiente
Junta de Andalucía
Córdoba. Spain.
rafaelm.arenas@juntadeandalucia.es
SPEAKERS ABSTRACTS
 THE RECOVERY OF AN EXTINCT BREEDING SPECIES IN THE
IBERIAN PENINSULA: THE OSPREY REINTRODUCTION PROJECT
IN ANDALUSIA

Eva Casado1, Roberto Muriel2, Miguel Ferrer2

1 Migres Foundation. Inca Garcilaso 1, 41092 Sevilla, Spain.

2 Department of Ethology and Biodiversity Conservation, Estación Biológica de Doñana
(C.S.I.C.)c/ Americo Vespucio s/n, 41092 Sevilla, SPAIN

The current situation of the Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) in the Mediterranean basin is
unfavorable, with few, small and isolated populations. The species was extirpated from
mainland Spain after 1981, and only two breeding populations remain in the Canary Islands
and Balearic Islands, each consisting in 15-20 pairs. Despite suitable breeding conditions and
the annual stop over of migratory Ospreys, the species has been unable to recolonize the
region. Thus, a reintroduction program started in 2003 in Andalusia (SW Spain) in order to
accelerate the return of the species. The final goals were to recover the ancient distribution of
the species and reinforce the stability of the Mediterranean meta-population.

Prior to start the project, a viability analysis was performed following the IUCN guidelines,
which confirmed that there was high resources availability (feeding and nesting sites,
incoming individuals), there were not threats that jeopardize the survival of released
individuals or the future population, and no genetic reasons for stopping the project.
Consequently, we designed the project, including not only issues related to habitat and to
Osprey population dynamics, but also to its migratory behavior and a continuous evaluation
by experts committee.

Between 2003 and 2011, 164 young Ospreys were released by means of hacking in two
locations: Barbate Reservoir (Cadiz) and Odiel Marshes Natural Reserve (Huelva). All the
nestlings were translocated from wild nests in Germany, Scotland and Finland. Nestlings
stayed for 2-4 weeks in the hacking facilities until they were able to fly. During this stage,
chicks were monitored and fed. Each bird was weighted, measured, and fitted with a
transmitter before releasing, between 2003 and 2009. Twelve birds were fitted with satellite
PTTs to track them during migration, a major concern in a migratory species. They started
migration between the end of August and beginning of October. Nine of the Ospreys fitted
with PTT transmitters were tracked up to their wintering grounds in Sub-Saharian Africa
(Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau and Mali). During the pre and post-fledging periods the
mortality rate was 10.6 %, all due to natural causes except one fledgling that was shot.
Twenty reintroduced birds, released in 2003-2009, were recorded back to the reintroduction
areas until 2011-2012 winter,, which results in a return rate of 16,3%.
First breeding attempt in mainland Spain since 24 years ago was recorded in 2005; a non-
reintroduced Osprey breeding pair built a nest and laid at least one egg in a reservoir close to
the release point in Cadiz Due to problems during the incubation period the eggs did not
hatched. To encourage site fidelity we conducted a fostering with two Osprey chicks from
Germany. The breeding pair reared the chicks, which fledged and started migration. Since
then, the incipient population has been growing slowly, reaching 7 breeding pairs by spring
2012.

According to a population viability analysis, the new established Osprey population in

southern Iberia can be considered self-sustainable since the predicted extinction probability
was 0.009 within 100 years. Therefore, the project can be considered as successful, so the
hacking phase was finished in 2012, ten years after it was started.
 REINTRODUCTIONS: NEW TOOLS IN A CHANGING WORLD

Miguel Ferrer1

1 Department of Ethology and Biodiversity Conservation,

Estación Biológica de Doñana (CSIC), c/ Américo Vespucio s/n, 41092, Seville, Spain.

According the IUCN guidelines, reintroductions are projects trying to establish a

species population in an area where the species was eradicated in the past; displacements are
the man-made movement of one existing population to other area; reinforcements are the
introduction in one population of wild individuals coming from other wild population of the
species; and introductions are the same that reintroductions but outside the historical
distribution area of the species.
Reintroductions are a useful tool for conservation management since it allows us to increase
the survival rate of a population, especially in the framework of global change that we are
living nowadays. Climatic change is modifying the habitat availability much faster than we
knew up to date. Consequently, some species can expand or extinct rapidly and we can avoid
it. On one hand, to increase the distribution area of a species is always good in order to avoid
the risk of synchronic stochastic fluctuations in subpopulations, thus increasing expected time
to extinction. On the other hand, a large distribution area increases opportunities of
geographical differences in gene frequencies, increases long term ability to survive in the face
of environmental changes.

We can find two sceneries when we want to reintroduce a species in an area.

Depending on the situation we have, the objective of the reintroduction project is different.
First, the reintroduction area is well apart of wild populations being the nearest at longer
distance than average dispersal distance for the species. Under this situation, we must get a
new population large enough to be viable by itself. Second, there are not breeding pairs but
the area is visited by juveniles that did not try to breed there due to absence of stimuli. So,
reintroduction area is inside the dispersal area for the species. Under this situation, the
objective is more to increases meta-population stability.

Independently of the final goal of any reintroduction project, the issues typically
suggested by IUCN guidelines to be analyzed are 1) historical record of the species in the
area, 2) causes of previous extinction had disappeared, 3) availability of good quality habitat,
4) carrying capacity and future population viability, 5) possible actual problems in the
reintroduction area, 6) sustainable source of young, 7) genetic considerations about donor
populations, 8) selection of the release area, 9) release method, 10) duration of the program,
11) evaluation and monitoring
 Although these general aspects are convenient to be consider before starting a
reintroduction project, are not enough to guarantee its success. Other key targets must
analyzed: a) origin of the translocated individuals (wild born or captive born), b) the effect of
nestlings extraction in donor population, c) where to install the hacking tower, in private or in
public properties, d) how many individuals we need to release, e) sex-ratio, f) how long is
going to take the project, g) when we expect to obtain the first breeding pairs, h) it is
fundamental to evaluate every year the results to confirm the right development of the project.

Reintroduction programs are a very useful tool in our changing world. But they must
be properly design using not only traditional analysis, but also population dynamic models.
This kind of models will allow us to evaluate it every year as well. To obtain the data needed
to assess every program requires a comprehensive monitoring of the released individuals.
 LEGAL ASPECTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AVIAN
REINTRODUCTION PROJECTS IN SPAIN

Rubén Moreno-Opo

Technical Assistant. Subdirección General de Medio Natural. Ministerio de Agricultura,

Alimentación y Medio Ambiente

The current accelerated rate of extinction or the increase of the threat level of animal and
plant species require the adoption of conservation programs towards reducing and avoiding
biodiversity loss. Among different available options, reintroductions are an important tool
adding extra value within the framework of conservation programs, either for the own species
recovery or for global restoration of wild areas. Aiming at a proper implementation, Spanish
legislation set management actions for the development of such projects in order to suit the
reintroduction initiatives to an adequate technical and scientific soundness, an efficient
coordination between competent authorities and public engagement.

Reintroduction projects must be developed in compliance with current legislation. At first

step, requirements for this kind of actions are included in the Act 42/2007, of 13th December,
of Natural Heritage and Biodiversity. In its article 52, relating to the guarantee of
conservation of native species, in its point 4 it is provided that “the convenience of
reintroduction extinct wild taxa, but which wild or captive populations still exist, will be
assessed taking into consideration previous experiences and international guidelines
regarding the matter, together with a proper public participation and audience”. Moreover, it
is mentioned that “in the case of species likely to extend their distribution to different Spanish
Regions –Comunidades Autónomas-, the reintroduction program must be submitted to the
Comisión Estatal para el Patrimonio Natural y la Biodiversidad, for its approval by the
Conferencia Sectorial de Medio Ambiente”.

Furthermore, and for the implementation of the Act 42/2007, the Royal Decree 139/2011, of
4th February, of the List of Wild Species in Special Protection Regime and the Spanish
Catalogue of Endangered Species, provides in its article 13, on Species reintroduction,
detailed legal conditions, such as:

- When planning the reintroduction of extinct species within a given territory/region

which are likely to expand their range to other regions –Comunidades Autónomas-, a
reintroduction program must be prepared and approved by the Conferencia Sectorial
de Medio Ambiente.
- To assess the suitability of implementing a reintroduction program, it should be taken
into account a) the previous expertise with the same or like-ecological-traits species,
b) the recommendations of international guidelines and criteria developed and
approved by the Ministry and Regions –Comunidades Autónomas- and c) appropriate
 public engagement. The Comité de Flora y Fauna Silvestres, official technical body
of competent authorities, will prepare a technical report on reviewing the compliance
and adequacy of the reintroduction program;
- The reintroduction program must be included within the national conservation strategy
of the species as a priority, and if that strategy would not exist, this inclusion must be
considered in the official plans approved by regional governments –Comunidades
Autónomas-, and
- Within potential reintroduction or extension areas of the targeted species of
reintroduction projects specific land management programs and conservation
measures must be implemented, to avoid negative affection for species that have led to
the appointment of these areas as protected.

Finally, it is remarkable that the requirements listed above about the Act 42/2007 and the
Royal Decree 139/2011 incorporate the most relevant provisions on reintroductions of the
Article 9 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, ratified by Spain in 2003, as well as
the prescriptions stated in Article 22 of Directive 92/43/EEC, on the conservation of natural
habitats and wildlife, into the Spanish regulatory framework.

Thus, for the proper enforcement of article 52.4 of the above mentioned Act, reintroduction
initiatives requiring their submission to the Comité de Flora y Fauna Silvestres for its
subsequent approval by the Conferencia Sectorial de Medio Ambiente, could be the
following:

- Benign/non benign introduction projects except 1) when released organisms or

their offspring are not likely to extend to a region –Comunidad Autónoma-
different to that promoting and developing the project or, 2) when being
susceptible to extend to another region where the species is currently located.
- Reintroduction projects except 1) when released organisms or their offspring are
not likely to extend to a region –Comunidad Autónoma- different to that
promoting and developing the project or, 2) when being susceptible to extend to
another region where the species is currently located.
- Re-enforcement, restocking or population supplementation projects of species
listed in the Spanish Catalogue of Endangered Species if they could lead to the
extent of the species to a region different to that promoting and developing the
project and in which the species is not currently distributed.

Other type of proposals only must be communicated to the Comisión Estatal para el
Patrimonio Natural y la Biodiversidad.
 BEARDED VULTURE RE-INTRODUCTION PROGRAMME IN
THE PICOS DE EUROPA NATIONAL PARK

Gerardo Báguena Sanchez

Director of the Bearded Vulture Conservation Foundation (Fundación para la
Conservación del Quebrantahuesos)

The Bearded Vulture (Gypaetus barbatus, Linnaeus 1758) is considered one of the
most endangered species on the European continent (Annex I of the Habitat Directive,
49/409/CEE; Appendix II of the Bern Convention, Decision 82/72/CEE of the Council; Bonn
Convention, Decision 82/461/CEE of the Council; CITES, Regulation (CE) nº 338/97).

A drastic process of regression suffered by western Palaearctic populations during the

XIX y XX centuries led to its decline and disappearance, with only one viable nucleus left in
the Pyrenees and two small isolated populations on the islands of Corsica and Crete (Antor et
al., 2003, Seguin, 2003, Xirouchakis & Andritsou, 2003). Currently, its distribution in Spain
continues restricted to the Pyrenean and pre-Pyrenean area, where a population of 130
reproductory units exists (2012), constituting 84% of the European population. The main risks
to the bearded vulture in Spain continue to be associated to its scarce distribution and low
colonisation capacity, due to which its population is still confined to the Pyrenean range,
necessitating expansion of its territorial distribution range and thus reducing possible risks
inherent in environmental stochasticity.

The Pyrenean Autonomous Regions’ development of recovery plans, in which

numerous specific protection actions are contemplated, has generated an increase in the
population and improved pre-adult survival rates. During the last decade, a significant
increase in the number of displacements of the species towards the Cantabrian Range, with
observations centred in the mountainous area of the Picos de Europa, has been documented.

The historical presence of the bearded vulture in the Picos de Europa has been
documented in numerous bibliographic sources. The bearded vulture was common in the area
until the beginning of the 1930s, and despite some uncertainty about the exact date of local
extinction, different authors situate the last nestings between the 1930s and 1960s. FCQ field
investigations confirm the finding of a bearded vulture nest occupied until the end of this
period. Preliminary studies have revealed valuable information on habitat selection and
viability criteria of a founding population.

The rescue of embryos without any survival possibilities in the wild is a widely
employed technique in the development of endangered species conservation programmes.
This technique allows for the diagnosis of problems related to the incubation process,
providing clinical solutions to embryos unviable in the wild. Hatching in captivity followed
by nurture through new methods will contribute to a) advances in our knowledge of
reproduction biology, and b) the restoration of old distribution areas. Advances achieved in
the nurture in captivity of other birds of prey have led to progress in the application of new
methods based on learning through natural imprinting, and have served as the basis for the
development of the technique applied in the bearded vulture reintroduction project in the
Picos de Eurpoa National Park. The creation of a stable extra-Pyrenean reproduction nucleus
will contribute to reducing the risk of extinction of the Spanish population.
 AVIAN REINTRODUCTIONS: GETTING THE INSTITUTIONAL
APPROACH RIGHT

Eladio Fernández-Galiano

Council of Europe

The Council of Europe has been involved for long in operations related to the re-
introduction of species and the implementation of action plans (recovery plans in the
terminology used in Spain) for species in Europe.

These operations involving translocation of animals are popular among biologists as a

way to “repair” ecosystems that may have lost their species due to a high variety of reasons,
mainly a change of habitat conditions or, in certain cases, an excessive hunting or the
persecution of species seen a “pests” for human interest (be these agriculture, hunting,
recreational fishing or other). Yet these operations are complex to organise and difficult to
assess, mainly due to the high number of people or interest groups that may have an interest
and the need to carefully plan and implement their follow-up and success –or lack of success.
Often biologists or conservation groups tend to minimise the institutional aspects involved in
reintroducing species and do not always follow in detail the generally sensible guidelines
agreed by international organisations. IUCN published in August 2012 new “IUCN
Guidelines for Reintroductions and Other Conservation Translocations”. The Council of
Europe adopted in 1997 its Bern Convention Recommendation No. 59 (1997) on the Drafting
and Implementation of Action Plans of Wild Fauna Species, which provides guidelines for such
operations. It dealt with aspects which are also relevant for reintroduction of avian species, such
as the following:

- Legal aspects and administrative arrangements: finances and long term involvement
- International co-operation
-.Identification of species requiring special conservation attention, including, if appropriate,
Action Plans (read “reintroductions”)
- Drafting action plans (read “reintroductions”) scientific aspects, contents, goals, setting of
priorities and funding
- Implementation, monitoring, update and follow-up
- Participation of NGOs; public information and educational aspects

Planning for a reintroduction operation requires checking if these conditions (and those
established by IUCN guidelines) are met. If those points are not clarified in advance to a
reintroduction operation it would perhaps be wiser to abstain, saving money and efforts for
more urgent or priority conservation action, especially in times of budgetary constraints.
 REINTRODUCTION OF NON-ENDANGERED SPECIES TO PROMOTE
CONSERVATION OF PROTECTED AREAS: THE CASE OF THE URDAIBAI
BIOSPHERE RESERVE

Aitor Galarza
Servicio de Recursos Naturales, Fauna cinegética y Pesca
Diputación Foral de Bizkaia

Reintroduction is a particularly useful tool for restoring a species in a habitat where it

has become extinct due to human persecution or habitat alteration, as long as these factors are
moved or can be controlled at present. The principle aim of any reintroduction is to establish
in the wild a viable population of a species, subspecies or race, which became globally or
locally extinct, but reintroduction programs can also be used to achieve parallel objectives,
such as favour economic benefits to the local communities or promote a positive perception of
conservation. However, the suitability of reintroductions is rarely discussed in the context of
these twin goals, also included by the IUCN among the objectives that a reintroduction may
pursue.

In protected areas, one of the biggest challenges facing their managers is the social
acceptance of restrictions imposed to human activities by the environmental legislation
(forestry, hunting, leisure, urban development, etc). This challenge can be achieved through
environmental awareness campaigns as well as actions that promote the economic
development of the local population. In this scenario, the management of charismatic species,
i.e. flagship species, can be a useful tool for both strategies. In addition, specific conservation
plans for flagship species can benefit many other species, such as with the management plans
of the umbrella species.

The Urdaibai Biosphere Reserve is located in Northern Atlantic Spanish coast (Biscay,
Basque Country) and covers 220 km2 that include an estuary surrounded by agricultural land
and forest. In the last years, the Biscay Regional Government has promoted the reintroduction
of two avian species in the Reserve: white stork Ciconiaciconia and osprey Pandionhaliaetus.
These species are classified in the Least Concern category of the IUCN Red List, thus they
are not threatened birds, and both are considered as flagship species.

During the 2003-2008 period a white stork reintroduction program was carried out in
this protected area.Beside getting the reproduction of white stork in the Reserve, results also
confirmed a great local interest in the program, with a high participation of primary-school
students and general public, and a high impact on local press, radio and television The
program also showed a sever impact of power lines on the survival of released individuals.
Because survival of released storks was of high local interest, news on electrocution or
collision generated awareness about this impact, thus promoting correction of power lines.
 In the last years, the Biscay Regional Government has evaluated the desirability and
feasibility of an osprey reintroduction in the area. As in the case of the white stork, osprey
reintroduction would be used as a tool for environmental awareness and to promote the image
of the Urdaibai Reserve. Moreover, the process of reintroduction and osprey nesting could be
decisive to improve measures for a better conservation of the Reserve (eg, more effective
regulations of leisure activities linked to the estuary or regulations of forestry) that can benefit
many other avian species.
 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AS ANOTHER TOOL IN AVIAN RE-
INTRODUCTION PROGRAMMES

Amara González Martínez

Directora de Programa

Dirección General de Calidad y Evaluación Ambiental

Impact assessment has two main scales of intervention: the strategic impact
assessment on the effects of certain plans and programmes over the environment, and the
impact assessment of projects whose area of intervention is much more restricted.

The development of programmes for the avian re-introduction has followed an

evolution in its implementation on the territory similar to that of the environmental
evaluation. That is, both started as projects with defined targets but, as they were being
developed, the need of a previous “strategic” intervention which allowed the “particular”
projects to show better results was proved.

This document, focusing on environmental evaluation in its two main versions, the
strategic version and the projects version, and leading to projects of avian re-introduction, as
these have to be necessarily developed on a territory that evolves through time, will try to
show the benefits that for these re-introduction projects may suppose a previous
environmental evaluation, which might lead to increase the success ratio of these projects.

This document will also suggest which might the instruments of evaluation be, its
guidelines, and will put forward how, through the evaluation of particular projects, can
specific re-introduction programmes be reinforced.

The first tool to be tackled is the strategic environmental evaluation of plans and
programmes, which allows to add to decision making, judgement criteria, such as those
relating with environmental aspects, and other basic aspects, such as transparency and public
consulting, which will let to improve the sustainability, in a wide sense, of the particular plan
or programme that is being evaluated.

The carrying out, by any kind of Public Administration, of an impact assessment

process requires the existence of fixed administrative procedures, supported by regulations
established for that purpose. Therefore, a brief analysis on the regulations to be applied has to
be made by the State General Administration regarding the species re-introduction and the
evaluation of plans and programmes which might have to be used in each of the cases. In this
sense, it is to be highlighted the strategic evaluation performed in the Strategic Plan for the
Natural Heritage and Biodiversity, and the instructions of this plan for the re-introduction of
species.

When we face a whole planning of the territory, strategic environmental evaluation is

specially important in order to be able to put together both conservation policies and
sustainable economic development policies. To achieve this, it is basic to establish a series of
environmental indicators which will help us to mark out the thresholds not to be gone beyond.

Nowadays, we find very undefined indicators to measure the pressure over the
environment and, for this lack of information, they are very difficult to calculate. This essay
wants to draw attention over the need that experts in different areas define certain indicators
that will help the strategic evaluation of any plan or programme affecting the environment to
be a real instrument for the protection of every interest involved.

One of the kind of programmes that could be the object of strategic impact assessment
are the programmes for the re-introduction of species in their natural environment. For this
reason, this essay considers a proposal for the environmental evaluation of these programmes
with the main aim of enhancening their effectiveness, particularly from the point of view of
public consulting and monitoring. It is considered that, regarding the purely environmental
aspects, their influence over the environment, at least presumptively, would be positive. This
idea of considering environmental evaluation as an aid for the accomplishment of the re-
introduction targets comes from the opinion of experts and standing organizations that point
out that, considering these programmes' costs, many of the experiences carried out haven't had
the expected results.

Eventually, the compensatory measures associated to the environmental impact

evaluation of the programmes are approached, considering they might be an opportunity to
start population reinforcement and threatened avian re-introduction programmes.
Nevertheless, these measures, that have been excessively used lately, cannot be applied in any
context, reason why this essay tries to set the minimum standard to be able to know in which
certain situations can these measures be considered and which elements have to be taken into
account to guarantee their effectiveness. In this sense, four key ideas are to be highlighted:

 To adopt a compensatory measure consisting in the reinforcement of species

populations, the intervention has to be scientifically justified, due to the impacts that
the project is going to have over a species of EC relating interest or its habitat.
 To guarantee the feasibility of the measure to be carried out, the grounds in which it is
going to be developed should be previously defined and the mechanisms that will
allow to have those grounds at our disposal should be prepared.
 It is advisable to analyse the possibility of protecting the key places for the success of
the compensatory measure (nesting areas, feeding areas,) to prevent future projects or
unsuited interventions on the habitat making undesired impacts in the grounds.
 *(Efecto grifo-sumidero)

Those responsible to carry out any compensatory measure are the promoters of the
project, who, usually, are not specialists in environmental management, so, to ensure that the
measure is properly designed and fulfilled; it is needed to have multidisciplinary teams and
collaboration agreements with specialised organizations.

Authors:
Amara González Martínez.Programme Director, General Subdirection of Impact Assessment. Degree
in Geologics and Supeior Technician in Environmental Conservation.
Luis Benavente Fournier. Programme Director, General Sudirection of Impact Assessment.. Degree in
Biologics and Superior Technician in Environmental Conservation
Ana Delgado Echevarría. Superior Technician, General Subdirection of Impact Assessment. Degree
in Environment Sciences and Superior Technician in Environmental Conservation.
 LIGHTS AND SHADES IN THE REINTRODUCTION OF BIRDS IN
THE VALENCIAN REGION: 25 YEARS OF (RE) BUILDING ITS
AVIAN FAUNA

Juan JIMÉNEZ , Juan A. GÓMEZ & Emilio LAGUNA

Generalitat Valenciana - Conselleria de Infraestructuras, Territorio y Medio Ambiente.

Servicio de Espacios Naturales y Biodiversidad. Valencia, Spain
jimenez_juaper@gva.es , gomez_jualop@gva.es, laguna_emi@gva.es

The ‘Servicio de Espacios Naturales y Biodiversidad’ (Wildlife Service of the

Generalitat Valenciana, Autonomous Government of Valencian Community, Spain), has
inherited the activitiy of former governmental agencies for the protecion of wild fauna and
flora in the Valencian territory, mainly focused on the conservation of endangered species.
Since its creation in 1986 developes several re-introduction and population reinforcement
programmes, including those for bird species. Main targeted species have been aquatic birds
(Purple Swamphen, Crested Coot, Marbled Duck), as well as a few marine birds (Audouin’s
Seagull) and raptors (Lesser Kestrel). The recovery programmes have been mostly based on
captivity breeding techniques. Some of these projects are re-introductions of locally extincted
projects (Purple Swamphen, Crested Coot, Lesser Kestrel); the remainder ones consisted of
translocations and/or population reinforcements of non-extincted species (Marbled Duck,
Audouin’s Seagull). Althoug the main motivation to propose and develop these programmes
was the recovery of extincted or seriously endangered species, other strategic parallel and
collateral goals must be taken in account: to defence protected sites, to acquire strengths able
to combat conflicts focused on the species, to make in value the activity of the environmental
administration … Anyway all the projects ongone with a large set of personnel willings,
encouragement and logistic facilities.

Regardless of these motivations -both scientifical-technical reasons and those due to

the above indicated collateral causes- all these projects have been long-term, continuously
developed and monitorised, including in most cases an external evaluation made by
researchers. This joint work has generated a set of scientifical publications, including those
criticizing the technical purposes of the same projects.

The main issues of these re-introduction projects are shown, both for demographic and
strategic results, pointing out their success and failures. As a former conclusion we propose
that the project success should not be exclusively measured through the species data -i.e.
demographic rate increase or decline, continuous recruitment, etc.-, but also evaluating their
ability to promote decisions and to solve territorial conflicts, as a part of a large-scale
environmental vision
 TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF THE SPANISH IMPERIAL
EAGLE REINTRODUCTION PROJECT IN THE PROVINCE OF
CADIZ (SOUTH OF SPAIN)

Agustín Madero Montero*.

*Jefe de Departamento de Geodiversidad y Biodiversidad. Delegación Territorial de Jaén.

Consejería de Agricultura Pesca y Medio Ambiente. Junta de Andalucía. E-mail:
agustin.madero@juntadeandalucia.es

The processes of reintroduction need from technical and scientific support not only
previous to start, but also during development and even after finishing. There is certain
consensus on this; nevertheless there are many difficulties to assess the appropriateness of
wild management such as rescues or nestlings and eggs collection. Moreover, handle of
individuals usually requires certain personal skills, inherent or acquired in early stages of the
technician’s life. We will show some examples about how the requirements of birds of prey
influenced the design of the hacking facilities.

Awareness campaigns on reintroduction projects are usually designed for people living
in cities, that are already ”sensitized", but they are not going to spend great part of their time
(professional, familiar or leisure time) in the field. Just few people as wardens, land owners,
hunters, shepherds, etc spend long time in the country side. Consequently, the awareness
campaign on the Spanish Imperial eagle reintroduction project was address to this sector of
society, who does not read brochures; do not see cartels and that are suspicious of any
governmental message. Furthermore the Spanish imperial eagle reintroduction project was
exhibit in national and regional governments, NGOs forums and it is on Andalusia
government’ web site since 2002 (the start of the project).

The first breeding pair formed by released individuals was recorded in 2006 in Seville,
4 years after the first release. The first breeding pair established in the release area was
recorded in 2009. The incipient breeding population in Cadiz has been increasing since then,
getting 5 breeding pairs in 2012. So, the annual growth rate was 100% between 2010-2011,
and 150% between 2011-2012, strongly higher than that recorded in Spain (5%) and even in
Andalusian (13% between 2011-2012). Consequently, we consider the Spanish reintroduction
project in Cadiz is a success, thanks to the tight collaboration among scientific, stakeholders
of the regional environment, technicians forming the project team, landowners and the rest of
countryside workers (wardens, cattle breeder, hunters, etc).
 WILDLIFE RESTORATION IN ISLANDS BY TRANSLOCATIONS

Joan Mayol

Conservation Officer of the Government of the Balearic Islands.

Islands represent a very small fraction of the land area, but are home of a very high
total species diversity very, as well as the presence of continental taxa as for the endemic
ones. On the other hand, the rate of extinctions on islands is much higher than on the
continents, and more accentuated by anthropogenic factors. Thus, island biological
conservation must be a priority.
The two most powerful tools for island conservation are the eradication of invasive
and species translocation. We will present several examples of reintroductions of locally
extinct non endemic species and island endemics recovery programs using translocation
techniques, including cases of benign introductions on islands where the species has not
previously existed.
A report on the projects that have been carried out in the Balearic Islands for the past
25 years is presented in detail, analyzing the results (successes and failures) from the
conservation point of view:
- Colonial Ardeidae in s’Albufera de Mallorca.
- Waterfowl (Netta rufina, Marmaronetta angustirostris and Oxyura leucocephala).
- Rallids (Porphyrio Porphyrio and Fulica cristata)
- Raptors (Aegypius monachus, Aquila fasciata, Pandion haliaetus).
We will analyze the biogeographical balance extinctions / colonization, including or
not translocation cases. In either alternative, the situation overall insular avifauna has evolued
positively in the period considered.
Finally, we present some preliminary data how translocations are perceived by the
more sensitive nature protection sectors.
 FOSTERING AND HACKING: NESTLING MANAGEMENT AND
TRANSLOCATIONS IN SUPPORT OF A DECREASING EAGLE
POPULATION, THE LESSER SPOTTED EAGLE (AQUILA POMARINA)

B-U. Meyburg, T. Langgemach, K. Graszynski, A. Hinz & I. Börner

The Lesser Spotted Eagle belongs to the group of species with obligatory Cainism
which means that, although two chicks usually hatch, both extremely seldom fledge from the
eyrie.

The breeding population in Germany, on the western fringe of the distribution range,
is in decline, from 133 pairs in 1993 to 102 in 2007 (23% decline). A great deal of effort has
been made to stabilise the populations through habitat protection in the breeding areas as well
as an international protection convention for the migration routes. In addition, since 2004,
nestling management has been implemented as a conservation measure. These measures are
based on earlier experience gained by B.-U. Meyburg during his early research on Cainism in
1968-1974 and the attempts to avoid this phenomenon by introduction of management
measures.

This involves the removal from the nest of the second chick (Abel) shortl after
hatching and rearing it in captivity. Shortly before fledging the anonymously reared young
eagle is put back into a nest with a young eagle of about the same age.This procedure is now
commonly described as ‘fostering‘.

The method of nestling management has the great advantage that no birds need to be
bred incaptivity.This cannot normally be avoided in reintroduction and population support
projects for other species.

In order to increase the number of annually fledged young eagles in Germany, from
2007 onwards Abels from Latvia were also introduced.

Survival after fledging of 35 managed young eagles was monitored by means of

satellite telemetry. This confirmed that the Abels are capable of surviving as are the Cains.
Abels from Germany have already been observed again in Germany as early as one year after
fledging. Young eagles translocated from Latvia have started to return to Germany when two
years old as most German birds. A three-year-old Latvian male has regularly been observed
near the release station in 2012 together with an unmarked adult female.
 From 2009 onwards the management was further optimised using the hacking method.
Here the fledged young eagles are not replaced in eyries in the wild but are prepared for
release in a so-called hacking station.

In the time frame 2004-2008, 26 Abels were fledged using the fostering method. In
2009–2012 a total of 50 additional second-born young were fledged using the hacking
method. This represents more than the annual result for the whole German Lesser Spotted
Eagle wild population.

Then number of young eagles that can be additionally reared is not restricted to the number of
available wild eyries an a given area when using the hacking method. Young eagles can be
imported from other regions and countries and subsequently released into the wild.This
method is therefore well suited to reintroduction programmes in already abandoned former
breeding areas without causing any loss to the donor population.
 ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR IN REINTRODUCTION PROGRAMS: POST
FLEDGING AND DISPERSAL PERIOD IN TRANSLOCATED SPANISH
IMPERIAL EAGLES

by Roberto Muriel

Translocations have been increasingly used as a conservation-oriented tool in the last

decades, promoting the collaboration between practitioners and scientists as a way to enhance
translocation success by applying adaptive evidence-based management. In order to increase
efficiency of release methods, behavioral ecology should play a central role in reintroduction
planning, as well as during post-release monitoring since unexpected behavioral variations
may increase present biological costs and reduce probabilities of settlement and success.
Scientists may also benefit from examining biological and ecological topics on interesting
experimental frameworks provided by translocations. In this sense, the reintroduction of a
long-lived species with deferred maturity, such as the Spanish imperial eagle (Aquila
adalberti), represents a great opportunity to examine behavioral variations during the post-
fledging and dispersal periods under colonization contexts.

We first examine the relative parental and young contribution to the PFDP regulation
in this species using young from non-manipulated territories, food supplemented territories
and birds translocated by hacking methods in absence of adults and with ad libitum food
supply. We found that extra food tended to homogenize the general nutritional condition and
reduce the length of the first stage of PFDP, though hacked birds did not shorten this stage
owing to the lack of parental stimulus to develop advanced flights. Despite hacked birds
extended slightly their PFDP, all birds left their natal territories independently of parental
presence. Thereby, young control on the regulation of PFDP and independence onset was
greater than expected, modulated mainly by the necessity of dispersal and secondarily by
parental effect. In addition, hacking demonstrated to be an effective method for raptor
translocation, without any negative drawback for young development, condition, behaviour
and future performance when properly used.

Finally we show how reintroductions can be used as experimental colonization

contexts with null density of settled individuals to test the relative role of philopatry and
conspecific attraction on founders’ dispersal prior to first settlements. We compare dispersal
pattern, timing, behavior and spatial strategy of reintroduced young Spanish imperial eagles,
with non-manipulated juveniles from a nearby existing population. We found that philopatry
and conspecific attraction acted simultaneously during dispersal, though with variable
intensity according to the conspecific scenario faced by juveniles as they mature.
Reintroduced birds started dispersal earlier and showed initial philopatric behavior.
Conversely, they revealed a subsequent expansive strategy characteristic of colonization
contexts, encouraged by the relative lower reproductive prospects in the release area in
comparison with existing populations within their dispersal range. Therefore, translocation
programs should consider specific dispersal patterns and landscapes, as well as post-release
monitoring to increase philopatry and success probabilities.
 REINTRODUCTIONS: JUSTIFICATION AND ISSUES

Ian Newton

Reintroduction can be defined as the re-establishment of a species in a part of its

natural range from which it was eliminated in the past, usually by human action, but in which
current conditions are judged suitable for the species. In this talk, I will discuss the
justification for reintroduction projects, their importance in the conservation of species, and
the circumstances in which they could most usefully be attempted. My emphasis will be on
birds, but most of the same problems apply also to other animal species, and to plants.

Reintroduction projects form growing component of modern conservation practice,

alongside the acquisition of nature reserves, restoration of habitats, enactment of protective
legislation, advocacy, and other things that conservation organisations do. Reintroductions do
not replace any of these other activities. They merely provide another tool in the armoury,
which can often be deployed for species restoration more efficiently and cheaply than
alternative techniques, and produce more rapid results. Reintroductions have now become an
accepted activity of many conservation bodies, and there is considerable scope for further
projects, as species restoration gains in urgency.

The biological argument for reintroductions stems from the fact that, the more widely
distributed is a species within its natural range, the more numerous and secure in the long
term it is likely to be. However, some reintroductions have been made primarily to restore
ecosystem function, or to support ecotourism or hunting. Some have brought unexpected
financial and other benefits to local communities. Among birds, most conservation-based
reintroduction projects worldwide have so far involved waterfowl, raptors and cranes, but
other projects have involved a wide range of other bird species. For different types of birds,
different release methodology is required. In Europe, most such projects have involved
species lost in the last 120 years, but the inclusion of species lost through presumed human
impact in earlier centuries would greatly increase the list of candidates.

Other issues which have arisen in consideration of reintroductions include potential

impacts on donor populations, genetic variance and inbreeding, potential disease problems,
numbers and release methodology, role of philopatry and dispersal, avoidance of imprinting
problems, developing acceptance in local human communities, and coping with criticism and
conflict resolution. These various issues are touched upon in this introductory paper.
 AVIAN REINTRODUCTION – IN-SITU OR EX-SITU, EXPENSIVE OR
ECONOMIC?

Jemima Parry-Jones MBE

Director International Centre for Birds of Prey

Serious captive breeding projects in conservation programmes are a last ditch attempt
in saving species. They are also very often the highest profile parts of a conservation
programme because they are hands on, exciting, hopefully positive and have live birds
involved, where solving the conservation issue by saving habitat is often much harder to ‘sell’
to the general public and less sensational.

The first question has to be is a captive breeding project needed, is it important to the
survival of a particular species, or is it just fun to do. (And actually captive breeding projects
are rarely fun to do when you come down to it, they are nerve racking, expensive, and a roller
coaster of emotions for those tasked to run them).In the case of the South Asian Vultures it
was an easy one to answer as we had no other option if we were to have birds left to conserve.

The next question is often where do we do it, and for the sake of this paper we will call
captive breeding projects situated within the natural range of the species ‘in-situ’ and projects
outside its natural range ‘ex-situ’.

Both have advantages and disadvantages, some are very obvious, some give no choice
in the matter, others are much more nebulous and sometimes surprising, these we will discuss.
They cover ethical, political, legal, practical, financial, personnel and cultural concerns. Add
to that mix what is actually possible and it makes for interesting decisions to be made.

The costs to be measured are not just financial ones, they are costs to people, the
animals involved, the political costs and eventually the financial ones which can be the
instrument of success or failure.
 DEFINITION OF SUCCESS CRITERIA FOR CONSERVATION
TRANSLOCATIONS

François Sarrazin

CERSP, UMR 7204, MNHN-CNRS-UPMC, 61 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris France

Reintroduction and other conservation translocations have been largely used to restore
wild population, particularly bird populations. However, despite the high number of these
programs, the strong involvement of practitioners and various meta analyses or
recommendations for clear assessment of their output, one of the most important challenges
faced by reintroduction biology remains the lack of agreement on reintroduction success
criteria. Indeed, if most agree that reintroduced population should be viable, we still need
general approaches, targets and threshold to define reintroduction success that help decision
making in planning programs, releasing individuals and monitoring reintroduced populations.
We propose simple elements that may help to structure these issues and may be widely used
among reintroduction programs. First, we distinguish reintroductions run for conservation
issues from other programs that may have their own ad hoc criteria. Second, we split
reintroduced population dynamics in three basic phases: establishment, growth and regulation.
Depending on life cycles, release strategies, and individual and environmental quality, their
duration may vary and they can even overlap. However demographic approaches may help to
assess success of each phase. Establishment and growth are necessary short term but only
temporary phases in these dynamics. The ultimate long term success of any reintroduction
thus relies on the third phase. This framework was recently included in the new version of the
IUCN guidelines on Reintroduction and other Conservation translocations. We finally
propose to use IUCN red list criteria to assess the impact of reintroduction programs on the
local, regional and global conservation status of the target species. We illustrate this approach
through the exploration of reintroduction programs ran in Europe during the last century on a
wide range of taxa including birds. We extensively collected published and unpublished
information on most of them. Preliminary results confirm that the effect of reintroduction
appears stronger when the species is evaluated at local and regional scales. This first step will
later open the possibility to re explore success factors. In this context, a database on European
reintroduction is being set up and should benefit from future network activities to enhance
experience sharing among actors working on different taxa.
LEARNING FROM HISTORY: WHEN A REINTRODUCTION MIGHT
NOT BE THE BEST OPTION (THE CRITICALLY ENDANGERED
MADAGASCAR FISH EAGLE AS A CASE STUDY)

Ruth Tingay

The island endemic Madagascar Fish Eagle (Haliaeetus vociferoides) is one of three
eagle species listed as critically endangered by the IUCN. With a known population of
between 220-300 birds, it is currently cited as one of the rarest birds in the world. Its
conservation status was assigned on a perceived notion of a historical and continuing
population decline and one management option was to consider a reintroduction programme
in areas of its former perceived range. Recently, the demographic history of the population
has been re-examined using two independent methods, to compare the species’ historical and
contemporary distribution, abundance and genetic diversity. Both methods suggest that the
Madagascar Fish Eagle has not suffered a recent or continuing population decline, but rather
this population is naturally small with an effective population size of ~24 breeding
individuals. These results have encouraged a review of the recommended conservation action
for this species, especially the often-cited view that ‘recovery management’ (increasing
population size and distribution) is warranted.
CONSERVATION TRANSLOCATION OF LIVING ORGANISMS: THE
IUCN POSITION STATEMENT AND GUIDELINES FOR SPECIES
REINTRODUCTION

Catherine Numa

Centro de Cooperación del Mediterráneo de UICN, Spain.

We are living in an era of accelerating ecological change: there are increasing and cute
pressures on much of the world’s biodiversity due to loss and reduction of habitats, biological
invasion and climate change. Restoration of single species of plants and animals through
intervention is now common, but with increasing evidence and appreciation of the risks.

Conservation translocation is the deliberate movement of organisms from one site for
release in other. It must be intended to yield a measurable conservation benefit at the levels of
a population, species or ecosystem, and not only provide benefit to translocated individuals.
Conservation translocations consist of 1. Reinforcement and reintroduction within a species’
indigenous range, and 2. Conservation introductions, comprising assisted colonization and
ecological replacement, outside indigenous range.

Conservation translocations require a multidisciplinary approach involving a team of

persons drawn from a variety of backgrounds. Its principle aim should be to establish a viable,
free-ranging population in the wild.

The basic programme for translocations should consist of different stages: pre-project
activities (with biological, socio-economic and legal requirements); planning, preparation and
release stages; and the follow-up stage.

As a part of the pre-project activities, biological requirements should include

individuals preferably being of the same subspecies or race as those which were extirpated.
Detailed studies should determine the species' critical needs: (foraging and feeding behaviour,
predators and diseases, reproductive biology…). At the moment of choosing and evaluating
the re-introduction site, this location should be within the historic range of the species. There
should be no remnant population to prevent disease spread, social disruption and introduction
of alien genes. The re-introduction area should have assured long-term protection. Choosing
the individuals, it is desirable that source animals come from wild populations. If captive or
artificially propagated stock is to be used, it must be from a population which has been
soundly managed both demographically and genetically, according to the principles of
contemporary conservation biology. Prospective release stock must be subjected to a thorough
veterinary screening process before shipment from original source: for to prevent illness.
Species that are going to be released should be given the opportunity to acquire necessary
information for survival, through training in their captive environment.

Within socio-economic and legal requirements, first at all sufficient funds must be
available to ensure that the project can be completed, including the follow-up phase. A
thorough assessment of attitudes of local people to the proposed project is necessary to ensure
long term protection, especially if the cause of species' decline was due to human factors. The
policy of the country to re-introductions and to the species concerned should be also assessed.
In the case of migratory species, provisions should be made for crossing of international or
state boundaries.

At planning, preparation and release stages, there are several factors to take into
consideration. It is needed: the approval of relevant government agencies and land owners,
and coordination with national and international conservation organizations; designing pre-
and post- release monitoring programme so that each re-introduction is a carefully designed
experiment, with the capability to test methodology with scientifically collected data;
monitoring the health of individuals, as well as the survival, is important; determining release
strategies (acclimatization of release stock to release area; behavioural training - including
hunting and feeding; group composition, number, release patterns and techniques; timing).
The welfare of animals for release is of paramount concern through all these stages.

At the follow-up stage (the last stage), the species impact on the habitat should be
monitored and any action (habitat protection or restoration) needed to improve conditions
identified and taken; interventions (e.g. supplemental feeding; veterinary aid; horticultural
aid) must be done when necessary; It is needed to take decisions for revision, rescheduling, or
discontinuation of programme where necessary; efforts should be made to make available
information on both successful and unsuccessful re-introduction programmed through regular
publications, seminars, etc.; and evaluation of cost-effectiveness and success of re-
introduction techniques must be realised.

Finally, international organisations and states planning to realize re-introductions

should guarantee sufficient funds. IUCN encourage collection of information on all aspects of
translocations, but especially on the case histories of re-introductions; on habitats especially
vulnerable to invasion; and notable aggressive invasive species.
 THE PEREGRINE FUND’S RAPTOR RESTORATION PROJECTS
Dr. Rick Watson
Vice President and International Programs Director

The Peregrine Fund, 5668 West Flying Hawk Lane, Boise, ID 83709, United States of
America.

The Peregrine Fund has conducted raptor restoration and conservation projects
worldwide for over 40 years. We have identified several elements that are consistently
important for success. These include a scientific understanding of the species’ population
status and factors limiting its distribution and abundance. The latter usually requires
quantitative studies of the species’ population ecology and behavior which typically precede
restoration interventions. If the species’ population has declined from some anthropogenic
cause, the cause should be resolved before conservation can be successful but, in some cases,
experimental restoration has been initiated even before the cause was known and reintroduced
birds studied to learn what factors limit their survival in the contemporary landscape. A well
defined and achievable conservation goal helps to focus effort on conservation actions that
will make a measurable difference. Such interventions must be adapted to the goal, and
methods have usually involved restoration through captive breeding and release of critically
endangered species, habitat protection, and public awareness to reduce shooting and other
anthropogenic effects such as use and misuse of pesticides, poisons, and drugs. Sufficient
funding over time is one of the most important resources needed, but talent and skill are just
as important and often overlooked. Talent includes people with the knowledge, experience,
passion, drive, and determination to be successful.

Developing skill locally is important for sustainability, but finding the right mix of
knowledge and passion is often difficult, especially in developing nations where conservation
is considered a luxury by the rural poor, and well-educated individuals prefer desk-jobs in the
city near the comfort of home. Other useful elements include organizational support, a
method for annually evaluating results, and a strategy that includes adaptive management of
the project as new information is gained. We have found that working collaboratively with
people who may be responsible for the species’ demise produces better, long-term results than
confrontation and litigation, and a cooperative philosophy also appeals to land owners and
financial donors whose support is often required. Laws can be either beneficial or detrimental
to conservation results, even if they were intended to be beneficial, and should be introduced
sparingly and preferably only after voluntary compliance has been tried first. These elements
will be described and explained in the context of four critically endangered species recovery
programs: Peregrine Falcon recovery, successfully completed; California Condor recovery, a
successful project that is ongoing and still responding to new information; Asian Gyps vulture
population crash, which presents some new challenges; and Harpy Eagle conservation which
aims to avoid species endangerment before more expensive restoration interventions are
needed.
 REINTRODUCTION OF WHITE-TAILED EAGLES TO SCOTLAND

Phil Whitfield
Natural Research

White-tailed eagles were persecuted to extinction in Scotland in 1918. To restore the

species to this former European stronghold, one of the earliest raptor reintroduction
programmes was begun on the west coast of Scotland in 1975. This involved a two-phased
release of 141 birds translocated as nestlings from Norway. By 2011 there were 57 pairs
established across a wide area. Aspects of the research that has been undertaken on this
population, such as demographics, dispersal, diet, nest site selection, potential competition
with golden eagles, and socio-economical issues are summarised. These illustrate the value
that such study can yield to better understanding of raptor ecology and to inform future large
raptor reintroductions. Aspects of the ongoing release programme to establish the species in
the different environment of the east coast of Scotland are briefly described.
 TOO MANY REINTRODUCTIONS? A PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION-
MAKING SYSTEM
Mario Díaz1,2, Irene Pérez3,4, José D. Anadón3, 4, Graciela G. Nicola5, José L. Tella6 and
Andrés Giménez4
1
Department of Biogeography and Global Change (BGC-MNCN), Museo Nacional de
Ciencias Naturales, CSIC, Madrid, Spain
2
Sociedad Española de Ornitología (SEO/BirdLife), Madrid, Spain
3
Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity. Arizona State University. Tempe, AZ, USA
*(iperezib@asu.edu)
4
Departamento de Biología Aplicada, Ecología. Universidad Miguel Hernández. Elche, Alicante,
Spain
5
Department of Environmental Sciences, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Toledo, Spain
6
Department of Conservation Biology. Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD-CSIC). Sevilla,
Spain

Reintroductions are intentional releases of organisms aimed at establishing or reinforcing

wild populations. The main goal of reintroductions is the recovery of viable wild populations
of species endangered by human impacts, and its potential for reaching this goal seems
straightforward. However, reintroduction projects may also fail for three main reasons: 1) It
use as a techno-fix for complex conservation problems without considering alternative tools,
2) its use for establishing populations of species that are not really endangered, and 3) the fact
that reintroductions are often unsuccessful due to technical or social reasons. In addition,
reintroductions may be harmful in the long term due to potential side-effects on the species or
on recipient communities and ecosystems. On this basis, the Spanish Society of Ornithology
(SEO/BirdLife) promoted a strategic document, under the advice of its scientific committee,
providing guidelines for supporting projects designed to achieve explicit conservation goals
(Díaz et al. 2008. Quercus 264: 28-33. Here we present recent research results related to these
ideas.

Existing guidelines for reintroductions provide lists of relevant issues that should be
taken into account. However, these guidelines cannot be used as a clear decision-making
process, because we still lack clear criteria to judge whether or not a given project is suitable
and likely to succeed and guidelines do not consider differences in relative importance of
issues related to necessity and potential usefulness. We have recently assessed how recent and
current reintroductions address criteria designed to evaluate their necessity and potential
usefulness (Pérez et al. 2012. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment,
doi:10.1890/110175). We first reviewed guidelines and reformulated them into 10 main
criteria. Then, we assessed whether or not ongoing projects addressed these criteria using two
independent databases: 280 studies published between 1996 and 2010 in eight major
conservation biology journals, and 174 projects developed for terrestrial vertebrates in Spain
during the last two decades. Compliance with criteria was assessed by means of
questionnaires filled out by selected experts.

Most projects, either published or unpublished, do not fully address reintroduction

criteria. We propose a Hierarchical Decision-making System for Translocations arranging
criteria into successive decision levels. The first level, “Necessity”, assesses whether the
project is carried out with adequate conservation objectives and reintroduction is the most
adequate tool for the conservation of the threatened species or population. The second level,
“Risk evaluation”, aims to ensure that the project will mitigate any impacts. The third level,
“Technical and logistical suitability”, aims to maximize the likelihood of success at
establishing new viable populations. Our proposal covers a key gap in conservation science
by integrating existing guidelines into an explicit method to determine whether or not a
project should be implemented. This will improve projects, increase their likelihood of
success, and contribute to the efficient use of resources available for conservation.
 CURRENT STATUS QUEBRANTAHUESOS REINTRODUCTION
(Gypaetus barbatus) IN ANDALUSIA

Rafael Arenas González

Junta de Andalucia Córdoba. Spain.

In 1986 he was officially confirmed the extinction of vultures (Gypaetus barbatus) as a

breeding species in Andalusia and since then the Government of Andalusia, was clear we had
to act. Commissioned a study to analyze the potential of a new town house in the Natural Park
of the Sierra de Cazorla, Segura y las Villas at Doñana Biological Station (EBD), credited the
fitness to maintain 13 to 15 breeding pairs.

In 1993 he established the first contacts with the Foundation for the Conservation of
the Bearded Vulture (VBGF), project to reintroduce the Alps, for the loan of specimens, and
the EBD provides a mathematical model for the selection of potential sites nesting in
Andalusia. To clarify the taxonomic classification of intraspecific osprey made a new
agreement with the EBD in 1995 and concluded that the best conservation strategy for the
species was considered as a single population. A year later he agrees with the assignment
VBGF copies and inaugurated Guadalentín Breeding Center. Subsequently, this breeding
center, joins the Endangered Species Programme (EEP) and establishing a new agreement
with the VBGF to accommodate all existing genetic lines. In 2000, the Foundation is created
Gypaetus, somewhat veiled by the Ministry of Environment, as a tool to provide rapid and
effective international exchanges and likewise begin feasibility studies in Andalusia
(Hernández et al. 2005 ). The first chick born in captivity in 2002 in Andalusia.

Twenty years after the extinction of vultures in Andalusia are released the first three
vulture. Since then they have released 23 birds have been found dead 9 (39%), 3 (13%) has
not been heard from for over a year and 11 (48%) recent data are available. The causes of
death are due to the poison (4), lead poisoning (2) and unknown (3). It is possible that the
copies are not localized, alive.

The appearance of the four specimens killed by poisons in the Sierra de Castril, and a
more or less continuous drip of poison baits, determined paralyzing the loose in Andalusia in
2011, the implementation of an "action plan to strengthen to eradicate the use of poison in the
Natural Park of the Sierra de Castril and neighboring hills and Wavelet Pozo (Parque Natural
de Cazorla, Segura and Las Villas and study the effects of non-natural mortality on the
feasibility of the reintroduced population (Gold Rivas, D. and Donazar, JA unpublished). In a
scenario where halved unnatural mortality and increase the number of birds that are released
every year (4 males and 4 females for 8 seguidosse years would achieve a viable population
size. Following the success of the first year of the Plan releases resumed in 2012 and currently
at least eleven copies flying free through Andalusia with dispersive movements to the
mountains of the Iberian Peninsula, for stays more or less prolonged.
PARTICIPANT POSTERS
PARTICIPANT:
ALONSO CORRAL, ADRIÁN
aacorral85@hotmail.com
SANTA CRUZ. ZIZUR MAYOR,
NAVARRA. SPAIN.
ALVAREZ XUSTO, ERNESTO
ernesto@grefa.org
GREFA, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain. .
ANDEVSKI , JOVAN
jovan.andevski@gmail.com
andevski@balkanvultures.info
Balkan Vulture Action Plan
Coordinator Vulture Conservation
Foundation ( VCF). Macedonia
DÍAZ RODRIGUEZ, TERESA
tesadiaz@hotmail.com
CIRAR (Centro de Interpretacion y
Rehabilitación de aves
Rapaces)Alcaudete. Jaén. Spain.
DURÁN GÓMEZ, PABLO
durangomez@hotmail.com
SAOBI. Sociedad Andaluza de
Ornitologia y Biodiversidad
Alcaudete. Jaén. Spain.
ELORRIAGA NAVARRO, JAVIER
jelorriaga@fundacionmigres.org
Fundación Migres, Algeciras. Cádiz.
Spain.
FRANCO RUIZ, ANTONIO
antonio.franco.ruiz@juntadeandalucia.e
s Palma de Mallorca, Palma de Mallorca
Servicio de Geodiversidad y
biodiversidad. Dirección General de
Gestión del Medio Natural. Consejería
de Agricultura, Pesca y Medio
Ambiente. Sevilla. Spain.
GARRIDO LÓPEZ, JOSE RAFAEL
jrgarrido@agenciamedioambienteyagua
.es
Agencia de Medio Ambiente y Agua
Consejería de Agricultura, Pesca y
Medio Ambiente. Junta de Andalucía.
Sevilla. Spain.
GIL CARRERA, ALBERTO
atoupa@hotmail.com
Ecoplanin Xestión e Información
Ambiental, S.L. R/ Antonio Nieto
Figueroa 7, P3, 2ºA. 36215 Vigo,
Galiza (Spain)Vigo. Galiza. Spain.
IZQUIERDO CEZÓN, PABLO
cria@grefa.org
GREFA. Majadahonda, Madrid. Spain.
LOPEZ VAZQUEZ, JOSE
MANUEL
josem.lopez.vazquez@juntadeandalucia
.es
Consejería de Agricultura Pesca y
Medio Ambiente de la Junta de
Andalucía. Delegación Territorial en
Cádiz. Spain.
ONRUBIA BATICON,
ALEJANDRO
aonrubia@fundacionmigres.org
FUNDACION MIGRES. EL PELAYO.
ALGECIRAS). CADIZ. SPAIN.
SANCHEZ GARCIA, IÑIGO
bioinigo@gmail.com
Zoobotánico de Jerez. JEREZ. Cádiz.
Spain.
VIADA SAULEDA, CARLOTA
carlotaviada@yahoo.es
(Baleares). Spain.
 REINTRODUCTION OF SCARLET MACAW IN COSTA RICA. THE
ARA PROJECT

Adrián Alonso Corral

Navarra, Spain.

The ARA Project,

Apdo. 1904-4050, 20101
Alajuela, Costa Rica.

The ARA Project is a Costa Rican organization dedicated to the conservation of the
endangered Great Green Macaw (Ara ambiguus) and the Scarlet Macaw (Ara macao). It
operates a breeding program and reintroduction projects.

The project at Tiskita, which is The ARA Project’s longest running, ongoing reintroduction
project is unique for two reasons:

1. One of the longest, ongoing studies on reintroduced Scarlet Macaws with nearly
continuous daily data collection.

2. All released individuals’ sex and age are known. This provides insight in Scarlet
Macaw behaviour that cannot be known with wild populations.

There were eight releases at Tiskita and all of them had three different phases that are
explained in the poster.

The study was mainly focused on the reintroduction success which was showed by survival
and adaptive behavior with data of survival, reproduction, dispersal and foraging. In the future
long term reintroduction success, or long term population viability, needs to be assed.

There were 73 macaws released. The released macaws have high survival rates and each year
new pairs start breeding. That is the reason why the project assumed that there is a first
generation offspring of the released macaws.

The project has created what seems to be becoming Costa Rica’s third largest population of
Scarlet Macaws and it contribute to a biological corridor that can help restore the Scarlet
Macaw all along the Pacific coast of Costa Rica.

In the future, it is expected that within the next few years the second generation will born as
well as new introduction of new bloodlines to further increase genetic diversity of the
population.
 THE LINK BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN POPULATIONS OF
CYNEREUS VULTURE (AEGYPIUSMONACHUS): PYRENEES’
REINTRODUCTION PROJECT

GÁLVEZ, M.1; MILLET, A.2; ÁLVAREZ, M.3; ÁLVAREZ, E.3; GALÁN, M.3; IGLESIAS, JJ.3

1
TRENCA 25006 Lleida
2
Àrea d l’Obra Social de CatalunyaCaixa, C/Provença, 261-265, Entresòl 08008 Barcelona
3
GREFA, Apdo.11, Majadahonda 28220 Madrid

The project is being run in theCatalunya’s Pre-Pyrenees. They are a set of mountains
parallel to central axis of the Pyrenees, where the two points of release and reintroduction
project can be found: The National Game Reserve (RNC) ofBoumort-with an area of 13,097
ha and owned by the Department of Agriculture, Fish, Food and Environment of the
Generalitat ofCatalunya and the MountainofAlinyà 5,350-ha-owned by CatalunyaCaixa’s
Social Work.

In 2005 the pertinent feasibility studies were approved by the Generalitat ofCatalunya.
The main objectives of the project are two: 1 Restore the black vulture as a breeding species
in the area. 2. Establish a population to reinforce the link between traditional populations of
southern Spain and the emerging population of the SE-France (Cévennes, Baronnies and
Verdon), increasing genetic variability and long-term survival of this great scavenger.
Birds coming from recovery centers were released by means of acclimation cages (N = 35),
while the captive bred chicks were released by hacking (N = 3). The birds were previously
marked (rings, wing tags and radio-transmitters) to allow their subsequent tracking.
From the total of 38 released individuals, between 2007 and 2012, the results are: 18 that are
present within the reintroduction area (48%), 13 have been found dead or un-releasable
(34%), 5 are considered missing (13%) and 2 settled down in differentregions (5%). Adding
to the previous birds, two more were born in natural conditions.

Objective number one of the project began to take root in 2010 with the first
successful reproduction of the species, which occurred in the RNC Boumort. The resulting
chick, a female named Gala, is currently in its third year and has set its home range in the
Pyrenees. In 2011 there were 4 breeding attempts, all unsuccessful, two were un-hatched eggs
while the other two were hatchedchicks that eventually died before the two months of age. In
2012 three breeding pairs were identified, and their offspring consisted of 3 chicks of which 1
died in the nest being 20 days oldwhile the other two fledged (although one of them was
found dead two weeks after fledging, with possible poisoning symptoms).
Nowadays, there are 4 stable pairs. And it has been detected a sex-ratio that differs from
normal in favor of females in the Pyrenees’ population.
 After five years of the first releases, it can be categorically said that objective number
two of the project -strengthening the connection between the Iberian and French populations-
it is a fact. So far, there have been at least 17 French black vultures, who have settled for a
variable time in the reintroduction area. At least eight individuals released in Catalunya have
visited the French population, having one of them paired in the Cevennes. A total of eight
individuals of the project have contacted, during their dispersive movements, with the main
Iberian colonies of this species. And finally, at least 31 black vultures of presumably Iberian
origin have been identify in the Pyrenees.
 THE IMPLICATION OF THE LOCAL POPULATIONS. A KEY
FACTOR IN THE SUCCESS OF THE REINTRODUCTION PROJECTS.
THE PROYECTO EREMITA EXPERIENCE

Lopez Vazquez, Jose Manuel

josem.lopez.vazquez@juntadeandalucia.es

Consejería de Agricultura Pesca y Medio Ambiente de la Junta de Andalucía. Delegación

Territorial en Cádiz. Spain.

ny reintroduction to have major guarantee of success has to possess inexorably the

participation of the human resident communities in the area. Beyond of spreading campaigns
to arouse them of the problematics or the value of the species in question must involve them
in an active way in the works to develop allowing this a direct and easy communication way
with the local population and generating economic benefits that stimulate this one to favoring
the success of the reintroduction project.

This Poster presents some examples of the actions realized in this respect in the frame
of the Proyecto Eremita whose aim is to test reintroduction technologies for Northern Bald
Ibis (Geronticus eremita) in the area of La Janda in SW Spain.
 RECOVERING BONELLI’S EAGLE POPULATION IN WESTERN
MEDITERRANEAN
Ernesto Álvarez1, Joan Mayol2, Jokin Larumbe3, Carlota Viada2, Gloria Giralda3, Manuel
Galan1, Alfonso Llamas3, Juan José Iglesias1, Pablo Izquierdo1, Itziar Almarcegui3, Paz
Aazkona3, Carmelo Fernández3
Grefa1,Ggobierno de las Islas Baleares2,Comunidad Foral de Navarra3, Comunidad de
Madrid, Junta de Andalucía, UFCS, Lpo/Birdlife France, Diputación de Álava.

The Bonelli’s Eagle is evaluated as Endangered according to IUCN criteria in the Spanish
Red List. The huge decline of the Iberian population suggests that captive breeding and
reinforcement/reintroduction initiatives can be a useful tool to preserve the species in Western
Mediterranean areas. In 2011 Navarra, the Balearic Islands and Madrid regions started a
conservation program in their territories testing the releasing of individuals from captive
breeding (GREFA in Madrid and UFCS in France), birds recovered in rescue centres and
chicks rescued at nest in Andalusia region. Up to now the results of these tests are highly
positive, thus an intense program is going to be developed. In that sense, a LIFE+ proposal
has been developed by all the participant entities in 2012.
Actions per region:
Madrid region
With only two breeding pairs, the species is classified as Endangered. Facing the possibility to
release captive bred individuals, a Reinforcement Viability study was asked to FICAS
(Fondopara la Investigación de los AnimalesSalvajes y suHábitat). After a positive
conclusion, a releasing site was chosen within the Natura 2000 site “Cuencas de los Ríos
Alberche y Cofio”.
In 2009 two Bonellis’s Eagle were bred in captivity in GREFA, the firsts in Spain through
natural breeding. The releases started in 2010 and a total of 10 birds have been released
between 2010 and 2012: 4 born in GREFA, 2 donated by Andalusia Government after being
rescued from nests and 4 donated by a French breeding centre (in Vendée, part of UFCS –
Union Française des Centres de Sauvegarde de la FauneSauvage).

Navarra region
The Bonelli’s Eagle showed a clear decline in this region, with only one breeding pair at the
beginning of the project. Previous actions of habitat improvement were not enough to reverse
the negative trend of the species. In 2011 the first two Bonelli’s Eagle nestlings coming from
captive breeding (GREFA and UFCS) were released using hacking. In 2012 two more
individuals, captive bred in GREFA, were released by hacking too.
Balearic Islands
Bonelli’s Eagle became extinct in Mallorca in the 70’s of the 20th century; only accidental
birds are recorded from time to time. Between 2011 and 2012, 10 birds have been released,
from captive breeding (GREFA, UFCS), nestlings and injured immatures from rescue centres
(Catalonia and Andalusia). 6 out of 10 were released by hacking and 4 immatures using a
large adapting cage after a period inside.
 AN EFFORT TO RECOVER THE GOLDEN EAGLE IN
GALICIA

Alberto Gil*, Ernesto Álvarez**, Manuel Galán**, Fernando González** , Juan José
Iglesias**, Miguel A. Fernández-Martínez*, Luis Tapia*** .
(* Ecoplanin, ** GREFA, *** Dpto. de Zooloxía e Antropoloxía Física, Fac. de Bioloxía,
USC).

Despite the apparent stability in the number of pairs of golden eagle in Galicia, direct
persecution, poisoning cases, habitat degradation and changes in traditional forest and
livestock uses, caused a regression of their historical presence, currently finding main
breeding area in southeastern Galicia. The gradual loss of territory in the last few decades in
Galicia, had a negative impact on the overall reproductive success, generating a clear risk of
extinction in the short and medium term in Galicia. Catalogued as an endangered species in
Galicia, required the development of a Recovery Plan.

This situation led to the implementation of the program of the golden eagle population
reinforcement in the Baixa Limia-Serra Xurés Natural Park by the Government of Galicia in
collaboration with GREFA (Group for Rehabilitation of Native Fauna and Habitat). The main
objective of this program is to establish a minimum viable population in the reintroduction
area, able to survive with little or no human intervention in the long term in the area of the
historical distribution of the species in the Baixa Limia-Serra Xurés Natural Park and
bordering Peneda-Gerês National Park. Expected to also support species recovery in Galicia,
in line with the proposed measures in the technical document of the Golden Eagle Recovery
Plan in Galicia. The protection of these natural areas facilitated the correction of most
problems that led the Eagles to this critical situation in the area. The technical, material and
human resources that have parks, good perception of the project by the local population as
well as the involvement of the Government of Galicia, facilitated the implementation of the
project. The reinforcement program includes measures in addition to involving the local
population, school, local hunters, tourism, ... involves the direct application of the measures
on the territory, with the correction of the impacts (such as the modification of power lines in
partnership with Union Fenosa Gas Natural, habitat improvements aimed to availability of
prey species and the monitoring and implementation of the protocols in the fight against the
use of poisons.

Between 2008 to 2012, the Galician Government in collaboration with Grefa and
coordinate with the editor of the recovery plan of the golden Eagle in Galicia (Ecoplanin),
proceeded to release the method of hacking 1, 4, 5, 2 and 3 juvenile specimens of Golden
eagle. This phase of the program is aimed at looking for the reproduction of the species in
four or five years. Considered necessary control and monitoring of individuals subject to the
program. Is currently developing the tracking of radio-tagged individuals and equipped with
Argos-GPS system. Obtained data are assessed daily from the Grefa center and monitoring on
the ground and with VHF done by vigilant resources natural PNBLSX and field Grefa
biologists in collaboration with Ecoplanin.

This information provides vital information on the status of the specimens, mortality,
the use and dispersal areas, inter and intra-specifically relationships, the response to
conservation measures implemented, such as additional food and habitat enhancement, and
allows the feedback to optimize these measures can know the frequency of return of the units
to the territory in which they are released by the hacking. Finally tracking allowed the
confirmation of the species nesting attempt this cross-border nature reserve, which was
considered extinct as a reproductive so far.