| 1. |
- Aronson, Åke, et al.
(author)
-
Ulv i Skandinavia : Statusrapport for vinteren 2009-2010
- 2010
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The wolves in Sweden and Norway are members of a joint Scandinavian wolf population. In a combined Swedish-Norwegian monitoring project, wolves on the Scandinavian Peninsula were located and counted during the winter of 2009-2010. In Sweden, County administrative boards perform the fieldwork and collection of field data (snow-tracking, DNA-samples), whereas the Wildlife Damage Center (VSC) at Grimsö Research Station was responsible for evaluating and summarizing the results of the wolf monitoring. In Norway, wolf biologists at Hedmark University College and a genetist at Rovdata (Trondheim) in cooperation with the Norwegian Nature Inspectorate (SNO) were responsible for the monitoring of resident and non-resident wolves, respectively. Furthermore, cooperative wolf pack monitoring has been carried out in Fennoscandia in collaboration with Finland. A large number of volunteers and organizations such as hunting associations in both countries and the Swedish Carnivore Association also report observations and participate in wolf monitoring activities. The estimated number of wolves in Scandinavia is mainly based on long distances of ground tracking on snow, but also by radio-telemetry and DNA-analysis. The estimate was restricted to the period of October 1, 2009 – February 28, 2010. To guarantee the quality of the reports used, the majority have been checked in the field by the project, or by other personnel with experience of ground tracking wolves on snow. Wolves were classified as 1) family groups (packs), 2) scent-marking pairs, 3) other resident wolves, or 4) other wolves. The results were presented as minimum-maximum numbers where the minimum was exclusively based on confirmed field-checked reports, while the maximum also included other reports. A total of 252-291 wolves were estimated on the Scandinavian Peninsula during the 2009-2010 winter. Among these, 28 packs included 165-175 wolves, and 44-49 wolves belonged to 21-24 scent-marking pairs. The majority of the wolves (186-215) were located in Sweden. Of the 33-39 wolves restricted to Norway, 21-23 were members of 3 packs, 6 were scent-marking pair members, none were classified as “other resident wolves”, and 6-10 were classified as “other wolves”. Areas were utilized on both sides of the national border between Sweden and Norway by 33-37 resident wolves. Successful reproduction in the spring of 2009 was confirmed in 26 of the Scandinavian wolf territories. Among these, 19 litters were born in Sweden, 4 litters was born in a transboundary packs, and 3 litters grew up in Norway. In 2009, two Finnish-Russian male wolves reproduced for the second time, one litter in Sweden (the Galven territory) and one in Norway (the Kynna territory). In Finland, during the winter 2009-10, a total of 76-78 wolves in 15 packs were estimated to have exclusively Finnish territories. In addition 72-74 wolves were pack members within 13 territories across the Finnish-Russian border
|
|
| 2. |
- Aronson, Åke, et al.
(author)
-
Ulv i Skandinavia : statusrapport for vinteren 2010-2011
- 2011
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The wolves in Sweden and Norway are members of a joint Scandinavian wolf population. In a combined Swedish-Norwegian monitoring project, wolves on the Scandinavian Peninsula were located and counted during the winter of 2010-2011. In Sweden, County administrative boards perform the fieldwork and collection of field data (snow-tracking, DNA-samples), whereas the Wildlife Damage Center (VSC) at Grimsö Research Station was responsible for evaluating and summarizing the results of the wolf monitoring. In Norway, wolf biologists at Hedmark University College and a genetist at Rovdata (Trondheim) in cooperation with the Norwegian Nature Inspectorate (SNO) were responsible for the monitoring of resident and non-resident wolves, respectively. Furthermore, cooperative wolf pack monitoring has been carried out in Fennoscandia in collaboration with Finland. A large number of volunteers and organizations such as hunting associations in both countries and the Swedish Carnivore Association also report observations and participate in wolf monitoring activities. The estimated number of wolves in Scandinavia is mainly based on long distances of ground tracking on snow, but also by DNA-analysis and radio-telemetry. The estimate was restricted to the period of October 1, 2010 – February 28, 2011. To guarantee the quality of the reports used, the majority have been checked in the field by the project, or by other personnel with experience of ground tracking wolves on snow. Wolves were classified as 1) family groups (packs), 2) scent-marking pairs, 3) other resident wolves, or 4) other wolves. The results were presented as minimum-maximum numbers where the minimum was exclusively based on confirmed field-checked reports, while the maximum also included other reports. A total of 289-325 wolves were estimated on the Scandinavian Peninsula during the 2010-2011 winter. Among these, 31 packs included 183-189 wolves, and 57-61 wolves belonged to 27-30 scent-marking pairs. The majority of the wolves (235-266) were located in Sweden, of which 149-154 were members of 25 packs, 43-44 lived in 20-22 scent-marking pairs, 4 were classified as “other resident wolves”, and 39-64 were classified as “other wolves”. Of the 32-34 wolves restricted to Norway, 18-19 were members of 3 packs, 8 were scent-marking pair members, one was classified as “other resident wolves”, and 5-6 were classified as “other wolves”. Another 22-25 resident wolves lived in 6-7 packs or scent-marking pairs in territories covering areas on both sides of the Swedish-Norwegian border. Successful reproduction in spring 2010 was confirmed in 31 of the Scandinavian wolf territories. Among these, 25 litters were born in Sweden, 3 litters were born in transboundary packs, and 3 litters grew up in Norway. In 2010, two Finnish-Russian male wolves reproduced for the third time, one litter in Sweden (the Galven territory) and one in Norway (the Kynna territory). In Finland, during the winter 2010-11, a total of 48 wolves in 8 packs were estimated to have exclusively Finnish territories. In addition 59-64 wolves were pack members within 11 territories across the Finnish-Russian border
|
|
| 3. |
- Axelsson, Robert, et al.
(author)
-
Evaluation of Multi-level Social Learning for Sustainable Landscapes : Perspective of a Development Initiative in Bergslagen, Sweden
- 2013
-
In: Ambio. - : Springer Netherlands. - 0044-7447 .- 1654-7209. ; 42:2, s. 241-253
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- To implement policies about sustainable landscapes and rural development necessitates social learning about states and trends of sustainability indicators, norms that define sustainability, and adaptive multi-level governance. We evaluate the extent to which social learning at multiple governance levels for sustainable landscapes occur in 18 local development initiatives in the network of Sustainable Bergslagen in Sweden. We mapped activities over time, and interviewed key actors in the network about social learning. While activities resulted in exchange of experiences and some local solutions, a major challenge was to secure systematic social learning and make new knowledge explicit at multiple levels. None of the development initiatives used a systematic approach to secure social learning, and sustainability assessments were not made systematically. We discuss how social learning can be improved, and how a learning network of development initiatives could be realized.
|
|
| 4. |
- Liberg, Olof, et al.
(author)
-
Monitoring of wolves in Scandinavia
- 2012
-
In: Hystrix, the Italian Journal of Mammalogy. - 0394-1914 .- 1825-5272. ; 23, s. 29-34
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Scandinavian wolf population is jointly monitored by Norwegian and Swedish authorities. Monitoring is made annually. Wolves are classified in different categories. Family groups (>= 3 animals sharing a territory), territorial pairs, other stationary wolves, and vagrants. Also number of reproductions are determined each year, and has the highest priority as national management goals for the wolf population in both countries are expressed as number of reproducing units. Three methods are used in combination. Tracking on snow is the basic method. Around 100 field workers are employed full time or part time to find and follow tracks of wolves during the monitoring season Oct. 1 - Feb 28. The second method is DNA-analysis, mainly based on wolf scats collected during tracking. DNA-analysis help verifying reproductions, identifying newly established pairs, differentiating between neighboring territories and for identifying new immigrants from the Finnish/Russian population. The third method is radio telemetry. 10-20 wolves are equipped with GPS-collars each year, and used for determining of territory extents and differentiating between neighboring territories. All monitoring data are recorded in national databases, and compiled each year in an annual monitoring reports. Annual budget for large carnivore monitoring in the two countries combined in 2011 was approximately 5.8 million Euro, of which approximately 1.5 million was spent on wolves.
|
|
| 5. |
- Talle, Malin, et al.
(author)
-
Mowing for biodiversity : grass trimmer and knife mower perform equally well
- 2014
-
In: Biodiversity and Conservation. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0960-3115 .- 1572-9710. ; 23:12, s. 3073-3089
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Mowing of semi-natural grasslands is an important management method to maintain the conservation value and species-richness of this habitat. Mowing using cutting instruments, e.g. sickle bar mowers, is thought to be superior by practitioners compared with other mechanical instruments that tears off the plant material, e.g. grass trimmers. However, almost no studies exist that supports this assumption. We analysed a 12-year field trial in a semi-natural grassland in south-eastern Sweden, with the aim of determining which mowing technique best maintains the conservation value of semi-natural grasslands. Two mowing techniques were compared: mowing using a hand-pushed sickle bar mower (a type of knife mower), or mowing using a grass trimmer at a 5-cm or 0-cm cutting height. The odds that a recorded species belongs to a group of indicator species were calculated for sample plots, and odds ratios were calculated contrasting treatments. Three types of indicator species classification systems were used: (i) indicators of management for species richness, (ii) indicators of excess nitrogen and (iii) indicators of lack of management. The odds ratios were calculated for years 1-5, 7 and 12 of the trial. In addition, Principal Response Curve analysis was performed to analyse the change in vegetation composition over time and ANOVA for plant species richness in plots. The results showed that over time there were no differences in the odds of finding indicators of any of the three types, for any of the mowing techniques. Furthermore, there were no apparent change in vegetation composition and only a small effect on richness. These results suggest that mowing using a sickle bar mower or a grass trimmer had the same effect on the floristic composition of grasslands, and both techniques can be recommended for use in semi-natural grasslands.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Åkesson, Mikael, et al.
(author)
-
Sammanställning av släktträdet över den skandinaviska vargstammen fram till 2013
- 2014
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Denna rapport redogör för uppdateringen av släktträdet över den skandinaviska vargpopulationen inom ramen för en överenskommelse mellan Naturvårdsverket och Grimsö forskningsstation. I rapporten presenteras stammens genealogi från 1983 till 2013 tillsammans med de reproducerande parens inavelsgrad samt en summering av inavelsutvecklingen i populationen.
|
|
