The German wildlife information system: population densities and development of European Hare (Lepus europaeus PALLAS) during 2002–2005 in Germany

Abstract

The German Wildlife Information System, founded in 2001, is a long-term monitoring program documenting occurrence, number, and development of game populations throughout Germany. Population numbers are recorded by standardized counting methods in so-called reference areas. The population densities of the European hare are calculated by spotlight strip censuses in the reference areas each spring and autumn all across Germany. From 2002 to 2005, the censuses were carried out by local hunters in 510 to 676 reference areas each year. During these years, the calculated spring densities increased significantly from 11.0 (2002) to 14.5 hares/km 2 (2005) nationwide. The overall increase in spring densities was primarily caused by the population rise from spring 2003 to 2004, which correlates with the high net growth rate in 2003. In 2005, the number of counted hares varied between less than 1 and more than 107 hares/km 2 in spring and between 0 and more than 170 hares/km 2 in autumn. Because of differing landscapes in Germany, three regions were differentiated. In spring 2005, the average population densities (median) in East Germany (5.4 hares/km 2 ) and Southwest Germany (14.6 hares/km 2 ) were significantly lower than in Northwest Germany (23.9 hares/km 2 ). These regional differences had been similarly distinct in former years.

The German wildlife information system (WILD): population densities and den use of red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and badgers (Meles meles) during 2003–2007 in Germany

“…Hunting bags give a good view on long-term population tendencies; however, they depend very much on the willingness and ability of hunters as well as on weather conditions (Gaillard et al 2003;Grauer and König 2009). Therefore, WILD established a live survey network of socalled reference areas, in which the densities of the European hare (Lepus europaeus, first results presented in Strauß et al 2008), the red fox (Vulpes vulpes), the badger (Meles meles), the carrion crow (Corvus corone) and the hooded crow (Corvus cornix) are recorded using standardised methods (DJV 2003). As the accuracy of such live surveys depends a lot on accessibility to area and interaction with local people (Gaidet-Drapier et al 2006), the reference areas are monitored by the local hunters.…”

“…The project was initiated on behalf of the German hunting association (Deutscher Jagdschutz-Verband e.V. (DJV)) as a permanent integral part of environmental assessment with the aim of developing strategies for conservation and sustainable use of game populations (see Strauß et al 2008) by monitoring live animals instead of estimating population sizes from hunting bags. Especially for cryptic or rare species, many detection errors persist within any survey method (Elphick 2008).…”

Performance and mortality of farmed hares

“…As a consequence, knowledge about productive performance and, more importantly, diseases of farmed hares is lacking (Trocchi and Riga, 2005;Sánchez-García et al, 2012). In contrast, a number of studies are available on free-living European brown hares in Italy and in Europe (Strauß et al, 2008;Ferretti et al, 2010); these mainly focus on local wild populations or farmed hares released into the wild.…”

Do Weather and Moon Have Any Influence on Spotlighting Mammals? The Case of Hare in Upland Ecosystem

“…Therefore, there is currently a difficulty in designing a study that takes weather and moonlight effects into account; consequently, their influence is generally overlooked in hare spotlight counts (Strauß et al, 2008;Sunde and Jessen, 2013). In upland and shrubland ecosystems in particular we are unaware of any studies concerning the influence of abiotic factors on spotlighting brown hares.…”

“…Spotlighting is a very common survey method for lagomorphs (Strauß et al, 2008;Tizzani et al, 2013) and studies reveal sources of variation in counts due to weather conditions and moon phase. Newman (1959) found that the number of cottontails (Sylvilagus floridanus) observed during early morning or late afternoon roadside counts was higher with increasing snow cover, frost, rain preceding the count, and decreasing temperature and wind speed.…”