Agri-environment Schemes Management Research Articles

Quantifying potential trade-offs and win-wins between arthropod diversity and yield on cropland under agri-environment schemes–A meta-analysis

In Europe, agri-environment schemes (AES) are a key instrument to combat the ongoing decline of farmland biodiversity. AES aim is to support biodiversity and maintain ecosystem services, such as pollination or pest control. To what extent AES affect crop yield is still poorly understood. We performed a systematic review, including hierarchical meta-analyses, to investigate potential trade-offs and win-wins between the effectiveness of AES for arthropod diversity and agricultural yield on European croplands. Altogether, we found 26 studies with a total of 125 data points that fulfilled our study inclusion criteria. From each study, we extracted data on biodiversity (arthropod species richness and abundance) and yield for fields with AES management and control fields without AES. The majority of the studies reported significantly higher species richness and abundance of arthropods (especially wild pollinators) in fields with AES (31 % increase), but yields were at the same time significantly lower on fields with AES compared to control fields (21 % decrease). Aside from the opportunity costs, AES that promote out-of-production elements (e.g. wildflower strips), supported biodiversity (29–32 % increase) without significantly compromising yield (2–5 % increase). Farmers can get an even higher yield in these situations than in current conventional agricultural production systems without AES. Thus, our study is useful to identify AES demonstrating benefits for arthropod biodiversity with negligible or relatively low costs regarding yield losses. Further optimization of the design and management of AES is needed to improve their effectiveness in promoting both biodiversity and minimizing crop yield losses.

Agri-environment schemes are associated with greater terrestrial invertebrate abundance and richness in upland grasslands

Agri-environment schemes are a key mechanism by which agricultural sustainability is encouraged by subsidising farmers to adopt environmentally friendly management (e.g. reduction of inputs) to maintain and enhance the delivery of biodiversity-associated ecosystem services. Studies testing the efficacy of agri-environment schemes have yielded varying results, and few have focused on upland (marginal or Less Favoured Area) grassland (> 150 m above sea level) where productivity is poor. This study used a factorial field experiment to examine patterns in plant communities and terrestrial invertebrates between agri-environment scheme and conventionally managed semi-improved and improved upland grasslands, using 90 spatially paired fields. Total plant species richness and rare plant species richness (those with < 10% occurrence) were unaffected by agri-environment scheme management, but were significantly higher on semi-improved than improved grasslands. Total and rare invertebrate abundance and family-level richness were unrelated to grassland type (semi-improved or improved). Total and rare invertebrate abundances were 4% and 218% higher, and total and rare invertebrate family-level richness were 17% and 14% higher in agri-environment scheme than conventionally managed fields, respectively. Here, we show that agri-environment scheme management of marginal or Less Favoured Area upland grassland was associated with higher multi-taxa invertebrate abundance and richness associated with swards indicative of wetter conditions with lower dominance of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) and greater coverage of other native grass species compared to conventional management. This suggests that agri-environment schemes may maintain, enhance or offset declines in terrestrial invertebrates and their associated ecosystem service delivery by maintaining more diverse swards, and suggests that they make a positive contribution to biodiversity conservation.

Aerial invertebrate functional groups respond to landscape composition with only detritivores and predators responding to agri-environment scheme management

Landscape-scale agricultural intensification is a major driver of biodiversity loss. Highly mobile species, such as aerial invertebrates may be disproportionately affected by land cover at large spatial scales due to their ability to disperse. Assessing the efficacy of environmentally friendly farming, such as Agri-Environment Schemes (AES), therefore, requires establishing the influence of land cover beyond focal farms or fields, contextualising the impact of agricultural management. This study measured the response of aerial invertebrate functional groups to AES management in improved and semi-improved upland grasslands accounting for spatial autocorrelation and multi-scale effects of land cover within buffers varying from 100 m to 5 km at 88 paired fields. Total aerial invertebrate abundance and diversity, including detritivores, herbivores, nectivores, predators and parasitoids all responded to different land cover types at varying scales indicative of highly complex and idiosyncratic functional group responses to landscape.After accounting for spatial autocorrelation and multi-scale landscape composition, total aerial invertebrate abundance was unaffected by agricultural management but diversity was (5%) higher in AES than conventionally managed fields. Detritivore (mostly Mycetophilidae fungus gnat) diversity and abundance were higher in AES than conventional fields, but only on improved grasslands, while predator (adult Muscidae house fly, Scathophagidae dung fly and Dolichopodidae long-legged fly) diversity was lower but abundance higher in AES than conventional fields. Aerial invertebrate herbivores (Anthomyiidae root-maggot flies and Cecidomyiidae gall midges and gnats), nectivores (Syrphidae hoverflies and Apoidea bees) and parasitoids (Ichneumonidae wasps) responded to landscape composition, but not agricultural management. Synthesis and Applications: this study suggests that landscape composition drives aerial invertebrate functional group diversity and abundance at multiple spatial scales. Nevertheless, the responses of some functional groups (detritivores and predators) to local agricultural management suggest that AES management may contribute to the maintenance or enhancement of ecosystem service delivery (nutrient cycling and pest biocontrol). Explicitly accounting for multi-scale landscape effects is necessary when assessing the impact of agricultural management on highly mobile taxa.

Upland grassland habitats and agri‐environment schemes change soil microarthropod abundance

Abstract Agricultural intensification is a major driver of biodiversity loss, with the implementation of Agri‐Environment Schemes (AESs) being a widespread policy designed to prevent further loss, and to maintain or restore ecosystem health. Upland grassland soils are disproportionately impacted by intensification including drainage, artificial fertiliser use, compaction and erosion while the effect of AES management on below‐ground microarthropods, which mediate a range of ecosystem processes, is largely unknown. This study tested the effects of AES management of upland grasslands on microarthropod communities using a large‐scale factorial field experiment. The study focused on microarthropods with distinct taxa‐specific responses observed. Oribatid mite abundance was associated with wetter, more extensive pastures with native grasses characteristic of semi‐improved grassland managed by AESs, whereas Collembola abundance was associated with drier, more intense, reseeded (Lolium perenne dominated) pastures characteristic of conventionally managed improved grasslands. Differences in taxa responses may be driven by life‐history traits and resilience to disturbance. There was no net effect of management, habitat or their interaction on total microarthropod family diversity or abundance. Synthesis and Applications. Results from this study suggest that in floristically simple upland agroecosystems the impact of agri‐environment measures on below‐ground soil biota are context‐dependent (differing between contrasting grassland types), and taxa‐specific, rather than leading to general increases in biodiversity per se, and the responses of soil microarthropods are driven by environmental variation caused by overall management of grassland fields. Measures should aim to increase the availability of areas of semi‐improved grassland, with native plant mixtures, adjacent to improved grasslands, to maximise the habitats available to soil microarthropods.

Designing a survey to monitor multi-scale impacts of agri-environment schemes on mobile taxa

Agri-environment schemes (AES) are key mechanisms to deliver conservation policy, and include management to provide resources for target taxa. Mobile species may move to areas where resources are increased, without this necessarily having an effect across the wider countryside or on populations over time. Most assessments of AES efficacy have been at small spatial scales, over short timescales, and shown varying results. We developed a survey design based on orthogonal gradients of AES management at local and landscape scales, which will enable the response of several taxa to be monitored. An evidence review of management effects on butterflies, birds and pollinating insects provided data to score AES options. Predicted gradients were calculated using AES uptake, weighted by the evidence scores. Predicted AES gradients for each taxon correlated strongly, and with the average gradient across taxa, supporting the co-location of surveys across different taxa.Nine 1 × 1 km survey squares were selected in each of four regional blocks with broadly homogenous background habitat characteristics. Squares in each block covered orthogonal contrasts across the range of AES gradients at local and landscape scales. This allows the effects of AES on species at each scale, and the interaction between scales, to be tested. AES options and broad habitats were mapped in field surveys, to verify predicted gradients which were based on AES option uptake data. The verified AES gradient had a strong positive relationship with the predicted gradient. AES gradients were broadly independent of background habitat within each block, likely allowing AES effects to be distinguished from potential effects of other habitat variables. Surveys of several mobile taxa are ongoing.This design will allow mobile taxa responses to AES to be tested in the surrounding countryside, as well as on land under AES management, and potentially in terms of population change over time. The design developed here provides a novel, pseudo-experimental approach for assessing the response of mobile species to gradients of management at two spatial scales. A similar design process could be applied in other regions that require a standardized approach to monitoring the impacts of management interventions on target taxa at landscape scales, if equivalent spatial data are available.

Landscape-scale simulations as a tool in multi-criteria decision making to support agri-environment schemes

Increasing concerns over the environmental impacts of agriculture in Europe has led to the introduction of agri-environment schemes (AES) into the Common Agricultural Policy to help mitigate biodiversity loss by encouraging farmers with subsidies for implementing environmentally-friendly farming techniques. However, effectiveness of AES has been mixed and only partially successful in achieving desired outcomes. To improve effectiveness and reduce costs, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can help support decision-making and determine the most effective management action. Although MCDA has great potential for evaluating policy measures, it rarely considers the context-dependency of species responses to management practices across different landscapes. Landscape simulations can, therefore, be valuable for reducing the uncertainties when predicting the consequences of management actions. A potential suitable simulation system is the Animal, Landscape, and Man Simulation System (ALMaSS), a mechanistic simulation with can improve MCDA with the automatic integration of landscape context and a species ecology and behaviour. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effectiveness of ALMaSS in evaluating AES management practices across different landscapes and estimate their ability to achieve the proposed conservation outcomes in three species of conservation interest. In this study, the effect of a particular management strategy on a species was dependent on the landscape context, in our case, a combination of landscape structure and the type and distribution of farms, and varied depending on the metrics being measured. We demonstrate how simulations can be used for MCDA to select between management strategies with different costs. Despite the complexity of ALMaSS models, the simulation results provided are easy to interpret. Landscape simulations, such as ALMaSS, can be an important tool in multi-criteria decision making by simulating a wide range of managements and contexts and provide supporting information for filtering management options based on specific conservation goals.

What can management option uptake tell us about ecosystem services delivery through agri-environment schemes?

Agri-environment schemes (AES), currently embedded in EU and UK policies, actively promote ‘greening’, ‘sustainability’ and ‘ecosystem services’ approaches to land management. The funding structures of these policies, however, run counter to this sustainable approach, and create barriers to AES success, primarily through a continued focus on productivity support. In this study, we aim to determine the effectiveness of action-based AES, as a delivery mechanism for ecosystem services, using secondary data analysis techniques to unravel the complexities of AES funding distribution and scheme structure and geographic information systems (GIS) to explore the spatial extent and uptake of AES management options, using Wales, UK as a study area. Our results show 84% of recipients of AES payments receiving <£10k annually, comprising only 35% of the total available funding. 15, out of a total of ∼165, management options, accounted for >75% of all advanced level management contracts awarded in both 2015 and 2017. This bias in option uptake, in many cases, positively prevents further deterioration of existing habitat condition through a ‘business as usual’ approach. However, we argue that the voluntary, over prescriptive nature of the schemes limits management option uptake, negatively impacts on the schemes ability to deliver ecosystem services, and lessens the government’s ability to promote long-term behavioural change. If AES are to deliver the ‘“Public Goods”’ that future policy demands, then targeted and adequate levels of funding and a willingness to participate must be combined with greater farmer autonomy and clear outcomes to deliver management options at a landscape scale.

Evaluating the benefits of agri-environment schemes on farmland bird communities through a common species monitoring programme. A case study in northern Italy

Biodiversity in agricultural environments is considered to be undergoing steep declines in most European countries. Among taxa which experienced consistent decreases, birds are of central importance, both for their value as ecological indicators and for the high number of species of conservation concern associated with agricultural ecosystems.In this paper, using data from the Italian Common Breeding Bird monitoring programme collected in the period 2009–2014, we analysed the effect on breeding birds of four Agri-Environment Schemes (AES) in Emilia-Romagna region, one of the most important agricultural areas of Italy. Specifically we compared the values of three community parameters (total, farmland and generalist species richness) and the abundance of seven species (Alauda arvensis, Hirundo rustica, Motacilla flava, Serinus serinus, Chloris chloris, Carduelis carduelis and Passer montanus) in areas covered by AES and not.The results of the analyses show that, at the scale we investigated, the positive effects of these measures are very limited and often not positive, particularly for farmland specialist species. These findings seem to suggest that the application of these measures, albeit widespread over the Region, is not able to counteract the negative effects of the simplification and impoverishment of the agricultural landscape. Our results show the AES management related more with single species metrics than community measures. Therefore to improve the effectiveness of AES, and to try to contrasts the dramatic decline of farmland bird species, we think these schemes should be designed on the specific needs of species and habitats of high conservation priority.

Effects of uncut hay meadow strips on spiders

Standard management of Czech hay meadows consists of machine mowing twice a year, with the first mowing in or before mid-June and the second mowing 40–60 days later. Here, we aimed to analyse the effects of the first year of implementation of the agri-environment scheme (AES), which consisted of allowing 3–10% of permanent grasslands within each land block to remain unmown until at least August 15, on the abundance and diversity of spiders. We conducted the study at 40 paired sampling sites in three meadow types in northern Czechia. Spiders were sampled using pitfall traps and sweeping, and the plant cover and vascular plant species composition were analysed. Nearly all study sites were associated with 100% vegetation cover, and hosted 209 vascular plant species, of which 12 were threatened. The number of vascular plant species exhibited only modest differences between the study sites under standard and AES-prescribed management. We captured a total of 3889 individuals of 103 spider species. The abundance of spiders was three-times higher at sites subjected to AES management. The number of species was similar irrespective of the management applied, but the species composition differed in response to the management (Sorensen index 0.562–0.736). The AES management was associated with higher abundance of common vegetation-dwelling farmland spiders, but epigeic spiders decreased there or were insensitive to AES management. It remains to be investigated whether threatened vegetation-dwelling spiders may benefit from similar AESs at sites of their occurrence, such as in fen meadows or steppes.

Agri-environment scheme enhances breeding populations of some priority farmland birds in Northern Ireland

ABSTRACTCapsule: The abundance of Tree sparrow Passer montanus, House Sparrow Passer domesticus and Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella, three priority farmland birds, increased over a 5-year period in response to a targeted agri-environment scheme (AES).Aims: To assess the effects of a targeted AES on the abundance of a suite of farmland bird species over a 5-year period.Methods: We compare temporal changes in abundance of 12 farmland bird species of conservation concern on 33 AES and 22 control farms in County Down, Northern Ireland. Five of these species were designated targets for conservation action under the Countryside Management Scheme (CMS).Results: CMS management was associated with more positive changes in abundance for three of the five target species and more negative changes for one target species (albeit caused mainly by a large reduction at a single farm). CMS management had little influence on the abundance of non-target species or on avian species richness. Farm-scale changes in abundance were generally unrelated to the extent of local CMS provision, the only exception involved House Sparrow and seed-rich winter habitats.Conclusion: This study demonstrates that generic AES land management can improve the population status of target farmland birds on farms with AES management.

Experimental evidence for optimal hedgerow cutting regimes for Brown hairstreak butterflies

Abstract The Brown hairstreak butterfly has declined in range and abundance over the past 50 years, leading to designated conservation status in several European countries including England and Wales. The Brown hairstreak's decline has been linked to changes in hedgerow management, based on mortality of eggs over winter and female oviposition preferences. We assessed Brown hairstreak egg abundance in late winter over 4 years in response to hedgerow management treatments to manipulate the frequency, timing, and the intensity of trimming (reduced intensity resulting in an annual increase of approximately 10 cm in hedge height and width), using a field experiment with a randomised block design. Hedgerow plots cut every year to a standard height and width had the lowest Brown hairstreak egg abundance; this is the most common hedgerow management outside agri‐environment schemes (AES). Cutting hedgerow plots at a reduced intensity nearly doubled the number of surviving eggs in late winter. Plots cut at a reduced frequency in autumn (once every 3 years), which forms part of current English AES, had 1.3 times more eggs than those cut annually. Current AES management prescriptions are likely to benefit the Brown hairstreak, but its requirements need to be balanced with those of other taxa in relation to the timing of hedgerow cutting. Cutting hedges at a reduced intensity has previously been shown to benefit the wider Lepidoptera community as well as Brown hairstreak butterflies. Reduced intensity cutting does not currently form part of AES hedgerow prescriptions, but could be considered for inclusion in future schemes.

Promoting diverse communities of wild bees and hoverflies requires a landscape approach to managing meadows

There is ongoing concern regarding the observed decline in pollinator populations. Managing agricultural landscapes through agri-environment schemes (AES) supports biodiversity and could counteract pollinator population declines. We investigated whether alterations to current AES grassland mowing regimes would increase the abundance and species richness of wild bees and hoverflies. Furthermore, we investigated the response of different nesting and feeding guilds of wild bees and hoverflies, respectively, to these regimes. The three experimental mowing regimes were: (i) first cut not before 15 June, before the beginning of summer (Swiss AES management, control meadows); (ii) first cut delayed until 15 July (delayed meadows); (iii) as for control meadows but leaving 10–20% uncut as a refuge (refuge meadows). The rationale behind the delayed and refuge mowing regimes was extending the availability of floral resources for pollinators, while also providing refugia for species that may be directly impacted by mowing. Hoverflies and wild bees were collected in 2014 and 2015, respectively, using pan-trapping and sweep-netting, once before and once after the first cut. The two collecting methods showed contrasting results. While there was no difference in the abundance or richness of wild bees between the meadows when using pan traps, following the first cut, sweep-netting resulted in a higher abundance and richness of wild bees in delayed and refuge meadows compared to control meadows. Pan-trapping detected a higher abundance of hoverflies in delayed compared to refuge meadows, whereas sweep-netting detected a higher abundance in delayed and refuge compared to control meadows, after the first cut. Saprophagous hoverflies were more abundant in the control and delayed than refuge meadows following the first cut, when sampled with pan traps. Predatory hoverflies were more abundant and species rich in delayed and refuge compared to control meadows following the first cut, when sampled by sweep-netting. Our study demonstrates that simple alterations to a common AES grassland mowing regime can enhance populations of pollinators and natural enemies of crop pests. Furthermore, the contrasting response of the life-history guilds indicates that promoting heterogeneous management practices within the landscape is important for supporting diverse communities, and maintaining key ecosystem services such as pollination and biocontrol.

Making the best of both worlds: Can high-resolution agricultural administrative data support the assessment of High Nature Value farmlands across Europe?

Worldwide, the role of farmlands for biodiversity conservation and the delivery of multiple ecosystem services has been widely acknowledged. In the European Union (EU), societal demands to include environmental conservation concerns within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) have resulted in the recognition of the importance of maintaining High Nature Value farmlands (HNVf).HNVf constitute complex social-ecological systems, which owe their nature conservation value to the maintenance of specific, mostly low-intensity farming systems, supporting high levels of species and habitats dependent on agricultural practices. Even though HNVf assessment in space and time is essential to evaluate the effectiveness of Rural Development Programmes, the diversity of rural landscapes across EU, the scarcity of data on farming systems, and the lack of common methodological guidelines has hampered the implementation of HNVf mapping and monitoring across Europe. Thus, there is a pressing need to develop and test methodological approaches that may support HNVf assessment across the EU.The Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) which is mandatory for all EU Member States constitutes a system for the management and control of CAP payments to farmers. Essentially, IACS comprises high-resolution, spatially explicit information on the type and intensity of agricultural land-use. Even though such data exhibits high thematic, spatial and temporal resolution, IACS has seldom been used, due to significant access restrictions. Here, the potential to use IACS data to support the assessment of HNVf was evaluated within the German Federal State of Lower Saxony by implementing a recently developed methodological framework. Sets of indicators known to be essential for identifying potential HNVf and underlying farming systems (expressing landscape structure and composition, farming systems, and crop diversity), were derived from IACS. Spatial patterns of indicators were analyzed at two different scales to delineate the potential distribution of HNVf across Lower Saxony.Results highlighted that most regions in Lower Saxony were characterized by intensive farming practices including high livestock density, high share of intensive crops and low density of linear elements. Only 3% of the Utilized Agricultural Area (UAA) of Lower Saxony potentially constituted HNVf, with the majority of HNVf coinciding with mosaics of arable and/or permanent crops and semi-natural features under less intensive farming practices. Semi-natural grasslands, partially under agri-environment scheme management contracts, covered roughly 1% of the UAA and were mostly intermingled with other farmland habitats in extensively managed agricultural landscapes.In the context of the EU-wide HNVf assessment, IACS constitutes an important source of data, characterized by a high spatial, thematic and temporal resolution of data collected annually. Whilst having the potential for use in HNVf assessment, some challenges remain, especially due to significant access restrictions. Nevertheless, IACS constitutes a powerful tool to evaluate the extent and condition of HNVf across the EU countryside. Making use of IACS data in such a way could provide a stepping-stone towards achieving a more effective balance between the management and control of CAP support payments and the growing societal demands related to the maintenance and enhancement of farmland biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Multi-scale effects of agri-environment schemes on carabid beetles in intensive farmland

Agri-environment schemes (AESs) were implemented to reduce the loss of biodiversity in agro-ecosystems. This study aimed to assess whether AESs at either local or landscape scale increase the carabid abundance-activity and species richness. Carabids were sampled in 496 fields in a 430km2 study area of central-western France. Based on the extensiveness of the agricultural practices involved, the different AES types were aggregated into three categories (AESEXT+, AESEXT++ and AESEXT+++) forming a gradient of extensiveness in farming practices. We sampled 20 fields in each of the three AESs categories. Each AES fields was paired with conventional fields. A series of statistical models were built to test the balance between the effects of AESs on either the carabid abundance-activity or species richness. AESs affected carabid abundance-activity and species richness both locally and at landscape scale (local characteristics having a greater effect than landscape composition). Carabid diversity benefited from AESs only when the most extensive practices were implemented, i.e. organic farming in cereal crops and delayed cutting in alfalfa. In addition, the local effects of organic farming and delayed cutting coverage interacted positively with these AESs at landscape scale. These results demonstrate that non-targeted organisms can benefit from AES management. They further emphasize the need to consider both local and landscape conditions when studying the effects of AESs on biodiversity. As only the most extensive practices had significant effects at both local and landscape scales, management must be planned strategically in space to ensure that AESs are distributed within the landscape to amplify their positive effects.

Evaluating conservation tools in Polish grasslands: The occurrence of birds in relation to agri-environment schemes and Natura 2000 areas

To halt the decline of biodiversity in European farmland, two major tools are available: the Natura 2000 network and agri-environment schemes (AES). We investigated the effect of these two measures on local species richness, single species occurrence and beta diversity of grassland birds in Poland. We counted birds on AES parcels (with less intensive grassland management) and control parcels, both within and outside Special Protection Areas (SPAs, part of Natura 2000), during 2013–2014. Local species richness of AES-target birds was not associated with AES. Similarly, the turnover of AES-target species among sites was comparable at AES and control parcels. Furthermore, no positive interaction between AES and SPAs was observed, indicating a general lack of effect of AES. Local species richness of SPA-target birds was not higher within than outside SPAs, but two SPA-target species were more common and the beta diversity of SPA-target species was higher within than outside SPAs. Thus, our study showed no positive effects of AES on the occurrence of their target species, but confirmed some positive effects of SPAs on their target species. The decision to restrict AES to Special Protection Areas in 2015–2020 has no justification in our analyses. Actually, many AES-target species will be protected within SPAs irrespective of whether the area is an AES or not, but future AES should also include parcels outside SPAs, as many target species occur there. However, to improve the effectiveness of AES management prescriptions should be diversified and customized to meet the largely different habitat preferences of present target species (such as, for instance, the lapwing and corncrake).

Effects of grass field margin management on food availability for Black-tailed Godwit chicks

Over the last six decades, populations of wader species like the Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa limosa) have sharply decreased in the Netherlands. Agricultural intensification has led to reduced habitat quality for meadow birds. As a consequence, reproductive success has declined. One of the main drivers of this decline in reproductive success is reduced food availability for meadow bird chicks. Agri-environment schemes (AES), designed to halt this decline, have so far been insufficient. Most of these AES focus on entire fields, but recent research suggests that differences in suitability exist within fields. Grass field margins may be more suitable for meadow bird chicks than the center of intensively managed grass lands. To improve existing meadow bird AES it could be beneficial to implement additional management in field margins of intensively managed grass fields. An already existing type of field margin AES with additional management is the botanical field margin. Here, we evaluate four different types of field margin management, including botanical field margins, focusing on aerial insects (an important part of the diet of Black-tailed Godwit chicks and Redshank chicks) in field centers and margins. Grass field margins contained more large aerial insects than field centers and, more importantly, additional management of the grass field margin increased the number of aerial insects in the margin. We conclude that combining meadow bird AES and botanical field margin management may enhance meadow bird food availability and improve the efficacy of AES.

Testing bespoke management of foraging habitat for European turtle doves Streptopelia turtur

Agri-environment schemes (AES) are increasingly being employed to mitigate biodiversity loss in agricultural environments. The European Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur is an obligate granivorous bird in rapid decline within both the UK (−96% since 1970) and across continental Europe (−77% since 1980), despite widespread uptake of AES. Here, we assess the efficacy of a potentially new, sown agri-environment option designed to provide abundant, accessible seed for S. turtur during the breeding season. During summer 2011 we compared vegetation structure and seed provision on trial plots to control habitat types (existing agri-environment options thought to potentially provide S. turtur foraging habitat) to assess whether trial plots performed better for foraging S. turtur than control habitats. In September 2011 all trial plots were topped (cut) and half of a subset of trial plots were then scarified (60% of soil surface disturbed). Vegetation structure on topped, and topped and scarified trial plots was measured during summer 2012 to determine which management regime was most effective in maintaining suitable sward structure and seed provision into the second year. No control habitat type produced as much seed important in S. turtur diet as trial plots at any point during year one. Trial plots provided accessible vegetation structure early in the season with no difference in vegetation metrics between trial plots and previously published data on S. turtur foraging locations. However, to allow later access, management is required during mid-June to open up the sward through localized topping or scarification. Vegetation structure during year two was generally too dense to attract foraging S. turtur. However, scarifying trial plots during the September following sowing encouraged self-seeding of Fumaria. officinalis (a plant species historically forming a significant proportion of S. turtur diet during the breeding season) into the second year, with this species present in 16% of scarified trial plots compared to only 4% of topped trial plots during year two. Thus, autumn scarification, possibly followed by topping or scarification of part of the trial plots in June, is necessary for trial plots to provide more seed and access for S. turtur than existing agri-environment options during year two. We recommend modifications to our original seed mix in order to reduce vegetation density and improve vegetation structure. The study provides an example of the need to strike the right balance between food abundance and accessibility, through vegetation structure, when designing agri-environment scheme management options that provide food for birds.

Higher-tier agri-environment scheme enhances breeding densities of some priority farmland birds in England

Agri-environment schemes (AES) are the main policy mechanism available to reverse the widespread losses of farmland biodiversity across Europe. Previous examples of AES enhancing the abundance of farmland birds have been restricted to targeted species recovery programmes, often with bespoke habitat management and high levels of advisory support for landowners. Here, we tested whether standard higher-tier AES agreements targeted at multiple species and with lower levels of advisory support than targeted species recovery programmes can enhance the breeding densities of farmland birds. Surveys of breeding birds were undertaken during 2008 and 2011 on 65 farms under higher level stewardship (HLS) and 21 farms lacking AES interventions, in three regions of England. After allowing for any impacts of predator control, changes in density were more positive on HLS farms in at least one region for six priority species. Five of the six species had mixed diets and were predominantly associated with field edges; the other (lapwing) probably responded to the provision of field-centre fallow plots. Changes in bird numbers were not consistently related to the extent of AES habitat provision. This is the first study to demonstrate that standard AES management without substantial ongoing advisory support can increase or maintain the densities of widespread declining species.

Influence of agri-environment scheme options on territory settlement by Yellowhammer (Emberiza citronella) and Corn Bunting (Emberiza calandra)

Conserving farmland birds is a key objective for agri-environment schemes (AES) across Europe, with a number of management options aimed at providing invertebrate food and nesting habitats. We analysed territory settlement by two widespread but declining farmland buntings with contrasting nesting requirements: the Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella, a boundary-nesting species, and the Corn Bunting Emberiza calandra, a ground-nesting species. The study was conducted on farms participating in the English Higher Level Stewardship scheme to test whether territory settlement is influenced by the provision of key arable AES options. Both species settled preferentially in localities containing sown arable field margins, while Corn Bunting also settled in localities containing nectar flower mixtures. These preferences are likely to reflect foraging rather than nesting habitat requirements. Yellowhammer selected territories containing hedgerows under AES management, which are nesting rather than foraging habitat but may also provide food. Uptake by land owners of several AES options likely to provide limiting resources for farmland birds was very low, and because uptake at the landscape scale is also low, wider-scale population level benefits are likely to be constrained. However, this is one of few studies demonstrating selection of widely applied arable AES options by breeding farmland birds.

Moth communities and agri‐environment schemes: Examining the effects of hedgerow cutting regime on diversity, abundance, and parasitism

Abstract Hedgerows provide an important habitat for wildlife including invertebrates, representing a large proportion of semi‐natural habitat patches in the modern agricultural landscapes of the UK and Europe. Around 40% of hedgerow length in England is managed under agri‐environment scheme (AES) options, which specify less frequent cutting and advise cutting in winter. Hedgerow management can alter habitat structure and quality, potentially influencing invertebrate community structure. We assessed the impacts of management treatments on moth communities and their parasitoids. Two treatments (‘cutting frequency’: once every 1, 2, or 3 years, and ‘cutting time’: autumn vs. winter) were applied to a long‐running hedgerow experiment, mimicking AES prescriptions. Moth larvae were collected from the hedgerows, identified and reared to determine parasitism. Hedgerow structure and foliar quality were quantified and related to changes in moth abundance, diversity, species richness, and parasitism. Hedgerow management did not significantly affect overall abundance of moth larvae, but did affect the abundance of certain feeding guilds and trophic interactions with parasitoids. Concealed moth larvae (mining, tentiform, and case bearing) were more abundant on hedgerows cut infrequently (every 2 or 3 years vs. annually). Parasitism rates were higher on hedgerows cut less often, when these were cut in autumn. There was a strong trend towards greater moth species richness and diversity on winter cut hedgerows. Agri‐environment scheme management can thus have complex effects on invertebrate communities. The abundance of some moths may be positively affected by AES hedgerow management and this can have knock‐on effects on parasitoid abundance.