Conservation of Threatened Grassland Birds in the Mediterranean Region: Going Up or Giving Up?

Abstract

Grassland bird populations in the Mediterranean lowlands have declined dramatically over the past few decades. This decline is due to a combination of factors, including changes in land use and farming practices as well as the impacts of climate change. In particular, more intensive agricultural methods have played a significant role in this reduction. However, in the higher-altitude uplands of the region, traditional practices like pastoralism and rotational low-intensity farming are still common, and these areas continue to support substantial populations of several threatened grassland bird species. In this viewpoint, we discuss the challenges that the uplands are facing and suggest rethinking regional development to better balance the needs of people and nature.

1. Grasslands and Bird Conservation in the Mediterranean Region

In the Mediterranean region, grassland-type habitats hinge on traditional low-intensity farming and management, and include hay meadows, upland grasslands, pastures, and rotational fallows associated with traditional cereal farming [1]. Despite their significance for the regional landscapes, culture, and biodiversity, a large-scale loss and degradation of grassland-type habitats happened, associated with changes in socio-ecological systems [2,3]. In fact, contemporary policies in this region (e.g., Common Agricultural Policy in Europe, Turkey Agricultural Support Programs, and Moroccan Agricultural Policy, among others) encouraged the specialization of agricultural systems by supporting schemes that promote productivity, despite the detrimental effects on ecosystem services and biodiversity [4,5]. One of the major changes with severe impacts on biodiversity was the substitution of grassland-type agroecosystems in the Mediterranean lowlands (Figure 1) by permanent cropping systems [3,6]. Concurrently, the toll taken on uncommon species by the intensification of agricultural management, the abandonment of traditional practices, and the spread of invasive species was not effectively addressed by conservation actions in lowland areas [3,6].

This was the case of the habitats associated with traditional cereal–steppe farming, a crop rotation system composed of a patchwork of cereal fields, pseudo-steppe fallows, and grazing areas [10]. Specific policies (e.g., European agri-environmental schemes, Green Morocco Plan) to manage and conserve this cultural agroecosystem have been unsuccessful in halting its decline [11,12]. The reasons for this failure are numerous, including climate change, misalignment with farmers’ preferences, and implementation of environmental policies in areas with limited agricultural value [13].

Grassland species, particularly birds, that achieve their greatest diversity and specialization in Mediterranean landscapes of cereal–steppe farming (also known as steppe species) have been heavily affected by changes in habitat and management practices during the late 20th and early 21st centuries [10,11,14]. These changes have led to significant population declines and a reduced distribution range [10,15]. As a result, these species are among the most at risk of extinction, particularly in South Europe, North Africa, and West Asia [16]. Reports indicate that even the strongholds for several steppe birds have recently become deserted, raising the risk of local or even global extinctions in the near future [17]. In fact, in the current context of climate change, the remaining suitable lowland habitats are experiencing increasingly extreme conditions of drought and high temperatures. These conditions are likely to disrupt bird physiology, habitat selection, nesting conditions, and predation pressure [18,19]. Additionally, these factors are already affecting species viability due to the combined impact of climate stress on nestlings and the earlier harvesting of crops: the early harvest reduces breeding success, both directly through nest destruction during harvest and indirectly by decreasing resource availability for broods [20,21].

In the Mediterranean region, upland areas consist of undulating countryside and flat-topped plateaus (Figure 1), often described as silvo-agro-pastoral systems, reflecting a mix of forestry, agriculture, and grazing activities [22]. These landscapes typically feature low-intensity land use, characterized by pastures and shrublands for grazing and semi-natural areas with cereal–steppe farming systems [22,23]. While research and conservation activities for steppe birds have mainly focused on lowland areas, many of these bird species also breed in significant numbers in upland habitats (e.g., Montagu’s harrier (Circus pygargus), Red-legged partridge (Alectoris rufa), Skylark (Alauda arvensis), and Tawny pipit (Anthus campestris), among others) [24,25]. Moreover, upland habitats play an important role as migration stopovers and wintering grounds for many other bird species like the Great bustard (Otis tarda), the Eurasian stone-curlew (Burhinus oedicnemus), or the Common quail (Coturnix coturnix) [26,27]. To illustrate, the breeding population of Montagu’s harrier in Portugal fell by 76–79% between 2012 and 2023, with a 44% reduction in its breeding range [28]. In 2012, about 90% of Montagu’s harrier territories were in lowland cereal–steppe farming areas. However, currently, over 30% of the population is found in upland pastures, upland dwarf-shrublands, and upland cereal–steppe farming systems [28]. This suggests that uplands could serve as isolated havens or refuges for various steppe species in the near future.

Nevertheless, recent studies [29,30,31] show that even these uplands, once considered sanctuaries, are becoming increasingly unsuitable. The reasons for the problem? The construction of energy facilities in upland areas—such as wind farms, hydroelectric plants, and rare earth mining—along with the expansion of fast-growing tree plantations, the abandonment of agroecosystems, and rural depopulation [3]. Although environmental impact assessments consider the risks associated with specific projects, like a single energy facility, they frequently fail to evaluate and predict the long-term cumulative ecological effects of multiple projects, which create what could be described as “energy landscapes” [32]. These factors lead to increased mortality among wildlife and reduced habitat suitability. Climate change exacerbates these effects, leading to unprecedented impacts on these upland populations [33].

2. Rethinking Upland Landscapes for People and Nature

In contrast to the lowland areas, where private ownership and commercial development are mainstream, many regions in the uplands are designated as public lands with legal protection [34,35]. This public ownership and regulatory oversight can promote development that focuses more on public interest and environmental sustainability rather than primarily catering to market-driven goals [35,36]. In fact, common land assertive management might address biological conservation issues alongside ensuring sustainable livelihoods and use of resources, culture, governance, and economic development [36]. Risks are associated with the low participation level in the life of the common lands, due to the co-management model and disinterest associated with non-agreeable decisions or to the long waiting for effective answers [37]. This way, raising awareness about the significance of upland areas for preserving grassland species, as well as for broader nature conservation and local communities’ well-being, is crucial, especially in the context of ongoing socio-ecological changes [36]. This should be a top priority, to ensure that these vital ecosystems are protected and valued amid shifting environmental and social dynamics [38].

To encourage sustainable development in upland areas, it is essential to build public support by creating shared visions and promoting collaborative initiatives with the energy and forestry industries. By forming innovative partnerships, it may be possible to find win–win solutions that balance economic interests with environmental conservation and local community needs [39]. A detailed approach to countering environmental and social changes in upland areas could involve creating socio-environmental programs that prioritize the conservation of traditional silvo-agro-pastoral systems [40]. These systems combine forestry, agriculture, and livestock practices that support both the ecosystem and rural communities. These programs aim to improve the quality of life for rural residents by boosting local economies and emphasizing the benefits provided by these ecosystems, such as biodiversity, soil health, ecotourism, and carbon sequestration. Additionally, implementing regulations that limit the expansion of fast-growing tree plantations and control the development of large-scale energy infrastructure can help maintain the natural character of upland landscapes.

By adopting interdisciplinary approaches linking natural and social science perspectives and participatory methods for making decisions from consensus within different views, the possibilities of success also increase [41,42]. Even though trade-offs, especially those between public and private entities, offer the potential for mutually beneficial outcomes, they are often accompanied by socio-political challenges concerning who reaps the benefits and who bears the costs [43]. Nevertheless, the current environmental policy provides several opportunities to address and overcome these challenges [43]. Several methods encompass various effective approaches to capture the essence and significance of lived human experiences from the perspectives of community members. By doing so, they promote inclusive and equitable pathways to biodiversity conservation that respect both the biophysical and sociocultural aspects. These approaches prioritize the everyday lives and decisions of real people, ensuring that their voices are central to conservation efforts [44]. Innovative ideas such as the integrative ‘transformative change’ aim to counter biodiversity loss, climate change, and injustice through fundamental, broad, and lasting alterations in human relationships with nature. However, if this concept is either oversimplified, overcomplicated, or lacks a focus on power dynamics and necessary political action, related initiatives might perpetuate or worsen the current crises [45]. Recommendations to solve these issues involve adopting a systems approach, collaborating with political movements for equitable and just change, connecting societal and personal (‘inner’) transformations, modernizing planning methods, facilitating the transition from diagnoses and planning to action, and enhancing our capacity to adapt to ongoing transformations [45]. In fact, the limited success of many conservation initiatives is often due to their externally designed nature, which relies on a narrow understanding of human motivation and behavior [46]. Incorporating local deliberative processes could address this issue by navigating the complex nature of people’s motivations and thereby strengthening local conservation governance [46].

To address the impact of existing critical infrastructure on wildlife in upland areas, several specific solutions could be implemented. These measures aim to protect birds and other flying species from harm caused by wind turbines, energy towers, and power lines [47]: (a) early detection systems using laser-based tools with GPS and cameras to detect approaching birds and other flying species—this technology can help identify potential risks early and trigger protective measures; (b) automated turbine shutdowns, namely by equipping wind turbines with systems that automatically shut down when birds are detected nearby—this reduces the risk of collisions during critical times; (c) acoustic deterrents that emit specific sounds to deter birds from approaching turbines and energy infrastructure—this method can be effective in keeping birds away from potentially dangerous areas; (d) color contrast for visibility, by painting wind turbine blades and energy towers in contrasting colors to increase their visibility for birds, reducing the chance of collisions; (e) power line markers attached to power lines to make them more visible to birds, minimizing the risk of accidental collisions. Implementing these strategies could help protect wildlife while allowing the continued use of critical infrastructure in upland areas, promoting a more balanced approach to conservation and development.

3. Final Remarks

To protect grassland birds (and particularly steppe species) in the Mediterranean region, conservation efforts need to explore alternatives to traditional focus on lowland agricultural areas. This shift is especially important as upland socio-ecological systems are facing disintegration, driven by factors like land use intensification, traditional agriculture abandonment, and climate change. There are many opportunities for conservation, such as land set-aside programs, incentives and voluntary practices for landowners, better environmental management by energy and utility companies, and supportive policies and regulations [48]. Also, studies should focus on the gaps in information that include overwinter survival and habitat use that will enable the identification of limiting factors, and more effective conservation investment and actions [48].

Collaborative approaches could help integrate local knowledge systems and interests with scientific methods, enhancing assessments, monitoring, and decision-making for both people and nature [49]. Joint research on social–ecological change can facilitate shared assessments and monitoring of biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and climate change impacts at local and regional scales [49].

By recognizing the value of upland ecosystems, countries can work on international strategies towards revitalizing these areas, presenting a unique opportunity to support both nature conservation and the well-being of local communities. Such an approach involves restoring upland habitats, fostering traditional silvo-agro-pastoral practices, and promoting socio-economic stability for the people living in these regions. This strategy could lead to a mutually beneficial outcome: preserving critical bird habitats while providing sustainable livelihoods and strengthening the resilience of upland communities [50].