Search

”Uppföljning av kvalitetsförändringar i ängs- och betesmark via NILS” (nedan kallat kvalitetsuppföljningen) är ett uppdrag till SLU från Jordbruksverket att årligen inventera ett urval av ängs- och betesmarker i syfte att kunna följa kvaliteter i ängs- och betesmarker. Urvalet utgörs av objekt som inventerades i ängs- och betesmarksinventeringen i början av 2000-talet och som finns registrerade i Jordbruksverkets TUVA-databas1 . Urvalet av objekt har gjorts inom ramen för NILS (Nationell inventering av landskapet i Sverige) systematiskt utlagda 5x5 km rutor. I norra Sverige finns färre ängs och betesmarker än i södra och urvalet i norra Sverige genomfördes därför inom 15x15 km-rutor centrerade runt NILS 5x5 km-rutor för att öka chanserna till att få med ängs och betesmarksobjekt. Kvalitetsuppföljningen består av en provyteinventering och en transektinventering av fjärilar och humlor. I kvalitetsuppföljningen ingår 696 ängs- och betesmarksobjekt fördelat på 402 NILS-rutor, för fler detaljer över design och datainsamling i kvalitetsuppföljningen, se Eriksson m.fl. (2011). Denna rapport redovisar tillstånd och förändringsskattningar för fjärilar och humlor såväl som för data insamlade på provytorna under perioden 2006-2015.

Worldwide declines in biodiversity have accentuated the need for conservation actions. Unfortunately, the decline is unlikely to be reversed by traditional conservation alone. Instead the practice of ecological restoration has come to play an ever increasing role. It is therefore important to develop methods that are beneficial for biodiversity, cost efficient and applicable on larger scales. By using a before-after control-impact experiment in boreal forest voluntary set-asides, I evaluated the response of forest-dwelling beetles and flat bugs to two cost neutral ecological restoration methods. The two restoration treatments, restoration burning and artificial gap creation were aimed at emulating natural disturbance processes, at the same time as they were expected to improve conditions for biodiversity. I compared the results from the two treatments with that of unmanaged reference stands. I found that beetles showed strongest response to restoration burning by increasing in abundance and species richness directly, as well as one year after restoration. In addition the composition of species communities differed significantly between beetles collected in burned stands compared to those collected in gap-cut and reference stands immediately after restoration. One year after restoration the composition of species communities differed significantly between all three treatment groups. Flat bugs also responded strongest to restoration burning by displaying higher abundance and species richness in burned stands compared to gap-cut- and reference stands. I also found that dead wood substrate type mattered for beetles. Tree species and tree posture, i.e. if the trees were standing up or lying down, had the strongest effect on the composition of species communities emerging from the dead wood. In addition, tree species was of importance for abundance and species richness in gap-cut stands, where spruce trees generally had higher counts that birch- and pine trees. As the voluntary set-asides already were established and the restoration costs were fully covered by revenues from the extracted timber, the restoration methods applied in this study may prove particularly useful. Not only because of the positive effects on forest biodiversity, but also due to their high level of applicability and cost effectiveness