Reconciling biodiversity conservation and agricultural expansion in the sub-arctic environment of Iceland

Intensified agricultural practices have driven biodiversity loss throughout the world and, although many actions aimed at halting and reversing these declines have been developed, their effectiveness depends greatly on the willingness of stakeholders to take part in conservation management. Knowledge of the willingness and capacity of landowners to engage with conservation can therefore be key to designing successful management strategies in agricultural land. In Iceland, agriculture is currently at relatively low intensity but is very likely to expand in the near future. At the same time, Iceland supports internationally important breeding populations of many ground-nesting birds which could be seriously impacted by further expansion of agricultural activities. To understand the views of Icelandic farmers towards bird conservation, given the current potential for agricultural expansion, 62 farms across Iceland were visited and farmers were interviewed, using a structured questionnaire survey in which respondents indicated a series of future actions. Most farmers intend to increase the area of cultivated land in the near future and, despite considering having rich birdlife on their land to be very important, most also report they are unlikely to specifically consider bird conservation in their management, even if financial compensation were available. However, as no agri-environment schemes are currently in place in Iceland, this concept is highly unfamiliar to Icelandic farmers. Nearly all respondents were unwilling, and thought it would be impossible, to delay harvest, but many were willing to consider sparing important patches of land and/or maintaining existing pools within fields (a key habitat feature for breeding waders). Farmers’ views on the importance of having rich birdlife on their land and their willingness to participate in bird conservation provide a potential platform for the co-design of conservation management with landowners before further substantial changes in the extent of agriculture take place in this sub-arctic landscape

Icelandic meadow-breeding waders: status, threats and conservation challenges

Populations of many migratory wader species around the world are in serious decline, largely caused by anthropogenic activities. Throughout the developed world, agricultural expansion and intensification have been identified as among the main drivers of these declines. However, not everywhere have agricultural activities reached levels where negative impacts on breeding waders are apparent. Since settlement, Icelandic farmers have largely been self-sufficient in agricultural productivity, and substantial expansion of agricultural land only began after the 1940s. Agricultural expansion has continued since then and today around 7% of area below 200 m a.s.l. (areas at higher altitudes are typically unsuitable) is used for cultivation. Large areas of natural or semi-natural habitats are therefore still common and widespread in Iceland, and the current mosaic-like landscape created by areas of agricultural land within these habitats may help to provide the resources needed by the very large populations of waders that breed in the country. Wader species have all been protected from hunting and egg-collecting by law since the 20th century. However, lowland landscapes in Iceland are changing quite rapidly, as a result of agricultural expansion, afforestation, shrub encroachment and widespread construction of summer cottages, and all of these developments pose potential threats to these species. Predictions of the potential impact of current and future land use changes on these species is hampered by limited information on population dynamics, and no specific conservation efforts are currently aimed at meadow-breeding waders in Iceland

Interacting effects of agriculture and landscape on breeding wader populations

The capacity of different landscapes to sustain viable populations depends on the spatial and temporal availability of key population-specific resources. Heterogeneous landscapes provide a wider range of resources and often sustain higher levels of biodiversity than homogeneous ones. Across the globe, agricultural expansion has resulted in large-scale homogenisation of landscapes with associated declines in many taxa. However, during the early stages of agricultural development, in terms of area and intensity, increased landscape heterogeneity and changes in local productivity through fertilizer inputs can potentially increase resource availability for some species. Agriculture in Iceland is currently neither highly intensive nor extensive, and primarily occurs as hayfields (>90% of agricultural land) embedded within a mosaic of semi-natural wetlands and heaths. These landscapes support internationally important breeding populations of several wader species but the role of agricultural land in promoting or constraining breeding wader densities is currently unknown. Understanding the relationship between cultivation and wader populations is important as the area of cultivated land is predicted to expand in Iceland in near future, largely through conversion of the remaining semi-natural wetlands. Here we (a) quantify relationships between breeding wader densities in lowland Iceland and the amount of cultivated land and wetland in the surrounding landscape using density estimates from 200 transects in common semi-natural habitats, (b) assess the extent to which cultivated land affects wader densities in these landscapes, and the potential effects of future agricultural expansion at the expense of wetlands on wader populations. Wader densities in semi-natural habitats were consistently greater when surrounding landscapes had more wetland at scales ranging from 500 m to 2500 m, indicating the importance of wetland availability. However, the effects of cultivated land in the surrounding landscape varied with altitude (ranging from 0 to 200 m); in low-lying coastal areas, wader numbers decline with increasing amounts of cultivated land (and the lowest densities (100 m a.s.l., where lowest densities occur in areas without cultivated land). This suggests that additional resources provided by cultivated land may be more important in the less fertile uplands. Further agricultural conversion of wetlands in low-lying areas of Iceland is likely to be detrimental for breeding waders, but such effects may be less apparent at higher altitudes

Agriculture and wader populations in Iceland

The development and expansion of agriculture throughout the world has been a major driver of biodiversity loss in recent decades. Icelandic agriculture is currently not as intense and widespread as in many other western countries, and the effects of agriculture on biodiversity in Iceland and similar farming systems are largely unknown. Iceland supports big populations of several wader species of international importance and the aim of this thesis is to explore the links between agriculture and breeding wader populations. This was done by surveying waders in agricultural landscapes across Iceland and by carrying out a questionnaire survey among farmers. Surveys of wader density in areas of varying agricultural management intensity throughout lowland Iceland revealed high densities of breeding waders in all three management categories. However densities are generally lower on more intensely managed land, suggesting possible negative effects of future expansion of agriculture, given that the majority of farmers questioned for the study reported they were likely to expand cultivated land in the coming years. The volcanic nature of Iceland and varying temperatures have a strong influence on bird distribution and abundance, and interact with the effects of cultivated land on birds. In areas further from volcanic activity, wader density increases when there is more cultivated land around but the reverse occurs in areas with high levels of historic volcanic ash fall. This suggests that the location of cultivated land expansion can partly determine future effects on birdlife. Currently there are few efforts towards protecting these species in Iceland and, when questioned about their views towards birdlife, farmers reported that they do not currently take bird conservation into consideration in their land use management, although they do consider it important to have rich birdlife on their land and were positive towards participating in proposed conservation management. Cooperation with farmers, who own most of the lowlands, will therefore be crucial in maintaining these widespread and internationally important wader breeding populations.Hnignun líffræðilegrar fjölbreytni í heiminum á síðustu áratugum má að stórum hluta rekja til aukinnar útbreiðslu og ákefðar í landbúnaði. Íslenskur landbúnaður hefur enn ekki náð sömu ákefð og útbreiðslu og víða í vestrænum ríkjum og áhrif landbúnaðar á líffræðilega fjölbreytni eru að mestu óþekkt hérlendis, sem og í öðrum sambærilegum landbúnaðarkerfum. Ísland er mikilvægt varpsvæði margra ábyrgðartegunda og hér finnast stórir stofnar vaðfugla. Markmið doktorsverkefnisins er að skýra tengsl landbúnaðar og vaðfuglastofna á norrænum slóðum með mælingum á Íslandi. Þetta var gert bæði með að meta þéttleika vaðfugla á landbúnaðarsvæðum sem og að spyrja bændur um fyrirætlanir þeirra í landnýtingu og viðhorf þeirra til fuglalífs á landi þeirra. Mat á þéttleika vaðfugla á svæðum undir mismiklum áhrifum landbúnaðar sýnir að almennt er hár þéttleiki á öllum svæðunum en þéttleikinn er lægri á svæðum undir meiri landbúnaðaráhrifum. Þetta bendir til að ef flatarmál ræktað lands eykst muni það hafa neikvæð áhrif á þéttleika vaðfugla en meirihluti þeirra bænda sem rætt var við fyrir verkefnið sögðust stefna á að auka ræktað land á komandi árum. Eldvirkni og hitastig hafa umtalsverð áhrif á fuglalíf á Íslandi, en að auki geta áhrif ræktaðs lands á þéttleika vaðfugla ráðist af þessum tveimur þáttum. Á sumum svæðum minnkar þéttleiki með aukinni útbreiðslu ræktað lands en á öðrum svæðum eykst þéttleikinn. Áhrif aukningar ræktaðs lands á vaðfuglastofna ráðast því að hluta til af staðsetningu. Það eru litlar áherslur lagðar á vernd þessara tegunda á Íslandi og þegar bændur voru spurðir út í viðhorf þeirra til fuglalífs á landi þeirra sögðust þeir almennt ekki taka mikið tillit þess við landnýtingu þrátt fyrir að telja mikilvægt að hafa ríkulegt fuglalíf. Aftur á móti voru bændur jákvæðir gagnvart þeim verndraðgerðum sem lagðar voru til en vitað er að samvinna við landeigendur er lykilatriði ef á að viðhalda þeim þáttum líffræðilegrar fjölbreytni sem hafa víðtæka útbreiðslu.Rannís (Icelandic Centre for Research) (grant number 130412- 051) and the University of Iceland Research Fund

European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Executive summary

Perkins GD, Gräsner J-T, Semeraro F, et al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Executive summary. Resuscitation. 2021;161:1-60.Informed by a series of systematic reviews, scoping reviews and evidence updates from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, the 2021 European Resuscitation Council Guidelines present the most up to date evidence-based guidelines for the practice of resuscitation across Europe. The guidelines cover the epidemiology of cardiac arrest; the role that systems play in saving lives, adult basic life support, adult advanced life support, resuscitation in special circumstances, post resuscitation care, first aid, neonatal life support, paediatric life support, ethics and education

Corrigendum to “European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Executive summary” [Resuscitation (2021) 1–60] (Resuscitation (2021) 161 (1–60), (S0300957221000551), (10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.003))

The authors regret that the list of the ERC 2021 Guidelines Collaborators which were included in Appendix A was incomplete. The complete list of collaborators is provided below: [Table presented] The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused

Corrigendum to “European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Executive summary” [Resuscitation (2021) 1–60] (Resuscitation (2021) 161 (1–60), (S0300957221000551), (10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.003))

The authors regret that the list of the ERC 2021 Guidelines Collaborators which were included in Appendix A was incomplete. The complete list of collaborators is provided below: [Table presented] The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. © 2021 The Author

Corrigendum to "European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Executive summary" [Resuscitation (2021) 1-60].

The authors regret that the list of the ERC 2021 Guidelines Collaborators which were included in Appendix A was incomplete. The complete list of collaborators is provided below: [Table presented] The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused