Goal not yet achieved
Our landscape and species diversity are perpetually evolving. Changes in ecosystems, the growth of settlements, globalisation and global warming are an expression of such change and in part also its cause. Our efforts to support biodiversity are showing first signs of success, especially in forests. The most important goal, however, is to halt the general loss of biodiversity. That goal has not yet been achieved. Especially in the Alps, with their in many respects outstanding natural assets, it is vital that the emerging negative developments will be averted.
The concept of biodiversity embraces the diversity of plant and animal species as well as their genetic variability, and also encompasses the wealth of their habitats. The mutual relationships and dependencies among organisms and the diversity of ecological processes (e.g. biomass decomposition or nutrient cycles) are further components of biodiversity. If we wish to maintain and promote biodiversity all these aspects must be considered. Given that across Switzerland there are well over 40,000 species of flora and fauna in an area of 41,000 square kilometres, it is clearly difficult to make reliable pronouncements on the state of biodiversity.
The programme for Biodiversity Monitoring in Switzerland (BDM) records developments in biodiversity largely on the basis of breeding birds, butterflies, vascular plants, mosses and molluscs. This selection is sufficient to reveal significant trends in biodiversity. Moreover, the BDM data can be supplemented with and linked to data recorded in other programmes. The BDM methodology is intentionally based on entire species groups rather than individual indicator species. The BDM methodology is intentionally based on entire species groups rather than individual indicator species.
Mountain landscapes under pressure
Current figures on construction activity emphatically confirm that Switzerland is undergoing thoroughgoing change. It is well known that industrialisation radically transformed our landscapes until the middle of the last century. However, it comes as more of a surprise that the shift from a subsistence and industrial society to a service economy from about 1970 as well as increasing urbanisation are causing landscape changes of equal dimensions. During the 1980s and 1990s settlements expanded by about 13 per cent, also affecting alpine valleys. Settlements in the Western Central Alps expanded particularly rapidly – by more than 20 per cent over that period.
Settlements are expanding at the expense of agricultural land. Agriculturally used land is under pressure from two sides (see Figure 10). On the one hand farmland represents the largest reserve of land for construction and transport infrastructure in the proximity of existing settlements. On the other hand farmers increasingly abandon land use in unprofitable areas, leading to the swift expansion of forest cover. This has repercussions for biodiversity in the open landscape: remaining farm holdings concentrate on lands in favoured areas which can be managed economically and they utilise these lands up into the high montane zone, strongly aided by machinery and nutrient inputs. Marginal lands on nutrient-poor soils and with a rich flora and fauna, such as dry meadows, are maintained with the aid of direct payments and conservation measures or they fall victim to either abandonment or intensification. Surprisingly this process is still advancing! It is scarcely possible to draw any other conclusion from land use and habitat conservation data. In this setting of land uses driven by economic forces, biodiversity continues to be under severe pressure. Whether the mountain areas of the Alps and the Jura will suffer a similar depletion as the Central Plateau did in the past century will be decided in the coming decades.
Settlement expansion has mixed repercussions
Settlement expansion at the expense of farming – that sounds like loss of nature. Undoubt edly soils sealed with buildings and roads are largely lost to nature. In contrast, however, unsealed soils in settlements are more species-rich than agricultural lands – at least as far as the groups of plant and animal species are concerned that are monitored by the BDM. This demonstrates the importance of settlements as refuges and substitute habitats, especially for plants and animals of the open countryside. If this is to remain so in the future, newly built-up areas must be carefully designed in a way that considers biodiversity.
Settlements can also be important refuges for specialised or rare species, such as pioneer and ruderal plants, for mosses thriving on rocky surfaces, for wild bees, bats or amphibians. At the same time however settlements have become gateways and areas for the dispersal of non-indigenous plants and animals which have undeniably and in some cases problematically taken hold in our landscapes. While assessments of these developments vary, the potential of settlement areas for biodiversity should not be underestimated.
The economic setting is key
Change is an inherent part of life and human culture. Man’s influence on the environment has been evident for thousands of years. Only in recent times have we begun to reflect upon the consequences of our actions on nature and to influence outcomes through targeted actions. This has resulted in new acts and ordinances such as the Swiss Forests Act (Waldgesetz), the Nature and Cultural Heritage Protection Act (Bundesgesetz über den Natur- und Heimatschutz, NHG), federal habitat protection schemes and the Federal Inventory of Landscapes and Natural Monuments of National Importance (Bundesinventar der Landschaften und Naturdenkmäler von nationaler Bedeutung, BLN). Conservation efforts have intensified considerably over the past 15 years. Examples of such efforts include ecologically focused direct payments to farmers, organic farming, the NHG-based contributions system for habitat protection, the Landscape 2020 programme and the forest programme for 2004–2015. As outlined in the chapters on forests and agriculture in this report, positive impacts of these measures have meanwhile become evident. However, economic conditions continue to fundamentally shape the type and intensity of land use to a greater extent than the mostly governmental steering measures. It is these economic conditions which explain the differences in the state of biodiversity in farmland and forests.
Signs of hope in the forests
Swiss forests now contain more near-natural stands than just ten years ago. However, significant areas of forest wilderness continue to be present only in the mountain regions. And it is only in those regions that forest wilderness has expanded. The area of forest reserves has also increased over the past ten years. These reserves are not subject to any form of utilisation or there may be intervention solely for nature conservation purposes. There has also been a major increase in the proportion of forests where natural regeneration is practised, including on the Central Plateau. Moreover, significantly greater quantities of deadwood can now be found in all regions compared to ten years ago (see Figure 12). Deadwood is an important resource for forest wildlife.Swiss forests now contain more near-natural stands than just ten years ago. However, significant areas of forest wilderness continue to be present only in the mountain regions.
These developments have a favourable impact on species diversity in forests, and especially on the diversity of shade-tolerant and deadwood-inhabiting organisms such as fungi, lichens, mosses and molluscs. Following the completion of the second census, the BDM will be able to assess these developments in a few years.
It can already be noted that the Swiss forests are developing in the direction set out in the Swiss Forest Programme for 2004–2015 (WAP-CH) and in other programmes for biodiversity conservation and promotion. It would appear that the first stage on the path towards biologically more diverse forests has been completed successfully.
Mixed results in the farming sector
There has also been some degree of progress in the farming sector in terms of environmental objectives as recently set out by the Swiss Confederation1. However, the overall result is still deficient. At first glance, an area of 121,000 hectares of ecological compensation areas – i.e. 11.4 % of the utilised agricultural area – appears impressive. However, farmers often pick the location of compensation areas solely based on economic considerations; therefore their benefit in terms of biodiversity is somewhat limited. Overall only about a quarter of the notified meadows, Streueflächen (meadows mown for animal bedding), traditional standard fruit tree orchards and hedges are of the quality prescribed by the Ecological Quality Ordinance (Ökoqualitätsverordnung, ÖQV; see Figure below). Overall only about a quarter of the notified ecological compen sation areas are of the quality prescribed by the Ecological Quality Ordinance.
While it is encouraging that the BDM has recorded a slight increase in mean species richness in Swiss meadows since 2001, first analyses show that this increase is mostly due to the continued spread of common plant species of fertilised meadows. There are as yet no indications that the diversity of characteristic, rare, or endangered species on agricultural lands has increased, which would be the actual aim of the Confederation. Quite the opposite is the case: population decreases in many bird species of the cultural landscape as documented by the Swiss Bird Index SBI® point in the opposite direction2. Moreover, there have been serious losses in both quality and area of fens and dry meadows.
Alps are of conservation concern
The Alps are of outstanding importance for biodiversity in Switzerland, especially the high altitude zones. Despite all modern developments the Alps have maintained most of their biodiversity, not least due to their extreme topography. The species richness of meadows and pastures as well as forests in the subalpine and alpine zones clearly stands out from those at lower altitudes. And nowhere else but in the Alps can such expanses of largely natural habitats be found: rocks and boulder fields and also dwarf-shrub communities, peatlands, and forests that are hardly subject to human interventions.
Not only individual ecosystems but whole landscapes in the Alpine regions host greater biodiversity than the Central Plateau, at least as far as vascular plants and butterflies are concerned. Butterfly-rich landscapes occur almost exclusively in the Alps, with some occurring in the Jura (see Figure below). The great diversity of butterflies at higher altitudes is due to grassland quality and not to these insects’ natural altitudinal distribution. Butterflies are strongly dependent on both the food supply offered by flowers and on suitable host plants. Therefore, the relatively species-rich mountain meadows have become much more suitable habitats than the valleys.
Switzerland has a special responsibility for the Alps as a biodiversity hotspot. Alpine plants and animals have a limited distribution more often than species of lower altitudinal zones, and are therefore generally at a greater risk of extinction. While there are very few plant and animal species which exclusively occur in Switzerland, about a quarter of the range of some 150 vascular plant species which are endemic to Central Europe lies on Swiss soil. These endemic species are predominantly mountain plants growing at high and highest altitudes. They occur on both farmed and natural sites.
In this context it gives cause for concern that the Alps are currently subject to major change. This is not only a matter of landscape change, especially in connection with farming, as described above: climate change is also particularly noticeable in the Alps. For the time being one can only speculate as to what climate change will mean for biodiversity in the mountains. However, rising temperatures may soon have repercussions for the special alpine species and for the altitudinal distribution of many species. There are already first signs: the BDM has recorded a mean rise of 13 m in the altitudinal distribution of subalpine and alpine plant species within the span of a mere five years. It remains to be seen whether this development will continue in coming years and what repercussions it will have for the biodiversity of alpine ecosystems. However, rising temperatures may soon have repercussions or the special alpine species and for the altitudinal distribution of many species.
Species richness in Switzerland
When looking at individual ecosystems, one should not lose sight of Switzerland as a whole. The number of wild species of fauna in Switzerland recorded by the BDM has largely remained unchanged between 1997 and 2006. Influxes – including non-indigenous species – and disappearances were roughly at par. However, there have definitely been changes in species numbers in the various Swiss regions. The addition of four breeding bird species in the Eastern Central Alps is particularly noticeable. These include the common rosefinch (Carpodacus erythrinus), tufted duck (Aythya fuligula), black kite (Milvus migrans) and willow warbler (Phylloscopus trochilus) (see BDM indicator “Species Diversity at National and Regional Level (Z3)”).
If one looks at longer time periods however, an unexpected dynamic can be seen. Despite the increasing threats to many animal species, the total number of wild species of fauna has on balance increased since 1900. This is due to the fact that apart from the many endangered species there are also those which have naturally extended their range or have been introduced by human action (see Figure below). The latter include problematic species such as the marsh frog (Pelophylax ridibundus) and the topmouth gudgeon (Pseudorasbora parva).
Of a total of 715 animal species in nine selected groups which have been assessed, 23 species have demonstrably disappeared from Switzerland since 1900. During the same period, 42 species have entered the country. Particularly noticeable increases can be seen in breeding bird species (+14 species) and mammals (+8 species). In accordance with BDM criteria species are taken to be “present” if they have been found living in the wild in Switzerland in at least nine out of 10 consecutive years. It must also be noted that the BDM only monitors a small number of selected groups of animal species. This limitation entails that non-indigenous new arrivals of recent years, such as the Harlequin ladybird (Harmonia axyridis), the garage spider (Zoropsis spinimana) and the river clubtail (Gomphus flavipes) have not yet been considered in the assessment. Experts are currently discussing which of these species may be enriching the native fauna and which ones may represent a threat.
Be this as it may, the observed trend is not solely due to conservation efforts. The increase in species numbers must also not obscure the fact that species and habitat conservation efforts have not yet succeeded in reversing adverse trends. The quality of the remaining peatlands has declined significantly and the area of dry meadows of national importance continues to contract. Moreover, the latter have still not been given comprehensive legal protection. In addition, the data on species richness yield no information on population increases or decreases. The assessment of the threat status of individual groups of organisms continues to give cause for concern: one out of three species in these groups is red-listed in Switzerland.
Species richness in ecosystems and landscapes
Changes in land use, changes in farming, and climate change have been described above as strong forces impacting on biodiversity. With its core indicators on the state of species diversity in habitats and landscapes the BDM is designed to directly document how organisms are affected by such impacts. Between 2001 and 2005 more than 2000 monitoring sites were surveyed. Since 2006 the first round of repeat surveys has been conducted on the same sites. Meanwhile two fifths of the total sample have been surveyed twice. Therefore the BDM is now in a position to provide initial indications of current changes in species richness in Switzerland. The BDM is now in a position to provide initial indications of current changes in species richness in Switzerland.
Using the already available data of the BDM indicator “Species Diversity in Habitats (Z9)” it is evident that mean vascular plant species numbers in Swiss meadows and pastures have increased, especially in the montane zone. This increase is due to many different plant species. However, particularly frequent newly occurring plant species on BDM monitoring sites include dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), rough meadow-grass (Poa trivialis), white clover (Trifolium repens) and common bugle (Ajuga reptans). These are common, nutrient-loving species. It appears that such species have continued to spread over the past five years and now also occur in areas and habitats where they were not previously recorded.
In contrast to the vascular plants, there are as yet no discernable trends for mosses and molluscs.
Initial results from the BDM indicator “Species Diversity in Landscapes (Z7)” show that the number of vascular plant species has also increased in whole landscape sections over the past five years. Species numbers are recorded on sites of a size of one square kilometre. Mean increases for the “Jura” and “Northern Alps” biogeographical regions have been statistically backed up. The BDM has not yet been able to substantiate changes in other regions. Initial assessments show that primarily characteristic nutrient indicator species of fertilised meadows and pastures have become more frequent.
For breeding birds there has been no change of species numbers at the landscape level since monitoring commenced in 2001, neither in Switzerland overall nor in the regions. In terms of population sizes of native bird species regularly breeding in Switzerland, the Swiss Bird Index SBI® compiled by the Sempach ornithological station shows a slight positive trend since the 1990s.
Enrichment or uniformity?
In many parts of the Swiss countryside, with its intensively used soils, high species richness is generally seen as positive, low species richness as negative. However, species richness alone does not say anything about the ecological quality of the species present. It is primarily species with special ecological requirements which are characteristic of a certain habitat and give it its distinctiveness. This aspect must not be ignored. In a globalised world driven increasingly by the dictates of economic efficiency, land-use methods as well as landscape design and management become more and more uniform. If such developments entail that special cultural and site-specific features of habitats disappear, then this is a bitter loss for biodiversity – even if species numbers remain constant or even increase. At the end of this process we would have standard meadows, standard forest margins and standard hedges which would look the same all over Switzerland.However, species richness alone does not say anything about the ecological quality of the species present.
This homogenisation of biocoenoses is now also being recorded by the BDM with its “Diversity of Species Communities (Z12)” indicator, which provides a meaningful monitoring instrument for a central aspect of biodiversity. The index should show whether the composition of flora and fauna at the various BDM monitoring sites is becoming more uniform or more diverse over time. The index is based on surveys of species richness in landscapes and ecosystems and compares the monitoring sites’ species lists. Using data recorded between 2001 and 2007 it has been possible to calculate initial changes. At present a trend towards more uniformity in species composition has only been found for meadows (see Figure below). No clear trends are yet discernable for other land-use categories.
