Ongoing declines have been reported for many of our wader species, and there is an urgent need to both understand the reasons for these declines and assess the effectiveness of any associated conservation action. Intertidal habitats are often well-used by waders outside the breeding season, but some species also make use of other adjacent habitats during this period, including agricultural fields. Understanding the importance of these non-tidal habitats for waders is crucial, especially as such land is rarely included within the protected areas designated for these species. This study investigates the use of non-tidal habitats bordering The Wash – an estuary in eastern England – by Curlew and Bar-tailed Godwit, species which are designated as ‘Near Threatened’ by the IUCN. Information on the winter-feeding distribution of the two species was collated from resightings of individually colour-marked birds, initially caught and ringed at sites around The Wash by the Wash Wader Research Group. The sex of individual birds was determined from measurements taken in the field, and this provided an opportunity to determine if males and females differed in their use of the available habitats. The resightings revealed that Bar-tailed Godwits were only seen on intertidal habitats and none were observed feeding inland. In contrast, colour-marked Curlews were regularly observed feeding on agricultural fields, the colour-marks revealing that the majority of individuals were feeding on both fields and mud flats. Importantly, those Curlews seen feeding in fields were significantly more likely to be male and those on the estuary more likely to be female. Although there is a small degree of overlap, female Curlews have longer bills than males. The difference in habitat use evident in the resighting data probably reflects the fact that the longer-billed females can access more intertidal worms and are more efficient feeders when probing. Shorter-billed individuals may be better suited to feeding in the denser substrate typical of agricultural fields, and they may also struggle to find sufficient prey when using intertidal areas. That inland fields are used by increasing numbers of Curlews, particularly males, through the winter months has implications for existing conservation approaches. The Wash is protected by various national and international designations, but these relate primarily to the intertidal habitats; the inland fields are not protected and are subject to pressure on land for development. Should these inland feeding sites be lost this is likely to affect males (particularly those with the shortest bills) disproportionately, which may have implications for the wider Curlew population. The study’s findings suggest that consideration should be given to extending the area around The Wash receiving protection.

Protected sites for birds are typically designated based on the site’s importance for the species that use it. For example, sites may be selected as Special Protection Areas (under the European Union Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds) if they support more than 1% of a given national or international population of a species or an assemblage of over 20,000 waterbirds or seabirds. However, through the impacts of changing climates, habitat loss and invasive species, the way species use sites may change. As populations increase, abundance at existing sites may go up or new sites may be colonized. Similarly, as populations decrease, abundance at occupied sites may go down, or some sites may be abandoned. Determining how bird populations are spread across protected sites, and how changes in populations may affect this, is essential to making sure that they remain protected in the future. These findings come from a new study by Verónica Méndez and colleagues from the University of East Anglia working with BTO. Using Wetland Bird Survey (WeBS) data the study looked at changes in the population sizes and distributions of 19 waterbird species across Britain during a period of 26 years and their effect on local abundance and site occupancy. Some of these species saw steady increases in population size (up to 1,600%, Avocet), whereas other saw mild declines (-26%, Purple Sandpiper and Shelduck). The results showed that changes in total population size were predominantly reflected in changes in local abundance, rather than through the addition or loss of sites. This is possibly because waterbirds tend to be long-lived birds, with high site fidelity and new suitable sites may not always be available. Thus colonisation of new sites may typically occur when their existing sites approach their maximum capacity. As changes in populations are largely manifested by changes in local abundance – and as sites are often designated for many species – the numbers of sites qualifying for site designation are unlikely to be affected. Understanding the dynamic between population change and change in local abundance will be key to ensuring the efficiency of protected area management and ensuring that populations are adequately protected. Data from the Wetland Bird Survey and its predecessor schemes, which are celebrating 70 years of continuous monitoring of waterbirds this year, have been integral to both the designation of protected sites and monitoring of their condition. Continuation of this monitoring through future generations will ensure that the impacts to waterbird populations of future environmental changes may be understood.