19th Meeting of the international haMster Workgroup...Luc Crevecoeur • Province of Limburg Roger de Muylder • Commune de Bertem Veronique Verbist • Agentschap voor Natuur en

Collective lessons from research and the field: improving the models for successful conservation

of the European hamster (Cricetus cricetus).

19th Meeting of the international

haMster WorkgroupNovember 20th-22nd 2012, Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium

Pantone 364CMYK 73 / 9 / 94 / 39

Pantone 390CMYK 24 / 0 / 98 / 8

2012 ConferenCe proCeedings

1

19th Meeting of the InternatIonal Hamster Workgroup Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

Conference Organisers

Alison Boyes • RISE Foundation • +32(0)495531318Caroline Mahr • European Landowners’ Organization (ELO) • +32(0)484499976

With thanks to these individuals ...

Pierre Crahay • European Landowners’ Organization (ELO)Robert de Graeff • European Landowners’ Organization (ELO)Luc Crevecoeur • Province of LimburgRoger de Muylder • Commune de BertemVeronique Verbist • Agentschap voor Natuur en Bos Bert Vanholen • Agentschap voor Natuur en Bos Stefanie Monecke • INCI, CNRS Université de StrasbourgMaurice la Haye • Wageningen University and Research Centre

... for their support and assistance in putting together this conference.

RISE would also like to thank the Province of Limburg for the generous funding, the Agentschap voor Natuur en Bos for lending the conference facilities and the Commune de Bertem for its hospitality during the excursion.

With special thanks to Gerard Muskens, Ulrich Weinhold and Mike Boyes for providing generously the photos which have been used to put together this booklet.

www.risefoundation.eu www.europeanlandowners.org

www.limburg.be www.natuurenbos.be

Pantone 364CMYK 73 / 9 / 94 / 39

Pantone 390CMYK 24 / 0 / 98 / 8

2


Foreward by RISE Chairman and former EU Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Develpment.

“RISE is an organisation whose raison d’etre is to promote a prosperous, vibrant and sustainable countryside in Europe. The conservation of its biodiversity and natural heritage is at the heart of such a mission. This is particularly important in this time of extreme pressure on our existing and new agricultural land to produce food, fiber and energy for a growing world population without leading to a corresponding degradation of the range of biodiversity which is present in agricultural landscapes or to the further conversion and degradation of natural grasslands, wetlands and forest which are home to so many of our endangered, emblematic species. RISE has repeatedly referred to this as the great food and environmental security challenge of the 21st century and has concentrated on projects which aim to develop innovative solutions to this great challenge. It is our belief that future models for conservation need to be more inclusive, collaborative and focused on the needs of various stakeholders. We are proud to be the initiators of the first large-scale transnational project for hamster conservation which aims to combine productive farming with biodiversity conservation objectives -launched this year. We are equally proud to host this interdisciplinary work-group working in the spirit of collective experimentation and shared learning to reverse the decline in European hamster populations. Nature conservation and particularly nature conservation on farmland cannot be achieved by the actions of a few working in isolation, neither by the sole actions of a few big institutions. Rather, it will require the concerted and enduring action of many participants upstream and downstream in the land management chains. This workgroup is a good example of such cooperation. I hope it will bring fruitful discussions as in previous editions. This year’s edition will feature the latest scientific research on topics including genetics, population dynamics, physi-ology and in-situ management as well as a special focus on European frameworks for protecting farmland biodiver-sity in partnership with the European Commission. An afternoon with local volunteers active in the conservation of wild hamster populations in Vlaams-Brabant and Limburg, Belgium will feature as well as a traditional rural dinner in a local restaurant and an excursion to a local site to witness the success of local agri-environment schemes in maintaining local populations. We hope that you will benefit from this three-day meeting of experts and enthusiasts joining together to advance the cause of European hamster conservation for the future.”

Franz Fischler, 2012.

3


Preface by Stefan Leiner, Head of Nature Unit, DG Environment, European Commission.

“In 2011, the European Commission revised its long-term strategy for biodiversity setting out the holistic and inte-grated path to achieve the headline target adopted in 2010 by EU Heads of States of “Halting the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020, and restoring them in so far as feasible, while stepping up the EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss.” The strategy included a specific target relating to the full imple-mentation of the EU Birds and Habitats Directive and aimed at achieving a substantial measurable improvement in the conservation status of the habitats and species covered by those Directives. The European Hamster is a strictly protected species listed in Annex IV of the EU Habitats Directive and had at the last assessment, covering the period up to 2006, a very unfavourable conservation status. This is mainly due to the fact that its habitat has been degraded over the years in several parts of the EU. It is therefore important that all possible efforts are done to substantially im-prove the status of this emblematic species so that it will achieve a favourable conservation status in the foreseeable future. Conserving and restoring the European Hamster will also bring benefits to many other species protected by the Birds and Habitats Directive closely linked to the management of agricultural land. This is in line with another tar-get of the EU biodiversity Strategy that relates to farmland biodiversity. The aim is to maximise areas under agricul-ture across grasslands, arable land and permanent crops that are covered by biodiversity-related measures under the EU Common Agricultural Policy. Central to success will be enhanced cooperation between farmers, administrations, scientists and NGOs from both the environmental and the agricultural field. A sound scientific basis and knowledge is another key for determining the right political and financial decisions that will be needed to create a framework enabling a better status of this species. The level in which we manage to improve the conservation status of the Eu-ropean Hamster will be a good indicator of how we are meeting our nature and biodiversity commitments in the EU.

The Commission therefore very much welcomes the work done by collaborative workgroups such as the Interna-tional Hamster Workgroup and thanks all those involved who demonstrate the passion and commitment that is necessary to mobilize ideas and resources to sustain our future environment. I wish you a successful and fruitful meeting in 2012.”

Stefan Leiner, 2012.

4


Programme

Monday November 19th

17.00 - 22.00 ARRIVALS AT HERKENRODE

18.30 -19.30 DINNER AT HERKENRODE FOR OVERNIGHT GUESTS

5


Tuesday November 20th

08.30 - 10.00 ARRIVALS AND REGISTRATION IN HERKENRODE ABBEY, CONFERENCE CENTRE

10.00 - 10.30 CONFERENCE OPENING AND WELCOMING COFFEE■ Welcome: Frank SMEETS, Deputy for Nature at the Province of Limburg■ Welcome: Bert VANHOLEN, Director of the Flemish Agency for Nature and Forests – Limburg,

10.30 - 12.00 INFORMATION SESSION WITH EU COMMISSION – current and future EU policy tools for biodiversity protection.

Chair: Thierry DE l’ESCAILLE (Belgium), Secretary-General, European Landowners’ Organisation Opening lecture: Stefan LEINER, Head of Nature Unit, DG ENVIRONEMENT, European Commission Speech title « The tools and strategies of the European Commission to safeguard Europe’s declining

farmland biodiversity. »■ Question and answer session with the European Commission.

12.00 - 12.30 PRESENTATION IHWG – POLICY AND MANAGEMENT■ GERARD MUSKENS (THE NETHERLANDS), “Ironing out the kinks in farm policy

management – the importance of good farmer relations”.

12.30 - 13.30 LUNCH BREAK - walking lunch + poster viewings.

13.30 - 15.30 PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF IHWG – physiology and behaviour. Chair: Maurice LA HAYE (THE NETHERLANDS)

■ Stefanie MONECKE (France), Activity and temperature recordings reflect circannial variations in the physiology of European hamsters.

■ Carina SUITZ (Austria). Body fat content and faecal cortisol secretion patterns in Common hamsters.

■ Elke, SCHEIBLER (Germany), Temperature and Moon affect Activity of Desert Hamsters: a Field Study in Alashan Desert.

■ Maurice LA HAYE (THE NETHERLANDS), What can we learn from weighing hamsters?■ Stefanie MONECKE (France), Distinct photoperiodic reaction and circannual

synchronisation in juvenile European hamsters.

15.30 - 16.00 COFFEE BREAK

16.00-17.00 PRESENTATION OF TRANSNATIONAL LIFE+ PROPOSAL ■ A TRANSNATIONAL EFFORT TO PROTECT EUROPEAN HAMSTERS.■ Speakers: Alison BOYES (Belgium), RISE Foundation and Veronique VERBIST (Belgium),

Flemish Agency for Nature and Forests Followed by question and answers on the project.

17.00 -18.00 PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF IHWG – Conservation■ Clotilde HERBILLON (France), The new French action plan for the grand hamster d’Alsace.■ Christophe MANSSENS (Belgium), Introducing breeding and reintroduction in-situ?

18.30 - 19.30 WALKING DINNER

19.30-21.30 MEETING AND PRESENTATIONS WITH LOCAL VOLUNTEERS – the state of play of conservation strategies in Belgium.

Chair: Luc CREVECOEUR (Belgium)■ Discussions with local volunteers and nature organisations to discuss local conservation issues

featuring informal presentations from: Luc CREVECOEUR (Belgium) - hamsters in Belgium, Veronique VERBIST (Belgium) - LIFE+ Flanders, David Billy HERMAN (Belgium) – Natuurpunt and the hamster in Flanders, Pierre CRAHAY (Belgium) - predation, Maurice LA HAYE (the Netherlands) - genetics.

6


Wednesday November 21st

09.15 - 11.00 PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF IHWG – Genetics and Population dynamics Chair: ULRICH WEINHOLD (GERMANY)

■ Tobias REINERS (Germany), Saving the genetic heritage of Common hamsters Cricetus cricetus in Western Europe,

■ Ivana PETROVÁ (Czech Republic), Density-dependent home range size in the common hamster

■ Oskar SCHRODER and Rainer HUTTERER (Germany) Differences in the coat colouration of the common hamster distinguish the westernmost populations

■ Group discussion: population updates from different regions.

10.30 - 11.00 COFFEE BREAK

11.00 - 12.30 PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF IHWG – Monitoring and Conservation strategy Chair: Stefanie Monecke (FRANCE)

■ Maurice LA HAYE (The Netherlands), A survival analysis of European hamsters: the devil is in the details!

■ Peer CYRIACKS (Germany), Selling the drama - The importance of public relations in (hamster) conservation.

■ Céline BOULADE (France), Operation of French breeding centres of the common hamster.

12.30 - 13.45 LUNCH BREAK – walking lunch + posters.

14.00 - 15.45 VISIT OF HERKENRODE MUSEUM

16.00 - 17.00 DISCUSSION ON THE IUCN STATUS OF CRICETUS CRICETUS Chair: Peer CYRIACKS (Germany)

■ Leading presentation, “Least concern or vulnerable? The IUCN-Status of Cricetus cricetus” from Ulrich WEINHOLD (Germany).

■ Discussion and debate about next steps for the IUCN report.■ GROUP DEBATE: Better linking research outputs with conservation objectives and strategy

(brainstorm activity)

17.00-18.30 GROUP DISCUSSION SESSION – solving problems Chair: Alison BOYES (Belgium)

■ Stakeholder perception of wild hamsters – an image problem? ■ Common monitoring protocol – finalising the basic minimum criteria■ Gathering data on predation and controlling reintroductions■ Connectivity and green infrastructures – what hope for reconnecting fragmented populations?

19.00 DEPARTURE FOR DINNER BY BUS OR OWN TRANSPORT

19.30 - 22.00 TRADITIONAL BELGIAN DINNER IN A RURAL RESTAURANT, “DOMEIN BOVY”

7


Thursday November 22nd

9.00 - 10.00 DISCUSSION OF FUTURE OUTPUTS FOR THE IHWG AND POSSIBLE COLLABORATIVE PROJECTS

■ Possible collaborative research projects: FP7?

10.15 DEPARTURE FOR THE EXCURSION BY BUS OR OWN TRANSPORT

11.15 ARRIVAL IN BERTEM AND WELCOME FROM THE CITY COUNCILLOR, ROGER DE MUYLDER ■ Welcoming drink and discussion with the City Councillor, Roger de Muylder.

12.00 - 13.30 GUIDED VISIT OF LOCAL AGRI-ENVIRONMENT MEASURES IN SITU (Bertem)

13.30 - 14.30 LUNCH IN LEUVEN

14.30 - 15.30 END OF MEETING, TRANSFER TO LEUVEN BY BUS

8


19th Meeting of the International Hamster Workgroup – key outcomes

What is the International Hamster Workgroup?

The International Hamster Workgroup was founded in 1994 when serious declines in European hamster populations became evident in Western Europe. From this first meeting the group has grown continuously and today unites international scientists from various fields with members of associations and representatives from public authorities, the political arena, and the agricultural sector.

Due to the complex reasons behind the decline in hamster populations, the Workgroup’s scientists focus on the European hamster’s biology in a variety of disciplines ranging from physiology to ecology, from fundamental to applied research, and from the molecular to the population level. In addition, there are also updates on current conservation programmes from those working in government agencies and organisations who, with the help of volunteers, farmers and politicians engage in the improvement of the habitat, reintroduction projects, and commu-nication activities. The sharing of knowledge and experience within the group strengthens the collective conserva-tion efforts. In fact, thanks to this interdisciplinary cooperation, the stabilization of populations has been achieved in a couple of regions. However, this is not sufficient and the long-term goal of the Workgroup is the restoration of stable hamster populations across its distribution range in Europe.

What did the Workgroup achieve at the 19th meeting?

Deputy for Nature at the Province of Limburg, Frank Smeets, said it all in his opening speech when he reminded those present that the 60 participants gathered in the Herkenrode Abbey Conference Centre outnumbered the hamsters currently surviving in Flanders’ fields. This was a sad but important reminder of the reason for gathering

together in Belgium. Stefan Leiner, Head of Nature unit from DG Environment at the European Commission, then gave the keynote speech on “the tools and strategies to safeguard the EU’s declining biodiversity”, explaining to the audience the achievements of the EU regulatory framework (such as the Birds and Habitats Directives, Natura 2000 network) for the preservation of species and habitats. On the pos-itive side, he noted that the large-scale destruction of high value nature areas had halted, cooperation between countries and stakeholders had increased, several species had been brought back from the brink of extinction and the funding for nature had significantly increased. How-ever, he stressed that many more efforts were still need-ed given that only 17% of all species currently had a fa-vourable conservation status, and this was as low as 7% for those living in agricultural grassland areas. Mr Leiner highlighted the success of the LIFE+ programme in pro-tecting habitats and species, stating that 320,000 hectares of land had been restored since the beginning of the pro-gramme. He declared the hamster a priority for the Com-mission and a good test case for the successful integra-tion of biodiversity into agricultural policy and practice.

Following the keynote address, the format of the con-ference switched to presentations from the workgroup members, with time for questions and discussions after

9


the individual presentations. First, there was a presentation about contradictions in the control mechanisms be-tween the hamster-friendly agri-environment schemes and the cross compliance regime, creating a serious disin-centive for farmers to continue with their voluntary participation in AE schemes, an issue which RISE could follow up with DG AGRI subsequently.Other key issues on the agenda included updates from the research side regarding important discoveries about the hamsters’ physiology which could be used to improve breeding and monitoring programmes in the field. There were also updates from the various on-going and planned conservation projects, including the LIFE + programme but also the new French National Action Plan as well as presentations mapping the current genetic diversity of remaining populations. The key contents of these presentations are outlined in the abstracts included in this proceedings document. For more information please contact the authors whose email addresses are included on the final page.

10


Working sessions

IUCN red list status:

A working session was organised by Dr Ulrich Weinhold in order to apply for an update of the IUCN Conservation status of the European hamster from that of “least concern” to “vulnerable” or even “endangered”. The group together amended the existing status in a file that would subsequently be sent for review by the IUCN. Notable amendments included more precise explanations on the causes of population decline (modern agriculture and pesticides were key issues) as well as more precise descriptions of population declines taking into account new population data from Central and Eastern Europe. The application was sent off in February 2012 and is currently being reviewed by the IUCN. This was a very positive concrete output of the 2012 IHWG since an updating of the status would mean an acknowledgement that the species faced a high chance of extinction in the wild which would support further conservation efforts greatly. You can find the revised assessment document sent to the IUCN on pages 56-60..

Future research

Possible collaborative research projects for the future was an important subject linking the working group members.A discussion of possible collaborative research projects for the future identified four research priorities: 1. In breeding stations it was remarked, that not all hamsters and sometimes even the majority of hamsters do

not hibernate. The reasons for that are unknown and might be complex. It is assumed that hibernation is beneficial for the body conditions for the next year’s reproductive phase, thus it should be investigated what might be the reasons for the lack in hibernation.

From other species it is known that the quantity and quality of nutrition influences timing and pattern of the hibernation phase. The effect of food restriction before or during the hibernation phase on the hibernation pattern and the subsequent body conditions should be tested in European hamsters. Due to extremely effective modern harvest, European hamsters most likely suffer food restriction in their natural habitat. The results of this project of Carina Siutz (University of Vienna) might help to improve the maintenance of Euro-pean hamsters in the breeding colonies and protection measures.

2. There are disquieting hints from some regions (Saxony-Anhalt, Germany; probably also in The Netherlands) that reproduction starts very late. In such late breeding population early litters, which might reach puberty in the year of birth and multiply the reproductive output of the population, are missing.

The recently developed temperature based method (see abstract Stefanie Monecke) allows following the seasonal reproductive rhythm in free-ranging European hamsters very accurately without disturbing the animals. With this method the timing of reproduction of different populations should be compared regard-ing management of their habitat, latitude, longitude and climate conditions. Cooperation partners of this project are so far Stefanie Monecke, University of Strasbourg (responsible) the Dutch group (Maurice La Haye) and the Czech group (Emil Tkadlec). The results of this work might give new insights of the reasons of hamster decline.

3. There is another reason to worry: In old literature life spans of 5-10 years were reported from free living and captive European hamsters. Nowadays, 2 years are considered as mean and 4 years as maximal life span. Other species of a similar size as hedgehogs or guinea pigs live 7-10 years. Moreover, hibernators should live longer than non-hibernators. Why not the European hamster? How long is the current life span of European hamsters and does it has decreased during the past?

As a start, this interdisciplinary project aims to develop new methods for age determination in living and dead animals, which are more precise and better feasible than using the abrasion of molars. When methods are established the age structure of recent populations should be compared with museum specimen. Co-operation partners are so far Stefanie Monecke (University of Strasbourg) Carina Siutz (University of Vienna),

11


Lutz Maul & Clara Stefen (Senckenberg Institute for Quaternary Palaeontology) and Alex Scheuerlein (Max Planck Institute for demographic research, Rostock, Germany). A decreased lifespan of European hamster might be a serious reason for the population decline since that would mean that hamsters have most likely participated in more breeding periods.

4. The present aim of hamster protection is to ensure survival in the current distribution area. However, the historic distribution area was once much larger and extended to Great Britain and Spain.

Understanding the historic traits of expansion and contraction of the European hamster distribution area is the aim of Lutz Maul (see above) and Rainer Hutterer (Zoological Research Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn, Germany). These insights might then serve to develop new concepts in hamster protection.

All of the proposed projects are dependent on the availability of funding. If you are interested in participating in any of the projects please don’t hesitate to contact the responsible person. To strengthen the relation between applied hamster protection and fundamental research and to use synergies between researchers such research workshops are very welcome in future meetings of the international hamster workgroup.

ExcursionFor the final activity of the 2012 IHWG, a walk and talk excursion was organised to visit in-situ agri-environment measures implemented by local farmers for the hamster in and around Bertem, in Vlaams-Brabant. The excursion was led by VLM (a Flemish Agency responsible for AE contracts with farmers) and ANB (Flemish Agency for Nature and Forests), who have been involved with the design of the measures, contracting with the farmers, and moni-toring results. During the excursion it was explained that farmers were compensated for planting rotations which included unharvested cereal strips through the winter to ensure food and cover for the hamsters after harvest. Restrictions applied also to ploughing and crop protection products.

The farmers seemed satisfied with the measures, explaining that the guaranteed income over five years was a useful security against bad weather events (even though the fixed prices did not vary according to market prices). The measures also had incidental benefits in the fight against erosion, as roots from cover crops helped to hold soil

12


particles in place. From 2013 onwards, some eight farmers would be participating in hamster protection in this area, covering an area of 30-40 hectares. In the medium-term this should help to stabilise the very small local population prior to expanding efforts over time. Core areas of 300 hectares with some management actions applied within them is thought to be the minimum necessary area in order to achieve viable population sizes (as discussed and agreed by the participants during this year’s meeting).

The participants were able to observe yellowhammers and skylarks during the excursion together with several birds of prey species. The walk and talk with the farmers in such well-managed landscapes took place under a blazing November sun, putting everybody in a warm mood before heading back to their respective locations. The 2012 Conference was thus drawn to a close having achieved several concrete outputs and numerous fruitful ex-changes of knowledge and experience. The conservation challenge remains urgent and complex but continual im-provements in knowledge and understanding are an important mechanism to make positive changes for the future. On behalf of the RISE Foundation we would like to thank all participants and sponsors for their ongoing support.

13


Conference Abstracts

14

PHYSIOLOGY AND BEHAVIOUR Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

TITLE:

Body fat content and faecal cortisol concentra-tions in free-ranging juvenile Common hamsters Author(s): Carina Siutz and Eva Millesi, Department of Behavioural Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, 1090 Vienna, Austria, e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: Free-ranging animals are often confronted with environmental challenges, activating the hypothalam-ic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. In hibernating small mammals a limited active season often causes temporal and energetic constraints. Female Common hamsters can produce up to three litters per season, therefore birth dates range from May to September resulting in different time spans available for early- and late-born offspring to grow and prepare for hibernation. These differences might lead to different tactics in the allocation of energy reserves (body fat and/or food stores) for the winter and could affect adrenal activity. Aims of the study were to analyse body fat proportions and cortisol excretion patterns in juvenile Common hamsters (Cricetus cricetus) during their first weeks after natal emergence and shortly before winter. We investigated free-ranging Common hamsters in an urban area in Vienna. Glucocorticoid levels in live-trapped animals were measured non-invasively by analysing faecal cortisol metabolites (FCM). The proportion of body fat was calculated by integrating the morphometric parameters body mass, head, tibia, and foot length measured at each capture. We analysed FCM levels and the proportion of body fat in early- and late-born juveniles at natal emergence, after weaning, and shortly before onset of hibernation. Proportions of body fat were similar in both groups at natal emergence and increased while they were still at the na-tal burrow. Early-borns accumulated body fat shortly before onset of hibernation, whereas in late-borns proportions remained quite stable. Furthermore, FCM levels were positively correlated with body fat content in juvenile males and negatively in females. These results indicate that early- and late-born juvenile hamsters use different tactics to survive over winter. Early-borns appear to allocate body fat reserves, while late-borns have to rely on food caches. Further, cortisol secretion seemed to promote body fat accumulation in juvenile males but not in females.

TITLE:

Activity and temperature recordings reflect circannial variations in the physiology of European hamsters, Author(s): Stefanie Monecke, Paul Pévet INCI, Département Neurobiology of Rhythms, CNRS-UPR 3212, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.

Abstract: The European hamster lives in a strongly seasonal environment, to which the animal is adapted by circan-nually driven changes in its physiology. In most lab-studies on circannual rhythms the body weight or the reproduc-tive state of an animal is followed. In field conditions, however, it is not possible to gain these data, without disturb-ing the animals frequently by captures. Here we show that in the European hamster also the seasonal changes in the daily activity pattern and in body temperature are under the control of the circannual clock. These parameters would be much easier to follow in natural conditions for example by implantable sensors for temperature or activity as ibuttons or accelerometers. Here we show that the recording of the activity and temperature pattern reflects precisely at least 4 characteristic time points in the course of a circannual cycle: onset and offset of hibernation and onset and offset of a 2 months phase of sensitivity to short photoperiod, which in natural conditions occur around the summer solstice. During this phase of sensitivity the activity rhythm is well defined and the mean daily body temperature is elevated. At the end of this phase the circannual clock is reset and from this day on, the mean daily body temperature drops and the activity rhythm weakens. 4 weeks later gonadal regression becomes visible. Thus, the recording of the activity and temperature rhythm allows also drawing conclusions about the reproductive state. In summary, the recording of the activity pattern and body temperature is a non-invasive and very precise method to observe the hands of the circannual clock in the European hamster. With this method even seasonal rhythms in wild animals can be followed without disturbing them by capture and recapture.

15


TITLE:

Temperature and Moon affect Activity of Desert Hamsters: a Field Study in Alashan Desert

Author(s): Elke Scheibler, Franziska Wollnik

University Stuttgart, Biological Institute, Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract: Time management of wild living hamsters was investigated in their natural semidesert habitat. Duration of activity outside the burrows, including activity onset and offset, length of foraging walks and inside stays during the night were analyzed, putting special focus on ambient temperature and lunar effects represented by moon phase and size of lunar disc. Animal data were determined using the radio frequency identification technique (RFID). Animals were caught in the field and marked with passive transponders, burrows were equipped with integrated microchip-readers and photo-sensors for detection of movements in and out of the burrow. The studies were per-formed in 2009, 2010 and 2012. While phases of the moon had no affect, the size of lunar disc had an influence on the beginning of activity (Spearman, r=-0.220; p=0.01), duration of nocturnal activity (Spearman, r=0.237; p=0.05) and duration of foraging walks (Spearman, r=0,236; p=0.04). End of activity and duration of nocturnal inside stays were unaffected by the moon. Possible effects of ambient temperature were analyzed in a factorial analysis, using the following parameters: mean, maximum and minimum temperature during the whole day, during the activity period, and during the first and last three hours of activity period. Separate analyses were performed for the current day and each of the previous three days. Activity onset was influenced by mean temperature of the current day and by mean temperature during the activity period of the night before (factorial analysis, KMO=0.775, p<0.001). Min-imum temperature of the current night had an effect on the end of activity (Pearson, r=-0.592, p=0.043). Duration of activity was affected by several temperature parameters of the current day and the previous day (Spearman cor-relation), most importantly by mean temperature of the current day and minimum as well as mean temperature of the previous day (KMO=0.775, p<0.001). Length of foraging walks and inside stays were unaffected by temperature.

In conclusion, we found that with increasing moon hamsters become active earlier, therefore the activity duration increases and the foraging walks take longer. Detailed analysis of temperature data also showed that shorter activity correlates significantly with increasing temperatures.

16


TITLE:

Distinct photoperiodic reaction and circannual synchronisation in juvenile European hamsters

Author(s): Stefanie Monecke1,2, Birgit Amann1, Karin Lemuth1, Franziska Wollnik1

1 Biological Institute, Department of Animal Physiology, University of Stuttgart, 70550 Stuttgart, Germany2 Institut des Neurosciences Cellulaires et Intégratives (INCI), Neurobiologie des Rythmes, CNRS UPR-3212, Université de Strasbourg, 5 rue Blaise Pascal, 67084

Correspondent author: Stefanie Monecke, Institut des Neurosciences Cellulaires et Intégratives (INCI), Neurobiologie des Rythmes, CNRS UPR-3212, Université de Strasbourg, 5 rue Blaise Pascal, 67084 Strasbourg, France; e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: Female European hamsters give birth to several litters in a year. Juveniles thus have to detect quickly at which season they are born and whether or not they should develop gonads before their first hibernation period. Since it is a circannual species also their circannual clocks needs to be synchronized. In adults, the characteristic changes in the activity pattern around the summer solstice are part of the circannual resetting mechanism, while changes in melatonin are of minor importance. In pups however, melatonin might be helpful in the correct timing of puberty. We recorded in 5 litters born in natural photoperiods at different seasons activity and urinary excretion of aMT6s. In pups the timing of puberty and the aMT6s excretion were dependent on the season of birth though the aMT6s levels were considerably higher than in adults. These data support the hypothesis that melatonin transduces the photoperiodic message for the timing and duration of the first reproductive phase. In contrast, the ontogeny of the activity pattern was age-dependent. In all animals a change from a “juvenile” activity pattern to the appropriate activity pattern of the season was observed around postnatal day 78. This juvenile pattern is identical to the one in adults when their circannual clock is reset and it is likely that it serves the same purpose. The data suggest that the timing of seasonal events in the year of birth and the synchronisation of the circannual clock for the timing of future events are 2 distinct processes: the former a pure photoperiodic response and the latter a true circannual synchronisation.

17


TITLE:

What can we learn from weighing hamsters?

Author(s): Maurice La Haye1,2,*, Gerard Müskens2, Ruud van Kats2, Loek Kuiters2, Hans Peter Koelewijn2.1 Radboud University Nijmegen / Bargerveen Society, Department of Animal Ecology and Ecophysiology, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 2 Wageningen UR, ALTERRA, PO Box 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands, * Currently working at the Dutch Mammal Society, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Abstract: It is well-known that it is quite difficult to get an indication of the age of a (wild) hamster, although every hamster-researcher will confirm that older hamsters are heavier than younger ones. Weighing hamsters therefore seems unnecessary and a waiste of limited research-time. However, comparing weights of hamsters between differ-ent habitats, settings and populations can reveal some unexpected results. In this presentation I will show some new findings of differences in hamster weights between a wild population in Vienna, the Netherlands and the famous laboratory-setting of Vohralik from 1975.

for the final published article please refer to pages 33-39 “What can We learn from Weighing hamsters?”

18

GENETICS AND POPULATION DYNAMICS Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

TITLE:

Saving the genetic heritage of Common hamsters Cricetus cricetus in Western Europe

Author(s): T.E. REINERS1, M.J.J. LA HAYE2, K. NEUMANN3, C. NOWAK1,4, 1Conservation Genetics Group, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Clamecystraße 12, D-63571 Gelnhausen; email: [email protected], 2Bargerveen Society / Department of Animal Ecology and Ecophysiology, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Radboud University Nijmegen, Toernooiveld 1, 6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands, e-mail: [email protected], 3Institute of Pathology/Molecular Diagnostics Section, Medical Centre Dessau-Rosslau, Auenweg 38, 06847 Dessau, Germany, email: [email protected], 4Biodiversity and Climate Re-search Centre (BiK-F), Senckenberganlage 25, D-60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany, email: [email protected]

Abstract: The Common hamster Cricetus cricetus is among the most critically endangered mammal species in West-ern Europe. Since the 1970ties they suffer from a dramatic and still ongoing decline at its western range. Even though western geographic lineages are considered to be a result of a relatively recent colonization, these lineages comprise distinctive genetic profiles.

In France, Belgium, Netherlands, and Germany current conservation programmes try to counteract the population decline by releasing animals out of breeding units into properly managed farm land sites. Although caged breeding and reintroduction actions are guided by genetic aspects to some extent, many questions concerning the genetic aspects of hamster reintroductions in some countries remain open. Here we present first results of the newly es-tablished reference centre for Common hamster genetics. This centre aims to clarify colonisation history, reveal the extent of historic levels of genetic diversity in the western distribution range, and to optimise and control breeding strategies with the aim to maintain high levels of genetic variation and minimize the risk of both inbreeding and outbreeding depression. These informations are considered to be crucial for guiding conservation efforts for the preservation of the genetic heritage of the common hamster at its western range margin.

19

GENETICS AND POPULATION DYNAMICS Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

TITLE:

Differences in the coat colouration of the common hamster distinguish the westernmost populations

Author(s): Oskar Schröder & Rainer Hutterer

Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany

The common hamster (Cricetus cricetus L.) is a rodent of the Eurasian steppes and agricultural areas that is threat-ened by habitat loss. Remaining populations in Western and Central Europe are small, isolated, and genetically im-poverished. Most affected by this decline is the western population from Belgium, The Netherlands, and North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, for which Nehring proposed the name canescens in 1899. It is distinguished from its eastern cousins by large white areas on throat, chest and forelegs. However, these traits are occasionally found in other populations, casting doubt on its subspecies status. To evaluate this variation in fur patterns we examined 630 skins collected between 1878 and 2006 from most of the common hamster’s European range. The traits that showed the most significant differences between populations are the frequencies of occurrence of the white chest spot and the cream-coloured thigh spots, as well as the relative lengths of the white chin streak and cuffs on the forelegs. Though individual variation for these traits is high, the frequencies and lengths are highest in “canescens”, where a white chest spot occurs in 67-100% of the specimens, and gradually decrease towards the east (0-8% in Central and Eastern European populations). Hamsters from the Upper Rhine area also display relatively high frequencies of these characters (7-44%) and are thus intermediate between Western and Central European hamsters. This suggests that after the last glacial maximum the western range was recolonised by Central European animals, probably from the

Thuringian basin, that crossed the Central German Uplands and established a popu-lation in the Upper Rhine Plains. A founder effect resulting from this range expansion might be responsible for the accumulation of the white fur traits in the western pop-ulations. Further migrations followed the Rhine valley upstream, crossing the Rhen-ish Massif, and establishing the hamster in North Rhine-Westphalia, Belgium and The Netherlands. The results demonstrate that the Western hamster is a morphologically distinctive lineage that is in need of imme-diate and specific conservation measures.

Figure 1. Colour variations in A) a hamster from North Rhine-Westphalia, showing pronounced white fur traits and B) a ham-

ster from Rhineland-Palatinate that lacks a chest spot and posseses only a short chin streak and cuffs.

References

Husson, A.M. (1959). On the systematic position of the western hamster, Cricetus cricetus canescens NERING (Mammalia: Rodentia). Bijdragen Dier-kunde 29: 187–201.

Nehring, A. (1899). Einige Varietäten des gemeinen Hamsters (Cricetus vulgaris Dsm.). Sitzungsberichte derGesellschaft Naturforschender Freunde zu Berlin 1: 1–3.

Wepner, A. (1936). Zur Frage der subspezifischen Abtrennung des Westhamsters. Zeitschriftfür Säugetierkunde 11: 254–256.

20

Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012 CONSERVATION

TITLE:

Operation of french breeding centers of the common hamster

Author(s): Céline Boulade.

Abstract: The common hamsters (Cricetus cricetus) produced by “Association Sauvegarde Faune Sauvage” (600 indi-viduals) are intended to be released into their natural environment for reinforcements measures of wild populations. However, animals born in captivity are not prepared to survive and feed in the Wild. Also, improve animal housing and feeding conditions becomes more than a luxury, it is a necessity to prepare them to natural conditions they will face upon their release to the wild. Therefore, to improve the reinforcements, breeding needs to constantly evolve and adapt to the knowledge of the species.

In its natural state, the common hamster Cricetus cricetus feeds by 80% from plants, but also by 15% from small animals (mammals and invertebrates) (Surdacki 1964 ; Gorecki et Grygielska 1975 ; Holisova 1977)1. That is why, in addition to the basic diet (water and granulates of cereals), and in order to consider the protein requirements of the species, hamsters have also, once a week, dried alfalfa, dry puppy food2 and “fresh” (alfalfa, wheat...). A study on the influence of the living feeding was conducted and preliminary results showed no behavioral change against the prey, so we do not need to prepare released hamsters for this type of diet. However, by giving different live prey (mealworms and mice), we stimulates the hamster in its foraging behavior. This is a positive enrichment that would need to be widespread and evenly to act permanently on the dynamism of individuals, especially as the results show no effect on the animals’ health status. Furthermore, it would be interesting to test the impact of the living feeding on reproduction, because a zootechnical point of view, it can induce behavioral changes.

To improve the populations reinforcements, and to minimize the human impregnation, wine racks (Ø 13 cm), as artificial burrows, were placed in each cage. However, one year after installation, and even though most hamsters use their “burrow” correctly, success is not total. Indeed, some hamsters prefer to keep their nest outside whole year, while others move from occasionally. A study is in progress to highlight the constraints that may explain these differences in use.

Hamsters are placed in columns with four cages. By digging, this rodent pushes over soiled litter which falls into the lower cage. That is why the fourth cage can receive soiled litter, and pheromones, from 3 upper cages. So there are no groups of more than 3 females per column, that is to say no risk of slowed or stopped estrus cycle (Lee Boot effect). The female placed in the third rank reproduce with the non consanguineous male (genetic selection by ZooEasy software) placed in the first rank, to avoid the spontaneous abortion of the female because of presence of another male than the genitor during pregnancy (Bruce effect). In order to trigger puberty and prepare females for reproduction by activating estrus cycle (Vandenberg and Whitten effects), they are stimulated, with urine of the non consanguineous male located in the first rank, for two or three weeks before mating or releasing, which per-mits within formed couples to increase the rate of pregnant females from 25.2% in 2011 to 49.7 % in 2012. Besides necessity to accelerate reproduction in breeding centers, we expect increase chances of reproduction for released females, and so to improve efficiency of reinforcements by triggering puberty. However, a study on the most favora-ble animals’ accommodation conditions for reproduction and juveniles breeding could be considered (temperature, humidity, brightness, bloodline…).

To respect animal welfare, mating occurs in a neutral box, without odors nor of the male nor of the female, with anti-skid mat to facilitate the race. The female is placed in the mating box while the male is inserted into a mouse-trap and left for 5 minutes to preview potential aggressive behavior and avoid spontaneous attack. Then the male is released, and the courtship last approximately 30 minutes. We noted that the acceptance rate of the male by the female is 78.3% with this system against 27.9% before. After mating, the couple will be placed in the female’s cage

1 Surdacki S., 1964. Uber die Nahrung des hamsters, Cricetus cricetus L.,, 1758. Acta Theriologica, 9 (20) : 384-386. Gorecki A., Grygielska M., 1975. Comsumption and utilization of natural foods by the Common Hamster. Acta Theriologica, 20 (18) : 237-246. Holisova V., 1977. The food of an overcrowed population of the hamster, Cricetus cricetus in winter. Folia Zoologica, 26 (1) : 15-25.

2 In collaboration with Mr Bas Martens of the Gaïapark in Holland and Mr Valentjin Assenberg of the Rotterdam Zoo

21

CONSERVATION Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

during eight days (estrous cycle of Hamster) (Reznick et al., 1974)3. An individual wooden box is added to ensure the best as possible the cohabitation between individuals. It would be interesting to determine the best time of the day for mating a nocturnal.

For potentially pregnant females (mated), a specific galactogen supplement4, to avoid suckling problems observed in some mothers which had to feed a large number of juvenile, was distributed twice a week one week before the theoretical date of parturition and until separation of youth, which can eat it too. Since youth birth, a half egg5 is given to the female whom sees this as an energy source. When juveniles are 7 to 10 days old, a whole egg is given because they devour it too and then they asleep. The mother can rest, which, in the case of 6 to 9 youth, is more than necessary for the survival of all juveniles. Then, soy sprouts, onions and fresh alfalfa are distributed to compen-sate feeding difficulties (especially for water) until juveniles learn to feed themselves and to drink at bottle after the separation from their mother (three weeks after the birth) and then the separation of siblings (two weeks later). In addition, during the breeding period, cages of pregnant females, nursing mothers and siblings are cleaned in cases of extreme necessity. Indeed, cleaning cages, already recognized as being very stressful for animals (Saibaba et al., 1996; Gattermann and Weinandy 1996 & 1997; Duke et al. 2001, Balcombe et al., 2004)6, is also a source of human impregnation for juveniles in the first weeks of life that it is better to limit.

Before releasing, animals are behaviorally and genetically selected. Some hamsters are implanted with an intra-ab-dominal transmitter to be monitored by telemetry. When the transmitter emits no signal, the female cannot be re-leased and we decided to use them to compare the re-production of females with and without implant. We have not been able to bring out any difference, nor in time of gestation, nor in the litter size, nor in behavior during the mating. It would be interesting to continue the study to confirm our conclusions and thus ensure that the marking system does not interfere with reinforcements.

We can still improve and study many factors to optimize the reinforcement and thus hope to save the species. The association will continue to develop new techniques and studies in this direction.

3 Reznik-Schuller H., Reznik G., Mohr U., 1974. The European hamster (Cricetus cricetus L.) as an experimental animal : breeding methods and observations of their behavior in the laboratory. Z. Versuchstierk, 16 : 48-58.

4 In collaboration with the “école Lyonnaise des plantes médicinales” (69001, Lyon), the “herboristerie Croix Rousse” (69002, Lyon) and Mr & Mrs Wurtz, renowned herbalists (68420, Freland)) : balls with fresh chopped nettles, carvi and cumin seeds, and dry puppy food.

5 In collaboration with Mr Ulrich Weinhold, Mrs Lisa Heimann and Mr Marco Sander of the Eidelberg zoo in Germany.

6 Saibaba P., Sales G.D., Stodulski G., Hau J., 1996. Behaviour of rats in their home cages: daytime variations and effects of routine husbandry procedures analysed by time sampling techniques. Lab. Anim., 30 : 13-21.

Gattermann R., Weinandy R., 1996 / 1997. Time of day and stress response to different stressors in experimental animals. Part I: Golden hamster (Mesocricetus auratus) / Part II : Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus). J. Exp. Anim. Sci, 38 : 66-76 / 109-122.

Duke J.L., Zammit T.G., Lawson D.M., 2001. The effects of routine cage-changing on cardiovascular and behavioral parameters in male Sprague–Dawley rats. Contemp. Top. Lab. Anim. Sci., 40 : 17–20.

Balcombe J. P., Barnard N.D., Sandusky C., 2004. Laboratory routines cause animal stress. Contemp. Top. Lab. Anim. Science, 43 : 42-51.

Comparison between 2011 and 2012 results

BirthsPregnant femalesCouples formedCouples tested

10002011

2012500

0

Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012 CONSERVATION

TITLE:

“Selling the drama“ The importance of public relations in (hamster) conservation“

Author(s): Peer Cyriacks, Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung

Abstract: Presence in the media is of particular im-portance for conservation. These messages must be delivered to the public since most conservation projects are costly and require public support. In all western countries the sectors of art, health or sports currently also receive remarkable amounts public funding. This kind of financial support though is hard-ly ever being questioned. Why is there a difference with conservation? Professional surveys prove that in general the public does indeed perceive a need for nature conservation and is very much aware of the often negative changes to the environment.

In order to overcome this lack of acceptance conservation stakeholders should make use of this potential. NGOs, state organizations and scientists need to accept that the sector of public relations is evolving very quickly and fol-low innovative examples from other sectors like the economy.

Stakeholders in nature conservation often lament a lack of media coverage, while journalists often lament a lack of quality in the press material they receive. This downward spiral may result in low interest from the public and low acceptance with respect to conservation projects. The Common hamster is the perfect ex-ample for this vicious circle. In Germany, the hamster is already a symbol for errant and bureaucratic pro-cesses in nature protection and is used in political campaigns. Examples of press releases and results of profes-sional surveys on the general understanding of conservation efforts show that the acceptance could well increase if conservation stakeholders improve their media work. This presentation will discuss why and how new and innovative methods for nature conservation can add to a new perception of sustaining biodiversity.

TITLE:

Least concern or vulnerable? The IUCN-Status of Cricetus cricetus

Author(s): Ulrich Weinhold, Institut Faunistik

Abstract: At last year’s meeting we discussed the necessity to approach the IUCN to reconsider the status of C. c. The IUCN in return sent the complete template to be filled in with the new data. The first draft will be presented and is open for discussion.

please see the revised assessment document presented to the iucn in february on pages 56-60.

22

23

CONSERVATION Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

TITLE:

The new French Action Program for the common hamster (Plan national d’actions en faveur du hamster commun (cricetus cricetus) 2012-2016)

Author(s): Clotilde Herbillon, Direction régionale de l’Environnement, de l’Aménagement et du Logement

Abstract: The common hamster in France only exists in Alsace. Despite two previous conservation programs, the population is still decreasing, with 309 burrows denombrated in april 2012 (420 in 2011). France is also in this case in the process of a suit by the European Court of Justice under the directive Habitat. The conservation of hamsters has to be urgently improved.

The new conservation program is a result of a long process (assessemnt of the previous program, discussion with stakeholders on all aspects of the new program), and illustrates the French Strategy to save the hamsters. It was ac-companied by a new set of regulations, aiming to protect the habitat of the hamster against growing urbanisation.

The objective is to enhance habitat, by developping favorable crops. The main change is that more efficient agro-en-vironmental mesures were defined (collective rotation between a group of farmer and non-harvested crops near each burrow denombrated in the same year).

This main objective, along with an increased population reinforcement based on the now effective process devel-opped by ONCFS (electric fences and non harvested crops), should have positive effects on the hamster population.

Other mesures will be implemented to complete this strategy, like research programs, communication and appro-priate governance.

The program will last 5 years, until 2016. It is now available on internet (http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/PNA_hamster_2012-2016_VF-3.pdf ), and will soon be translated in English.

24

POPULATION DATA AND MONITORING Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

TITLE:

A survival analysis of European hamsters: the devil is in the details!

Author(s): Maurice La Haye1,2,*, Gerard Müskens2, Ruud van Kats2, Loek Kuiters2, Hans Peter Koelewijn2.1 Radboud University Nijmegen / Bargerveen Society, Department of Animal Ecology and Ecophysiology, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 2 Wageningen UR, ALTERRA, PO Box 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands, * Currently working at the Dutch Mammal Society, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Abstract: Survival, and its opposite mortality, is of crucial importance for the sustainability of wild hamster popula-tions. So far, survival is measured quite robust with survival/mortality-rates calculated for years or in some cases on a half year basis. Survival rates are mostly based on capture-recapture-studies or short radio-telemetry-studies. The data of the Dutch reintroduction-project allowed a very detailed survival analysis of more than 700 (!) captive-bred, wild and wild-translocated hamsters. In this presentation some new and interesting findings will be presented, with a high relevance for future monitoring-projects (i.c. the LIFE-proposals of 2012).

25

POPULATION DATA AND MONITORING Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

TITLE:

Density-dependent home range size in the common hamster

Author(s): Petrová I, Losík J, Tkadlec E

Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, Palacky University Olomouc, Třída Svobody 26, Olomouc, Czech Republic

Most behavioural traits in mammals are largely dependent on population density. In hamsters, density-dependent variation in home range size has never been studied. In the suburbs of Olomouc, Czech Republic, a natural popula-tion of the common hamster has been studied for more than 10 years. By capture-recapture approach, the popula-tion sizes were estimated each year using the Jolly-Seber model. Moreover, in 6 years of this research, radiotelemetry was used to determine the home range sizes of selected individuals, both males and females. Radiotelemetry data show that the home ranges are larger in males than in females and they also vary with population density. In the years with high population densities in autumn, smaller home range sizes were observed. Using the method of min-imum convex polygons, maximum home range size of only 0.022 ha was estimated in 2004 when the population size was 133 individuals. In 2011, the population size was only 11 individuals and the home range sizes reached up to 3.83 ha. The dependence was much stronger in males than females whose home ranges were quite small even at low densities. These results suggest that spatial behaviour in the common hamster is highly flexible trait sensitive to changes in population density, especially in males.

26

POSTER ABSTRACTS Herkenrode Abbey, Belgium, November 20th- 22nd, 2012

TITLE:

Maternal care and offspring development in Common hamsters, Cricetus cricetus

Author(s): Birgit Weissinger, Carina Siutz and Eva Millesi

Department of Behavioural Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, 1090 Vienna, Austria, e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: The extent of maternal care can be crucial for the offspring’s development and survival. Natal emergence in juvenile Common hamsters occurs about 20 days after birth. Usually, pups are weaned shortly thereafter, although the duration of maternal care varies among adult females. Several factors like litter size, offspring sex, body mass, the mother’s condition and environmental factors could influence maternal investment. In this study, we investigated potential effects of maternal care on juvenile development in free-living-Common hamsters in an urban area in southern Vienna. Sex, age, body mass, and some morphometric parameters like head and tibia length were record-ed in live-trapped individual hamsters. All juveniles were individually marked and could be assigned to the litters of individual females, thus litter sizes could be determined. The period of maternal care was defined as the time span from birth until either the juveniles or the mother left the breeding burrow, thus including lactation duration and the period of common burrow use. The results revealed that the longer the juveniles received maternal care the higher was their body mass shortly before dispersal. In addition, females born early in the season were significantly heavier at natal emergence than those born later. This relationship was not found in male offspring and independent of litter size. The results indicate that the time span the females invest in their offspring positively affects the pup`s development. Female juveniles born early in the season can reproduce successfully in their first year; however, this requires a sufficient body condition. Males frequently become sexually mature in their first season but are unable to compete directly with older males. Thus juvenile body condition of early-born males may be less crucial for repro-ductive success than that of females.

27


TITLE:

Behaviour of the common hamster juveniles under natural conditions

Author(s): Joanna Ziomek¹, Agata Banaszek2, Urszula Nowak¹, Anna Walkiewicz¹

¹Department of Systematic Zoology, Adam Mickiewicz University; Umultowska 89, 61-614 Poznań, Poland; e-mail: [email protected]²Institute of Biology, University of Białystok; Świerkowa 20B, 15-950 Białystok, Poland; e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: Studies on the behaviour of the common hamster juveniles under natural conditions were conducted in the years 2007-2011 during social phase. Behaviour of group of juvenile as a whole was investigated in the years 2007-2009 and differences in types of behaviour and interactions between sexes were researched in the years 2010-2011. Surface activity and behavioural parameters were noted from dawn until dusk. The investigation took place in a 10 ha area of a mosaic of arable fields in Jaworzno-Jeziorki (UTM CA-75) situated in Upper Silesia, the south-west-ern part of Poland. In total, the observations were conducted during 158 days. The ‘‘Focal animal sampling’’ was used as an observation method, and the total time of observation amounted to 955 hours. 68 individuals of the common hamster were studied.

The aim of our research was to categorise and describe as-pects of non-social and social behaviour of the common hamster young. 22 main elements in the common ham-ster young’s behaviour were distinguished and 36 acts and postures described. During our observation 6835 bouts of behaviour were recorded. The number of the non-social behaviour prevailed significantly over the number of the social behaviour (n=396; 5.8%). The most frequent observed non-social behaviour were: horizontal and vertical locomo-tion (n=3192; 49.6%) and behaviour connected with vigi-lance (n=2784; 43.2%). Among inter-individual interactions: following (33.6%; n=133) and direct identification (15.4%; n=61) were noticed most frequently.

Frenzy dance, play-fighting, hugging, imitation and synchronization were the aspects of the social behaviour char-acteristic of the young only.

Sniffing was an important element of the juvenile behaviour in comparison with adults (χ²= 8.76; p= 0.012) which was essential for learning about the surrounding of the burrow and the way back to it. Furthermore, imitation, fol-lowing and play-fighting originated from the mechanisms of learning and gaining experience.Such aspects of non-social behaviour as checking (χ2=19,6; p= 0.05), activity locomotion (χ2=5,64; p=0.05), foraging (χ2=9,88; p= 0.05) and eating (χ2=4; p= 0.05) were significantly different between sexes.In social behaviour there were significant differences in direct identification (χ2=3,6; p- 0.05) and vocalization (χ2=5,44; p= 0.05). Differences in remaining elements of the social behaviour were not significant. The juveniles left the breeding burrows after 5-6 weeks.

Key words: Cricetus cricetus, behaviour, natural conditions

28


TITLE:

Hormonal profiles and energy substrates during the annual life cycle of Syrian hamster (Mesocricetus auratus)

Author(s): Mathieu WEITTEN1, Marie QUILLE1, Jean-Patrice ROBIN1, Paul PEVET2, Caroline HABOLD1

1Université de Strasbourg, IPHC-DEPE, 23 rue Becquerel, 67087 Strasbourg, France1CNRS, UMR 7178, 23 rue Becquerel, 67087 Strasbourg, France2CNRS, Département de Neurobiologie des Rythmes, Institut des Neurosciences Cellulaires etIntégratives, UPR-3212, 5 rue Blaise Pascal, 67084 Strasbourg, France

Abstract: Seasonal variations in food resources have imposed special adaptations to animals. Among these, hiber-nation is one of the most effective adaptations that allow animals to cope with seasonal declines in food resources through a significant decrease in energy expenditure. The hibernation period is constituted by a succession of peri-ods of hypometabolism and hypothermia called torpors interrupted by periods of arousal during which the animal returns to eumetabolism and euthermia. Many metabolic changes occur during these periods, including variations in the type of body reserves used. Our study aims at defining the major regulatory pathways of these metabolic changes, including hormone profiles (Insulin, Glucagon, Leptin, Adiponectin, GLP-1, GiP), plasma concentration of metabolites (Glucose, Free fatty Acid, Triglycerides, Urea) and body composition measurements. For this purpose, blood samples were collected and adiposity was measured on Syrian hamsters at different times of their annual cy-cle: 1 /during long photoperiod at 20 ° C (LP20 group), 2 / during short photoperiod at 20 ° C (SP20 group), 3 / during short photoperiod at 8 ° C (SP8) in early torpor (Torpor group) and 4 / SP8 in early intertorpor arousal (Arousal group). Our results show that use of fat stores in hamsters during torpor would be associated with decreased circulating levels of glucagon, insulin, leptin, and an increase in adiponectin. Refeeding during arousal results in a decrease in free fatty acid plasma concentration, in increased glycaemia and circulating concentration of incretins.

To conclude, we can assume that reduced incretin levels and increased adiponectin levels could be responsible for the observed shift in metabolism during torpor. However, this has to be verified through further measurements, notably chronic perfusion of these hormones.

29


TITLE:

They are all look-alikes, are they?Individual differentiation of the common ham-ster Cricetus cricetus based on fur markings and fur color patternsAuthor(s): Lisa Heimann, Marco Sander, Ulrich WeinholdInstitut für Faunistik, 69253 Heiligkreuzsteinach

Introduction: At a first glance all regular colored common hamsters look identical, which makes them hard to dis-criminate. The common hamster Cricetus cricetus has a typical fur pattern: the dorsal fur has different brown shades, the ventral fur is black with an optional medial white chest and chin markings, in the face and lateral on each side of the body are several beige spots in a typical disposal, nose and feet are white (NIETHAMMER 1982). However in our breeding station in Heidelberg Zoo we experienced that fur markings are quite different. In the fol-lowing study we would like to demonstrate the most important fur markings and some fur patterns to distinguish the individuals.

The most obvious markings are white chest and chin markings, those are on the ventral side surroundet by black fur.

The chest marking (Fig.1) variates in size, shape and alignment. Some hamsters do not have them at all, some have more than one and sometimes the marking is so big that it is connected to the white fur of the forelegs or the chin

marking. The white chest marking is often centered between the forelegs but it could also be shifted to either the right or the left side of the chest. Some hamsters also have white dots or single white hairs elsewhere on the ventral side, mostly along the me-dialline and right above the genitals.

Fig.1: Nine individual chest

markings

30


The chin marking (Fig. 2) is a little less obvious then the chest marking. It variates in length, width and often has a special shape. Sometimes it is linked to the chest marking, it can be interrupted by black fur or contain black fur.

Fig.2: Chin markings of six

different hamsters

The outlining of the black fur (Fig. 3) to the white fur at the legs is another marking, not as obvious as chest and chin marking but in adittion to them very helpful. At the forelegs the amount of white variates and the outlining can draw some individual curves, seldomly even containing white spots within the black fur and vice versa.The black fur at the heels can cover half the foot, part of it in a special pattern or not exist there at all.

Fig.3: Fore- and hindleg

markings of several individ-

uals

Besides the markings there are severel variations in the fur color patterns and color variations.

The beige spots (Fig. 4) can show some slight variations: By examining only the three lateral beige body spots, we used a different numbering than PETZSCH (1952). The third of the spots can appear in different sizes from being ob-vious to not existing. There are three separate beige spots between the hind legs as described by PETZSCH (1948). In

31


a variation those spots can be linked forming a unique pattern, this can only be seen from the ventral side. The spots on the head and the other body spots can also show variations.

Fig.4: Patterns of different beige spots

The fur appears to have a few variations within the color:• The ventral black can instead be a very dark brown• The dorsal brown shows variations between the regular brown, a lighter or a reddish color (WEINHOLD & KAYSER 2006)• The beige spots can also be as white as the white fur of the markings

Conclusion: The individual markings and patterns can be used to differentiate numerous individuals. The main focus therefore should lie on the chest marking combined with the chin marking, in addition striking features of the other variations should be mentioned, as well as other striking marks like e. g. injuries (ears, tail etc.). If used in a large breeding stock on a regular base it might take some effort but reduces the costs for subcuta-neous transponders or tattooing. It can prevent mix-ups and makes it possible to differentiate juveniles within a litter, as soon as the fur color shines through the skin around the 4-5th day (EIBL-EIBESFELDT 1953). Today with the means of digital photography and image recognition software it would be also applicable for field studies. The limitations of the method are given by individuals of the same sex and very similar features.

Literature:

EIBL-EIBESFELDT, I. (1953): Zur Ethologie des Hamsters (Cricetus cricetus L.). – Zeitschrift für TierpsychologieNIETHAMMER, J. (1982): Cricetus cricetus (LINEUS, 1758) – Hamster (Feldhamster). – In: NIETHAMMER, J. & KRAPP, F.: Handbuch der Säugetiere EuropasPETZSCH, H. (1948): Über Warn- und Drohreaktionen, Imponiergehaben, Schreckstellung und Flucht des Hamsters (Cricetus cricetus L.). – Zeitschrift für TierpsychologiePETZSCH, H. (1952): Der Hamster. – Neue Brehm-Bücherei WEINHOLD, U. & KAYSER, A. (2006): Der Feldhamster. – Neue Brehm-Bücherei

32


Articles

33


TITLE:

What can we learn from weighing hamsters?

Author(s): Maurice La Haye1,2,*, Gerard Müskens2, Ruud van Kats2, Loek Kuiters2, Hans Peter Koelewijn3.

Introduction

It is well-known that it is quite difficult to get an idea of the age of a (wild) hamster (La Haye & Müskens, 2004; Heimann & Weinhold, 2011), although every hamster-researcher will confirm that older hamsters are heavier than younger ones. Weighing hamsters therefore seems unnecessary and a waste of limited research-time. However, comparing weights of hamsters between different habitats, settings and populations revealed some unexpected results. We compared data of wild-trapped hamsters in the Netherlands, with weights of hamsters measured in the Dutch breeding program, a wild population in Vienna and the laboratory-setting of Vohralík from 1975. The results are presented and discussed in this manuscript

Material and methods

Weight-data were in the first years not collected in a structured way: no strict protocol was used to trap and weigh hamsters at specific times or moments during the season. In practice, most hamsters were measured after trapping in the wild and with using a normal kitchen-balance. Only in 2010 we started to use camera-traps which automati-cally weighed and filmed each individual entering the camera-trap (Out et al. 2011).

Results

Autumn-spring comparisonAs trapping of hamsters normally took place before hibernation in autumn and after hibernation in spring (Kuit-ers et al. 2010), the first comparison was between autumn- and spring weights. Franceschini-Zink & Millesi (2008) found that in their Vienna population body mass loss was in general 23% ± 12% (range 0-38%, n=8) for females. In the Netherlands body mass increase was 19% (± 22% sd) in females (range -7% - +78%, n=18) and 33% (± 30% sd) in males (range -1% - +107%, n=22). This result in the Netherlands is opposite to that of Vienna. No indication was found that different crops (cereals versus alfalfa) influenced weight increases, but it seems reasonable to think that the possibility of gathering a winter storage influenced weight-differences during hibernation. In Vienna, where hamsters lost weight during hibernation, it is unknown if hamsters have a winter storage and what is collected as winter storage (pers. observation Carina Siutz). In the Netherlands hamsters have a large winter storage, consisting of cereals and sometimes other seeds or plant-roots (La Haye pers. observation).Secondly, weight increase differed between sexes and less heavier hamsters increased more in weight than ham-sters with an already heavier body weight as can be seen in figure 1 and figure 2.

Figure 1) Females with a low body-weight

at the start of hibernation (X-axis), increase

their body-weight more than females with

a higher body-weight (net weight increase

on Y-axis).

1 Radboud University Nijmegen / Bargerveen Society, Department of Animal Ecology and Ecophysiology, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands,

2 Wageningen UR, ALTERRA, PO Box 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands, 3 Nunhems Netherlands BV, PO BOX 4005, NL-6080 AA Haelen, The Netherlands.* Currently working at the Dutch Mammal Society, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

34


Figure 2) Males with a low body-weight

at the start of hibernation (X-axis), increase

their body-weight more than males with a

higher body-weight (net weight increase

on Y-axis).

Camera-traps revisited: new calibration linesVohralík (1975) was the first to publish growth rates of juvenile hamster and since then several researchers (for example Kupfernagel, 2007) have used this data to calculate age of trapped hamsters in their wild population. The data provided by Vohralík were also compared with data from the Dutch breeding program and data form the wild Vienna population. As can be seen in figure 3 and figure 4, the weight data of Vohralík (1975), the Dutch breeding program and Vienna perfectly match and show the same weight increase in juvenile hamsters from birth till an age of more than 100 days.

Figure 3) Juvenile female hamsters in-

crease their body weight with the same

rate in the laboratory setting of Vohralík

(1975), in the Dutch breeding program

and in the wild in the urban population of

Vienna.

Figure 4) Juvenile male hamsters increase

their body weight with the same rate in

the laboratory setting of Vohralík (1975),

in the Dutch breeding program and in the

wild in the urban population of Vienna.

However, as found earlier in the Dutch reintroduction project, juvenile hamsters seems to grow much faster in semi-wild conditions (La Haye & Müskens, 2004). During the soft-release reintroduction attempts in the Sibbe-reserve (years 2002 and 2003). Pregnant females were placed in large-outdoor enclosures (La Haye 2008). After four or five weeks, the mother and her juveniles were trapped to transponder the juveniles and to provide the mother with an implant transmitter. To the big surprise of involved researchers in those years, juveniles were much heavier than ex-pected (figure 5 and figure 6), with some juveniles even showing signs of sexual maturation with for example clear developed testis in juveniles males.

35


Figure 5) Juvenile female hamsters born

in semi-wild conditions (outdoor enclo-

sures) increase their body weight much

faster than females born in captivity

(Vohralík and Dutch breeding program) or

in an urban area (Vienna).

Figure 6) Juvenile male hamsters born in

semi-wild conditions (outdoor enclosures)

increase their body weight much faster

than males born in captivity (Vohralík and

Dutch breeding program) or in an urban

area (Vienna).

Critics that semi-wild conditions positively influenced growth rates as food was provided ad libitum does not hold, because the same growth rates in juveniles were found using camera-traps in ‘true’ wild conditions (Müskens et al. 2011; Out et al. 2011). Camera-traps were placed near burrows of wild females. Juveniles (and their mother) were weighed for a few days during a period of several weeks in the season of 2011. Again, growth rates of juveniles were much faster than could be expected based on earlier knowledge (figure 7) and similar to that of growth rates of juveniles in outdoor enclosures.

Figure 7) Growth rates of juvenile ham-

sters during the season 2011 as revealed

by data from the camera-traps.

These results show that calculating age of juveniles hamsters is ‘tricky’ unless information is known of growth rates of juvenile hamsters in the same conditions. In the Netherlands (new) calibration lines were formulated to indicate age of juveniles born in the wild based on weight-measures. In females this age-indication becomes unreliable above a weight of 200 grams and in males above a weight of 250 grams. Other, yet unknown, measures are needed to find out age of hamsters with a weight above these boundaries.To have an indication of age (in days) of a juvenile female hamster born in the wild, you just have to fill in the follow-ing formula: X = (Y + 0,9157) / (5,917), with X = age in days and Y = weight in grams (figure 8). And for males born in the wild the formula is : X = Y – 0,2119) / (6,7564), with X = age in days and Y = weight in grams (figure 9).

36


Figure 8) Formula to calculate age in ju-

venile female hamsters in wild conditions

in the Netherlands based on combined

weight measures from the Dutch reintro-

duction project (initial birth weight based

on Vohralík, 1975).

Figure 9) Formula to calculate age in juvenile male hamsters in wild con-ditions in the Netherlands based on combined weight measures from the Dutch reintroduction project (initial birth weight based on Vohralík, 1975).

Discovery of birth dates with growth rates

When knowing the accurate age of juveniles, it is possible to reconstruct birth dates of litters in our wild population (Harpenslager et al. 2011). However, as trapping sessions were mainly planned at the end of the summer/early autumn and because the calibration line can only ‘look back’ for some four –five weeks, it was not possible to recon-struct timing of litters during the breeding season which last from late April until late September in the Netherlands.

More reliable data on timing of births is only possible by using camera-traps or by regular trapping sessions during the complete active season. From a point of limited financial resources it seems attractive to plan regular trapping sessions and not to use expensive camera-traps, however, unless trapping is done by volunteers or students and damage of crops is acceptable, it can be more efficient to use camera-traps. The costs and time which is needed to organize large scale trapping sessions and compensating farmers for crop damage in order to collect enough data is far more than buying camera-traps and analysing data collected with a such camera-traps.Although it was not possible to estimate timing of litters throughout the season, it was possible to get an indication of the end of the reproductive period in different years. As trapping continued weeks after termination of the breed-ing period, it was possible to find out the date of the last litters in several years (table 1). From this table it is clear that the end of the reproductive season can vary with at least four weeks (circa 30 days) between years, which is a con-siderable period of time as the reproductive season starts in May in the Netherlands (first pairings) and is terminated at the beginning of September (last litters born), which means a season of circa 125 days in general.

Year Date of birth of litter

2003 5th of September

2004 29th of August



2007 1st of October

2008 31th of August

2009 26th of August


Table 1: observed birth data of last litters in 2003 till

2011 (no data available from 2010).

37


Pregnancies should result in heavier weights

Repeated measures of females using camera-traps will also give information on the increase in weight of pregnant females. A considerable increase in weight was expected, as juvenile hamsters have a weight of 5-6 grams at birth and mean litter size will be at least 5 in the Dutch populations (La Haye 2008). However, looking at trends in weight during the reproductive season and the moment of birth of observed litters in monitored females, no differences in weight could be detected.

Figure 10) Trend in weight

of female JV404, with re-

constructed date of births

between black lines. On

the X-axis time of the calen-

dar-year and on the Y-axis

weight of the female in

grams.





the X-axis time of the cal-

endar-year and on the Y-ax-

is weight of the female in

grams.








grams.


of female KV395, with re-






grams.

38


Discussion and conclusions

During the reintroduction period in the Netherlands, body-weights of hamsters were not collected systematical-ly, although noted at each trapping event as part of the handling protocol, however, comparing data between populations was found to be very informative. For example, hamsters increase their body-weight in winter in the Netherlands, while losing weight in Vienna. A clear explanation is not found yet, but the amount (presence) of winter storage is expected to play a major role in this difference. The lack of winter storage may prevent hamsters in Vienna to gain weight during winter, whereas hamsters in the Netherlands have large winter storages and are able to in-crease their body-weight. However, this hypothesis has to be verified.

The difference in growth rates in juvenile hamsters in captive/laboratory/urban populations and the wild population in the Netherlands was already detected some years ago (La Haye & Müskens 2004; Heimann & Weinhold 2011) and confirmed by results from camera-traps in the last few years (Müskens et al. 2011; Out et al. 2011). These results show the high ecological plasticity of the species and are a warning that data from different populations should be used carefully and not used without checking or awareness of the difficulties in using data from different populations, regions or countries.With the new camera-trap measurements new calibration lines for aging juvenile hamsters were constructed. Note that above a weight of 200 grams in females, respectively 250 grams in males, the calibration lines become unrelia-ble and aging is not possible.

With knowing the more or less exact age of juveniles, it is possible to estimate birth dates of trapped juveniles and therefore to reconstruct the timing of birth of hamsters trapped in different trapping sessions. However, as juvenile hamsters grow very fast, the period to ‘look back’ is only four-five weeks. This period is too short to cover the com-plete reproductive season. For a more reliable picture, more trapping sessions are needed at regular time intervals during the reproductive season. Using camera-traps is preferred above regular life-trapping sessions, because of less crop-damage and high costs involved in organizing and applying large-scale life-trapping sessions.Although it was not possible to estimate timing of litters throughout the season, it was possible to get an indication of the end of the reproductive period in different years. The end of the reproductive season can vary with at least four weeks (circa 30 days) between years, which is a considerable period of time as the reproductive season starts in the Netherlands in May and is terminated at the beginning of September (circa 125 days). Prolongation of the reproductive period has probably a strong and positive effect on population size and number of hamsters. Contrary to our expectations, weights of monitored females did not show any clear trend in relation to pregnancy.

Acknowledgements

We thank the breeders of Rotterdam Zoo, Vereniging Das&Boom and GaiaZoo for their cooperation and information of the Dutch breeding project. Stefanie Monecke for her ongoing support and ideas on growth rates in juvenile hamsters and Carina Siutz for the data of Vienna. A lot of the data were analysed by students and especially by Marinde Out and Mirte Schipper. The hamster reintroduction project was funded by the former Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality (Program BO-02-013: Active policy on species management).

39


References

Franceschini-Zink C. & E. Millesi (2008): Reproductive performance in female common hamsters. Zoology 111,76-83

Harpenslager SF, La Haye MJJ, van Kats RJM, Müskens GJDM (2011) Reproduction of the female Common hamster (Cricetus cricetus) in Limburg,

the Netherlands. Säugetierkundliche Informationen Band 8, Heft 42, pp 131-138. Proceedings of the 16t and 17th Meeting of the International

Hamster Workgroup; Ranis, Germany (2009), Gödollo, Hungary (2010).

Heimann L. & U. Weinhold (2011) Conservation breeding of Cricetus cricetus in Germany – postnatal development in captivity. Proceedings of

the 18th Meeting of the International Hamster Workgroup; Strasbourg, France (2011).

Kuiters L, La Haye M, Müskens G, Van Kats R (2010) Perspectieven voor een duurzame bescherming van de hamster in Nederland. Boek/Rapport

Alterra, Wageningen.

Kupfernagel C, (2007) Populationsdynamik und Habitatnutzung des Feldhamsters (Cricetus cricetus) in Südost-Niedersachsen. Dissertation,

Technischen Universität Carolo-Wilhelmina zu Braunschweig, Deutschland.

La Haye M. & G. Müskens (2004) New information about the reproduction of hamsters and its consequences for model-studies. Poster at the

12th International Hamster Congress. October, 2004. Strasbourg, France.

La Haye M. (2008) Is there a future for the Common hamster (Cricetus cricetus) in Western Europe? In Cricetinae, Internationales Ehrensymposi-

um: 54-59, Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Stuttgart/Leipzig.

Müskens GJDM, Out M, van Kats RJM, Hermsen AM, La Haye MJJ & Kuiters L (2011) Hamsters (Cricetus cricetus) and Camera – Use of a camera

for collecting biological data about number of litters and the gain of weight of young in the first two months. Säugetierkundliche Informa-

tionen Band 8, Heft 42, pp 117-120. Proceedings of the 16ht and 17th Meeting of the International Hamster Workgroup; Ranis, Germany (2009),

Gödollo, Hungary (2010)

Out ME, Müskens GJDM, La Haye MJJ & van Kats RJM (2011) Unravelling the secret Life of Common Hamsters: special equipped camera traps

reveal new data about reproduction aspects of hamsters in the Netherlands. Proceedings of the 18th Meeting of the International Hamster

Workgroup; Strasbourg, France (2011).

Vohralík V. (1975): Postnatal development of the common hamster Cricetus cricetus (L.) in captivity. Academia Nakladatelství Ceskoslovenské

Akademie Ved, Praha

40


TITLE:

How (inter)national regulations negatively affect hamster-friendly management

Author(s):G. Müskens1 and M. La Haye1,2,*

Introduction

The hamster (Cricetus cricetus) is in Europe a heavily threatened species and protected under the EU habitat direc-tive: appendix IV, under the convention of Bern and in the Netherlands under the Flora and Fauna Act (Kuiters et al., 2010). The main factor for this strong decline since ca. 1960 is loss of habitat due to changes in agricultural use, par-ticular a very strong decrease of farmland with cereals and changes in the cultivation of cereals. These changes re-sulted in less cover through the use of herbicides and earlier and more efficient harvest techniques (Out et al., 2011). To keep the hamster as a wild species in the Netherland, two national conservation plans hamster were made (Bes-chermingsplan Hamster 2000-2004 and Beschermingsplan Hamster 2005-2010). The main goals were to protect the remaining hamsters, starting a breeding-, reintroduction- and research program, establishing 500 ha of ham-ster-friendly management and create a better habitat-quality for nature on arable land. During the period of 2002 till 2010 it became clear that 500 ha was not enough and should be increased to 1000 ha. At the moment (autumn 2012) more than 300 ha of farmland is under contract by farmers and 100 ha by nature conservation organizations. From 2002 onwards to 2010 the hamster-friendly management was implemented as an experiment to find out how to organize and execute it, with the flexibility to change rules and prescriptions after each season. An approach which was impossible under existing conservation-programs (because of national and international regulations) (kuiters et al., 2010). Since 2011 the hamster-friendly management is part of the Support system for Nature and Landscape (SNL). All forms of agricultural nature management (all Agri-Environment Schemes) in the Netherlands are part of this national settlement which is partly subsidized by the EU. The administration of SNL is a new system which is completely digital and is connected with other digital national systems which are (must be) used by all Dutch farmers.

Method

At the start of the pilot in 2002 it was very difficult to find farmers who would participate in the project. There were very strong misconceptions about the hamster due to presumed severe legislation. However, the Dutch govern-ment wanted to stop the decline of the hamster population anyway. As a result high costs were made to establish strict farmland reserves and to convince farmers to sign contracts for hamster-friendly managementIn the years from 2002 till 2010 the support and the number of participating farmers increased rapidly due to a good cooperation based on trust and open discussion between farmers, researchers and the government (coordinated by the Dutch Hamster Committee). Almost all the farmers who participated in the pilot-project continued there contribution in the new SNL project in 2011 against much lower but more realistic compensation payments. How-ever, because this financial compensation is also partly subsidized by EU money there were new strong demands. The administrative execution of payments for hamster-friendly management is in the hands of a special department of the Ministry: the Directorate Regulations (DR) and the field control is done by the new Food and Goods Authority (nVWA).The conditions are: good agricultural practice, conform the prescribed hamster management rules, conform EU rules, conform the national SNL-contract and paying of the compensation in the first quarter the year afterwards.Submitting an application for hamster-friendly management and paying out the money for compensation was

1 Wageningen UR, ALTERRA, PO Box 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2 Radboud University Nijmegen / Bargerveen Society, Department of Animal Ecology and Ecophysiology, Institute for Wetland and Water

Research, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands, * Currently working at the Dutch Mammal Society, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands

41


arranged in a completely automatic digital system. That means in practice: all actions as submitting a request for hamster-friendly management, software checks on permitted crops and software checks on exact surface and bor-ders of the plots are done via a digital system, without assistance or a check by someone of DR.

Results

In the first year that the new SNL regulation was running there were no problems with the executing of the ham-ster-friendly management in the field (outside management was okay). However there were lots of problems as a result of the new digital request and payment system (lot of administration problems). Most of the farmers had more or less troubles with the digital system (table 1).

Table 1. Occurrence of problems with the digital request and paying system for hamster-friendly management by participating farmers in 2011 (n = 27 farmers).

Occurrence percentage

mistakes by submitting the application 55%

only partly paid 37%

not paid at all 26%

no problems 11%

In all the cases the farmers received automatically produced letters in official jargon which is difficult to understand. To complain they had 6 weeks to write an objection. Some of the farmers had to write even more then one. In the end, almost all problems could be repaired but it took the whole year of 2012. It was not possible for the Ministry to repair the problems and mistakes by themselves due to juridical rules.

The observed problems could be addressed on the one hand to wrong choices (by farmers) in the digital application and on the other hand to wrong checks on allowed crops (by DR), wrong data in the system regarding exact surfaces of farmland-plots (provided by DR) and allowed bandwidth or on a combination of these (table 2).

Table 2. Observed cases resulting in payment problems

application individual or collective individual not allowed

application bandwidth forgotten or unclear

checks crops radish was not recognized as an allowed crop

checks surface unclear borders

checks bandwidth below minimum results in no payment

EU check cross compliance discount on all agricultural subsidies (not only HFM

For a better understanding of problems , three examples will be given.

Example 1: On plots with hamster-friendly management three crops were allowed: Lucerne, all kind of cereals (ex-cept maize) and radish (fig.1). The digital check unfortunately did not recognize radish as an allowed crop. So the area of this crop within the hamster-friendly management-agreement was deducted to the total area of hamster-friendly management and was not compensated. In the case that the area of hamster-friendly management became under the minimum bandwidth , the farmer received a (automatically received) letter that he would not be paid at all and that he had to pay back all the compensation from previous years. After complaints, the Department of Regulations added radish as allowed into the system. However, all farmers with radish still had to complain and ask for an official revision of their payments.

42


Figure 1. Hamster-friendly field with lucerne on the left and radish on the right

Example 2: Inaccurate demarcation lines caused also several times problems. Because the system is totally digital, failures in allowed land use resulted in automatically generated fines for some farmers. For instance a farmer had a plot of 3.21 ha with hamster-friendly management. Only 3.03 ha could be selected for hamster-friendly manage-ment because a demarcation line from the provincial government was not plot exactly on the border of his ham-ster-friendly managed plot (fig.2). The farmer requested for paying out 3.21 ha (which was correct). The 3.03 ha was paid by the department without any problem but for the missing 0.17 ha he became a fine of €634,- the double of the compensation money he had the right to. This farmer received an automatic written letter four months after the final payment of his HFM. An objection is written and the expectation is that it will be declared valid.

Figure 2. A field from which a part

that could not be marked for ham-

ster-friendly management

Example 3. Cross Compliance rule. Every year 1% of the Dutch farmers are selected for the Eu-ropean Cross Compliance con-trol. In 2011 one of the farmers with hamster-friendly manage-ment was in this random cho-sen group. Unfortunately this farmer who participated with all his 16 ha property in ham-ster-friendly management and other nature friendly manage-ment, had ploughed a plot of 1.5 ha without reporting which

43


was obligatory after January 1, 2011. The action of ploughing itself was permitted. Because of his mistake of not reporting, this farmer got a discount of 3% on all his money related to EU subsidies. In his case €251 for the normal agricultural bonus but also on the compensation for income loose on the hamster-friendly management fields, an orchard and a hedge being €976. He would not have had this last fine in the case of a normal agricultural product. This measure was felt as very unfair in the case of compensation for income. The case is under the judge at the moment.

Figure 3. Plough is in principle not allowed anymore because of the erosion regulation in hilly area

Conclusion

In the years between 2002 till 2010 during a pilot with experimental hamster-friendly management a lot of sup-port for and trust in hamster-friendly management was built up with farmers. In 2012 after the hamster-friendly management was categorized under new ministerial rules in accordance with European rules there was a strong loss of support due to delayed payment, payments just after objections, extraordinary financial sanctions and cross compliance rules. At the end of 2012 almost all the problems from the year 2011 were solved but with lots of annoy-ance, unnecessary extra costs and much extra time from advisors, the hamster-area coordinator and employees of the Ministry. Problems were not due to people but to the flaws of a totally digital system and juridical obstacles. The Ministry and the province were warned beforehand, but were too afraid to miss EU-subsidies or were not capable of tackling the predicted problems.

The problems as mentioned above (will) have a strong negative effect on future hamster-friendly management contracts and on uptake of HFM by new farmers. It is of utmost importance that Governments (or other responsible bodies) recognize problems as mentioned above as early as possible and prevent that farmers will be confronted with automatically generated fines and wrong decisions. We signalize an urgent need for a better balance between rules and agricultural practice for ‘green’ services.

44


Abstract

Since January 1, 2011 hamster-friendly management (HFM) in the Netherlands has been placed in the Support sys-tem for Nature and Landscape (SNL). All forms of agricultural nature management in the Netherlands are part of this national settlement. The exploitation costs for this management are taken by the ministry of Economic Affairs. The ministry receives a European subsidy for this Program. The requirements of the EU to obtain this subsidy are very strict and hinders uptake of hamster-friendly management.

In 2011 the HFM to which the farmers were familiar with, was done conform the rules of the preceding years. How-ever, the administrative handling by the Dutch government led to serious problems. In almost all cases the origin of these problems were not addressed to farmers but to the administrative governmental bodies: fear for EU-sanctions led initially to less or even no payment for involved farmers. In various cases fines have been imposed because the application for HFM was not made conform the rules. In all cases, farmers had too proof that the government had made the mistakes, which led to much incomprehension. Last but not least it turned out that one of the farmers with HFM-project had been selected for a Cross Compliance Control. Because he had not reported the plough of a small field, for which he normally had been given a warning, he got a deduction of 3% on all bonuses and subsidies (not only HFM, but also all other subsidies), which applied also to the compensation-payment for losses in income due to HFM.

Farmers were ‘not amused’ because of all problems and the support for uptake of HFM was severely shattered. It took almost ten years to convince farmers to implement HFM on their farms and only one year to break down their support. This shows once more how fragile and sensitive nature conservation on farmland still is. At the end of 2012 almost all the problems were solved, but only with the dedication of provincial employees, advisors and the regional hamster-area coordinator.

Literature

Anonymous. Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Visserij, 1999. Beschermingsplan hamster 2000-2004. Rapport nr. 41, Directie Kennis, Ministerie van LNV, Ede. 60 p.

Kuiters L, La Haye M, Müskens G, Van Kats R (2010) Perspectieven voor een duurzame bescherming van de hamster in Nederland. Boek/Rapport 2022 Alterra, Wageningen.

La Haye, M. en H. Jansman, 2005. Beschermingsplan hamster 2005-2010 (not published).

Out ME, van Kats RJM, Kuiters L, Müskens GJDM & La Haye MJJ (2011) Hard to stay under cover: seven years of crop management aiming to preserve the Common Hamster (Cricetus cricetus) in the Netherlands. Säugetierkundliche Informationen Band 8, Heft 42, pp 37-50. Proceedings of the 16t and 17th Meeting of the International Hamster Work-group; Ranis, Germany (2009), Gödollo, Hungary (2010).

45


OFFICIAL AppLICATION DOCuMENT:

Cricetus cricetus 2012 Red list assessment - drafted by the IHWG members

Cricetus cricetus - (Linnaeus, 1758)ANIMALIA - CHORDATA - MAMMALIA - RODENTIA - CRICETIDAE - Cricetus - cricetus Common Names: Hamster Comn (Spanish; Castilian), Common Hamster (English), Grand Hamster (French), Black-bellied Hamster (English) Taxonomic Note: The former separation into the Western subspecies C. c. canescens is due to recent genetic studies no longer valid (Neumann et al. 2004, 2005). Several genetic lineages exist within the species, (Neumann et al. 2004, 2005, Banaszek et al. 2010).

Red List Status

VU - Vulnerable, (IUCN version 3.1)

RED LIST ASSESSMENT

Assessment Information

Date of Assessment: 2012-10-25 Assessor(s): Banaszek, A., Eidenschenk, J., Hutterer, R., La Haye, M., Müskens, G., Reiners, T. E., Rusin, M., Tkadlec, E., Verbist, V., Weinhold, U., Ziomek, J.Reviewers: Amori, G. (Small Nonvolant Mammal Red List Authority) & Temple, H. (Global Mammal Assessment Team) Regions: Global

Assessment Rationale

The common hamster has declined in almost all European range states. Local and regional extirpations and extinc-tion have occurred in Belgium, The Netherlands, France, Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. These are nearly 50 % of the range states. With Poland, the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia large parts of the Eastern range are now concerned. Future prospects due to the art. 17 Habitats Directive reports are considered as bad or poor. Data deficiency still exists in various Eastern range states.

Reasons for Change

Change to higher category: Decline over 30 % within 10 years criterion A2! Generally meets criterion Bb (continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected, in any of the following:(i) extent of occurrence(ii) area of occupancy(iii) area, extent and/or quality of habitat(iv) number of locations or subpopulations(v) number of mature individuals.)

DISTRIBUTION

Geographic Range

Cricetus cricetus has a large global range, extending from Western Europe, through central and Eastern Europe, Russia, and Kazakhstan, reaching as far East as the Yenisey river (Asian Russia). In Europe, it occurs from Belgium, the

46


Netherlands and Eastern France (Alsace) in the West to Russia in the East, and from central Germany, Poland and Russia in the North to Bulgaria in the South (Panteleyev 1998, Weinhold 1999). It is found from sea level to 650 m (Nechay 2000).

Extent of Occurrence (EOO)

Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO)- in km2: 0

Elevation / Depth / Depth Zones

Elevation Lower Limit (in metres above sea level): 0 Elevation Upper Limit (in metres above sea level): 650 Depth Zone: null

Map Status

Map Status: Done

Biogeographic Realms

Biogeographic Realm: Palearctic

OCCURRENCE

Countries of Occurrence

Country Presence Origin Formerly Bred Seasonality

Austria Extant Native - -

Belarus Extant Native - -

Belgium Extant Native - -

Bulgaria Extant Native - -

China Extant Native - -

Croatia Extant Native - -

Czech Republic Extant Native - -

France Extant Native - -

Georgia Extant Native - -

Germany Extant Native - -

Hungary Extant Native - -

Kazakhstan Extant Native - -

Luxembourg Extinct Native - -

Netherlands Extant Native - -

Poland Extant Native - -

Romania Extant Native - -

Russian Federation Extant Native - -

Slovakia Extant Native - -

Slovenia Extant Native - -

Ukraine Extant Native - -

POPULATION

It has undergone severe range and population declines in Western, central and Eastern Europe, and it now has a highly fragmented distribution in these areas.

47


Extirpations and extinction on local and regional scale have occurred in a number of countries including Belgium, The Netherlands, France, Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Ukraine and Russia (Ziomek & Banaszek 2007, Ba-naszek et al. 2011, Tkadlec et al. 2012, Sidorov et al. 2011, Rusin & Banaszek 2013 in prep.). In Poland Cc. lost 80 % to 90 % of its former range and remaining populations are fragmented. Polish experts therefore classify the status as critically endangered (Ziomek & Banaszek 2007, Banaszek et al. 2011). In the Czech Republic Cc. vanished from vast parts of the country and retreated to lowland habitats along great rivers (Tkadlec et al. 2012). Due to severe declines in the Ukraine the common hamster received a protection status in 2009 and was included in the Red Book (Mezhzherin 2009).

In Belarus Cc. is also under protection of a Red Book with just several localities known (Demyanchik 2004). In the Russian Federation it has gone extinct in many Western regions (Oparin pers. com. 2011, Tikhonov & Stakheev pers. com. 2011) and also declined in Southern Siberia (Sidorov et al. 2011). But in general little is still known about the status of the species in Eastern Europe and Russia. There is no certainty anymore that the species is more abundant in the Eastern range than in the West, instead it becomes more and more obvious that the decline of the common hamster covers the whole distribution range.

Population Information

Current Population Trend: Decreasing

Severely fragmented? Justification

Yes Meets criterion B a and b (ii, iii)

HABITATS AND ECOLOGY

Its original habitat was fertile steppe and grassland, but it has successfully spread into a variety of anthropogenic habitats including meadows, croplands (especially cereals), and field edges, road verges and scrubby fallow areas on farms. In Eastern parts of its range it is found quite often in gardens and orchards, in close proximity to human habi-tation. It is more abundant in these man-made habitats than it is in natural grassland. It prefers relatively deep, heavy soils, in which it digs extensive burrows. Its diet mainly consists of the green parts of plants and seeds, supplemented by invertebrates and, occasionally, small vertebrates. At high densities, it can be an agricultural pest (Nechay 2000).

IUCN Habitats Classification Scheme

Habitat Suitability Major Importance?

3.4. Shrubland -> Shrubland - Temperate Suitable -

4.4. Grassland -> Grassland - Temperate Suitable -

14.1. Artificial/Terrestrial -> Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land Suitable -

14.2. Artificial/Terrestrial -> Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland Suitable -

14.3. Artificial/Terrestrial -> Artificial/Terrestrial - Plantations Marginal -

14.4. Artificial/Terrestrial -> Artificial/Terrestrial - Rural Gardens Marginal -

Systems

System: Terrestrial

THREATS

The causes of the global decline of Cc. are complex and not fully understood yet.Its decline in Western Europe has been attributed to a combination of persecution and agricultural intensification. Habitat loss and fragmentation due to intensive building of industrial estates alongside with the improvement of

48


road networks and infrastructure are severely disturbing natural population dynamics and lead to highly endan-gered “island populations”.

Habitat fragmentation also causes loss of genetic diversity (Banaszek et al. 2011, Banaszek & Ziomek 2012, La Haye et al. 2011, Neuman et al. 2004, 2005).

Agricultural intensification, specifically the loss of perennial crops, the lack of crop diversity and large scale mono-cultural farming, are suspected to have negative impact. So may have the use of pesticides. The current change in agricultural practices in Central and Eastern Europe, where the hamster population has traditionally been consid-ered stable, is an actual threat in the near future. In former times it was trapped and poisoned to prevent damage to crops, and this practice continues in some parts of the hamster’s range. In Hungary and possibly also other Eastern European countries it continues to be trapped for the fur trade.

Threats Classification Scheme

Threat Timing Scope Severity Impact Score

2.1.3. Agriculture & aquaculture -> Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> Agro-industry farming

Ongoing - - high Impact:1?

2.3.3. Agriculture & aquaculture -> Livestock farming & ranch-ing -> Agro-industry grazing, ranching or farming

Ongoing - - high Impact: 1?

5.1.1. Biological resource use -> Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> Intentional use (species is the target)

Ongoing - - low impact: 3

5.1.3. Biological resource use -> Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> Persecution/control

Ongoing - - high Impact: 1?

9.3.4. Pollution -> Agricultural & forestry effluents -> Type Un-known/Unrecorded

Ongoing - - low Impact: 3

Habitat loss Ongoing - - high Impact: 1

Fragmentation Ongoing - - high Impact: 1

Loss of Genetic diversity Ongoing medium impact: 2

CONSERVATION

It is listed on Appendix II of the Bern Convention and Annex IV of the EU Habitats and Species Directive. Specific conservation recommendations to improve the status of the species in Western Europe are detailed in Stubbe and Stubbe (1998), Nechay (2000), Weinhold (2009) and various other authors. These focus on subsidizing farmers to manage agricultural habitats appropriately, to restore key habitat elements such as lucerne fields offering cover and food after harvest and minimising the use of pesticides. In the last years reintroductions have been carried out in France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany but are still in the release phase. The Standing Committee of the Bern Convention adopted an action plan for the conservation of the European hamster in 2009 (Weinhold 2009), recommending the urgent need to update population data and trends in the Eastern part of the range as well as the preparation of protection plans in those countries. Only in Western Europe (Belgium, France, The Netherlands ,Ger-many) conservation measures are currently carried out and monitoring of population trends takes place regularly. These are 4 out of 19 countries belonging to the range of Cc where it is extant.

The remaining 15 countries together comprise the largest part of the range and especially with Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia having the highest responsibility for this species. Monitoring is ur-gently required in Eastern range states to determine population trends.

49


Conservation Actions In- Place

Successfully reintroduced or introduced benignly Note

YesMigrated from Conservation Measures 5.1 Species-based ac-

tions->Re-introductions: in-place (only in GER, NL, FRA)

Conservation Actions Needed

Yes

Research Needed

Yes

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Banaszek, A., Jadwiszczak, K. A., Ziomek, J., Neumann, K. (2010): Population structure, colonization processes and barriers for dispersal in Polish common hamsters (Cricetus cricetus). - J Zool Syst Evol Res (2010) 48(2): 151–158.

Banaszek, A., Jadwiszczak, K. A., Ziomek, J. (2011): Genetic variability and differentiation in the Polish common hamster (Cricetus cricetus L.) - Genetic consequences of agricultural habitat fragmentation. Mammalian Biology (76): 665-671

Banaszek A. & Ziomek J. (2012): Genetic variation and effective population size in an isolated population of the common hamster, Cricetus cricetus. Folia Zool. 61: 34–43.

Demyanchek, V.T. (2004): Cricetus cricetus. In: Red Book of Belarus

IUCN. 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 5 October 2008).

La Haye, M., K. Neumann & H. Koelewijn (2011): Strong decline of gene diversity in local populations of the highly endangered Common hamster (Cricetus cricetus) in the Western part of its European range. Conservation Genetics: 1-12.

Mezhzherin, S.V. (2009): Cricetus cricetus. In: Red Book of Ukraine. Kiev: 531Nechay, G. 2000. Status of hamsters: Cricetus cricetus, Cricetus migratorius, Mesocricetus newtoni and other hamster species in Europe. Council of Europe Publishing.

Neumann, K.,Jansman,H.,Kayser,A.,Maak,S.,Gattermann,R. (2004): Multiple bottlenecks in threatened Western European populations of the common hamster Cricetus cricetus (L.). Conserv.Genet.5,181–193.

Neumann, K.,Michaux,J.R.,Maak,S.,Jansman,H.,Kayser,A.,Mundt,G.,Gatter mann, R. (2005): Genetic spatial structure of European common hamsters a result of repente range expansion and demographic bottlenecks. Mol.Ecol.14, 1473–1483.

Panteleyev, P. A. (1998): The Rodents of the Palaearctic Composition and Areas. Pensoft, Moscow, Russia.

Rusin, M. & Banaszek, A. (2013): The common hamster (Cricetus cricetus) in Ukraine: evidence for population decline. Folia Zoologica, article in preparation.

Sidorov, G.V., Kassal, B.Yu., Goncharova, O.V., Vakhrushev, A.V., Frolov, K.V. (2011): Theriofauna of Omsk oblast: game species of rodents

Stubbe, M. and Stubbe, A. (1998): Ecology and Protection of the Common Hamster. Wissenschaftliche Beitr Martin-Luther-University-Halle-Wittenberg.

Tkadlec, E. , Heroldová, M., Víšková, V., Bednář, M. and Zejda, J. (2012): Distribution of the common hamster in the Czech Republic after 2000: retreating to optimum lowland habitats. Folia Zool. 61 (3-4): 246-253

Weinhold, U. (1999): Cricetus cricetus. In: A. J. Mitchell-Jones, G. Amori, W. Bogdanowicz, B. Krystufek, P. J. H. Reijnders, F. Spitzenberger, M. Stubbe, J. B. M. Thissen, V. Vohraland J. Zima (eds), The Atlas of European Mammals, Academic Press, London, UK.

Weinhold U. (2009): European action plan for the conservation of the common hamster (Cricetus cricetus, L. 1758). Nature and Environment n°158, Council of Europe, Strasbourg.

Ziomek J. & Banaszek A. (2007): The common hamster, Cricetus cricetus in Poland: status and current range. Folia Zool. 56: 235–242.

50


First Name Last Name Contact email address Organisation

Mathias Abts [email protected] Vlaamse Overheid - Landbouw en Visserij

Jérémy Bochenek [email protected] Association Sauvegarde Faune Sauvage

Céline Boulade [email protected] Association Sauvegarde Faune Sauvage

Pierre Boulay [email protected] GEPMA

Cécile Bouquier cecile.bouquier@developpement - durable.gouv.fr DREAL Alsace

Alison Boyes [email protected] RISE Foundation

Pierre Crahay [email protected] ELO

Victoria Canella [email protected] Association Sauvegarde Faune Sauvage

Luc Crevecoeur [email protected] Province of Limburg

Peer Cyriacks [email protected] Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung

Mark de Boer [email protected] Rotterdam Zoo

Julien Eidenschenck [email protected] Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage

Jimmy Grandadam [email protected] Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage

Caroline Habold [email protected] CNRS

Lisa Heimann [email protected]

Clotilde Herbillon clotilde.herbillon@developpement - durable.gouv.fr DREAL Alsace

Rainer Hutterer [email protected] Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig

Roux Julie [email protected] GEPMA

Wilfried Karwoth [email protected]

Ute Köhler [email protected]

Maurice La Haye [email protected] WUR

Christophe Manssens [email protected] Faune & Biotopes

Bertille Marquet [email protected] Association Sauvegarde Faune Sauvage

Bas Martens [email protected] Gaiazoo

Stefani Martens [email protected]

Stefanie Monecke [email protected] CNRS/Université Strasbourg

Gerard Müskens [email protected] WUR

Urszula Nowak [email protected] Adam Mickiewicz University

Ivana Petrova [email protected] Palacky University Olomouc

Boulay Pierre [email protected]

Alice Pillot [email protected]

Tobias Erik Reiners [email protected] Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt

Hans Roosen [email protected] De Vlaamse Landmaatschappij

Julie Roux [email protected]

Joke Rymen [email protected] Regionaal Landschap Haspengouw en Voeren

Marco Sander [email protected]

Elke Scheibler [email protected]

Ralf Schreiber [email protected]

Oskar Schröder [email protected] Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig

Carina Siutz [email protected]

Michael Stevens [email protected] Biostation Neuss

Kristijn Swinnen [email protected] Antwerp University

Emil Tkadlec [email protected] Palacky University Olomouc

Ruud van Kats [email protected] WUR

Martijn van Schie [email protected]

Wim Vandenrijt [email protected] De Vlaamse Landmaatschappij

Goedele Verbeylen [email protected] Natuurpunt Studie

Ulrich Weinhold [email protected] Institut für Faunistik

Veronique Verbist [email protected] Agentschap voor Natuur en Bos

Birgit Weissinger [email protected]

Mathieu Weitten [email protected] CNRS

Anja Werfling [email protected] raskin Umweltplanung und Umweltberatung GbR

2012 INTERNATIONAL HAMSTER WORKgROup ATTENDEES

51


IMAgES FROM THE 2012 IHWg – THANKS TO ALL FOR yOuR pARTICIpATION

52


Main Conference Organiser RISE Foundation

Address: 67 Rue de Trèves, B-1040, Brussels, BelgiumWebsite: www.risefoundation.eu Email: [email protected] Tel: 00 32 (0)2 234 30 00Fax: 00 32 (0)2 234 30 09

Conference Co-OrganiserEuropean Landowners’ Organization

Address: 67 Rue de Trèves, B-1040, Brussels, BelgiumWebsite: www.europeanlandowners.orgEmail: [email protected]: 00 32 (0)2 234 30 00Fax: 00 32 (0)2 234 30 09

Conference SponsorsProvince of Limburg

Address: Universiteitslaan 1, 3500 Hasselt, BelgiumWebsite: www.limburg.beEmail: [email protected]: +32 11 23 71 11

Flemish Agency for Nature and Forests

Address: Agentschap voor Natuur en Bos Koning Albert II-laan 20, 1000 Brussel Website: www.natuurenbos.beEmail: [email protected] Tel: +32 25 53 81 02 Fax: +32 25 53 81 05

Conference VenueHerkenrode Abbey

Address: Abdijsite HerkenrodeHerkenrodeabdij 4, B 3511 HasseltWebsite: http://www.abdijsiteherkenrode.be/Email: [email protected]: +32 11 23 96 70Group visits, reservations and information Tel: +32 11 23 95 [email protected]

Pantone 364CMYK 73 / 9 / 94 / 39

Pantone 390CMYK 24 / 0 / 98 / 8

Pantone 364CMYK 73 / 9 / 94 / 39

Pantone 390CMYK 24 / 0 / 98 / 8

19th Meeting of the International Hamster Workgroup, 2012. Organised by the RISE Foundation with the support of the Province of Limburg, the Flemish Agency

for Nature and Forests, and the European Landowners’ Organization.

Documents

19th Meeting of the international haMster Workgroup...Luc Crevecoeur • Province of Limburg Roger de Muylder • Commune de Bertem Veronique Verbist • Agentschap voor Natuur en