Article 17 web tool

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: The values given in 6.2 refer to the number of subadult and adult individuals. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Monitoring of the population is based primarily on lynx sightings reported by the large carnivore contact persons, especially sightings of litters. Population size is estimated from observations done during snow period from the entire country. However, in northernmost Finland, in reindeer herding area, network of contact persons is sparse and snow tracking is less intensive. In some areas (mainly in Southern Finland) also monitoring by GPS-tracking is used. The number of separate family groups is estimated each year from the observational data of lynx family groups (female with young). Family group number was converted to adult individuals by using a species specific multiplier (4,5-6) which is based on scientific research on female lynx movements and proportion of family groups of the whole population (done in Scandinavia). Only very small part of the Finnish lynx population is living in alpine region.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: QA feedback : Confirmation de l'évaluation Favorable FV de l'Aire de répartition - compte tenu de la dynamique positive de la répartition ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Favourable Reference Range for Alpine region is the same as the current range
since all available space is already inhabited by lynx. ||
->Population: Based on the camera trapping surveys in the part of Alpine region, it has been determined that the average density of lynx was 0.8 /100km. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: In 2018 only one main in southern Trentino (Giudicarie) probably extending his home range in Switzerland, and a second one on Carnic Alp in Friuli Venezia Giulia region (Nasfelpass) ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Aktualnie określony zasięg gatunku jest większy od zasiegów określonych w poprzednich raportach - w raporcie z 2007 r. zasięg gatunku został określony na 7 000 km2, a w raporcie z 2013 r. na 6 420 km2. Jednakże przyczyną tej różnicy jest zastosowanie innej metody jego wyznaczania. Aktualnie, zgodnie z wytycznymi, zasięg został wyznaczony przyjmując, że przerwy w rozmieszczeniu gatunku sięgające do 40 km wliczane są do zasięgu występowania gatunku. W poprzednich raportach przerwy w rozmieszczeniu, które były wliczane do zasięgu gatunku, były mniejsze. ||
->Population: Liczebność gatunku została określona na podstawie ekstrapolacji zagęszczeń populacji stwierdzonych na stanowiskach monitoringowych na cały obszar rozmieszczenia gatunku w regionie. Ze względu na niską wykrywalność rysi określono jedynie minimalną wielkość populacji. Stwierdzona aktualna liczebność jest niższa od tej podawanej w poprzednich raportach. W raporcie z 2007 r. wielkość populacji została oszacowana na 90-100 osobników, a w raporcie z 2013 r. na minimum 100 osobników. Jednakże dane udostępnione na stronie internetowej ogólnopolskiej inwentaryzacji wilka i rysia prowadzonej przez IBS PAN w Białowieży wskazują na inne liczebności. Biorąc dane IBS PAN pod uwagę należy uznać, że liczebność rysia w analizowanym okresie była stabilna - w sezonie 2006/2007 wynosiła minimum 128 osobników na terenie całego kraju, z czego około 50% w Karpatach. Program inwentaryzacji wilka i rysia koordynowany przez IBS PAN został zakończony 2012 r., a ostatnie dane o liczebności rysia pochodzą z sezonu 2008/2009. Stwierdzono wtedy minimum 115 osobników na terenie całego kraju. Porównanie aktualnych dany (niniejszy raport) z danymi IBS PAN wskazuje zatem na stabilną liczebność populacji rysia w ciągu ostatnich 12 lat. Referencyjną wielkość populacji określono jako większą niż aktualnie notowaną, gdyż jest niższa od średniej minimalnej liczebności (ok. 70 osobników) jaka była notowana w latach 2000-2009. ||
->HabInfo: W raportach z 2007 r. i 2013 r. powierzchnia siedliska została określona jako udział terenów leśnych w obrębie zasięgu gatunku. Stosując tę samą metodę określenia powierzchni siedliska należałoby uznać, że powierzchnia siedliska uległa zwiększeniu. Wzrost ten jednak jest pozorny, gdyż wynika ze zmiany metody określania zasięgu. Pomimo postępującego rozwoju zabudowy oraz infrastruktury drogowej, jakość siedliska wydaje się być nadal odpowiednia dla trwania tego gatunku w regionie alpejskim, o ile będą prowadzone stosowne działania ochronne. Przy ocenie stanu siedliska wykorzystano dane Państwowego Monitoringu Środowiska GIOŚ. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Similar comment as for wolf and wolverine. ||
->Population: "Very high quality data, the change in population size is calculated by putting the values from the yearly inventories into a General Additive Model (GAM), the decrease is considered a part of the normal predator-prey cycle. Since Sweden is not counting lynx based on biogeographic zone, we partition the national estimate to the alpine zone and the boreal zone. The minimum and maximum values for the multi-year mean are the region's fraction of the lowest and highest national estimate during the reporting period. The most recent Scandinavian estimation is 262 family groups in Scandinavia that corresponds to a population of about 1542 lynx (95 % CI = 1301– 1783). ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: Poaching and political decisions concerning hunting (both in Sweden and neighbouring Norway and Finland) are also important factors for the nationally transboundary population (http://www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer6400/978-91-620-6793-9.pdf?pid=21308). Prospects are viewed as good (http://awsassets.wwf.no/downloads/agreement_no_se_and_fi.pdf). ||
->Conclusion: The declining population is not considered a problem since the population is above the FRP, and the decline is due to natural causes (reduction in prey density by lynx), hence we still consider the population stable despite a <1% annual decline. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Hellborg et al. (2002) Differentiation and levels of genetic variation in northern European lynx (Lynx lynx) populations revealed by microsatellites and mitochondrial DNA analysis. Conservation Genetics 3: 97–111.
Sjögren-Gulve, P. (2019) Favourable Reference Values (Population & Range, respectively) for Brown Bear (Ursus arctos), Lynx (Lynx lynx) and Wolverine (Gulo gulo) in Sweden 2013-2018. Memo, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency case NV-02653-18.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: In the reporting period 2013-2018, there was no systematic monitoring of lynx population size. Monitoring started in 2018 within LIFE Lynx project, but no data is yet available. The reported number is an expert opinion guess for the beginning of the reporting period. ||
->HabInfo: Lynx show preference for forested habitats, followed by shrubs and herbaceous vegetation and avoid of highways, settlements and areas of high agricultural land use. In the Alpine biogeographical region there is enough of highly suitable habitat for lynx, especially in the Dinaric Mountains. An important barrier between the Alps and the Dinaric Mountains is the highway Ljubljana – Koper. Prey availability is not a limiting factor in the region. Based on a habitat model, there is enough suitable habitat for 150 lynx in Slovenia. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Change is caused by significant reduction of food base (roe deer population) due to extremely cold winters in 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: The lynx population grew since 1978 until 2014. Population estimate in 2014 was 2740−2890 but in 2018 it was 1865-1990 adult individuals. In 2014 about 431- 487 litters were born, that decreased to 332-375 litters in 2018. The long term trend of population increase ended in 2014, the decrease from then on being between 8% (from 2015 to 2016) to 21% decrease in 2018 (Holmala et al 2018). Monitoring of the population is based primarily on lynx sightings reported by the contact persons, especially sightings of litters. Population size is estimated from observations done during snow tracking from the entire country. However, in northernmost Finland, in reindeer herding area network of contact persons is sparse and snow tracking is less intensive. In some areas (mainly in Southern Finland) also monitoring by GPS-tracking is used. The number of separate family groups is estimated each year from the observational data of lynx family groups (female with young). Family group number was converted to adult individuals by using a species specific multiplier (4,5-6) which is based on scientific research on female lynx movements and proportion of family groups of the whole population (done in Scandinavia). The main objectives of the conservation, management and regulation of Finland’s lynx population have been stated in the population management plan (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 2007). The main goal is to maintain the favourable conservation status of the lynx population in the future. Finland has been divided into two large regions for lynx population management purposes: the reindeer husbandry area and the rest of Finland. The objective is not to increase the lynx population in the reindeer herding area, but to ensure the free movement of lynx between Scandinavia and Russia. In management areas outside the reindeer husbandry area, the objective is to establish a lynx population that allows natural spreading and the creation of new habitats in harmony with special regional features. Growth of the lynx population is to be limited, especially in areas where there is a population concentration, taking into account the principle of sustainable use and the objective of achieving a more even distribution of the lynx population. Hunting has been the major cause of mortality of lynx, varying between less than 10% upto over 20% of the estimated minimum population (years 2000 - 2018). Other mortality varies between years (0,5-5%) but has been estimated to be only few % of the minimum population size.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: The lynx population size is monitored by Latvian State Forest Service (SFS). The official statistics (partly available at http://www.vmd.gov.lv/valsts-meza-dienests/statiskas-lapas/medibas/valsts-meza-dienests/statiskas-lapas/skaitli-un-fakti?id=766) are based on regular observations by SFS employees, giving an estimate on the number of the lynx for each year by the 1st of April. According to expert opinion, there are no more than 600–800 lynxes in Latvia. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Ibid. ||
->Population: "Very high quality data, the change in population size is calculated by putting the values from the yearly inventories into a General Additive Model (GAM), the decrease is considered a part of the normal predator-prey cycle. Since Sweden is not counting lynx based on biogeographic zone, we partition the national estimate into the alpine region and the boreal region. The minimum and maximum values for the multi-year mean are the region's fraction of the lowest and highest national estimate during the reporting period. The most recent Scandinavian estimation is 262 family groups in Scandinavia that corresponds to a population of about 1542 lynx (95 % CI = 1301– 1783). ||
->HabInfo: In the boreal zone, the population is considered limited by prey abundance (roe deer). ||
->Future: Poaching and political decisions concerning hunting (both in Sweden and neighbouring Norway and Finland) are also important factors for the nationally transboundary population (http://www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer6400/978-91-620-6793-9.pdf?pid=21308). Prospects are viewed as good (http://awsassets.wwf.no/downloads/agreement_no_se_and_fi.pdf). ||
->Conclusion: The declining population is not considered a problem since the population is above the FRP, and the decline is due to natural causes (reduction in prey density by lynx), hence we still consider the population stable despite a <1% annual decline. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Hellborg et al. (2002) Differentiation and levels of genetic variation in northern European lynx (Lynx lynx) populations revealed by microsatellites and mitochondrial DNA analysis. Conservation Genetics 3: 97–111.
Sjögren-Gulve, P. (2019) Favourable Reference Values (Population & Range, respectively) for Brown Bear (Ursus arctos), Lynx (Lynx lynx) and Wolverine (Gulo gulo) in Sweden 2013-2018. Memo, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency case NV-02653-18.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: The values given in 6.2 refer to the number of subadult and adult individuals. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Das Verbreitungsgebiet ist insbesondere im Südwesten fluktuierend, es findet dort bislang keine Reproduktion statt. ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Übernahme Angabe Expertengruppe ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: Situations contrastées entre le noyau jurassien et le noyau vosgien. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Aktualnie określony zasięg gatunku jest większy od zasiegów określonych w poprzednich raportach - w raporcie z 2007 r. zasięg gatunku został określony na 9 600 km2, a w raporcie z 2013 r. na 15 623 km2. Jednakże przyczyną tej różnicy jest zastosowanie innej metody jego wyznaczania. Aktualnie, zgodnie z wytycznymi, zasięg został wyznaczony przyjmując, że przerwy w rozmieszczeniu gatunku sięgające do 40 km wliczane są do zasięgu występowania gatunku. W poprzednich raportach przerwy w rozmieszczeniu, które były wliczane do zasięgu gatunku, były mniejsze. ||
->Population: Liczebność gatunku została określona na podstawie ekstrapolacji zagęszczeń populacji stwierdzonych na stanowiskach monitoringowych na cały obszar rozmieszczenia gatunku w regionie.
Ze względu na niską wykrywalność rysi określono jedynie minimalną wielkość populacji. Stwierdzona aktualna liczebność jest niższa od podawanej w poprzednich raportach. W raportach z 2007 r. i 2013 r. wielkość populacji została oszacowana na 90-100 osobników. Wg danych z ogólnopolskiej inwentaryzacji wilka i rysia prowadzonej przez IBS PAN w Białowieży w sezonie 2006/2007 liczba rysi bytujących na terenie całego kraju wynosiła minimum 128 osobników, z czego około połowa poza Karpatami (region alpejski). Program inwentaryzacji wilka i rysia koordynowany przez IBS PAN został zakończony w 2012 r., a ostatnie dane o liczebności rysia pochodzą z sezonu 2008/2009. Stwierdzono wtedy minimum 115 osobników na terenie całego kraju. Porównanie aktualnych dany z danymi IBS PAN wskazuje zatem na stabilną liczebność populacji rysia w ciągu ostatnich 12 lat. Biorąc pod uwagę, że populacja gatunku może się potencjalnie rozwijać - duże kompleksy leśne położone na zachód od Wisły nadal nie są zasiedlone przez ten gatunek - do określenia FRP został użyty operator. ||
->HabInfo: W raportach z 2007 r. i 2013 r. powierzchnia siedliska została określona jako udział terenów leśnych w obrębie zasięgu gatunku. Stosując tę samą metodę określenia powierzchni siedliska należałoby uznać, że jego powierzchnia zwiększyła się. Wzrost ten jednak jest pozorny, gdyż wynika ze zmiany metody określania zasięgu. Ponieważ rozmieszczenie gatunku w zasadzie nie uległo zmianie, należy przyjąć, że powierzchnia siedliska również nie uległa zmianie. Ryś ma stosunkowo wysokie wymagania siedliskowe i bardzo uproszczone w swej strukturze lasy antropogeniczne nie są preferowane przez ten gatunek. Jakość aktualnie zajmowanych przez rysie siedlisk wydaje się być stabilna. Jednakże biorąc pod uwagę fakt, że w regionie kontynentalnym liczące obecnie od kilku do kilkunastu osobników subpopulacje bytują w izolowanych od siebie dużych kompleksach leśnych, jakość siedliska rysia należy uznać za słabą, a perspektywy przetrwania gatunku w dłuższej perspektywie czasowej za wątpliwe. Szczególne niebezpieczeństwo dla przetrwania gatunku w regionie kontynentalnym stanowi rozwój sieci autostrad i dróg ekspresowych zwłaszcza w północno-wschodniej części regionu, gdyż może pogłębić istniejącą już izolację poszczególnych subpopulacji. Przy ocenie stanu siedliska wykorzystano dane Państwowego Monitoringu Środowiska GIOŚ. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: No data collected. ||
->HabInfo: No data collected. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Lynx lynx"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report