Bonasa bonasia Linnaeus, 1758
Text, map and photo from
Storch I. (2000) : Grouse Action Plan 2000-2004,
reproduced here with the Editor's agreement
Synonyms:
Tetrastes
bonasia,
Common
names:
Lesharka
Bulgarian
Hua wie zhen
ji
Chinese
Jerábek
lesní
Czech
Hjerpe
Danish
Hazel
grouse
English
Lanepüü
Estonian
Pyy
Finnish
Gélinotte
des bois
French
Haselhuhn
German
Agriokota
Greek
Császármadár
Hungarian
Francolino di
monte
Italian
Ezo-raicho
Japanese
Jerpe
Norwegian
Jarzabek
Polish
Ryabchik
Russian
Gozdni
jereb
Slovenian
Grevol
Spanish
Järpe
Swedish
Tetrao bonasia
Photo: a male, by Hans
Aschenbrenner
Conservation Status
IUCN 1996: Lower risk
(least concern).
CITES 1998: not listed in Appendices.
EU Birds Directive: Annex I
National red data books: some central and southern European
countries; China.
Taxonomy
There are currently 11 (Potapov and Flint 1989) or 12 (del Hoyo et al. 1994) subspecies recognised based on morphological traits. Only the western and easternmost subspecies are geographically isolated (see Bergmann et al. 1996).
Distribution
Eurasia. Boreal, montane, and temperate forests from France and Scandinavia east to Japan. The northern limit of the range coincides with the edge of the taiga forest; the northernmost populations are at approx. 70°N in Lapland and Siberia. The southern limit of the species mostly parallels the southern border of the boreal forest; in Europe and parts of eastern Asia the hazel grouse also occurs in deciduous temperate forests and montane forests south of the boreal zone. The species is missing in an area in northeastern Siberia along the river Indigirka; probably related to the absence of alder Alnus spp. (see Potapov and Flint 1989, Bergmann et al. 1996).
Population size and trend
In the boreal forest the hazel grouse still occupies most of its historical range and is generally common. In western and central Europe major declines and range contractions have occurred during the past century and already before; most remaining populations are restricted to mountainous areas; many are scattered and small. Some range contractions, partly already in historical times, have occurred in China and Mongolia due to large-scale deforestation. In Japan, a dramatic decline occurred in the 1970s (see Potapov and Flint 1989, Fujimaki 1995, Bergmann et al. 1996).
Habitat and ecology
Hazel grouse inhabit mostly mixed coniferous-deciduous forests. They show fairly narrow requirements for habitat structure; availability of relatively dense coniferous or deciduous cover from the ground to about 2 m in height seems to be critical. Hazel grouse are found in a wide variety of habitat types that provide this structural requirement; old growth as well as managed deciduous or coniferous forests of different harvest regimes and successional stages. In pure coniferous forests, e.g. in the Alps, hazel grouse may occur in low densities as long as small deciduous patches are provided, e.g. along streams. During snow, hazel grouse feed on catkins and buds of deciduous trees such as Alnus, Betula, Corylus, Sorbus, Fagus, and Chosenia. Close interspersion of feeding trees and cover is crucial. In snowfree times, the birds feed on a variety of shrubs, herbs, and grasses. Hazel grouse avoid open areas and seem to be particularly vulnerable to forest fragmentation (see Swenson 1991, 1995, Åberg 1996, Bergmann et al. 1996).
Hunting and cultural importance
The hazel grouse is a popular game species throughout most of its range. European hunters mostly attract the birds by imitating their calls with special grouse whistles in spring and autumn. This kind of hunting is still practised in Scandinavia and Russia. In the boreal zone, however, hazel grouse are more commonly hunted with pointing dogs in autumn. In Russia, the greatest hunting bags of hazel grouse result from snaring and trapping.
Hazel grouse hunting no longer plays any economic role in central Europe. Only few birds are taken and hunting is banned in several countries. In part of the boreal region, hazel grouse shooting remains economically important. After the willow ptarmigan, the hazel grouse is the most numerous of all grouse, and probably of all small game species, in the bag of Fennoscandian and Russian hunters. The species is hunted for both sport and food in northern Europe. In Russia it is primarily hunted for food, but is also used as a bait for trapping mustelids. The Russian hunting bag of hazel grouse probably still exceeded 2 million birds per year in the early 1990s (Grabuzov 1995). In Japan, sport hunting of hazel grouse is popular, but shooting bags have dropped from 50,000 in the late 1960s to 5,000 in 1991, because of a population decline. (See Potapov and Flint 1989, Fujimaki 1997, Flint 1995, Grabuzov 1995, Bergmann et al. 1996.)
Principal threats
Habitat degradation. Habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation related to changes in human land use or sylvicultural practices are the most important threats to the hazel grouse. Deforestation (parts of Asia), loss of a dense understorey in industrial forests (central, southern Europe; Fennoscandia), and clearcutting (boreal forest) may result in declining hazel grouse numbers.
Predation. A dramatic decline in hazel grouse numbers in Japan coincided with an increase in red foxes; in parts of Europe, increasing numbers of generalist predators and wild boar are believed to result in reduced survival and nesting success.
Research needs
Long term counts, preferably with measures of reproductive success, are needed to estimate minimal viable population size and minimum spatial habitat requirements for population and metapopulation persistence. Information is needed on population dynamics and colonisation and extinction in habitat patches in relation to the size, quality, and isolation of habitat patches. Comparative approaches from various parts of the range with different landscape patterns and disturbance regimes should be continued.
Current conservation measures
Legal protection. The degree of legal protection varies between countries. In general, the species is fully protected in countries with small and declining populations; e.g. in central Europe and China. Illegal hunting was reported from several countries but nowhere was its influence on population dynamics believed to be high.
Protected areas. Only a minor proportion of the species´ range is covered by protected areas, and their role for grouse conservation is generally considered to be limited. In a few countries at the limits of the range, reserves are seen as critical for long-term survival of hazel grouse populations (Greece, Hungary, Japan, Mongolia).
Surveys and monitoring. In Fennoscandia, monitoring is common as a means of harvest planning. In other parts of the range, mostly regionally restricted and irregular surveys and monitoring of some populations have been reported. In Bohemia (Czechia), hazel grouse have been monitored for 30 years; this is the only established monitoring scheme in central Europe.
Habitat preservation. Habitat management for hazel grouse has been initiated in some parts of Europe with small or declining populations. Measures include maintaining coppice woodlands, favouring deciduous trees and shrubs within coniferous forests, and planting patches of conifers for cover within extensive deciduous forests. Because many capercaillie habitats are also suitable for hazel grouse, both species can simultaneously benefit from sylvicultural practices promoting multi-layered, but not too dense forests.
Priority conservation measures
Habitat preservation. Integrating forestry practices and habitat conservation appears to be most important where industrial forestry is introduced, where sylvicultural practices change forest structure in a way unfavourable to the species, and where populations are declining. From some countries, protected areas have been suggested as a means of habitat protection (e.g. Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Japan). Landscape scale aspects of hazel grouse habitats need to be considered where populations are spatially structured. Regarding the sensitivity of the species to habitat fragmentation, maintaining or restoring spatial connectivity among scattered populations seems to be vital, e.g. in western and central Europe.
Surveys and monitoring. Population monitoring is recommended to track potential declines and to ensure sustainability of exploitation, primarily in those parts of the range where the species is potentially threatened or declining, or in regions with high hunting pressure.
Law enforcement. Better law enforcement is required in some countries where the species is threatened and illegal hunting appears to be common, e.g. Bulgaria and Greece.
Correspondents
Andras Baldi, Massimo Bocca, Ariane Bernard-Laurent, Hans-Heiner Bergmann, Ayurzanyn Bold, Miran Cas, Roman Dziedzic, Volodymyr Domashlinets, Laurence Ellison, Michael Fasel, Yuzo Fujimaki, Marijan Grubesic, Lazlo Kalaber, Wolfgang Kantner, Siegfried Klaus, Harto Lindén, Alexander Mikityuk, Pierre Mollet, Tatjana Pavlushchick, Roald Potapov, Athanassios Sfougaris, Peter S. Shurulinkov, Torstein Storaas, Ilse Storch, Sun Yue-Hua.
Key publications
Bergmann, H.-H., Klaus, S., Müller, F., Scherzinger, W., Swenson, J.E., Wiesner, J. 1996. Die Haselhühner, Westarp Wissenschaften, Magdeburg, Germany. 278 pp.
Office National de la Chasse 1994. Plan de restauration pour quelque galliformes européens galliformes: gelinotte, grand tétras, tétras-lyre et perdix bartavelle &endash; tome 1. Gibier Faune Sauvage 11(1), 348 p.
Office National de la Chasse 1994. Restoration plans for some European galliformes: hazel grouse, capercaillie and black grouse; part 2. Gibier Faune Sauvage 11(2), 222 p.
Swenson, J. E. 1991. Social organisation of hazel grouse and ecological factors influencing it. PhD Thesis, Univ. of Alberta, Canada.
Swenson, J. E. 1995. Habitat requirements of hazel grouse. In: Jenkins, D. (ed.): Proc. Intern. Symp. Grouse 6: 155-162.