top of page

攀岩與猛禽

Updated: Jul 4, 2021


Photo courtesy of: © Greg Orton

攀岩與猛禽

CLIMBING AND RAPTORS:

攀岩活動與猛禽生態適應性管理手冊 A Handbook for Adaptive Raptor Management


發表:Access Fund | 岩場開放基金會 – 2021 / 06 / 11


AFRaptor-Paper
.pdf
Download PDF • 4.84MB

翻譯:陳震宇

審閱:王大濟、許永暉

 


CONTENTS | 目錄

  • Intruduction | 前言

  • Factors to Consider in Raptor Management | 猛禽保育的考量要件

  • Collaboration, Monitoring, and Community Science | 合作、監測,以及在地研究團體

  • Communication and Education | 溝通與教育

  • Acknowledgements | 致謝

  • Appendices | 附錄



Photo courtesy of: © Greg Orton

本手冊旨在供攀岩者、在地攀岩組織 (LCO)、以及土地管理者 / 當局,在從事重要而複雜的猛禽生態保育與周邊區域的攀岩活動管理時參考用。本手冊係由頂尖的猛禽研究人員與岩場開放基金會 (Access Fund) 共同彙編而成,讓攀岩者知道如何運用現有最佳的科學研究成果,與當地的猛禽生態建立起良性的互動關係。同時,本文件也探討其他重要議題;例如攀岩者與岩場的土地管理者該如何建立合作關係、發展監測計畫、並與在地攀岩社群進行有效的溝通,或推行生態教育工作。本手冊將取代岩場開放基金會過去出版與「猛禽 / 攀岩者互動管理」議題相關的所有文件。

This handbook is designed as a resource for individuals, local climbing organizations (LCOs), and land managers as they navigate the complex and crucial work of managing rock climbing activities in the proximity of raptors. Written in collaboration between leading raptor researchers and Access Fund, this handbook presents the best available science applied to the interaction between climbers and raptors. This document also addresses critical topics such as how to build relationships between climbers and land managers, develop monitoring programs, and effectively communicate with and educate the climbing community. This handbook replaces and supersedes previous Access Fund publications on raptor-climber interactions and management.




CHAPTER 1 | 第一章

INTRODUCTION | 前言

猛禽 (raptor) 這個名詞,是泛指某些特定肉食性鳥類的通稱,包含隼、鷂、鷹、鴞、鷲、雕等等。由於自然環境與人為因素的威脅,例如棲地減少、氣候變遷、因誤食農藥或含鉛產品而中毒¹ 等等,使得某些種類的猛禽已被列為敏感或瀕危物種。遊隼 (Peregrine Falcon) 是一種會與攀岩者共用岩壁的猛禽,雖然有少數特定岩場會為了其他較為敏感的猛禽 (如金鷹) 而封閉²,但絕大多數定期封閉的岩場,都是為了遊隼的保育。

儘管遊隼已於 1999 年自美國聯邦政府的瀕危物種名單上除名,但牠們仍享有過去的種種保育措施。除了受到許多州政府的法律保護外,所有種類的猛禽與候鳥都包含在《候鳥保護條約³ 》中,受到聯邦法的保護,禁止所有未經許可的獵捕與販售行為。然而儘管遊隼數量已大幅回升,但在某些州,牠們仍被列為敏感或瀕危物種。現今實施的許多遊隼保育管理計畫,自 1990 年代開始施行後便未曾更新過,土地管理者並未考量這 20 年來的科學研究進展,依舊試圖執行過時的聯邦保護法令。本手冊不僅借鑒了 2000 年以前的研究基礎,同時也包含近年來不斷發展的科學研究文獻。

遊隼,是美國野生動物保育史上最卓著的成功案例之一,而在這個神奇鳥類的復育工作中,攀岩者始終扮演著至關重要的角色。運用各種專業的高空作業技術,攀岩者不僅提供了難以取得的研究資料協助觀測,甚至也曾將遊隼幼雛放回岩壁上的巢位以協助其復育;但也由於攀岩者是極少數能夠靠近猛禽棲地的活動族群,因此也經常成為驚擾其育雛的尷尬角色,全美各地的許多天然岩場也為此展開季節性的定期封閉措施,使得保護猛禽生態、與其共享天然資源,已成為戶外攀岩體驗的重要元素之一。

近年來,關於猛禽生態保育的管理觀念已經有了轉變,過去全面性的封閉措施 – 每年定期封閉整面岩壁或部分岩場分區 – 如今已愈來愈少見;以科學監測為基礎的適應性管理方式,正在逐漸成為一種標準管理模式。由於全面性的封閉措施並不見得都是以鳥類行為、攀岩者活動模式、或現場地形等在地條件作為參考依據,因此有愈來愈多的野生動物學家,開始針對特定地點的在地條件與相關資料,深入研究「適應性管理」與「定期封閉局部岩場」的保育成效差異。而適應性管理模式的實現,仰賴攀岩者與土地管理者共同參與;透過攀岩者對在地岩場的了解,以及他們在岩壁上的移動能力,各種志願性質的監測研究計畫才能夠順利進行。

The terms raptors or birds of prey refer to a species of birds that are primarily carnivorous and includes falcons, eagles, owls, hawks, and vultures. Some species of raptors are listed as sensitive or endangered due to natural and human threats such as loss or degradation of habitat, climate change, and poisoning from pesticides and lead-based products.¹ Peregrine falcons are a raptor that commonly share cliffs with climbers. While closures for other types of sensitive raptors such as golden eagles may be in place at certain climbing areas,² the majority of seasonal closures related to climbing areas are in place to protect peregrine falcons.

Even though peregrine falcons were delisted as a federal endangered species in 1999, they still enjoy many of the same protections they did while listed. Besides protection under numerous state laws, all species of raptors are included in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act,³ which federally protects raptors and all migratory birds from hunting or collecting for commercial purposes without a permit. Though peregrines have made a strong comeback, they are still listed as an endangered or sensitive species at the state level in several states. Many peregrine management plans in place today have not been updated since their implementation in the 1990s, and land managers are still attempting to enforce the same federal protections from that era without considering the best available science from the past 20 years. This handbook draws from the scientific literature developed in more recent years, as well as fundamental research conducted pre-2000.

The peregrine falcon is one of the greatest success stories in the history of American wildlife conservation, and climbers played a significant role in the recovery of this incredible bird. Utilizing a specialized skill set, climbers have not only provided data and monitoring services, but even placed peregrine chicks on nest ledges to help facilitate their recovery. As one of the very few user groups who can access raptor nests, climbers are also, however, in a unique position to disturb nesting birds. This has led to seasonal raptor closures being a regular part of the climbing season for many locations across the country. Coexisting with and protecting raptors has become part of the climbing experience.

The thinking around raptor management has evolved in recent years. Blanket closures—where entire cliffs and/or climbing areas are shut down for a portion of the year—are becoming less common. Adaptive, monitoring-based management is becoming the standard. Blanket closures are not always based on bird behavior, climber-use patterns, or terrain. Increasingly, wildlife biologists and climbers are instituting management or seasonal closure areas that cover a limited section of cliff line, based on site- specific conditions and data. Adaptive management practices are bolstered by partnerships between climbers and land managers, and by establishing volunteer monitoring programs for which climbers are particularly well suited, thanks to their knowledge of local crags and ability to access cliff sites.


註 1.《猛禽面臨的威脅》“Threats to Raptors.” https://hawkwatch.org/learn/threats-to-raptors
註 2. 波德峽谷 2015《猛禽保育定期封閉措施》“Seasonal closure in Boulder Canyon to protect nesting birds of prey.” 2015. https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/arp/news-events/?cid=FSEPRD879975
註 3.《候鳥保護條約》“Migratory Bird Treaty Act.” 2020. https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/migratory-bird-treaty-act.php
註 4. 各州的猛禽數量狀態可在此處查詢 Individual state status of raptors can be checked here: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
註 5.《遊隼回來了!》1998 “The Peregrine Falcon is Back!” 1998. https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/pressrel/1998/98-38.htm


ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT | 適應性管理

根據美國林業局指出:

適應性管理,是一種根據明確的預期成效與監管機制,確認所有的管理措施是否能夠滿足 / 達到預期成效的管理模式;若無法達成,則應即時改善各項管理措施,確保其能達成,抑或重新評估預期成效... 該方案執行期間亦須知會所屬單位,詳述其監管機制,以便確認是否達成其預期成效

換言之,適應性管理即為一種持續滾動更新的系統。每當新的資料或科學出現時,整個管理系統的計畫與方針就必須隨即做出相應的調整,這樣的管理策略,是源自意識到我們現有的知識,會隨著天然資源與生態系統的不確定性與變動性而不斷增長

任何初步決策的關鍵之一,就是設計出一種管理措施,能夠在產生資訊的同時,還能為下個階段的管理決策保留調整空間。而適應性管理方案也必須明確指出,當監管與分析過程中顯示管理措施無法達成預期成效時,必須明確指出可能調整的環節¹⁰。具體而言,在針對猛禽保育實施適應性管理時,必須不斷地進行評估,並在必要時做出調整,以確保管理措施能夠有效降低人類休閒活動對猛禽族群數量造成的影響。

According to the US Forest Service,

adaptive management is a system of management practices based on clearly identified intended outcomes and monitoring to determine if management actions are meeting those outcomes; and, if not, to facilitate management changes that will best ensure those outcomes are met or re-evaluated.... Such proposals must also describe the monitoring that would take place to inform the responsible official during implementation whether the action is having its intended effect.

In other words, adaptive management is a system centered on iteration. As new data and/or science about a given management scenario emerges, plans and tactics are adjusted accordingly. This strategy stems from the recognition that knowledge about natural resource systems is sometimes uncertain and can change.

An important part of any first decision is to design management actions that will produce information and allow for possible adjustments during a second phase of management. Adaptive management proposals should identify the adjustments that may be made when monitoring, and analysis indicates an action is not having the intended effect.¹⁰ Specifically, in relation to raptors, practices should be regularly evaluated and, if necessary, revised to ensure that they are effective in lessening potential detrimental effects of recreation activities on bird populations.


註 7. 美國林業局 2008 國家環境政策程序法 USDA Forest Service. 2008. National Environmental Policy Act Procedures, Final rule. 36 CFR Part 220, RIN 0596-AC49. Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 143/ July 24, 2008. https://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/nepa_procedures/includes/fr_nepa_procedures_2008_07_24.pdf
註 8. 威廉斯, B. K. 與 E. D. 布朗。2012《適應性管理:美國內政部應用指南》華盛頓特區美國內政部適應性管理工作小組 Williams, B. K., and E. D. Brown. 2012. Adaptive Management: The U.S. Department of the Interior applications guide. Adaptive Management Working Group, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. ISBN: 978-0- 615-59913-7. https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/DOI-Adaptive-Management-Applications-Guide-WebOptimized.pdf
註 9. 出處同上 Ibid;    波爾曼 • 伯納德 T、派崔克 G. 昆寧罕、馬沙 H. 布魯克斯、凡 W. 曼寧、麥可 W. 克洛比。1994《太平洋西北方生態系統適應性管理》奧勒岡州波特蘭市美國農業部林業局太平洋西北方工作站 Bormann, Bernard T., Patrick G. Cunningham, Martha H. Brookes, Van W. Manning, and Michael W. Collopy. 1994. Adaptive ecosystem management in the Pacific Northwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-341. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 22 p. https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr341.pdf    魯道克 M 與 D.P 懷特菲爾德。2007 《特定鳥類干擾範圍調查報告》自然研究 (計畫) 有限公司與蘇格蘭自然遺產 Ruddock, M and D.P Whitfield. 2007. “A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species.” Natural Research (Projects) Ltd to Scottish Natural Heritage. http://www.anev.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/ AREVIE1.pdf
註 10. 威廉斯, B. K. 與 E. D. 布朗。2012《適應性管理:美國內政部應用指南》Williams and Brown. 2012. Adaptive Management: The U.S. Department of the Interior applications guide.


SEASONAL CLOSURES | 定期封閉措施

所謂的定期封閉措施,指的是在猛禽繁殖季時,將其棲地周遭特定範圍完全封閉,藉此提高其繁殖的成功率。實施適當的封閉措施並確實執行,對於野生動物的健康狀態是非常重要的,因為當人類活動干擾達到一定程度時,就有可能導致猛禽成鳥棄巢,進而毀掉一整年的所有繁殖機會。因此,為了讓成鳥能夠順利孵育幼雛提升族群數量,定期封閉有時可能會是必要措施。

土地管理者必須費盡心思,才能做出恰到好處的管理決策;在保護猛禽之餘,還能確保人民享有休閒活動的機會。相對地,攀岩者當然也必須盡力保護大自然的野生動物。自然環境,包括猛禽在內,同樣都是攀岩本質的一部份;戶外攀岩體驗包含各種面向,從身體在岩壁上移動的生理感受,到目睹遊隼從樹冠層上方高速俯衝而下的心理刺激,都是戶外攀岩體驗的一部份,而根據科學研究結果制定的管理方案,例如定期封閉措施,不僅能保護猛禽,同樣也能保護這份珍貴的體驗。

A seasonal closure is a temporary closure during raptor breeding season put in place to increase the likelihood of the reproductive success of the birds. Establishing and compliance with appropriate closures is important to ensure the health of the wildlife the closures are designed to protect. Seasonal closures may be necessary to allow the raptors space to breed, produce, and fledge their young. Given enough disturbance, raptors may abandon their nests, ruining any chance for fledglings that year.

Just as land managers must make nuanced adaptive management decisions to address the needs of raptors and optimize recreation opportunities, climbers must also do their best to protect wildlife. The natural environment, including raptors, are an intrinsic part of climbing. The climbing experience encompasses many aspects, from the physical act of moving on rock itself to the thrill of seeing a peregrine dive far above a forest canopy. Management actions that protect raptors, such as scientifically appropriate seasonal closures, also protect this experience.



THE ROLE OF CLIMBERS | 攀岩者的角色

攀岩者處在一個很特殊的位置,因為他們的休閒活動,讓他們成為少數能夠直接影響猛禽繁殖成敗的族群之一。因此,攀岩者有幾個重要責任:尊重封閉措施、貢獻技能參與猛禽的監測工作、與管理當局共同制定適當的猛禽生態保育區,並肩負起攀岩社群內部的溝通教育工作。當攀岩者完成這些目標時,他們不僅能確保猛禽保育工作的成功,同時也能將其他非必要封閉措施的可能性降到最低。

Climbers are in a unique position in that they are one of the few recreational user groups that can directly impact raptor breeding success in both positive and negative ways. Climbers have several key responsibilities: respecting closures, volunteering skills as part of monitoring and data collection efforts, working with land managers to determine appropriate raptor management areas, and communicating with and educating the climbing community. When climbers collaborate to accomplish all of these objectives, they ensure not only the success of raptors but also that the minimum possible closures are being instituted.




CHAPTER 2 | 第二章

FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN RAPTOR MANAGEMENT | 猛禽保育的考量要件


WHAT FACTORS IMPACT RAPTORS? | 影響猛禽生態的因素有哪些?

為了建立具備科學基礎的猛禽 / 攀岩者管理策略,了解影響猛禽行為和育雛成敗的因素至關重要。無論是從零開始,或是從現有的封閉措施過渡到適應性管理策略,以下原則都將同樣適用。

預測攀岩活動如何影響猛禽行為的主要因素有:

  1. 猛禽築巢的岩壁與周遭的地形特徵

  2. 該區域內既有的人類活動的性質

  3. 猛禽個體對視覺干擾的耐受性 / 敏感性

  4. 在特定的季節變化下,猛禽個體對環境變化與人為干擾的敏感程度

透過根據這四個因素的全面考量,以及現地條件的基礎,攀岩者與土地管理者就能為在地岩場量身定制一套有效的管理策略。雖然這些因素普遍適用於猛禽,但以下內容是特別針對遊隼進行探討。

In order to establish a science-based climber-raptor management strategy, it is crucial to understand the factors that influence raptor behavior and nesting success. The following principles will apply equally whether you are starting from scratch or looking to transition an existing closure toward an adaptive management strategy.

The main determinants of predicting raptor behavior relevant to climbers are:

  1. the characteristics of the cliff and landscape in which raptors are nesting;

  2. the nature of preexisting human activity in the area;

  3. the tolerance/sensitivity of the individual birds to visual disturbance; and

  4. specific seasonal variations in sensitivity to environmental changes and disturbances.

By considering these four factors holistically, as well as on a site-specific basis, climbers and land managers can determine a tailored and effective management strategy for their local climbing areas. Though these factors are broadly applicable to raptors in general, the following discussion is tailored for peregrines.


因素 1:築巢地點 / 猛禽巢位 - 猛禽巢位¹¹ 的評估,在於找出可能吸引猛禽築巢並足以支撐其育雛工作的潛在地點,我們不能預期所有的築巢地點都能讓親鳥成功育雛,但若能找到品質更好的巢位,猛禽對干擾的耐受力就會更高,且不同種類的猛禽,也需要不同的巢位特徵才能成功育雛。還有一點也同樣值得注意:猛禽親鳥常會使用替代巢位,一對親鳥通常會在其棲地內同時維護多個巢位,即便在該年中只會使用其中的一個。監測工作需要涵蓋所有巢位,並且不應只集中在攀岩活動區域;如果猛禽選擇一個遠離岩場的替代巢位,封閉措施就可以立即解除。

猛禽巢位的品質依序可分為三個等級:A、B 和 C 級¹²,等級愈高,猛禽親鳥對於其他掠食者、人類干擾、以及天候變化的耐受力就愈強,對牠們獵食餵養幼雛也就愈有利。以下內容將特別針對遊隼描述。

A 等級巢位是品質最好的,前提是附近的獵物來源充足¹³。A 等級巢位在岩壁上的高度,足以為猛禽提供持續性的能見度和保護,不會隨著時間推移而改變。對遊隼而言,牠們通常傾向選擇近乎垂直的陡峭岩壁,或是從頂部到下方樹林高度超過 200 英尺 (> 60 公尺) 緊密相鄰的岩峰,並且是寬度至少 500 英尺 (150 公尺) 的連續岩壁的一部分;這類巢位能夠為遊隼提供瞭望點和掩護,並具備多個「良好」的築巢岩階¹⁴。「良好」的築巢岩階會有懸岩保護,免受陽光直射和風吹雨打,同時也包含岩石或土壤等材料,讓遊隼能夠輕壓 / 爮刮地面製造凹槽以安置牠的蛋 (大多數其他種類的猛禽則會自行築巢)。

Factor 1: Nest site/eyrie - Eyrie¹¹ assessments look at the potential of a site to attract and support nesting raptors. Not all nesting sites or breeders can be expected to have the same success at fledging young. Raptors will be more resilient to disturbance if they find a higher quality eyrie, and different species of raptor require different eyrie characteristics to succeed. It is also important to note that alternate nests may be used by a pair of raptors. A pair often maintains multiple nest sites within their territory, although only one will be used during a given year. Monitoring needs to focus on all of these sites, not just ones in climbing areas; if the raptors choose an alternate nest away from climbing, any closures can be lifted immediately.

Eyrie quality can be broken down into three levels: A, B, and C grades.¹² The higher the grade, the more resilient the raptor is to predators, human disturbance, and weather, and the better their position for finding food to feed their young. The following descriptions are specific to falcons, the peregrine in particular.

Grade A Cliffs are the highest quality, assuming adequate prey is nearby.¹³ Grade A sites are high enough on cliff faces to afford consistent visibility and protection for the raptors that will not change over time. For falcons, these cliffs are usually an almost sheer rock face, or closely spaced pinnacles that are more than 200 feet (>60 m) in height from the top to the wooded slope beneath and are part of a rocky escarpment that is at least 500 feet (150 m) long; such cliffs provide lookout points and cover for the falcon, with more than one “good” nesting ledge.¹⁴ A “good” nesting ledge will be one that is protected by an overhang of rock from the direct rays of the sun and direct rain and that contains material, either rock or soil, in which a slight indentation known as a “scrape” can be made by the falcon to contain her eggs (most other raptor species build nests instead).


註 11. Eyrie 指猛禽築巢位置 An eyrie is a nesting site for raptors. Also sometimes spelled “eyrie.”
註 12. 瑞特克力菲 • 德瑞克 A。1993《遊隼》第二版 Ratcliffe, Derek A. 1993. The Peregrine Falcon. Second ed. T and A.D. Poyser. London, U.K. pp. 160-174. http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7471.html
註 13. 佩特拉 • 蘇瑪斯古特納等人。2014《動物學的新疆界》 Sumasgutner et al. 2014. “Frontiers in Zoology.” 11:48 http://www.frontiersinzoology.com/content/11/1/48
註 14. 萊斯 • 詹姆士 N。1965《賓夕福尼亞州遊隼種群數量的衰減》遊隼種群數量 – 牠們的生態學與數量衰減 1969 喬瑟夫 • 希奇。威斯康辛大學 Rice, James N. 1965. “Decline of the Peregrine Falcon in Pennsylvania.” In Peregrine Falcon populations - Their biology and decline. 1969. Joseph Hickey, ed. Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Milwaukee and London. https://www.amazon.com/PEREGRINE-FALCON-POPULATIONS-BIOLOGY-DECLINE/dp/B000OSEI38/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1434342837&sr=1-1&keywords=Peregrine+Falcon+populations+their+biology+and+decline.+1969.+Joseph+Hickey&pebp=1434342837677&perid=36D939AA494D4E8EBAC5

另外還有一項重要考量:築巢岩壁的最佳高度會因不同緯度而有所差異,並且不一定必須包括 200 英尺 (60 公尺) 高的連續岩壁¹⁵。在植被較少且條件較惡劣的環境中 (意即偏北、氣候較寒冷的緯度),稍微小一些的岩壁仍可視為等級 A 的巢位;反之,在熱帶 / 溫帶氣候地區,A 等級巢位的岩壁則需要夠高的高度提供夠寬闊的視野,讓周遭植被的季節性變化不會對猛禽巢位的獵食工作造成不利。

同樣值得注意的,是資源可獲得性的重要程度,以及它如何影響巢位的等級判別。在某些地區,例如西部較乾旱的地區,獵物的取得性多半就會成為猛禽是否築巢的決定因素;然而在東部的森林地形中,整體資源較豐富,獵物來源也更廣泛,因此在這些地區,猛禽可能更常選擇在 B 或 C 等級的巢位棲息,因為獵物來源不虞匱乏,但反而最基本的築巢環境可能會限制牠們的繁殖能力。

B 等級巢位,通常會是一面接近垂直或地形破碎的岩壁,高度低於 200 英尺 (< 60 公尺),寬度不到 500 英尺 (< 150 公尺),至少有一個「良好」的築巢岩階,與數個「尚可」的潛在巢位。B 等級巢位可能會因周邊植被的季節性變化,對該地的獵食工作造成有益或不利的影響。 因此,隨著周圍環境的植被變化,這些巢位的分級有可能會在 B 和 C 之間波動¹⁶

C 等級巢位,通常是由一處或多處岩石露頭組成的矮岩壁 (因緯度高低而異),包含一處或多處可能的猛禽巢位。 通常位處寬約 300 英尺 (91 公尺) 的岩壁,或是連續的岩壁地形中相對較不陡峭的區域;不像 A 或 B 等級巢位,其包含的連續性岩壁能夠提供充分的掩護¹⁷,C 等級巢位通常會受到現地植被的不利因素影響;矮岩壁上由於植物屏障較少,導致巢位更難以防禦和獵食,因此也讓育雛工作變得更艱難¹⁸

It is important to consider that the optimum cliff height will vary by latitude and will not always include an expansive 200 feet.¹⁵ In environments with less vegetation and harsher conditions (i.e., northerly, cold latitudes), somewhat smaller cliffs may still qualify as grade A, while in tropical and temperate climates grade A cliffs need to be high enough over the surrounding landscape that temporal (i.e., seasonal) changes in vegetation will not adversely affect hunting close to the eyrie.

Similarly, it is worth noting the importance of resource availability and how that interacts with eyrie class. In some areas, such as the more arid regions of the west, prey availability is likely the determining actor in eyrie occupancy. However, in the forested landscapes of the east, overall landscape productivity is higher and prey is more widely available. In these regions, raptors may inhabit more B and C grade eyries, since nesting substrate, not prey resources, limits their ability to reproduce.

Grade B cliffs are usually an almost sheer or jumbled rock face less than 200 feet high and less than 500 feet in width with at least one “good” nesting ledge and other possible “fair” nesting ledges. Grade B cliffs can be affected by temporal changes in vegetation that can adversely affect or enhance hunting close to the eyrie. Therefore, quality ratings for these cliffs can fluctuate between grades B and C as the surrounding vegetation changes.¹⁶

Grade C cliffs are short cliffs (relative to latitude) consisting of one or more rock outcroppings, one or more of which contain a possible raptor nesting ledge. It is usually part of a 300-foot (91 m) wide or lesser escarpment of a more continuous nature, different from the contiguous “good cover” type present in grade A or B cliffs.¹⁷ Small size cliffs with a vegetative screen over the lower portion can make the site more difficult to defend and hunt from, making it a more marginal nesting habitat.¹⁸ Grade C cliffs are often affected by existing vegetation that can adversely affect the eyrie.


註 15. 簡金斯 • 安德魯 R 與菲利浦 A. R. 哈奇。2001《獵物取得性對棲地耐受性的影響:熱帶地區遊隼稀少現象釋疑》南開普敦大學波西費茲派翠克研究所 Jenkins, Andrew R. and Philip A. R. Hockey. 2001. “Prey availability influences habitat tolerance: an explanation for the rarity of Peregrine Falcons in the tropics.” Percy Fitz Patric Inst., Univ. of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701 South Africa. Ecography 24:3 (2001) pp. 359 – 367. http://www.globalraptors.org/grin/researchers/uploads/211/rarity_2001.pdf
註 16. 牛頓 • 伊恩。1991《雀鷹的棲地變化與種群調控》IBIS 國際鳥類科學期刊 Newton, I. 1991. “Habitat variation and population regulation in Sparrowhawks.” 1BIS 13.3 suppl. I: 76-88. http://www.globalraptors.org/grin/researchers/uploads/302/habitat_variation_and_population_regulation_in_sparrowhawks.pdf
註 17. 萊斯 • 詹姆士 N。1965《賓夕福尼亞州遊隼種群數量的衰減》Rice. 1965. “Decline of the Peregrine Falcon in Pennsylvania.”
註 18. 懷特 • 克萊頓 M。2012《桑伯恩郡立公園峰頂岩的遊隼棲地》致函聖塔克拉拉郡公園休閒管理處 White, Clayton M., 2012. The Peregrine Falcon nesting site at Summit Rock, Sanborn County Park. Letter to Santa Clara County Department of Parks and Recreation 298 Garden Hill Drive, Los Gatos, CA. 95032.

QUESTIONS TO ASK | 值得思考的延伸問題

天然岩場的猛禽育雛巢位又該如何分級 (A、B、C)? What is the climbing area’s quality grade (A, B, or C) for raptor nesting?


因素 2:對人類活動的耐受力 – 有四個主要因素會決定遊隼對巢位周邊人類活動的容忍度:

  1. 人類活動類型

  2. 活動類型的可預測性

  3. 人類活動的頻率與規模

  4. 人類活動的時間點

在人類活動沒有威脅且相對可預測的情況下,猛禽表現出極高的容忍度,經常能遷就看起來不像是合理棲地的環境。健康的遊隼種群數量能夠證明這一點;在橫跨波特蘭到紐約的許多城市中,都能看到牠們在繁忙的高速公路主要橋樑上築巢¹⁹。反之,在人煙較少的偏遠環境中,這些猛禽對人類活動往往更敏感,也更容易覺得受到威脅²⁰。透過了解上述四個因素在當地岩場的變化,就能判定在封閉期間裡巢位周遭的人類活動範圍。

人類行為 – 人類休閒活動的行為會對野生動物的反應造成影響²¹。直接向野生動物快速移動會驚擾到牠們,而遠離或以間接方式靠近,對動物造成的驚擾較小²²。一般而言,在任何空間環境中的野生動物,對於緩慢移動的干擾反應通常較為溫和。 例如緩慢接近水鳥,會比快速趨近更不容易嚇走牠們²³

猛禽的反應,也受到巢位周遭的地形與植被遮蔽度 (又稱「viewshed – 視域²⁴」) 影響,因為這些地貌條件都會限制巢位的視野。築巢的猛禽對其巢位上方視域內的人類,會比下方或對面的人類更為敏感。若在一年當中最敏感的繁殖期受到長時間的干擾,其結果通常就是棄巢,這些干擾會迫使親鳥離開巢位長達數小時;當攀岩者在靠近巢位的路線上花費長時間攀爬時,就可能會出現這種情況²⁵。儘管如此,仍有跡象顯示遊隼在更大、更開闊的岩壁 (A 級或 B 級巢位) 上,還是有可能適應這種程度的侵入活動;例如過去也曾在未受管制的熱門岩場和活動頻繁的採石場中出現育雛成功的案例²⁷。基本結論是,不同的親鳥個體對不同的人類活動和干擾程度會有不同的反應,而充分的觀測工作可以協助判斷牠們的容忍度。

Factor 2: Resilience to human activity - There are four major factors that determine how tolerant falcons will be of human activity near the eyrie:

  1. Type of human behavior

  2. Predictability of the activity

  3. Frequency and magnitude of the activity

  4. Timing of the activity

Where human activity is non-threatening and relatively predictable, raptors have shown a remarkably high degree of tolerance, often becoming accustomed to environments that would not seem like reasonable nesting sites. This is evidenced by the healthy peregrine populations making eyries on major bridges spanning busy highways in urban areas from Portland to New York City.¹⁹ Alternatively, in remote environments where the raptors are unaccustomed to human activity, the birds tend to be more sensitive and likely to feel threatened.²⁰ By understanding how the four above factors vary at a local crag, the extent of nearby human activity that is allowable during a closure can be determined.

Human Behavior - The behavior of recreationists can have an influence on wildlife response.²¹ Rapid movement directly toward wildlife frightens them, while movement away from or at an oblique angle to the animal is less disturbing.²² Slow-moving disturbances in any spatial context appear to elicit a milder response from wildlife in general. For example, humans that slowly approach waterfowl flush fewer birds than humans moving rapidly.²³

Responses also are influenced by the topography of the nesting cliff and surrounding vegetative screening (referred to as the “viewshed”²⁴ ), which limit the area within view of the eyrie. Nesting raptors will be more sensitive to people within the viewshed above their eyrie than to people below or across from it. Desertions are usually the result of prolonged disturbances at sensitive times of the year that keep the bird off the eyrie for several hours; these sometimes happen when rock climbers spend a long time on a route close to the nest ledge.²⁵ Even so, there are signs that on larger, more open cliffs (grade A and B cliffs), peregrines may adapt to even this degree of intrusion. For example, broods have been successfully reared on several unregulated much-climbed cliffs²⁶ and in active rock quarries.²⁷ The primary takeaway is that individual nesting pairs will react differently to activity and disturbance levels. Adequate monitoring can establish the degree of tolerance.


註 19. 莫頓 • 凱蒂。2011《一度瀕臨絕種的遊隼在波特蘭城市中成長茁壯》奧杜邦學會 Muldoon, Katy. 2011. Once endangered, Peregrine Falcons thrive in Portland’s urban landscape, Audubon finds. The Oregonian/Oregon Live: April 15, 2011, updated April 18, 2011 https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2011/04/peregrine_falcons_find_portlan.html
註 20. 懷特 • 克萊頓 M、N.J. 克魯姆、T.J. 凱德、W.G.杭特。2002《遊隼》– 北美鳥類圖鑑 White, Clayton M., N.J. Clum,T.J. Cade, and W.G. Hunt. 2002. Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus). In The birds of North America, No. 660. A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The Birds of North America, Inc. Philadelphia, PA https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/species/perfal/introduction    魯道克 M 與 D.P 懷特菲爾德。2007《特定鳥類干擾範圍調查報告》Ruddock and Whitfield. 2007. “A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species.”
註 21. 克萊恩 • 瑪麗 L.。1993《水鳥對人類活動干擾的反應行為學》野生動物學會公報 Klein, Mary L. 1993. “Waterbird behavioral responses to human disturbances.” Wildl. Soc. Bull. 21:31-39. http://obpa-nc.org/DOI-AdminRecord/0046362-0046370.pdf
註 22. 奈特 • 理查 L.與大衛 N. 柯爾。2013《影響野生動物對人類休閒活動反應的因素》野生動物與遊憩民眾:透過管理與研究找出共存模式 Knight, Richard L. and David N. Cole. 2013. “Factors that influence wildlife responses to recreationists.” In Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through management and research. (Eds.) Richard L. Knight and Kevin Gutzwiller. Island Press. 71-79pp. https://www.academia.edu/16799312/Wildlife_and_Recreationists_Coexistence_through_Management_and_Research
註 23. 喬安娜 • 博格。1981《人類活動對海岸線鳥類的影響》生態保育國際期刊 Burger, J. 1981. “The effects of human activity on birds at a coastal bay.” Biological Conservation. 21:231-241. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0006320781900926
註 24. 坎普 • 理查 J.、大衛 T. 辛頓、理查 L. 奈特。1997《視域:緩衝區的補充管理辦法》野生動物學會公報第 25 期 Camp, Richard J., David T. Sinton, and Richard L. Knight. 1997. “Viewsheds: a complementary management approach to buffer zones.” In Wildlife Society Bulletin Vol. 25, No. 3 (Autumn, 1997): 612-615. http://docketpublic.energy.ca.gov/PublicDocuments/09-AFC-07C/TN200060_20130729T145348_CBD’s_Comments_on_PSA_FinalAttachment_4.pdf
註 25. 瑞特克力菲 • 德瑞克 A。1993《遊隼》第二版 Ratcliffe, Derek A. 1993. The Peregrine Falcon. Second ed. T and A.D. Poyser. London, U.K. 416pp. http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7471.html    米恩斯 R. 與 伊恩 • 牛頓。1988《南蘇格蘭遊隼繁殖成功的因素》動物生態期刊第 57 期 Mearns R. & Newton I. 1988. “Factors affecting breeding success of Peregrines in South Scotland.” J. Anim. Ecol. 57: 903–916. https://www.jstor.org/stable/5100?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
註 26. 瑞特克力菲。1993《遊隼》 Ratcliffe. 1993. The Peregrine Falcon.
註 27. 魯道克與懷特菲爾德。2007《特定鳥類干擾範圍調查報告》Ruddock and Whitfield. 2007. “A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species.”

可預測性 – 一般而言,人為活動的可預測性會逐漸形塑猛禽的反應行為。當不具威脅的人為活動頻繁到足以讓動物預期時,牠們幾乎不會表現出明顯的反應²⁸;反之,如果野生動物認為該干擾無法預測,且 / 或具威脅性,那麼牠們的反應就會截然不同,並可能會出現防禦行為。例如在活動頻繁的採石場築巢的遊隼可以忍受人為活動干擾,但牠們的反應仍受到採石場運作時段²⁹ 影響。

頻率和規模 – 人為活動干擾產生的影響程度,取決於干擾的頻率和規模。許多研究針對鳥類繁殖成功率在不同的人為活動頻率下的結果做比較,一般而言,人為活動頻率愈高的巢位,繁殖成功率就愈低³⁰

時間點 – 在繁殖季時,人為活動干擾對猛禽造成的影響和其他時候並不相同;猛禽在選擇巢位以及孵化期間³¹ 是對干擾最敏感的時期。然而,巢位附近岩壁上持續性的人為活動干擾,對親鳥行為造成的影響目前尚無定論³²。在許多案例中,當遊隼親鳥選擇重回熱門岩場的巢位繁殖時,只要攀岩者不是直接向巢位靠近,多數親鳥對於一般攀岩活動的間接干擾³³ 顯得並不在意;相反地,在春季前期,人們尚未開始大量從事健行、攀岩和其他休閒活動之前,那些已有遊隼進駐的地區反而更需要特別小心。

Predictability - In general, predictability of a given activity will shape a raptor’s response to it. When animals perceive a disturbance as frequent enough to be expected and nonthreatening, they show little overt response.²⁸ On the other hand, if wildlife perceive a disturbance as unpredictable and/or threatening, they react quite differently, and will likely exhibit defensive behaviors. Peregrine nesting in active quarries were tolerant of disturbance, although their reactions depended on whether disturbance occurred inside or outside quarry working hours.²⁹

Frequency and Magnitude - The degree to which a disturbance has an impact will depend on its frequency and magnitude. A number of studies have compared reproductive success of birds at frequently visited nest sites with those that were infrequently visited. In general, nest sites visited more often exhibited lower reproductive success.³⁰

Timing - The impacts of disturbances are not consistent throughout the year and the breeding season. The period of greatest sensitivity to disturbance occurs during nest selection and incubation.³¹ The effect of prolonged disturbances occurring on cliffs near eyries is inconclusive.³² In many cases when the peregrines chose to reoccupy a cliff where climbing was actively occurring, many did not seem disturbed by climbing that did not directly approach the nest.³³ However, there may be a greater concern in locations where peregrines establish territories early in the spring, before hiking, rock climbing, and other recreational activities begin.


註 28. 懷特 • 克萊頓 M.、湯瑪斯 L. 梭羅。1985《鵟在可控性人為干擾下的繁殖狀況》兀鷲 – 庫柏鳥類學會 White, Clayton M., Thomas L. Thurow. 1985. “Reproduction of Ferruginous Raptors exposed to controlled disturbance.” The Condor 87:14-22. The Cooper Ornithological Society. https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/condor/v087n01/p0014-p0022.pdf    奈特 • 理查 L.與大衛 N. 柯爾。2013《影響野生動物對人類休閒活動反應的因素》野生動物與遊憩民眾:透過管理與研究找出共存模式 Knight, Richard L. and David N. Cole. 2013. “Factors that influence wildlife responses to recreationists.” In Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through management and research. (Eds.) Richard L. Knight and Kevin Gutzwiller. Island Press.71-79pp. https://books.google.com/s?hl=en&lr=&id=BRbBAvLwQlAC&oi=fnd&pg=PR2&dq=Knight,+Richard+L.+and+David+N.+Cole.+2013.+Factors+that+influence+&ots=tNyTNOFtID&sig=qckQZrTXSX7B23qSYkaacBJyiUQ#v=onepage&q=Knight%2C%20Richard%20L.%20and%20 David%20N.%20Cole.%202013.%20Factors%20that%20influence&f=false
註 29. 魯道克與懷特菲爾德。2007《特定鳥類干擾範圍調查報告》 Ruddock and Whitfield. 2007. “A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species.”
註 30. 奈特與柯爾。2013《影響野生動物對人類休閒活動反應的因素》Knight and Cole. 2013. “Factors that influence wildlife responses to recreationists.”    懷特與梭羅。1985《鵟在可控性人為干擾下的繁殖狀況》 White and Thurow. 1985. “Reproduction of Ferruginous Raptors exposed to controlled disturbance.”
註 31. 出處同上 Ibid; 格馬克 F.。1992《研究人員干擾對鳥類育雛造成的影響》 Gotmark, F. 1992. “The effects of investigator disturbance on nesting birds.” In Current Ornithology, ed., D.M. Power, 63-104, vol. 9. New York: Plenum Press. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4757-9921-7_3#page-1
註 32. 凱德 • 湯姆 J.、馬克 • 馬岱爾、派崔克 • 雷迪格、桂格里 A. 賽普頓、哈里遜 B. 陶德福。1996《在北美都市棲息的遊隼》 Cade, Tom J., Mark Martell, Patrick Redig, Gregory A. Septon, and Harrison B. Tordoff. 1996. “Peregrine Falcons in urban North America.” In Bird, David, Daniel Varland, and Juan Negro, eds. 1996. Raptor in Human Landscapes adaptations to buildings and cultivated environments. ISBN 0-12- 100130-X, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
註 33. 出處同上 Ibid.

QUESTIONS TO ASK | 值得思考的延伸問題

  • 有哪些人為活動是目前常見或剛開始興起的?這些活動造成的干擾程度和可預測性又是如何? Which activities are ongoing or new, and how frequently or predictably do they occur?

  • 有哪些人為活動會出現在巢位的可見範圍內? Which activities occur within sight of the scrape or nest ledge?

  • 有哪些人為活動會出現在猛禽求偶期間 (自 2 月起至 3 月初左右)? Which activities are likely to occur during courtship (February to early March)?

  • 這些人為活動會使用哪些路徑 (例如道路、步道、或小徑)?使用的頻率和可預測性又是如何? What access routes and corridors (such as roads and trails) are used, and how frequent or predictable is that use?


因素 3:視域和緩衝區 – 緩衝區是從猛禽巢位向外輻射延伸的保護區,限制該區內的休閒活動可能是有益的。緩衝區可以有不同的大小和限制程度,端視現場地形、該區人為活動性質、猛禽的品種與耐受性等因素而定。自 1980 年代開始,管理巢位周邊人為干擾的方式,就是控管視覺與聽覺這兩種干擾源。

聽覺干擾 – 當猛禽習慣噪音後,或許就能容忍巢位附近的大量噪音 (例如在繁忙城市的高速公路橋上築巢),除非牠們開始將那些噪音和視覺干擾當成威脅³⁴。由於牠們對攀岩和其他形式的休閒活動所造成的聽覺干擾幾乎沒有反應,因此也似乎不會影響牠們的繁殖³⁵

視覺干擾 – 經研究發現,和聽覺干擾³⁶相比,繁殖期間的猛禽更需要視域內的緩衝區來緩衝視覺干擾。因此,在限制巢位周邊緩衝區的人為活動時,視覺干擾就會是主要的考量要件。視覺緩衝區的作用是一個重要的概念,因為只要能將關鍵的野生動物棲息區,和具威脅性的人為干擾在視覺上做出區隔,就能減少非必要的活動限制;即便是靠近巢位的步道,如果有足夠的植被或地形作為緩衝,其他非威脅性的人為活動還是可以被接受的³⁷。換句話說,巢位的「視域」– 鳥類的視線涵蓋範圍 – 對緩衝區的決定至關重要。

對視域的了解,可以讓我們針對猛禽的需求進行更精準的現地評估。以地理環境資訊系統 (GIS) 輔助,搭配控管措施,已被證明是在野生動物敏感時期降低潛在威脅干擾的有效工具³⁸,視域管理的運用,讓管理人員能夠更真實地了解環境需求。和早期的圓周區域式管理規定的策略相比,視域管理法能夠更有效地控管環境中的干擾,且需要限制的封閉區域也更少³⁹

Factor 3: Viewsheds and buffer zones - The buffer zone is the protected area that extends out from the actual raptor nesting site, within which it may be beneficial to limit recreational access. Buffer zones can be of different sizes and degrees of restrictiveness, depending on topography, the nature of activity within the zone, the tolerance of the raptors, and the species of bird, among other factors. Original guidelines from the 1980’s for managing disturbances around eyries include the consideration of disturbances from both visual and audio sources.

Audio Disturbance - Raptors may tolerate considerable noise close to their nests if they are familiar with it (for example, nesting on highway bridges in busy urban areas), unless they have learned to connect that noise with a visual threat.³⁴ Their response to audio disturbances from climbing and other forms of recreation can be expected to be minimal and would not appear to limit raptor productivity.³⁵

Visual Disturbance - Studies have found a greater need for disturbance buffering within view of an eyrie ledge during nesting rather than from audio disturbances.³⁶ As such, visual disturbance is the main factor that needs to be accounted for when creating a buffer zone of restricted access around an eyrie. The role of visual buffers is an important concept, as it can result in reduced spatial restrictions by separating critical wildlife areas from threatening disturbances. Trails and other non-threatening activities can be compatible in close proximity to an eyrie or perch if that activity is visually buffered by vegetation or topographic features.³⁷ In other words, the “viewshed” from the eyrie—what the birds can and cannot see—is critical in determining an appropriate buffer zone.

Knowledge of the viewshed provides a more accurate landscape assessment of a raptor’s needs. A geographic information system (GIS)-assisted viewshed approach, followed by validation monitoring, has been shown to be an effective tool for reducing potential threatening disturbances during sensitive periods.³⁸ The use of viewsheds provides a manager with a realistic understanding of spatial requirements. The viewshed approach to spatially managing disturbance can be highly effective yet require less protected area than a traditionally prescribed circular management zone strategy.³⁹


註 34. 懷特與梭羅。1985《鵟在可控性人為干擾下的繁殖狀況》 White and Thurow. 1985. “Reproduction of Ferruginous Raptors exposed to controlled disturbance.”;    吉爾莫 D.S. 與 R.E. 史都華。1983《北達科塔州的王鵟種群與棲地利用》野生動物管理期刊 Gilmer, D.S., and R.E. Stewart. 1983. “Ferruginous hawk populations and habitat use in North Dakota.” J. Wildl. Manage. 47:146-157. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/19372817    坎普 N. 與 O. 休波普。1997《飛行器噪音對野生動物的影響:研究與評論》 Kempf, N. & O. Hueppop, 1997. “The Effects of Aircraft Noise on Wildlife; a Review and Comment”. Vogel und Luftverkehr, Bd. 1/97: 58-70.
註 35. 艾德華 C.C.。1969《猶他州西部的美洲白頭雕冬季行為與種群變化》猶他州楊百翰大學博士論文 Edwards, C.C. 1969. “Winter behavior and population dynamics of American Bald Eagles in western Utah.” Ph.D. dissertation, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.;    史特馬斯特 • 馬克 V. 與詹姆士 R. 紐曼。1978《越冬白頭雕對人類活動的反應行為》野生動物管理期刊 Stalmaster, Mark V. and James R Newman. 1978. “Behavior response of wintering bald eagles to human activity.” J. WildL. Manage. 42(3):506-513. http://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/Susitna/22/APA2271.pdf    豪翠森 • 安東尼。1986《天鵝瀑布大壩的施工活動與科學試爆對草原隼的繁殖期行為與繁殖狀況的影響》明尼蘇達大學獸醫生物學系猛禽研究所 Holthuijzen, Anthonie. 1986. “Behavior and productivity of nesting prairie Falcons in relation to construction activities at Swan Falls Dam and experimental blasting.” Raptor Research Institute Dept. of Veterinary Biology, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN 55101. BLM Library QL 696.F34 H647 1986. https://archive.org/stream/behaviorproducti00holt/behaviorproducti00holt_djvu.txt    大衛 • 艾利斯 H.、凱薩琳 • 艾利斯、曼戴爾 D.。1991《猛禽對低空噴射機與音爆的反應》環境污染 Ellis, D.H., Ellis, C. and Mindell, D. 1991. “Raptor responses to low-level jet aircraft and sonic booms.” Environmental Pollution, 74, 53-83. http://www.globalraptors.org/grin/researchers/uploads/203/ellis_et_al_1991_raptor_responses_sonic_booms.pdf    魯道克與懷特菲爾德。2007《特定鳥類干擾範圍調查報告》 Ruddock and Whitfield. 2007. “A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species.”
註 36. 出處同上 Ibid.
註 37. 瑞特克力菲。1993《遊隼》Ratcliffe. 1993. The Peregrine Falcon.;    奈特 • 理查 L.與大衛 N. 柯爾。2013《影響野生動物對人類休閒活動反應的因素》野生動物與遊憩民眾:透過管理與研究找出共存模式 Knight, Richard L., and S. A. Temple. 1995. “Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through management.” Pages 327-333 in R. L. Knight and K. J. Gutzwiller, eds. Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through research and management. Island Press, Covelo, Calif. 372pp. http://ir.nmu.org.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/119239/6fb3a955838dd225f4a1d745926052ca.pdf?sequence=1
註 38. 理查森 • 凱瑞 T. 與柯林頓 K. 米勒。1997《重新審視保護猛禽免受人為干擾的建議措施》野生動物學會公報 Richardson, Cary T. and Clinton K. Miller. 1997. “Recommendations for protecting raptors from human disturbance: a review.” Wildlife Society Bulletin 1997 25(3):634-638. http://docketpublic.energy.ca.gov/PublicDocuments/09-AFC-07C/TN200071_20130729T152048_CBD’s_Comments_on_PSA_FinalAttachment_15.pdf    坎普 • 理查 J.、大衛 T. 辛頓、理查 L. 奈特。1997《視域:緩衝區的補充管理辦法》野生動物學會公報第 25 期 Camp, Richard J., David T. Sinton, and Richard L. Knight. 1997. “Viewsheds: a complementary management approach to buffer zones.” In Wildlife Society Bulletin Vol. 25, No. 3 (Autumn, 1997): 612-615. http://docketpublic.energy.ca.gov/PublicDocuments/09-AFC-07C/TN200060_20130729T145348_CBD’s_Comments_on_PSA_Final Attachment_4.pdf
註 39. 出處同上 Ibid.

Photo courtesy of: © Chris Winters
圖 1 – 猛禽視域示意圖。紅色區域的地形是猛禽的實際可見範圍,該區域的人為活動更有可能對猛禽造成干擾,但在此圖中,茂密的森林遮蔽或許能將地面的干擾降低。 Figure 1 - An example of a nesting raptor’s viewshed. Red-shaded terrain is what the raptor can actually see. Activity in this area is more at risk of creating disturbance, though in this image, ground disturbance would likely be mitigated by the extensive tree cover.

視域緩衝區 – 常用於劃定緩衝區域,或依據猛禽對棲地領域內不同範圍的反應,來劃分緩衝區內不同距離的干擾程度與優先順序。猛禽對干擾的反應分類方式應包含以下內容:

  • 中立反應 – 對干擾無明顯反應。

  • 警戒距離 – 當猛禽對靠近的干擾源做出明顯反應行為時的距離。

  • 起飛與防禦 – 當猛禽起飛衝向靠近的干擾源 (例如朝入侵者俯衝、嗥叫等等),或飛離干擾源積極保衛棲巢時的距離。

Viewshed Buffers - A common method used to prescribe viewshed buffers or prioritizing areas for confirming existing closure involves sorting measures of disturbance distance into different “territorial response classes,” meaning the response of the raptors to the disturbance. Response classes include the following:

  • Neutral - no response from the falcons.

  • Alert distance - the distance between the disturbance and birds to the point where the birds change their behavior in response to the approaching disturbance source.

  • Flight and Defensive - the distance at which the birds will flush or otherwise move away from the approaching disturbance source and actively protect their nest (i.e., potentially dive-bombing intruders, shrieking, etc.).


棲地反應預測分類表

Territorial response class prediction table



總距離 = (巢位上方或下方的垂直距離) + (水平距離) 基於觀測需求,亦可將起飛視為防禦反應 Total Distance = (elevation above or below nest ledge) + (horizontal distance) For monitoring purposes it may be helpful to include flight as a defensive response.


圖 2 – 棲地反應預測分類表。上圖表示在緩衝區尚未建立前,確認緩衝區距離的經驗法則。一般而言,應設定緩衝區並盡可能讓遊隼 / 猛禽保持在「中立」區域;請注意,距離的設定應根據專家建議,且在進行進一步驗證前,應將該距離視為起始點。此外,距離固然重要,但不應作為區分棲地反應類別的單一因素 ⁴⁰。若有某種形式的視覺遮蔽,例如樹林,則視域內的緩衝區應至少為 350 ft (107 m) 長,並包含樹冠層頂端至巢位高度;若無植被掩護,則為地面距離 ⁴¹。無視覺遮蔽時,視域內的緩衝區應至少為 740 ft (226 m) 長 ⁴²,直到觀測出確切的適當距離。距巢位約 1,650 ft (503 m) 以外的區域通常不需要緩衝區。視域外的緩衝區 (例如巢位背面) 很少需要超過 250 ft (76 m)。當然,緩衝距離必須視當地岩壁的地形與具體條件,並可能需要超過本表提供的最小數據。更詳細的表格內容請參見附錄 C。 Figure 2 - Territorial response class prediction table. The above graphic represents the rule of thumb data on determining buffer distance when buffers have not already been established. In general, buffers should be set up to keep the falcons in the “neutral” zone to the extent possible. It is important to note that distances will initially be based on expert opinion recommendation. Distances should be regarded as a preliminary starting point until further validation has been undertaken. Furthermore, distance (while crucial) should not be used as a single factor for predicting territorial responses.⁴⁰ Where there is some form of visual screening, such as tree cover, buffers should be a minimum of 350 feet (107 m) long within the viewshed (including the height of the eyrie above the tree canopy, or ground if there is no vegetation).⁴¹ Where there is no visual screening, a starting buffer should be a minimum of 740 feet (226 m) long within the viewshed,⁴² until monitoring confirms an appropriate size. Areas more than approximately 1,650 feet (503 m) away from the eyrie will usually not require buffering. Buffers outside the viewshed (i.e., behind the eyrie) will rarely need a buffer of more than 250 feet (76 m). Buffer distances must, of course, be adapted to the specific factors and topography of the local crag, and may need to be larger than the minimum numbers given here. See appendix C for a more detailed table.

註 40. 費南德茲–尤里齊克 • 易斯特班、M. 寶拉凡尼爾、丹尼爾瑞尼遜、丹尼爾 T. 布魯史坦恩。2005《野生動物對休閒空間行為模式的敏感度:草原鳥類最小接近距離和緩衝區的關鍵評估》生態保育 Fernandez-Juricic, Esteban, M. Paula Venier, Daniel Renison, Daniel T. Blumstein. 2005. “Sensitivity of wildlife to spatial patterns of recreationist behavior: a critical assessment of minimum approaching distances and buffer areas for grassland birds.” Biological Conservation 125.
註 41. 瑞特克力菲。1993《遊隼》;魯道克與懷特菲爾德。2007《特定鳥類干擾範圍調查報告》;史特馬斯特與紐曼。1978《越冬白頭雕對人類活動的反應行為》 Ratcliffe. 1993. The Peregrine Falcon.; Ruddock and Whitfield. 2007. “A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species.”; Stalmaster and Newman. 1978. “Behavior response of wintering bald eagles to human activity.”
註 42. 懷特與梭羅。1985《鵟在可控性人為干擾下的繁殖狀況》 White and Thurow. 1985. “Reproduction of Ferruginous Raptors exposed to controlled disturbance.”    布蘭比拉 • 馬蒂亞、迪亞哥魯博里尼、弗蘭卡 • 谷達利。 2004《攀岩與渡鴉的出現如何抑制遊隼的繁殖成功率》 Brambilla, Mattia, Diego Rubolini, and Franca Guidali. 2004. “Rock climbing and raven Corvus Corax occurrence depress breeding success of cliff nesting Peregrine Falco peregrinus.” Ardeola 51(2), 2004, 425-430. https://www.ardeola.org/en/volumes/512/articles/425-430/?stc=ok


視域範圍內棲地反應預測鳥瞰圖

Predicting response classes across a viewshed




圖 3 – 以視域鳥瞰圖區分預測反應的範例。請注意開闊地帶 (例如草原) 在靠近巢位時被歸類為「黃色 – 警戒區」,若在更遠的地方或有視覺遮蔽的區域,則被歸類為「綠色 – 中立區」,巢位下方的大部分森林 (即視覺遮蔽) 斜坡也是中立區域。巢位正下方區域屬於「紅色 – 防禦區」,而附近的開闊區域 (即遊隼未築巢的岩壁) 屬於「橘色 – 起飛區」。 Figure 3 - Mapping example of predicting response classes across a viewshed. Note how open areas, like meadows, fall into the “alert” (yellow) class if they occur close to the eyrie, and the “neutral” (green) class if they occur further away or are visually screened. Most of the forested (i.e., visually obstructed) slope below the nest is neutral territory. The area immediately below the eyrie falls into the “defensive” (red) class, while open areas nearby (i.e., the cliff face where the falcons are not nesting) falls into the “flight class” (orange).

QUESTIONS TO ASK | 值得思考的延伸問題

  • 出現在巢位視線範圍內的人為活動有哪些? Which activities occur within sight of the scrape or nest ledge?

  • 植被能夠為這些活動提供多少程度的遮蔽? To what extent does vegetation shield these activities from view?

  • 這些活動發生的位置距離巢位岩壁多遠?巢位距離地面的高度又是多少? How far away from the nest ledge do these activities take place, accounting for height of the nest ledge above the ground?

  • 若考量植被的視覺遮蔽效果,這些活動可能會讓猛禽出現什麼程度的反應? Considering visual screening from vegetation, what response class are the raptors likely to fall into for a given activity?


因素 4:季節敏感度 – 在確認一項適當的封閉措施前,還需要考慮最後一個因素,就是猛禽在不同季節的敏感度變化。一年中的某些時期 – 特別是築巢期剛開始的階段 – 是猛禽最容易被干擾的時期之一 (圖 4)。然而在考量以下描述時,還必須思考前文提到的三項因素,並考慮彼此間的相互關係;例如,無論是哪種距離範圍,猛禽對於在視域外出現的干擾,或在視域內有視覺屏障下的干擾,並不見得會與在視域內相同距離範圍,但無視覺屏障的開闊地帶出現的干擾產生類似的反應。

下列繁殖月份為北美洲中緯度地區:

2 月中旬到 3 月初 – 求偶:2 月至 3 月初是遷徙性遊隼抵達棲地並展開求偶的時期。我們可以預期在這段期間裡出現的干擾,有可能會產生中 / 高程度的風險致使牠們棄巢,或遷移到其他地點。從求偶和選擇巢位開始 (例如 2 月中下旬到 3 月初),直到巢位確立且雄隼開始捕回獵物前,遊隼對干擾會特別敏感,也特別容易棄巢;在開始選擇巢位前,遊隼對開闊地形的干擾所產生的反應相對難以預測,不過一旦巢位確立後,牠們的棲地行為就會以巢位為中心朝視域方向展開,並開始變得相對可預測。也就是說,通常需要近距離的反覆干擾,或 / 與長時間的嚴重干擾,才能達到引發遊隼棄巢的臨界點。

3 月中旬至 4 月初 - 孵化期:在這段期間裡,多數親鳥會在看到人類過於接近棲巢,甚至達到伸手可及的距離時,都會飛回巢位防禦,特別是在天氣寒冷或潮濕的情況下⁴³;但有少數個體在看到巢位周邊約 1,600 英尺或 0.31 英里 (500 公尺) 範圍內有人類靠近時,就不會回巢了。 請注意,如果棲地在中高海拔地區 (1,800 公尺以下),孵化期有可能會到 4 月或更晚才開始。一般而言,2 月中到 4 月初的這段期間,通常被認定為中高海拔以下棲地的敏感期。

4 月中旬至 6 月初 - 育雛期:在此期間,雖然仍有可能發生棄巢的情況,但一般休閒活動也不太可能被猛禽視為重大干擾⁴⁴

5 月下旬至 6 月中旬 - 離巢期:幼鳥在孵化大約 40 天左右離開棲巢,但通常在 35 天左右就已具備飛行能力⁴⁵。幼鳥一旦離巢,任何的封閉措施都不應延續超過兩週⁴⁶。若某個巢位在繁殖期尾聲 (例如 7 月或更晚) 才有幼鳥離巢,很可能表示牠是第二次甚至第三次繁殖的個體,同時也可能代表該巢位曾經失去蛋或雛鳥⁴⁷;失去蛋或雛鳥通常是巢位太靠近岩壁邊緣的結果,因此長久來看,岩壁邊緣的巢位通常不利於遊隼繁衍後代。

Factor 4: Seasonal sensitivity - The final factor to consider in determining an appropriate closure is seasonal variation in raptor sensitivity. Certain times of the year—especially early in the nesting cycle— are ones of higher vulnerability for raptors (figure 4). The following descriptions should be considered in the context of the three previously mentioned factors. For instance, for any given distance, disturbances occurring outside the viewshed or within the viewshed with visual side-screening will not necessarily result in a similar territorial response as when the same disturbance occurs in open view within the viewshed.

Mid-February to early March - Courtship: February through early March is the period when migratory raptors arrive at the cliff and courtship takes place. During this period, one can expect a moderate to high risk that disturbance could cause abandonment or movement to another site. Falcons can be particularly sensitive to disturbances and scrape site abandonment from the time they are courting and selecting a nesting ledge (e.g., mid to late February through early March) until a scrape or nest ledge is selected and the male begins bringing in prey. Prior to nest selection, responses are fairly unpredictable to disturbances out in the open. Once a ledge is selected, territorial behavior centers around the viewshed and becomes predictable. That said, it usually takes repeated disturbance at close range and/or major disturbances for extended periods to reach a threshold that would cause site abandonment.

Mid-March to early April - Incubation: This is a period when certain individuals can be wary about going back to the eyrie if a human is visibly closer than 1,600 feet or 0.31 mi (0.5 km), while others will return while an intruder is still on the cliff quite close at hand, especially if the weather is cold or wet.⁴³ Note that the incubation phase can start in April, or later, in subalpine habitats. As a general rule, the period from mid-February through early April is typically considered to be a sensitive period for eyries below subalpine.

Mid-April to early June - Hatching: During this time period, nest abandonment is less likely though still possible, and recreational activities are also less likely to result in significant disturbance to the raptors.⁴⁴

Late May to Mid-June - Rearing to fledging: Young will leave the nest roughly 40 days after hatching, but are often able to sustain flight as early as 35 days in age.⁴⁵ Any remaining closures should be lifted no later than two weeks after the young have fledged from the nest.⁴⁶ Eyries fledging young late in the season (e.g., July and beyond) may suggest that there have been second or perhaps even third clutches. This can be an indicator that they are losing eggs or nestlings.⁴⁷ Losing eggs or nestlings is often a result of nesting in a marginal site. Over time, a marginal site is not likely to produce many offspring.


註 43. 瑞特克力菲。1993《遊隼》 Ratcliffe. 1993. The Peregrine Falcon.
註 44. 豪翠森 • 安東尼。1986《天鵝瀑布大壩的施工活動與科學試爆對草原隼的繁殖期行為與繁殖狀況的影響》明尼蘇達大學獸醫生物學系猛禽研究所 Holthuijzen, Anthonie. 1986. “Behavior and productivity of nesting prairie Falcons in relation to construction activities at Swan Falls Dam and experimental blasting.” Raptor Research Institute Dept. of Veterinary Biology, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN 55101. BLM Library QL 696.F34 H647 1986. https://archive.org/stream/behaviorproducti00holt/behaviorproducti00holt_djvu.txt    懷特與梭羅。1985《鵟在可控性人為干擾下的繁殖狀況》 White and Thurow. 1985. “Reproduction of Ferruginous Raptors exposed to controlled disturbance.”
註 45. 安提爾 • 亞歷山大與阿雷斯特 • 法蘭克。2013《遊隼的種群內繼養與雙棲巢轉換》 Anctil, Alexandre and Alastair Franke. 2013. “Intraspecific Adoption and Double Nest Switching in Peregrine Falcons (Falco peregrinus).” Artic Vol. 66, No. 2 (June 2013) P. 222 – 225. http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic66-2-222.pdf
註 46. 凱德等人。1996《在北美都市棲息的遊隼》Cade et. al. 1996. “Peregrine Falcons in urban North America.”    彼得森。2018 訪談 Peterson. 2018. Interview.    凱德 • 湯姆 J.、詹姆士 H. 安德森、珍妮林西昆等人。1996《遊隼棲地管理指南》遊隼基金會 Cade, Tom J., James H. Enderson, Janet Linthicum, ed. 1996. “Guide to management of Peregrine Falcons at the eyrie.” The Peregrine Fund, Inc. Boise, ID. http://assets.Peregrinefund.org/docs/pdf/research-library/manuals/manual-eyrie-management.pdf
註 47. 懷特。2012 個人信件 White. 2012. Personal Letter.


圖 4 – 岩場開放基金會和觀鷹者國際組織合作,針對繁殖季猛禽的敏感度議題聯手製作的教材。 Figure 4 - Access Fund and Hawk Watch collaborative educational material for seasonal sensitivities of nesting raptors.

確立適當的管理策略 - 在決定特定區域的最佳管理方案時,需要針對影響猛禽育雛的四個主要因素做全面性的考量。健行步道、岩場小徑,或其他有視覺遮蔽的地方可能根本不需要封閉,而高度敏感區域內的特定地點卻可能需要整季封閉;有些區域則可能介於兩者之間,需要更短或規模更小的封閉措施,亦或其他形式的緩解方式。每個岩場都需要根據當地四個主要因素的組成方式,制定其獨有的管理方案,隨著更多資料的收集,加上對當地猛禽更深入的了解,管理方案通常能夠 / 也應該在當季的繁殖期內或逐年優化。

如果需要封閉,其時間長度將根據猛禽個體的育雛行為而有所不同。理想情況下,監測工作應從冬末 / 初春的巢位選擇期開始,直到幼鳥羽化或築巢失敗。管理資源和人力的缺乏,常導致監測工作無法進行,進而實施全面性的季節封閉,這是令人最不樂見的狀況。在缺乏官方資源的地方,當地的研究團體與志願性的監測計劃,對於確保適當的休閒活動機會至關重要,下一章會針對這部份做更詳細的討論。全面性的繁殖季封閉可能會在 2 月到 4 月間的某個時間點開始,並持續到幼鳥離巢後的兩週,中高海拔以下地區通常會到 6 月左右,而充足的科學資料,可以協助土地管理者更精確地訂定最佳的封閉日期區間。

Determining the appropriate management strategy - The four major factors impacting raptor nesting success need to be considered holistically when deciding what the best course of action is for a given area. Approach trails and crags distant or visually screened from raptor nesting sites may not need a closure at all, while areas within the most sensitive zones may require season-long closures. Some zones may fall in between these extremes, requiring a shorter or smaller closure or some other form of mitigation. Each crag will require its own management prescription based on the unique combination of the four main factors at the specific site, a prescription which can—and often should—evolve both within a season and from year to year as more data is gathered and the behavior of the site’s raptors is better understood.

If a closure is necessary, the length will vary for each site based on individual raptor nesting activity. Ideally, onsite monitoring would be conducted from the late winter/early spring nest selection period to when the young have fledged or the nest has failed. Often a lack of land management resources and staff result in no on-site monitoring being conducted and blanket seasonal closures being implemented, but this is highly undesirable. Where agency resources are lacking, community science and volunteer monitoring programs become essential to ensure appropriate recreational access; the next chapter discusses this in more detail. Blanket seasonal closures may start sometime between February and April and last until two weeks after young have fledged, typically in June below subalpine conditions. Strong data, however, can help land managers better pinpoint when the optimal start and end dates of a closure should be.


QUESTIONS TO ASK | 值得思考的延伸問題

  • 該地區是否有監測記錄? Are there monitoring records available for the area?

  • 這些巢位曾有多少幼鳥成功離巢? How successful have these eyries been in fledging young?

  • 除了現用巢位之外,該地區是否還有其他舊巢位的監測記錄? Are there monitoring records of other ledges or rock faces in the area being used for nesting that are not currently being used?

  • 當地猛禽求偶通常會從哪一天開始? What date does courtship typically begin?


Photo courtesy of: © Greg Orton



CHAPTER 3 | 第三章

COLLABORATION, MONITORING, AND COMMUNITY SCIENCE | 合作、監測,以及在地研究團體


COLLABORATION BETWEEN CLIMBERS AND LAND MANAGERS | 攀岩者與土地管理者的合作關係

在土地管理者與攀岩者之間,建立起相互尊重且富有成效的合作關係,對於永續的攀岩環境與健全的猛禽生態至關重要。攀岩者能協助管理當局提升不同層面的資源管理能力,包括猛禽繁殖的監測工作和資料收集。在地攀岩組織 (LCO) 或攀岩者個體,若能與官方單位和野生動物研究者培養出密切的合作關係,無論是確保攀岩活動的機會,或鳥類的生態保育工作,都會更加成功。在地攀岩組織可以透過許多方式協助土地管理者,包含提供:

  • 岩場資訊 (岩場各分區位置、路徑出入口、停車場、以及岩場的攀登活動行為模式)

  • 以天然資源為基礎的攀岩活動管理方式 – www.climbingmanagement.org

  • 溝通資源 (例如透過社群媒體、電子郵件和攀岩資訊平台如 mountainproject.com 分享封閉公告與生態保育相關資訊)

  • 協助發展志願性的猛禽生態監測計劃

同樣地,管理當局亦可透過下列方式與攀岩者合作:

  • 對於影響攀岩活動相關措施的決策過程保持透明與清楚

  • 主動聯繫攀岩者,以獲得相關措施的回應與建議;

  • 提供即時更新的猛禽棲息狀態

  • 實施適應性管理方案,並保持開放態度,願意根據最新資料即時調整管理措施;無論是增加或減少限制。因應生態系統與環境使用者的使用變化而調整的靈活管理方案,將會改善管理者與環境使用者之間的關係。

Productive, respectful relationships between local land managers and climbers are essential to long term climbing access, sustainable climbing infrastructure, and the health of raptors. Climbers can enhance land managers’ capabilities when it comes to many aspects of resource management, including monitoring and data collection for nesting raptors. Local climbing organizations (LCOs) and individual climbing advocates are more successful at protecting both climbing access and birds when they foster collaborative relationships with agencies and wildlife biologists. LCOs can assist land managers in a variety of ways, including by providing:

  • Climbing resource information (climbing area locations, access points, parking, and general climbing use patterns specific to your crag);

  • Climbing management resources related to natural resource management – www.climbingmanagement.org;

  • Communication resources (i.e., sharing closures and educational messaging via social media, emails, and mountainproject.com);

  • Assistance in developing a volunteer monitoring program.

Similarly, land managers can collaborate with climbers by:

  • Being transparent and clear about the decision-making processes that impact climbing access;

  • Reaching out to climbers proactively for feedback and consultation on those decisions;

  • Providing timely updates on raptor status;

  • Practicing adaptive management/staying open to adjusting management practices based on the best available data, whether that means increasing or decreasing restrictions; flexibility in management prescriptions to accommodate changes in both the ecosystem and visitor use will improve relations between managers and recreationists.


QUESTIONS TO ASK | 值得思考的延伸問題

  • 土地管理者 (例如生物學家、該區警務單位等) 和攀岩者有聯繫嗎? Have land managers (lead biologist, district ranger, etc.) and climbers connected?

  • 該區過去是否有季節性封閉的歷史紀錄? 若有: Is there a history of a seasonal closure at this climbing area? If so:

    • 如由聯邦政府或州政府執行,是自願性封閉或強制封閉? If coming from the federal or state government, is it a voluntary or mandatory closure?

    • 是否有監測計劃,以及是否每年實施? Is there a monitoring plan, and is it implemented each season?

    • 每季的封閉措施是否在幼鳥離巢兩週後就立刻解除? Is the closure lifted each season no later than two weeks after the young have fledged?

    • 與決策有關者是否具備該區域主要戶外活動的專業知識 (例如攀岩者)? Do stakeholders have expertise in the recreational activity being monitored (e.g., climbers)?

  • 土地管理者與 / 或在地攀岩者是否與岩場開放基金會有聯繫? Have land managers and/or local climbers connected with the Access Fund?


監測計畫與公民科學 – 監測計劃的首要需求,就是明確指出研究小組希望從監測中學到什麼⁴⁸。跨單位監測工作小組的監測建議,包含運用現有最佳的科學研究手段,透過嚴謹的資料收集方式 (監測工作⁴⁹) 驗證各種假設,進而制定相應的管理措施,確保管理方案符合保護猛禽生態的目標,同時盡可能減少對休閒活動的限制。一般而言,遊隼生態監測著重於封閉措施的執行和幼鳥成功離巢的數量。然而,不斷增加的種群數量或高密度的穩定種群,有可能並不需要透過管理來提高繁殖成功率或重新分配幼鳥⁵⁰

監測驗證的主要目的為:

  • 在實施管理方案的過程中知會管轄單位,以確認是否達到預期效果

  • 當監測資料顯示該方案未能達到預期效果,或正在產生不良影響時,明確指出可行的調整方式

  • 加強人們對於影響猛禽生態因素的因果關係的理解

攀岩者與土地管理者共同合作,保護猛禽生態與確保休閒活動機會最成功的案例之一,就是透過實施志願性監測工作或公民科學計劃;讓志願者、攀岩者或在地攀岩組織、土地管理者、以及野生動物學家彼此通力合作,共同收集當地猛禽生態活動的相關資料。任何適應性管理策略背後的支柱都是監測工作,以科學研究作為休閒活動管理策略的基礎,必須仰賴這些計畫才能成功。由於攀岩者造訪岩場的頻率,以及在岩壁上的移動能力,讓攀岩者得以在收集資料與巢位監測方面扮演重要的角色⁵¹

如果在與猛禽共享的岩場沒有志願性監測計劃,那麼攀岩者與土地管理者就應合作發展。這些計劃對攀岩社群、管理者、和猛禽都有好處;收集紮實的監測資料至關重要,不僅要密切關注巢位的狀況、制定強有力的管理策略,且如果必要時,充分的科學監測資料也能確保季節性的全面封閉措施,無論在地理環境或時間區段都會是最佳選擇。 幸運的是,我們已有健全的猛禽生態監測準則 (細節請參見附錄 B)。

成功的監測計劃應包含:

  • 充足的資金

  • 明確的目標 (要取得哪些具體成果?)

  • 土地管理者對於發展監測系統以及監督志願者工作進度的能力

  • 一個活躍且數量充足的志願者人力基礎

  • 培訓志願者並培育大眾對此議題的興趣

  • 易於使用的資料收集技術以及適當的監測設備 (例如雙筒望遠鏡、觀測鏡等)

  • 完整繁殖季的長期監測計畫

  • 有效的資料分析和完整的報告,包含資訊的充分揭露

  • 定義明確且不斷優化的適應性管理策略,包含志願者與決策者的定期會談,將必要的監測資料即時納入管理措施中

Monitoring and citizen science - The primary need for any monitoring plan is to state explicitly what your group would like to learn from monitoring.⁴⁸ Interagency Monitoring Working Group recommendations for monitoring include implementing the best available science and management practices, ensuring that implementation meets the goals of protecting raptors while minimizing restrictions on recreation, and testing assumptions through rigorous data gathering (validation monitoring).⁴⁹ Typically, peregrine monitoring has focused on the enforcement of closures and the number of young fledged. However, increasing populations or stable ones with high density probably do not warrant management to increase reproductive success or to redistribute young.⁵⁰

The primary purpose of validation monitoring is to:

  • Inform partners and the responsible official during implementation whether the action is having its intended effects,

  • Clearly identify the adjustment(s) that may be made when monitoring indicates that the action is not having its intended effect, or is causing undesirable effects, and

  • Strengthen the understanding of probable cause-and-effect relationships that impact raptors.

One of the most successful examples of climbers and land managers working together to protect raptors and recreational access is the implementation of volunteer monitoring or citizen science programs where volunteers, climbers, and/or LCOs partner with land managers and biologists to assist in collecting on- site data related to raptor activity. The backbone of any adaptive management strategy is monitoring, and these sorts of programs are critical elements to successful science-based recreation management strategies. Thanks to the frequency of climber visits, and the ability to access high angle terrain, climbers can play a particularly important role in data collection and nest monitoring.⁵¹

If there is not an established volunteer monitoring program at a climbing area that is shared with raptors, climbers and land managers should collaborate to start one. These programs are good for climbers, managers, and birds: Gathering robust data is essential not only to keep tabs on how the nests are doing and craft strong management strategies, but also goes a long way toward ensuring that if seasonal closures are necessary, they are optimized in geographic and temporal extent. Fortunately, raptor monitoring protocol is well established (see Appendix B for a detailed monitoring protocol).

A successful monitoring program should include:

  • Adequate funding

  • Clearly stated objectives (what are the goals?)

  • Land manager ability to develop monitoring systems and oversee volunteer efforts

  • An active and sufficient volunteer base

  • Volunteer training and mentoring public interest

  • Easy to use and access data collection technology and appropriate monitoring equipment (i.e., binoculars, spotting scopes, etc.)

  • Consistent monitoring throughout the nesting season

  • Effective data analysis and reporting, including making results easily available

  • Clearly defined adaptive management strategies that include regular meetings between volunteers and decision-makers to incorporate monitoring data into management policy


註 48. 胡托 R.L. 與 R.T. 貝洛特。2013《森林生態與管理》 Hutto R.L., and R.T. Belote. 2013. "Distinguishing four types of monitoring based on the questions they address" Forest Ecology and Management 289 (2013) 183–189. http://hs.umt.edu/dbs/labs/hutto/documents/pubs-pdfs/94_2013-Hutto-Belote_forest%20ecology%20and%20management.pdf
註 49. 波爾曼 • 伯納德 T、派崔克 G. 昆寧罕、馬沙 H. 布魯克斯、凡 W. 曼寧、麥可 W. 克洛比。1994《太平洋西北方生態系統適應性管理》奧勒岡州波特蘭市美國農業部林業局太平洋西北方工作站 Bormann , Bernard T., Patrick G. Cunningham, Martha H. Brookes, Van W. Manning, and Michael W. Collopy. 1994. Adaptive ecosystem management in the Pacific Northwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW- GTR-341. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 22 p. https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr341.pdf
註 50. 凱德 • 湯姆 J.、詹姆士 H. 安德森、珍妮林西昆等人。1996《遊隼棲地管理指南》遊隼基金會 Cade, Tom J., James H. Enderson, Janet Linthicum, ed. 1996. Guide to management of Peregrine Falcons at the eyrie. The Peregrine Fund, Inc. Boise, ID. http://assets.Peregrinefund.org/docs/pdf/research-library/manuals/manual-eyrie-management.pdf

QUESTIONS TO ASK | 值得思考的延伸問題

  • 土地管理者目前是否在進行監測?若是,是否需要額外的監測工作? Is monitoring currently being conducted by the land manager? If so, is there a need for additional monitoring?

  • 土地管理者是否有意願發起志願性監測計劃? Is the land manager open to starting a volunteer monitoring program?

  • 在地攀岩組織是否有能力 / 意願主持或參與監測計劃? Does the LCO have the capacity/interest to run or participate in a monitoring program?




CHAPTER 4 | 第四章

COMMUNICATION AND EDUCATION | 溝通與教育

土地管理者、在地攀岩組織、以及每一位攀岩者,在岩場封閉措施的宣導工作上都扮演著關鍵的角色。有幾種有效的方法可以確保攀岩者了解繁殖季封閉的重要性,不會在無意中闖入封閉區域。方法如下:

  • 更新網站頁面相關資訊。與在地岩場相關網站的管理員聯繫,確保將所有封閉措施的相關訊息放公告在網站上。另外,幼鳥離巢後兩週應為預設的解除封閉日期。

  • 請在地攀岩組織協助宣導。在大多數地區,在地攀岩組織是分享猛禽繁殖進度更新和封閉訊息的主要管道。請在地攀岩組織與土地管理者合作,透過網站、社交平台、或電子郵件等管道向所有成員分享相關資訊。

  • 與在地攀岩指南的出版商分享季節性封閉相關資訊。若封閉措施是定期且可預測的,攀岩指南可以分享概略的開始與解除日期,以及受影響的區域,讓攀岩者能夠更容易規劃有限的活動範圍。

  • 在當地的裝備用品店和社區中心 (或附近的餐廳、商家、露營地等等) 張貼封閉公告。即使是現今的網絡時代,高效益地點的傳單仍可以大幅提高社群的注意度。

  • 在岩場張貼醒目的告示。可貼在岩場入口、停車場、遊客中心、以及關閉區域的路徑兩端。告示不僅用於溝通,而且還需要明確劃定封閉區域的實際界線。

  • 透過電子郵件發送相關資訊。大多數加入在地攀岩組織郵件列表的成員,都會希望聽到該組織的相關訊息。

  • 活用社群媒體。Facebook、Instagram、Twitter,以及其他社群媒體,都已成為重要的教育 / 宣傳工具。

當攀岩者了解他們的角色為何重要時,遵守封閉措施的意願通常就會更高。傳達基本資訊 (例如開始和解除日期、受影響的路線等),並強調封閉措施對當地野生動物的重要性。詳細說明在地攀岩組織、攀岩者、與土地管理者如何合作實施具備科學基礎且靈活的管理策略,並透過監測計畫的執行,為相關人員提供參與的機會。

Land managers, LCOs, and individual climbers play a crucial role in getting the word out about closures. There are several effective ways to ensure that climbers understand the importance of seasonal closures and do not unintentionally trespass in a closed area. These include:

  • Updating Mountain Project pages. Get in touch with the administrator for the local Mountain Project pages and make sure that any closure information is added to relevant crags. Access Fund also can make these updates if informed of closures. Mountain Project makes it very easy to highlight access issues like restrictions. Two weeks after fledging should be the default end date for closures.

  • Ask your LCO to help spread the word. In most areas, LCOs are a primary outlet for sharing seasonal raptor updates and closure areas. LCOs are ready to work with land managers to share this information with their audience via website, social channels, and email lists.

  • Sharing seasonal closure information with publishers of climbing guidebooks. Where closures are a regular, predictable occurrence, guidebooks can share approximate start and end dates and areas impacted, allowing climbers to better plan around limited access.

  • Posting notices in local gear shops and community centers (restaurants, campgrounds, etc.). Even in today’s online age, flyers in strategic locations can still go a long way toward raising community awareness.

  • Posting notices at the crag. Highly visible signage, placed at trailheads, parking areas, visitor centers, and at the start/end of the closures themselves, are required not only for communication but also to clearly delineate the actual boundaries of the closure.

  • Sending out information via email lists. Take advantage of a captive audience: Most people who sign up for LCO mailing lists want to hear from the organization.

  • Utilizing social media. Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and other social media venues have become essential tools for education and communication.

Compliance with closures is more likely when climbers understand why they matter. Communicate logistics (start and end dates, routes impacted, etc.), and highlight the importance of the closure for local wildlife. Give details about how LCOs, climbers, and land managers are working together to implement a flexible, science-based management strategy and provide opportunities for stakeholders to get involved through monitoring.




ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS | 致謝

岩場開放基金會謹此感謝凱絲派克和已故的湯瑪士凱德。謝謝他們對岩場開放基金會既有的猛禽保育與攀岩活動管理導引文件的貢獻,同時也為這本手冊奠定了基礎。此外,我們還要感謝觀鷹者國際組織的生物學家 – 艾瑞克切伯特、美國魚類暨野生動物管理局的生物學家 – 戴夫彼得森 (已退休),以及北卡羅來納州野生動物資源委員會的生物學家 – 克莉絲汀凱莉與克莉芙頓艾芙芮,感謝他們的回應與審閱。最後,我們由衷地感謝桂格歐爾頓,他撰寫了本手冊援引的論文,並在整個過程中提供了全面而寶貴的指導。

有疑問嗎? 如有疑問或回應,請聯繫 policy@accessfund.org

Access Fund would like to thank Kath Pyke and the late Thomas Cade for their contributions to the original Access Fund climbing and raptor management guidance documents, which laid the foundation for this handbook. In addition, we would like to thank Eric Chabot, research biologist at Hawkwatch, Dave Peterson, USFWS biologist (retired), and Christine Kelly and Clifton Avery, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commision biologists, for their feedback and critique. Finally, we owe a great debt of gratitude to Greg Orton, who wrote the paper from which this handbook was adapted, and who has provided extensive and invaluable guidance throughout this process.

Questions? Please reach out with questions and feedback to policy@accessfund.org.




APPENDICES | 附錄

下列附錄提供更多、更詳細的猛禽生態管理相關資源,包含大量的科學參考資料、志願性的猛禽監測準則、專業用語、概念、以及相關法令。每項附錄均有簡短描述,並可透過以下連結取得:

附錄 A:完整參考書目 除了文本中的尾註引用外,附錄 A 還包含猛禽生態管理文獻的參考書目,其中包括此處未引用的許多資源。請與我們聯繫,提出添加到此列表的建議。

附錄 B:志願性猛禽生態監測計劃概述 本附錄為公民科學家 / 志願者提供有關猛禽生態監測的基本資訊與最佳施行方式。

附錄 C:猛禽物種描述 本附錄提供各種猛禽物種與繁殖行為的詳細說明,還包括一份樣本監測表。

附錄 D:專業用語和概念 本附錄定義了與猛禽生物學與管理相關的關鍵用語和概念。

附錄 E:相關法令 本附錄包含猛禽生態相關法令、法律案件、行政命令和官方意見的引文。

These appendices provide additional, more detailed resources on raptor management, including an extensive list of scientific references, volunteer raptor monitoring protocols, terms and concepts, and relevant law. Short descriptions of each appendix are below, and can be accessed at the following link:

Appendix A: Full Bibliography In addition to the endnote citations within the text, appendix A contains a bibliography of raptor management literature that includes many resources not cited here. Please contact us with suggestions for additions to this list.

Appendix B: Volunteer Raptor Monitoring Program Overview This appendix offers basic information and best practices on raptor monitoring for citizen scientists/ volunteers.

Appendix C: Raptor Species Descriptions This appendix provides detailed descriptions for various raptor species and nesting behavior, and also includes a sample monitoring form.

Appendix D: Terms and Concepts This appendix defines key terms and concepts related to raptor biology and management.

Appendix E: Relevant Law This appendix contains citations for laws, court cases, executive orders, and official opinions related to raptors.



Comments


bottom of page