Study about the illegal use of poison in the environment in the Balkan Peninsula

STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA 3 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA BALKAN DETOX LIFE: STRENGTHENING NATIONAL CAPACITIES TO FIGHT WILDLIFE POISONING AND RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT THE PROBLEM ACROSS SEVEN BALKAN COUNTRIES (LIFE19 GIE/NL/001016) Prepared by: Vulture Conservation Foundation Project Partners: Funded by: ALBANIAN ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY AOS 4 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Contributors Regional Administration of Protected Area Vlore Center for Investigation and Wildlife Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tirana Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Albania Federal Administration for Inspection Issues of Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgarian Society for Protection of Birds Croatian Veterinary Institute Veterinary Faculty University of Zagreb State’s Attorney Office of the Republic of Croatia Greek Antipoison Task Force (Arcturos, Anima, HOS, HSPN, Callisto, NHMC-University of Crete & WWF Greece) Forestry Service of Atalantis Forestry Service of Nigritas Veterinary Office of Kastoria Forestry Service of Alexandroupolis Forestry Service of Istiaias Forestry Service of Serron Veterinary Service of Lakonias Forestry Service of Kilkis Vet Service of Kavalas Forestry Service of Aridaias Veterinary Service of Ionia Nisia Veterinary Service of Western Athens Forestry Service of Samou Veterinary Service of Western Macedonia Forestry Service of Karpenisiou Forestry Service of Kassandras Forestry Service of Lidorikiou Forestry Service of Naousas Forestry Service of Goumenissas Forestry Service of Soufliou Forestry Service of Nevrokopiou Forestry Service of Mouzakiou Forestry Service of Kalampakas Forestry Service of Aliveriou Veterinary Service of Ioanninon Forestry Service of Lagkada Forestry Service of Pierias Forestry Service of Elassonas Veterinary Service of Lefkadas State Environmental Inspectorate of North Macedonia State Hunting Inspectorate of North Macedonia Scientific Veterinary Institute “Novi Sad” Institute for nature conservation of Vojvodina province Subject and purpose of the report This document is prepared within the framework of the BalkanDetox LIFE project (LIFE19GIE/NL/001016) and relates to the deliverable “Study about the illegal use of poison in the environment of the Balkan Peninsula”, defined under Action A.2: Preparation of the current review of the problem of illegal wildlife poisoning in the Balkan Peninsula. This study is designed to provide a clear and up-to-date overview into the current circumstances regarding the illegal use of poisonous substances and the detrimental effects this illegal practice has on vulture populations and other wildlife species in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, the Republic of North Macedonia, and Serbia. Additionally, it represents a baseline for monitoring the impact that actions implemented within this project and other similar conservation initiatives towards diminishing the threat of illegal wildlife poisoning will have in the region, as well monitoring of the change in perception about this practice among key stakeholder groups and socio-economic impact. Authors The Vulture Conservation Foundation, Albanian Ornithological Society, Association BIOM, Bird Protection and Study Society of Serbia, Fund for Wild Flora and Fauna, Hellenic Ornithological Society / BirdLife Greece, Macedonian Ecological Society, Ornitološko društvo “Naše Ptice”, Protection and Preservation of Natural Environment in Albania. 5 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Geographical scope This study reflects on the illegal practice of using poisonous substances in the environment and wildlife mortality induced by it in the following countries of the Balkan Peninsula: Albania, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, the Republic of North Macedonia and Serbia, as well as different challenges related to the prevention of wildlife poisoning that exist in these countries. Date of production February 2022. Recommended citation for the report Pantović, U., Andevski, J., Duro, K., Selgjekaj, L., Dervović, T., Peshev, H., Dobrev, D., Fabijanić, N., Ntemiri, K., Saravia-Mullin, V., Sideri-Manoka, N., Petrovski, N., Vukićević, A. (2022): Study about the illegal use of poison in the environment in the Balkan Peninsula. Technical report for Action A.2 of the BalkanDetox LIFE project (LIFE19 GIE/NL/001016). Vulture Conservation Foundation. About the project The BalkanDetox LIFE project is a five-year endeavour with a €1.8 million budget, which aims to raise awareness and strengthen national capacities to fight the problem of wildlife poisoning across Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, the Republic of North Macedonia and Serbia. It received funding from theEU’sLIFE Programme with a contribution of 1.004.792€ (54,82%) to the total project budget, and it is co-financed by theVulture Conservation Foundation, theMAVA FoundationandEuronatur, as well as by theWhitley Fund for NatureandEnvironmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fundfor specific actions. Project partners are the Vulture Conservation Foundation as the coordinating beneficiary, and theAlbanian Ornithological Society,Association BIOM,Bird Protection and Study Society of Serbia,Fund for Wild Flora and Fauna,Hellenic Ornithological Society,Macedonian Ecological Society,Ornitološko društvo NAŠE Pticeand theProtection and Preservation of Natural Environment in Albaniaas associated beneficiaries. Furthermore, this project is based on Spanish best practice experience and counts with the support from theJunta de Andalucíaand the Spanish Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge. Learn more at www.balkandetoxlife.eu Cover photo: Santiago Ruiz 6 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Table of Contents Acronyms and abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 1. Introduction …………………....……………………………………………………………..............………… 8 Chapter 2. Approach and methodology …………………………....………………………………..................…… 9 Chapter 3. Overview of the situation with wildlife poisoning in the Balkan countries ................... 12 3.1 Albania ......................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Bosnia and Herzegovina ........................................................................................................... 24 3.3 Bulgaria ....................................................................................................................................... 33 3.4 Croatia ......................................................................................................................................... 41 3.5 Greece ......................................................................................................................................... 52 3.6 North Macedonia ......................................................................................................................... 65 3.7 Serbia ........................................................................................................................................... 74 Chapter 4. Conclusions …………………………………………………...…………………………….........…………… 87 Chapter 5. Recommendations ……………………………………...……………………………..........……………… 94 References ……………………………………………………………………………………………….......……………… 101 ANNEXES …………………………………………………………………………………………….....…………………… 104 Annex I: Overview of poisoning incidents in Albania confirmed by toxicological analysis .... 104 Annex II: Overview of poisoning incidents in Bulgaria confirmed by toxicological analysis …… 404 Annex III: Overview of poisoning incidents in Croatia confirmed by toxicological analysis ……… 107 Annex IV: Overview of poisoning incidents in Greece confirmed by toxicological analysis ………… 108 Annex V: Overview of poisoning incidents in North Macedonia confirmed by toxicological analysis .. 110 Annex VI: Overview of poisoning incidents in Serbia confirmed by toxicological analysis ………… 111 Annex VII: Questionnaire about recorded wildlife poisoning and presumable poisoning events …… 113 Annex VIII: Questionnaire for target audiences in local communities ………………….........………. 116 Annex IX: Questionnaire for target audiences within relevant governmental institutions ……..…… 124 7 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Acronyms and abbreviations BAPP - Balkan Anti-Poisoning Project BAVP - Balkan Vulture Action Plan BCTF - Bird Crime Task Force BPPS - Birds of Prey Protection Society BSPB - Bulgarian Society for Protection of Birds CAWI - Computer Assisted Web Interviewing CSO - Civil Society Organization EU - European Union FWFF - Fund for Wild Flora and Fauna HOS - Hellenic Ornithological Society MES - Macedonian Ecological Society PAPI - Paper and Pen Interviewing PID - Poison Incident Database SOP - Standard Operational Procedure VCF - Vulture Conservation Foundation Vulture MsAP - Vulture Multi-species Action Plan 8 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA INTRODUCTION The environmental effects of the illegal use of poison in the environment have been devastating and it has now become one of the main threats to biodiversity. The use of poisonous substances in the environment is one of the most commonly used predator eradication methods worldwide. Poison is used to kill wildlife and undesirable domestic animals considered to be harmful to certain human activities, in particular livestock farming and other agricultural practices, as well as game management for hunting and pigeon keeping. It is also not uncommonly used as a way of settling various feuds and disputes between people. The illegal use of poison is considered one of the most important issues regarding illegal killing of birds due to the serious conservation impacts it has on scavenging species and is confirmed to be among the most important direct threats to the vulture populations in Europe (Vultures MsAP). The most common use of poison for the purpose of eliminating undesirable animals is placement of poison baits in the environment. The use of poison baits usually involves lacing a food item (most commonly a piece of meat, or an entire animal carcass) with a toxic compound, usually phytosanitary products like insecticides, rodenticides, fungicides, herbicides or molluscicides, and placing them in the environment so that they are accessible to the target animals, and often to other non-target species, which may also be affected. Intentional poisoning is therefore a non-selective and destructive method of eradicating animals deemed harmful for human activities and can even pose a serious risk to human health. The illegal use of poison baits remains the single most important threat that vultures are currently facing in the Balkans and has contributed to the regional extinction or severe depletion of all the species in the region. The vulture populations of the Balkan Peninsula had been brought to the brink of extinction by the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st century mainly because of illegal wildlife poisoning in the environment (Pantović & Andevski 2018). Of the four species that were once commonly spread throughout the region, the Bearded Vulture and Cinereous Vulture are now reduced to single, isolated populations. The last population of Bearded Vultures in the region is found in Crete (Greece), numbering around 6-7 breeding pairs and the Cinereous Vultures in Dadia-Lefkimi-Soufli Forest National Park, NE Greece, 28-35 pairs (Xirouchakis 2019). The number of Egyptian Vultures has declined by more than 50 % in the last ten years and continues to decline. This species stronghold in the region is in Bulgaria, while it is still in small numbers present in North Macedonia, Greece and Albania, totaling to less than 50 breeding pairs in 2021 for the entire Balkan Peninsula (Valevski et al. 2015, LIFE16 NAT/BG/000874). The population of Griffon Vulture has also been significantly depleted and the species has disappeared from many countries of its former range (Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Montenegro), whilst in continental Greece and Northern Macedonia isolated and small populations are still persisting, numbering 29-37 and 7 breeding pairs respectively in 2021 (Xirouchakis 2019). Strong populations are present in Serbia, numbering up to 230-233 breeding pairs, and up to 121 pairs in Croatia, while the populations in Bulgaria (up to 163) and Crete, with an estimated population of 280-350 breeding pairs (Xirouchakis 2019), are showing signs of increase in the last years. This practice is illegal in Europe, including the Balkans, but it is still in use by local people as a quick and inexpensive method for resolving conflicts with predators and other wildlife. The main driver for such an intensive use of the poison is the conflict between livestock breeders, hunters, farmers and mammalian predators, mainly wolves, but also jackals, foxes and feral/stray dogs (Andevski 2013). Its widespread use has also been facilitated by the poor enforcement of the legislation, the black market of banned pesticides and the relative free availability of poisoning substances on the markets. Wildlife poisoning is a serious conservation issue, which needs to be investigated in detail and actions need to be carefully planned and implemented to achieve desirable results. This study pro- 9 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA vides an overview of the situation with the illegal use of poison in the environment and its effects on wildlife in each of the target Balkan countries. Its objective is to collect and analyze the data from the Balkan region and identify regional aspects of the poisoning problem, but also recognize the particularities in each country and propose general actions. It directly builds on the “Balkan vulture poison study” (Review of the problem of poison use and vulture poisoning in the Balkan Peninsula), produced by the Vulture Conservation Foundation (VCF) in 2018. This study fundamentally consists of two components. The first component entails compilation and analysis of data about poisoning and presumable poisoning events from the countries of the Balkan Peninsula dating from the year 2000 onwards and analysis of the scope, severity, root causes behind it and substances most used in the region. The study will highlight the collected data relevant to vulture poisoning incidents, as vultures, being mostly obligatory scavengers, continue to be victims of poison and poison baits intended for other animals in the environment, primarily mammalian predators, and are a group of species most deeply affected by this practice. Additionally, this study will reflect in more detail on the incidents involving mortality of other wildlife species, especially of those with an unfavorable conservation status. Increasing and improving available information on the scope of this illegal practice in the Balkans is essential for better understanding of its drivers, conveying the message to the public and other target audiences that it is a public hazard and that it has damaging effects to numerous wildlife, especially scavengers. The second component of this action represents the conduction of a baseline evaluation of the perception and knowledge among relevant stakeholders about this illegal practice, their personal experience (number of cases investigated, number of cases processed and brought to trial, number of sentenced cases) in poisoning incidents in each of their respective countries, as well as a baseline for monitoring of the socio-economic impact of the project. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY Information represented in this study about poisoning and presumable poisoning events that have occurred in the Balkan region during the study period was collected from relevant governmental institutions for environmental crime, as well as internal databases of the beneficiaries of the BalkanDetox LIFE project, who have been systematically recording all such incidents for many years. For this purpose, a questionnaire was prepared (Annex VII), requesting information regarding: historical data about poisoning incidents, number of poisoning incidents recorded during the last 20 years (their location, species affected, main driver behind them and substances used), number of presumable poisoning incidents where official necropsies been conducted on wild animals which were suspected to have died from poisoning or ingesting poison baits, number of presumable poisoning incidents where toxicological analysis been conducted, either on dead animals or on poison baits, number of poisoning incidents that have officially been prosecuted by the public prosecutor’s office and have reached court trials, and number of poisoning incidents for which court rulings have been delivered. The questionnaires about wildlife poisoning incidents were distributed by the BalkanDetox LIFE project beneficiaries among relevant governmental institutions, primarily to enforcement agencies, environmental inspectorates, and public prosecutors by means of formal requests for information, as this data represents information of public importance and therefore must be made available. Additionally, project beneficiaries have endeavored to obtain all publicly available data (official records and reports from relevant national institutions, published papers and project reports, internal databases of CSOs) relevant to wildlife poisoning incidents. The analysis of the collected data enables us to define the most significant gaps in the chain of custody and enforcement mechanisms in each Balkan country. This will represent a baseline for 16 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA According to the available data, most common victims of wildlife poisoning in Albania are mammalian predators such as Red Fox (7 individuals in 7 separate incidents) and Eurasian Wolf (9 individuals in at least 2 separate incidents). Other victims include Eurasian Brown bear (4 individuals during 2019), Golden Jackal (1 individual in one poisoning incident), Beech Marten (1 individual in one poisoning incident), Rough-legged Buzzard (1 individual in one poisoning incident), Eurasian Magpie (3 individuals in one poisoning incident), House Sparrow (2 individuals in one poisoning incident). Additionally, 2 Eurasian Sparrowhawks were found presumably poisoned due to conflicts with pigeon fanciers and the damages they might inflict upon racing pigeons. This specific driver of illegal poisoning is recorded for the first time in Albania, although it has been well documented in other countries of the region, notably Serbia and Croatia. It is important to mention that one presumably mass poisoning incident dating from 2013 was obtained from the relevant authorities which indicates that 114 individuals from at least 3 different bird species probably died from poisoning. There are indications from hunters that conflicts between wild predators (mainly wolves and jackals) and livestock breeders are becoming more frequent since the national hunting ban has been enforced in 2014. And, since there are no alternative official methods of population management enforced by relevant governmental institutions, it is believed that the populations of predators, as well as damages they inflict upon livestock, are increasing, which is why local livestock breeders often resort to poisoning as an easy and affordable method. In addition to this, there are no compensatory measures in place for damages inflicted by wildlife, which further deepens the conflict. However, additional data is needed to support these indications and efforts should be made to further investigate them, as they potentially represent the most significant threat that vultures might face in Albania. Significant progress has been made in Albania in the struggle against illegal wildlife poisoning, chiefly towards amending the national legislation relevant to wildlife crime, as well as investigating the scope of illegal wildlife poisoning in the country. In synergy with the BAPP project supported by VCF and MAVA Foundation, “Illegal Killing and Taking of Birds” supported byEuroNaturand MAVA Foundation and the “Egyptian Vulture New Life project” (LIFE16 NAT/BG/000874) supported by Bulgarian Society for Protection of Birds (BSPB) and the EU, the Albanian Ornithological Society (AOS) lobbied in 2018 for the amendment of the Law No. 10 006, dated 23.10.2008 “On the Protection of Wild Fauna”. In July 2019, the Albanian Parliament adopted these amendments, explicitly stating that poisoning and particularly the use of poison baits is by law a prohibited action,and that the use of agricultural chemicals, veterinary drugs and services is a potential threat to wild fauna in case they are used contrary to the current legislation covering agricultural chemicals, veterinary drugs and services. Furthermore, these amendments were incorporated also into the penal code. These amendments of the national legislation represent a pre-requisite for any further conservation work related to combating wildlife poisoning. Following this, nature conservation CSOs and the Ministry of Tourism and Environment have currently developed an Anti-Poisoning Road Map which will orientate anti-poisoning policies in Albania. The adaptation of the legal national framework and the enhancement of the strategical framework is for sure a steppingstone in the right direction, but still significant efforts need to be made towards detection of poisoning incidents, awareness raising of both general public and relevant governmental institutions, from decision makers to enforcement bodies, and also towards capacity building. Training relevant to detection, reporting, sampling, and further processing of poisoning cases needs to be provided for police officers, environmental and veterinary inspectors and operational protocols developed so that they have the necessary tools to implement the newly amended legislation. Also, detailed training needs to be provided towards conduction of toxicological analysis, which is of crucial significance for further legal proceedings of poisoning incidents. 17 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Single case of poisoning 2-5 cases of poisoning 5-10 cases of poisoning 10-25 cases of poisoning 25-50 cases of poisoning 50+ cases of poisoning Map 2. Distribution of poisoning events by regions in Albania during 2000-2020. 18 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Legal framework Existing national legislation relevant to wildlife poisoning in Albania: • Law No. 46/2019, dated 08.07.2019 “On some changes and additions to law no. 10 006, dated 23.10.2008 “On the protection of wild fauna”: According to Article 10: “On the protection of wild fauna from substances, hazardous waste, and services” the use and administration of hazardous substances and waste, agricultural and veterinary chemicals, and services is done in accordance with the provisions of the legal framework in force, relating to chemical substances and preparations, hazardous waste management, plant protection service, as well as taking into account specific issues related to the prevention of poisoning of migratory birds, in accordance with the obligations defined in the agreements to which our country is a party. According to Article 19: “Prohibited Actions” of the same law, the use of poison baits for the extermination of wild fauna is punished with a fine in the amount of 100 000 ALL to 200 000 ALL. • Penal Code: According to Article 202: “Harming of protected species of flora and fauna” of the Penal Code, killing, destruction, possession, acquisition or trade of specimens of protected species of wild flora and fauna or their parts or by-products, in breach of the requirements of specific national legislation or relevant permit, unless such a case has occurred over a negligible amount of these specimens from the biological point of view of the group belonging to the protected species, and has no significant impact on the conservation status of the species, constitutes criminal contravention and is punishable by a fine or imprisonment of two to seven years. Relevant international treaties and conventions that Albania is parties to: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern, 1979): Ratified by Albania in 1999, it prohibits the use of any non-selective means of capture or killing as well as of means that may induce local extinction or heavily disturb the populations of a species, namely means listed in Annex IV”, while in Annex IV of the same Law, which is entitled “Prohibited means and methods of hunting and other forms of exploitation”, “Poisons and poison or tranquilizing baits” are included. Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning in local communities in Albania The research included 100 respondents to the survey questionnaires. The majority of livestock/ cattle and agricultural production farmers, rangers, veterinarians and policemen in hotspot areas in Albania are not informed about the presence and breeding of key species of vultures in their country. 56% of respondents from the local communities believe that Albania can be a breeding ground for the Egyptian Vulture, the Griffon and Cinereous Vulture follow (42% and 31%, respectively); when it comes to other species of vultures that were mentioned, the number of respondents who state that they are familiar with their presence is considerably lower. Target groups in local communities in Albania mostly have limited information on the key threats to the vulture populations. While wildlife poisoning is identified as the biggest threat by less than 15% of respondents, the majority (35%) find reasons for the endangerment of vulture species in some other causes and 17% of respondents claim that they are not informed. Farmers, rangers, veterinarians, and policemen in our target communities in Albania also assess their knowledge of the issue of wild- 19 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA life poisoning as below average (39%). The respondents’ knowledge related to the causes of vulture poisoning is limited and unclear, as the majority identify poison baits intended for other animals (29%) and consumption of poisoned animals (18%) as the key causes of vulture poisoning, which implies accidental poisoning, at the same time close to 50% of respondents believe that wildlife poisoning mostly occurs intentionally, with illegal poisons from the black market (36%) or by abuse of legal poisoning substances such as pesticides, insecticides, etc. (12%). Responsibility for vulture poisoning lies primarily with livestock breeders, farmers and people who intentionally poison animals out of aggressive and destructive impulses; hunters follow. The key motivations for poisoning animals are related to protection from pests, protection of pastures and livestock from wild animals, but also protection from stray dogs and cats and conflicts among people about land use. The majority of the respondents who witnessed/ heard of poisoning cases in the past 10 years believe that the incidents were the result of deliberate poisoning of any type of animal within the settlements and inhabited areas implying the need for better protection of property, cattle, and pets within human settlements. Although a smaller number of poisonings were attributed to intentionally poisoned wild animals outside of settlements because “they bothered someone”, this is still an issue to address in the communication with residents of local communities in Albania. 0% 10% 20% 15% 16% 32% 27% 21% 20% 34% 48% 47% 15% 27% 15% 14% 46% 8% 13% 16% 7% 20% 7% 4% 7% 38% 26% 16% 15% 10% 6% Livestock breeders Individuals who deliberately poison animals simply because they like killing things Farmers Hunters Pigeon fanciers/ breeders Beekepers 60% 20% 80% 40% 100% Figure 2. Perceived responsible groups for wildlife poisoning in Albania I don’t know Never Rarely Occasionally often 20 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA On the other hand, responsibility for reporting poisoning incidents to the authorities is attributed to hunters and veterinarians, as well as the general population. Still, more than 70% of target groups believe that people who report someone for poisoning wild animals risk altercations and conflicts in their community, which is one of the important barriers for preventing and sanctioning these incidents (40% of respondents are concerned about the possible risks and claim readiness to report the incidents only if they personally wouldn’t have negative consequences, while 1 in 5 stated that they would not report the poisoning). Apart from communicating the importance of the cooperation with the authorities in detection and prevention of these cases, research results show the need for communicating which are the proper institutions to report the poisoning to, especially as the authorities need this type of cooperation to detect the remote locations’ poisoning cases, that are not easy to detect. Research results also show the importance of a public discussion about personal vs shared responsibility (“there are enough other people worrying about that”), and the importance of dealing with wildlife poisoning beyond the immediate effects that it has on individuals. When it comes to the measures for prevention and combating wildlife poisoning, 80%-90% of respondents perceive that that the state/government should financially compensate the damage to livestock breeders and farmers caused by wild animals, and that additional resources should be invested in informing the general population about the problem of wildlife poisoning. Other relevant measures include addressing pasture ownership issues, installing electric fences, controlling the export and import of legal toxic substances, creating more feeding grounds for vultures, but also stricter imposing of fines for animal poisoning. Wildlife poisoning investigations are also identified as important police work by close to two thirds of the respondents. 16% of the target group on the other hand considers these investigations as mostly or completely unimportant. Figure 3. Perceived motives behind wildlife poisoning in Albania I don’t knowNever Rarely Occasionally often Protection from pests (rats, insects et at.) Protection from stray dogs and cats Protection of pigeons from birds of prey Protection of hunting activities Protection of apiaries from bears 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Protection of agricultural fields from wild animals Protection of pastures and lifestock from wild animals Human-human conflicts over land use Protection of agricultural fields from birds of prey 41% 21% 8% 8% 51% 48% 13% 8% 12% 19% 16%14%6%18%46% 39% 16% 19% 15% 11% 20%29%12%16%23% 18% 15% 18% 29% 20% 9%50%7%7%27% 20% 4% 13% 56% 10% 11% 11% 10% 17% 22% 21 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA A promising finding of the research shows that most of the residents in local communities in Albania recognize the importance of the vulture population for both humans and the environment (around 70%). Also, about 70% of the target groups residents realize that the Earth has limited space and resources, that it is challenging to maintain the natural balance, and that plants and animals have the same rights as humans. However, the results of the research also imply the need for further communication of the dangers of wildlife poisoning, as around one third of the respondents consider controlled institutionally conducted poisoning of wild animals as a proper means to control pests, and also that poisoning of vultures is justified in certain situations. The most polarizing attitude is related to the dominance of man over nature – while 4 out of 10 respondents believe that people are the ones who have primacy, a similar number disagrees with the idea of human rule over nature. Ordinary citizens in general are identified as the target group for the awareness campaign about the threats of wildlife poisoning; livestock breeders, farmers, hunters and game wardens, follow. Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning within relevant governmental authorities in Albania Online Interviews of the targeted groups of government services and institutions officials, law enforcement officials and veterinary service employees in Albania were carried out. The sample included 22 respondents in total out of 49 employees in targeted institutions. Officials employed in relevant institutions in Albania are well informed that the Egyptian Vulture, the only vulture species breeding in Albania is present on the territory of their country. However, there is a certain lack of knowledge when it comes to the conservation status of other species of vultures, as less than half of the respondents think that the Griffon Vulture still breeds in Albania and a small number of respondents consider that Cinereous Vulture and Turkey Vulture are also present in Albania. Wildlife poisoning is perceived as the key threat to the vulture populations in Albania (by more than half of the officials employed in relevant institutions). Wildlife poisoning is considered to be both accidental and intentional, by using illegal poisons from the black market or legal poisoning substances such as pesticides or insecticides. On the other hand, poisoning of the vultures is mostly perceived as unintentional either from poison baits intended for other animals or from secondary poisoning by consuming poisoned animals. The key target groups responsible for wildlife poisoning are identified as livestock breeders and farmers. These groups resort to wildlife poisoning to protect the pastures, agricultural land and livestock from wild animals and as protection from pests. More than half of the government employees believe that Gjirokastër is the region of Albania where wild animals are most frequently poisoned, while considerable number of officials (around one third) claim to be uninformed about the region(s) where wild animals are most often poisoned. The key aggravating circumstances and obstacles for prevention and sanctioning of wildlife poisoning are inadequate law enforcement (although laws and regulations themselves are not assessed as unsatisfactory), low penalties for wildlife poisoning and inadequate and unclear protocols for police action and limited police capacities. In terms of legislations and legal processing of poisoning incidents, officials additionally point to the rare imposing of fines (especially under the Hunting Act), and to the lack of public prosecutors’ education for managing incidents related to the poisoning of wild animals. Regarding sanctions for various unlawful actions detrimental to animals and the environment, the majority of officials agree that all forms of mass and non-discriminative killing of animals (trapping, poisoning, explosives, etc.) should be severely punished 22 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA and that fines for every type of poaching or illegal shooting should be increased. They also recognize the necessity for treating the possession of poison baits as a separate offense, regardless of whether it has been proven that an animal was killed and believe that the rangers should have the authority to arrest perpetrators, if they are caught in the act. On the other hand, there is no unanimous opinion whether the fines for animal poisoning should only be financial, or they should envisage imprisonment. In general, there is very little knowledge about the existence of National action plan for combating wildlife poisoning, a protocol defining procedures and jurisdictions for investigating wildlife poisoning and a database for poisoning incidents of birds amongst officials from relevant institutions. They also point out the inadequate cooperation between governmental institutions and civil society organizations regarding data collection about poisoning events, which is in line with the perception that the lack of coordination among relevant institutions and organizations is a bigger problem than a lack of resources. Regarding the role of the Police in investigating wildlife poisoning incidents, respondents recognize the complexity of the investigations, assessing at the same time the capacities of the police as inadequate, both in terms of equipment and in terms of education and training of police forces. The majority of governmental employees surveyed identify the necessity for introduction of more people in the field for timely detection of poisoning incidents, introduction of specialized police units for environmental crime, including wildlife poisoning, and introduction of specialized canine units for detecting poisonous substances used for wildlife poisoning. Modern technologies and methods, as well as the cooperation with representatives of civil society in the investigation process are also identified as necessary. In addition, about two-thirds of respondents believe that additional effort is needed to change the attitude of the police towards a more serious understanding of the need for investigating wildlife poisoning incidents. An additional obstacle in the work of the Police is the lack of reporting of poisoning incidents to the police forces, which should be the responsibility of veterinarians and hunters in the first place, but also general population (every person). Still, close to two thirds of respondents perceive that reporting of such incidents can pose certain risks in the respective local communities for those who inform on the poisoning. An important barrier is also believed to be lack of information who to report animal poisoning incidents to. Speaking of measures for preventing wildlife poisoning, almost all governmental employees believe that further raising of awareness among citizens in general and key stakeholders (livestock breeders, farmers, hunters, institutions), imposing a stricter control of the sales of legal poisoning substances and providing compensation to livestock breeders and farmers for the damages caused by wild animals are the key preventive measures that can help reduce wildlife poisoning. Additional supplementary feeding sites for vultures and better protection of wild ungulate populations are the measures which are also perceived as important and beneficial. Research results indicate a developed environmental consciousness among officials in Albania. They understand that plants and animals have an equal right to exist as humans and that the natural balance is very delicate and easily disturbed. Also, optimism for future actions is present in beliefs of the half of the respondents who dispute that humans are destined to rule over the rest of the nature, although one third agree with the domination of people over nature. Conclusions Wildlife poisoning in Albania is an evident environmental issue. The efforts invested into the research of this practice since 2018 provide preliminary insight into its scope and nature. We now know that people mostly resort to poisoning to resolve conflicts with wildlife, most often predators such as foxes, wolves and bears in order to reduce the damages that these animals may inflict upon livestock and other agricultural practices. For the better investigated poisoning events 23 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA we can see that poison baits are mostly prepared using Methomyl and Organophosphates. A new potential driver of poison use registered in Albania is the deliberate use of poison due to conflicts with pigeon fanciers and the damages they might inflict upon racing pigeons. This specific driver of illegal poisoning is recorded for the first time in Albania, although it has been well documented in other countries of the region, notably Serbia and Croatia. It is important to mention that information about one presumably mass poisoning incident obtained from the relevant authorities indicate that misuse of pesticides used in agriculture could also be an important source for wildlife poisoning in the country. It is necessary to monitor and record all potential poisoning events in the country in order to more adequately determine the actual scope of this practice in the whole country and precisely define the areas where it most often occurs. Conservation work regarding wildlife poisoning in Albania resulted in creating conditions for legal sanctions against this practice. The recent changes in the national legislation now make it possible for poisoning to be treated as an illegal activity, punishable by law, which represents the basic foundation for combating this damaging practice. Since the change in national legislation is very recent, the jurisdictions and responsibilities of national law enforcement agencies need to be precisely defined. Additionally, a significant amount of specific training for combating wildlife poisoning, and environmental crime in general, is needed for enforcement agents from the relevant institutions in order to be able to adequately address potential poisoning events. Poisoning in general is not perceived as a very significant threat for vultures or other wildlife by the general population inhabiting rural areas in Albania, and the majority of people are not well informed about this conservation issue. On the other hand, they perceive that livestock breeders and hunters are groups which might often resort to the use of poison baits as they most commonly have conflicts with wildlife. These groups are perceived as the main culprits behind wildlife poisoning also by relevant governmental authorities, which generally exhibit a significantly higher ecological awareness when it comes to poisoning and wildlife crime in general. Therefore, future anti-poison efforts in Albania should also integrate a significant educational and awareness raising component aimed at changing the perception about this practice and labeling it as a socially unacceptable behavior. 24 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA Introduction The negative effect that the use of poison baits has on wildlife is well documented in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The first data about the effects of this practice on birds, especially on vultures, was noted in Othmar Reiser’s works published in the end of 19th and first years of 20th century, when it was pointed out that it is necessary to regulate the use of poisons in the environment to prevent the killing of Bearded and Griffon Vultures. Vulture populations in the country suffered the severest blow in the mid-20th century, when the use of poisonous substances for exterminating large carnivores, mainly wolves, was a legally sanctioned practice. This uncontrolled and unprecedented poisoning practice led to extinction of the Cinereous (1910), Bearded (1987) and Egyptian Vulture (1995) from Bosnia and Herzegovina. The last major poisoning event was observed at the beginning of the 1991 when the last breeding colony of Griffon Vultures in the country was poisoned in a single poisoning event. In the last 20 years the problem of poisoning is still present, although almost no records of massive poisoning incidents of wildlife have been officially reported to the relevant institutions. There are no systematic records or relevant database related to wildlife poisoning incidents in the country among the relevant governmental institutions. Since 2018. and the launch of the BAPP project in Bosnia and Herzegovina, information about potential poisoning incidents has been systematically recorded by Ornitološko društvo “Naše ptice”, which enables us some insight into the current situation of the illegal poisoning in the country, Historical perspective There is very little available data related to wildlife poisoning in general, and even fewer data related to vulture poisoning from Bosnia and Herzegovina, although the use of poison baits for population control and extermination of various mammalian predators and other undesirable animals is a well-documented practice in the country. Therefore, avian scavengers could frequently encounter poisoned dead animals (either as bait or as victims of poisoning) in the environment. From the middle of the 19th to the middle of the 20th century Strychnine was extensively used for the control of wolf populations. The poisoning was not selective and was affecting many other different species as well. Another reason for using poison was the control of population of feral and stray dogs. Large, organized poisoning actions, with the use of strychnine and Hydrogen cyanide were carried out after the II World War. It is estimated that around 220 vultures (mainly Griffon Vultures) were poisoned throughout Bosnia and Hercegovina during 1959 alone (Mardešić & Dugački in Marinković, 1999). The practice of illegal placing of poison baits in the environment for the same reasons continued throughout the 80s and 90s. During the period of 1980-1991, 97 Griffon Vultures were poisoned in eastern Hercegovina (Marinković et al. 2007). It was proven that in some incidents Furadan (Carbofuran) and hydrogen cyanide were used. The last recorded incident of massive poisoning of vultures in Bosnia and Herzegovina was recorded on June 26th, 1991 in Blagaj, where the last breeding population of Griffon Vultures used to breed, on cliffs towering above the Buna River. Thirty Griffon Vultures were found poisoned after feeding on an animal carcass laced with Fura- 25 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA dan, which was placed in order to eliminate stray and feral dogs from the vicinity of a local settlement, according to official reports. This single poisoning incident wiped out the last breeding population in the country and the species hasn’t recovered since. Currently there are no vulture species breeding in Bosnia and Herzegovina, only vagrant individuals of Griffon Vultures, and recently of reintroduced Cinereous Vultures from Bulgaria, have been recorded flying across the country during the last 20 years. Current situation in the country First comprehensive investigation of the practice of wildlife poisoning in Bosnia and Herzegovina was conducted through the implementation of the BAPP project, which was implemented from 2018-2021. Within this period, efforts were mainly invested in determining the current scope of this practice on a national level, drivers behind it, substances most commonly used and areas in the country where it most often occurs (or where conflicts with wildlife, especially predators, have been recorded the most). There is very little information regarding wildlife poisoning available in general, both from the relevant governmental authorities and media, and even less about poisoning incidents relevant to vulture mortality, the drivers behind it and the substances most frequently used. Based on the available data a total of 6 presumable poisoning wildlife incidents have been recorded in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 2000-2020, mainly due to misuse of pesticides in agriculture. The last massive poisoning incident was recorded in 2004 near Sarajevo, where 20 Common Buzzards were found dead on an agricultural field. The misuse of rodenticides for control of rodent populations was believed to be the cause behind this incident, like the one recorded in 2017, where 2 White Storks were found dead in Vrbaška. Since 2018, 4 presumable wildlife poisoning incidents were recorded, with no information available about the motives behind them or poisoning substances used. In 2018 one Griffon Vulture was suspected to have died of poisoning in the recovery aviary in Blagaj. In 2020, 3 Western Marsh-harriers were found dead in Gacko most likely due to misuse of pesticides in agriculture. In the Canton of Sarajevo, the same year 1 Eurasian Brown bear and Peregrine Falcon were found dead, presumably poisoned. The necropsy conducted on the bear concluded that there were indicative signs of poisoning. However, since there are currently no referent toxicological laboratories in Bosnia and Herzegovina for conducting forensic toxicological analysis on wildlife it is not possible to conduct necessary analyses to validate if the cause of death was actually poisoning and what was the substance used. Additionally, the current legislation does not permit samples from wildlife, especially protected species to be transported for toxicological analysis in referent laboratories abroad, which further complicates the issue of officially confirming poisoning incidents in the country. Therefore, it is vital that future conservation efforts in Bosnia and Herzegovina relevant to wildlife poisoning focus on amending the current legislation in place and develop capacities within existing relevant national laboratories for conducting toxicological analysis on samples obtained from wild animals. Since half of the recorded wildlife poisoning incidents in the last 20 years indicate that the animals most likely died from secondary poisoning, due to improper application of rodenticides in agricultural areas, it is important to note that this unintentional poisoning constitutes a significant factor in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Poisonous substances are mostly used by farmers, most of them insufficiently informed about proper usage and application. There are legal protocols that prescribe the proper manner and amount of use of these substances, however adequate enforcement of these protocols is completely lacking or is restricted to large, commercial farms. There is no control of the application of these substances by small farmers and farmsteads. Furthermore, it is important to note that the procurement of banned substances is very much present in the country and is often conducted through social networks (Facebook), various web sites, indicating that a black market for these substances exists. 32 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA protection of wild ungulate populations, resolving the issues of pasture ownership and the right to use them, ensuring free electric fences and state/ government financial compensation for the damages caused by wild animals to livestock breeders and farmers, have a key place in the prevention of wildlife poisoning incidents. According to the respondents, all citizens need to be better informed to whom they should report cases of poisoning of wild animals. Also, it is necessary to promote the protection of vultures and inform the citizens about the dangers of poisoning to create a climate in which citizens are not afraid of risks and conflicts in their environment if they report poisoning cases. The sensitivity of the natural balance and the possibility of it being easily disturbed, as well as the limited resources and space on Earth, were unanimously recognized by target group of employees in the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina. On the other hand, although plants and animals are recognized as equal in terms of the right to life and existence, the presence of the attitude that people are destined to rule over nature is still evident. Conclusions Although efforts have been made in the past several years to determine the actual scope of wildlife poisoning in Bosnia and Herzegovina by national CSOs, there has been very little data available about this occurrence in the country during the last 20 years, although it has been a deeply rooted practice until the 1990s. Almost no available data about animal poisoning exists among the relevant governmental authorities in the country, despite the fact that the practice of using poison baits to eliminate undesirable animals has been illegal for more than 30 years. Existing data almost exclusively relates to poisoning of pets, mostly dogs, in urban environments. The lack of a referent national laboratory where it would be possible to conduct forensic toxicological analysis, to confirm if a wild animal has indeed died as a consequence of poisoning, further complicates the issue. Most presumable poisoning events involving wildlife relate to unintentional poisoning mainly due to inadequate use of pesticides or other plant protection products used in agriculture. On the other hand, wildlife poisoning is perceived as one of the three key threats to vultures in Bosnia and Herzegovina by the general population in rural areas, apart from poaching and the lack of food. Vultures are not perceived as primary targets of poisoning, but mostly as accidental fatalities from poison baits intended for other animals. However, further educational and awareness raising actions about the dangers of illegal poisoning of animals, and the importance of reporting these incidents to the relevant authorities, need to be implemented as almost half of the surveyed people in rural areas consider controlled institutionally conducted poisoning of wild animals to be an adequate measure for control of populations of pests and undesirable animals. Additionally, a great majority of surveyed people in Bosnia and Herzegovina perceive that wildlife poisoning mostly occurs intentionally (mostly by illegal poisons from the black market and to a somewhat lower percentage by abuse of legal poisoning substances such as pesticides, insecticides, etc.). Therefore, it is very probable that a significant number of intentional poisoning incidents remains unnoticed and unreported. People from the local communities perceive that the responsibility for wildlife poisoning mainly to rests on hunters, individuals who deliberately poison animals simply because they like killing things and livestock breeders and farmers. Although Bosnia and Herzegovina has a complicated political and administrative setting, the existing legislation in place clearly prohibits the use of poison baits and any similar means of non-selective extirpation of animals. Relevant law enforcement institutions in the country are inexperienced in dealing in poisoning incidents, and significant efforts need to be invested to build up their capacities in order to be able to tackle this specific type of environmental crime. The lack of coordination and cooperation among relevant governmental institutions, lack of clear operational protocols, and the possibility of conducting toxicological analysis on wild animals are recognized as the main gaps that result in poor engagement and performance of the relevant authorities with wildlife poisoning in the country. 33 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA BULGARIA Introduction During the middle of the 20th century the use of poisoned baits was widely and systematically used to control populations of wild predators in Bulgaria, much like other neighboring countries of the Balkan region. The effects of this legal, governmentally sponsored initiative back then are well documented. The Bearded Vulture is considered to have been extinct since the 1970s when the last individual was found poisoned in the Eastern Balkan Mountains. Since then, only single vagrant individuals have been irregularly observed in southern Bulgaria. The Cinereous Vulture has been extinct from Bulgaria since 1993. The last breeding pair of the species was confirmed in 1993 in the Eastern Rhodopes. Decades of work on vulture conservation in the country conducted by the national CSOs, and in particularly through the recent reintroduction efforts within Vultures back to LIFE project (LIFE14 NAT/BG/000649) have created favorable conditions for the species to breed again. In 2021 first breeding attempts of the Cinereous Vultures have been documented after nearly 20 years. The Griffon Vulture population in Bulgaria rapidly declined throughout most of the 20th century and was thought to be extinct in the country in the 1960s mainly due to wildlife poisoning and changes in animal husbandry practices. In the beginning of the 90s Bulgaria ratified the Bern Convention and the practice of using poison baits was finally banned. Additionally, the establishment of the Natura 2000 network in Bulgaria and hence the incorporation of the Birds and Habitats Directive further reinforced national legislation. However, although randomly distributed spatially and temporally, the illegal use of poison baits is still practiced as a common method for extirpation of wild predators, birds of prey, feral and stray dogs, and any other unwanted animals (e.g., wild boar, horses etc.). Detection of poisoning incidents very much depends on the efforts invested in field searches for signs of poisoning or poisoned animals. Recently, through implementation of several LIFE projects, significant progress has been made in detection of poisoning, proper processing of poisoned animals, development of anti-poison awareness campaigns and judicial processing of poisoning incidents. Since the beginning of the 21st century systematic records and documentation of poisoning incidents have been kept, especially those related to vulture mortality, by national CSOs working on bird conservation in the country. Historical perspective Historical data relevant to wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria dates from the very beginning of the 20th century, when Cyanide and Arsenic were commonly used to kill indiscriminately any mammalian predators and birds of prey deemed undesirable or harmful to human activities. During the middle of the 20th century Strychnine was introduced and widely and systematically used by forestry officers, veterinary officers and hunters for such purposes in a nationalized and centralized economy of the country. After 1962 vultures were listed as protected species in Bulgaria, but the main reason for their population decline – the use of poison baits was not officially banned. No specific survey on poisoned wildlife animals was conducted, nor records of such incidents kept, until the 90s, when BSPB project members in the Eastern Rhodopes started to conduct toxicological analyses of dead vultures. However, this practice was intensively introduced in wildlife conservation in Bulgaria since 2003 with the appointment of National working group on poisoning incidents which was coordinated by Fund for Wild Flore and Fau- 34 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA na (FWFF) within the Balkan Vulture Action Plan (BVAP). The FWFF, Green Balkans, BSPB, Birds of Prey Protection Society (BPPS), Balkani Wildlife Society and others work on their own projects and in co-ordination to combat the illegal use of poison baits in the environment. Current situation in the country Nature conservation organizations in Bulgaria have been very active in addressing the issue of wildlife poisoning, as it is one of the main threats that national population of vultures and other scavenger species are facing, and are managing their own databases about this practice, such as FWFF. Additionally, under the scope of LIFE+ project “The Return of the Neophron” (LIFE10NAT/ BG/000152), BSPB has established together with other project partners the Poison Incident Database (PID), where available data about poisoning incidents that occur in Bulgaria are stored. A unified national database for recording and storing information regarding wildlife poisoning incidents is key for conducting adequate spatial analysis, determining the scope and severity of poisoning, and defining hotspots for poisoning in the country and subsequently directing conservation actions and effort where they are most needed. Ministry of Environment and Water in 2021 approved the National Action plan to combat the illicit use of poisons in the wild, developed by BSPB. This plan represents an extremely important tool for combating one of the biggest threats to biodiversity in Bulgaria. The entry into force of this strategic document is a key step in the conservation of wildlife and a number of endangered species in the country. Available information about wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria indicates that 88 poisoning and presumably poisoning events have occurred in the country during the period 2000-2020. According to the data compiled and analyzed in this study the most common driver behind the use of poison in Bulgaria are livestock losses, inflicted by mammalian predators, predominantly wolves (identified in 38% of registered poisoning events where mammalian predators were the target), but also jackals, foxes, and bears. In 2 poisoning events where bears were targeted, honey mixed with toxic compounds was used as a bait. The second most numerous cause of poisoning of wildlife in Bulgaria is misuse of pesticides in agriculture, which is responsible for 26,1% documented events (Figure 6.). Although this type of poisoning is unintentional, banned pesticides, such as Carbofuran, have been used for preparation of poison baits against rodents. Conflicts with birds of prey, that may often inflict damages to racing pigeons, and conflicts with shepherd dogs, unwanted by hunters because of conflicts with their dogs, as well as conflicts with stray dogs are also identified as motives for using poison in Bulgaria. conflicts with predators conflicts with shepherd dogs conflicts with birds of prey unknown 30% 26% 39% 3% 1% 1% Missuse of pesticides in agriculture conflict with stray dogs Figure 6. Motives behind wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria 35 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Depending on the drivers behind poison use, there are several different groups of the society that most frequently use poison to kill wildlife, domestic animals or livestock: hunters, game keepers, livestock breeders, dove and pigeon keepers, farmers. The situation with poison use is very much dynamic and incidents may appear randomly in space and time. The most important areas however (hotspots for poisoning) are those in which large carnivores (wolf, jackal, bear) are frequently present and especially areas with extensive animal husbandry. It is more efficient to focus anti-poison actions to areas where certain conservation dependent species are present. However, a national anti-poison campaign covering all target groups is crucial for combating this issue long-term. There is no restriction to season when it comes to wildlife poisoning, but the vultures are usually affected in March-May, when the livestock is about to be moved to summer pastures. According to the available data compiled for this study, toxic compounds that were used for poisoning were identified in 54% of wildlife poisoning events. The most frequently used toxic substances for wildlife poisoning are Carbamates, most notably Methomyl and Carbofuran, and Organophosphates. The last poisoning incident where Strychnine was used was registered in 2003. Toxicological analysis also confirmed the use of Zink phosphate for poisoning animals, and Lindane, which is often used both as an agricultural insecticide and as a pharmaceutical treatment for lice and scabies. Stricter control of legally used pesticides and their application in agriculture should be enforced as well, where conservation dependent species may be poisoned in arable areas where these substances are applied legally. These actions should be planned species by species and site by site because substances that are lethal for one species may not be too dangerous for others (related to the way of application and introduction in the food chain) and vice versa. 0 Griffon Vulture Common Buzzard Egyptian Vulture Raven Golden Eagle Wolf Red FoxGolden Jackal Imperial Eagle 10 20 30 50 40 60 70 Incidents Casualties Figure 7. Common victims of wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria 36 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA A total of 30 species of wild animals have been found poisoned or presumably poisoned during the period from 2000-2020. The most common victims were Griffon Vultures, appearing in 17% of poisoning and presumably poisoning events (Figure 7). Sixty vultures in total we found poisoned and presumably poisoned within 15 separate incidents, but it is estimated that up to 90 birds ultimately might have perished from this practice. The most devastating poisoning event during this period occurred in March 2017 in the area of Kresna gorge (Peshev et al. 2018). The number of dead birds discovered amounted to 18, and it was estimated that at least 30-40 birds might have died, which was a significant blow to the local population, which had been restored there after years of conservation work. The Griffon Vultures found dead constituted the bulk of the local breeding population.The relevant authorities confirmed that the substance used for poisoning was Carbofuran and it is proved that the motive behind this incident was conflicts with wolves. The second most common victim of poisoning events according to the available data in Bulgaria (Figure 7.) is the Egyptian Vulture (19 individuals in 11 separate incidents), followed by the Common Buzzard (40 individuals in 10 separate incidents), Red Fox (13 individuals in 10 separate incidents) and Wolf (25 individuals in 9 separate incidents). Other victims of wildlife poisoning include Cinereous Vulture, Golden Eagle, Imperial Eagle, Long-legged Buzzard, Peregrine Falcon, Saker Falcon, Goshawk, Hen Harrier, Raven, Black Stork, White Stork, Common Starling, Partridge, Barn Owl, Tawny Owl, Goldfinch, Greater White-fronted Goose, Golden Jackal, Wild Boar, Brown Bear, Marbled polecat, Stone Marten, Badger, Hedgehog and Hare. The most numerous victim during this period was the Common Starling, as 244 individuals were found presumably poisoned within 3 separate events, from which 224 individuals in a single probable poisoning event due to misuse of pesticides in agriculture. Available data indicates that wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria is still a common practice, showing no signs of significant decrease of occurrence during the past 20 years. The frequency of occurrence of poisoning events in Bulgaria is highly irregular and further efforts are needed to investigate the annual differences in the number of recorded events and if they truly reflect the actual scope of wildlife poisoning in the country. Figure 8. Number of poisoning events in Bulgaria within the research period 0 2001 2005 2010 2015 2020 6 2 1 0 5 8 12 11 5 0 0 33 3 2 4 4 6 7 1 5 8 8 12 4 10 14 37 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Map 4. Distribution of poisoning events by regions in Bulgaria during 2000-2020. Single case of poisoning 2-5 cases of poisoning 5-10 cases of poisoning 10-25 cases of poisoning 25-50 cases of poisoning 50+ cases of poisoning 38 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Legal framework National legislation of Bulgaria strictly prohibits the use of poison baits to kill hunting and protected species. The action of setting poison baits on its own is forbidden, but poorly described and addressed in existing legislation and thus differently interpreted and often not applicable. In the Criminal Code, owning highly toxic substances without permission is considered illegal. However, all these measures are not enough, and additional explanatory texts and justifications should be included in existing legislation. Existing national legislation relevant to wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria: • Biological Diversity Act (State Gazette No. 77/9.08.2002): Article 44. prohibits the use of poison, poisoned or anesthetic baits (Annex 5) for capturing or killing any species listed in Annex 4 of the Biological Diversity Act. Relevant EU legislation - Directive 79/409/EEC of the Council of April 2, 1979, on the conservation of wild birds and Directive 92/43/EEC of the Council of May 21, 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora were integrated into the above mentioned national legislation. • Law for hunting and protection of game (SG. 78/26 Sep 2000, amend. SG. 26/20 Mar 2001, amend. SG. 77/9 Aug 2002, amend. SG. 79/16 Aug 2002): Article 65. prohibits the use of poisonous or anesthetic substances, as well as baits with such substances as a means or method in hunting. • Penal Code: According to article 237. (Amend., SG 28/82; SG 89/86; SG 86/91; SG 85/97; amend., SG 92/02) who kills or catches such game in time of prohibition, in a prohibited place or by prohibited means, shall be punished by corrective labor for up to six months or by a fine of one hundred to three hundred levs, as well as by revoking of rights according to art. 37, item 7. Relevant international treaties and conventions that Bulgaria is parties to: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern, 1979): Ratified by ratified by Bulgaria on 25.01.1999, in force for Bulgaria since 01.05.1991 (State Gazette ¹ 23/1995). It prohibits the use of any non-selective means of capture or killing as well as of means that may induce local extinction or heavily disturb the populations of a species, namely means listed in Annex IV”, while in Annex IV of the same Law, which is entitled “Prohibited means and methods of hunting and other forms of exploitation”, “Poisons and poison or tranquilizing baits” are included. Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning within relevant governmental authorities in Bulgaria Research about the perception of key audiences in local communities, as well as relevant governmental institutions in Bulgaria, was not the target for the scope of this study. However, efforts were made to obtain information from relevant institutions through the online survey, while we did not have sufficient capacities to conduct the surveys in local communities where wildlife poisoning is frequently registered. Employees of relevant institutions in Bulgaria are mostly well informed about the presence of certain species of vultures on the territory of Bulgaria today, such as the Griffon Vulture and Egyptian Vulture. Wildlife poisoning is not acknowledged as the most important threat to the existence of vultures in Bulgaria. The key perceived threats to the vulture population in Bulgaria are accidental electrocution from electric cables or fences, excessive and negligent use of legal poisons (pesticides, insecticides, rodenticides) and accidental consumption of poisoned animals by vultures. On the other hand, wildlife poisoning is recognized as to certain extent accidental, but to certain extent also intentional, using illegal poisons from the black market. 39 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA The main responsibility for wildlife poisoning lies with hunters, livestock breeders, farmers, and people who deliberately poison animals to kill them, while the key reasons for the poisoning of vultures are protection of pastures and livestock from wild animals and protection of hunting grounds. Other important reasons are conflicts between people over land use (pastures, hunting grounds), protection from pests (rats, insects, etc.), protection of pigeons from birds of prey, protection of agricultural land from wildlife and birds of prey and even protection from stray dogs and cats. The responsibility for reporting incidents of poisoning to institutions in charge thus lies with citizens, hunters, and veterinarians while citizens in general and livestock breeders have been singled out as the key target groups for awareness-raising campaigns on wildlife poisoning. However, respondents also recognize that the reporting process of the incidents of poisoning remains challenging because those who report someone risk conflicts in their communities. The valleys of the Struma, Rila and Pirin rivers are perceived as the key areas most often affected by animal poisoning. The Forebalkans, Stara Planina, Trans-Balkan fields, the valley of the river Mesta and the Rhodopes have been identified as well. The key obstacles for the prevention and sanctioning of wildlife poisoning have been identified as the complexity of the investigation, difficulties with evidence in the court, the insufficient education of public prosecutors for handling cases related to poisoning of wild animals, the insufficient or rare application of penalties based on the laws governing hunting grounds, and the black market for illegal poisons on the Internet. Respondents are mostly uninformed or believe that there are no databases on poisoning incidents, that there is no national action plan to combat poisoning or protocol defining procedures and responsibilities in investigations of wildlife poisoning. The cooperation between governmental institutions and civil society organizations regarding data collection about poisoning incidents, is also mostly perceived as inadequate, or respondents state they are undecided and cannot evaluate it. Low penalties for wildlife poisoning, the quality of the legal framework for punishing animal poisoning and whether the existing legislation regulates biodiversity protection well enough, as well as inadequate law enforcement are also perceived as important obstacles in the prevention, detection and sanctioning of wildlife poisoning. The role of the Police and the investigation of wildlife poisoning are recognized as relevant police work, pointing to the need to introduce specialized police units that would deal with the crimes of wildlife poisoning. Respondents have divided opinions regarding the sufficiency of police force education and training to investigate wildlife incidents, the need to introduce modern technology and methods, and the extent of the problem of not reporting incidents to police. Regarding the investigation of animal poisoning incidents, important solutions include the need for specialized police units for environmental crimes, including wildlife poisoning, police reinforcement with specialized canine units for detecting poisonous substances used for wildlife poisoning, and the need to put more agents in the field (police, environmental inspectors, rangers, etc.) for timely detection of poisoning incidents. Imposing of a stricter control of the trade of legal poisoning substances (pesticides, rodenticides, etc.), raising awareness of the general public and key stakeholders (livestock breeders, farmers, hunters, institutions), enforcing severe punishments for all forms of mass and non-discriminatory killing of animals, as well as higher penalties for every form of poaching/ illegal shooting, resolving issues of the ownership of pastures and rights to use them and state / government financial compensation for the damage caused by wild animals to livestock breeders and farmers are identified as having a key place in the prevention of wildlife poisoning incidents. Respondents recognize that rangers in protected areas should have the authority to arrest perpetrators who poison animals if they are caught in 40 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA the act, and if poisoning of wild animals occurs in a commercial hunting area, the concessionaire should be deprived of the concession. Increased number of supplementary feeding sites for vultures, and better protection of wild ungulate populations also have a key place in the prevention of wildlife poisoning incidents in the opinion of the employees from relevant governmental institutions. Ecological awareness among the respondents employed in institutions in Bulgaria is evident in their attitudes about the sensitivity of the natural balance and the possibility of it being easily disturbed, as well as the fact that plants and animals have the same right to exist as humans. Some of the respondents, however, still believe that people are destined to rule over nature, and they fail to recognize that the Earth is like a spaceship, with very limited space and resources. Conclusions The practice of wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria is still an evident threat for many wild species in Bulgaria, especially for avian scavengers inhabiting the country such as vultures. The most common motive behind intentional use of poison and poison baits remains to be conflicts with mammalian predators, which often inflict damages to livestock and other types of agricultural production. Wolves are identified as the primary targets of poison baits, but also jackals, foxes and bears are specifically targeted. The increase in numbers and expansion of the distribution of jackals throughout Bulgaria, and wolves in certain areas, are potentially a cause of concern as it might lead to the more frequent conflicts with livestock breeders, hunters and game keepers, which are identified as groups of society that most often use poison to kill animals. Carbamates, most notably Carbofuran and Methomyl, are most often used for preparation of poison baits in Bulgaria, which indicates that an illegal market, or stockpiles of these substances exist in Bulgaria, similar to other countries from the region. Vultures continue to be the most common victims of illegal wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria, appearing as victims in every third poisoning event. Griffon Vulture population suffered the most from this practice during the last 20 years, as 60 individuals in total were found poisoned and presumably poisoned, but it is estimated that up to 90 birds ultimately might have perished from this illegal practice during this period. Non-governmental organizations in Bulgaria have been very active in combating illegal wildlife poisoning, as the main threat for vulture populations since the begging of the 21st century. Implemented actions that range from awareness raising among key stakeholders and general public, applying preventive measures in local communities where conflicts with predators occur regularly, providing specific training to relevant governmental institutions, setting up databases to record all potential poisoning incidents, and using GPS tracked birds as sentinels for poisoning have significantly impacted the perception about this practice and is indeed responsible for periodical decreases in the number of recorded poisoning events in Bulgaria. Bulgaria’s Ministry of Environment and Water recently approved the country’s National Action Plan to combat the illicit use of poisons in the wild, which is a key step towards creating a functional system for combating this environmental issue. Further specific training for law enforcement agents is crucial for reinforcing this action plan and ensuring its successful implementation in the long run. 41 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA CROATIA Introduction The first known organized and governmentally sponsored poisoning campaigns in Croatia started after the II World War, but such practices were present since the turn of the 20th century, as a legal method that hunters used to extirpate mammalian predators, primarily wolves and foxes. Strychnine was commonly used for the preparation of poison baits in an attempt to resolve the issue of wolf predation on sheep and other livestock. Although the use of poison baits for predator control was banned in 1972, the practice lingered on among livestock breeders, hawing a detrimental effect primarily on vulture populations in the country. Griffon Vulture used to be widespread along the Croatian coast and it was also regular in some parts of continental Croatia until the end of 19th century. Throughout the 20th century its breeding area in Croatia was constantly shrinking and in late 20th century it became restricted only in the Kvarner islands. The Cinereous Vulture went extinct in Croatia during the 1950s, while the Egyptian Vulture was registered as a breeding species for the last time in 1987. The Bearded Vulture is believed to have gone extinct in 1910. Reasons behind severe population declines of vultures in Croatia are loss of traditional farming practices and the widespread practice of poisoning, especially after the II World War. Concerning vulture populations, the biggest problems started during the second half of 1980s, when hunters introduced Wild Boars as a game species to the Kvarner Islands. During the same period an increasing number of Golden Jackals and Brown Bears started to cross from the mainland to islands and to inflict damages on livestock, especially lambs. When the Ministry of Environmental and Nature Protection issued the order to hunters to eliminate all introduced species from all islands in Croatia, hunters refused to remove them. Wild boars, jackals and bears killed thousands of sheep (not only lambs) and shepherds became desperate, and the easiest way for them to eliminate this threat was to place poison in sheep carcasses. Although poison use has been prohibited in Croatia by the National Hunting Act of 1972, it is still practiced, especially after the failure of the government to enforce the legislation related to removal of introduced and invasive game animals from the Kvarner islands. Furthermore, different banned substances (notably Carbofuran) can still easily be acquired on the black market from neighboring countries. Historical perspective The practice of wildlife poisoning is a well-documented practice in Croatia. Systematic records related to mortality of wildlife, and especially vultures, have been kept by CSOs, while a centralized database within relevant governmental institutions is still lacking. The extent of wildlife poisoning in Croatia can be easily perceived from several well-documented records. For example, in Gorski kotar (small part of Croatia – 1.273 sq.km), where during the 40-year period (1946-1985) 26 brown bears and 177 wolfs were found poisoned, while during 1961-1972 3.6 wolves/year were poisoned (Frković in Sušić 2000). These poisoning incidents were a part of the governmental sponsored poisoning campaigns, which started after the II World War, similar to other countries in the region. In the period from 1996-2013, in the Rescue Centre for Griffon vultures, 157 Griffon vultures arrived, 31 of which died, and 12 of them had significant neurological symptoms. In the same period, 59 dead vultures were found (of which 17 in one incident 48 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA By far the largest number of respondents (61.7%) believe that the most important thing is to raise awareness about animal poisoning among citizens in general, with no statistically significant difference between livestock, farmers and hunters. Of the necessary preventive measures, respondents are most inclined to the state to compensate livestock and farmers for wild animals, followed by a measure to inform the public about the problem of wildlife poisoning, followed by measures to control the import and trade of legal toxic substances and raising fines for wildlife poisoning. At the same time, livestock breeders are more inclined to agree with the statement about the need for the state to compensate farmers and farmers for the damage caused by wild animals, while hunters are more likely to detect the need to build more feeding grounds for vultures. Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning within relevant governmental authorities in Croatia A total of 62 employees of relevant governmental institutions in Croatia were surveyed during this research. The largest share of respondents are in lower or middle status in relation to the organizational hierarchy in the institution. 17.7% of respondents in their work are in direct contact with the issue of poisoning of wild and domestic animals, while slightly less than a quarter of them have been in contact with this issue at least once in their work. Only every tenth respondent has received at least one training related to the detection and processing of wildlife poisoning cases. Cooperation between government institutions and non-governmental organizations is rated 2.6 on average. Figure 12. Personal attitudes towards reporting poisoning incidents to the relevant authorities In most communities it is a “public secret” which individuals poison animals Hunters should more often report information about wildlife poisoning to the police People don’t know who to report animal poisoning incidents to Citizens who report someone from their community for poisoning of animals risk creating conflicts in their community Every citizen should report wildlife poisoning to the police Wildlife poisoning mostly occurs in remote locations which is why the perpetrators are rarely identified Veterinarians should more often report information about wildlife poisoning to the police 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% I disagree completely I mostly agree I mostly disagree I completely agree I neither agree nor disagree 49 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA When it comes to respondents’ knowledge of vultures, most respondents answered all the questions correctly. In general, the shares of respondents who answered questions incorrectly are still slightly lower than those in the survey of livestock farmers, farmers and hunters. For example, half of the respondents in the latter survey believe that vultures feed on captured large mammals, rodents and domestic animals, while in this survey these shares are significantly lower. Respondents rate their knowledge of poisoning on average 2.6 on a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is very poor and 5 is excellent). Even a higher proportion of respondents, compared to those in the survey of cattle breeders, farmers and hunters, answered they do not know when poisoning most often occurs in the year (33.9%). Also, representatives of institutions from the three counties that are most affected by the problem of poisoning best recognize that it is a problem in Lika-Senj County, and least recognize this problem in Split-Dalmatia County. Unlike respondents in the survey of livestock farmers, farmers and hunters, who believe that wildlife poisoning most often occurs intentionally, the largest share of respondents in the survey of representatives of institutions (38.7%) believe that it happens by accident, misuse of legal toxic pesticides. insecticides, etc.) substances, out of ignorance. Respondents in a survey of representatives of institutions estimate that farmers or cattle breeders are most often responsible for poisoning, followed by individuals who deliberately poison animals because they simply like to kill. When respondents are asked to assess how often certain reasons are behind the poisoning of wild animals, they on average put protection against pests (rats, insects, etc.) in the first place in terms of frequency, second protection of pastures and livestock from wild animals, and protection of agricultural areas from wild animals in the third place. In this regard, it can be generally noted that the assessments of the main reasons are similar to those in the survey of livestock, farmers and hunters, with representatives of the institutions more often answering “I don’t know” and less often answering that some of these reasons never stand out. When it comes to respondents’ attitudes about reporting poisoning cases to the competent institutions, respondents mostly believe that poisoning should be reported (more often) by veterinarians, hunters and anyone who has knowledge of such cases. Let us remind you that the respondents from the survey among cattle breeders, farmers and hunters mostly agree with the same three statements. However, we see an interesting difference in the statement “People do not know to whom to report animal poisoning”: a larger share of respondents in the survey of livestock, farmers and hunters disagree with this statement (27.4%, compared to 12.9% of respondents from the ranks of representatives institution). Regarding the methods that need to be applied in poisoning investigations, the representatives of the institutions put toxicological analysis in the first place, although it is interesting that one third of the respondents did not recognize such analysis as important. Since the list of offered answers is based on the experience of Spain, where all the above methods are used in interdisciplinary teams, the fact that respondents rarely recognized the relevance of many of these methods suggests the need for education on good practices in other countries. Regarding the capacities for processing poisoning cases, it is generally possible to note that a large part of the respondents could not determine themselves according to the allegations in the questions asked. Representatives of the institutions at least agree with the statement “Public prosecutors are sufficiently educated to handle cases related to wildlife poisoning.” On the other hand, they are mostly inclined to agree on average that they rarely impose penalties under the Hunting Act. Regarding the punishment of various illegal acts that harm animals and nature, the general impression is that the respondents who participated in the survey of representatives of institutions 50 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA support strict punishment. Of all the allegations offered, they strongly agree with “All forms of mass and non-discriminatory killing of animals (traps, poisoning, explosives, etc.) should be severely punished”, and immediately afterwards that more punishments are needed for all which forms of poaching. Also, over two-thirds of respondents agreed with the statement that conservationists (rangers) should have the authority to arrest people who poison animals if they are caught in the act. Regarding resources for poisoning investigations, respondents mostly agree with the statement “We need more people in the field (police, conservationists, etc.) to be able to detect poisoning cases in time”, while the least agree with the statement “There are enough in Croatia laboratories that have the capacity for the necessary toxicological analysis”. In general, attitudes about the need for greater resources for poisoning investigations dominate, but it is interesting that almost a fifth of the respondents do not recognize search dogs for the detection of poisons used against wild animals as a relevant resource. Regarding the capacity of the police to investigate poisonings, the main problem is the non-reporting of poisoning cases to the police. But the second statement according to the level of average agreement is “Police do not take seriously the need to launch investigations into wildlife poisoning”, while respondents least agree with the statement that the police are sufficiently equipped and educated to investigate wildlife poisoning. We can summarize that the attitudes of the respondents suggest that there is room for better capacity building of the police for wildlife poisoning investigations, but also for raising awareness of the importance of these investigations. Approximately a quarter of respondents are aware of the fact that in Croatia there is no database on animal poisoning incidents, a national action plan to combat animal poisoning or a protocol that will define procedures and responsibilities in investigations into wildlife poisoning. However, the answers of the participants in the research indicate that it is possible that some institutions or their organizational units still have internal protocols and a database of poisoning cases. Respondents working in state institutions, as well as those surveyed from the groups of livestock breeders, farmers and hunters, put in the first place raising awareness of wildlife poisoning among citizens in general, ie the general public. Respondents, on average, consider the most important work to raise awareness of the general public and key stakeholders (livestock, farmers, hunters, institutions), followed by the introduction of stricter control over the import and trade of legal toxic substances. We find it interesting to point out that, comparing the average answers to the offered claims, respondents from state institutions give less priority to state monetary compensation for livestock and farmers, compared to respondents from the survey of cattle breeders, farmers and hunters, who support this measure. We also asked the interviewed representatives of the institutions to assess how important certain aggravating circumstances are, which make prevention and sanctioning more difficult. Respondents estimate that these are first of all difficulties with evidence in court, followed by insufficient and unclear protocols for police actions and too low penalties for animal poisoning, while they perceive the black market of prohibited poisons over the Internet as the least important problem. Respondents, like those from the survey of cattle breeders, farmers and hunters, are predominantly pro-environmentally oriented, but with a slightly different emphasis. Respondents from the ranks of representatives of institutions thus strongly reject anthropocentrism (whose indicator is agreement with the statement “People are destined to rule over the rest of nature”) and put the problem of limited resources in the first place. 51 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Conclusions Efforts invested during the last couple of years towards assessing the scope of wildlife poisoning and its effects on populations of species of conservation concern in Croatia have resulted in the increase of the number of recorded poisoning incidents in the country, making it very evident that this illegal practice represents a serious conservation issue. The main driver behind the use of poison baits in Croatia are losses to livestock due to conflicts with predators, especially jackals, but also with wild boars, which have been introduced to the Kvarner islands for hunting purposes, and which inflict significant damages to local shepherds. Wildlife poisoning in Croatia had the worst effect on Griffon Vultures, as these scavengers appear as casualties in every second poisoning event. Over the course of the last 20 years a total of 52 individuals perished in poisoning and probable poisoning events. Anti-poison activities implemented in Croatia by national CSOs resulted in establishing good cooperation with relevant governmental institutions, which led to their increasing engagement in managing wildlife poisoning incidents. This is mostly evident with those institutions responsible for conducting forensic necropsies and toxicological analysis on presumably poisoned wild animals. Since 2018 toxicological analysis have been conducted in over 85% of potential poisoning events, which is unprecedented compared to other countries from the region. Carbofuran is the most frequently used substance for poisoning wildlife in Croatia. Livestock breeders, farmers and hunters in Croatia perceive that poisoning of wild animals occurs mostly intentionally, and most often through the abuse of legal toxic substances (pesticides, insecticides, etc.). Individuals who deliberately poison animals because they simply like to kill are perceived to be most often responsible for poisoning, followed by farmers, then hunters and livestock breeders. Protection of agricultural land and production is perceived as the biggest motive for poisoning of wild animals, followed by protection of pastures and livestock. Unlike people who live in rural areas, who believe that wildlife poisoning most often occurs intentionally, the largest share of respondents in the survey of representatives of relevant governmental institutions believe that it occurs mostly by accident, due to misuse of legal toxic (pesticides. insecticides, etc.) substances, out of ignorance. Also, they perceive that farmers and livestock breeders are most often responsible for poisoning, followed by individuals who deliberately poison animals because they simply like to kill. Similar to other countries in the Balkans, one of the biggest gaps in dealing with potential poisoning incidents in Croatia is the unwillingness of citizens to report these cases to the police, as well as low capacities of enforcement agencies to respond and actively investigate them. Additional efforts are needed for raising awareness about the importance of reporting poisoning events and the impact of this practice on wildlife and human health, as well as for providing specific training for investigation of poisoning incidents to the relevant law enforcement institutions in the country. 52 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA GREECE Introduction The use of poison baits as a method of population control for predators (mainly mammals such as foxes or wolves, but occasionally also birds, insects, etc.) has been illegal in Greece since 1993. However, in the following years after its banning, deliberate poisoning for the same purpose continued illegally in most regions where conflict with predators were still present. Moreover, poison was used not only to kill wild animals but also dogs (feral, stray, shepherd, hunting dogs). The use of poison baits is still a deeply rooted practice in rural areas of Greece and national populations of vultures, raptors and mammalian predators continue to be seriously affected by the perpetuation of this practice. This practice is well documented, and the CSOs from Greece have been very vigilant in documenting and monitoring poisoning incidents. Conflicts with wildlife, which often result in damages to crops, livestock and game animals are the most common drivers behind the use of poison baits in the environment. However, a very significant driver of poison use are also human conflicts among different stakeholder groups. Farmers, livestock breeders and hunters usually stand accountable for these human-wildlife and human-human conflicts and the use of poison baits that usually follows. Although agricultural and stockbreeding cooperatives and hunting clubs are formally against the use of poison baits, the practice is still widespread among these groups. The extensive use of poison baits in Greece was the main reason for population declines of all vulture species in the country and is currently the biggest restrictive factor for their recovery, especially in mainland Greece. The absence of a clear-cut and comprehensive legal framework addressing the illegal use of poison baits greatly hinders the resolution of the problem, although a step in the right direction was initially made in 2018 with the endorsement of a Ministerial Decision on Local Action Plans against wildlife poisoning. Further progress is expected in 2022 once it becomes a Joint MD, involving other relevant authorities and law enforcement agencies. Historical perspective The use of poison baits was a common practice in Greece since the beginning of the 20th century. Since 1939 the use of Strychnine to cull foxes and other wild species regarded as “vermin” was regulated with annual circulars published by the Ministry of Agriculture. As from 1969 and until 1981, the Forestry Services oversaw the culling of wild animals and systematically used baits made of strychnine that were placed during the night and collected in the morning. After this, strychnine was substituted with Potassium cyanide, in order to avoid secondary poisoning, which had already been observed to have severely affected populations of avian scavengers, raptors and other species that often scavenge. Literature records for instance state that 75 jackals were killed in October 1931 in Samos, while 5108 wolves and jackals were culled in the whole country between 1933-1939 (most of them believed to be killed with the use of poison baits). According to the Ministry of Agriculture, during the period 1971-1979, 700-800 wolves were culled each year, while the numbers of foxes ranged from 40.000 to 74.000 individuals per year from 1974-1981. 53 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Following the pressures exerted by national environmental associations and Nature protection policies defended in the European Union, the use of poison baits was finally completely banned in Greece in 1993. However, people in rural areas were so accustomed with the practice that despite its prohibition, and owing to the lack of law enforcement, the use of poison baits endured as a traditional practice for resolving conflicts with wildlife and continues to take its toll on their populations. The survival of many protected species has been directly threatened by the use of poison baits. Many avian scavengers went extinct in different areas of Greece or declined significantly in numbers due to this practice. The Bearded Vulture went extinct from continental Greece at the turn of the 21st century, when the last individual on the continental part of the Balkan Peninsula, in the mountains of Almopia in the Greece-North Macedonia border area, disappeared in 2004. Currently the only population of this species in the whole Balkan Peninsula can be found on the island of Crete, where 6-7 breeding pairs still endure (Xirouchakis 2019). The Cinereous Vulture was relatively widespread in Greece. Following a severe population decline dating since the 1950s, the species became resident only to the Dadia-Lefkimi-Soufli Forest National Park (Xirouchakis & Tsiakiris 2009; Skartsi et al. 2010). A second breeding group of Cinereous Vultures that was discovered in the mountain Olympos in the 1980s collapsed in 1989 due to secondary poisoning (Tucker and Heath 1994). The Egyptian Vulture used to be very common and widespread, breeding across all continental Greece and on many islands (Handrinos & Akriotis 1997). By the beginning of the 20th century though, numbers had started to decrease, and although still considered common, in the 1980 the species had disappeared from all islands and southern Greece. In 2021 the population is reduced to only 6 territories, or 4-5 breeding pairs and one solitary individual (Egyptian Vulture New Life project LIFE16 NAT/BG/000874). The species main threat, particularly in the present time, is the illegal use of poison baits. The population of the Griffon Vulture in mainland Greece, once widespread in all mainland massifs and semimountainous areas in Greece, has crashed, mostly because of the poison baits, and has been reduced to 29-37 breeding pairs, or 165 – 240 individuals in total (Xirouchakis 2019). Current situation in the country National nature conservation organizations in Greece have invested significant efforts towards combating the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning. Illegal poisoning of wildlife in Greece is very common and has forced several species to the brink of extinction. These circumstances conditioned the creation of the Anti-Poison Task Force, which was formed in 2012 and consists of environmental CSOs (ARCTUROS, Hellenic Society for the Protection of Nature, Hellenic Ornithological Society (HOS), Callisto, WWF Greece and Hellenic Wildlife Care Association ANIMA) and the Natural History Museum of Crete. Since 2014, under the framework of LIFE+ project “The Return of the Neophron” (LIFE10 NAT/BG/000152), HOS is coordinating the Task Force and managing the Poison Incidents Database. The main objective of the Task Force is to promote proposals and institutional changes to eradicate the killing of wildlife by poison baits and to make known the extent of this conservation problem at local and national level. The continuous efforts of the Task Force members to collect as much information as possible is supporting the further development of the database and provides a better perception of this practice’s characteristics, as well as its underlying reasons. A regularly updated database represents an extremely valuable tool for combating wildlife poisoning and can lead to the identification of hot spots for poisoning and consequently to a better prioritization and more efficient utilization of the relevant authorities’ already limited resources. Until now, poisoning incident data collection is carried out mainly by the members of the Task Force and secondly by the public authorities. Under the scope of the “Return of the Neophron” LIFE project, the Anti-Poison Task Force produced a very detailed technical report on the illegal use of poison baits in Greece (Ntemiri & Saravia 2016). This document provides insight into the current situation with use of poison baits in the country. Significant amount of information available from this report, as well directly from the PID was integrated in this study. 54 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA From the year 2000 to 2020 a total of 581 poisoning and presumably poisoning incidents have been recorded in Greece which resulted in mortality of wildlife and domestic animals, most notably dogs. Every poisoning and potential poisoning incident where at least one individual of a wild species was found dead was considered as a wildlife poisoning incident. Additional 346 incidents have been recorded during this period where only domestic animals were casualties of poisoning and were therefore not analyzed in detail for the purpose of this study. Although the motives behind the great majority of wildlife poisoning incidents remain unknown, according to the data compiled from more successfully investigated cases most common drivers behind the use of poison baits are conflicts with mammalian predators which inflict damages to livestock (33 poisoning events) and to populations of game animals in hunting areas, which was the motive behind 26 poisoning events that occurred within this period (Figure 13). Forensic toxicological analysis has been carried out for 58 (9,9%) potential wildlife poisoning incidents. The low number of toxicological analyses is mainly due to the following reasons: specimens were in advanced state of decay and difficult for conducting toxicological analysis; civilians who reported poisoning incidents are unwilling to proceed with official complaints or have already buried or destroyed the specimens and as a result, no samples could be taken for toxicological analyses; In some cases, the referent services due to lack of operational capacities and funds were unable or unwilling to handle poisoned animals and take or send samples for analysis (difficulty in finding the culprit/extra bureaucracy). The procedure for conduction of toxicological analyses is also hindered by the fact that to date there is no clear legislative framework to define the competent services, as well as lack of operational capacities, for the proper handling of animal poisoning incidents (animal removal, extraction of samples and delivery to specialized labs for analyses, operational capacities of referent toxicological laboratories). Figure 13. Motives behind wildlife poisoning in Greece unknown damages to beehives damages to crops damages to livestock conflicts with hunting dogs 84% 1% 1% 0% 0% 5% 5% 2% 2% human conflincts conflicts with shepherd dogs losses in hunting conflicts with stray dogs       55 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA According to the available data, a total of 14 toxic compounds were used for setting up poison baits in Greece during this time period, and these are Carbofuran, Potassium cyanide, Methomyl, Methamidophos, Fenthion, Sulphur, Methyl-Parathion, Endosulfan, Cyproconazole, Metribuzin, Phorate, Chlorpyrifos, Heptachlor and Endrin aldehyde. The most widespread type of poison baits in Greece is the use of a piece of meat, often a liver or a sausage, laced with an approved or illegal pesticide. For large carnivores, like the wolf, whole carcasses of livestock laced with poison are commonly found to be used. The results of the conducted toxicological analyses showed that phytosanitary products from the group Carbamates are most frequently used for wildlife poisoning. These include approved and legally available products but also products banned at national, European or international level. The most frequently used substances for wildlife poisoning, identified during the investigation of poisoning events, was Methomyl, registered in 20 poisoning events. The use of Methomyl in powder form was banned in Greece in 2008 but its use was reapproved in liquid form in early 2013. Another commonly used Carbamate for preparing poison baits is Carbofuran, which was registered in 10 poisoning incidents. Carbofuran was banned in Greece since 2008 but is still regularly used for wildlife poisoning. Potassium cyanide, registered in 16 poisoning events, is the second most used toxic substance (Figure 14). Poison baits with Cyanide are frequently found as a capsule covered with wax. This type is different to the others in that it doesn’t cause secondary poisoning, meaning an animal feeding on a poisoned animal will not be poisoned itself. Cyanides are extremely toxic and when the capsule breaks, they can cause instant death though inhalation, digestion, or skin contact. Apart from Metamidophos, which was registered in 5 poisoning events, all other toxic substances were registered in single poisoning incidents. This insecticide has not been approved for use in Figure 14. Registered toxic compounds used for wildlife poisoning in Greece from 2000-2020 Carbofuran Potassium cyanide Methomyl Methamidophos Methyl-Parathion Metribuzin Heptachlor Fenthion Endosulfan Phorate Endrin aldehyde Sulphur Cyproconazole Chlorpyrifos 33% 8% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%2% 2% 26% 16% 56 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA the EU since 2008. Poisoning in Greece during the period from 20002020 caused the mortality of 29 species of wild animals. According to the available data, this practice had the worst effects on the group of vultures, primarily Griffon Vultures, causing the death of 213 individuals within 169 separate poisoning and probable poisoning incidents, and other avian scavengers, such as the Common Buzzard, which was recorded in 94 incidents with 109 individuals found poisoned or presumably poisoned. Additionally, a total of 22 Cinereous Vultures were found dead within 16 separate incidents, and 19 Egyptian Vultures within 12 poisoning and probable poisoning incidents. The single most numerous species that was recorded in poisoning incidents in Greece was the Red Fox, suffering 348 casualties within 110 separate events (Figure 15). Other recorded casualties include Bearded Vulture, Golden Eagle, Short-toed Eagle, Marsh Harrier, Honey Buzzard, Common Kestrel, Peregrine Falcon, Saker Falcon, Eleonora’s Falcon, Longeared Owl, Eagle Owl, Barn Owl, Scops Owl, Dalmatian Pelican, Magpie, Beech marten, Pine marten, European badger, European hedgehog, Brown bear, Golden jackal, Wolf, Wildcat and Wild boar. Poison baits are often placed by individual hunters for the control of the fox population. The fox is considered to be the main factor limiting hare populations, a prized game species, and it is also poisoned to facilitate hunting dogs to train and chase hares, as they may chase foxes instead of the desired quarry. Apart from hunters, farmers may also place poison baits if bears, wild boars or even smaller mammals, like badgers and martens, inflict damage to their crops. Available data indicates that the use of poison baits in Greece is still a common practice, showing no signs of significant decrease in occurrence during the past 20 years. The Anti-poison Task Force in Greece has been vigilant in recording and actively searching potential poisoning events in the countryside and in systematically storing the data in the Poison Incident Database. Figure 15. Common victims of poisoning in Greece (2000-2020) 0 50 200 100 250 350 150 300 400 Griffon Vulture Egyptian Vulture Common Buzzard Pine Marten Barn Owl Beech Marten European Badger Brown Bear European Hedgehog Cinereous Vulture WolfRed Fox Incidents Casualties 57 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA The anti-poison efforts in Greece were significantly reinforced with the establishment of two Canine Teams (Anti-poison dog units) in 2014 which greatly facilitated their work in combating wildlife poisoning. Apart from being a preventive means, the Canine Teams contribute to the dissemination and increase of awareness regarding this conservation problem, and they also assist the competent authorities in their pre-trial work, collecting findings that can be used as evidence during the investigation and the judicial procedure. For example, From March 2014 till May 2021 the two teams carried out 440 patrols, covering 1057 km and detecting 212 poisoned animals and 227 poison baits in 102 poisoning incidents. During the two years that the Canine Teams were active (2014-2015), 28% of the total poisoning events recorded in the database were detected thanks to the use of the Teams, proving just how effective these units can be and underlining the importance of having such a tool in the fight against poison. It is important to highlight that the Ministry of Environment has acknowledged the usefulness of this teams and will start operating seven of them across Greece in 2022. The sudden decline in recorded potential poisoning events in 2020 may be attributed to a general reduction of activities in the field from many relevant stakeholders due to the outbreak of the Covid19 pandemic, but this can only be validated with new data in the years to come. The use of poison baits for extirpation of undesirable domestic animals outside of settlements is a common practice on Greece. A total of 346 poisoning and potential poisoning events have been recorded during the period 2000-2020 in Greece where the casualties were only domestic animals (Figure 16). In this case, this practice frequently aims to reduce the presence of abandoned hunting, shepherd, or pet dogs. However, significant and frequent motives for using poison baits are also human conflicts, namely local disputes, and land use conflicts. These conflicts most often result in intentional use of poison baits, targeting specifically shepherd and hunting dogs. Poisoning has been confirmed in 39 events (9,35%) that cause mortality of domestic animals. The most commonly used toxic compounds for these poisoning events by far is Methomyl, which is responsible for 66,67% of confirmed poisoning incidents with domestic animals. Other compounds that have been identified during toxicological analysis include Carbofuran (6 poisoning incidents), Potassium cyanide (4 poisoning incidents), Endosulfan (2 poisoning incidents), Methamidophos, registered in only 1 poisoning incident. Figure 16. Number of poisoning events in Greece within the research period 0 2000 2006 2014 2003 2009 2017 2001 2007 2015 2004 2012 2010 2018 2002 2008 2016 2005 2013 2011 2019 2020 50 10 60 20 70 30 80 40 90 Number of wildlife poisoning incidents Number of poisoning incidents with domestic animals 64 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA stitutions in Greece consider that for achieving success in investigation of wildlife poisoning incidents, it is necessary to introduce the following measures: canine units, toxicological analysis, fingerprint analysis, and using the records of sale of legal poisoning substances. When it comes to preventive measures - more supplementary feeding sites for vultures, free shepherd and guard dogs, resolving problems related to pasture ownership and improved protection of wild ungulate population are also recognized as important measures that could lead to better protection of wildlife species and prevention of poisoning. Employees from relevant institutions in Greece share a common belief that plants, and animals have an equal right to exist just like humans, and they recognize the fragility of the natural balance. In addition to this, the prevailing belief among them is that the Earth has limited space and resources. The majority of them do not believe that humans are destined to dominate over the rest of nature. Conclusions Wildlife poisoning in Greece is a very common practice, one which has devastating effects on many wild species, primarily those that resort to scavenging as a source of food. Vultures are the group of species which are affected the most by the illegal use of poison baits, appearing as casualties in every third wildlife poisoning event in the country. Griffon Vulture is the most common species of vultures, and wildlife in general, to get poisoned in Greece. The practice of setting poison baits has caused mortality of 213 individuals over the course of the last 20 years and has crippled the population inhabiting mainland Greece to the point of extinction. Wildlife poisoning continues to be the most significant threat for vultures inhabiting mainland Greece, and also poses a threat for populations of neighboring countries, as birds from Bulgaria, Croatia and Serbia have also been found poisoned there. CSOs in Greece have been very diligent in recording all potential poisoning events in their national database and making it publicly available to all interested parties. From the data used for the purpose of this study it is evident that the most important drivers for the use of poison baits are damages which mammalian predators inflict on livestock and game animals in hunting areas as well as conflicts between different land users groups. Conduction of toxicological analysis is a big gap in the overall management of poisoning events, as there is only one referent national laboratory in the country (Athens Veterinary Centre), operating with only one staff member responsible for conducting forensic toxicological analysis. On the other hand, these analyses have confirmed that numerous toxic compounds have been used for preparation of poison baits, unlike in other countries where only 2-3 substances are usually used for poisoning. The most commonly used compounds are Carbamates (52%), primarily Methomyl, followed by Potassium cyanide. Additionally, the diversity of baits used for poisoning in Greece, often prepared to target specific species, suggest that the practice of wildlife poisoning is still a deeply rooted one and commonly practiced. According to the results from the interviews carried out, wildlife poisoning is perceived as a key threat to vulture populations in Greece by people from rural areas. They perceive that vultures are killed mostly accidently from eating poisoned animals or from ingesting poison baits intended for other animals. Livestock breeders and hunters as perceived as groups mostly responsible for wildlife poisoning. Same perception about the effects of wildlife poisoning on vultures, drivers and responsible groups for poisoning have employees of relevant governmental institutions. Livestock breeders are singled out as the most important target group for awareness raising actions. Additionally, law enforcement agencies in Greece are perceived of having insufficient capacities, as well as engagement, for investigating poisoning incidents. Therefore, specific training towards these stakeholders would be crucial for building up capacities and achieving better results in the investigation of this practice. 65 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA NORTH MACEDONIA Introduction Earliest records of wildlife poisoning from North Macedonia relate to organized poisoning campaigns primarily against wolf populations. The use of poison baits started to take their toll among vultures and other scavenger species in the country since 1947. Although the use of poison baits for predator control was banned in 1985, the practice is deeply rooted, especially in rural areas. Poison baits continued to be used by livestock breeders and are usually placed after wolf packs inflict major damages to livestock. Poisoning of stray dogs is also common in and around most of the rural and urban settlements, and some of their carcasses are occasionally available for vultures on the settlements dumping sites. As a result of the practice of poison use, which is most frequent in the period between February and April, an estimated number of 1000-3000 Griffon Vultures have been poisoned since 1947 till today. Poison use is likely one of the underlying causes for extinction of the Bearded and Cinereous Vultures from North Macedonia. Although both species last bred in the country in the 1980s, the last individuals of these species remaining in the country in 2002 were lost in 2005–2006. In the same period, the populations of both Griffon and Egyptian Vulture declined strongly mainly because of the illegal use of poison baits for the control of predators and feral dogs, but also as a result of food shortage, habitat loss and disturbance, which may lead to their extinction as well (Velevski et al. 2013; Grubač 2014). Historical perspective The effects of the practice of using poison baits in the environment on wildlife is well documented in North Macedonia, especially on scavengers such as vultures, which are mostly affected by this practice. The first recorded poisoning event with Griffon Vultures in North Macedonia is from Shar Planina Mountain, where hundreds of birds were poisoned in the period 1947-1954 (mostly on the territory of Kosovo, Naumov 1981). Since then, such practice has been often documented in North Macedonia, and Grubač (2000) mentions poisoning of about 100 vultures and other avian scavengers around Prilep in 1979. Reasons for the use of poison in the past were almost exclusively related to governmentally sponsored nation-wide poisoning actions against wolves and other mammalian predators. Apart from this, it is very important to note that a single case of misuse of rodenticides for pest control is responsible for the loss of an entire pre-migratory flock (60-70 individuals) of Egyptian Vultures in 1992, which practically crippled the population that continued to decline since. This incident highlights the threat that improper use of such, and similar toxic compounds can have on scavengers and other wildlife, and the importance of enforcing better control of the application of pesticides and rodenticides in agriculture. Other motives for poison use identified in the past include intentional use of poison baits, to eliminate feral and stray dogs from local communities, use of poison (insecticides) to reduce damages to beekeepers - mainly targeted at martins, and intentional use of poison to resolve human-human conflicts between neighbors. Even though the use of poison and poison baits has been prohibited in 1985 with the change in national legislation, the practice still endured as an affordable and effective method for elimination of undesirable animals and wildlife in both rural and urban areas, especially after different pesticides become readily available on the market in high concentrations for low prices. By then, the 66 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Cinereous and Bearded Vulture became extinct as breeding species in the country and only individual vagrant birds were occasionally recorded. A single pair of Bearded Vultures endured in the country until 1985 when the solitary female died from poisoning, and with her the species practically became extinct from the Balkan Peninsula (except the island population on Crete). Current situation in the country The practice of wildlife poisoning in North Macedonia has been generally well documented since the beginning of the 21st century onwards. Relevant governmental institutions keep records of all wildlife poisoning cases that were investigated and prosecuted, while national non-governmental nature conservation organizations, such as Macedonian Ecological Society (MES), remain vigilant in documenting all poisoning and presumably poisoning events that occur and mortality induced by it. Most available records relate to poisoning events that cause mortality of vultures, eagles and similar emblematic species which are of a higher conservation concern. Generally, incidents with these species are more often reported to the authorities by citizens, and therefore it is very likely that mortality of other species goes unrecorded. During the period of 2000-2020 a total of 29 poisoning and presumable poisoning events were documented in North Macedonia. Although the motives behind most poisoning events remain unknown, the most common drivers behind the use of poison baits identified within this period were conflicts with predators in rural areas, predominantly wolves and jackals (Figure 19). These conflicts are responsible for 31% of all poisoning events documented. Other drivers of poison use identified include conflicts with stray dogs. Forensic toxicological analysis has been conducted in only 2 events and remains the biggest gap in conducting proper investigation of poisoning incidents in North Macedonia. In both cases Methomyl was identified as the substance used for poisoning. Relevant national laboratories are lacking operational capacities and equipment to conduct analysis of samples from wild animals and this issue should represent one of the priorities in future actions concerning combating wildlife poisoning in the country. Figure 19. Motives behind wildlife poisoning in North Macedonia 31% 3% 66% Conflicts with predators Conflict with stray dogs unknown 67 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Map 7. Distribution of poisoning events by regions in North Macedonia during 2000-2020. A total of 6 species of wild animals have been found poisoned or presumably poisoned during the period from 2000-2020 in North Macedonia. According to the available data, the most common victims by far were Griffon Vultures, with mortality recorded in 75,8% poisoning and presumably poisoning incidents. A total of 102-125 individuals were found poisoned and presumably poisoned within 22 separate events. The Griffon Vulture breeding population reached its lowest number in 2006 (12 breeding pairs), followed by a slight recovery but has fallen again, numbering up to 14 pairs in 2019. Several events of mass poisoning of Griffon Vultures have been recorded during this period. In 2001 12 individuals were found dead in Mariovo, 14 individuals in 2003 in St. Nikole, 7-15 individuals the same year in Demir kapija, and 5-7 individuals in Mariovo in 2014. The second most numerous victim of poisoning events in North Macedonia is the Egyptian Vulture (4 individuals in 2 separate incidents), followed by Imperial Eagle (3 individuals in 2 separate incidents). Other species affected by this practice include Golden Eagle, Common Buzzard, Golden Jackal and Hooded Crow. Single case of poisoning 2-5 cases of poisoning 5-10 cases of poisoning 10-25 cases of poisoning 25-50 cases of poisoning 50+ cases of poisoning 68 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Based on the available data about wildlife poisoning, the use of poison and poison baits in the recent period seems unevenly distributed, being more frequent in the regions of Mariovo, Tikves, Ovce Pole and likely Plackovica Mt. These areas are one of the most important agricultural areas in the country, which could be the reason for more frequent conflicts with various wildlife, especially predators. There is some overlap and uncertainties with jurisdiction between legal bodies regarding prevention, control, and investigation of illegal poisoning. Firstly, the proper procedure for reporting wildlife poisoning incidents is unclear, mainly which institution needs to be contacted first. Therefore, more efficient, clear-cut legal protocols for describing responsibilities in reporting, investigating and processing cases of wildlife poisoning need to be developed and distributed within all responsible institutions to precisely define jurisdiction of each one within national legislation and avoid overlaps. Also, communication and information exchange between responsible institutions and sectors related to jurisdiction, responsibilities need to be enhanced. Apart from this, clear-cut protocols and Standard Operational Procedures related to duties and responsibilities of existing governmental laboratories about processing poisoned animals, as well as accredited protocols and security measures in sampling are lacking and need to be developed to facilitate their work. According to the data that we were able to obtain from the State Environmental Inspectorate and State Hunting Inspectorate, criminal charges against unknown perpetrators were brought up in two wildlife poisoning cases, in 2007 when 19 Griffon Vultures were found most likely poisoned in the area of Mariovo, and in April 2011, when 2 Egyptian Vultures, 1 Common Buzzard. 1 Raven, and 2 dogs were found poisoned. No court rulings were made in either case. Legal framework The Republic of North Macedonia overall has good legislation in place related to the use of poison substances in the natural environment, where wildlife poisoning is clearly defined as an illegal activity, punishable under Criminal law. Existing national legislation relevant to wildlife poisoning in North Macedonia: • Hunting law: Article 54. states that hunting is prohibited by any means which can lead to massive losses to populations of game animals, including the use of poisonous substances. • Law on nature protection: Article 43. prohibits the use of non-selective means of capturing and shooting of wild species, as well as use of substances that may cause local exhaustion or serious disturbance of the populations of those species, in accordance with the international agreements ratified by the Republic of North Macedonia, and in particular: poison and tranquilizing substances and poison and tranquilizing baits. • Law on plant protection products: Although this law does not particular refer to wildlife poisoning, it is relevant because it describes the legal use and application of toxic substances in agriculture. Inadequate use and application of these phytosanitary products are often a source of unintentional poisoning of various wildlife. • Criminal law: Article 230. refers to persons who store, disintegrate, or keep hazardous waste that has traits of explosiveness, reactivity, inflammability, extravagance, toxicity, infectivity, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, teratogenicity, ecotoxicity or toxicity release property through chemical reactions and biological reproduction. Under the Criminal law they are liable to be penalized by prison sentence from one to five years. Relevant international treaties and conventions that North Macedonia is parties to: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern, 1979): Ratified with the Law on Ratification (“Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia no. 49/97) and entered into force in 1999. It prohibits the use of any non-selective means of capture or killing as well as of means that may induce local extinction or heavily disturb the populations of a species, 69 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA namely means listed in Annex IV”, while in Annex IV of the same Law, which is entitled “Prohibited means and methods of hunting and other forms of exploitation”, “Poisons and poison or tranquilizing baits” are included. Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning in local communities in North Macedonia Surveys in North Macedonia were carried out in communities of Mariovo and Vithacevo, which have a population of 550 inhabitants. The sample included 31 respondents in total, most of which (52%) are livestock breeders and farmers. Respondents from local communities are relatively knowledgeable about the vultures that inhabit their country, but with a significant number of them are undecided or do not have information about vultures and factors that threaten their populations in North Macedonia. Wildlife poisoning stands out as the most important factor endangering the vulture population in North Macedonia (71%). Poison baits intended specifically for vultures are in the second place among the key reasons that lead to the significant decrease of the population of these species (23%), while the first are also poison baits, but intended for other animals (42%). The results of the research imply that people from local communities in North Macedonia are aware of the importance that vulture species have for the entire ecosystem, but also for human activities, and they believe if vultures were left alone, without interfering, their numbers would increase (75% to 80% of respondents agree with this). Also, close to two-thirds of farmers and hunters who took part in the survey share the opinion that the natural balance is very delicate and easy to disturb, and that people, plants, and animals should have equal rights to exist. On the other hand, it seems that despite the awareness of the importance of vultures, they, like wild animals, are generally placed in a subordinate position in relation to humans. Two thirds of respondents cite attractiveness for tourists as the vultures’ main value, while 4 out of 10 respondents believe that people dominate nature, and the same number believe that wildlife poisoning is a problem only when it is endangering people. Figure 20. Perception of groups responsible for wildlife poisoning in North Macedonia I don’t know Never Rarely Occasionally often Livestock breeders Individuals who deliberately poison animals simply because they like killing things Farmers Hunters Pigeon fanciers/ breeders Beekepers 0% 60% 20% 80% 40% 100% 13% 19% 10% 26% 32% 19% 26% 7% 26% 23% 19% 36% 10% 19% 16% 16% 10% 16% 42% 16% 16% 55% 10% 13% 7% 10% 7% 16% 52% 16% 70 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Respondents believe that the poisoning of wild animals is the result of intentional actions, mostly by using illegal poisons from the black market (55%), and in a smaller percentage by misuse of legal poisoning substances (19%). The groups that are recognized as mainly accountable for wildlife poisoning are livestock breeders and individuals who deliberately poison animals simply because they like killing things (58% and 45%, respectively). Hunters, veterinarians, and citizens in general (every individual) are on the other hand perceived as primarily responsible for reporting cases of wildlife poisoning to the relevant authorities. One of the most important obstacles for reporting wildlife poisoning events to the police is the concern about potential negative personal consequences, as well as the possibility of disapproval or inconvenience within their community. While four out of ten respondents would report the incidents regardless of these consequences, every third shows concern about the negative impact reporting would have on them, while one fourth wouldn`t report such cases at all because among other things, they do not receive any personal benefits from such actions. According to the results of the survey, about twothirds of respondents from targeted occupational fields believe that people do not have enough information about the institutions to which they can report incidents to. This can also be considered as a barrier that reduces the likelihood of identifying those responsible for wildlife poisoning. All this points to the importance of further communication and raising the awareness of citizens about endangered species, problems of wildlife poisoning, referrals to relevant institutions and government officials who have a significant role in solving these problems, as well as in emphasizing the importance of the contribution of each individual to reducing wildlife poisoning. The key motives behind the poisoning of wild animals are protection of pastures and livestock from wild animals and protection from pests, implying the need for improving existing measures for the protection of economic goods (Figure 21). Figure 21. Perceived motives behind wildlife poisoning in North Macedonia I don’t knowNever Rarely Occasionally often Protection from pests (rats, insects et at.) Protection from stray dogs and cats Protection of agricultural fields from wild animals Protection of pigeons from birds of prey Protection of pastures and lifestock from wild animals Human-human conflicts over land use Protection of agricultural fields from birds of prey Protection of hunting activities Protection of apiaries from bears 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 16% 7% 10% 48% 19% 32%36%16%7%10% 19% 16% 39% 26% 32%26%13%13%16% 36% 13% 3% 19% 29% 36%13%10%10%32% 32% 7% 13% 10% 39% 39%13%7%7%36% 39% 10% 10% 10% 32% 71 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA About two-thirds of respondents claim they knew at least one poisoning incident with animals in the past 10 years. These were mostly the intentional cases of poisoning inside the settlements and inhabited areas (67%), but intentional poisoning cases outside of settlements because of conflicts with animals cannot be overlooked either (48%). Also, 80% of respondents in North Macedonia claim that they encountered incidents in terms of pet and hunting or guard dog poisonings in their households or community. Southwest and Western Macedonia are perceived as regions in this country where the poisoning of wild species most often occurs (16% both), while around 40% of respondents claim not knowing what the key “hot spot” areas are. Respondents, in general, agree that different measures should be undertaken in order to reduce wildlife poisoning and protect endangered species. About two-thirds of them consider necessary setting up additional supplementary feeding sites for vultures and increasing administrative fines for cases of wildlife poisoning, better information and more intense public campaigns about wildlife poisoning, and financial compensation to livestock breeders and farmers for the damages caused by wild animals. Half of the respondents believe that wildlife poisoning investigations are an important part of police work. Campaigns related to raising awareness of the negative consequences of wildlife poisoning should primarily be aimed at citizens in general (32%), as well as livestock breeders and game wardens (16% each). Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning within relevant governmental authorities in North Macedonia Officials employed in relevant institutions in North Macedonia are well informed about vulture species inhabiting their country. They are familiar that Griffon Vulture and Egyptian Vulture are present and breed on the territory of the country. Wildlife poisoning and extensive use of legal toxic compounds (pesticides, insecticides, rodenticides) are perceived as the key threats to the vulture populations in North Macedonia (by around half of the officials). Wildlife poisoning is considered to be both accidental and intentional, by misuse of legal poisoning substances such as pesticides or insecticides or by using illegal black-market poisons. On the other hand, poisoning of vultures is mostly perceived as unintentional secondary poisoning by consuming poisoned animals or poison baits intended for other animals. The key target groups responsible for wildlife poisoning are identified as livestock breeders, hunters and individuals who intentionally kill animals out of aggressive impulses. These groups mostly resort to wildlife poisoning to protect the pastures, agricultural land and livestock from wild animals and birds of prey, to protect hunting grounds, and as a protection from pests, stray cats and dogs. Officials are not well informed about the regions of North Macedonia where wildlife poisoning most frequently occurs. They most often mention Eastern and Central Macedonia (around one third of respondents) as affected areas. In terms of legislation and legal processing intended to sanction poisoning incidents, representatives for the governmental institutions emphasize inadequate law enforcement (even though they perceive the legal framework for punishing the practice of poisoning animals as good), lack of coordination among relevant institutions, low penalties for wildlife poisoning and sporadic imposing of fines (i.e. under the Hunting Act). They however mostly trust public prosecutors and their level of education for managing incidents related to the poisoning of wild animals. Considering sanctions for various unlawful actions damaging to animals and the environment, majority of officials endorse severe punishments for all forms of mass and non-discriminative killing of animals (trapping, poisoning, 72 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA explosives, etc.), as well as increase of fines for every type of poaching or illegal shooting. They also acknowledge the need for treating the possession of poison baits as a separate offense, regardless of whether it has been proven that an animal was killed and believe that the rangers in protected areas should have the authority to arrest perpetrators, if they are caught in the act. Similarly, majority of them would advocate imprisonment sentences for poisoning of animals as opposed to only administrative (financial) sentences. The majority of representatives from relevant institutions in North Macedonia are not informed about the existence of National action plan for combating wildlife poisoning, a protocol defining procedures and jurisdictions for investigating wildlife poisoning and a database for poisoning incidents of birds. They also caution of inadequate cooperation between governmental institutions and civil society organizations in collecting data about poisoning incidents, which is in line with the perception that lack of coordination between relevant institutions and organizations is a bigger problem than the lack of resources. Among the key aggravating circumstances and obstacles for prevention and sanctioning of wildlife poisoning they highlight the difficulties with evidence procedures in court, and lack of control over the prescribed use of legal poisons, such as pesticides, rodenticides, etc. Considering the role of the Police in investigating wildlife poisoning incidents employees of relevant governmental institutions recognize the complexity of the investigations, assessing at the same time the capacities of the police as inadequate in terms of human capacities and in terms of education and training of police forces. Majority of officials believe that the Police should be strengthened by introducing of additional forces (people) in the field for timely detection of poisoning incidents and to deal more effectively with the situation where most incidents occur in remote locations (posing a serious barrier for identifying of the perpetrators). Strengthening would also imply introduction of specialized police units for environmental crime, including wildlife poisoning, and introduction of specialized canine units for detecting poisonous substances. They are however uncertain or divided in opinion about the level of equipment of the police for investigating wildlife poisoning and the need for expensive and sophisticated technology. All respondents state that toxicological analyzes are necessary in police investigations of wildlife poisoning, but that their expensiveness also poses significant barrier to effective investigations. In addition, almost all respondents recognize the necessity for the records of the sales of legal poisoning substances. Two-thirds of respondents believe that there is a necessity for additional efforts to change the attitude of the police towards a more serious understanding of the need to investigate wildlife poisoning. An additional obstacle in the work of the police is the failure to report cases of poisoning to the police force, which should be the responsibility of veterinarians and hunters, but also the general population (every person). However, most officials believe that the lack of information to whom incidents of animal poisoning should be reported is an important impediment. Considering measures for preventing wildlife poisoning, almost all institutional employees believe that further raising of awareness among citizens in general, livestock breeders and game wardens, imposing a stricter control of the sales of legal poisoning substances, creating additional supplementary feeding sites for vultures and better protection of population of wild ungulates are the key preventive measures that can help reduce wildlife poisoning. The results of the research indicate a developed environmental consciousness among officials in North Macedonia. They understand that plants and animals have an equal right to exist as humans, and that the natural balance in a closed system such as the Earth, with very limited space and resources, is very delicate and easily disturbed. Also, optimism for future 73 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA actions exists in the beliefs of two thirds of respondents who doubt that humans are destined to rule over the rest of nature. Conclusions The practice of wildlife poisoning during the last 20 years in North Macedonia had the worst effects on populations of vultures inhabiting the country. Griffon Vultures are by far affected the worst by poisoning, appearing in over 70% of all recorded incidents. Up to 125 individuals perished from this illegal practice from 2000 to 2020, making it evident that it represents the most important threat for the dwindling national population, and one of the biggest obstacles for their recovery in the country. Circumstances are similar for the Egyptian Vulture as well. Although only 4 individuals were recorded to have perished from poisoning, it is still a heavy blow to the small and decreasing national population. Conflicts with mammalian predators, mainly wolves and lately jackals, which inflict damages to livestock are the main reason why people in North Macedonia resort to poisoning. Only 7 wild species have been recorded as victims of potential poisoning within 30 separate incidents, which likely indicates that only incidents with those large and more emblematic species, such as vultures, eagles, wolves, and bears, which are usually of higher conservation concern, are mainly reported to the authorities and investigated. Therefore, it would be recommendable that further efforts are invested into researching the full scope of illegal poisoning and its effects on other species in North Macedonia. Additionally, awareness raising activities about the damaging effects of wildlife poisoning on the environment and human health, and especially about the importance of reporting potential poisoning events to the relevant authorities should be implemented on a larger scale in rural areas of the country. Currently the biggest gap in the management of poisoning incidents is the lack of a national toxicological laboratory which would conduct forensic toxicological analyses on wild animals. Therefore, this should be one of the priorities to resolve within future anti-poisoning initiatives in North Macedonia Wildlife poisoning is perceived to be the most important factor endangering vulture populations in North Macedonia by inhabitants of rural areas. They believe that the poisoning of wild animals is the result of intentional actions, mostly by using illegal poisons from the black market, and in a smaller percentage by misuse of legal poisoning substances. The groups that are recognized as mainly accountable for wildlife poisoning are livestock breeders and individuals who deliberately poison animals simply because they like killing things. The key motives behind wildlife poisoning are perceived to be protection of pastures and livestock from wild animals and protection from pests, implying the need for improving existing measures for the protection of economic goods derived from agriculture. 80 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA The great majority (83%) of all recorded poisoning incidents in Serbia during this period originate from the region of Vojvodina. Such spatial distribution of poisoning and potential poisoning events is somewhat biased and represents primarily the result of intensive field work that BPSSS has conducted in the region towards detection of potential poisoning events, where they are based, and where most of their members, volunteers and supporters are located. The reality of wildlife poisoning is that if one invests more time and effort in looking for wildlife poisoning, the more potential poisoning events will be recorded. Therefore, it is expected that the region of Vojvodina would have the highest concentration of poisoning incidents compared to the rest of the country, where very few efforts are invested in detection and prevention of poisoning. The main driver of poison use in this region of Serbia are conflicts with jackals and stray dogs which can often cause damages to game animals in commercial hunting areas, and to livestock in rural areas. Additionally, Vojvodina is the most intensively farmed region in Serbia which is why cases of misuse of pesticides and other phytosanitary products are mostly recorded here as well. Therefore, it is highly probable that the current distribution of poisoning events does not reflect the realistic situation and scope of the illegal use of poison in the whole country. Reducing the threat that wildlife poisoning poses to many wild species in Serbia primarily depends on much stricter enforcement of existing legislation by relevant governmental authorities, especially legislation related to the control of production, trade and application of pesticides and similar chemical compounds used in agriculture. Banned substances are relatively available on the existing black market and were even recorded to have been advertised through social networks such as Facebook, various internet adds and freely sold on local fairs and markets in rural areas. There are uncertainties with responsibilities and jurisdiction of relevant institutions regarding prevention, control and investigation of poisoning incidents. Therefore, more efficient and clear-cut legal protocols for describing responsibilities in reporting, investigating, and processing cases of wildlife poisoning need to be developed. Also, communication and information change between responsible institutions and sectors related to jurisdiction, responsibilities need to be enhanced. Apart from this, the development of organized systems and protocols related to reporting, collecting and disposal of dead animals would also be very useful in reducing the amount of unsafe food available for scavengers, thus reducing the probability of poisoning to occur. According to the data we were able to obtain, there is only one poisoning incident that occurred in the last 20 years where the culprit was successfully identified, prosecuted and sentenced, while in several other incidents where protected wildlife species were poisoned, charges were brought up against unknown perpetrators. The case dates to April 2020 when 5 dead Common Cranes were found poisoned in an agricultural field from corn seeds laced with Carbofuran, which were inadequately set as baits for rodents. Legal framework Serbia has good national legislation in place related to the use of poison substances in the natural environment, where wildlife poisoning is clearly defined as an illegal activity, punishable under Criminal law. Existing national legislation relevant to wildlife poisoning in Serbia: • Law on nature protection: Article 79. prohibits the use of certain means of catching and killing wild species animals endangering and harassing their populations and/or habitats, disrupts their well-being and can cause their local disappearance, which include the use of poison or tranquilizing baits. • Law on hunting and game animals: Article 22. prohibits the use of phytosanitary substances and other chemical substances in quantities and dosages that can cause damages to game animals, as well as intentional poisoning of game animals. • Criminal law: According to article 269, whoever, by violating these regulations, 81 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA kills, hurts, tortures or otherwise abuses animals, shall be punished by a fine or imprisonment not exceeding one year. Additionally, according to article 276, whoever hunts game animals whose hunting is forbidden or who hunts without a special permit a particular game animal for which hunting requires such a permit or who hunts in a manner or means that inflicts mass destruction of game animals, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. Relevant international treaties and conventions that Serbia is parties to: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern, 1979): Ratified with the Law on Ratification (“Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 49/97) and entered into force in 1999. It prohibits the use of any non-selective means of capture or killing as well as of means that may induce local extinction or heavily disturb the populations of a species, namely means listed in Annex IV”, while in Annex IV of the same Law, which is entitled “Prohibited means and methods of hunting and other forms of exploitation”, “Poisons and poison or tranquilizing baits” are included. Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning in local communities in Serbia Surveys in Serbia were carried out in communities of Svilojevo and Pešter, and the sample included 45 respondents in total. Respondent from the local communities in Serbia are generally well informed about the presence of Griffon Vultures in their country. However, they are inadequately informed when comes to the presence of the other vulture species and whether they breed in Serbia. They are also not sufficiently informed about the issue of wildlife poisoning in Serbia and its impact on wildlife. Wildlife poisoning is perceived as the biggest threat to the vulture population in Serbia. However, awareness needs to be additionally raised and become more widespread since only a third of respondents (29%) perceive it as the greatest danger that vultures face. Poisoning is followed by electrocution as a result of collision with electric cables (18%). Lack of food and disturbance are both seen as the third most important threat to vultures in Serbia (13% each), this is followed by poaching (11%). Vultures in Serbia are considered to be victims of unintentional poisoning, as they are perceived to perish due to eating poisoned animals, or poison baits intended for other animals. Only a small number of respondents believe that vultures are the targets of intentional poisoning (7%). Nearly 70% of respondents acknowledge the important role that vultures have in the ecosystem and 60% of them believe that their existence is important for humans as well. These findings indicate a prevailing positive attitude towards vultures and their role in the environment. In line with this are the respondents’ general attitudes towards nature – they believe that the Earth has limited space and resources, that plants and animals have the same right to exist as humans do and that the balance of nature is very delicate and easy to disturb. Further informing about the risks and consequences of intentional poisoning of animals is necessary, as about one third of respondents believe that governments should organize controlled campaigns of poisoning as a means to control populations of feral animals and pests, and around one quarter of them find that occasionally poisoning of wildlife is justified. However, it should be noted that respondents are divided when it comes to this question. 40% of them believe that it is not justified and one third is undecided. In addition to this, they are similarly divided when it comes to whether humans have the right to rule over nature - 36% of them believe that it is the destiny of humans to rule over nature while 40 % consider this not to be true. A little less than 60% of respondents from the targeted local communities in Serbia believe 82 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA that wildlife poisoning happens intentionally – approximately in equal measure either through the abuse of legal poisoning substances such as pesticides and insecticides, or through the intentional usage of illegal poisoning substances from the black market. About one quarter of respondents are of the opinion that wildlife poisoning most often happens accidentally, through the misuse of legal poisoning substances out of negligence or ignorance. Respondents from local communities in Serbia (Figure 25) perceive the following groups to be the most responsible for wildlife poisoning: farmers (62%), livestock breeders (49%) and hunters (34%). When it comes to the responsibility for reporting information/knowledge about wildlife poisoning to the police, the majority of respondents (71%) believe that this should be the responsibility of all citizens in addition to hunters and veterinarians. For the majority (60%) the most important barrier for reporting incidents of wildlife poisoning is avoiding coming into conflict with members of their community. Nearly 40% of respondents state that they would report the incident only if they knew that there would be no negative consequences for them, 13% of the respondents would not report it and nearly 10% are undecided. In addition to this, there appears to be somewhat of a diffusion of responsibility, as one fifth of the respondents believe that that are enough people who are already dealing with the issue of wildlife poisoning and their involvement is not necessary. Another key barrier is the perception that citizens do not know who to report these incidents to – nearly 70% of respondents share this attitude and on the other side only 10% disagree with this statement. These findings imply that it is necessary to provide citizens in affected communities with important information concerning whom they can report wildlife poisoning cases to, but also to work on shifting public opinions in the direction of normalizing the reporting of these cases and additionally empowering citizens to participate in the identification and prevention of poisoning incidents. Figure 25. Perception of groups responsible for wildlife poisoning in Serbia I don’t know Never Rarely Occasionally often Livestock breeders Individuals who deliberately poison animals simply because they like killing things Farmers Hunters Pigeon fanciers/ breeders Beekepers 0% 60% 20% 80% 40% 100% 9% 5% 24% 42% 20% 9% 40% 36% 4% 11% 11% 17% 38% 27% 7% 7% 20% 40% 11% 22% 25% 18% 44% 11% 2% 7% 38% 31% 24% 83 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA The most frequently highlighted motives for wildlife poisoning are protection from pests, (76%), protection from stray dogs and cats (51%), protection of agricultural land, pastures and livestock from wild animals (27% each). These finding imply that there is a need to raise awareness about alternative solutions to these issues that could be offered and applied with less detrimental effects on the environment (Figure 26). Around half of the respondents claim to know of at least one case of poisoning in their community/ environment in the past ten years. The majority of these are cases of intentional poisoning. Nearly 70% of them claim to have encountered cases of intentional poisoning in settlements, whereas more than one fifth of report encountering incidents when someone intentionally poisoned wild animals outside of settlements. The majority of poisoned animals were pets, followed by bees and guard dogs. When it comes to regions where poisoning occurs, approximately one third of the sample believes that Vojvodina is the region where poisoning occurs most often. It is followed by East and South Serbia, West Serbia and Šumadija, and Belgrade (11%, 9% and 9%, respectively), which are all identified as problematic areas regarding wildlife poisoning. Regarding measures for prevention and combating wildlife poisoning, the one that is singled out as the most important is that the state/government should financially compensate the damage to livestock breeders and farmers caused by wild animals (82%). It is closely followed by increasing administrative fines for wildlife poisoning (78%), increased informing of the general public about wildlife poisoning (76%) and stronger control regarding import and trade of legal poisoning substances (67%). Additionally, 44% of respondents consider wildlife poisoning investigations to be important police work. One third of the sample believes that awareness about the issue of wildlife poisoning needs to be raised among citizens in general. They are followed by farmers (25%), livestock breeders and hunters (9% each). Figure 26. Perceived motives behind wildlife poisoning in Serbia I don’t knowNever Rarely Occasionally often Protection from pests (rats, insects et at.) Protection from stray dogs and cats Protection of agricultural fields from wild animals Protection of pigeons from birds of prey Protection of pastures and lifestock from wild animals Human-human conflicts over land use Protection of agricultural fields from birds of prey Protection of hunting activities Protection of apiaries from bears 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 4% 2% 36% 40% 18% 22%22%29%20%7% 2% 29% 13% 22% 34% 22%13%22%16%27% 18% 20% 20% 7% 35% 36% 35% 44%9%16%20%11% 26% 20% 9% 7% 38% 7% 11% 20% 16% 20% 20% 18% 18% 84 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Perception of the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning within relevant governmental authorities in Serbia Representatives of relevant governmental institutions in Serbia are well informed about certain species of vultures, such as the presence of the Griffon Vulture in their country. However, there is somewhat of a lack of knowledge when it comes to the conservation status of other species of vultures, as one third of the respondents think that the Egyptian Vulture still breeds in Serbia and a little less than one fifth believe the same for the Cinereous Vulture. Wildlife poisoning is acknowledged as the most important threat to the existence of vultures in Serbia (by around half of the officials), but the usage of legal toxic compounds (pesticides, insecticides, rodenticides) is also amongst top identified dangers that leads to poisoning of wild animals (approximately every fifth respondent). While the majority of the respondents believe that the key cause of vulture poisoning is accidental, either through ingestion of poison baits intended for other animals or by eating animals that died of poisoning, opinions of respondents are divided when it comes to the question of whether wildlife poisoning occurs accidentally or intentionally. Close to half of institutions employees believe that wildlife poisoning happens accidentally by misuse of legal poisoning substances and negligence, while the other half believes that wildlife poisoning happens mostly intentionally, by using illegal poisons from the black market or through abuse of legal poisoning substances. Farmers, and to a lesser extent hunters, but also individuals who deliberately poison animals out of aggressive and destructive impulses are perceived as the most responsible groups for wildlife poisoning. This is partially in line with what respondents consider to be the most important motives for the poisoning of wild animals. Above two thirds of officials from relevant institutions consider protection from pests and agricultural land from wild animals, protection of pastures and livestock from wild animals and protection from stray dogs and cats to be the key motives behind wildlife poisoning that should be addressed by joint institutional efforts. Conflicts among people about land use (pastures, hunting areas) should also be legally addressed in this process. Vojvodina and Western Serbia and Šumadija are the regions of Serbia, that should be paid special attention in the fight for wildlife protection according to the opinion of employees of relevant governmental institutions. Inadequate enforcement of the laws, low penalties and rare imposing of the fines for wildlife poisoning, inadequate and unclear protocols for police action, complexity of the investigations, difficulties with evidence procedures in court, inadequate education of public prosecutors to handle the incidents related to poisoning of wild animals, lack of control over the prescribed use of legal poisons, such as pesticides, and online black market for banned poisons are all perceived as important aggravating circumstances and obstacles for the prevention and sanctioning of wildlife poisoning in Serbia. Poor reporting of poisoning events from witnesses is also perceived as an important obstacle, and the responsibility for reporting information about wildlife poisoning to the police is allocated to all members of the population (every person), as well as hunters and veterinarians. This is hindered by perceived risk of altercations and conflicts in local communities that people who report poisoning events face, but also by the lack of information to whom to report animal poisoning incidents to. Therefore, citizens in general, and specifically farmers, are identified as the most important target groups for awareness raising actions. The respondents are mostly uninformed about the existence of database for poisoning incidents in Serbia, National action plan for combating wildlife poisoning and protocol defining procedures and jurisdictions for investigating wildlife poisoning. Although a few of the respondents claim that they use the data from the existing database for poisoning incidents of birds for carrying out work within their jurisdiction, the small number of officials informed about the database are divided 85 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA about the clarity of protocol for documenting poisoning incidents and they mostly agree that the existing database is not adequately used for informing the public and raising their awareness about the problem of wildlife poisoning. At the same time, results of the research indicate the need for improvement of the cooperation between governmental institutions and civil society organizations regarding data collection about poisoning incidents. Representatives from the relevant governmental institutions in Serbia emphasize the important role of police work in investigation of wildlife poisoning incidents. Several aspects regarding the capacity of the police that need improvement have been identified, from the need to introduce specialized police units for environmental crime, specialized canine units for detecting poisonous substances, to introducing additional agents (police, environmental inspectors, rangers etc.) in the field, training and capacity building for police forces, to the need to involve representatives of civil society organizations in wildlife poisoning investigations. Insufficient education of the police forces for investigating these incidents and lack of coordination among relevant institutions is perceived as a bigger problem than the lack of resources and equipment. Respondents are indecisive and not completely sure about the need for expensive and sophisticated technology in police investigations of wildlife poisoning. When it comes to measures for preventing wildlife poisoning, respondents are in agreement in recognizing the importance of the following measures: raising awareness among key stakeholders (livestock breeders, farmers, hunters, institutions) as well as the general public, imposing a stricter control of the trade of legal poisoning substances (pesticides, rodenticides, etc.), financial compensation from the state/government for the damages to livestock breeders and farmers caused by wild animals, creating more supplementary feeding sites for vultures, and better protection of wild ungulate populations. Respondents are in favour of enforcing the most severe forms of punishment for all forms of mass and non-discriminative killing of animals (trapping, poisoning, explosives et al.), and they believe that higher fines are needed for every type of poaching/illegal shooting. The majority of them also believe that the possession of poison baits should be considered a separate offence, regardless of whether it has been proven that an animal was killed. Officials mostly agree that rangers of protected areas should have the authority to arrest persons who poison animals, if caught in the act, and that the concessionaire should be deprived of the concession if poisoning of wild animals occurs in a commercial hunting area. They also consider that poisoning of animals should not only be a criminal offense if it occurs in a protected area (nature park or national park) and that the sentences should correspondingly include imprisonment (as opposed to solely administrative sentences) for not only affecting the humans but also endangering the animals. The vast majority of representatives for governmental institutions from Serbia believe that plants and animals have an equal right to exist just like humans and that the natural balance is very delicate and easy to disturb. Majority of respondents also perceive the Earth to be like a spaceship, with very limited space and resources. Close to three fourths of the sample believe that humans aren’t destined to rule over the rest of nature. Conclusions Poisoning of wildlife continues to be a common occurrence in Serbia, having the worst effect on species who often resort to scavenging as a potential food source, such as the White-tailed Eagle, Common Buzzard and Marsh Harrier, which are the usual victims of poisoning in the country. Unlike all the other countries from the region, wildlife poisoning currently does not appear to be a serious threatening factor for the national vulture population. Incidents with vulture mortality are rarely recorded, and with vulture poisoning even rarer, with the last one being recorded in 2008. However, apart from the existing protected areas which were created primarily for the purpose of protecting the remaining population of Griffon Vultures in Serbia, very little efforts have been invested to assess the scope of wildlife poisoning in the 86 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA rest of the country and to determine to what extent it potentially threatens the country’s vultures. Therefore, future conservation efforts should focus on investigating the scope of human-wildlife conflicts, especially conflicts with predators, such as wolves and jackals, which often inflict damages to livestock and game animals. These conflicts are currently the biggest known drivers of poison use in Serbia, followed by the misuse of plant protection products in intensively farmed landscapes in the country’s northern province. Conservation efforts invested by CSOs during the last decade into diminishing the threat of wildlife poisoning in Serbia have resulted in better engagement of relevant governmental authorities with this specific type of environmental crime. During the last 5 years, for every third poisoning event toxicological analysis was conducted, which is a significant step forward towards better management of potential poisoning events. Designating additional toxicological laboratories with sufficient capacities for conducting forensic analysis on wildlife would further improve this situation. Additionally, these invested efforts also resulted in somewhat better engagement of relevant law enforcement institutions in Serbia. Although this engagement mainly relates to investigation of incidents which involve mortality of emblematic species which are of a higher conservation concern, such as eagles, it is a significant progress, which resulted in several investigated cases being brought to court. Further specific training of law enforcement agents, public prosecutors and other relevant stakeholders is necessary in order to improve the overall management of poisoning incidents. Wildlife poisoning is perceived as the biggest threat to the vulture population in Serbia by people from rural areas. The majority of them believes that wildlife poisoning happens intentionally, equally through the abuse of legal poisoning substances such as pesticides and insecticides, or through the intentional use of illegal poisoning substances from the black market. They perceive farmers, livestock breeders and hunters as the groups most responsible for wildlife poisoning in Serbia. The same groups are identified by the representatives of relevant governmental institutions, who believe that wildlife poisoning happens accidentally by misuse of legal poisoning substances and negligence, while the other half believes that wildlife poisoning happens mostly intentionally, by using illegal poisons from the black market or through abuse of legal poisoning substances. 87 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Status of wildlife poisoning in the Balkan Peninsula Wildlife poisoning continues to represent one the most dominant threats for many wild species in the Balkan Peninsula. It also affects numerous domestic animals, and because of its common and frequent use in various forms it represents a severe threat to human health as well. The analysis of effects of poisoning on domestic animals was not the subject of this study, although it is important to mention that poisoning events with domestic animals, primarily dogs (hunting, shepherd dogs, stray dogs and pets) are more common, especially in urban environments, and are more frequently reported to the authorities. The most common type of wildlife poisoning in the Balkan Peninsula is the intentional placement of poison baits for the purpose of killing wild, feral or in some cases domestic animals. Poison baits in the Balkans come in all shapes and sizes, from entire carcasses of dead animals (mostly livestock, but also game animals, poultry), individual body parts, pieces of meat of various sizes, sausages, boiled eggs, fish, honey laced with toxic compounds, and also wax capsules with Cyanide. Presently, the use of poison baits or poisoning of animals in general is illegal in each country of the Balkan Peninsula, but it is a deeply rooted practice, still commonly practiced by people as a quick and relatively affordable method for resolving conflicts with wildlife. Within the period of 2000-2020 a total of 1048 poisoning and presumable poisoning wildlife poisoning events have been recorded throughout the Balkan Peninsula. More than half (55%) of all events that occurred in the region during this period originate from Greece. The diversity of poison baits and toxic compounds used for poisoning of animals additionally contribute to the perception that this type of environmental crime is indeed much more frequent in Greece than in other countries of the Balkan region. On the other hand, the issue of illegal use of poison baits has been the focus of conservation efforts of national CSOs in Greece for the past 10 years, which have invested significant efforts and resources in documenting this illegal practice compared to other countries. The reality of wildlife poisoning is that if more efforts are invested into research of its scope, more poisoning incidents will be detected. This is true as well for spatial distribution of poisoning incidents, and therefore those areas in which more efforts were invested in monitoring usually show a higher number of poisoning incidents. Therefore, it is highly likely that the current status of wildlife poisoning in the Balkan region and in each country individually, which was the subject of this study, does not reflect the realistic situation and that a great number of potential poisoning events remains unrecorded. Apart from Greece, high numbers of poisoning incidents can be found in Serbia, where more than a quarter (28%) of all poisoning and presumable wildlife poisoning events that have been recorded in the region originate from. Similar to the situation in Greece, CSOs from Serbia have invested significant efforts in monitoring the phenomenon of wildlife poisoning, although almost exclusively in the northern regions of the country where they have more people on the ground for active and preventive searches for potential poisoning incidents. Other target countries from the region show significantly lower numbers of recorded incidents, which can mostly be attributed to the fact that systematic monitoring and documentation of wildlife poisoning has been conducted primarily in areas that are important for certain species of conservation concern at the national level (vulCONCLUSIONS 88 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA ture species, Imperial Eagles or Saker Falcons). Additionally, apart from Bulgaria, in the remaining countries wildlife poisoning only became a focus of active research and monitoring since 2018. Data about wildlife poisoning used to produce this study originates from internal databases on CSOs which are active in combating this environmental crime. There are no official databases among relevant governmental institutions from the Balkan countries where information about poisoning and potential poisoning incidents are stored. Most of the relevant institutions store only information about those incidents which were fully investigated by law enforcement officials and that made it to court. Less than 1% of poisoning incidents in the Balkans ever make it to court trials, and even less get officially sanctioned, as charges are usually brought up against unknown perpetrators. All of this indicates that wildlife poisoning is very low on the list of priorities of relevant governmental authorities and that their overall engagement with this type of environmental crime is also minimal. Based on the available information about poisoning and potential poisoning incidents that occurred from 2000-2020 in the Balkan Peninsula it is evident that the Griffon Vulture population inhabiting this region suffered the worst from the illegal practice of wildlife poisoning (Figure 27). These vultures appear as casualties in every fifth poisoning event in the Balkans, and a total of 400 individuals perished within 233 separate poisoning or presumable poisoning incidents. Common Buzzard and Red Fox closely follow, with 392 individuals within 190 separate incidents and 389 individuals within 141 separate incidents respectively. Other more frequent victims of this illegal practice include White-tailed Eagle, which was recorded as a casualty in 75 separate incidents where 111 individuals got poisoned, Marsh Harrier, recorded in 31 separate incidents with 89 poisoned individuals and Eurasian Wolf, recorded in 40 separate incidents with 75 individuals found poisoned or presumably poisoned. Figure 27. Common victims of wildlife poisoning in the Balkan Peninsula 450 300 150 400 250 100 350 200 50 0 Golden Eagle Marsh Harrier Griffon Vulture Eurasian Wolf Common Buzzard Golden Jackal Red Fox Brown Bear White-tailed Eagle Egyptian Vulture Cinereous Vulture Imperial Eagle Incidents Casualties 89 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Avian scavengers in general are a group of species which suff ers the most from illegal wildlife poisoning, non-more so than vultures, which are recorded as casualties in every forth incident. From the year 2000 to 2020 a total of 468 vultures perished in the Balkan Peninsula, including 47 Egyptian Vultures, 23 Cinereous Vultures and one Bearded Vulture. These data are not estimates, but concrete data obtained from poisoning and presumable poisoning events that occurred in the region, from which we can conclude that an average of 22 vultures are poisoned annually on the Balkan peninsula. If we take into account that approximately only 20 % of poisoning incidents are ever discovered and documented, we can estimate that about 112 vultures are potentially being poisoned annually throughout the Balkans. Such losses exert a heavy toll on the vulture populations of the region. Therefore, it is evident that wildlife poisoning continues to be the single most important threat to vultures in the Balkan Peninsula and current limiting factor for their recovery. This factor has to be taken into account when planning any conservation initiatives regarding vultures, especially re-stocking and reintroduction initiatives. Figure 29. Number of poisoning events in the Balkan Peninsula within the research period Figure 28. Vulture poisoning in the Balkan Peninsula from 2000-2020 Number of perished vultures Number of poisoning incidents 0 2000 2005 2010 2001 2006 2011 2015 2002 2007 2012 2016 2003 2008 2013 2017 2019 2004 2009 2014 2018 2020 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 40 20 27 27 21 42 45 47 74 42 32 34 54 73 60 49 83 70 92 62 48 42 30 60 80 10 50 30 70 90 100 96 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA toxicological analysis to prosecution and legal proceeding of poisoning incidents are essential. Encourage cooperation and coordination between various sectors involved, including experts of the Environmental authorities, public prosecutors, law enforcement officers, environmental CSOs, hunting associations, farming associations and the media on all levels (federal, entity-level, cantonal). Set up channels for fluid exchange of information with the law enforcement officials, Public Prosecutors’ Office with other relevant governmental authorities and CSOs to coordinate joint action. Bulgaria Nature conservation organizations in Bulgaria have been very active in the field of vulture conservation for the past 20 years, including the struggle with illegal poisoning as the most important conservation issues for these scavengers. The course of implementation of projects and initiatives related to vulture conservation in Bulgaria have defined the following activities as priority actions to be developed and implemented in the future in order to combat wildlife poisoning more effectively on a national scale. Advocate better law enforcement, adaptation and improvement of current national legal framework: Improve the legislation related to wildlife poisoning and vulture conservation towards stricter penalties and legal ramifications. Develop a commonly agreed and legal protocol for responsible authorities related to legal processing of wildlife poisoning cases, responsibilities and jurisdiction of all responsible governmental institutions. Enforcement of the recently endorsed National Action plan against wildlife poisoning in Bulgaria. Capacity building and networking: Significant efforts are needed towards capacity building and training of legal and technical personnel and law enforcement officers of the governmental authorities related to this matter. Training ranging from detection of poison baits and poisoned animals in the field, conduction of toxicological analysis to prosecution and legal proceeding of poisoning incidents are essential. Encourage cooperation and coordination between various sectors involved, including experts of the Environmental authorities, public prosecutors, law enforcement officers, environmental CSOs, hunting associations, farming associations and the media on all levels (federal, entity-level, cantonal). Awareness raising activities: Continue to raise awareness of the general public and governmental authorities of the problem doing so by means of media campaigns and promotional work. Continue to conduct environmental education campaigns about the impact of poisons on threatened species and human health risks, plus the penalties which can apply, as well as the benefits of the presence of predators in the ecosystem, targeting livestock breeders, hunters, gamekeepers and other stakeholders relevant to potential use of poison baits in the environment. Active conservation measures: Continue with the introduction and reinforcement of wild ungulates species (Ibex, Fallow Deer, Chamois, Red deer) to provide natural prey for the predators and vultures and to decrease losses of livestock. Advocate for shifting from sheep and goats to cattle raising in certain areas, which would further decrease losses of livestock due to predation by mammalian predators. 97 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Establish a network of Permanent safe supplementary feeding sites for avian scavengers in the country. Continue with active detection and surveillance of the use of poison baits in the environment using Canine Teams and GPS tracked vultures. Croatia Awareness raising activities: Significant efforts need to be made towards raising awareness of the general public and governmental authorities of the magnitude of the problem with illegal poisoning and addressing the conflict between social groups involved is a way to prevent poisoning. If the specific drivers for the use of poison baits are eliminated, then the incidents of poisoning will be reduced. Awareness raising activities should also focus on the importance of reporting potential poisoning events to the relevant authorities. Conduct environmental education campaigns targeting all stakeholders relevant to potential use of poison baits and substances in the environment. These campaigns should stress the impact of poisons on threatened species and human health risks, plus the penalties which can apply, as well as the benefits of the presence of predators and scavengers in the ecosystem. Advocate better law enforcement, adaptation and improvement of current national legal framework: Adopt National Anti-poisoning Road Map, relevant to the specific issues occurring in the country, and advocate for its incorporation into the national legislation. Standard operational protocols for investigation procedures, conduction of forensic necropsy and toxicological analysis of poisoning incidents are needed for facilitating the work or relevant governmental authorities responsible for dealing with this type of environmental crime. Advocate for the enforcement of the ministerial decision to eradicate introduced and invasive game animals on island ecosystems, as conflicts with those animals are the main reason for the use of poison, which threatens the remaining Griffon Vulture population in the country. Increase and improve relevant information about wildlife poisoning: Data from Croatia have been integrated into the regional Poison Incident Database which enables the user to assess the scope and severity of wildlife poisoning, as well as to define potential hotspots for these illegal activities and plan appropriate conservation actions. Efforts need to be invested into collection of any available data about poisoning and documentation of potential poisoning events. Capacity building and networking: Efforts are needed towards capacity building and training of legal and technical personnel and law enforcement officers of the governmental authorities related to this matter. Training ranging from detection of poison baits and poisoned animals in the field, conduction of toxicological analysis to prosecution and legal proceeding of poisoning incidents are essential. Encourage improvement of cooperation and coordination between various sectors involved, including experts of the Environmental authorities, public prosecutors, law enforcement officers, environmental CSOs, hunting associations, farming associations and the media. Set up channels for fluid exchange of information with the law enforcement officials, Public Prosecutors’ Office with other relevant governmental authorities and CSOs to coordinate joint action. 98 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Greece Nature conservation organizations in Greece have been very active in combating wildlife poisoning, including the use of several Canine Teams, establishment of a national Task Force devoted to combating wildlife poisoning and a centralized database for wildlife poisoning, which has been expanded to other countries from the region. They have also lobbied and advocated for the endorsement of laws and species actions plans that address the problem of poison bait use. The course of implementation of projects and conservation initiatives related to reducing the threat of poisoning for vultures and other affected species have defined the following activities as priority actions to be developed and implemented in the future. Advocate better law enforcement, adaptation and improvement of current national legal framework: Develop operational protocols for responsible authorities related to management of wildlife poisoning cases, responsibilities and jurisdiction of all responsible governmental institutions and advocate for their official endorsement by relevant governmental authorities. Advocate for improvement and upgrade of the MD for Local Action Plans against wildlife poisoning to JMD as well as the official governmental endorsement of a National Anti-poisoning strategy. Advocate for more efficient management of poisoning incidents by governmental authorities: In most cases, the competent authorities do not deal with poisoning events due to lack of staff, expertise, and awareness of the problem. Advocate for introduction of stricter and heftier fines and penal sanctions for perpetrators found guilty of wildlife poisoning into the existing national legislation as an important deterrent measure against this illegal practice. Capacity building and networking: Efforts are needed towards capacity building and training of legal and technical personnel and law enforcement officers of the governmental authorities related to this matter. Training ranging from detection of poison baits and poisoned animals in the field, conduction of necropsies and toxicological analysis to prosecution and legal proceeding of poisoning incidents are essential. Improvement of existing human resources, infrastructures and equipment of the referent national toxicological laboratory, recruiting additional staff, particularly for forensic necropsies. Establish a new, second, referent toxicological laboratory in the north of Greece to be able to process more poisoning incidents. Encourage improvement of cooperation and coordination between various sectors involved, including experts of the Environmental authorities, public prosecutors, law enforcement officers, environmental CSOs, hunting associations, farming associations and the media. Set up channels for fluid exchange of information with the law enforcement officials, Public Prosecutors’ Office with other relevant governmental authorities and CSOs to coordinate joint action. Active conservation measures: Increase efforts to promote and enforce application of preventive measures: granting subsidies for electric fences is recommended in order to protect livestock capital from wildlife predation, as well as for usage of Greek shepherd dogs as livestock guards. Improve the compensation system for damages to crop production and livestock. Increase efforts towards warding: In poison hotspot areas or those that host species vulnerable to poisoning joint patrols should be carried out systematically by wardens, gamekeepers and rangers of 99 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA the management bodies of protected areas in order to deter people from using them as well as to increase chances of locating poison baits or poisoned animals. Awareness raising activities: Significant efforts need to be made towards raising awareness of the general public and governmental authorities of the magnitude of the problem with illegal poisoning and addressing the conflict between social groups involved is a way to prevent poisoning. If the drivers for the use of poison baits are eliminated, then the incidents of poisoning will be reduced. Conduct environmental education campaigns targeting all stakeholders relevant to potential use of poison baits and substances in the environment. These campaigns should stress the impact of poisons on threatened species and human health risks, plus the penalties which can apply, as well as the benefits of the presence of predators and scavengers in the ecosystem. North Macedonia Advocate better law enforcement, adaptation and improvement of current national legal framework: Adoption of the National Anti-poisoning Road Map, relevant to the specific issues occurring in the country, and advocate for its incorporation in the national legislation. Standard operational protocols for investigation procedures, conduction of forensic necropsy and toxicological analysis of poisoning incidents are needed for facilitating the work of relevant governmental authorities responsible for dealing with this type of environmental crime. Develop Accredited protocols/Standard Operational Procedures (SOP) and security measures in sampling and processing poisoned animals. Development of organized systems and protocols related to reporting, collecting and disposal of dead animals is needed. Designate a referent laboratory, within existing institutions, for processing cases of wildlife poisoning and conduction of forensic toxicological analysis. Awareness raising activities: Significant efforts need to be made towards raising awareness of the general public and governmental authorities of the magnitude of the problem with illegal poisoning and addressing the conflict between social groups involved is a way to prevent poisoning. If the drivers for the use of poison baits are eliminated, then the incidents of poisoning will be reduced. Conduct environmental education campaigns targeting all stakeholders relevant to potential use of poison baits and substances in the environment. These campaigns should stress the impact of poisons on threatened species and human health risks, the importance of reporting potential poisoning events to the relevant authorities, deterrent measures foreseen under the national legislation, as well as the benefits of the presence of predators and scavengers in the ecosystem. Capacity building and networking: Efforts are needed towards capacity building and training of legal and technical personnel and law enforcement officers of the governmental authorities related to this matter. Training ranging from detection of poison baits and poisoned animals in the field, conduction of toxicological analysis to prosecution and legal proceeding of poisoning incidents are essential. Encourage improvement of cooperation and coordination between various sectors involved, including experts of the Environmental authorities, public prosecutors, law enforcement officers, environmental NGOs, hunting associations, farming associations and the media. 100 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Set up channels for fluid exchange of information with the law enforcement officials, Public Prosecutors’ Office with other relevant governmental authorities and NGOs to coordinate joint action. Serbia Advocate better law enforcement, adaptation and improvement of current national legal framework: Adoption of the National Anti-poisoning Road Map, relevant to the specific issues occurring in the country, and advocate for its incorporation in the national legislation. Standard operational protocols for investigation procedures, conduction of forensic necropsy and toxicological analysis of poisoning incidents are needed for facilitating the work or relevant governmental authorities responsible for dealing with this type of environmental crime. Advocate for enforcement of stricter deterrence measures, such as higher penal and criminal penalties. Advocate for more efficient management of poisoning incidents by governmental authorities: In most cases, the competent authorities do not deal with poisoning events due to lack of staff, expertise, and awareness of the problem. Awareness raising activities: Continue with conducting awareness raising activities and media campaigns towards the general public and governmental authorities of the magnitude of the problem with illegal poisoning and the importance of reporting potential poisoning event to the relevant authorities. Conduct environmental education campaigns targeting all stakeholders relevant to potential use of poison baits and substances in the environment. These campaigns should stress the impact of poisons on threatened species and human health risks, plus the penalties which can apply, as well as the benefits of the presence of predators and scavengers in the ecosystem. Capacity building and networking: Efforts are needed towards capacity building and training of legal and technical personnel and law enforcement officers of the governmental authorities related to this matter. Training ranging from detection of poison baits and poisoned animals in the field, conduction of toxicological analysis to prosecution and legal proceeding of poisoning incidents are essential. Encourage improvement of cooperation and coordination between various sectors involved, including experts of the Environmental authorities, public prosecutors, law enforcement officers, environmental NGOs, hunting associations, farming associations and the media. Set up channels for fluid exchange of information with the law enforcement officials, Public Prosecutors’ Office with other relevant governmental authorities and NGOs to coordinate joint action. Active conservation measures: Increase efforts towards warding: In poison hot spot areas or those that host species vulnerable to poisoning joint patrols should be carried out systematically by wardens, gamekeepers and rangers of the management bodies of protected areas in order to deter people from using them as well as to increase chances of locating poison baits or poisoned animals. 101 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Andevski. J. 2013. Summary. Andevski. J (ed): Vulture Conservation in the Balkan Peninsula and Adjacent Regions: 10 years of research and conservation. Pp: 36-37. Vulture Conservation Foundation. Ćurić, S., Sabočanec, R., Šimpraga, B., Beck, A., Hohšteter, M, Šegrt, V., Botka-Petrak, K., Pavoković, G., Sušić, G., Beck, R. 2008. Handel mit Carbofuran: Gefahr für die gefährdete Population der Gänsegeier (Gyps fulvus) in Kroatien. Tierärztliche Umschau 63:437-441 Demerdzhiev, D., Hristov, H., Dobrev, D., Angelov, I., Kurtev, M. 2014. Long-term population status, breeding parameters and limiting factors of the Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus) population in Eastern Rhodopes, Bulgaria. Acta zool. bulg., 66 (3): 373-384. Driskell, W.J., Groce, D.F., Hill, R.H. Jr. (1991) Methomyl in the blood of a pilot who crashed during aerial spraying. J Anal Toxicol 15:339-340 Grubač, B. 2008. Beloglavi sup Gyps fulvus u Srbiji: distribucija, brojnost, trend, opasnosti i problemi zaštite u savremenom periodu. Zaštita prirode (Protection of Nature) 58 (1-2): 123-139. Grubač, B. 1998. Stanje, problem I mere zaštite lešinara (Aegypiinae) Srbije. Zaštita ptirode 50: 199-205, Beograd. Grubač, B. 2000. The Present Status of Vultures Aegypiinae in Central Balkans. Actas del II Congreso International sobre aves carroneras, pp. 93-103, Kanizares – Solan de Cabras, Cuenca. Grubac, B., Velevski, M., Lisicanec, T., Lisicanec, E., Rolevski, D. & Andevski, J. (2007): The decreasing population size of Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus) in Macedonia and assesment of conservatuion measures. pp. 101–102 In: Abstract book from the 3rd Congress of the Ecologists of Macedonia, with international participation, 6–9 Oct 2007, Struga. Grubač, B., Velevski, M. (2012): Long-term population decline and changes in the breeding success of the Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus in Macedonia. IV Congress of Ecologists of Republic of Macedonia, 1215.10.2012, Ohrid. Abstract Book, 35. Macedonian Ecological Society. Handrinos G., Akriotis T. (1997): The birds of Greece. A & C Black, London. Kotrošan, D., Marinković, S., Šimić, E., Viada, C., 2009: Priručnik za edukaciju posmatrača ptica u Bosni i Hercegovini. I. Lešinari. Ornitološko društvo “Naše ptice”, Sarajevo. Kunovac, S., 2004: Čovjekova nebriga ili ... Lovački list, NS 79: 15. Kret, E., Vavylis, D., Saravia, V. & Ntemiri, Κ. 2015. Poison bait detection with specially trained dogs in Thrace and Central Greece, Annual report 2014. Technical report under action C1 of the LIFE+ project “The Return of the Neophron” (LIFE10 NAT/BG/000152). Hellenic Ornithological Society & WWF-Greece, Athens. 41 p. Kret, E. 2018. Poison bait detection with specially trained dogs in Thrace, Annual Report 2017, WWF Greece, Athens. pp. 35. [In Greek with EN summary] REFERENCES 102 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Lukač, G. 2004. The extinct and endangered bird species in Paklenica National Park. Paklenički zbornik 2, Pp.161-166. Marinković, S. 1999. Ekološke osnove zaštite i održavanja beloglavog supa Gyps fulvus (Hablizl, 1783) na Balkanskom poluostrvu. Doktorska disertacija. Biološki fakultet, Beograd. Marinković, S., Orlandić, Lj., Micković, B. & B. Karadžić. 2007. Census of vultures in Herzegovina. Vulture News, 56:14–28. Međugorac, B., Kraš, M. Sušić, G., Pavoković, G. 2001. Teški metali u tkivima bjeloglavog supa. Zbornik radova XXVIII stručnog skupa «Izazovi u ekologiji». Plitvice, 7-9.11.2001. Ntemiri, Κ. & Saravia, V. (2016): The illegal use of poison baits in Greece. 2012-2015. Hellenic Ornithological Society/BirdLife Greece, Athens, 43 p. Parvanov D., Stoynov E., Vangelova N., Peshev H., Grozdanov A., Delov V. & Iliev Y. 2018. Vulture mortality resulting from illegal poisoning in the southern Balkan Peninsula. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 25 (2): 1706–1712. Pavoković, G. i G. Sušić (2005): Poisoning of seventeen Eurasian Griffons by carbofuran on the Island of Rab, Croatia, in December 2004. Vulture News 53: 24-25. Peshev H., Stoynov E., Vangelova N., Georgiev G., Stoyanov N. & Grozdanov A. 2018. Re-introduction of the Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus in Kresna Gorge of Struma River, Bulgaria. Annual Report 2017. Fund for Wild Flora and Fauna. Blagoevgrad. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12195.76320 Rajzer, O., 1889: Prebivanja četirju vrste evropskih lešinara u Bosni i Hercegovini. GZM BiH 1 (1): 51-57. Ružić, M., Mirić, R., Vračarić, M., Rajković, D., Rajkov, S., Knežević, S., Stanojević, N., Mišković, M., & Pantović, U. (2017): Report on illegal shooting, poisoning, trapping, possessing and trade of wild birds in the Republic of Serbia for the period 2000-2017. Bird Protection and Study Society of Serbia, Novi Sad. Sabočanec, R., Konjević, D., Srebočan, E. and Z. Petrinec (2005): Fatal poisoning of a Griffon vulture (Gyps fulvus) with methomyl. Eur J Wildl Res (2005) 51: 210-212. Skartsi, Th., Elorriaga, J. & Vasiliakis, D. (2010): Eurasian Black Vulture: the focal species of the Dadia-Lefkimi-Souflii Forest National Park, 195206. In: Catsadorakis, G. & Källander, H. (eds.). The Dadia-Lefkimi-Souflii Forest National Park, Greece: Biodiversity, Management and Conservation. WWF Greece, Athens. Sušić, G. (2000): The legal and illegal use of poison and its impacts on the Griffon vulture and other protected species in Croatia. International congress on the illegal use of poison in natural environment. Alcudia, Mallorca, 2-5. March 2000. Pp. 77. Sušić, G. (2002): Survival or extinction? In: Sušić, G. and I. Grbac (2002): Do you want reality or myth? The Story of Eurasian Griffon. Croatian Natural History Museum, Zagreb. Pp. 90-111. Tomlin, C.D.S. (ed) (2000) The pesticide manual, A world compen¬dium. The British Crop Protection Council, Pp. 258-259 Tsatsakis, A.M., Tsakalof, A.K., Siatitsas, Y., Michalodimitrakis, E.N. (1996) Acute poisoning with carbamate pesticides: The Cretan experience. Sci Justice 36:35-39. Tucker, G.M., Heath, M.F. (1994): Birds in Europe - Their conservation status. Cambridge, UK. Vavylis, D., Kret, D., Saravia, V. & Ntemiri, K. 2016. Poison bait detection with specially trained dogs in Thrace and Central Greece, Annual report 2015. Technical report under action C1 of the LIFE+ project “The Return of the Neophron” (LIFE10 NAT/BG/000152). Hellenic Ornithological Society & WWF-Greece, Athens. 48 p. Vavylis, D., Kret, D., Saravia, V. & Ntemiri, K. 2016. Poison bait detection with specially trained dogs in Thrace and Central Greece, Annual report 2016 & Summary Report of 2014-2016. Technical report under action C1 of the LIFE+ project “The Return of the Neophron” (LIFE10 NAT/BG/000152). Hellenic Ornithological Society & WWF-Greece, Athens. 77 p. 103 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Vavylis, D., Saravia, V. & Ntemiri, K. 2018. Poison bait detection with specially trained dogs in Central Greece. Hellenic Ornithological Society, Athens. 47p. [In Greek with EN summary] Velevski, M., Nikolov, S.C., Hallmann, B., Dobrev, V., Sidiropoulos, L., Saravia, V., Tsiakiris, R., Arkumarev, V., Galanaki, A., Kominos, T., Stara, K., Kret, E., Grubač, B., Lisičanec, E., Kastritis, T., Vavylis, D., Topi, M., Hoxha, B., Oppel, S. (2015): Population decline and range contraction of the Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus in the Balkan Peninsula. Bird Conservation International. BirdLife International. Xirouchakis,S.andTsiakiris,R. (2009)Status and population trends of vultures in Greece. Pp.160– 177inDonázar,J. A.,Margalida,A.andCampion, D., eds. Vultures, feeding stations and sanitary legislation: a conflict and its consequences from the perspective of conservation biology.MUNIBE Suplemento/Gehigarria 29. Donostia, Spain:Sociedad de Ciencias Aranzadi. Xirouchakis, S., (rev., 2019). Action Plan for three vulture species: Bearded Vulture (Gypaetus barbatus), Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus), Cinereous Vulture (Aegypius monachus). LIFE-IP 4 NATURA Project: Integrated actions for the conservation and management of Natura 2000sites, species, habitats and ecosystems in Greece (LIFE16 IPE/GR/000002). Deliverable Action Α.1. Hellenic Ornithological Society, Athens, 180 pages. & 6 Annexes. 104 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Annex I. Overview of poisoning incidents in Albania confirmed by toxicological analysis. Species No. of poisoned individuals Date/Period Location Type of poisoning Main driver Substance Eurasian Wolf 6 2007* Kukes intentional conflict with predators/protection of livestock Strychnine Eurasian Wolf 3 2018* Tepelene unknown unknown Organic phosphates Eurasian Brown bear 42019* Puke intentional conflict with predators/protection of beehives Organic phosphates Red Fox; Cats 1; 4 08.06.2020. Kavajë intentional conflict with foxes Methomyl 90 sp Red Fox; Pet dogs; Cats 1; 1; 1 14.06.2020. Kavajë intentional conflict with foxes Methomyl 90 sp * number of poisoned animals relates to the period of the entire year, not just one single poisoning incident; Annex II. Overview of poisoning incidents in Bulgaria confirmed by toxicological analysis. Species No. of poisoned individuals Date/Period Location Type of poisoning Main driver Substance Wolf, Wild boar, Raven 1, 1, 4 2001 Tserovo, Blagoevgrad intentional Conflicts with wolves Lindane Wolf 8 2003 Krandjilitsa, Petrich intentional Conflicts with wolves Strychnine Griffon Vulture 2 16.04.2003 Studen Kladenets, Krumovgrad Unknown Conflicts with wolves Zink phosphate Griffon Vulture 105.05.2003 Letovnik, Momchilgrad unknown conflicts with wolves Organophosphate Partridge 1 22.06.2004 Blagoevgrad incidental agriculture Organophosphate ANNEXES 105 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Species No. of poisoned individuals Date/Period Location Type of poisoning Main driver Substance Common Starling 12 15.11.2004 Stara Zagora incidental agriculture Carbofuran Common Buzzard 2 11.12.2004 Topolovgrad incidental agriculture Zink phosphate Goshawk 1 15.12.2004 Topolovgrad incidental agriculture Carbamate/ Organophosphate Egyptian Vulture 2 2004 Jenda, Kardzhali unknown Conflicts with wolves Carbamate/ Organophosphate Imperial Eagle 1 2004 Yambol, Bolyarovo unknown unknown Organophosphate Hen harrier 1 15.01.2005 Topolovgrad incidental agriculture Carbamate/ Organophosphate Common Buzzard 116.01.2005 Durankulak, Dobrich incidental agriculture Carbamate Common Starling 8 15.02.2005 Plovdiv incidental agriculture Carbamate/ Organophosphate Golden Eagle 2 14.12.2005 Pirdop intentional Conflicts with wolves Zink phosphate Griffon Vulture 114.01.2006 Studen Kladenets, Krumovgrad unknown Conflict with wolves Carbamate/ Organophosphate Black Stork 2March, 2006 Katina, Sofia incidental agriculture Carbamate/ Organophosphate Imperial Eagle 1 05.06.2006 Topolovgrad incidental agriculture rodenticide White Stork 1 June, 2006 Simitli incidental agriculture Carbamate/ Organophosphate Common Buzzard 1December, 2006 Pazardjik incidental agriculture Carbamate/ Organophosphate Common Buzzard 15 19.01.2007 Belozem incidental agriculture rodenticides Common Buzzard, Barn Owl, Tawny Owl 5, 3, 3 February , 2007 Along Trakia Highway, near Plovdiv incidental agriculture Carbamate/ Organophosphate Golden Eagle, Raven, Golden Jackal 1, 1, 9 17.03.2007 Shilkovtsii, Elena intentional Killing of Jackals Carbamate/ Organophosphate Partridge, Common Buzzrad, Peregrine 20, 12, 1 April, 2007 near Pazardjik intentional Killing of Jackals Lannate/ Methomyl Brown Bear 1 June, 2007 Rozino intentional Killing of bear, with contaminated bee honey Carbamate/ Organophosphate Egyptian Vulture 1 26.07.2007 Madzharovo, Haskovo incidental Most probably have eaten at rubbish dump Carbamate/ Organophosphate Brown Bear 1 July, 2007 Klisoura intentional Killing of bear, with contaminated bee honey Ammonium nitrate Egyptian Vulture 1 16.10.2007 Madzharovo, Haskovo unknown Unknown, dry corpse found quite late under the nest Carbamate/ Organophosphate Wild Boar 1 09.05.2010 Gradevo, Simitli intentional Killing of wild boar in potato field Carbamate/ Organophosphate Annex II. cont. 112 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Species No. of poisoned individuals Date/ Period Location Type of poisoning Main driver Substance White-tailed Eagle 1 27.01.2016. Mošorin, Titel unknown unknown Carbofuran Common Buzzard 6 22.02.2016. Čantavir, Subotica intentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran White-tailed Eagle 219.02.2016. Tovariševo, Bačka Palanka unknown unknown Carbofuran Common Buzzard 3 03.03.2016. Sl. Aradac, Zrenjanin unknown unknown Carbofuran Marsh Harrier, Common Buzzard 3, 1 15.03.2016. Hajdukovo, Subotica intentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran White-tailed Eagle 226.03.2016. Erdevik, Šid intentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran Common Buzzard, Marsh Harrier, Raven 1, 1, 1 06.04.2016. Temerin unknown unknown Carbofuran* Common Crane 5 21.04.2016. Novi Kneževac unintentional misuse of pesticides in agriculture Carbofuran Common Buzzard 1 27.12.2016. Bačka Topola unknown unknown Carbofuran Red Kite 102.11.2017. Ritiševo intentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran Peregrine Falcon 1 29.11.2017. NoviSad, Grbavica intentional conflicts with birds of prey Carbofuran White-tailed Eagle, Common Buzzard, Raven 2, 4, 3 17.12.2017. Vitijevci, Ruma unintentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran Common Buzzard 1 18.12.2017. Bačka Palanka unknown unknown Carbofuran White-tailed Eagle, Common Buzzard 2, 1 21.12.2017. Vitojevci unknown unknown Carbofuran Imperial Eagle 1 08.01.2018. Svilojevo, Apatin unintentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran Common Buzzard, Magpie 5, 2 11.01.2018. Svilojevo, Apatin unintentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran White-tailed Eagle, Common Buzzard, Magpie 2, 1, 1 14.01.2018. Svilojevo, Apatin intentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran White-tailed Eagle 201.02.2018. Vitojevci unknown conflicts with predators Carbofuran Annex VI. cont. 113 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Species No. of poisoned individuals Date/ Period Location Type of poisoning Main driver Substance Marsh Harrier 1 23.05.2019. Novo Orahovo unknown unknown Carbofuran Common Starling, Collared dove, Feral pigeon 22, 10, 55 16.10.2018. Vršac unintentional misuse of pesticides in agriculture Carbofuran Magpie 217.07.2019. Srbobran intentional conflicts with stray dogs Carbofuran Common Buzzard 1 25.10.2019. Novo Orahovo unknown unknown Carbofuran White-tailed Eagle 1 25.02.2020. unknown unknown unknown Carbofuran Marsh Harrier 213.4.2020. Bačka Topola unknown unknown Carbofuran Common Crane 5 21.4.2020 Novi Kneževac unintentional misuse of pesticides in agriculture Carbofuran Golden Jackal 113.1.2021. Dobanovci intentional conflicts with predators Carbofuran * Poison detected in the bait; Annex VII. Questionnaire about recorded wildlife poisoning and presumable poisoning events. QUESTIONNAIRE CONTRIBUTOR INFORMATION Country: Organisation: Address: Telephone: Email: Webpage: Name and position of person providing the information: E-mail of the person providing the information: Annex VI. cont. 114 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Q1. Please specify to the best of your knowledge how many wildlife poisoning incidents (WPI) are you aware of that have occurred in your country, their location, species affected, and other relevant information presented in the table below. WPI Date/Period Location (GPS coordinates if available) Species affected No. of poisoned individuals Type of poisoning (intentional, incidental, unknown) Main driver (conflict with predators, stray dogs, other wildlife, etc.) Substance used 1 2 3 4 5 * please add new rows for more WPIs if needed; Q2. Please specify to the best of your knowledge for how many wildlife poisoning incidents in your country have official necropsies been conducted on wild animals which were suspected to have died from poisoning or ingesting poison baits. (please use the same numbering for the incidents as in the table above) WPI Species Cause of death/ necropsy results Name of referent institution * please add new rows for more WPIs if needed; Q3. Please specify to the best of your knowledge for how many wildlife poisoning incidents in your country have toxicological analysis been conducted, either on dead animals or on poison baits. (please use the same numbering for the incidents as in the table under Q2.) WPI Sample (animal species or poison bait) Tested substances Confirmed substances Name of referent laboratory * please add new rows for more WPIs if needed; 115 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Q4. Please specify to the best of your knowledge how many wildlife poisoning incidents in your country have officially been prosecuted by the public prosecutor’s office and have reached court trials. (please use the same numbering for the incidents as in the table under Q2.) Q5. Please specify to the best of your knowledge for how many wildlife poisoning incidents in your country have court rulings been delivered. (please use the same numbering for the incidents as in the table under Q2.) 116 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA Contributor information for relevant governmental institutions Country: Institution: Address: Telephone: Email: Webpage: Name and position of person providing the information: E-mail of the person providing the information: Annex VIII. Questionnaire for target audiences in local communities. QUESTIONNAIRE P1. Based on your knowledge, do the following vulture species breed in … country…? Please answer with yes, no or I don't know. 1. Yes 2. No 3. I do not know, I am not informed 1. Griffon Vulture 2. Turkey Vulture 3. Cinereous Vulture 4. King Vulture 5. Egyptian Vulture P2. Do you know which types of food do vultures in …country… use from the types listed below? Please answer with yes, no or I don't know. 1. Yes 2. No 3. I do not know, I am not informed 1. Carcasses of wild animals 2. Carcasses of domestic animals 3. Hunted large mammals 4. Hunted rodents 5. Hunted domestic animals 6. Hunted insects 117 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA What is endangering the vulture populations in …country.. the most? Read the answers from 1-6. Rotate the answers from 1-6. When you read the list say: or some other cause which we haven’t stated? 1. Lack of food 2. Disturbance 3. Wildlife poisoning 4. Poaching 5. Accidental electrocution of collision with power cables 6. Extensive use of legal toxic compounds (pesticides, insecticides, rodenticides) 7. Other, what?_________ 98. Doesn’t know (don’t read) 99. Refuses to answer (don’t read) P3. How would you evaluate your own knowledge about the issue of wildlife poisoning on a scale from 1 to 5, 5 being excellent knowledge. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (Don’t know / can not evaluate) P4. What do you think, from which of the causes listed below do vultures get poisoned the most? 1. from poison baits intended for vultures 2. from poison baits intended for other animals 3. because they consume poisoned animals 4. because they get poisoned by pesticide 5. Some other cause, which? 98. Doesn’t know 99. Refuses to answer P5. Do you agree with the following statements? Express your personal attitude towards each statement using the following scale: (1) I disagree completely, (2) I mostly disagree, (3) I neither agree nor disagree, (4) I mostly agree, (5) I completely agree 1. I disagree completely 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 98. I don't know (do not read) 1. Vultures have important roles for human activities 1 23 4 5 98 2. The greatest value of vultures such as the Griffon Vulture is the fact that it is a tourist attraction 123 4 5 98 3. Vulture numbers would increase if we would simply leave them alone. 123 4 5 98 4. Vultures have an important role in the ecosystem 1 23 4 5 98 5. Wild animals have/play an important role for human activities 123 4 5 98 6. Poisoning wild animals is sometimes justified 123 4 5 98 7. Governments/Countries should conduct controlled poisoning of wild animals on their own 123 4 5 98 8. Wildlife poisoning is only a problem when it poses a threat for people/humans 123 4 5 98 118 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P6. Wildlife poisoning/Poisoning of wild animals in …country… can occur intentionally or unintentionally, with legal or illegal poisoning substances. According to your opinion, how does wildlife poisoning most commonly occur? 1. Intentionally, with illegal poisons from the black market 2. Intentionally, by misuse of legal poisoning substances (pesticides, insecticides...) 3. Accidently, by misuse of legal poisoning substances out of negligence/ignorance P7. What do you think, how often are people from the following groups responsible for wildlife poisoning in ..country..? Please evaluate using a scale of 1-4, where 1 means „often“, 2 „occasionally“, 3 „rarely“, and 4 „never“. 1. often 2. occasionally 3. rarely 4. never 98. I don’t know (do not read) 1. Livestock breeders 1 23 4 98 2. Hunters 123 4 98 3. Farmers 1 23 4 98 4. Beekeepers 1 23 4 98 5. Pigeon fanciers/breeders 1 23 4 98 6. Individuals who deliberately poison animals simply because they like killing things 123 4 98 P8. According to your assessment, how often is each of the below listed motives behind the poisoning of wild animals in…country..? Please evaluate using a scale of 1-4, where 1 means „often“, 2 „occasionally“, 3 „rarely“, and 4 „never“. 1. often 2.occasionally 3. rarely 4. never 98. I don’t know (do not read) 1. Protection of pastures and livestock from wild animals (wolves, bears, etc.) 123 4 98 2. Protection of agricultural land from wild animals 123 4 98 3. Protection of agricultural land from birds of prey 1 23 4 98 4. Protection of pigeons from birds of prey 1 23 4 98 5. Protection of apiaries from bears 1 23 4 98 6. Conflicts among people about land use (pastures, hunting areas) 123 4 98 7. Protection of hunting activities 1 23 4 98 8. Protection from stray dogs and cats 123 4 98 9. Protection from pests (rats, insects et at.) 1 23 4 98 119 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P9. According to your assessment, in which regions of .,,country,,,, are wild animals most frequently poisoned? (Please choose one of the answers below) 1. Vojvodina 2. East and South Serbia 3. West Serbia and Šumadija 4. Belgrade 98. Doesn’t know (do not read) 99. Refuses to answer (don’t read) P10. According to your assessment, in what period of the year does wildlife poisoning mostly occur in ...country...? Please choose one or more seasons. 1. Spring 2. Summer 3. Autumn 4. Winter 98. Doesn’t know (do not read) 99. Refuses to answer (don’t read) P11. To what extent do you agree with the following statements related to reporting poisoning incidents to the relevant authorities? Please express your personal attitude towards each statement using the following scale: (1) I disagree completely, (2) I mostly disagree, (3) I neither agree nor disagree, (4) I mostly agree, (5) I completely agree 1. I disagree completely 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 98.I don’t know (do not read) 1. People/citizens do not know who to report animal poisoning incidents to 123 4 5 98 2. It is known which individuals poison animals in this area, it is a „public secret“ 123 4 5 98 3. Every person should report to the police any information/knowledge about wildlife poisoning 123 4 5 98 4. Hunters should report to the police information/knowledge about wildlife poisoning more often 123 4 5 98 5. Veterinarians should report to the police information/knowledge about wildlife poisoning more often 123 4 5 98 6. People who report someone from their community for poisoning wild animals risk altercations and conflicts in their community 123 4 5 98 7. Poisoning mostly takes place in remote locations and therefore the perpetrators are rarely identified 123 4 5 98 120 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P12. What of the following would you do if you had information about poisoning? Read the answers 1-3. Rotate the answers 1-3. 1. I wouldn’t report it to the police 2. I would report it to the police but only if it it would not have any negative consequences for me 3. I would report it to the police even if I knew that i might have negative consequences for me 98. Doesn’t know (do not read) 99. Refuses to answer (don’t read) Question only asked if P13 is answered 1 or 2 P13a. If you would not report it, which of the following would be the main reason? Read the answers 13. Rotate the answers 13. When you read the list say: or some other reason which we haven’t stated. 1. Because there are enough other people worrying about that 2. Not to come into conflict with people from my environment/community 3. Because there is nothing in it for me 4. From some other reason, which__________ 99. Refuses to answer (don’t read) P13. Do you know for at least one poisoning incidents with animals in your environment/ community for the past 10 years, apart from deration: 1. Yes 2. No Question asked only of P14 answered „Yes“ P14a. What was it about? /instruction: don’t read the answers, let the respondent say it on his own and mark / Mark 1. Mass poisoning of birds from pesticides 2. Using explosives for fishing 3. Someone intentionally poisoned wild animals outside of settlements because they bothered them in some way 4. Someone intentionally poisoned any type of animal (wild animals, stray dogs or cats, birds of prey) in settlements/ inhabited areas because they bothered them in some way 5. Any protected species accidentally poisoned 6. One or more vultures accidentally poisoned 7. Other. What?_________ Question asked only of P14 answered „Yes“ 121 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P14b. Have you personally or anyone from your community had an animal poisoned? If so, which? / instruction: don’t read the answers, let the respondent say it on his own and mark / Mark 8. Pet 9. Guard dog or shepherd dog 10. Hunting dog 11. Domestic animal (pigs, poultry et al.) 12. Bees 13. Pigeons 14. Some other animals. Which? 15. No, I never had such an experience. P14. In which group of people is it most important to raise awareness about wildlife poisoning? Please, choose one answer. Read the answers 1-5. Rotate the answers 1-5. When you read the list say: or some other group which we haven’t stated. 1. Citizens in general 2. Hunters 3. Game wardens 4. Livestock breeders 5. Farmers 6. Other groups. Which?_____ 98. Doesn’t know (do not read) 99. Refuses to answer (don’t read) P15. How important would you rate wildlife poisoning investigations, compared to other police work? Express your personal attitude using the following scale: (1) completely irrelevant, (2) mostly irrelevant, (3) neither irrelevant nor important, (4) mostly important, (5) extremely important. 1. Completely irrelevant 2. Mostly irrelevant 3. Neither irrelevant nor important 4. Mostly important 5. Extremely important 6. Doesn’t know (do not read) 99. Refuses to answer (don’t read) 128 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P11.To what extent do you agree with the following statements related to reporting poisoning incidents to the relevant authorities? 1. I completely disagree 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 1. People/citizens do not know who to report animal poisoning incidents to 2. It is known which individuals poison animals in this area, it is a „public secret“ 3. Every person should report to the police any information/knowledge about wildlife poisoning 4. Hunters should report to the police information/knowledge about wildlife poisoning more often 5. Veterinarians should report to the police information/knowledge about wildlife poisoning more often 6. People who report someone from their community for poisoning wild animals risk altercations and conflicts in their community 7. Poisoning mostly takes place in remote locations and therefore the perpetrators are rarely identified P12.In which group of people is it most important to raise awareness about wildlife poisoning? (Please choose one answer) 1. Citizens in general 2. Hunters 3. Game wardens 4. Livestock breeders 5. Farmers 6. Other groups. Which? 129 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P13.Do you agree with the following statements, related to investigation of wildlife poisoning incidents? 1. I disagree completely 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 1. Specialized police units for environmental crime, including wildlife poisoning, are needed 2. More people are needed on the field (police, environmental inspectors, rangers etc.) for timely detection of poisoning incidents 3. Game wardens to often tolerate unlawful practices in hunting areas 4. Police should have specialized canine units for detecting poisonous substances used for wildlife poisoning 5. Lack of coordination among relevant institutions is a bigger problem than lack of resources 6. In …country.. there are sufficient laboratories with enough capacities to conduct needed toxicological analyses P14.Do you agree with the following statements, related to legislation and legal processing of poisoning incidents? 1. I disagree completely 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 1. Public prosecutors are sufficiently educated for managing incidents related to poisoning of wild animals 2. The legal framework for punishing the practice of poisoning animals is good, but the main problem is law enforcement 3. Rarely are fines imposed under the Hunting Act 4. Existing legislation regulates biodiversity protection well enough P15.How would you evaluate the cooperation between governmental institutions and civil society organizations regarding data collection about poisoning incidents on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is “very bad”, and 5 “excellent cooperation”: 1 2 3 4 5 (I do not know / I cannot evaluate) 130 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P16.The following next statements relate procedures and documentation related to wildlife poisoning. According to the best of your knowledge: 1. Yes 2. No 3. I do not know, I am not informed 1. Is there a database for poisoning incidents of birds in …country.. 2. Is there a National action plan for combating wildlife poisoning in place 3. Is there a protocol defining procedures and jurisdictions for investigating wildlife poisoning /IF P17.1. = yes, P18 question opens/ P17.Related to database for poisoning incidents: 1. Yes 2. No 3. I do not know, I am not informed 1. Is there a clear protocol for documenting poisoning incidents in the database 2. Do you ever use data from the existing database for carrying out work within your jurisdiction 3. Do you consider that the existing database is adequately used for informing the public and raising their awareness about the problem of wildlife poisoning IF P17.3. = yes, P19 question opens/ P18.Related to the protocol that defines procedures and protocols for investigating wildlife poisoning: 1. Yes 2. No 3. I do not know, I am not informed 1. Is the existing protocol clear enough? 2. According to the protocol, must the reports about poisoning incidents include an impact analysis of a single poisoning incident to the environment and biodiversity? 3. Should the existing protocol be improved? If yes, how?________ 131 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P19.To what extent do you agree with the following statements, related to punishment of various unlawful actions damaging to animals and the environment? 1. I disagree completely 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 1. All forms of mass and non-discriminative killing of animals (trapping, poisoning, explosives et al.) should be punished as severely as possible 2. Higher fines are needed for every type of poaching/illegal shooting 3. Prison sentences should not be administered placing poison baits unless people are not put in danger, but only animals 4. Rangers of protected areas should have the authority to arrest persons who poison animals, if they are caught in the act 5. Sentences for poisoning of animals should be only administrative (financial), but not imprisonment 6. Having poison baits should be a separate offense, regardless of whether it has been proven that an animal was killed 7. Poisoning of animals should be a criminal offense only if it occurred in a protected area (nature park, national park) 8. If poisoning of wild animals occurs in a commercial hunting area, the concessionaire should be deprived of the concession P20.To what extent do you agree with the following statements, related to the capacities of the police. 1. I disagree completely 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 1. Police investigations about wildlife poisoning need expensive and sophisticated technology 2. The main is problem that incidents are not reported to the police 3. The police is sufficiently equipped for investigating wildlife poisoning 4. The police is sufficiently educated for investigating incidents with wild animals 5. Police investigations about wildlife poisoning should include representatives of the civil society organizations 6. The police has better things to do and should not waste resources on investigating wildlife poisoning incidents 7. The police do not take seriously the need to launch investigations into wildlife poisoning 8. Specialized police units should be introduced to deal with the crime of wildlife poisoning 132 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P21.In police investigations of wildlife poisoning it is necessary to use: Please mark all the answers you believe to be correct (Format: multiple choice) 1. Forensic entomology 2. Toxicological analysis 3. Fingerprint analysis 4. Forensic ballistics 5. Forensic psychology 6. Canine units 7. Records of sale of legal poisoning substances (pesticides, insecticides, rodenticides…) 8. Confirming time of death of the animals P22.Some of the means of preventing wildlife poisoning are listed below. According to your opinion, how important would it be to undertake some of the listed measures? 1. Enirely irrelevant 2. Mostly unimportant 3. Neither important nor important 4. Mostly important 5. Extremely important 1. That the state/government financially compensates the damage to livestock breeders and farmers, caused by wild animals 2. Create more supplementary feeding sites for vultures 3. Better protect wild ungulate populations 4. Ensure livestock breeders and farmers are provided with free shepherd and guard dogs 5. Ensure free electric fences 6. Resolve issues of the ownership of pastures and rights to use them 7. Completely ban logging in …country.. for some time 8. Work of reducing the populations of allochthone animals 9. Work more on awareness raising of the general public 10. Work more on awareness raising among key stakeholders (livestock breeders, farmers, hunters, institutions) 11. Impose a stricter control of the trade of legal poisoning substances (pesticides, rodenticides et al.) 133 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P23.To what extent do you agree with the following statements? 1. I disagree completely 2. I mostly disagree 3. I neither agree nor disagree 4. I mostly agree 5. I completely agree 1. The natural balance is very delicate and easy to disturb 2. Earth is like a space ship, with very limited space and resources 3. Plants and animals have an equal right to exist just like humans 4. Humans are destined to rule over the rest of nature P24. Do you work in - List of the institutions to which the questionnaire is sent P25.Do you directly deal with the issue of wildlife poisoning in your line of work? 1. No 2. Yes, but only of domestic animals 3. Yes, both of wild and domestic animals /IF P26 = No/ P26. Have you in any way been involved in the issue of poisoning of animals in your line of work? 1. No 2. Yes, but only of domestic animals 3. Yes, both of wild and domestic animals P27. How would you evaluate your own knowledge about the issue of wildlife poisoning on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is “very bad” and 5 “excellent knowledge”. 1 2 3 4 5 (I do not know / I cannot estimate) P28.Have you ever attended any educational programme related to detection and processing of wildlife poisoning incidents? 1. No 2. Yes /Only for those who answered yes/ P29a. Who organized the educational programme? _________________ P29.How many years of service do you have in the institution where you now work? _________ 134 STUDY ABOUT THE ILLEGAL USE OF POISON IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA P30. How many years of service do you have in the department you are currently working in? _________ P31. Which of the following best describes your current job position? 1. Employee 2. Lower management level 3. Middle management level 4. Upper management level 5. Highest management level (director of the institution, member of the management board, general director) 6. External associate 7. Other. What?