The distribution of Gomphus vulgatissimus in The Netherlands and North Rhine-Westphalia in the period 1995-2004 (Photo: E. Schoppers). 

Context in source publication

Context 1

... preparation for the German-Dutch symposium, data were combined in order to prepare cross-border distribution maps, providing useful information on the status of species on both sides of the border. The maps show the distribution from 1995-2003. The most recent data for the Netherlands is presented in B OUWMAN ET AL ., 2008 . Recent data for North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) will appear in the coming distribution atlas as well as on the website of Arbeitskreis Libellen NRW. The current situation of six characteristic species will now be described in detail. Cordulegaster bidentata is a characteristic species of very small springs. It does not occur in the Netherlands and only has a few, rather scattered populations in NRW (figure 2). The recent records from near Aachen and Osnabrück are interesting from a Dutch perspective. Also in Belgium, in the vicinity of Liège/Luik a small population is present ( D E K NIJF ET AL ., 2006 ). Although the chance of finding C. bidentata in the Netherlands is very small, these records show that (small) populations are present just 20 kilometres from the border. Vagrants may enter the Netherlands, and possibly there are potential habitats for reproduction in the southern part of Limburg, especially in very small streams in a semi-forested environment. With tens of populations of Cordulegaster boltonii present, the situation in NRW is much better than that in the Netherlands, where no more than six populations are left (figure 3). Some recent (re)discoveries ( E . G . K ALKMAN & K OESE , 2006 AND T ERMAAT & G ROENENDIJK , 2005 ) do indicate that the species may be recovering very slowly. The records from Naturpark Hohe Mark (not far from Winterswijk in the Netherlands) do indicate that C. boltonii might also be present in the nearby Dutch regions of the Achterhoek and Twente. Although C. splendens (figure 4) has never completely disappeared, its expansion in the past two decades is one of the strongest recoveries among the European Odonata. It is now a common damselfly of the lower reaches of brooks in both the Netherlands and NRW (figure 4). However, the species distribution is interesting. It is almost absent from the western part of the Netherlands and eastern NRW. In the Netherlands, this is because there are hardly any flowing waters, while in NRW, most brooks are cold, shadowy, fast-flowing waters in their upper courses in mountain ranges (e.g. Eifel, Westerwald). These are more suitable for C. virgo than for C. spendens . It is not surprising that C. virgo shows an almost opposite distribution pattern, occurring almost exclusively along forested brooks in the southern part of the Netherlands (but not in western regions!), and in the mountain ranges of NRW (figure 5). Gomphus vulgatissimus is a characteristic species of the lower reaches of broader brooks and rivers. Genuine cross-border populations are present along (north to south) the Dinkel, Berkel, Rhine and the Roer/Rur. The Dutch and NRW distribution areas connect very well; the range of G. vulgatissimus is still expanding on both sides of the border (figure 6). Most people have special memories about the first time they encountered Gomphus flavipes. Because of its ecology, the species almost reaches mythical proportions among odonatologists. Is it its preference for very large rivers, is it the dramatic transition from larva to adult dragonfly, sometimes accented by a walk of tens of meters over sandy shores, or is it the dancing flight above rough vegetation along the river banks? Or maybe it has something to do with its dramatic increase in the last few years. Its distribution areas in the Netherlands and NRW connect well. The largest populations can be found in the Rhine system (with the rivers Nederrijn, IJssel and Waal in the Netherlands). There are smaller populations along the Maas and Roer in the Netherlands, and along the Weser and Rur in NRW (figure 7). The scarcity of Ophiogomphus cecilia is rather in contrast to the commonness of other rheophilic dragonflies. This species has always been very scarce in NRW; recent records are from the Rhine, Sieg and Weser, but nowhere are large populations present. In the Netherlands, O. cecilia was locally common in the province of Limburg in the first half of the 20th century (NVL, 2002), but has since disappeared completely. However, populations were recently discovered along the Roer ( IN 2000: V AN S CHAIK & G ERAEDS , 2001) and Swalm ( IN 2006: V. VAN S CHAIK , PERS . COMM . ). The Dutch records indicated that it was highly probable that O. cecilia occurred along the German parts of these large brooks. This triggered a search by German odonatologists and indeed the species was found upstream along the German part of the Rur (figure 8). Although the lotic Odonata are among the most successful species in terms of recovery, there is still work to do. The following constraints hamper these dragonflies from being fully protected: The ongoing worsening situation concerning springs. Due to the large-scale lowering of groundwater tables these groundwater- fed systems continue to be under threat of desiccation. A further problem is the high nitrogen content of groundwater in many sandy soils. In combination with the increased mineralisation of spring water, this aids significantly to the eutrophication of these habitats. Water quality of flowing waters. In the past decades, their quality has without doubt improved significantly, but it is still nowhere near the ecological reference value of 100 years ago. A related constraint is the unnatural hydrology of brooks and rivers. Peak discharges are extremely high because of rapid drainage in catchment areas, and consequently some brooks suffer from desiccation in a dry summer period. The hydromorphology of flowing waters in the Netherland and NRW is anthropogenic, despite many improvements in the past years. Many rivers and brooks are canalised and dammed to improve drainage and facilitate shipping. There are many ways of further improving the ecological quality of flowing waters, as well as legal obligations to do so. However, working within the scope of cross-border co-operation, societies for dragonfly conservation may be helped in achieving their common objectives by two major European treaties, namely the Habitats Directive and the Water Framework Directive. Both directives are solid European legislation. Especially with regard to lotic ecosystems, with their rheophilic flora and fauna, the success of this legislation largely depends on international co-operation. The distribution of species on both sides of the border, for example Gomphus flavipes and G. vulgatissimus , is a good illustration (figures 7 and 9). B AL & G ROENENDIJK (2006) give a review on the significance of the Habitats Directive for the protection of Dutch dragonflies. Five rheophilic species from table 1 are listed in the Habitats Directive, of which three are part of Annex 2. B AL & G ROENENDIJK show that only a few special protection zones have been assigned, mainly for Coenagrion mercuriale in NRW. No special protection zones have been assigned for Coenagrion ornatum and Ophiogomphus cecilia in NRW despite a number of populations there. In the Netherlands two special protection zones were assigned for O. cecilia . Special protection zones are also assigned for the conservation of habitat types (Annex 1). However, only two habitat types are relevant for rheophilic dragonflies: H3260, water courses of plain to montane level with Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation and H7220, petrifying springs with tufa formation ( Cratoneurion ). The first habitat type refers to brooks and rivers, and most situations in the Netherlands and NRW do not meet the European criteria for assignment to this type. The latter is a very specific and scarce habitat, but is the primary habitat for Cordulegaster bidentata . It is therefore obvious that the protection of rheophilic Odonata through the assignment of special protection zones is inadequate. It only works well for Coenagrion mercuriale and Cordulegaster bidentata , and partly for Ophiogomphus cecilia . The Water Framework Directive may be more promising, and it has recently started to be implemented. This directive forces countries to achieve rather ambitious goals for the improvement of the surface water quality in terms of chemical and hydromorphological parameters. With regard to the protection of rheophilic dragonflies, priority should be given to implementing this directive to meet the ecological needs of threatened dragonflies (figure 9). By co- operating, Dutch and German conservationists can exchange experiences, incorporating them into their own activities. Most brooks and rivers do cross borders, and measures for the improvement of their ecological quality should be taken in at least two countries. Dutch and German odonatologists should make use of that, and the exchange of distribution data is a first step. This article has shown the relevance of good data for understanding distribution patterns. Now the data should be used for the conservation of the dragonflies ...