The definition of the most relevant parameters that describe the wild boar (WB) population dynamics is essential to guide African swine fever (ASF) control policies. These parameters should be framed considering different contexts, such as geographic, ecological and management contexts, and gaps of data useful for the parameter definition should be identified. This information would allow better harmonized monitoring of WB populations and higher impact of ASF management actions, as well as better parametrizing population dynamics and epidemiological models, which is key to develop more efficient cost‐benefit strategies. This report presents a comprehensive compilation and description of parameters of WB population dynamics, including general drivers, population demography, mortality, reproduction, and spatial behaviour. Beyond the collection of current available data, we provided an open data model to allow academics and wildlife professionals to continuously update new and otherwise hardly accessible data, e.g. those from grey literature which is often not publicly available or only in local languages. This data model, conceived as an open resource and collaborative approach, will be incorporated in the European Observatory of Wildlife (EOW) platform, and include all drivers and population parameters that should be specified in studies on wild boar, and wildlife in general, ecology and epidemiology at the most suitable spatio‐temporal resolution. This harmonized approach should be extended to other taxa in the future as an essential tool to improve European capacities to monitor, to produce risk assessment and to manage wildlife under an international perspective.

This report presents the results of field activities in relation to the generation of reliable wild boar density values by camera trapping (CT) in 19 areas in Europe, mainly in East Europe. Random Encounter Model (REM) densities ranged from 0.35±0.24 to 15.25±2.41 (SE) individuals/km2. No statistical differences in density among bioregions were found. The number of contacts was the component of the trapping rate that determined the coefficient of variation (CV) the most. The daily range (DR) significantly varied as a function of management; the higher values were detected in hunting grounds compared to protected areas, indicating that movement parameters are population specific, and confirming the potential role of hunting activities in increasing wild boar movement and contact rates among individual or groups. The results presented in this report illustrate that a harmonized approach to actual wildlife density estimation (namely for terrestrial mammals) is possible at a European scale, sharing the same protocols, collaboratively designing the study, processing, and analysing the data. This report adds reliable wild boar density values that have the potential to be used for wild boar abundance spatial modelling, both directly or to calibrate outputs of model based on abundance (such as hunting bags) or occurrence data. Future REM developments should focus on improving the precision of estimates (probably through increased survey effort). Next steps require an exhaustive and representative design of a monitoring network to estimate reliable trends of wild boar populations as a function of different factors in Europe. In this regard, the newly created European Observatory of Wildlife will be a network of observation points provided by collaborators from all European countries capable to monitor wildlife population at European level.

The present document has been produced and adopted by the bodies identified above as authors. This task has been carried out exclusively by the authors in the context of a contract between the European Food Safety Authority and the authors, awarded following a tender procedure. The present document is published complying with the transparency principle to which the Authority is subject. It may not be considered as an output adopted by the Authority. The European Food Safety Authority reserves its rights, view and position as regards the issues addressed and the conclusions reached in the present document, without prejudice to the rights of the authors.

The 2nd ENETWILD Annual General Meeting took place on 5‐6th October 2021, bringing together experts, stakeholders and ENETWILD collaborators in online workshop discussions. First, workshop discussions contributed to the analysis and proposal of approaches for a harmonized European‐wide wildlife monitoring framework able of sustaining coordinated decision‐making. Secondly, participants identified the key challenges that managers face in making decisions for wildlife in Europe and data needs for policies. Finally, we illustrated these challenges with the case of wild boar as a model species widely distributed across Europe. Inputs from the participants were collated into a plan of proposed steps and objectives for the mid‐term (5‐year time frame) to achieve progress on harmonised, coordinated, and integrated wildlife monitoring at the European level, which requires the contribution of experts from the early stages.. Specific proposed actions include the creation of a trans‐disciplinary authority at the European level, effective points of reference for data collection and sharing at different administrative levels and countries, a standing committee to coordinate and exchange experience and capacities on data collection between countries, and expert groups for problem solving, with proper EU financial support, establishing regular policy meetings. . To provide useful results, wildlife monitoring must ensure proper design and data analysis for subsequent science‐based management and best allocation of management resources. The 'Observatory' approach (a representative network of intensively monitored sites) can provide long‐term systematic and representative insights, normally more feasible for comparative studies, providing less biases and support for decision‐making. For international decision‐making by wildlife managers and politicians based on scientific knowledge and interdisciplinary research, experts should define the foundations of a common European wildlife decision‐making framework (inter‐institutional and inter‐sectorial). The development of a European legislation on wildlife management may represent an opportunity for addressing the abovementioned steps, identifying data priorities matching the needs of the various European Directorates, Agencies, and monitoring frameworks.

It is essential to provide tools to wildlife professionals and researchers in order to facilitate data collection on wildlife density estimation following standardized protocols in the field. This is relevant for efficient harmonized data management systems, from the field to final reporting. Our main objective was to facilitate the collection of information in the field using established density estimation protocols. The specific objectives were (i) to evaluate and use already existing data registration IT tools for collecting and storing the data in the field; (ii) to make these data available in real time (cloud‐based solution), and (iii) being flexible enough to incorporate new protocols and species, as methods (such as camera trap‐based) and needs continuously evolves. We improved an already existing tool, Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART; https://smartconservationtools.org/). It is an open source software, which allows easily collect, visualize, store, analyze, report and act on a wide range of field data relevant for wildlife monitoring. The integration of SMART tools on EOW was successfully done for (i) distance sampling, (ii) hunting data and (iii) camera trap protocols. ENETWILD, therefore, made now available new IT functionalities to wildlife professionals and researchers to facilitate and harmonize wildlife data collection systems.