circumpolar protected areas monitoring - arctic portal

CAFF Monitoring Series Report Nr. 5March 2011

Circumpolar Protected Areas MonitoringArctic Protected Areas Monitoring Scheme Background Paper

CAFF Designated Agencies:

• DirectorateforNatureManagement,Trondheim,Norway

• EnvironmentCanada,Ottawa,Canada

• FaroeseMuseumofNaturalHistory,Tórshavn,FaroeIslands(KingdomofDenmark)

• FinnishMinistryoftheEnvironment,Helsinki,Finland

• IcelandicInstituteofNaturalHistory,Reykjavik,Iceland

• TheMinistryofDomesticAffairs,NatureandEnvironment,GovernmentofGreenland

• RussianFederationMinistryofNaturalResources,Moscow,Russia

• SwedishEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,Stockholm,Sweden

• UnitedStatesDepartmentoftheInterior,FishandWildlifeService,Anchorage,Alaska

CAFF Permanent Participant Organisations:

• AleutInternationalAssociation(AIA)

• ArcticAthabaskanCouncil(AAC)

• Gwich’inCouncilInternational(GCI)

• InuitCircumpolarCouncil-(ICC)

• RussianIndigenousPeoplesoftheNorth(RAIPON)

• SaamiCouncil

Thispublicationshouldbecitedas:Livingston,D.(et al).2011.CircumpolarProtectedAreasMonitor-ing.ArcticProtectedAreasMonitoringSchemeBackgroundPaper.CAFFInternationalSecretariat,CAFFMonitoringSeriesReportNr.5.ISBN:978-9935-431-10-3

Backcoverphoto:NOAA

GraphicsbyHugoAhlenius

Formoreinformationpleasecontact:CAFF International SecretariatBorgir, Nordurslod600 Akureyri, IcelandPhone: +354 462-3350Fax: +354 462-3390Email: [email protected]: http://www.caff.is

Editing:MichaelSvobodaLayout:CourtneyPrice

Acknowledgements

___CAFFDesignatedArea

3

Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 5

1.0 Background .................................................................................................................................... 61.1TheCircumpolarBiodiversityMonitoringProgram(CBMP)........................................................................ 6Figure1:Arcticconservationareatopographicmap.............................................................................................. 61.2ExpertMonitoringGroups(EMGs)........................................................................................................................ 71.3ArcticProtectedAreasMonitoringScheme...................................................................................................... 7

2.0 Context ............................................................................................................................................ 82.1Protectedareas:whatandwhy?............................................................................................................................ 82.2Circumpolarprotectedareas:wherearethey?............................................................................................... 82.3Monitoringandmonitoringprogramsinprotectedareas............................................................................ 82.3.1MonitoringinEuropeandNorthAmerica:differentapproaches.......................................................... 82.3.2Observationsaboutmonitoring......................................................................................................................... 9

3.0 Current and projected issues facing Arctic protected areas ..................................................... 11Table1:KeyissuesaffectingprotectedareasinFinland....................................................................................113.1Climatechange..........................................................................................................................................................12Table2:ClimatechangeconcernsinfourEcoregionsofAlaska.....................................................................123.2Increasinghumanuse.............................................................................................................................................133.3Developmentwithinandsurroundingprotectedareas.............................................................................133.4Globalandlocalcontaminants............................................................................................................................133.6Lossoftraditionalknowledge..............................................................................................................................133.7Capacity,administrationandcoordination.....................................................................................................14

4.0 Current monitoring programs .................................................................................................... 144.1U.S.(Alaska)...................................................................................................................................................................14Figure2ProtectedAreasofAlaska...............................................................................................................................15Table4:PotentialAlaskanmonitoringindicators.................................................................................................174.2Canada...........................................................................................................................................................................18Table5:CanadianWesternArcticNationalParkMonitoringReport,2008.................................................18Figure3ProtectedAreasofCanada............................................................................................................................194.3Greenland.....................................................................................................................................................................20Table6:MonitoringprogramsinGreenland..........................................................................................................20Figure4ProtectedAreasofGreenland.......................................................................................................................224.4Iceland...........................................................................................................................................................................23Table7:Icelandprotectedareaswithmonitoringprograms...........................................................................244.5Norway..........................................................................................................................................................................27Figure5ProtectedAreasofIceland.............................................................................................................................27Figure6ProtectedAreasofNorway............................................................................................................................28Table8:MonitoringprogramsinNorway.................................................................................................................294.6Sweden............................................................................................................................................................................38Figure7ProtectedAreasofSweden............................................................................................................................39Table9:MonitoringprogramsinSweden................................................................................................................404.7Finland.............................................................................................................................................................................41Figure8ProtectedAreasofFinland.............................................................................................................................41Table10:MonitoringprogramsinFinland..............................................................................................................424.8Russia...............................................................................................................................................................................43

5.0 Themes, key ecosystem components, and indicators ................................................................ 445.1EuropeanUnion(EU)................................................................................................................................................44

4

Figure9ProtectedAreasofRussia...............................................................................................................................44Table11:EUbiologicaldiversitythemesandindicators.....................................................................................455.2NorthAmerica............................................................................................................................................................45Table12:ProposedAlaskanmonitoringregime....................................................................................................465.3Selectionconsiderations...........................................................................................................................................47

6.0 Proposed approach for an APAMS .............................................................................................. 476.1Terminology.................................................................................................................................................................486.2APAMSprogram-monitoringschemecomponents...................................................................................49Table13:CBMPecosystem,monitoringtheme,keyvaluesandkeylinkedstressors............................50Table14:DraftAPAMS.....................................................................................................................................................511.CBMPecosystem:TerrestrialFloraandFauna......................................................................................................511(a)Flora...............................................................................................................................................................................511(b)Fauna.............................................................................................................................................................................512.CBMPecosystem:Freshwater...................................................................................................................................523.CBMPecosystem:Marine..........................................................................................................................................524.CBMPecosystem:Coastal.........................................................................................................................................525.Additionaltheme:localknowledge.......................................................................................................................52Table15:CurrentArcticprotectedareamonitoringprograms........................................................................53

7.0 Additional considerations and next steps .................................................................................. 54

8.0 Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 55

5

Executive Summary

TheCircumpolarBiodiversityMonitoringProgram(CBMP)isaninternationalforumofleadingscientistsandconservationexpertsfromtheeightArcticcountries,theIndigenousorganizationsoftheArcticCouncil,andkeyglobalconservationorganizations.AsthecornerstoneprogramoftheArcticCouncil’sConservationofArcticFloraandFauna(CAFF)WorkingGroup,theCBMP(www.cbmp.is)aimstoimprovedetectionandreportingtrendsinArcticbiodiversitybyharmonizingandintegratingbiodiversitymonitoringeffortsacrosstheArctic.TheCBMPhasbeenendorsedbytheArcticCouncilandisthebiodiversitycomponentoftheSustainingArcticObservingNetworks(SAON).

TheCBMPfocusesonfivekeyprogramareas:coordinationandintegrationofArcticmonitoring;datamanagement;capacitybuilding;communications,education,andoutreach;and,reporting.Withrespecttothefirstofthesefocusareas,coordinationandintegrationofArcticmonitoring;theCBMPisfacilitatinganintegrated,ecosystem-basedmanagementapproachtomonitoringthroughthedevelopmentofExpertMonitoringGroupsrepresentingfourmajorArcticbiomes(marine,coastal,freshwaterandterrestrial).TheCBMPisalsoexploring,withrepresentativesfromvariousagenciesresponsiblefornationalandregionalarcticprotectedareamanagement,theidentificationofasuiteofbiodiversitymeasuresthatwouldbecommonlymonitoredacrosstheArcticandimplementedinastandardizedwaybyeachagency.ThisinitiativeisintendedtoenablecoordinatedreportingofbiodiversityinArcticprotectedareasandtoprovideacircumpolarunderstandingofchangeoccurringwithinprotectedareasaroundthearcticregion.

Thisreport:• SummarizesthebackgroundandcontextforaArcticProtectedAreasMonitoringScheme(APAMS)• DescribescurrentbiodiversitymonitoringprogramsofArcticCouncilmemberstates;• Reviewstheroleofprotectedareasinexistingbiodiversitymonitoringprograms;• IdentifiesdifferencesbetweentheEuropeanandNorthAmericanapproaches;• OutlineschallengesandopportunitiesforanArcticProtectedAreasMonitoringScheme• Summarizescurrentandprojectedissuesfacingprotectedareas;• Proposesanapproachforintegratingcircumpolarprotectedareasmonitoring;• OutlinesfactorsthatshouldbeconsideredforthedevelopmentofanArcticProtectedAreas

Monitoringscheme.

Finally,thereportoutlinesfactorsthatshouldbeconsideredforthedevelopmentofanArcticProtectedAreasMonitoringScheme.

6

1.0 Background

TheArcticisexperiencingpressurefromnumeroussources.Localpollution,long-rangecontaminanttransport,habitatfragmentation,meltingofsea-iceandpermafrostduetoclimatechange,over-harvesting,invasivespeciesandtheeffectsofregionalandeconomicdevelopmentandsubsequenttransportareamongthemanyfactorsaffectingArcticbiodiversity.

WhiletheeffectsofchangestoArcticbiodiversityareofcommonconcern,statusandtrenddataareinconsistentandavailableonasporadicbasisornotatall.Nationalandregionalinformationisoftenlacking,notwellsharedandgatheredusingdifferentmethodologiesandprotocols.AlthoughtherearenumerousbiodiversitymonitoringprogramsinplaceinthecircumpolarArcticthereislittlecoordinationofeffortsamongthem.Asaconsequence,ourunderstandingofthelargerpictureofecosystemintegrityintheArcticandthestatusandtrendsofArcticspeciesandtheirhabitatsisincomplete.

1.1 The Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP)

TheCBMPisbeingdevelopedbytheConservationofArcticFloraandFaunaWorkingGroupoftheArcticCouncil(CAFF)inresponsetodirectivesbytheArcticCouncilministers,numerousinternationalagreementsandconventionspromotingthevitalimportanceofbiodiversityconservationandpreservationofecosystems.Theneedforclear,comprehensive,consistentandintegratedArcticenvironmentalmonitoringandreportinghasalsobeenrecommendedbytheauthorsoftheArcticClimateImpactAssessmentreportandotherstudies.

Figure 1: Arctic conservation area topographic map

CAFF´smandateistoaddresstheconservationofArcticbiodiversity,andtocommunicatethefindingstothegovernmentsandresidentsoftheArctic,helpingtopromotepracticeswhichensurethesustainabilityoftheArctic´sresources.Withinthiscontext,theCBMPisintendedto:allowforbettercoordinationfortheimplementationandanalysesofmonitoringactivitiesintheArcticregion;facilitatemoreeffectivetransferofinformationtovariousstakeholders;enablewideraccesstomonitoringresultsandassociatedresearch;andfacilitatejointactivitiessuchascombininglogisticalandfinancialresources,commonanalysesandassessmentsofdataovertheentirecircumpolarregion.

TheCBMPhasinitiatedtwolinkedapproaches:theExpert Monitoring Groups (EMGs) andtheArctic Protected Areas Monitoring Scheme (APAMS).OnceAPAMS

hasidentifiedthemonitoringactivitiesthatcouldapplyacrosscircumpolarArcticprotectedareas,thedesignandimplementationoftheseactivitiesshouldbeconsistentwith,indeedidenticalto,therelevantmonitoringprotocolsdevelopedbytheEMGs.Bothprogramsaredescribedbelow.

Source: CAFF

7

1.2 Expert Monitoring Groups (EMGs)

TheenormousgeographicalandbiophysicalscopeofArcticbiodiversitynecessitatesatargetedandstreamlinedapproachtomonitoring.Inordertoachieveacomprehensive,cost-effectivepan-Arcticmonitoringapproachwiththeabilitytodetectlarge-scaletrends,theCBMPhasidentifiedthecreationoffourEMGsaskeydeliverables(freshwater,terrestrial,marine,andcoastalEMGs)..

EachEMGiscomprisedofscientistsandcommunityexpertsfromnetwork-basedresearchandmonitoringprogramscurrentlyactiveintheArctic.Theprimarytasksofeachgrouparetodesignandimplementon-the-groundmonitoringintherespectiveareaofexpertiseandtodevelopstrategiestoovercomecriticalmonitoringgaps.Incarryingoutthesetasks,theEMGsutilizeexistingmonitoringdata,consultwithexpertsfrombothwithinandoutsidetheArctic,drawfromotherdisciplines,incorporatebothcommunityandscience-basedapproaches,developstandardizedprotocols,optimalsamplingschemesandanalyticaltools,andutilizeexistingandemergingtechnologiesasneeded.

AmajorfocusoftheEMGsisorganisms(andindicators)ofcriticalimportancetotheintegrityofArcticecosystems.Specialattentionisbeinggiventocommunity-basedobservationsandcitizenscience,recognizingthevaluableandsignificantcontributionsthatpeoplelivingintheregioncanmakeinmonitoringArcticbiodiversity.

ThefirststepEMGsoftencompleteisaninventoryofexistingbiodiversitymonitoringprogramsandbiodiversitytrendinformation,focusingonbothhistoricaldataandknowledge.TheresultsoftheinventoryprovidetheinformationnecessarytoassesswhatthecurrentArcticmonitoringcapacityisandenabletheestablishmentofhistoricalbaselinesandtrendsforArcticbiodiversity.ThesecondstepEMGscompleteentailsatechnicalgapanalysis.UsingtheinventoryresultsandlinkingtotheworkoftheEMGs,thegapanalysiswillpinpointthecurrentelementalandgeographiccoverageofbiodiversityandmonitoringandidentifystatisticaldesigndeficienciesandinefficiencies.Together,theinventoryandgapanalysiswillprovidethefoundationforthecompletionofacomprehensiveArcticBiodiversityMonitoringScheme.

1.3 Arctic Protected Areas Monitoring Scheme

TheCBMPisalsochargedwiththedevelopmentofasetofmonitoringprogramsthatcanbeappliedconsistentlyandeffectivelyacrossArcticprotectedareas.BecauseprotectedareasrepresentrelativelyundisturbedlandscapescharacteristicofmanyimportantArcticecosystemstheycanserveasimportantbenchmarksorcontrolsitesformonitoringprograms,ascomparedtomoredisturbedlandscapesoutsidetheprotectedareaboundaries.

TheArcticProtectedAreasMonitoringScheme(APAMS)isbeingledbyArcticcountryrepresentativesfamiliarwiththeArcticprotectedareasandwiththemonitoringprogramswithintheirrespectivejurisdictions.TheobjectiveistodevelopasuiteofindicatorswhichwillbemonitoredacrosstheArcticprotectedareasnetwork.Thiswillinvolveaninventoryofexistingprograms,theidentificationofcommonthemesandprograms,theidentificationofgapsandthedesignofacommonapproachtomonitoringbiodiversityincircumpolarprotectedareas

APAMSneedstotakeintoaccountanumberoffactorsincludingcurrentandprojectedissuesfacingArcticprotectedareas,currentmonitoringcapacityinthoseareasandopportunitiesforasetofcommonparameterstobeimplementedacrosstheprotectedareanetworkwithinexistingmonitoringcapacityandmandates.

8

2.0 Context

2.1 Protected areas: what and why?

Protectedareasrepresentrelativelyundisturbedlandscapes.Theyarecreatedandmaintained,primarily,• tosupporttheconservationofbiodiversity,includingtheprotectionofrareandendangeredspecies;• fortheprotectionofimportantculturalheritage;and• fortheprotectionofspecialphysicalfeatures

Manyprotectedareascombineallthreeattributesandareimportantforrecreation,educationandeconomicdevelopment.

Protectedareasareimportantforresearchandmonitoringbecausetheycanserveasimportantbiophysical“benchmarks”or“controlsites”wherehuman-causedstressesareminimal,oratleastwelldefined.Thesesitesoffertheopportunitytomeasure“ecologicalintegrity”(definedbyParksCanadaas:“aconditionthatisdeterminedtobecharacteristicofitsnaturalregionandlikelytopersist,includingabioticcomponentsandthecompositionandabundanceofnativespeciesandbiologicalcommunities,ratesofchange,andsupportingprocesses”),andtomonitorchangesinkeyattributes,indicatorsandvalues.

“ProtectedareasarerecognizedbyalltheArcticcountriesaseffectiveandnecessarymeansofconservingArcticbiodiversityandsupportingthesustainableuseofbiologicalresources”.(CAFFCircumpolarProtectedAreaNetwork(CPAN)expertgroup).Whilethisexpertgroupiscurrentlydormant,itsworktodateisavaluablesourceofinformationtoinformandguidetheCBMP.

TheInternationalUnionforConservationofNature(IUCN)definesaprotectedareaas“anareaoflandand/orseaespeciallydedicatedtotheprotectionandmaintenanceofbiologicaldiversity,andofnaturalandassociatedculturalresources,andmanagedthroughlegalorothereffectivemeans.”Onepremiseisthatprotectedareasbesecureinperpetuity.Anotheristhattobesuccessful,protectedareasmustbedesignedandnetworkedinthebroaderregionallandscape,allowingforbuffersandmigrationcorridorsandcarefulmanagementoutside(andinside)theprotectedareasthemselves.ThisisoneoftheprinciplesoftheEuropeanUnion’sNatura2000program,whichreliesonamixofprotectedareasonstate-ownedandprivatelands,whicharesetinacontextofbroaderenvironmentalstewardship.

2.2 Circumpolar protected areas: where are they?

CAFFhasupdatedthecircumpolarprotectedareanetworkindexinthereportArctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 – Selected indicators of change.ThefirstprotectedareasdatasetfortheArcticwascreatedbyCAFFin1994andmostrecentlyupdatedin2010.ThisupdateddatasethasbeensubmittedasanArcticcomponenttoUnitedNationsEnvironmentProgramme(UNEP)WorldProtectedAreasDatabase.Icelandisleadingaprojectfocusingonthoseprotectedareaswhichhaveamarine/coastalcomponent.Thisprojectwillfurtherdeveloptheinformationontheseareasandcompileadatasetdetailingthenatureandextentoftheprotectionafforded.

2.3 Monitoring and monitoring programs in protected areas

2.3.1 Monitoring in Europe and North America: different approaches

Itisimportanttounderstandthecircumpolarandregionalcontextofprotectedareas,andunderstandthehistoricaldifferencesintheEuropeanandNorthAmericanapproachestotheestablishmentandmonitoringofprotectedareas.

9

OneofthemainaimsoftheEuropeanUnionistostemthelossofbiodiversity.TheNatura2000networkisoneofthemaintoolstoachievethisgoal.Natura2000iscomposedofSpecialProtectedAreasdesignatedundertheEUBirdsDirectiveandSpecialAreasofConservationdesignatedundertheEUHabitatsDirective.ProtectedareasintheNatura2000networkareestablishedonamixofprivatelyownedlandsandstate-ownedlandsinEurope,althoughinsomeScandinaviancountriesmostprotectedareasareonstate-ownedland.IntherestofEurope,protectedareasarepartofabroadplanningframeworkthatincludesbothprivatelyownedlandandnationally-designatedformallyprotectedareasonpublicland.Asaconsequence,monitoringprogramsinEuropeoftendonotdistinguishbetweenprotectedareasandthebroaderlandscape.

TheapproachisdifferentinNorthAmerica,whereprotectedareasarelargelylocatedonfederalorstate-ownedlandandareformallydesignated.AlsoincontrasttomuchofEurope,manyNorthAmericanprotectedareasareverylarge,particularlyintheArctic.Thustheymay,foratime,maintainecologicalintegritybecauseoftheirsizeandbecauseoftherelativelyunderdevelopednatureoftheirsurroundings.Ineffect,manyprotectedareasintheNorthAmericanArcticarerepresentativeofthebroaderlandscape,asopposedto“islands”ofprotectioninotherwisedisturbedlandscapesastheyareinmuchofEurope.

MonitoringprogramsintheNorthAmericanArcticareatdifferentstagesofdevelopment,dependingonthemanagingagencyandthenationaljurisdiction.TheU.S.NationalParkServicehasastrongprogramfocusedonmonitoringchangeacrossavarietyofbioticandabioticmetrics.TheU.S.FishandWildlifeServiceisintheprocessofdevelopinganinventoryandmonitoringprogramthatwilladdressbothlocalandecoregionalinformationneeds.NewlydevelopedconservationsciencepartnershipsintheformofLandscapeConservationCooperativeswillprovidecoordinationamongagencies,universitiesandprivatestakeholderstoensureafocusonbroaderissuesandtheroleprotectedareasplayintheconservationlandscape.

IntheCanadianArctic,ParksCanada(responsiblefornationalparks)andtheCanadianWildlifeService(responsibleforNationalWildlifeAreas,MigratoryBirdSanctuariesandMarineWildlifeAreas)focusmonitoringeffortsonthedesignatedprotectedareaswhileconsideringbroaderregionalissues.RegionalmonitoringeffortsintheCanadianArcticarerelativelylimitedandarenotwellcoordinatedamongresponsibleagencies(federalandterritorial).GiventhatmanyprotectedareasintheCanadianArcticareverylargeandthesurroundingregionisrelativelyundisturbed,monitoringinprotectedareasintheCanadianArcticis,fornowatleast,alsogenerallyindicativeofconditionsoutsidethoseprotectedareas.

2.3.2 Observations about monitoring

Aprinciplereasonforcreatingprotectedareasistoconservethespecialbiodiversityvalueswithinthem.Maintainingtherelativelyundisturbedlandscapesandecosystemswillhelpensurethattheimportantvaluesareconserved;atthesametime,theselandscapesandecosystemsofferimportantbiodiversitymonitoringopportunities.InthecontextofaAPAMSprogram,protectedareasoffertheopportunitytoserveasbiodiversitymonitoringlocationswherenaturalecosystemprocessescontinuerelativelyundisturbed,incontrasttoareaswhereindustrialandotherdevelopmentsarethenorm.Arcticprotectedareasaresubjecttorelativelyfewdisturbancesandthereforeprovideimportantbenchmarksorbaselinesforbiodiversitymonitoring.

Monitoringprogramsareessentialindeterminingwhetherinternalorexternalpressurestotheprotectedareaareaffectingthebiodiversityvalues.Theyarealsoessentialinassessingthesignificanceofchanges,andfacilitatingmitigatingactionifsuchactionsaredeterminedtobenecessary.Inotherwords,monitoringresultshelptodeterminewhatischangingandwhatmanagementactions,ifany,shouldbetaken.Monitoringcanalsodeterminetheeffectivenessofthosemanagementactions.

10

Monitoringprogramsshouldhavespecificpurposestiedtospecificobjectivesinordertobeeffective.Otherwise,resourcesmaybewastedincollectingunnecessarydata.Norshouldmonitoringprogramsbeconfusedwithresearchprograms.Asnotedearlier,monitoringprogramsshouldbedesignedtoevaluatechangesintargetedindicators(“whatishappening?”);researchprogramsaredesignedtodeterminehowandwhysomethingishappening.Thetwoareclearlylinkedanditerative.

Long-termmonitoringisessentialindeterminingbaselineconditionsandtrends,andresearchiscriticaltounderstandingwhythingsarethewaytheyareandwhychangesareoccurring.Monitoringtoolsrangefromlong-termsamplingatconsistentsitestosatelliteimagery(includingtheuseofhistoricalimagery)toextrapolationandinterpolationfromtheexistingdatabase.Researchapproachesvaryaswell,accordingtotheneed,interest,andresourcesavailable.Intheend,effective,integratedandlong-termresearchandmonitoringprogramswilltelluswhatischanging,whyitischanging,whywemightbeconcerned,andwhatwemightdoaboutit,ifanything.

Toensurethatmonitoringprogramsareeffective,itiscriticalthatwebeclearaboutthequestionswearetryingtoanswer(e.g.,whatarethechangeswearelookingforandwhy),theappropriateindicatorsandhowthemonitoringprogramswillbecarriedout.BothphysicalandtemporalscalesareimportantinthecaseoftheAPAMS:thephysicalscaleiscircumpolarwhilethetemporalscaleishistorical,currentandongoing.

Eachprotectedareaisunique.Eacharearepresentsauniquecollectionofecosystemsandhabitats,floraandfauna,humanuses,andvulnerabilitytochangingconditionsandcircumstances.Thisistruewhetheranareaisoneofseveralinaparticularecoregion/ecozoneorstandsalone.Thisobviouslypresentschallengesinthedevelopmentofacommonmonitoringschemeforallcircumpolarprotectedareas.Furtheraddingtothechallenge,mostEuropeanmonitoringprogramsareregionalinnatureandnotfocusedspecificallyonprotectedareas.InNorthAmerica,protectedarea-specificmonitoringprogramsarethenorm,althoughcoverageisfarfromcompleteorcomprehensive.

Thischallengeiscompoundedbythetendencyforthe“stove-piping”ofmonitoringprograms,i.e.,thetendencyofdifferentorganizationstodeveloptheirownapproachestomonitoring,thuscreatingcompatibilityobstacles.Therearemanyexamplesofthis.ItisimportantthatastheworkbeingundertakenbytheExpertMonitoringGroupsisadvanced,itbeappropriatelylinkedtotheworkoftheAPAMSnetworkaswellastotheactivitiesofandotherrelevantprograms.Clearly,athoroughreviewofrelatedinitiativeswillbeessentialbeforeanyfinaldecisionsaretakenwithrespecttoAPAMSimplementartion.

Furtheraddingtothechallengeistheabsenceofintegratedmonitoringprogramsinmanyprotectedareas,whereprogramsexistatall.Finally,notallmonitoringprogramscanberelevanttoallprotectedareas.

Allthatsaid,theopportunitytocreateastandardizedsetofmonitoringactivitiesforprotectedareaswithintheArcticthatwillyieldcomparableresultsisanexcitingone.Thereisenormouspotentialforimprovingourindividualandcollectiveabilitiestoidentifyandtracktrendsinkeybiodiversityindicatorsinachangingclimateandonacircumpolarscale,usingprotectedareasasbenchmarksorcontrolsites.Inthiscontext,monitoringprogramswillservetwopurposes:individually,eachmonitoringprogramwilltrackchangesinkeycomponentsofecosystemswithineachprotectedarea;collectively,themonitoringprogramswillprovideanindicationofchangesinbiodiversityoccurringonacircumpolarscale.Thechallengeistoselectasetofmonitoringprogramsmostrelevanttoeachprotectedareaandindicativeofchangesincircumpolardiversity.Thisrequirestheidentificationofcommonthemesandasetofcommonindicatorsthatcanbemonitoredconsistentlyandrelativelyeasilyacrossthecircumpolarprotectedareanetwork.

Insomecases,thenecessarymonitoringprogramsarealreadybeingimplemented.Inothercases,there

11

maybeopportunitiestodevelopnewprograms.ThechallengefortheAPAMSnetworkistodevelopamonitoringprogramthateffectivelyandefficientlyleveragesexistingprograms,utilizescommonmethodologiesandenablesanunderstandingofcircumpolarbiodiversitychangeinresponsetoasuiteofstressors.

3.0 Current and projected issues facing Arctic protected areas

Therearemanypressuresfacingprotectedareasworldwide.Mostoftheserelatetoincreasedhumanactivitywithinandadjacenttoprotectedareas.IntheArctic,climatechangeisamajorfactor.ThefollowingsectionsoverviewmanyofthepressuresthatArcticprotectedareasareexperiencinggenerally.Asonespecificexample,Table1highlightspressuresidentifiedbyFinlandwithrespecttoitsprotectedareas.

Table 1: Key issues affecting protected areas in Finland Issuesreferheretothreatsandpressurestobiodiversityconservationobjectivesorchallengesinmanagement.Issuesvarywithprotectedareatypeandlocation.(Source:HeikkiEeronheimo,Metsahallitus).

Protected area type and management\protection objectives

Key Issues

Established protected areasArctic-alpine,forestandpeatlandhabi-tatsandtheirspecies:Mainlymaintain-ingortolesserextentimprovingthestatusofthehabitatsandspecies,(activemanagemente.g.,somethreatenedspe-cies,seminaturalgrasslands).

Tourism,recreationaluse(hiking):mainlyinNationalParks.

Huntingpermitted(alsoinsomeStrictNatureReserves)atleastforlocalpeople.Commonly,commercialhuntingpermitted,butregulatedandmanagedbythestateauthorityMetsähallitus,NaturalHeritageServices(NHS).

Recreational(commercial)fishingusuallypermitted.Restrictionsfortypesoffishing(fishingnets,etc.)inmostareas.

Existinggoldminingisapressureinsomeprotectedareas.Miningisalsoafuturethreat,exceptinStrictNatureReservesandNationalParks,wherenewminesarenotpermitted.

Reindeerherding:overgrazingbyreindeersisaprobleminmanyareas.Localerosionbyrecreationalvehicles.

Wilderness areasArctic-alpine,forestandpeatlandhabitatsandtheirspecies:Establishedforsafeguardingwildernesscharacter,Saamiculture,traditionalnature-basedlivelihoodculture(e.g.,reindeerherding,hunting,fishing)andpromotingmultipleuseofnature.

Forestrypermittedinsomeareasandinsmallscale,butisnotpracticedinrecentyearsnorwillbeinthenearfuture.

Managingthelevelofnature-basedlivelihood.

Reindeerherding:overgrazingbyreindeersisaprobleminmanyareas.Localbyrecreationalvehicles.

State areas reserved for protection Areabelongingmainlyinnationalcon-servationprogrammes.Arctic-alpine,forestandpeatlandhabi-tatsandtheirspecies.

Seeallprotectedareasabove.

Notyetestablished>regulationspartlymissing,andthusunclear(forindividualpersons,sometypesoflanduse,e.g.,mining).

Natura 2000 networkHabitatsandspecieswhicharelistedinEUhabitatsdirective(proposed=SitesofCommunityImportanceandestablished=SPeeecialAreaofConservation)orbirdsdirective(SpecialProtectedArea):MainlymaintainingortolesserextentimprovingthestatusofthehabitatsandspeciesintheEU-directives(activemanagemente.g.,somedecliningspecies,seminaturalgrasslands).

Challenge:Managementofareas,whicharemanagedbyothermeasuresthannatureconservationareas.ThisisofminorimportancesinceinFinnishArcticareamostoftheNatura-areasarestateownedbyPAsorareasreservedforprotectionandmanagedNHS.Otherkeyissuesaremuchthesameinprotectedareas.

12

3.1 Climate change

Inmany,ifnotall,Arcticprotectedareas,climatechangeishavingwidespreadandprofoundeffectsonhabitats,bioticcommunities,humanactivities,accessibility,diseaseandotheraspectsofbiodiversity.Theconsequenceswillincludechangesinthecharacteristicsofprotectedareas,thenatureofhumanuseinthoseareasandthetypesofmanagementactionsrequiredtomaintainprotectedareavaluesandmission.Climatechangemayresultinthedisappearanceordramaticmodificationofkeyfeaturesofaprotectedarea(e.g.,glaciersandpermafrostfeatures),threatstowildlifepopulationsandendemicspecies,theintroductionofnon-nativespeciesandnewdiseases,reductionofriverflowsandsoon,withconsequentecosystemeffects.Offshore,thelossofseaicewillhavesignificantandwide-rangingeffectsontheecologyofmostArcticmarinemammals.

Changesareoccurringrapidlyinmanyareas.Seaiceisdisappearingatanacceleratedrate.Otherexamplesincludeincreasedmeltingofglaciers,unprecedentedoutbreaksofinvasiveandharmfulinsects(e.g.,themountainpinebeetle)andexpansionnorth(andintohigherelevations)ofthenormalrangesof“southern”mammals,reptiles,vegetationandbirds.Table2summarizesclimatechangeconcernsinfourecoregionsinAlaska.Monitoringprogramswillneedtobeinnovative,robust,sufficientlydetailedandflexibleiftheyaretocapturethesechanges.

Table 2: Climate change concerns in four Ecoregions of Alaska

Polar Bering Coast Interior Alaska North Pacific Coast

Alteredmanagementofharvestedspecies

Changeinplantandanimalcommunitycompositionandstructure

Alteredfireregimes(in-creaseddryinglikelytocausemorefrequentandintensefires)

Alteredphenology(betterunderstoodinterrestrialecosystems)

Altereddistributionofinvasivespecies(relatingtodetectionandcontrol)

Dryingofwetlands Changesininvasivespeciesdiversityanddistribution

Waterquality,especiallymeltingofglaciers,surfacewaterflow,waterchemistry,andtiming&qualityoffreshwaterenteringmarinesys-tems(andconsequentlocaleffectsonsalinity).

Alteredwaterqualityandquantity

Changesinamountandtim-ingofprecipitation

Alteredsubsistenceman-agement(populationsizes,reproductionanddemog-raphy;harvestregulations;phenology)

Alteredanimalcommunitydynamics(terrestrialandmarine),duetospecies’dif-ferentialresponsestoclimatechange.

Effectsonbiologicaldiversity(includinglegalandstatutoryramifications)

Alterationstoterrestrialhydrology

Effectsonrareanddecliningspeciesandhabitats(identifylosses,determineconserva-tionactionsneeded)

Changesinoceandynamics(upwellings,acidification,alteredcurrents,impactsonmarinefoodwebs,nutrientflows,effectsonseabirds)

Changesinthetypes,levelsandspatialdistributionofanthropogenicactivities

Alterationstowaterqual-ityandquantity(includingmanagementofupstreamactivities)

Changeinplantcommunitycompositionandstructure

Effectsonspeciescoveredbytreaties(forwhichbroad-scalecoordinationisessen-tial)

Alterationstomigratoryandinvasivespecies.

Source:Woodward,A.,andE.Beever.2010.FrameworkforecologicalmonitoringonlandsofAlaskaNationalWildlifeRefugesandtheirpartners:Anchorage,Alaska.USDepartmentoftheInterior,USGeologicalSurvey,Open-FileReport2010-xxx.V+88pgsDRAFT14Dec09

13

3.2 Increasing human use

Ashumanpopulationscontinuetoincrease,protectedareaseverywherearecomingunderincreaseddirecthumanpressurefromsimplevisitation,recreation,harvestingandotheruses(includingresearchandmonitoring).Insomeareasbackcountryuseisincreasing.recreationalvehicletrafficinEuropeanprotectedareas,andcausingconcern.Day-useofprotectedareasislikelytoincreasewithpotentialconsequencesforeasilyaccessibleareas.Overall,humanactivitieswillhaveincreasinglysignificantimpactsonecosystems,archaeologicalresourcesandtraditionalculturaluses.Monitoringprogramsmustcapturetheseandotherchangesresultingfromchangesinhumanactivities.

3.3 Development within and surrounding protected areas

Protectedareaecosystemsarenecessarilydirectlylinkedtosurroundingareas.Boundariesaretransparenttowildlifeandplantsandtheeffectsofactivitiesoutsideprotectedareas(andwithinprotectedareas)willhaveconsequenteffectsontheotherside.Ashumanpressuresincreaseandclimatechangeeffectsbecomemoreacute,fragmentation,contamination,lossofhabitatandoveruseinareasadjacenttoprotectedareasarelikelytoincrease,creatingpressuresontheprotectedareasthemselves.WithinsomeEuropeanprotectedareas,reindeerovergrazingisalreadyaseriousthreattoecosystemintegrity.

Pressuresfromforestry,pipelinedevelopment,mining,roadsandcommunitygrowthareamongthoseexpectedtogrowsignificantlyaspopulationsincreaseanddemandsfornaturalresources,particularlyminerals,oilandgas,growapace.Thedirectandindirecteffectsofindustrialdevelopmentadjacenttoprotectedareasaresignificantbutthepressuretoopenprotectedareastodevelopmentisperhapsthegreaterconcern.

3.4 Global and local contaminants

Long-rangeatmosphericandoceanictransportmechanismsarebringingcontaminantstoprotectedareas.Contaminantsarealsobeingintroducedthroughdevelopmentoflocalnaturalresources(e.g.,mining,oilandgasdevelopment)andaccessbymotorizedvehicles.Contaminantscausenumerousandvariedchronicandacuteeffects,somesubtleandlong-term,someobviousandimmediate.Monitoringprogramsneedtobedesignedaccordingly.

3.5Non-nativeinvasivespeciesAsairandwatertemperaturesincrease,non-nativespeciesareincreasinglyappearingandpersistinginareaswheretheydidnotpreviouslyexist.Thesenon-nativespeciescompetewith(andsometimesdisplace)nativespeciesforpreyorhabitat,bringwiththemnewdiseasesandparasitesandaltertheecosysteminsignificantways.Increasedhumanaccesstoprotectedareasalsobringstheriskofintroducingnewspecies,withconsequentecosystemchanges.

3.6 Loss of traditional knowledge

Traditionalknowledge(TK)relatedtoprotectedareasisdiminishinggloballyasaconsequenceofmanyfactorsincludinginadequatedocumentation,thepassingonofTKholders,inappropriateintegrationofTKinanalysesanddecision-making,inadequateinstitutionalstructures,politicaldisregardordisrespectforthevalueofTK,andotherreasons(e.g.,lossoflinguisticdiversity).ImprovedmechanismsareneededtoensurethatTKisfullyincorporatedinprotectedareadecision-making(includingthedesignandimplementationofmonitoringprogramsandtheapplicationoftheresultsoftheseprograms).Theeffectivenessofthesemeasureswillrequiresoundmonitoringprogramsandadaptivemanagement.

14

3.7 Capacity, administration and coordination

Inadditiontotheneededadjustmentofmonitoringprogramssotheyaccommodaterapidlychangingconditions,theseprogramsalsoface“administrative”challenges.Forexample,effectivemonitoringprogramsrequiresustainedfundingandretentionofexpertstaff,whichisalwaysadifficultchallenge.MonitoringprogramsmustalsobecompatibleandthereforeshouldbedevelopedcollaborativelyamongArcticnationssothatmethodologiesareconsistent,theresultsarecomparableandconsistentlyandquicklyreportedandthetechnicalandlogisticalissuesareaddressedpragmatically.

ThedifferentapproachestomonitoringinEuropeandNorthAmericareferencedearlierpresentsignificantchallenges.InEurope,theEUdirectivesformthebasisofmuchmonitoringandthatmonitoringtendstoberegionalornationwideratherthanfocusedontheprotectedareas,versustheNorthAmericanapproachwhereprotectedarea-specificmonitoringisoftenthenorm.

Sustainedeffortbymembernationswillberequiredtoovercomethetendencyforeachtogoitsownwayandtoovercomethetendencyofagenciestoworkseparatelyratherthancollaborativelywhenitcomestobiophysicalresearchandmonitoringprograms(andotheractivities).

Investmentinhumancapacityisvital.Effectivelong-termmonitoringreliesonhighlytrainedscientistsstaffedinpositionswheretheycandotheirjobseffectivelyandefficientlyandwheretheycanworkwithtrainedandknowledgeablelocalpeople.

Finally,whileitisrelativelysimpletodevelopasetofmonitoringprogramsthatcouldbeimplementedacrosscircumpolarprotectedareas,itwillbefarmorechallengingtoimplementandsustainthiscommitment.

4.0 Current monitoring programs

Ineveryjurisdiction—state,provincial,territorial,federal—thereisamultiplicityofenvironmentalmonitoringprograms.InCanada’sNorthwestTerritoriesalonethereareatleast278monitoringprograms,mostofwhichareuncoordinatedandtheresultsofwhichareoftenincompatible.Unfortunately,thissituationappearstobethenormnationallyandinternationally.Compoundingthechallengeofdevelopingacomprehensiveunderstandingofchangesincircumpolarbiodiversityisthedifficultyinidentifyingandinventoryingexisting(andpast)monitoringprograms,anexercisewhichinturnpalesincomparisontocataloguingthedatacapturedintherespectiveprogramsinamannerthatisconsistentacrossprogramsandreadilyavailabletootherusers.

ThegenericallydifferentapproachestakeninNorthAmericaandEuropewithrespecttomonitoringofprotectedareaspresentafurthercomplication.Broadly,theformer(CanadaandtheU.S.)haveagency-drivenmonitoringprogramsspecificallytargetingprotectedareas.Ontheotherhand,EuropeancountriestendtohaveregionalprogramsdriveninlargepartbyEuropeanUniondirectives.Theseprogramsoftendonotfocusonprotectedareaspersebutdoincludeprotectedareas.

ThefollowingsectionsoverviewtheprotectedareamonitoringprogramsandapproachescurrentlyinplaceinArcticcountries.

4.1 U.S. (Alaska)

EcologicalmonitoringinAlaskanprotectedareashasalonghistory.Itisbroad-rangingandinthecaseofgovernment-runmonitoringprograms,isundertakenbynumerousagencies,notablytheU.S.FishandWildlifeService(USFWS),theAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGame,theU.S.ForestService,theU.S.NationalParkServiceandtheBureauofLandManagement.However,aswithmanyotherjurisdictions,

15

monitoringandresearcheffortsareoftenundertakenbyseparateagenciesornon-governmentalentitiesindependentlyofoneanother.Differentorganizationsmayfollowdifferentmonitoringprotocolsandtheprogramsthemselvesareoftennotwellintegratedacrossorwithin.StateandfederalauthoritiesinAlaskaareworkingtoimprovethissituation,inpartthroughtheadventofLandscapeConservationCooperatives(LCCs)andprogramssuchastheNorthSlopeScienceInitiativesothatcollectivelyagenciesandorganizationsarebetterabletotrackchangesinbiodiversityatvariousspecialresolutions(refuge,ecoregionandstate-wide).

Inthiscontext,theU.S.NationalParkServicehasdesignedandimplementedanintegratedmonitoringprogramforAlaskannationalparks,theresultsofwhichareintendedtoimproveunderstandingofparkecosystems,informwiseparkmanagementandtobesharedwithotherjurisdictions,particularlythoseintheArctic.

TheArcticNetworkMonitoringProgramincludesseveralcoreinventories:anaturalresourcebibliography;basecartographicdata;geologyandsoilsmaps;weatherdata;airqualitydataandairqualitystationlocations;waterbodylocation,classificationandwaterqualitydata;vegetationmap;specieslist(includingvertebratesandvascularplants);andspeciesdistributionandstatusdata.

Nationalparkvitalsignsmonitoringtracksasubsetofphysical,chemicalandbiologicalelementsandprocessesofparkecosystemsselectedtorepresenttheoverallhealthorconditionofparkresources,knownorhypothesizedeffectsofstressors,orelementsthathaveimportanthumanvalues.Table3summarizestheU.S.NationalParkServiceArcticNetworkMonitoringProgram.

Protected areas, IUCN Class V-VIProtected areas, IUCN Class I-IV

CAFF area

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

alaska3.pdf 1 2011-10-12 14:13:56

Only protected areas overlapping or north of the CAFF boundary are displayed

Figure 2 Protected Areas of Alaska

16

Table 3: Vital signs of the Alaskan National Park Service Arctic Network

NationalParkslisedinclude:BeringLandsBridge(BELA),CapeKrusenstern(CAKR),GatresoftheArctic(GAAR),KobukValley(KOVA),andNoatak(NOAT).

MonitoringFramework

Vital Sign Parks Where Monitored

BELA CAKR GAAR KOVA NOAT

AirandClimate Airbornecontaminants

Climate

Snowpack

GeologyandSoils Coastalerosion

Seaice

Permafrost

Water Lakecommunitiesandecosystems

Lagooncommunitiesandecosystems

Streamcommunitiesandecosystems

Surfacewaterdynamics

BiologicalIntegrity Landbirds

Yellow-billedloons

Brownbears

Dall’ssheep

Muskox

Caribou

Moose

Fishassemblages

Smallmammalassemblages

Terrestrialvegetationandsoils

Invasive/exoticspecies

HumanUse Subsistence/harvest

Pointsourcehumaneffects

Landscapes Fireextentandseverity

Landscapepatternsanddynamics

TheUSFWShasdevelopedastrategicplanandanoperationalblueprintforinventoryandmonitoringofnationalwildliferefuges.ThiswillenabletheUSFWStoassessthevulnerabilityofwildliferefugestoclimatechangeandassociatedstressors,includingchangesinprecipitationpatterns,watershortages,increasedfirerisk,contaminants,landusechangesandincreasesinweedspecies,pestsanddiseasepathogens.TheinventoryandmonitoringprogramshouldalsoenabletheUSFWStodetectchangesinbiodiversity(e.g.,changesinbiomesandspeciesranges,migrationpatternsandextinctionrates),toassessthevulnerabilityofcoastalrefugesofsealevelrise,risingoceantemperaturesandoceanacidificationandtoassessthevulnerabilityofArcticrefugestoclimatechanges.Ultimatelythis

Source:RobertA.Winfree,NationalParksServiceAlaskaVitalsignsforwhichthenetworkwilldevelopprotocolsandimplementmonitoringwithfundingfromthe

vitalsignsorwaterqualitymonitoringprogram.Vitalsignsthatarecurrentlybeingmonitoredlong-termbyanetworkpark,anotherNPSprogramorby

anotherfederalorstateagency.Thenetworkwillcollaboratewiththeseothermonitoringeffortswhereappropriatebutwillnotusevitalsignsorwaterqualitymonitoringprogramfunds.

Vitalsignsforwhichmonitoringwilllikelybedoneinthefuturebutwhichcannotcurrentlybeimplementedduetolimitedstaffandfunding.

17

informationwillinformadaptationstrategies.

ProposedUSFWSmonitoringindicators(Table4andTable12)areintended,amongotherthings,toenabletheUSFWStodeterminetrendsinpopulationsizeofspeciesusedforsubsistence;todeterminewhetherintactecosystemsandnaturalprocessesarebeingconservedwithinandacrossrefuges;todeterminepopulationtrendsinfocalspecies;andtodeterminetrendsinwaterqualityandwaterquantity.

CollaborativelandscapeconservationhasbeenidentifiedasanimportantstepinaddressingconservationconcernsbyAlaskaandthefederaldepartmentsoftheInterior,CommerceandAgriculture.PartneragenciesinLCCsarebeginningtoconsiderhowtoshareexpertiseandcapacitytoachievecommonlandscapeconservationgoals.LCCswillbringtogetherfederal,state,tribal,andlocalgovernmentswithprivatelandowners,academiaandorganizationstodevelopstrategiesforunderstandingandrespondingtolandscape-levelimpacts

TheNorthSlopeScienceInitiative(NSSI)wasdevelopedbyfederal,stateandlocalgovernmentswithtrustresponsibilitiesforlandandoceanmanagementtofacilitateandimprovethecollectionanddisseminationofecosysteminformationpertainingtotheAlaskanNorthSloperegion,includingcoastalandoffshoreregions.Itwillimprovescientificandregulatoryunderstandingofterrestrial,aquaticandmarineecosystemsforconsiderationinthecontextofresourcedevelopmentactivitiesandclimatechange.

Table 4: Potential Alaskan monitoring indicators

Indicator Ecoregion


AirandClimate BeaufortGyreSeaicedistributionPhenology,ShorefasticedistributionPhenology

MarineclimateSeaicedistributionPhenologyShorefasticedistribu-tionPhenologyOceancurrents

CO2levels(releasebymeltingpermafrostandpeatdegradation,fires;sequestrationbyplantgrowth)

SeaicedistributionPhenology

GeologyandSoils Marine-derivednutri-ents

Marine-derivednutri-ents

Marine-derivednutri-entsPermafrostdistributionandmelting

Marine-derivednutri-entsIsostaticreboundVolcanism

WaterQualityandQuantity

Marineconditions MarineconditionsAspectsofKuskokwinRiverwaterAspectsofYukon,KobukRivers

MarineconditionsRiverflowandfloodriskRiver-icebreakup

Marineconditions(pol-lutants,acidification,climaticinfluence)

BiologicalIntegrity MigratorybirdsCaribouherdsPhenology(insects,seaice,vegetation,green-up,migratorybirds)

Belugawhales,OthermigratorylargemarinemammalsMigratorybirdsAnadromousfishesCaribouherdsPhenology(ice,vegetation,green-up,migratorybirds)

MigratorybirdsAnadromousfishesCaribouherdsPhenology(insects,riverice,vegetation,green-up,migratorybirds,fireseason)

WhalesNorthernfursealsOthermigratorylargemarinemammalsMarinefoodwebPhenology(whalemigrations,vegetationgreen-up,migratorybirds)

18

Indicator Ecoregion


AnthropogenicStress-ors

HarvestofmigratoryanimalsFiremanagement



HarvestofmigratoryanimalsFiremanagementOilandgasdevelop-ment

Source:Woodward,A.,andE.Beever.2010.FrameworkforecologicalmonitoringonlandsofAlaskaNationalWildlifeRefugesandtheirpartners:Anchorage,Alaska.USDepartmentoftheInterior,USGeologicalSurvey,Open-FileReport2010-xxx.V+88pagesDRAFT14Dec09)

4.2 Canada

Asnotedearlier,thereisamultiplicityofmonitoringprogramsoccurringwithinprotectedareasinCanada.ParksCanadamonitoringprogramsforWesternArcticNationalParksaresummarizedinTable5.

Table 5: Canadian Western Arctic National Park Monitoring Report, 2008

Monitoring Aulavik NP Ivvavik NP Tuktut Nogait NP Pingo Canadian Landmark

Wildlife

Wildlifecards

NWT-Nunavutbirdchecklist

Aquaticinvertebratemonitoring

Lemmingwinternextmonitoring

Bluenose-westcariboumonitoring

Porcupinecariboumonitoring

Habitat

Satellitemonitoringofnorthernecosystems

Pingomonitoring

Human Use

FirthRivercampsitemonitoring

Humanusemonitoring

Cultural Resources

TuktutNogaitNPculturalresourcemonitoring

Environmental Processes

Weathermonitoring

Riverflowmonitoring

Waterqualitymonitoring

Freshsurfacewatermappingandmonitoring(RA-DARSAT)

Solid Waste

GroundwatermonitoringatKomakukBeach

TheprimarygoalofParksCanadaistoensure“ecologicalintegrity”withinitsparksystem.ParksCanadahasselectedindicatorsthroughwhichitmeasurestrendsinecosystemintegrity,includingabioticcomponents(e.g.,water,rocks);landscapediversitycomponents(e.g.,tundra,rainforest,grasslands);speciesdiversitycomponents(e.g.,bears,trees,birds);andecosystemprocesscomponents(e.g.,fire,

19

floods,predation).

ParksCanadausesthefollowingbreakdown:

Indicator:glaciersandpermanenticeMeasure:glaciermassbalanceMeasure Assessment and Trend:improving,stable,ordeclining(asappropriate)Data Quality:deficient,fair,good(asappropriate)

Themaintenanceofecosystemintegrityisguidedbydiscreteobjectivesrelevanttotheparticularpark.Forexample,anobjectivemaybetomaintainallnativespecieswithinaparkatviablepopulationlevels,tomaintainforestecosystemproductivitythatoptimizesrepresentationandhabitatrequirementsortomaintainlakeandstreamwaterqualityandquantityatpredefinedlevels.Withclimatechangeitmaywellbeimpossibletomaintain“ecologicalintegrity”asdefinedbyParksCanadaasthatparticulardefinitionassumesalevelofstationaritythatlikelynolongerappliesbuttheapproachclearlyallowstrendstobeidentifiedandtrackedonanationalscale.

MonitoringtodetermineecologicalintegrityinnationalparksiscarriedoutonthegroundbyParksCanadaanditspartners,byremotesensingthroughCanada’sParkSpaceprogram,throughotheragenciesandthroughtheapplicationoftraditionalecologicalknowledge.


CAFF area

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

canada1.pdf 1 2011-10-12 14:18:39


Figure 3 Protected Areas of Canada

20

4.3 Greenland

Greenlanddoesnothavespecificprotectedareamonitoringprograms.Nordoesithaveanationalmonitoringstrategyalthoughoneisunderdevelopment.

Currently,government-monitoringeffortsarefocusedonharvestedresources,threatmonitoringinresponsetopressuresfromindustrialdevelopment(includingmining,oilandgasexploration,andincreasedshipping),wildlifemonitoringandobservationsbytheDanishArmy.Somemonitoringactivitiesdofocusonspeciesthatoccurinprotectedareasandthusprovideinformationtosupportbiodiversityassessments(Table6).

Greenland’smonitoringprogramscurrentlyincludethefollowing:

• GreenlandEcosystemMonitoring(GEM)attwosites,ofwhichoneisattheZackenbergResearchStationinNortheastGreenlandNationalParkandtheothernearNuuk(notwithinaprotectedarea);GreenlandInstituteofNaturalResources,monitoringofharvestedspecies(someinprotectedareas),threatmonitoring(someinprotectedareas),andlocalmonitoringbynon-scientists(someinprotectedareas).TheZackenbergmonitoringprogramhasbeenunderwaysince1995andincludesmonitoringonfivethemes:climate,marine,geological,glacial,andbiological.Thelatterincludesmonitoringofthedynamicsofalargevarietyoforganismsandbiologicalprocessesinthelocalecosystems;

• Monitoringofharvestedspecies,insomecasesdatingbackover100years,includingnarwhal,otherwhales,walrus,harbourseal,polarbear,muskox,reindeer,fox,hare,guillemot,eider,grouse,cod,halibut,lumpsucker,salmon,redfish,crab,shrimpandmollusks.Manyofthesespeciesoccurinprotectedareasalthoughthemonitoringeffortvarieswiththespecies;

• Threatmonitoringincludingmonitoringthenumberofexpeditions/visitors(EastGreenlandNationalParkandotherprotectedareas),monitoringadhocvisitstoatleastoneprotectedarea,monitoringharvestedspeciesinprotectedareaswithquotas(e.g.,polarbear,walrus,narwhal,beluga,muskoxandcaribou)andmonitoringgrazingeffectsattwosites,neitherofwhichareinprotectedareas;and,

• Localmonitoringbynon-scientistsincludingpatrol-basedrecordingofwildlifebySiriusSledgePatrolinEastGreenlandNationalPark,community-basedmonitoringofselectedspecies,threatsandclimateparameters(underdevelopment)andapublicobservationdatabase(underdevelopment)wheremembersofthepubliccanreportsightingsofspecies,climateobservationsandobservationsofotherenvironmentalmatters.

Table 6: Monitoring programs in Greenland

ProtectedAreas

KeyEcosystemComponents

KeyIssues

MonitoringProgram(s)

Indicator(s) Other Issues

MelvilleBayNa-tureReserve

NarwhalPolarbears

Populationstatus

Marinemammalmonitoringprogramme(GINR)

Populationsize

IlulissatIcefiord,WorldHeritageSite

GlacierIceHalibut

Erosion Fishmonitoringprogramme(seeGINR)AdhocvisitsbysitemanagerErosionmonitoring(non-data-based)

Halibutpopula-tionsize

21

ProtectedAreas


KeyIssues



UnnartoqHotSprings

Tourism AdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

Klosterdalen Birchforest AdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

Tiningnertoq Birchforest AdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

Akilia Oldrockforma-tions

AdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

NorthandEastGreenlandNationalPark/UNESCOBio-sphereReserve

VegetationzonesWildlife

ClimatechangeOilandmineralexplorationTourism

1.ZackenbergEcologicalRe-searchOperationshttp://www.zackenberg.dk/monitoring.Sitespecific,coveringlessthanonepercentoftheNationalPark.Fivesubcomponents:-ClimateBasis-MarineBasis-GeoBasis-GlacioBasis-BioBasis

2.Wildliferecordingsduringpa-trolactivities(non-scientist)3.Adhocbirdandmammalsurveys4.Impactmonitoring5.AdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

1.Various2.Numberofob-servations3.Populationsize/health/distribution4.Expeditionsandvisitornumbers

NationalParkin-cludestwoRamsarsites

Qinnguadalen Birchforest AdhocvisitsbyNNPANAdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

Ikkafjorden IkkaitBacteriaFungi

AdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

Austmannadalen SheepReindeer

Hunting Terrestrialmammalmonitoringprgogramme(GINR)

Reindeerpopula-tionsize,sexandageStructure

ArnangarnupQoorua/Paradis-dalenn.

MuskoxVegetation

Hunting Terrestrialmammalmonitoringprogramme(GINR)

Populationsize,sexandageStructure

Kitsissunnguit(GrønneEjland)

LumpsuckerArcticternEiderOtherbirdspe-cies

Huntingandfishing

Adhocpopulationassessment(GINR)

Populationsize(birds)

AlsoRamsarsite

ArcticResearchStation

AdhocvisitsbyNNPAN

OtherProtectedAreas

ThirteenBirdPro-tectionAreas

GuillemotEiderOtherbirdspe-cies

Hunting SeaBirdMonitoringProgramme(GINR)Adhocpopulationassessment

Populationsize

ElevenRamsarsites

GeeseArcticternEiderOtherbirdspe-cies

Hunting Adhocpopulationassessment(GINR)

Populationsize

22

ProtectedAreas


KeyIssues



Birdcoloniespro-tectionzones

GuillemotRazorbillLittleaukKittiwakeFulmarCormorantEiderKingsEiderBlackguillemotPuffinArcticternGulls

Hunting Populationsize(notallspecies)

Source:ElmerTopp-Jørgensen,DepartmentofDomesticAffairs,GovernmentofGreenland


CAFF area


Figure 4 Protected Areas of Greenland

23

4.4 Iceland

Icelanddoesnothavespecificprotectedareamonitoringprograms.Aswithmanyothercountries,monitoringinIcelandisnotaswelldevelopedorstructuredasitmight.Therearefewinhabitants;itisarelativelybigcountry;limitedfundingandexpertise.Differentbodiesincludingacademia,governmentinstitutes,andlocalinstitutescarryoutmonitoring.Gatheringandcollatingdataiscomplicatedandreliestoalargeextentonindividualresearchers.

MonitoringprogramsinIcelandoftendonotdifferentiateprotectedareasfromtherestofthecountryandinsomecasesmonitoringprogramsonlyincludeaportionofprotectedareas(Table7).Thefocusofmonitoringprogramsismainlybirdsandfishstocksandthenplantsandvegetation.Whalesandsealsgetlittleattentionandterrestrialmammalmonitoringislimitedalthoughreindeers(notnativeforIceland)havebeenmonitoredformanyyears.Goodhuntingandfishingstatisticisinplaceandannualmonitoringofplankton.

Icelandhasplansinplacetoreorganizeitsenvironmentalmonitoringprogramsandtorefocuscollaborativeefforts.Thisincludesencouragingthedifferentinstitutesandagenciestoworktogetherandhavecommonoraccessibledatabases,startingwithplantsandbirds.Anewmonitoringschemeforallnaturallyoccurringbirdspeciesincludingarcticpassagebirdsandothermigratoryspeciesisunderway.Inthemeantime,existingbird-relateddatabasesincludemid-winterbirdcounts,theBirdRingingSchemeanddatabasesforindividualspecies(seaeagle,ptarmigan,Slavoniangrebe,Brentgoose,eider,etc).Icelandalsoholdsdatabasesforinvertebrates,insects,marinefish,plankton(phyto-andzooplankton)whalesandplants,includinghabitat-typeandvegetationmaps.Drawingfromallavailabledata,Icelandhaspreparedadraftreportonbirdswhichincludesdataqualityassessments,speciespopulationsizeandtrendsandrevisionstotheRedList.Acomplete,quantitativeandrepeatablesurveyofcliff-breedingseabirdsinIcelandwasfirstcarriedoutin1983-1985andreplicatedin2006-2008,providinganewbaselineforimprovedmonitoring.

Withrespecttomarineareas,theBIOICEprojecttodeterminedistributionofbenthosinIcelandicwatershasconcludedafter19expeditions.Resultsincluded1390samplestakenfrom579locationsfrom20-3000mdepth,4.5millionanimalscollectedandtheidentificationof28previouslyunknownspecies.Thiswasabaselinestudywithverylimitedfollowup.

Icelandhascompletedaninventoryofgeothermalareasandhasmappedhabitattypesinthemidhighlandandispreparingtodefineandmaphabitattypesforlowlandareasincludingfreshwaterandcoastalareas.IcelandwilldothisusingthesamemethodologyasisusedinNatura2000asIcelandisamemberstateintheBernconventionwhereEmeraldNetworkisaparallelprogram.ThiswillgivetheopportunitytomonitornaturalhabitatsandspeciesinaccordancewithEUcountriesasdescribedinTable11andwillalsogiveopportunitytouseremotesensingforlong-termmonitoringofhabitattypes.Icelandalsoparticipatesininternational,monitoringprogramssuchascollectingmosssampleseveryfiveyearsforheavymetalanalysesandisamemberoftheNOBANIS-EuropeanNetworkonInvasiveAlienSpecies.ThisprojectisdevelopingacommondatabaseonalienspeciesandinvasivespeciesincludingthoseinIceland.

Severalgovernmentalinstitutionsareinvolvedinmonitoringofbiodiversity(research)inIcelandandkeepdatabasesintheirfield,amongthemare:The Icelandic Institute of Natural History(theInstituteconductsbasicandappliedresearchandmonitoringonthenatureofIcelandwithemphasisonbotany,ecology,taxonomygeologyandzoology,maintainsscientificspecimencollectionsanddatabases,operatestheIcelandicBird-RingingScheme,advisesonsustainableuseofnaturalresourcesandlanddevelopment,andassessestheconservationstatusofspecies,habitatsandecosystems).The Marine Research Institute(research/monitoringonthemarineenvironmentaroundIcelandanditslivingresourceswithspecialemphasizeoncommercialfishstocks),The Environment Agency

24

(managementandsupervisionofdesignatedprotectedareas,monitoringofenvironmentalquality,wildlifemanagement).The Met Office(conductingmonitoring/researchonthephysicsofair,landandsea,specificallyinthefieldsofhydrology,glaciology,climatology,seismologyandvolcanology),The Institute of Freshwater Fisheries(research/monitoringonfreshwaterfishstocksandsuperviseandadviseriverandlakefisheriesassociationsconcerningfisheriesmanagementandenhancementoffisheries),The Soil Conservation Service of Iceland (monitoring/research/combatingdesertification,sandencroachmentandothersoilerosion,promotionofsustainablelanduseandreclamationandrestorationofdegradedland)andtheIcelandforestService(research,development,consultationanddistributionofknowledgewithinforestry).Thereareseverallocalnatural history centreslocatedaroundIcelandthatconductscientificresearch/monitoringonIceland’snatureintheirregion,aswellascollectdataregardingthenaturalhistoryintheregionandparticipateinnatureconservationandenvironmentaleducation).BesidetheinstitutionsmentionedabovetheuniversitiesinIceland,especiallyUniversity of IcelandandThe Agricultural University of Iceland,conductwidevarietyofmonitoringandresearchonnaturalhistorybothinsideandoutsideprotectedareas.FurtherthereareindividuallocalnaturalhistoryresearchcentersthatfocusoncertainareasliketheNatural History Museum of Kópavogur (research/monitoringinfreshwaterecology),The Icelandic Seal CenterandThe Arctic Fox Center orfocusonspecificarealikeThe Lake Myvatn Research StationthatmonitorandresearchonthenaturalhistoryoftheprotectedareaofLakeMývatnandtheriverLaxáandsurroundingarea.

Table7givesanoverviewoversomeofthemonitoringprograms,speciallyaimedatbiodiversity,conductedinsideprotectedareasinIcelandbutisbynomeansexhaustive.

Table 7: Iceland protected areas with monitoring programs

Protected Area Key Ecoystem Components

Key Issues Monitoring Program

Indicator Other Issues Comment

National Park

Snæfellsjökull Mink(Mustelavision)

NumbershuntingStatis-tics

invasivespecies

Þingvellir FreshwaterfishesArcticcharrTroutPlankton

Populationstatus

Harvet Numbers(fish-ingstatistics)Condition

Fourvariants(subspecies)ofArcticcharr

ProtectedbyspecialAct

Vatnajökul-sþjóðgarður

ReindeerPtarmiganGyrfalconPlants

Populationstatus

Populationsize NumberHarvest(hunt-ingstatistic)

ProtectedbyspecialAct

Nature Reserve

Ástjörn Slavoniangrebe Populationstatus

Breedingpairs Numbers Partofmonitor-ingthespeciesaroundthecountry,LakeMývatnetc.

Dyrhólaey Partlymarine

Eldey Gannet Populationsize Numbers Partlymarine

Flatey BlackguillemotPhalathrope

Populationsize Numbers Partlymarinearea.InsideBreiðafjörður

Grótta Partlymarinearea

25




Grunnafjörður BrentGoose Populationsize Partofinternalpopulationes-timation-otherareasinIcelandincluded

Guðlaugstun-gur

Pinkfootedgoose,waders

Populationsize,Breedingpairs

Partofinternalpopulationesti-mation–otherareasinIcelandincluded

Hornstrandir Arcticfox Populationstatus

Huntingsta-tisticsexistforArcticfoxinIceland

Arcticfoxpro-tectedinthearea

Hrísey Partlymarinearea.InsideBreiðajörðurarea

Kringilsárrani Reindeer Populationstatus

Populationsize NumberHarvest(hunt-ingStatistic)

SeealsoVatnajökul-sþjóðgarðurNP

Lónsöræfi Reindeer

Melrakkæy Partlymarinearea.InsideBreiðajörðurarea.

Miklavatn WhooperswanGreylagTuftedduckScaup

Populationstatus

Populationsize Numbers

Skrúður Seabirds Populationsize Irregularly Partlymarinearea

Surtsey Ecosystemdevelopment

Plant,birdandinsectcoloniza-tionPopulationstatus

Successionmonitoring

NumbersHarvest

Newislandsince1963,geologicalresearch

Partlymarinearea

Varmárósar Partlymarinearea

Vatnasfjörður Partlymarinearea

Vífilsstaðavatn LakeSomefreshwa-termonitoring

Subspeciesofstickleback

Þjórsárver Pink-footedgoosPlantcommu-nity

Populationstatus

Populaitonsize,breedingpairsPlant.com,ITEX

NumbersPlant.comDensity

Habitattypemapexists

WetlandareaRamsararea

Natural Monument⁄ Mostly Geological Formations

Arnarnesstrítur HotspringsCones⁄geother-malchimneys

EldborgíBláfjöllum

InsideBláfjal-lafólkvangs

26




EldborgirundirGeitahlið

InsideReyk-janesfólkvangs

Fossvogsbakkar Partlymarinearea

Háubakkar Partlymarinearea

HverastrýturábotniEyjaf-jarður

HotspringsCones⁄geoter-malchimneys

Skútustaðagi-gar

InsidetheMý-vatnLaxaarea

Country Park

ÁstjörnogÁsfjall

SeeÁstjörn

Hleinnar Partlymarinearea

Hilð Partlymarinearea

HvaleyrariónogHvaleyrarhöfði

Marinearea

Kasthúsatjörnfjaran

Coastandmarine

Reykjanes Seabirds Populationstatus

Populationsize Numbers Kýísuvíkurbjargbirdcliff

Habitat Protection Area

Hvanneyri Whitefrontedgoose

Populationstatus

Populationsize Numbers Wetland

Sker-jafjörðurinnanGarðabæjar

Brentgoose Populationstatus

Populationsize Numbers Partofin-ternationalpopulationes-timation-otherareasinIcelandincluded

Coastandma-rinearea

Protection by Special Act

Breiðafjörður SeabirdsSeaeagleEiderOtherwildbirdspeciesWhales(fishinggrounds)Mink(Mustelavision)Alsopollutants

Popuationstatus

PopulationsizeHarvest

NumbersCon-dition

Speciesofconcern,eidercolonies(eiderdownutiliza-tion)

CoastIslandsMarinearea

LakeMývatnandRiverLáxa

WetlandareaLakeandriverFreshwaterfishesBirdspecies(ducks,gyrfal-con,Slavoniangrebe)PlanktonMidgeAquaticplants

Populationstatus

Harvest Numbers(breedingpairs)Condition

OneofthebestmonitoredareasinIceland,speciesofcon-cern

Ramsararea

Other Protection

27




Plantspecies Aegagropilalinnaei

Source:TraustiBaldursson,IcelandicInstituteofNaturalHistory

4.5 Norway

Norway’smonitoringeffortisextensiveandwelldocumented(Table8).However,aswithotherEuropeancountries,Norwaydoesnothaveaprotectedareas-specificmonitoringframeworkandconductsgeneralmonitoringindependentofprotectedareas.RegionalmonitoringprogramsofparticularrelevancetoNorwegianprotectedareasincludelargecarnivores,arcticfox,goldeneagle,moose,palsapeatlands,freshwaterpearlmussel,airquality,seabirds,vegetation(NDVIimagery)andphysicaldisturbancebyindustrialdevelopments.



CAFF area

= 1 000 km2

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

iceland1.pdf 1 2011-10-12 14:30:08

Figure 5 Protected Areas of Iceland

28

NorwaydoesconductextensivemonitoringoftheenvironmentsofSvalbardandJanMayen,andanintegratedmonitoringprogram,“EnvironmentalMonitoringofSvalbardandJanMayen,”(MOSJ)isinplacefortheseareas.

MOSJbeganin1999andisdesignedtoevaluatehowtheenvironmentofthesetworegionsisfaringrelativetonationalgoalsfortheenvironmentinthePolarregion.Itpresentstheresultsfrom69separatemonitoringprogramsinastandardizedmannerandfollowsfivegeneralthemes:climate,humaninfluence/disturbance,fauna,floraandculturalheritage.Eachthemeissubdividedintoindices,e.g.,thereare12indicesforclimate,16fordisturbance,25forfauna,etc.Manyofthetimeseriesdatefromthe1980s.

WhileNorwaydoesnotplantodevelopaprotectedarea-specificprogramforArcticprotectedareas,muchoftheNorwegianArcticIslandsareprotectedandincludedinMOSJ.Thereisalsoanongoingprocesstoestablishaprotectedarea-specificmonitoringprogramformainlandNorwaywhichwillbecloselyrelatedtotheEUdirectives.


CAFF area

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

norway1.pdf 1 2011-10-12 14:36:30


Figure 6 Protected Areas of Norway

29

Table 8: Monitoring programs in Norway

Marine Programmes

Broad Objectives of the Program

Specific Species and⁄or Ecosystems included

Geographic coverage

Contact Person\Project Leader

Implementaed or related to CAFF\MAP

SeabirdPopula-tionProgram/SEAPOP(2005)

Includesseveralprojectsspecifiedinthelist(seebelow)

Monitoringofbreedingandwinteringseabirdpopulations

Seeinterlinkedprogrammesandprojectsbelow

NorwegiancoastfromLofotenandNorthward

TheseaareaaroundSvalbard(incl.BearIsland)

BritVeie-Rosvoll

MortonEkker(DN)

TychoAnker-Niils-sen(NINA),

HallvardStrøm(NPI)

CAFF

MonitoringPro-gramforSvalbardandJanMayan(MOSJ)

Monitoring Seeinterlinkedprojectsbelow

SvalbardArchi-pelagoJanMayan

BirgitNjåstad,NPI CAFF\AMAP

NorwegianNationalMonitor-ingProgramonBreedingSeabirds(1998)-From2005incl.inSEAPOP

Trendofmonitor-ingofNorwegianbreedingseabirds

- Fulmarus glacialis- Morus bassanus- Phalacrocora x Carbo- Phalacrocora x aristotelis- Somateria mollissima- Catharacta skua- Larus canus- Larus fuscus- Larus argentatus- Larus marinus- Rissa tridactyla- Sterna hirundo- Sterna paradisea- Alca torda- Uria aalge- Uria lomvia- Fratercula arctica

Norwegiancoast S.H.Lorenstsen,NINA

CAFF

NationalMonitor-ingoftheMarineEnvironmentandLivingResources

Monitoringofseaenvironmentwithspecialfocusonsustainablefisher-iesmanagement

-Physicalandchemicalparameters-Zooplankton-Phytoplankton-Fisheggsandlarvae-Severalfishspe-cies-Prawn-Lobster-Benthicecosys-tems

BarentsSeaNorwegianSea

Lead:NorwegianInstituteofMarineResearch(IMR)

AMAP/CAFF


30

Marine Programmes



Geographic coverage



IntegratedMap-pingProgrammefortheNorwegianSeasandCoastalAreas(MAREANO)

Maptheseabed -Bathymetry-Geology-Biology-Contaminants

SeabedinNorwe-gianwaters

OleJørgenLønneandLeneBuhl-Mortensen,IMR

TrondSkyseth,SK

TerjeThorsnes,NGU

CAFF/AMAP

NationalCoastalMonitoring

Monitoringofthestateofenviron-mentrelatedtonutrientsandbiodiversity

-Hydrology–chemistryandplankton

-Softandhardbottomecology

CoastalareasinNorway

KarenFjøsne,SFT

(FrithjofMoy,NIVA)

AMAP/CAFF

ScreeningandsurveyprojectsintheArcticasapartoftheNorwegianStatePollutionMonitoringPro-gram

Monitoringofpol-lutantsinseabirdeggsandadultseabirds

Glaucousgulla.o. NorthernNorwayandSvalbard

IngunnSkaufelSimensen

JonL.Fuglestad,SFTNPI

AMAP

JointAssessmentandMonitor-ingProgramme(JAMP)underOSPAR(incl.contaminantsandbiodiversityele-ments)-(1981-)

Analysesofcontaminantsinsediments&organisms

Sedimentsandbenthicorganisms

Norwegiancoastalwaters

PerErikIvversen,SFT(NormalGreen,NIVA)

AMAP/CAFF

TheEUWaterFrameworkDirec-tive(WFD)–whenstarted(probablyin2008)

JoHaleraker,DN AMAP/CAFF

Offshoremonitor-ingoftheNorwe-gianpetroleumactivities

Monitoringofpollutantsandspeciesdiversityinsedimentsinthevicinityofoffshoreinstallations

Monitoringofuptakeandeffectsofpollutantsinmusselsandfish

Seabedfauna/biodiversity/eco-systems.

Fishandcagedbluemusselsinwatercolumn

ThewholeNor-wegianselfwherethereisoilandgasactivities

NinaMarieJør-gensen,SFT

AMAP

RockybottomresearchalongthecoastsofNorthernNorway,Svalbard,andJanMayan

Mappingandstatemonitoring

Benthicecosys-tems

AlongthecoastsofNorthernNor-way,SvalbardandJanMayan

BjørnGulliksen,UniversityofTromsø

CAFF

31

Marine Programmes



Geographic coverage



TheSeaMammalResearchProgram

Populationregistrationandmonitoring

-Whales(mainlyBalaenopteraacutorostrata,butalsoothers)-Pagophilusgroenlandicus-Cystophoracristata-Phocavitulina-Phocahispida-Halichoerusgrypus-Odobaenusrosmarus

Whales:NorthSea,NorwegianSeaandBarentsSea

Seals:GreenlandSeaandNorwe-giancoast,Spits-bergen(ringedseal)

Svalbard(walrus

IMR,NPI AMAP/CAFF

ContaminantsinPolarbearintheSvalbardareaNPI(1991-2005)

MOSJ Ursusmaritimus Svalbard GeirW.Gabrielsen,NPI

AMAP

Populationecol-ogyofPolarbearintheSvalbardarea(1967-)

MOSJ Ursusmaritimus Svalbard MagnusAnder-sen,NPI

CAFF

Polarbearpopula-tionintheBarentsSea(Russian/Nor-wegianmonitor-ing)–(2005-)

Long-termmonitoringofpopulationsizebyaeriallinetransectsurveys

Ursusmaritimus BarentsSea

Svalbard

FranzJosephLand

NovayaZemlia

JonAars,NPI CAFF

PuffinpopulationecologyinRøst(1964-)

MonitoringofthelargestseabirdcolonyontheEu-ropeanmainland

Fraterculaarctica RøstArchipelago TychoAnker-Nils-sen,NINA

CAFF

Blackguillemotpopulationecol-ogyinRøst(1990-)

ComparativemonitoringtothePuffinmonitoring

Cepphusgrille RøstArchipelago TychoAnker-Nils-sen,NINA

CAFF

Monitoringofsea-birdpopulationsonBearIsland

Populationtrendmonitoringofthetwolargestsea-birdspeciesintheBarentsSeaandthemarineeco-systemthatthesespeciesbelong

-Uriaaalge-Rissatridactyla-Fulmarusglacialis-Stercorariusskua-Allealle-Larushyper-boreus

BearIsland HallvardStrøm,NPI

CAFF

Populationdevel-opmentofEiderinKongsfjorden,Svalbard(1981-)

Populationmoni-toring

-Somateriamollis-sima

Kongsfjorden,Spitsbergen

GeirWingGabri-elsen,NPI

CAFF

ContaminationinGlaucousgullinBearIsland(1995-2002)

Tissuelevelsandeffectsofcontami-nants

-Larushyper-boreus

BearIsland JanOveBustnes,NINA

AMAP

32

Marine Programmes



Geographic coverage



Ivorygull(MOSJ)(2007-)

Breedingcolonymonitoringandbloodsampling/contamination

-Pagophilaebur-nean

SvalbardArchipel-ago(+coopera-tionwithRussia)

HallvardStrøm,NPI

AMAP/CAFF

ContaminantsinglaucousgullsfromBearIsland(1995-2005)

Bloodsamples -Larushyper-boreus

BearIsland GeirWingGabri-elsen,NPI

AMAP

NorwegianNa-tionalMonitoringProgram(NNMP)onwinteringSeabirds(1980-)–from2005incl.inSEAPOP

Monitoringofwinteringseabirdsandwaterfowlsindefinedwinteringareas

-Gaviastellata-Storlom(Gaviaarctica)-Islom(Gaviaim-mer)-Horndykker(Podicepsauritus)Gråstrupedykker,(Podicepsgrisei-gena)-Storskarv(Phalacrocoraxcarbo)Toppskarv(Phalacrocoraxaristotelis)-Kanadagås(Brantaenelopes)-Brunnakke(Anasenelope)-Krikkand(Anascrecca)-Stokkand(Anasplatyrhyn-chos)-Toppand(Aythyafuligula)-Bergand(Aythyamarila)-Somateriamollis-sima-Somateriaspec-tabilis-Polystictastelleri-Clangulahyema-lis-Melanittanigra-Melanittafusca-Bucephalaclan-gula-Mergusmergan-ser

Definedlocations/areas(includedareasinthreenorthernmostNorwegiancoun-tiesnorthofthePolarCircle.

S.H.Lorentsen,NINA

CAFF

33

Marine Programmes



Geographic coverage



Svalbardseabirdmonitoringpro-gram(1988-)

Monitoringoftrends,demo-graphicparam-etersanddietofsomeseabirdspe-ciesinSvalbard

-Uriaaalge-Urialomvia-Allealle-Fulmarusglacialis-Somateriamollissima-Rissatridactyla-Stercorariusskua-Larushyper-boreus

Svalbard HallvardStrøm

HaraldSteen,NPI

CAFF

Populationdevel-opmentandecol-ogyofseabirdsinHornøya,EasternFinnmark(1980–)

NNMP -Rissatridactyla-Uriaaalge-Urialomvia-Fraterculaarctica-Phalacrocoraxaristotelis

Hornøya(Island) RobBarrett,Uni-versityofTromsø

CAFF

PopulationdevelopmentofNorthernGannetinNorway(1947–)

NNMP -Morusbassanus Breedinglocalities(cliffs)inNorway

RobBarrett,Uni-versityofTromsø

CAFF

Populationdevel-opmentofSea-birdsinSouthernVaranger,EasternFinnmark(1966-)

Breedingpopula-tionmonitoring

-Rissatridactyla-Phalacrocoraxcarbo-P.aristotelis-Uriaaalge-Alcatorda

SouthernVaranger RobBarrett,Uni-versityofTromsø

CAFF

ContaminantsinseabirdeggsfromNorthernNorwayandSvalbard(1983,1993,2003)

Eggsamples -Larusargentatus-Fraterculaarctica-Rissatridactyla-Larushyper-boreus

-Hornøya-Røst-BearIsland-Kongsfjorden

GeirWingGabri-elsen,NPI

AMAP

Populationde-velopmentofKit-tiwakesinKongsf-jorden(1998-)


-Rissatridactyla Kongsfjorden GeirWingGabri-elsen,NPI

CAFF

Long-termvaria-tionsinarcticsoft-bottombenthosI(1920s-)

Benthiccommu-nitycomposition

-Benthicecosys-tems

OpenBarentsSea Akvaplanniva CAFF

Long-termvaria-tionsinarcticsoft-bottombenthosII(1980-)

Benthiccommu-nitycomposition

-Benthicecosys-tems

Svalbardfjords Akvaplanniva CAFF

JAMP,NorthwestRussia(2002-)

POPslevelinma-rinesediments

-Benthicecosys-tems

CoastalareasofNorthwestRussia

Akvaplanniva AMAP

34

Marine Programmes



Geographic coverage



MonitoringofsedimentaryenvironmentsinIsfjorden,Svalbard(1992–)(timeintervalbetweensurveysis5years)

POPslevelinsedi-mentsandbenthicorganisms

-Benthicecosys-tems

SelectedfjordsintheIsfjordencom-plex,Svalbard

Akvaplanniva(plusothers)con-tractedbySyssel-mannenSvalbard

AMAP

MonitoringofNor-wegianfjords

Contaminantsinsediments

-Benthicecosys-tems

Norwegianfjords MatsWaday,NIVA AMAP

Shipsofopportu-nityandremotesensing

Oilinsedimentcontamination

-Benthicandpelagicecosystems(mostlyalgae)

AlongcoastalsailingtransectoftheNorwegian“Hurtigruten”uptoKirkenes,Finnmark,andfrom2007thesail-ingtransectfromTromsøtoLong-yearbyen

DominiqueDu-rand,NIVA

AMAP/CAFF

Limnic Programmes


Specific Species and/or Ecosystems Included

Geographic Coverage

Contact Person/ Project Leader

Implemented or related to CAFF / AMAP

Monitoringprogramforlongrangetransportofairpollutantsandtheireffects

Documentdeposi-tionandeffectsinrelationtocriticalloadsandinterna-tionalagreements

-Freshwatereco-systems-Fish-Invertebrates

WholeNorway TorJohannessen,SFT

AMAP

PersistentorganicpollutantsandheavymetalsinsedimentsandfishfromlakesinNorthernNorwayandSvalbard

POPsandheavymetallevelsinsedimentsandfish

-Freshwatereco-systems

NorthernNorwaySvalbard

GuttormN.Chris-tensen,Akvaplan-NIVA

AMAP

Nationalmoni-toringoflakes;effectsoflongrangetransportofcontaminants

POPsandheavymetallevelsinsediments,waterquality

-Freshwaterecosystems

Norway BritLisaSkjelkvåle,NIVA

AMAP

EUWaterFrame-workDirective

Directivenotyetimplementedandnospecificmoni-toringstarted

MonitoringofbreedingwadersandArcticSkuainSletnes(Gamvik),Finnmark(1989-)

Monitoringofbreedingpopula-tions

-Waders

-Stercorarius

Sletnes,Finnmarkcounty

K.B.Strann,Univer-sityofTromsø

CAFF

MonitoringofbreedingwadersinKautokeino,Finnmark(1996-)

Monitoringofbreedingpopula-tions

-Waders Kautokeino,Finn-markcounty


CAFF

35

Limnic Programmes



Geographic Coverage



SpringmigrationmonitoringofRedKnotinBalsfjord,TromsandPor-sangen,Finnmark(2002-)

Monitoringofspringmigration

-Calidriscanutus Balsfjord,TromsandPorsangen,Finnmark


CAFF

Waterfowlcount-inginPasvikZapovednikandPasvikNatureReserve(1996-)

Densityanddistri-butionofwater-fowls

-Ducks-Geese-Waders

PasvikRiverwithinPasvikZapovednik&PasvikNatureReserve

PaulAspholm,BioForsk

CAFF

Populationcom-positionofadultAtlanticsalmoninriversandsea–NINA(1989-)

Monitoringofescapedsalmonfarmfishinseaandrivers

-Salmosalar Salmonfjordsandrivers

PederFiske,NINA CAFF

RepparfjordRiverinFinnmark.ScaletestsofadultAtlanticsalmon–NINA(1932-)

Monitoringofescapedsalmonfarmfish

-Salmosalar Repparfjord,Finn-markcounty

ArneJensen,NINA CAFF

AtlanticsalmonandseatroutinSaltdalRiver(1975-)

Long-termmoni-toring

-Salmosalar-Salmotrutta

SaltdalRiver,Nor-dlandcounty


Migrationofanad-romoussalmoninHalselvaRiver,Finnmark–NINA(1987-)

Monitoringofmi-grationandpopu-lationstructure

-Salmosalar-Salmotrutta-Salvelinusalpinus

Halselva,Finnmarkcounty


ImpactsoffishfarmingonseatroutandAtlanticsalmon–Univer-sityofLifeandScience(UMB)(1988-)

Long-termeffectsoffishfarmingonwildpopulations

-Salmotrutta-Salmosalar

Salmonfjordsandrivers

ReidarBorgstrøm,UMBandOysteinSkaala,IMR

CAFF

MonitoringoffishandzooplanktoninPasvikRiver–(1991-)

-Coregonuslavaretus-C.albula-Salmotrutta-Percafluviatilis-Esoxlucius-Lotalota

Per-ArneAmund-sen,UniversityofTromsø

CAFF

Long-rangeim-pactsoffishthin-ningsinStouraja-vri(1981-)

Monitoringofapolymorphicpopulation

-Coregonuslavaretus

Stourajavri,Finn-markcounty

Per-ArneAmund-sen,UniversityofTromsø

CAFF

MonitoringofPearlmusselinNorway(1999-)

National-widemonitoring

-Margaritiferamargaritifera

BjørnMejdellLarsen,NINA

CAFF

36

Limnic Programmes



Geographic Coverage



Monitoringofcrustaceanin100Norwegianlakes,nationalcontami-nationmonitoring(1996-)

Statusanddevelopmentofacidification

-135speciesofCladoceraandCopepoda

Nationalnetwork AnnKristinSchar-tau,NINA

AMAP/CAFF

MonitoringofGy-rodactylussalariesin120-130riversinNorway(1980-)

-Gyrodactylus-Salmosalar

Nationalnetwork AnnKristinSchar-tau,NINA

AMAP/CAFF

MonitoringofGy-rodactylussalariesin120-130riversinNorway(1980-)

NorwegianFoodandSafetyAuthor-ity

CAFF

NorwegianNa-tionalEutrophica-tionInvestigation1988-2001,of405lakes(1988-2001)

NIVA AMAP

LakeTakvatninTroms,Aquaticfauna(1980-)

UniversityofTromsø

CAFF

Terrestrial Programmes



Geographic Coverage



TerrestrialMoni-toringProgram(TOV),Fauna

PopulationandreproductionmonitoringandeffectsofLTRAP

-Passeriformesspp.-Ficedulahypo-leuca-Lagopuslagopus-Aquilachrysaetos-Falcorusticolus-smallrodents

WithinCAFFarea:Dividalen,Tromscounty

JohnAtleKålås,NINA

CAFF

TerrestrialMoni-toringProgram(TOV),Birchforest

MonitoringofLTRAPongroundvegetationinbirchforest


VegarBakkestuen,NINA

CAFF

TerrestrialMoni-toringProgram(TOV),epiphytevegetation

MonitoringofLTRAPonepiphytevegetationinbirchforest

-Lichens-Alga-Bryophyte


IngaE.Bruteig,NINA

CAFF

37




Geographic Coverage



Monitoringofpalsapeatlands

Monitoringoflong-termdevel-opmentofedaphicstructure,perma-frost&vegeta-tion

-Peatland FerdesmyraandGoatteluobbal,Finnmark

Ostojeaggi,Troms

HaugtjørninandLeirpullan,Sør-Trødelag

HaukskardmyrinOppland

AnnikaHofgaard,NINA

CAFF

Polarfoxmonitor-ing(1900-)


-Alopexlagopus Norway OlavStrand,NINA CAFF

Populationmoni-toringofPolarfoxinSvalbard(1982-)

MOSJ -Alopexlagopus Brøggerhalvøya/KongsfjordenSassen/Advent-dalen

EvaFuglei,NPI CAFF

NationalMonitor-ingProgramforLargeCarnivores(1990-)


-Lynx-Wolverine-Wolf-Brownbear

Norway HenrikBrøseth,NINA

CAFF

Svalbardcariboupopulationmoni-toringinAdvent-dalen(1979-)

Identifymecha-nismsforthepersistentinsta-bilityofanaturalpopulationofreindeer

-Rangifertarandus-platyrhynchus

Adventdalen,Spitsbergen

NicholasTyler,Uni-versityofTromsø

CAFF

Svalbardcari-bouinBrøggerPeninsula(1978-)–projectofMOSJ



BrøggerPeninsula,

Ny-Ålesund,Spits-bergen

RonnyAanes,NPI CAFF

Svalbard(jawsfromhunting,monitoring)(1984-)



NordenskiöldLand,Spitsbergen

ØysteinWiig,Uni-versityofOslo

CAFF

CuobbojeaggiProject(1991-)

Fecundityoffe-malereindeers

-Rangifertarandus-tarandus

Finnmarkcounty NicholasTyler,Uni-versityofTromsø

AMAP/CAFF

Muskrat(Ondatrazibeticus)inthePasvikRiver(1994-)

Populationde-velopmentofaninvasivespecies

-Ondatrazibetica PasvikRiver SteinarWikan,BioForsk

CAFF

Microtusrossiae-meridionalisdy-namicsinSvalbard(1991-)

Monitoringonanintroducedspecies

-Microtusrossiae-meridionalis

Colesbay,Crou-mant,Longyearby-eninSpitsbergen

NigelG.Yoccoz,NINA

CAFF

MonitoringofLesserWhite-frontedGooseinNorway(1991-)

Migrationmoni-toring

-Answererythro-pus

Valdak,Finnmarkcounty

IngarØien,NOF CAFF

38




Geographic Coverage



Populationdy-namics&studiesofBlackandWhiteFlycatcherinNorthernScandi-navia(1986-)

Monitoringofpop-ulationdynamics

-Muscicapidae Ammarnes,Swe-den(NorwegianareasonlySouthofthePolarCircle)

PerGustavThings-tad,NTNU

CAFF

NorwegianBreed-ingBirdCensus(1995-)

Biodiversitymoni-toring

-AllNorwegianbirdspecies

MagneHusby,HINT

CAFF

PopulationMoni-toringofSvalbardPtarmigan(1999-)projectofMOSJ


-Lagopusmutushyperboreus

CentralareaofSpitsbergen

EvaFuglei,NPI CAFF

Pink-footedgooseinVesterålen(2000-)

Migrationmoni-toring

-Anserbranchyrhynchus

Vesterålen IngunnM.Tombre,NINA

CAFF

BarnaclegooseinNyÅlesund–NINA(1992-1998)

Reproductivebehavior

-Brantaleucopsis Ny-Ålesund,Spits-bergen

IngunnM.Tombre,NINA

CAFF

Brownbearregis-trationsinPasvik(1972-)


-Ursusarctos Pasvik MartinSmith,BioForsk

CAFF

BearinPasvik;springobserva-tions(annually)

Monitoringtimeofcaveleaving

-Ursusarctos Pasvik MartinSmith,BioForsk

CAFF

Cesium137measuresinbodytissuesofreindeerherders(Samipeople)(1996-)

RadiationfromTsjernobylacci-dent

Finnmarkcountyandmid-Norway

ToneD.Bergan,NorwegianRa-diationProtectionAuthority

AMAP

Monitoringofpopulationdevel-opment,fitnessandreproductionofsevenMoosepopulations(1967-)

Populationcondi-tions

-Alcesalces Tromscounty ErlingSolberg,NINA

CAFF

Source:BårdØyvindSolberg,DirectorateforNatureManagement

4.6 Sweden

TheSwedishmonitoringprogramisoutlinedinTable9andfollowstheEuropeanUnionHabitatsDirectiveandtheBirdsDirective.Toalargeextentthismonitoringiscoordinatedwithalreadyexistingnationalmonitoringprograms(e.g.,nationallandscapeinventory,nationalforestryinventory).Protectedareasarenotnecessarilyseparatedfromotherareasinthesenationalmonitoringprograms.Whileregionallake,watercourseandbirdmonitoringeffortsinSwedencanbeappliedtoprotectedareasfairlyreadily,morecouldbedonewithwetlands,largecarnivores,smallmammalsandclimatedatasets.

ThelimitedmonitoringprogramsoccurringspecifictoSwedishprotectedareasnowfocusontheparticularvaluesoftheprotectedarea(especiallythosethatcanbeprotectedandordevelopedbymanagement),theeffectsofconservationmeasures,visitationanddamagescausedbyrecreational

39

vehicletraffic.Someprogramsarenetwork-wideandothersarelimitedtocertainprotectedareas.Allareconstrainedbyverylimitedbudgetsandstaff.

Swedenisinterestedinenhancingitsprotectedareamonitoringandisconsideringseveralapproaches,includingextractingprotectedarea-specificdatafromregionalmonitoringprograms,addingvariablestoexistingmonitoringprograms,increasingthesamplesizeinprotectedareasinthecontextofregionalmonitoringandconductingmoreprotectedarea-specificmonitoring.


CAFF area

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

sweden1.pdf 1 2011-10-12 14:45:18


Figure 7 Protected Areas of Sweden

40

Table 9: Monitoring programs in Sweden

Program Broad Objectives of the Program

Specific Species and/or Ecosystems In-cluded Geographic Coverage

MonitoringofhabitatsandspeciesinHabitatsDirective(92/43/EEG)onbio-geographicalscale(alpine/boreal/continental)

TomeettherequirementsofArticles11and17inhabitatdirective

Forhabitatsthefollowingwillbemeasured:RangeAreaStructureandfunc-tionincltypicalspecies

Forspeciesthefollowingwillbemeasured:Popula-tionsizeandRangeArea

Terrestrialhabitatshaveanongoingmonitor-ingprogram.

Aquatichabitatsandmonitoringofspecieswillbedevelopedwithinthecomingtwoyears.

Entireterritory

MonitoringofNa-tura2000Network

TomeettherequirementsofArticles11and17inhabitatdirective

Programtobelaunchedthisyear.Thefollow-ingwillbemonitored:

Habitats:-Area(allareas,butinfrequent)-Structureandfunctions(asmallno.ofpa-rameters,e.g.,Forest:forestfires,treespeciescomposition,CWD;Wetlands:Hydrology;Watercourses:Hydromorphology);Typicalspecies(veryfewofthesewillbemonitored)

Species:Populationsize&habitat

Allprotectedareas(mostareNatura2000)

Source:ErikHellberg,Naturvardsverket

41


CAFF area

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

finland1.pdf 1 2011-10-12 14:25:19

4.7 Finland

SimilartootherEuropeannations,Finlanddoesnothavemuchinthewayofmonitoringprogramsdirectedspecificallyatprotectedareas.Inaddition,Finlandconsiders“protectedareas”toincludenotjustthoseareaslegislatedassuchbutalsostatelandreservedfornatureprotectionbygovernmentdecisionbutnotyetformallyestablishedbylaw.ItalsoincludesitsNatura2000Network,sitesestablishedforthepurposeofprotectingandmanagingcertainspeciesandhabitats,thoughnotformallyprotected.InmostcasestheNatura2000areasoverlapwithestablishedprotectedareasorareasreservedfornatureprotection.Table10broadlydescribesthemonitoringprogramsinFinlandwhereprotectedareamanagersareresponsibleorimportantpartners.Monitoringcarriedoutinprotectedareasisnormallyconductedinthecontextofnationalbiodiversityandnaturalresourcesmonitoringprograms,ofwhichthereareabout60programsandmanyofthoseareconductedbyorinconjunctionwithNGOs.Finlandusesmorethan100biodiversityindicatorsgroupedintodifferentcategories,mainlybyhabitat,andincludingindicatorsforpressures,state,impactsandresponses.

MonitoringprogramsinFinlandtendtofallintotwobroadcategories:thoseintendedtomonitorbroadchangesinbiodiversityatthespecies,habitatandlandscapelevels;andmorespecificprogramswhichfocusonrareorendangeredspeciesandhabitattypes.SomesurveysarespecifictoprotectedareasbutmosttendtobepartofthenationalmonitoringprogramframeworkwhichisdrivenlargelybytheHabitatsDirectiveandtheBirdsDirective.TheproportionofthespeciespopulationsandhabitatareaandtheirtrendandwithintheNatura2000networkmustbereportedforthefirsttimein2013.KeyArcticspeciesbeingmonitoredinFinlandincludegoldeneagle,peregrinefalcon,gyrfalcon,lesserwhite-frontedgoose,Arcticfox,white-tailedeagle,freshwaterpearlmusselandwolverine.

Theprotectedareacomponentofnationalmonitoringprogramshasbeenanalyzedinsome


Figure 8 Protected Areas of Finland

42

researchprojectsandconservationassessmentsbutnotonaregularbasis.Theseanalysesareusuallyledbyresearchinstitutesoruniversities.Protectedareavisitationismonitoredandperiodicsurveysareconducted.FinlandisplanningtoassessperiodicallythestateofallNatura2000areasincludingstatusandtrendassessmentofhabitats,species,recreationalandsubsistencevalues,keythreatsandsoon.

Table 10: Monitoring programs in Finland OnlythemonitoringprogramswhereprotectedareamanagersintheArcticareaareinvolvedarelisted.Source:HeikkiEeronheimo,MetsahallitusMonitoring Program(s) Indicator(s) StandardGoldeneagle(Aquila chrysaetos)populationmonitoring

Informationcollected:nestlocations,occupancy,breedingresults

Nordiccountries

Peregrinefalcon(Falco peregrinus)populationmonitoring

Informationcollected:territorylocations,occupancy,breed-ingresults

National,adaptedfromGoldeneaglemonitoring

Gryfalcon(Falco rusticolus)populationmonitoring

Informationcollected:nestlocations,occupancybreedingresults

National,adaptedfromgoldeneaglemonitoring

Lesserwhite-frontedgoose(Ansererythropus)populationmonitoring

Informationcollected:nestlocations,occupancy,breedingresults National

Arcticfox(Alopex lagopus)populationmonitoring

Informationcollected:denlocation,itscharacteristics,andoccupancy

National/Nordiccountries

White-tailedeagle(Haliaeetus albicilla)populationmonitoring

Informationcollected:nestlocations,occupancy,breedingresults

National,partlyadaptedfromGoldeneaglemonitor-ing

Freshwaterpearlmussel(Mar-garitifera margaritifera)popula-tionsurveys

Informationcollectedfromlocalities:status,abundance,loca-tion,descriptionofhabitats

(National?)

Breedingland-birdlinetransectcensusesinprotectedareas(survey/monitoring)

Summariesbyprotectedarea:observationnumbers,estimat-eddensitiesandpopulationsizesforeachobservedspeciesandfordifferentspeciesgroups

Standardizedwidelyusedmethod(atleastNational)

Speciessurveysinprotectedareas(mainlypolyporesintheArcticarea)

Informationcollected:speciesobservations(location,abundance),surveymethods,surveyedareas

WithinNHS,developedbyNHSfordifferentspeciesgroupandsurveytarget

Monitoring/surveysofthreatenedand/orhabitatdirective’sspecies

Informationcollectedfromknownlocalities:status,abundance,location,descriptionofhabitats,managementneeds

Partlyunderpreparation,TargetNational/EU

Monitoring/surveysofthreatenedand/orhabitatdirective’sspe-cies(NHSnationalcoordinationresponsibility

Informationcollectedfromknownlocalities:status,abundance,location,descriptionofhabitats,managementneeds

Underpreparation,TargetNational/EU

Wildlifetrianglecounts(gamespecies)

Abundancelevelsandchangesofspecies National

Monitoringoflargecarnivores Abundancelevelsandchangesofspecies National/RegionalHabitatsurveyofprotectedareas Informationcollectedbycompartment(polygonfeature):habitat

characteristics,treecomposition(plusdeadwood),Natura-habitats,managementneeds,otherbiodiversityvalues,etc

Nationalprotectedareas

AssessmentofconservationstatusofspeciesandhabitatsinHabitatsDirective

Habitats:assessmentofrange,areacoveredbyhabitat,specificstruc-turesandfunctions(includingtypicalspecies),futureprospectsandoverallassessments

Species:assessmentsofrangepopulation,habitatforthespecies,futureprospectsandoverallassessment.

Assessmentsincludeinformationonsize,trend,reasonfortrend,pressures,andthreatswhenrelevant

EU-scale

AssessmentofcontributionofNatura2000Network(andotherconservationmeasures)ontheconservationstatusofthehabitatsandspeciesinHabitatsDirective

Proportion(area/populationsize)innetwork,trendinnetwork,con-servationmeasuresandtheireffects)

EU-scale

43

Monitoring Program(s) Indicator(s) StandardAssessmentonthestateofNatura2000areas

Underpreparation,pilotphase:statusandtrendassessmentsofconservationvalues,managementactivitiesandneeds,pressuresandthreats,definitionofothermainvalues

National

IUCNRedListassessments:species Threatclassesandtheirchanges;threatsandpressures,etc.

IUCN

IUCNRedListassessments:habi-tats

Threatclassesandtheirchanges;Threatsandpressures,etc.

Nationalscale

4.8 RussiaEnvironmentalmonitoringprogramsinRussiavaryaccordingtothecategoryofprotectedarea.“Strictreserves”haveecologicalmonitoringasoneoftheirmainfunctions.Nationalparksnormallydoaswellandwhilewildlifereserveshavenosuchrequirements,“adhoc”observationsareconductedbyoutsideagenciesincludingresearchinstitutes,universities,huntingandfishingagenciesandmeteorologicalagencies.

EcologicalmonitoringinthestrictreservesisconductedwithinthecontextoftheNatureChroniclesProgram,whichdescribesmonitoringthemes,monitoringmethodologiesandtheformatofpresentationandanalysesofresults.

Themesincluderelief,soil,weather,water,floraandvegetation,animalsandanthropogenicimpacts.Withineachthemearediscretecomponentsorindices,e.g.,floraandvegetationindicesincludenewspecies,rarespeciespopulation,phenology,productivityandyieldofberries,nuts,etc.

TherearesomechallengesinherentintheNatureChroniclesProgramincludingaveryformalstructurewithoutprioritization(i.e.,allcomponentsandindicesareconsideredtobeofequalimportance),adesignintendedlargelyforforestedareasandlackofresources(bothfinancialandexpertise).

Thatsaid,RussiadoeshaveextensivemonitoringobservationsforArcticandSubarcticreserves.Thebestseriesincludeweather,phenology,endangeredbirdandmammalspecies,harvestedmammals,waterfowl,seabirds,lemmingsandreindeer.Significantgapsincludepermafrost,seaice,freshwaterfish,marinefish,marinemammalsandinsectobservations.

Toaddresstheinconsistenciesamongstrictreservemonitoringprogramsandtoenablebetterassessmentofbiodiversityconditionsandcurrentandpossiblethreatstoprotectedareaintegrity,Russiadecidedtodevelopamorestandardapproachtomonitoring,focusingonthefollowingthemes: -localfloraandfauna -landscapeorvegetationstructure -mostimportantabioticprocesses -weatherandphenology -endangeredspecies -speciesofsocioeconomicimportance -speciesofbiocentricimportance -majorecosystems -mostimportantanthropogenicimpacts

Eachthemeissubdividedintomonitoringindices.Forexample,majorecosystemindicesincludepermafrost,snowcover,groundwater,icecover,vegetationstructureandproductivity,phytoplankton,invertebratepopulation,zooplankton,birdpopulations,rodentpopulationsandfishpopulations.Eachindexisfurthersubdividedintomonitoringindicators(e.g.,speciespopulationindicatorsincludeabundance,areaanddistribution,sex-agestructure,physiologicalconditionandhabitatconditions).

However,whilethedesignforcomprehensiveprotectedareamonitoringinArcticandSubarcticRussiaisinplace,implementationhasbeenpostponedduetolackofresourcesandmanagementchallenges.

44

5.0 Themes, key ecosystem components, and indicators

5.1 European Union (EU)

TheEUHabitatsDirective,theBirdsDirective,theWaterFrameworkDirectiveandtheNatura2000NetworktogetherformthefoundationforEurope’sNatureConservationPolicy.TheWaterFrameworkDirectivefocusesontheprotectionofEuropeanwatersandbiotaincludingfish,benthicinvertebrates,macrophytesandplankton.TheHabitatsDirectiveconcentratesontheconservationofimportanthabitatsandassociatedspeciesandtheBirdsDirectiveconcentratesonthestateofallEuropeanbirdspecies.Natura2000isthecenterpieceofEUnatureandbiodiversitypolicy.ItisanEU-widenetworkofnatureprotectionareasestablishedundertheHabitatsDirectiveandisintendedtoensurethelong-termsurvivalofEurope’smostvaluableandthreatenedspeciesandhabitats.ItiscomprisedofSpecialAreasofConservationdesignatedbyEUstatespursuanttotheHabitatsDirectiveandSpecialProtectionAreasdesignatedpursuanttotheBirdsDirective.

EuropeanUnionstatesarerequiredtomonitornaturalhabitatsandspeciesinaccordancewiththesedirectiveswithparticularattentiontopriorityhabitattypesandpriorityspecies.Monitoringistobecarriedoutfortheentireterritoryandnotjustthespecificprotectedareas.Memberstatesarerequiredtoreporteverysixyears(thenextreportisduein2013).Inparticular,thereportsincludeinformationconcerningconservationmeasurestaken,theeffectivenessofthosemeasuresandthemainresultsoftherespectivemonitoringprograms.

Table11summarizestheEUbiodiversitythemesandindicators.


CAFF areaOnly protected areas overlapping or north of the CAFF boundary are displayed

Figure 9 Protected Areas of Russia

45

Table 11: EU biological diversity themes and indicators

FOCAL AREA: STATUS AND TRENDS OF THE COMPONENTS OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITYEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:TrendsinabundanceanddistributionofselectedspeciesAbundanceanddistributionofselectedspeciesEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:Changeinstatusofthreatenedand/orprotectedspeciesRedListIndexforEuropeanspeciesSpeciesofEuropeaninterestEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:Trendsinextentofselectedbiomes,ecosystemsandhabitatsEcosystemcoverageHabitatsofEuropeaninterestEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:Trendsingeneticdiversityofdomesticatedanimals,cultivatedplants,fishspeciestreesofmajorsocioeconomicimportanceLivestockgeneticdiversityEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:CoverageofprotectedareasSitesdesignatedundertheEUHabitatsandBirdsDirectives

FOCAL AREA: THREATS TO BIODIVERSITYEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:NitrogendepositionCriticalloadexceedancefornitrogenEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:TrendsininvasivealienspeciesInvasivealienspeciesinEuropeEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:ImpactofclimatechangeonbiodiversityOccurrenceoftemperature-sensitivespecies

FOCAL AREA: ECOSYSTEM INTEGRITY AND ECOSYSTEM GOODS AND SERVICESEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:MarineTrophicIndexMarineTrophicIndexofEuropeanseasEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:Connectivity/FragmentationofecosystemsFragmentationofnaturalandsemi-naturalareasFragmentationofriversystemsEuropeanHeadlineIndicator:WaterqualityinaquaticecosystemsNutrientsintransitional,coastal,andmarinewatersFOCAL AREA: SUSTAINABLE USEEuropean Headline Indicator: Area of forest, agriculture, fishery and aquaculture ecosystems under sustainable management Forest: growing stock, increment and fellingsForest: deadwoodAgriculture: nitrogen balanceAgriculture: area under management practices potentially supporting biodiversityFisheries: European commercial fish stocksAquaculture: effluent water quality from finfish farms European Headline Indicator: Ecological Footprint and biocapacity of European countries Ecological Footprint of European countries

5.2 North America

TheU.S.andCanadianapproachestomonitoringinArctic-protectedareastendtobeagencyandarea-specificandnotwellintegrated.Therespectivethemes,keyecosystemcomponentsandindicatorsusedbyAlaskan(bothfederalandState)andCanadianagenciesaredescribedforAlaskaandCanadainSection5.Thatsaid,Alaskan(andCanadian,inaseparatebutsimilarinitiative)authoritiesareworkingtodevelopanintegrated,cascadingmonitoringschemewherebycertainthemeswouldbemonitoredatstate-wide,ecoregionorrefugescales,asfollows:


46

Statewide: Climate Airquality,precipitationchemistry Phenology Waterqualityandquantity Deformitiesandcontaminantsinorganisms

Ecoregion: Habitatmosaics Migratoryspecies Permafrost-relatedeventsandresources Shorelinechanges Otherlandscapeprocesses

Refuge: Subsistenceresources Ecologicalkeystones,ecosystemengineersorkeylandscapemodifiers Localstressorsandresponses Refuge-significantspeciesnotcoveredatecoregionalextent Specialplantandanimalcommunitiesindividualrefuges

Table12illustrateshowthekeyecosystemcomponentscouldbemonitoredusingvariousindicators(attributes).

Table 12: Proposed Alaskan monitoring regime

Indicator Measure / AttributeClimate Accumulatedatafromexistingweatherstationsandotherclimatenetworks;supplementbyfillinggapsthat

willimproveclimatemodelsatvariousextents;attributesincludetemperature,precipitations,snowdepth,snow-waterequivalent,freeze-thawevent,lengthofgrowingseason

Airquality,precipitationchemistry

Accumulatedatafromexistingair-qualitystations;fillgapstoimprovemodelaccuracy

Landcover Includeattributesofvegetationmosaic,distributionofwaterbodies,glaciers,seaice;createaseamlessmapeveryfivetosevenyears(perhapswithpaneldesignusingsatelliteimagery,ground-truthing,ormaybeasys-tematicgridofgroundplots;collaboratewithUSForestService’sForestInventoryandAnalysisprogram

Phenology Thisisalreadybeingdonebyothers;surrogateforotherspecies’dynamics;exampleattributesincludevegeta-tiongreeningandbrowningusingNDVIice-outandice-in,andothermetricsorganizedbytheNationalPheno-logicalNetwork(e.g.,budburst,arrivalofmigrants,firstnestingdates)

Waterqualityandquantity

Mostcost-effectivetoorganizeatstatewideextent,butmayneedtoparameterizeatecologicalorfinerresolu-tion;includeswetlands,riparianareas,andlenticsystems

Deformitiesandcon-taminantsinorganisms

Birdbeaks,amphibians;contaminantsinseabirds,othertaxa

Habitatmosaics Compositionofhabitattypesimportanttoprimarymonitoringentitiesintheecoregion(e.g.,asdeterminantsofdistributionsofspeciesmonitoredbythoseentities)

Migratoryspecies Includesbirds,largemammals(ungulates,carnivores,anadromousfishes,andmarinespecies)Permafrost-relatedeventsandresources

Exampleattributes:thermokarst,fillinganddrainingoflakes&wetlands

Shorelinechanges Mayneedlocal-scalenormalizationOtherlandscapepro-cesses

Examples:fireandsubsequentsuccession

Subsistenceresources Examples:plantparts,animalsEcologicalkeystones,ecosystemengineersorkeylandscapemodifiers

Examples:seaotters,beavers,moose,and(cyclically)lagomorphs

Localstressorsandresponses

Examples:roads,snow-machineuse,non-subsistenceharvest,localizedsitesofrecreation,etc.

Refugesignificantspeciesnotcoveredatecoregionalextent

Examplesincludespeciesinrefugespurposesandotherstatuteswithhomerangessmallerthantherefuge(e.g.furbearers)

47

Specialplantandanimalcommunities

Examples:Eelgrass,rarehabitat,endemicornarrowlydistributedanimals

Source:Woodward,A.,andE.A.Beever.2010.FrameworkforecologicalmonitoringonlandsofAlaskaNationalWildlifeRefugesandtheirpartners,Anchorage,Alaska.U.S.GeologicalSurvey,Open-FileReport2010-1300,94p.

5.3 Selection considerations

EachArcticcountryandvirtuallyeveryagencyapproachesmonitoringinitsownwayalthoughtherearecommonfeatures.

Mostmonitoringagenciescapturemonitoringprogramsaccordingtotheme(e.g.,wildlife,climate,habitat,humanuses,speciescomposition,etc.).Whilethereislittleconsistencyamongagenciesinlabelingthemes,keyecosystemcomponentsandindicators,thereissufficientcommongroundtodrawoutaconsensuslist.

Intheend,selectedkeyecosystemcomponentsshouldbe:

• relevanttomostprotectedareas(notallmonitoringprogramscanapplytoallprotectedareasgiventhediversityofecoregionsrepresentedandtheneedtodeveloparelativelyshortlistofcommonmonitoringprograms);

• relevanttokeybiodiversityissues(responsivetothestressorsidentifiedin3.0,above);• responsivetochange(nottoosensitive,nottooresilient);• measurableacrossextremelybroadscales(butatthesametimesensitiveenoughtoyielduseful

data);• measuredbymultipleArcticcountries(relevanttospecificconcernsinspecificprotectedareasand

atthetimeyielddataandinformationrelevanttothecircumpolarArctic);• amenabletouseofstandardprotocolsthatcanbecomparedacrosslargeareas(oneofthekey

challengesisthestandardizationofmonitoringprotocolssothatdatacanbecomparedfromjurisdictiontojurisdiction);

• easilyestablished,inexpensiveandreadilymaintained(otherwisetheprogramswillrequiretoomuchtimeandresourcestobesustained).Inthiscontext,satellite-basedremotesensingoffersconsiderableopportunityforcost-effective,efficientandeffectivelong-termmonitoringofsomeindicators.

Finally,whereverpossible,theoverallmonitoringschemeshouldutilizeexistingresourcesandprogramsandbuildonotherinitiativesratherthanproceedingseparateandapartfromthem.Arcticcountriesareunlikelytoagreetotakeonsignificantnewmonitoringprogramsgivenresourceconstraints.

6.0 Proposed approach for an APAMS

Theidealmonitoringscheme—onesetofmonitoringprogramsthatallArcticcountrieswouldimplementatthesametimeusingthesameprotocols—isunlikelyintheshortterm,ifatall.Resourceshortfalls,differentmonitoringapproachesatthenationallevel,multipleagenciesandorganizationsexactingindividualprograms,thefactthatnotallprotectedareascontainacommonsetofkeyecosystemcomponents–allthesefactorsleadtotheconclusionthata“one-size-fits-all”approachisnotimmediatelyfeasible.

A“modular”approachshouldbeadopted.This“modularapproach”shouldcombinemonitoringprogramsconductedatdifferentscales,whichmayfocusondifferingkeyecosystemcomponents,butcomplimentallcountries.Differentkeyecosystemcomponentsmayactassurrogates;monitoringdoneatastate-widescalemaycompliment(orsubstitutefor)monitoringinformalprotectedareas.Resultsofmonitoringprogramsthatdonotfocusexplicitlyonprotectedareasmaybeinterpolatedorextrapolated

48

toprotectedareas.Insomecases,monitoringtakesplaceinlocationsoutsideprotectedareasthatareindistinguishableinbiodiversityanddisturbancelevelsfromthosethatareprotected(e.g.,GreenlandandSweden;seeFigures10and11,and13-15respectively).MonitoringresultsfromtheselocationsareasvalidasthosefromformalprotectedareasforthepurposeoftrackingchangesinbiodiversityintheArctic.Thekeywillbetoselectrepresentativeappropriateecosystemcomponentsandsurrogates;tointerpolateorextrapolateusingsoundmethodologies;andtoensurethatmonitoringprogramsconductedatallscalesfollowstandardprotocolstoensurecomparativeresults.

6.1 Terminology

OneofthefirststepsindevelopinganeffectiveAPAMSprogramistheadoptionofclearmonitoringprogramterminology.

TheCBMPapproachtoArcticbiodiversityindicesandindicatorsisdescribedinTable2oftheCBMPImplementationPlanOverviewDocumentwherethefollowingdefinitionsareused:

Theme:overarchinglandscape,biologicalorpolicycategory.Examplesinclude:speciescomposition;ecosystemstructure;habitatextentandchangeinquality,ecosystemfunctionsandservices;humanhealthandwell-being;andpolicyresponses.

Index:themesubcategoryconsideredcentraltotheprotectedareaecosystem.Examplesinclude:theArcticSpeciesTrendIndex;theArctictrophiclevelindex;theArcticlandcoverchangeindex;,theArctichumanhealthwell-beingindex;coverageofprotectedareas;andtrendsinextent,frequency,intensityanddistributionofnaturaldisturbances..

Indicator:specificelementsassociatedwithindicesthat,whencarefullymonitored,areindicativeoftheoverallconditionoftheindex.Examplesinclude:,trendsinabundanceofkeyspeciesandtrends;keytrophiclevelindicator;trendsinextentofbiomes,habitatsandecosystems;trendsinpatchsizedistributionofhabitats;trendsinextent,frequency,intensityanddistributionofnaturalandhuman-induceddisturbances;trendsinavailabilityofbiodiversityfortraditionalfoodandmedicine;changesinprotectedareacoverage.

Inthisexample,eachindicatorwouldhaveasub-elementorelementsthatwouldberepresentativeoftheoverallthemeandthefocusofamonitoringprogram(e.g.,speciescomposition/ArcticSpeciesTrendIndex/trendsinabundanceofkeyspecies,orterrestrialfauna/caribou/femalecariboubodyfatconditioninwinter).Statisticscouldbeobtainedthroughharvestersurveys,whichcouldprovideanumberofothermeasuressuchashuntereffort,weatherconditions,snowdepthandsoon.

Incomparison,theU.S.NationalParkServiceusestheterms“monitoringframework,”(e.g.,airandclimate)and“vitalsigns,”(e.g.,airbornecontaminants).TheU.S.FishandWildlifeServiceuses“indicator”and“measurement”or“attribute”respectively.TheNorthwestTerritoriesCumulativeImpactMonitoringProgram(NWTCIMP)uses“valuedcomponent”(e.g.,climateandclimatechange),and“indicator”(e.g.,snowpackdepth).ParksCanadauses“ecosystemintegrityindicators”,wheretheNWTCIMPuses“valuedcomponents,”andsoon.

Forthepurposesofthisdiscussionpaper,theterms“CBMPbio-theme”,“monitoringtheme”,“focalecosystemcomponent”,“indicator”and“measure”willbeusedtodescribeacascadingapproach(fromtheverybroadandgeneral,tothenarrowandprecise)toacommonmonitoringprotocol.Thisapproachfollowsthatofthe

Anexample:

CBMPecosystem:terrestrialfaunaMonitoringtheme:ungulatesFocalecosystemcomponent:caribouIndicator:breedingsuccessMeasure:cow/calfratio

49

ExpertMonitoringGroupsestablishedbytheCBMP.TheapplicationoftraditionalknowledgeinArcticbiodiversitymonitoringhasbeenaddedasaseparatetheme.

6.2 APAMS program - monitoring scheme components

TheAPAMSprogramschememustanswerthebroadquestion:HowisArcticprotectedareabiodiversityrespondingtothekeychallengesandstressorsidentifiedearlierinthispaper?

Onceacommonterminologyhasbeenaccepted,thenextstepistoagreeonwhatwillbemonitored.Tobeeffective,eachmonitoringprogramshouldtargetandtrackaspecificmeasurethatreliablyrepresentsthestateofaspecificindicatorchosenasanaccurategaugeofthestateofaparticularfocalecosystemcomponent,whichinturnisrepresentativeofakeymonitoringtheme.Consistentmonitoringoftheselectedmeasureswillovertimewillyieldtrendsinindicators,focalecosystemcomponentsandperhapsmonitoringthemes.Monitoringwillalsodeterminethefeasibilityofusingdifferentfocalecosystemcomponentsassurrogatesforothersandthefeasibilityofusingaparticularindicatorasasurrogateforotherindicators,thusincreasingtheoveralleffectivenessandefficiencyofthemonitoringprograms.

Theoverarchingmonitoringthemeswerederivedfromcurrentcircumpolarmonitoringprograms.Focalecosystemcomponentswerelikewisedrawnfromexistingprograms,butalsobecauseoftheirassociatedvaluesandsensitivitytothestressorsidentifiedearlierinSection4.0.Additionally,thereport“ArcticBiodiversityTrends2010–Selectedindicatorsofchange”(CAFFInternationalSecretariat,Akureyri,Iceland.May2010)identifiedthefollowingindicators:

• Polarbears• Wildreindeerandcaribou• Shorebirds–redknot• Seabirds–murres(guillemots)• Seabirds–commoneiders• Arcticchar• Invasivespecies(human-induced)• TheArcticSpeciesTrendIndex• Arcticgeneticdiversity• Arcticsea-iceecosystem• GreeningoftheArctic• Reproductivephenologyinterrestrialecosystems• AppearinganddisappearinglakesintheArcticandtheirimpactsonbiodiversity• Arcticpeatlands• Effectsofdecreasedfreshwatericecoverdurationonbiodiversity• Changingdistributionofmarinefish• Impactsofhumanactivitiesonbenthichabitat• Reindeerherding• Seabirdharvest• Changesinharvest• Changesinprotectedareas• Linguisticdiversity

Table13summarizessomeofthekeyvaluesofeachmonitoringthemeandthelinkedstressors.Becauseeachfocalecosystemcomponentforeachmonitoringthemeshouldfulfillthesamevaluesandrespondtothesamestressors,theyarenotlistedseparatelyhere.

50

Table 13: CBMP ecosystem, monitoring theme, key values and key linked stressors

Ecosystem Monitoring Theme Value Linked StressorTerrestrialfauna ungulates centralecosystemcomponent,

culturalimportanceclimatechange,increasinghumanuse,development

predators iconicspecies,toppredators,someatrisk

climatechange,increasinghumanuse,development

smallmammals importantkeystonespeciesinecosystemfoodchains

climatechange,development

passerinesandshore-birds

indicatorsofchange,someatrisk climatechange,development,contaminants,invasivespp

waterfowl indicatorsofchange,culturalimportance,someatrisk


Freshwater fish indicatorsofchange,culturalimportance,someatrisk


water indicatorofchange,fundamentalecosystemimportance

climatechange,development,contaminants

icecover indicatorofchange,ecosystemfunction,importanthabitat

climatechange

Terrestrialvegetation phenology indicatorofchange,importanthabitat

climatechange,invasives

landscapechange indicatorofchange,importanthabitat


Marine marinemammals indicatorofchange,culturalim-portance,someatrisk

climatechange,increasinghumanuse,contaminants

fish indicatorofchange,culturalim-portance,someatrisk

climatechange,increasinghumanuse

seabirds indicatorofchange,culturalim-portance,someatrisk


oceancirculation indicatorofchange,ecosystemfunction

climatechange

Coastal coastaldynamics indicatorofchange,ecosystemfunction

climatechange

Traditionalknowledge traditionalknowledge knowledgeofecosystempro-cesses,atrisk

lossoftraditionalknowledge

Table14summarizestheproposedAPAMSprogram.ItliststheabioticandbioticmonitoringthemesforeachCBMPecosystem.Eachmonitoringthemeincludesseveralfocalecosystemcomponents(perhapsinterchangeableandatleastcomplementary).Thesuggestedindicatorsarecommonforeachfocalecosystemcomponent,i.e.,theindicatorsallapplytoeachfocalecosystemcomponentinthatparticularmonitoringtheme,e.g.,breedingsuccessappliestoallungulatefocalecosystemcomponents.Eachindicatorinturnhasadiscretemeasure,e.g.,theindicatorofbreedingsuccessisthecow/calfratio.

Suggestedkeyecosystemcomponentsarethemselvesindicatorsofvariousaspectsofbiodiversity,forexample:• wolverine,grizzlybear,goldeneagle–indicatorsofrangequality• lemmings–keystonespecies,indicatorsofecosystemfunctioning• caribounumbers–indicatorsofecosystemrecovery• endangeredspeciesorthoseatrangelimits–indicatorsofuniqueness• vegetationcover–indicatorofdiversity• speciessensitivetoclimatechange,increasingordecreasingicecover–indicatorsofresilience• invasivespecies–indicators(andagents)ofchange

Theselectionofappropriatemeasuresisimportant.Appropriatemeasuresshouldincludethose:• wherethereareexistingprogramsandstandardizedprotocols(e.g.,aerialcensus)• wheretherearelong-term,standardized,universaldatabases(e.g.,seaicerecords)

51

• thatareamenabletosatelliteorotherremotesensingtechnologies(e.g.,seaicedistributionandthickness)

• thatcanbeimplementedeasily(e.g.,NDVI)

Table 14: Draft APAMS

1. CBMP ecosystem: Terrestrial Flora and Fauna

1 (a) FloraMonitoring theme Focal ecosystem compo-

nentIndicator Measure Expert agency

Phenology Plantcommunitystruc-ture

Speciescomposition,ratios Sppidentification,sppratiocalculation,invasivespp,yeartoyearcompari-son

UNEPGRIDA,IUCNarcticplantbryophytespecial-istgroups,IUCNRedListauthorities

Plantgrowth Springgreen-up NDVI ITEX,GLORIA,IUCNspecialistgroups

Landscapechange permafrost Groundtemperature,groundslumpingnatureandextent

Temperaturemea-surements,landscapemapping

Universities,governmentagencies

Infrastructuredevelopment Roads,buildings,trails Mappingofnewinfrastructuredevel-opment,yeartoyearcomparison

Protectedareamanage-mentauthority

Humanuse Natureandfrequencyofvisitation

Surveys,observa-tions,visitorreports

Protectedareamanage-mentauthority

1(b) FaunaMonitoring theme Focal ecosystem

componentIndicator Measure Expert agency

Ungulates CaribouWildreindeerMooseMuskoxWildsheepandgoats

Abundance,distribu-tion,breedingsuccess,populationtrend,herdhealth

census,seasonalmove-ments,cow/calfratio,fatcondition,harveststatistics,yeartoyearcomparison

CARMA,IUCNCaprinaeSpecialistGroup,wildlifeagencies

Predators Brown/grizzlybearWolfWolverineRedfoxWhitefox

Abundance,distribu-tion,breedingsuccess,populationtrend

census,seasonalmove-ments,littersuccess,harveststatistics,yeartoyearcomparison

BrownBearNetwork,IUCNwolf,bear,canid,smallcar-nivorespecialistgroups,wildlifeagencies

Smallmammals LemmingsVolesMiceHaresPikasshrews


census,seasonalmove-ments,littersuccess,yeartoyearcomparison

ParksCanada,Finland,Russia,IUCNsmallmammal,lago-morphspecialistgroups.

Passerinesandshore-birds

PasserinespeciesShorebirdspecies,e.g.,redknot,phala-ropespp


census,seasonalmove-ments,nestingsuccess,yeartoyearcomparison

IUCNbirdspecialistgroups

Waterfowl BrentgooseSlavoniangrebewhite-frontedgoose

Abundance,distribution,breedingsuccess,popula-tiontrend

census,seasonalmove-ments,nestingsuccess,harveststatistics,yeartoyearcomparison

WetlandsInternational,IUCNgooseduckspecialistgroups,wildlifeagencies

Endangeredspecies RedBook(unlessnotedabove)


census,seasonalmove-ments,reproductivesuccess,yeartoyearcomparison

IUCNBirdRedBookauthori-ties,IUCNThreatenedWater-fowlSpecialistGroup

52

2. CBMP ecosystem: FreshwaterMonitoring theme Focal ecosystem


Fish WhitefishspeciesArcticcharRedBookspecies

abundance,distri-bution,spawningsuccess,yeartoyeartrends

census,seasonalmovements,youngofyear,harveststatis-tics,yeartoyearcomparison

FisheriesJointManage-mentCommittee(NWT),IUCN/WIFreshwaterFishSpecialistGroup,IUCNSalmonidSpecialistGroup,IUCNRedBookauthori-ties,fisheriesmanagementagencies

Water Waterquality benthicinvertebrates,chemistrytemperature,turbidity

benthiccommunitystructure,keychemicalconstituents(e.g.,nutrients),temperaturemeasure-ments,turbiditymeasurements,yeartoyearcomparison

ParksCanada,FreshwaterBiodiversityNetwork,NationalWaterResearchInsti-tute(EnvironmentCanada)

Waterquantity seasonalflow,sur-facecover/extent

Waterlevelsandvolumes,surfacemapping,yeartoyearchanges

CanadianMeteorologicalService/WaterSurveyofCanada

Ice Icecover Icedistribution,icethickness

Surfacemapping,thicknessmeasurements,yeartoyearcomparison

CanadianIceService,NOAA

3. CBMP ecosystem: MarineMonitoring theme Focal ecosystem


Marine mammals Seal speciesWalrusPolar bearWhale species

Abundance, distribution, breeding success, popula-tion trend

census, seasonal move-ments, reproductive suc-cess, harvest statistics, year to year comparison

IUCN cetacean, polar bear, pinniped specialist groups

Fish ShrimpTurbotSalmonInvasive spp

Abundance,distr ibution, spawning success, year to year trends

census, seasonal move-ments, spawning suc-cess, harvest statistics year to year comparison

IUCN Salmonid Specialist Group, fisheries manage-ment agencies

Seabirds MurreEiderGuillemot species

Abundance,distr ibution, breeding success, popula-tion trend

census, seasonal move-ments, nesting success, year to year comparison

Circumpolar Seabird Group

Endangered species Red Book (unless noted above)

Abundance, distribution, breeding success, popula-tion trend

census, seasonal move-ments, reproductive success, year to year comparison

IUCN Bird Red Book authorities, IUCN Threat-ened Waterfowl Specialist Group

4. CBMP ecosystem: CoastalMonitoring theme Focal ecosystem com-

ponentIndicator Measure Expert agency

Coastaldynamics Coastlinechange coastalerosionordeposition

Coastlinemapping,currentregimemonitoring(speed,direction,vol-ume)yeartoyearcomparison

Governmentagencies,universities

Icecover seasonaldistribution,thickness

seaicecovermapping,thicknessmea-surement,yeartoyearcomparison

CanadianIceService

5. Additional theme: local knowledge

Monitoring theme Focal ecosystem com-ponent

Indicator Measure Expert agency

Useoftraditionalknowledge

Applicationoftraditionalknowledgeinenvi-ronmentalmonitoringprograms

Traditionalknowledgeholdersatisfaction

Surveys,participationbytraditionalholdersinmoni-toringprograms

Aboriginalgovernments,au-thoritiesandindividuals

53

Table15showswhichArcticcountriesarecurrentlymonitoringthethemesidentifiedabove.NA(notapplicable)appliesincaseswherethethemeisnotrelevantorpossibleinacountry.Insomecasesmonitoringisspecifictoprotectedareas(PA);inothercasesmonitoringisonastate-widescale(S)notspecifictobutincludingprotectedareas.Insomecasesmonitoringoccursonbothscales.Protectedarea-specificinformationcanalsobeextractedfromstate-wide(EU)programs;it’sprobablethattheseprogramscouldalsobeexpandedwithinprotectedareaswithoutsignificantadditionalcost.Table 15: Current Arctic protected area monitoring programs

Monitoring theme Indicator Alaska Canada Greenland Iceland Norway Sweden Finland Russia

CBMP ecosystem: Terrestrial

Uncertain:Monitoringprogramshave beendesigned but specific informationon theirapplicationis missing

Ungulates

abundance, distri-bution, herd health, breeding success, population trend

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

S(moose)

Predators

abundance, distri-bution, breeding success, popula-tion trend

SPA

SPA S S

PASPA S S

SmallMam-mals

abundance,distri-bution,breedingsuccess,populationtrend

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

Passerinesandshore-birds


SPA

SPA S S

PASPA

SPA

SPA

Waterfowl


SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

S

Endangeredspecies


SPA

SPA S S

PASPA S S

PA

Phenology

speciescomposition SPA

SPA S S

PAS S

PA S Uncertain:Monitoringprogramshavebeendesignedbutspecificinformationontheirapplicationismissing

green-up SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA S S

Landscapechange

permafrosttem-perature PA S

PASPA S S

PA S

infrastructure SPA

SPA PA PA PA PA

54

Monitoring theme Indicator Alaska Canada Greenland Iceland Norway Sweden Finland Russia

CBMP ecosystem: Freshwater

Uncertain:Monitoringprogramshavebeendesignedbutspecificinformationontheirapplicationismissing

Fish

abundance,distri-bution,spawningsuccess,populationtrend

SPA

SPA S S

PASPA S S

Waterqual-ity

benthicinvertebratehealth,chemistry,temperature,turbid-ity

SPA

SPA S S S S

PA S

Waterquan-tity

seasonalflows,surfaceextent

SPA

SPA

SPA S S S

Icecover icedistribution,thickness S S S S S S S

CBMP ecosystem: Marine

Marinemammals


S S SPA

SPA S NA

Fish

abundance,distri-bution,spawningsuccess,populationtrend

SPA

SPA S S

PASPA S NA

Seabirds


SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA

SPA NA

Oceancircu-lation

temperature,salin-ity,currentflow S S S S S NA

CBMP ecosystem: Coastal

Coastaldynamics

coastalerosion/de-position

SPA

SPA NA

currentflow S S S S S NAseasonalicecover-age,thickness,character

SPA

SPA S S S NA

Traditional knowledgeApplicationinmonitor-ing

Applicationinmoni-toringprograms

SPA

SPA S S S PA

7.0 Additional considerations and next steps

Thechallengeofcreatingaconsistentandcommoncircumpolarprotectedareasmonitoringprogramissignificantforanumberofreasons,amongthem:verydifferentapproachestoprotectedareasmonitoringinEuropeandNorthAmerica;frequentabsenceofconsistentmonitoringandreportingprotocols;limitedcommunicationandcoordinationamongresponsibleagencieswithinandamongArcticcountries;fundingandpersonnelconstraintsandsoon.Allthatsaid,itcanbedone.Thechallengeisnotsomuchtheabsenceofmonitoringprograms–therearefewsignificantgaps–butinthemanagementofthedataandknowledgederivedfromthenumerousmonitoringprograms.

Themostefficientapproachtodevelopingacommonsetofmonitoringprogramsistoderivefromexistingprogramsthecommonthemes,focalecosystemcomponents,indicatorsandmeasuresandtoconstructfromthemacircumpolarscheme.Anexaminationofexistingprotectedareaandstate-widemonitoringprogramssuggeststhatrelativelyminorimprovementsandenhancementstoexistingprogramswouldfilltheremaininggaps.Wherecountriesarenotmonitoringthesuiteoffocalecosystemcomponents,sufficientsurrogatesareavailable;similarly,whereprotectedarea-specificmonitoringprogramsarenotbeingconducted,datafromstate-wideprogramscanbeextrapolatedorinterpolated

effectively.Finally,relativelyminoradjustmentstothestate-wideprogramstoprovidemoredataspecifictoprotectedareascanbedonewithrelativelylittleeffort.Intheend,theobjectiveofmonitoringbiodiversityonacircumpolarscaleusingprotectedareasascontrolsorbaselinescanlargelybeachievedwithminorimprovementstoexistingmonitoringprogramsandgreatereffortdirectedtoinformationmanagement.

OnceconsensusisreachedbytheAPAMSnetworkonadraftsetofmonitoringthemes,focalecosystemcomponents,indicatorsandmeasures,thenextstepshouldbeconsultationwiththeExpertMonitoringGroups.Whilethevariousgroupsarefollowingdifferenttimelines,finalizingthestructureoftheAPAMSprogramshouldberelativelystraight-forward.

Followingthis,aAPAMSprogramimplementationplanwillberequired.Theplanwillneedtoaddresstwokeyaspects:first,creationofaninformationmanagementsystemthatcan“mine”existingdatabasesfortheinformationnecessarytoreportonthestateofArcticbiodiversityasseenthroughaprotectedarealens;andsecond,fillingtheremaininggapsinmonitoringprogramstoimprovethequalityofthebiodiversityassessments.

8.0 Summary

Agreementonasustainablesuiteofcircumpolarprotectedareabiodiversitymonitoringprogramsthatwilleffectivelyandefficientlycapturerepresentativekeydataattheappropriatescaleanddesigningandimplementingtheappropriateinformationmanagementsystemisbothdoableandarguablynecessary.

Therearerealchallengesassociatedwiththedevelopmentandimplementationofalong-termprotectedareabiodiversitymonitoringprogramthatcrossesnationalandinternationaljurisdictionsandthattakesintoaccountdifferentmonitoringapproachesandphilosophies.However,thegreaterchallengeisnotthedevelopmentofthemonitoringprogramspersebutrathercollecting,collatinganddisseminatingtheinformationthatisalreadyavailable.Therearefewsignificantgapsincurrentprotectedareamonitoringprogramsandstate-wideprogramsthatincludeprotectedareasthatwouldpreventreliablebiodiversityassessments.Withoutaneffectiveinformationmanagementregime,however,theknowledgegainedthroughthosemonitoringprogramsisoflimitedavailability.“Mining”andmanagingtheinformationalreadyheldinnumerousdatabasesisachallengebutonethatcanbeovercomewithrelativelyfewadditionalresources.

Asissooftenthecasewithenvironmentalmonitoringandstewardshipprograms,thesinglegreatestlimitingfactorisresources.Trained,professionalstaffareofteninshortsupply;adequatebudgetstoenablethemtodothenecessaryworkareofteninshortersupply.ThedevelopmentandimplementationofaneffectiveAPAMSprogramisarelativelystraightforwardexerciseiftheresourcesandcommitmentarethere.Astherisksandchallengesfromclimatechange,industrialdevelopment,longrangetransportofcontaminants,etc.increasinglyaffecttheArctic,itwillbeallthemoreimportanttoensurethatweunderstandwhatishappening,whyitishappeningandwhattheimplicationsare.ArobustandeffectivebiodiversitymonitoringprogramutilizingallavailableinformationandparticularlyinformationfromcircumpolarArcticprotectedareasisessentialnowmorethanever.

Forfurtherinformationandadditionalcopiescontact:

CAFF INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIATBorgir

Nordurslod600 Akureyri

ICELAND

Telephone:+3544623350Fax:+3544623390E-mail:[email protected]

Internet:http://www.caff.is

ISBN:978-9935-431-10-3

circumpolar protected areas monitoring - arctic portal

Documents