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: caff@caff.isInternet: http://www.caff.is

Editing:MichaelSvobodaLayout:CourtneyPrice

Acknowledgements

___CAFFDesignatedArea

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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,

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

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

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

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.

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)

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,

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

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

Figure 3 Protected Areas of Canada

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

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

ProtectedAreas

KeyIssues

Birdcoloniespro-tectionzones

GuillemotRazorbillLittleaukKittiwakeFulmarCormorantEiderKingsEiderBlackguillemotPuffinArcticternGulls

Hunting Populationsize(notallspecies)

Source:ElmerTopp-Jørgensen,DepartmentofDomesticAffairs,GovernmentofGreenland

CAFF area

Figure 4 Protected Areas of Greenland

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

(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

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

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

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

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

Figure 5 Protected Areas of Iceland

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

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

Figure 6 Protected Areas of Norway

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)

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

NationalMonitor-ingoftheMarineEnvironmentandLivingResources

Monitoringofseaenvironmentwithspecialfocusonsustainablefisher-iesmanagement

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

BarentsSeaNorwegianSea

Lead:NorwegianInstituteofMarineResearch(IMR)

AMAP/CAFF

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

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

RockybottomresearchalongthecoastsofNorthernNorway,Svalbard,andJanMayan

Mappingandstatemonitoring

Benthicecosys-tems

AlongthecoastsofNorthernNor-way,SvalbardandJanMayan

BjørnGulliksen,UniversityofTromsø

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

Populationecol-ogyofPolarbearintheSvalbardarea(1967-)

MOSJ Ursusmaritimus Svalbard MagnusAnder-sen,NPI

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

Blackguillemotpopulationecol-ogyinRøst(1990-)

ComparativemonitoringtothePuffinmonitoring

Cepphusgrille RøstArchipelago TychoAnker-Nils-sen,NINA

Monitoringofsea-birdpopulationsonBearIsland

Populationtrendmonitoringofthetwolargestsea-birdspeciesintheBarentsSeaandthemarineeco-systemthatthesespeciesbelong

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

BearIsland HallvardStrøm,NPI

Populationdevel-opmentofEiderinKongsfjorden,Svalbard(1981-)

Populationmoni-toring

-Somateriamollis-sima

Kongsfjorden,Spitsbergen

GeirWingGabri-elsen,NPI

ContaminationinGlaucousgullinBearIsland(1995-2002)

Tissuelevelsandeffectsofcontami-nants

-Larushyper-boreus

BearIsland JanOveBustnes,NINA

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

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

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

Populationdevel-opmentandecol-ogyofseabirdsinHornøya,EasternFinnmark(1980–)

NNMP -Rissatridactyla-Uriaaalge-Urialomvia-Fraterculaarctica-Phalacrocoraxaristotelis

Hornøya(Island) RobBarrett,Uni-versityofTromsø

PopulationdevelopmentofNorthernGannetinNorway(1947–)

NNMP -Morusbassanus Breedinglocalities(cliffs)inNorway

RobBarrett,Uni-versityofTromsø

Populationdevel-opmentofSea-birdsinSouthernVaranger,EasternFinnmark(1966-)

Breedingpopula-tionmonitoring

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

SouthernVaranger RobBarrett,Uni-versityofTromsø

ContaminantsinseabirdeggsfromNorthernNorwayandSvalbard(1983,1993,2003)

Eggsamples -Larusargentatus-Fraterculaarctica-Rissatridactyla-Larushyper-boreus

-Hornøya-Røst-BearIsland-Kongsfjorden

GeirWingGabri-elsen,NPI

Populationde-velopmentofKit-tiwakesinKongsf-jorden(1998-)

-Rissatridactyla Kongsfjorden GeirWingGabri-elsen,NPI

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

Marine Programmes

Geographic coverage

MonitoringofsedimentaryenvironmentsinIsfjorden,Svalbard(1992–)(timeintervalbetweensurveysis5years)

POPslevelinsedi-mentsandbenthicorganisms

-Benthicecosys-tems

SelectedfjordsintheIsfjordencom-plex,Svalbard

Akvaplanniva(plusothers)con-tractedbySyssel-mannenSvalbard

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

PersistentorganicpollutantsandheavymetalsinsedimentsandfishfromlakesinNorthernNorwayandSvalbard

POPsandheavymetallevelsinsedimentsandfish

-Freshwatereco-systems

NorthernNorwaySvalbard

GuttormN.Chris-tensen,Akvaplan-NIVA

Nationalmoni-toringoflakes;effectsoflongrangetransportofcontaminants

POPsandheavymetallevelsinsediments,waterquality

-Freshwaterecosystems

Norway BritLisaSkjelkvåle,NIVA

EUWaterFrame-workDirective

Directivenotyetimplementedandnospecificmoni-toringstarted

MonitoringofbreedingwadersandArcticSkuainSletnes(Gamvik),Finnmark(1989-)

Monitoringofbreedingpopula-tions

-Waders

-Stercorarius

Sletnes,Finnmarkcounty

K.B.Strann,Univer-sityofTromsø

MonitoringofbreedingwadersinKautokeino,Finnmark(1996-)

Monitoringofbreedingpopula-tions

-Waders Kautokeino,Finn-markcounty

Limnic Programmes

Geographic Coverage

SpringmigrationmonitoringofRedKnotinBalsfjord,TromsandPor-sangen,Finnmark(2002-)

Monitoringofspringmigration

-Calidriscanutus Balsfjord,TromsandPorsangen,Finnmark

Waterfowlcount-inginPasvikZapovednikandPasvikNatureReserve(1996-)

Densityanddistri-butionofwater-fowls

-Ducks-Geese-Waders

PasvikRiverwithinPasvikZapovednik&PasvikNatureReserve

PaulAspholm,BioForsk

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

MonitoringoffishandzooplanktoninPasvikRiver–(1991-)

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

Per-ArneAmund-sen,UniversityofTromsø

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

Monitoringofapolymorphicpopulation

-Coregonuslavaretus

Stourajavri,Finn-markcounty

Per-ArneAmund-sen,UniversityofTromsø

MonitoringofPearlmusselinNorway(1999-)

National-widemonitoring

-Margaritiferamargaritifera

BjørnMejdellLarsen,NINA

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

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

NIVA AMAP

LakeTakvatninTroms,Aquaticfauna(1980-)

UniversityofTromsø

Terrestrial Programmes

Geographic Coverage

TerrestrialMoni-toringProgram(TOV),Fauna

PopulationandreproductionmonitoringandeffectsofLTRAP

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

WithinCAFFarea:Dividalen,Tromscounty

JohnAtleKålås,NINA

TerrestrialMoni-toringProgram(TOV),Birchforest

MonitoringofLTRAPongroundvegetationinbirchforest

VegarBakkestuen,NINA

TerrestrialMoni-toringProgram(TOV),epiphytevegetation

MonitoringofLTRAPonepiphytevegetationinbirchforest

-Lichens-Alga-Bryophyte

IngaE.Bruteig,NINA

Geographic Coverage

Monitoringofpalsapeatlands

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

-Peatland FerdesmyraandGoatteluobbal,Finnmark

Ostojeaggi,Troms

HaugtjørninandLeirpullan,Sør-Trødelag

HaukskardmyrinOppland

AnnikaHofgaard,NINA

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

Svalbardcariboupopulationmoni-toringinAdvent-dalen(1979-)

Identifymecha-nismsforthepersistentinsta-bilityofanaturalpopulationofreindeer

-Rangifertarandus-platyrhynchus

Adventdalen,Spitsbergen

NicholasTyler,Uni-versityofTromsø

Svalbardcari-bouinBrøggerPeninsula(1978-)–projectofMOSJ

BrøggerPeninsula,

Ny-Ålesund,Spits-bergen

RonnyAanes,NPI CAFF

Svalbard(jawsfromhunting,monitoring)(1984-)

NordenskiöldLand,Spitsbergen

ØysteinWiig,Uni-versityofOslo

CuobbojeaggiProject(1991-)

Fecundityoffe-malereindeers

-Rangifertarandus-tarandus

Finnmarkcounty NicholasTyler,Uni-versityofTromsø

AMAP/CAFF

Muskrat(Ondatrazibeticus)inthePasvikRiver(1994-)

Populationde-velopmentofaninvasivespecies

-Ondatrazibetica PasvikRiver SteinarWikan,BioForsk

Microtusrossiae-meridionalisdy-namicsinSvalbard(1991-)

Monitoringonanintroducedspecies

-Microtusrossiae-meridionalis

Colesbay,Crou-mant,Longyearby-eninSpitsbergen

NigelG.Yoccoz,NINA

MonitoringofLesserWhite-frontedGooseinNorway(1991-)

Migrationmoni-toring

-Answererythro-pus

Valdak,Finnmarkcounty

IngarØien,NOF CAFF

Geographic Coverage

Populationdy-namics&studiesofBlackandWhiteFlycatcherinNorthernScandi-navia(1986-)

Monitoringofpop-ulationdynamics

-Muscicapidae Ammarnes,Swe-den(NorwegianareasonlySouthofthePolarCircle)

PerGustavThings-tad,NTNU

NorwegianBreed-ingBirdCensus(1995-)

Biodiversitymoni-toring

-AllNorwegianbirdspecies

MagneHusby,HINT

PopulationMoni-toringofSvalbardPtarmigan(1999-)projectofMOSJ

-Lagopusmutushyperboreus

CentralareaofSpitsbergen

EvaFuglei,NPI CAFF

Pink-footedgooseinVesterålen(2000-)

Migrationmoni-toring

-Anserbranchyrhynchus

Vesterålen IngunnM.Tombre,NINA

BarnaclegooseinNyÅlesund–NINA(1992-1998)

Reproductivebehavior

-Brantaleucopsis Ny-Ålesund,Spits-bergen

IngunnM.Tombre,NINA

Brownbearregis-trationsinPasvik(1972-)

-Ursusarctos Pasvik MartinSmith,BioForsk

BearinPasvik;springobserva-tions(annually)

Monitoringtimeofcaveleaving

-Ursusarctos Pasvik MartinSmith,BioForsk

Cesium137measuresinbodytissuesofreindeerherders(Samipeople)(1996-)

RadiationfromTsjernobylacci-dent

Finnmarkcountyandmid-Norway

ToneD.Bergan,NorwegianRa-diationProtectionAuthority

Monitoringofpopulationdevel-opment,fitnessandreproductionofsevenMoosepopulations(1967-)

Populationcondi-tions

-Alcesalces Tromscounty ErlingSolberg,NINA

Source:BårdØyvindSolberg,DirectorateforNatureManagement

4.6 Sweden

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

ThelimitedmonitoringprogramsoccurringspecifictoSwedishprotectedareasnowfocusontheparticularvaluesoftheprotectedarea(especiallythosethatcanbeprotectedandordevelopedbymanagement),theeffectsofconservationmeasures,visitationanddamagescausedbyrecreational

vehicletraffic.Someprogramsarenetwork-wideandothersarelimitedtocertainprotectedareas.Allareconstrainedbyverylimitedbudgetsandstaff.

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

CAFF area

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

Figure 7 Protected Areas of Sweden

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

CAFF area

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

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

Monitoring Program(s) Indicator(s) StandardAssessmentonthestateofNatura2000areas

Underpreparation,pilotphase:statusandtrendassessmentsofconservationvalues,managementactivitiesandneeds,pressuresandthreats,definitionofothermainvalues

National

IUCNRedListassessments:species Threatclassesandtheirchanges;threatsandpressures,etc.

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.

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

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:

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)

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

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

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.

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)

• 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

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

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

S(moose)

Predators

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

SPA S S

PASPA S S

SmallMam-mals

abundance,distri-bution,breedingsuccess,populationtrend

Passerinesandshore-birds

SPA S S

Waterfowl

Endangeredspecies

SPA S S

PASPA S S

Phenology

speciescomposition SPA

SPA S S

PA S Uncertain:Monitoringprogramshavebeendesignedbutspecificinformationontheirapplicationismissing

green-up SPA

SPA S S

Landscapechange

permafrosttem-perature PA S

PASPA S S

infrastructure SPA

SPA PA PA PA PA

Monitoring theme Indicator Alaska Canada Greenland Iceland Norway Sweden Finland Russia

CBMP ecosystem: Freshwater

Uncertain:Monitoringprogramshavebeendesignedbutspecificinformationontheirapplicationismissing

abundance,distri-bution,spawningsuccess,populationtrend

SPA S S

PASPA S S

Waterqual-ity

benthicinvertebratehealth,chemistry,temperature,turbid-ity

SPA S S S S

Waterquan-tity

seasonalflows,surfaceextent

SPA S S S

Icecover icedistribution,thickness S S S S S S S

CBMP ecosystem: Marine

Marinemammals

S S SPA

SPA S NA

abundance,distri-bution,spawningsuccess,populationtrend

SPA S S

PASPA S NA

Seabirds

SPA NA

Oceancircu-lation

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

CBMP ecosystem: Coastal

Coastaldynamics

coastalerosion/de-position

SPA NA

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

SPA S S S NA

Traditional knowledgeApplicationinmonitor-ing

Applicationinmoni-toringprograms

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:caff@caff.is

Internet:http://www.caff.is

ISBN:978-9935-431-10-3

Circumpolar Protected Areas Monitoring - Arctic Portal

Documents

Predation of arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) pups by common ...€¦ · The arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) is a relatively common predator within its arctic circumpolar distribution, where

CIRCUMPOLAR MILITARY FACILITIES OF THE ARCTIC …thesimonsfoundation.ca/sites/default/files/2016-07/Circumpolar... · Circumpolar Military Facilities of CANADA Page ... 1.3 Organizations

INUIT CIRCUMPOLAR COUNCIL ALASKA FOOD SOVEREIGNTY …€¦ · inuit circumpolar council alaska food sovereignty and self-governance inuit role in managing arctic marine resources

Circumpolar Arctic Tundra Vegetation Change is Linked to ...2010 (in revision): Circumpolar Arctic tundra vegetation change is linked to sea-ice decline, Earth Interactions. Technical

UNIVERSITY OF THE ARCTIC Module 13 Conservation in the Arctic · UNIVERSITY OF THE ARCTIC Bachelor of Circumpolar Studies 311 1 Module 13 Conservation in the Arctic Developed by Snorri

Arctic Future: The Circumpolar International Internship ...The Circumpolar International Internship Newsletter Issue 11, December 2008 The Compass Points North for the Circumpolar

Making the Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map Bioclimate

CIRCUMPOLAR MILITARY FACILITIES OF THE ARCTIC FIVE

Application of IASOA circumpolar observations in studies ......Application of IASOA circumpolar observations in studies of atmospheric transports into and out of the central Arctic

2016 ANNUAL REPORT - The Arctic Institute€¦ · Media Appearances 2016 was a pivotal year for the circumpolar region. From the Arctic Council’s 20th Anniversary to the Alaskan

Health and Environment in Circumpolar Populations · Health and Environment in Circumpolar Populations Kue Young Dean and Professor Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA Collaborative Arctic

Proceedings of the Third International Circumpolar …Proceedings of the Third International Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Mapping Workshop By Carl J. Markon and DA Walker Open-File

Potential Effects of Climate-change on Polar Bear Populations in the Circumpolar Arctic Ursus maritimus

WHITE PAPER Microgrid Innovation in the Circumpolar Arctic

Freshwater Expert Monitoring Group, Circumpolar Biodiversity … · 2016-04-29 · Freshwater Expert Monitoring Group, Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program ARCTIC COUNCIL The

Greening of the Arctic: Climate change and circumpolar Arctic vegetation

BCS 100: Introduction to the Circumpolar North University ... · BCS 100: Introduction to the Circumpolar North University of the Arctic MODULE 6: Political Systems Gary N. Wilson

Seasonal movements of Gyrfalcons Falco rusticolus include ... · The Gyrfalcon Falco rusticolus is the largest falcon and breeds in the circumpolar High Arctic to Sub-arctic zones,

BCS 100: Introduction to the Circumpolar North …...BCS 100: Introduction to the Circumpolar North University of the Arctic MODULE 7 Climate Change (Part 2) Developed by Richard D

University of Groningen Inuit outside the Arctic Terpstra, Tekke · 2016-03-09 · Circumpolar Studies Volume 10 Circumpolar Studies is a series on Dutch research in the Polar Regions