Framework document

Circumpolarbiodiversity Monitoring

program

Acknowledgements: The CAFF International Secretariat acknowledges Christoph Zöckler, of the World Conservation Monitoring Center, Cambridge, UK for his tireless assistance in the creation of this document. CAFF Designated Agencies: Canadian Wildlife Service, Yellowknife, Canada Finnish Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, Finland Greenland Homerule, Ministry of the Environment, Nuuk, Greenland Icelandic Institute of Natural History, Reykjavik, Iceland Directorate for Nature Management, Trondheim, Norway Russian Federation Ministry of Natural Resources, Moscow, Russia Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, Sweden United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska Cover photo by: Carsten Egevang/ARC-PIC.COM The Little Auk breeds in large colonies in some of the most remote parts of the High- Arctic zone. Scoresbysund, Greenland. July 2004.

This publication should be cited as: Petersen, A., Zöckler, C., Gunnarsdóttir, M.V., 2004. Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program – Framework Document. CAFF CBMP Report No. 1. CAFF International Secretariat, Akureyri, Iceland. 46 pp ISBN: 9979-59526-9-5.

For further information and additional copies, please contact: CAFF International Secretariat Borgir Nordurslod 600 Akureyri Iceland Phone: +354 462-3350 Fax: +354 462-3390 Email: caff@caff.is Internet: http://www.caff.is Layout and printing by: Prentstofan Stell ehf.

CAFF Area

framework document

Circumpolarbiodiversity Monitoring

program

by

Aevar PetersenDirector, Reykjavik Division

Icelandic Institute of Natural History

Dr. Christoph ZöcklerSenior Advisor Freshwater, Arctic and Migratory Species

UNEP - World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP - WCMC)

María Victoría GunnarsdóttirCAFF Executive Secretary

CAFF International Secretariat

CAFF CBMP Report No. 1

November 2004

About CAFF

The program for the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) of the Arctic Council wasestablished to address the special needs of Arctic ecosystems, species and their habitats in the rapidlydeveloping Arctic region. It was initiated as one of four programs of the Arctic EnvironmentalProtection Strategy (AEPS), which was adopted by Canada, Denmark/Greenland, Finland, Iceland,Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States through a Ministerial Declaration at Rovaniemi, Finlandin 1991. Other programs initiated under the AEPS and overtaken by the Arctic Council are the ArcticMonitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), the program for Emergency Prevention, Preparednessand Response (EPPR) and the program for Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME).

Since its inaugural meeting in Ottawa, Canada in 1992, the CAFF program has provided scientists,conservation managers and groups, and indigenous people of the north with a distinct forum inwhich to tackle a wide range of Arctic conservation issues at the circumpolar level.

CAFF's main goals, which are achieved in keeping with the concepts of sustainable development andutilization, are:

• To conserve Arctic flora and fauna, their diversity and their habitats;• To protect the Arctic ecosystems from threats;• To improve conservation management laws, regulations and practices for the Arctic;• To integrate Arctic interests into global conservation fora.

CAFF operates through a system of Designated Agencies and National Representatives responsiblefor CAFF in their respective countries. CAFF also has an International Working Group, which meetsregularly to assess progress. CAFF is headed up by a chair and vice-chair who rotate among the Arcticcountries. The CAFF International Secretariat, located in Akureyri, North Iceland, supports the chairand vice-chair; coordinates implementation of the CAFF Work Plan; coordinates cooperation withother Arctic Council working groups; and communicates CAFF goals and activities to the public.

The majority of CAFF’s activities are directed to conserving Arctic biodiversity—the abundance anddiversity of Arctic flora, fauna, and habitats—and to integrating indigenous people and their knowledgeinto CAFF. In recognition of this, the Arctic Ministers in 1998 endorsed CAFF’s Strategic Plan forConservation of Arctic Biological Diversity as a framework for future program activities. The StrategicPlan is built around five objectives addressing biodiversity monitoring, conservation of genetic resources,species and habitats, establishment of protected areas, conservation outside protected areas, andintegration of biodiversity conservation objectives into economic plans and policies. Examples ofmajor projects CAFF is currently working on are: a status report on Arctic biodiversity; developmentof a program to monitor Arctic biodiversity; assessment of climate change impacts on Arctic ecosystemsin collaboration with AMAP and other Arctic organizations; assistance with implementation ofcircumpolar conservation strategies for murres (guillemots) and eiders; development of a CircumpolarProtected Areas Network (CPAN); preparing a Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map; and listing andmapping rare Arctic vascular plants. Whenever possible, CAFF works in co-operation with otherinternational organizations and associations to achieve common conservation goals in the Arctic.

SUPPORTING PUBLICATIONS TO THECBMP FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT

• Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring ProgramExecutive Summary and Recommendations

• Strategy for Coordination of Monitoring Activities betweenCAFF and AMAP

• Expert Network Monitoring PlansInitial list includes:

I. ShorebirdsII. Reindeer/CaribouIII. ITEX

• Discussion PapersInitial list includes:

I. Wetlands International and CAFF Cooperation Strategy:Global and flyway-scale monitoring, and conservationprograms for migratory waterbirds of the Arctic

II. UNEP-WCMC and CAFF Cooperation Strategy:Data Management and Communications for the CBMP

III. Community-based monitoring written by PermanentParticipants to CAFF, with introduction by IPS

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary

2. Introduction2.1 History of the CBMP2.2 Purpose of the CBMP2.3 The Arctic as a sentinel for the rest of the world

3. Impacts on Arctic Biodiversity3.1 Climate change3.2 Other impacts

4. Monitoring and an Ecosystem-based Approach to Conservation4.1 Biodiversity monitoring4.2 Ecosystem-based approach to conservation

5. Regional and Global Perspectives5.1 Arctic Climate Impact Assessment – ACIA5.2 International Founding Principles for the CBMP

5.2.1 The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)5.2.2 The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands5.2.3 The Convention on Migratory Species5.2.4 The UNESCO World Heritage Convention5.2.5 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)5.2.6 United Nations Millennium Declaration

5.3 CAFF and the Arctic Council

6. Development of the Circumpolar BiodiversityMonitoring Program (CBMP)6.1 Goals and objectives6.2 Current monitoring programs6.3 Biodiversity indicators6.4 Cooperation, partnerships, and capacity building6.5 Network structure6.6 Data management and communication

6.6.1 Data integration6.6.2 Web-based portal6.6.3 Harmonization of data standards

6.7 Communication

7. Value of Cooperation with the CBMP and theIntegrated Monitoring Approach

8. Action Plan8.1 Initial actions

8.1.1 Establishment of CBMP Steering Committee8.1.2 Creation of Work Plan8.1.3 Discussion papers8.1.4 Creation of a pilot project8.1.5 Synthesis of current network data8.1.6 Gap analysis of monitoring activities, data and deficiencies8.1.7 CAFF reports on status and trends of biodiversity

8.2 Long-term actions8.3 Time line

9. Conclusions

10. Bibliography

Appendix I:Provisional Indicators for Global and Regional Biodiversity Monitoring(CBD targets, Ramsar, ACIA)

List of Figures

Figure 1: CAFF map of the ArcticFigure 2: Biodiversity stressors – to species, habitats and

ecosystems in the ArcticFigure 3: Development of monitoring plan based on global,

national, regional and management objectivesFigure 4: One possible example of a food web for monitoring

1

1. Executive Summary

The Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program(CBMP) has been developed by the Conservationof Arctic Flora and Fauna Working Group of theArctic Council (CAFF), in response to directivesby the Arctic Council Ministers, and numerousinternational agreements and conventions thatare promoting the vital importance of biodiversityconservation and preservation of ecosystems.

Children in Scoresbysund, East Greenland.Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang/ARC-PIC.COM

Conservation of biological diversity is inextricablylinked to sustainable development. For effectivepolicies to be developed by Arctic State Ministersthat protect Arctic flora and fauna fromextinction, but also allow for the sustainable useof the Arctic’s living resources, socio-culturalstability, and successful regional and economicdevelopment, very thorough and comprehensiveinformation must be provided on the status andtrends of biological diversity in the Arctic.

The Arctic is experiencing stress from numeroussources including pollution, contaminanttransport, habitat fragmentation, melting of thesea ice due to climate change, over-harvestingof Arctic marine and terrestrial species, invasivespecies, regional and economic development,and increased shipping traffic. Status and trenddata is available for some Arctic species on asporadic basis, and there is national and regionalinformation in some cases on the effects thesestressors are having on Arctic biodiversity.However, the larger picture of the overall statusand trends of Arctic species, their habitats, andecosystem integrity in the Arctic and along

migratory routes is not fully known. Further,though there are numerous monitoring effortscurrently being executed in the Arctic region,there is little coordination of efforts betweenthem, or coordination of analyses.

The CBMP is being developed by CAFF to serveas a coordinating entity for currently existingbiodiversity monitoring programs in the Arctic,for data gathering and data analyses, and forcoordinating the communication of results. TheCBMP will serve to assist in the harmonizationof currently existing monitoring efforts, andcooperate with other research organizations toidentify gaps and deficiencies in the currentknowledge base. New monitoring initiatives willbe designed and implemented in conjunctionwith AMAP and other organizations, to makethe most efficient use of financial, scientific andlogistical resources, and to provide comprehensivedata on the state of Arctic biodiversity on acircumpolar scale.

Nenets reindeer herders from Kanin Peninsula in the forest of the Mezen Regionin the “Kanin” community, Kuloy River Onset, Mezen Region, ArchangelskOblast. Photo courtesy of Association of Nenets people of “Yasavey”

There is significant added value to this type ofcoordination. Though local, national, andregional programs continue independently, allcan benefit from the added coordinated effortsof the CBMP. Standardizing certain datagathering methodologies, coordinating dataanalyses, and presentation of results through acommon web-based portal, benefits allstakeholders. This collaborative effort will provide

1

2

answers to questions not previously attainableon a circumpolar scale, and will lead to a muchbroader understanding of the Arctic environment,and the effects that the various stressors arehaving on biodiversity and ecosystem integrity.

It is hoped as well that this Framework Documentand the supporting publications may serve toassist scientists and research organizations inobtaining grant money for further long-termbiodiversity monitoring research projects in theArctic.

2. Introduction

2.1 History of the CBMP

Biodiversity monitoring - as long-term, regularobservations of selected elements of flora andfauna, their habitats and ecosystems - has longbeen recognized as essential for well-guidedefforts for conservation and sustainability of theglobal environment. This was acknowledgedearly on in the work of the Arctic Council (AC)and its predecessor, the Arctic EnvironmentProtection Strategy (AEPS). The Conservation ofArctic Flora and Fauna Working Group of theArctic Council (CAFF), has highlighted theimportance of biodiversity monitoring in severalof its publications. The Strategic Plan for theConservation of Biological Diversity (1998) wasendorsed by Arctic Council Ministers in Iqaluit,Canada in 1998. The Inari Declaration in 2002welcomed with appreciation CAFF’s overviewreport Arctic Flora and Fauna – Status andConservation published on the decadalanniversary of the AEPS in 2001; andacknowledged the recommendations put forthin Arctic Flora and Fauna - Recommendationsfor Conservation (2002), as a strategy for futurebiodiversity conservation work of the ArcticCouncil. The Inari Declaration further recognized“that enhanced monitoring of biodiversity atthe circumpolar level, fully utilizing traditionalknowledge, is required to detect the impacts ofglobal changes on biodiversity and to enableArctic communities to effectively respond andadapt to these changes.”

CAFF has as its mission: To address theconservation of Arctic biodiversity, andcommunicate findings to the Indigenous Peoples,other local residents, governments of the Arctic,and stakeholders inside and outside the Arctic,helping to promote practices which ensuresustainability of the Arctic’s living resources.

Eqi, Disko Bay, Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang/ARC-PIC.COM

In addition, development of this CircumpolarBiodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP) supportsnumerous international conventions andagreements which stress the inextricable linkbetween conservation of biological diversity andsustainable development. The recent ArcticClimate Impact Assessment (ACIA 2004), hasidentified monitoring as one of the essentialcomponents for future climate impact studieson biodiversity and ecosystem integrity. TheCBMP links to other complementary monitoringinitiatives, such as that of the Arctic Monitoringand Assessment Program (AMAP); and otherregional and global monitoring efforts, which

1 Many definitions exist for monitoring, but in the present sensethese are in essence regular, standardized observations of elementsof the environment, creating long-term time series of information.Hence trends, which otherwise may go unnoticed until too late, arerealized at an earlier stage; early enough to counteract them withthe appropriate mitigation measures.

1

Collected data will be compiled through theCBMP, at the circumpolar level, allowing thelinkage of biodiversity data with the latestinformation on contaminants, climate data, andother relevant information, using remote sensing,modern GIS techniques and web-based portalsfor distribution to, and easy access by allstakeholders in Arctic conservation - regionaland global. CAFF will publish circumpolar analysesin regular reports for use by members of ACgovernments, Permanent Participants, local Arcticresidents, and other regional and globalstakeholders, enabling informed policy-makingdecisions on issues that affect regionaldevelopment and conservation of the Arctic’senvironment.

Eider hen swimming on a polynya in the Belcher Islands, Canada. Photo courtesyof Grant Gilchrist

address the state of the Arctic environment. TheCBMP is a holistic, integrated ecosystem-basedapproach to conservation and sustainable useof the Arctic’s living resources and the Arcticenvironment.

Little Auk, East Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang, ARC-PIC.COM

2.2 Purpose of the CBMP

The overall purpose of the CircumpolarBiodiversity Monitoring Program is to strive forconservation of biological diversity, to halt orsignificantly reduce its loss, and provideinformation for the sustainable use of the Arctic’sliving resources for the Indigenous Peoples ofthe Arctic, and other Arctic residents andstakeholders inside and outside the Arctic.

The CBMP addresses the conservation andmanagement of Arctic biological diversity(biodiversity), and the sustainable use of theArctic’s living resources. The CBMP is beingdeveloped to serve as a coordinating entity,helping to bring together existing monitoringdata on Arctic biodiversity, facilitate commonmethodologies for data collection and analyses,and initiate relevant programs to address gapsin the existing data on status and trends. TheCBMP will allow for better coordination for theimplementation and analyses of monitoringactivities in the Arctic region; will facilitate moreeffective transfer of information to the variousstakeholders; enable wider access to monitoringresults and the associated research; and willfacilitate joint activities such as combininglogistical and financial resources, commonanalyses and assessments of data over the entirecircumpolar region.

3

2"Ecosystem" means a dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their non-living environment interactingas a functional unit.

Living resources or biological resources includes genetic resources,organisms or parts thereof, populations, or any other biotic componentof ecosystems with actual or potential use or value for humanity.

3 Article 2 of the CBD defines the following term:"Biological diversity" means the variability among living organismsfrom all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and otheraquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they arepart; this includes diversity within species, between species and ofecosystems.

2

3

Chukchi fisherman with salmon harvest, Chukotka, Russian Federation.Photo courtesy of Christoph Zöckler

some 14.8 million km of land and 13 millionkm of ocean. It plays a key role in the physical,chemical and biological balance of the globe.The Arctic region encompasses relatively pristineenvironments, compared to the rest of the globe.Vast wilderness areas are crucial for thepreservation of the Arctic’s unique biologicaldiversity, and the Arctic is additionally of muchcultural, economic, and recreational value. TheCAFF overview report (2001) highlighted suchdiverse actual and potential importance of Arcticbiodiversity as for fuel, food (e.g. fisheries),fodder, nature tourism, ecosystem functioning,feedbacks from ecosystems to the globalatmosphere, future genetic recombinations andadaptations, fiber pharmaceuticals, anti-microbialdrugs, and industr ial enzymes (fromextremophiles).

The Arctic is unique in biological, physical, andchemical properties. Life in the Arctic has adaptedto extreme conditions of darkness, cold and abrief summer season where food becomesplentiful. Arctic ecology is shaped by the severityof the climate and its variability in space andtime. Arctic species must survive long periodswhen food is limited or unavailable, or otherwisemigrate to more southerly latitudes, as many doto all corners of the globe. Arctic species mustbe adapted to respond quickly when conditionsimprove. The growing season is brief and intense.When sunlight reaches the oceans in the spring,plankton bloom. On land, the growth of plantsbegins the summer feast for the terrestrialspecies, allowing the breeding, raising of young,and storage for the upcoming winter. At thefoundation of the intricate marine food webs

4

The Arctic, as a region, is showing the impactsof climate change almost two and half timesfaster than the rest of the globe. The Arctic canbe looked at as an early warning system foranthropogenic impacts. In connecting biodiversitymonitoring data, with AMAP’s contaminantsand climate change data, and data from manyother national, regional, and international sourcesperforming monitoring in the Arctic, a full picturecan be formed of the state of the Arcticenvironment. No one agency or national effortcan achieve this goal. CAFF, through the CBMP,can provide the coordination for this cooperativeeffort for the Arctic. Through this type ofcomprehensive, coordinated biodiversitymonitoring, policy makers and residents of theArctic, and other stakeholders will be providedaccess to the necessary information they needto adapt to the changes occurring in the Arctic,and mitigate the impacts. The audience for theresults of the CBMP would be all who have aninterest in the effects of climate change in theArctic and globally, and have interest in workingtowards sustainability of the earth’s naturalresources for the common good of all people.

Festival Ergav, Lorino, Chukotka. Photo courtesy of Vera Tymneraskova

2.3 The Arctic as a sentinel for the rest ofthe world

The circumpolar Arctic region, as defined forthe purpose of CAFF at its inaugural meeting(see Figure 1 - CAFF map of the Arctic), covers

2

2

Monitoring of the natural and anthropogenicimpacts to the food webs and the ecologicalfunctions of the Arctic environment andecosystems provides critical information aboutthe status and trends of Arctic species and theintegrity of the food webs on which they dependfor their survival. For humans, this directly relatesto the socio-economic stability of their societies.

The Arctic has high genetic diversity among itsspecies. Many migratory species breed in theArctic but spend the non-breeding season atmore southerly latitudes. As a polar region,greater and faster impacts are being seen in theArctic from climate change. Consequently Arcticbiodiversity is experiencing both greater andearlier impacts than many other parts of theglobe. These issues, vulnerabilities and impactsare more fully documented in Arctic Flora andFauna: Status and Conservation (2001), andImpacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic ClimateImpact Assessment (2004).

Polar Bear hunting. Photo courtesy of MMS Alaska Office

Of the approximately 450 species of birds, whichbreed or have bred in the Arctic region, 279breed in significant numbers within the Arcticand spend the boreal (northern hemisphere)winter in significant numbers outside the CAFFmember states. Migratory birds from the Arcticreach every part of the world except the interiorof Antarctica. Thirty species reach southernAfrica, 26 species reach Australia and NewZealand, 22 species reach southern SouthAmerica and several pelagic species reach thesouthern oceans.

5

are highly specialized species of phytoplanktonand sea ice algae, especially adapted to theextreme conditions of darkness and cold, andthe freshwater-brine conditions of the sea ice-ocean interface. Terrestrial and freshwater foodwebs are usually simpler than those in the marineenvironment, but are closely linked to the marineecosystem, e.g. through run-off and manycreatures which move between the differentecosystems.

Narwhals near Coburg Island, Canada. Photo courtesy of Mark Mallory, CanadianWildlife Service

The complexity of Arctic biodiversity stems inpart from the interplay between the terrestrialspecies, habitats and ecosystems, with those inthe marine environment. In the overlappingstructure of ecosystems, all species in a systemdepend to some degree on the ecologicalfunctions of other species such as foodproduction, competition, and predation; andspecies behavior such as reproduction andmigration are closely linked with these functions.With an integrated, ecosystem-based approachto monitoring, the impacts of stressors to theseecological functions are better identified andunderstood, as this type of monitoring bridgesecosystems, habitats and species. For example:seabirds nest on land but may feed in the oceanor in lakes and rivers on fish and invertebrates.Salmon, Arctic Char and certain other fish speciesare anadromous – crossing from the marineecosystem to the freshwater ecosystem to breed.Polar bears den on land in snow banks, but huntalmost exclusively out on the edge of the seaice. Seals make their homes in and on the seaice and hunt in the ocean. Indigenous Peopleshunt across all ecosystems and habitats in theArctic, marine, terrestrial and freshwater.

6

Virtually all the world’s major ecosystems supportsome Arctic breeding birds during the borealwinter, with Arctic migrants occupying everymajor habitat in every major region. Theconservation of all Arctic breeding birdsthroughout their migratory ranges is a globalchallenge, covering virtually all of the world’smajor terrestrial and marine ecosystems, andrequires a high level of international cooperationwhich can be achieved in part through the CBMP.

Arctic Tern, Iceland. Photo courtesy of Daniel Bergmann

In addition to the migrating birds, several speciesof land and marine mammals migrate to theArctic in search of rich food resources. Migrationroutes link Arctic species to marine and terrestrialecosystems throughout the world including theAntarctic. The Arctic’s nutrient-rich coldwaterfeeding grounds are crucial to the survival ofmany species of whales and are the foundationfor the huge numbers of Arctic fish stocks.Northern waters, particularly the North Atlanticand the Bering Sea, are some of the world’slargest and most important marine fisheries. Thelink between the survival of humans andsustainability of the living environment istherefore obvious and of paramount importance.

Figure 1: CAFF region

3. Impacts on Arctic Biodiversity

3.1 Climate change

Within the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment(ACIA) report, monitoring is stated as an essentialtool in tracing the effects of climate change inyears to come; filling in the gaps of currentknowledge, and assisting in finding the propersolutions for mitigation and adaptation to futurechanges that inevitably will affect the existenceof humans in the Arctic, and the naturalenvironment on which their livelihoods depend.Global change processes are now presentingsevere threats to the Arctic environment. Scientificresearch has demonstrated significant climatechange in recent decades and predicts futurechanges in the Arctic up to two and a half timesgreater than the global average. As aconsequence, resource utilization, shipping, andtourism, are expected to increase, presentingadditional stress on the natural and humanenvironments. In recognition of this, the ArcticCouncil, through CAFF and AMAP, and incooperation with the International Arctic ScienceCouncil (IASC), initiated an assessment of thepresent knowledge on climate change and itseffects on the physical and biologicalenvironments, as well as economic, cultural, andother human-related issues.

7

Eqi, Disko Bay, Greenland ice cap, Greenland. Photo courtesy of CarstenEgevang/ARC-PIC.COM

The ACIA report has confirmed that: oceanicsurface temperatures are increasing; reflectivesea ice, glacier volume, and snow cover arereducing significantly; river runoff is increasing;sea level is rising; precipitation is overall on theincrease; permafrost is thawing; ranges of floraand fauna are shifting; and all with associatedmajor impacts on the circumpolar Arctic residents.The effects of rising temperatures, sea level rise,melting sea ice and the associated changes inocean current patterns as a result, are affectingthe Arctic ecosystems and biodiversity in waysonly superficially understood at this time. Oneexample of this is the sea ice and snow cover,which have acted as a solar reflector. Thethinning/melting ice and snow have revealeddarker land and ocean surfaces beneath, whichpermit a greater absorption of solar radiation,creating an accelerated cycle of warming. Inaddition, recent rapid warming has been moredramatic in some areas than others, showingsignificant sub-regional variations. This is havingan effect in all ecosystems of the Arctic, thoughthere are huge gaps in scientific knowledge onthe consequences of this increase in radiation.

3.2 Other impacts

The accelerated rate at which the various impactsare affecting the Arctic environment, is assignificant as the changes or impacts themselves.The sudden and unpredicted changes nowoccurring in the Arctic are increasing societies’vulnerability and instability. The only way toacquire adequate data sets to predict and prepare

for further change is through regular observationsor surveys, i.e. monitoring.

In addition to climate change, the Arcticenvironment and particularly Arctic biodiversityis experiencing certain impacts from: naturalresource extraction of oil, gas, mineral resourcesand peat; regional development; bio-accumulation of contaminants; over-harvestingof fish, whales, birds, timber; hunting andbycatch; increased shipping due to the meltingsea ice; habitat fragmentation; and increasedeconomic development (see Figure 2).

Arctic Bramble (Rubus arcticus), Hot Springs, Lavrentia, Chukotka AutonomusOkrug, Russia (Beringia). Photo courtesy of Bjørn Frantzen

Arctic land is easily damaged by physicalanthropogenic disturbance, because permafrosterodes rapidly once the protective plant coveris removed. Many components of Arcticbiodiversity, in particular large carnivores,herbivores, and many birds, are sensitive toincreasing fragmentation of habitats andwilderness areas. Chemical pollution in the Arcticis high, carried by prevailing air and watercurrents. POPs, radioactive particles, oil, heavymetals, freons and acids all are transported tothe Arctic from southern industrial regions andmore densely populated regions of the globe.

Arctic conditions are already at the extremewithout anthropogenic forces coming into play.The effects of human-related impacts, and indeedof many natural as well, on the livingenvironment, are in many cases unknown, or at

8

best piecemeal. Although the physical impacts of climate change may be well documented, and futurepredictions of these inspire confidence, the real or predicted effects on Arctic biodiversity is rather poorlydocumented and understood, as a result of lack of the relevant monitoring and associated research. Thereare major knowledge gaps in the status and trends of major groups of Arctic biodiversity, like microorganisms,invertebrates, benthos, and lower plants - the foundations of the food webs. Fragmented data exist atbest on most other groups, with the exception of a few vertebrate species of major economic interest.For most species groups (taxa), lack of information precludes adequate classification. Many commercialfish stocks in the Arctic are already fully exploited, some over-exploited. Sources and long-range transfersof contaminants from lower latitudes have been identified, and their accumulation and redistributionwithin Arctic ecosystems are of serious concern.

Fragmentary data indicate a circumpolar decline in some migratory species, e.g. certain shorebirds andseabirds, while others are recovering, e.g. some geese and whales, from former over-exploitation levels.Migratory species link the Arctic to the rest of the globe, reminders that their conservation remains a jointresponsibility. For some better-known Arctic taxa, the number of globally threatened species has risen inrecent decades, currently including 43 mammal, 16 bird, 12 fish, and 73 vascular plant species. Replacementby more southern, or in some cases latitudinal, biota may significantly alter Arctic ecosystems in years tocome. Introductions of alien species are a major concern, as they may impact indigenous flora and fauna.Fragmentation of habitats, due to increased infrastructure, can seriously undermine Arctic habitats, affectingthe distribution and numbers of plant and animal species. Hunting is an important activity in the Arctic,involving many species of mammals, birds and fish, and keeping this at a sustainable level, is an ongoingchallenge for the inhabitants of the region and all others who share these resources.

Figure 2: Biodiversity Stressors – to species, habitats and ecosystems in the Arctic

Many marine species are under threat from contaminants, which are released into the ocean, bio-accumulating in mammals and birds at the upper trophic levels. Eventually these find their way to humans,who utilize the natural resources and are at the top of the food chains. The effects of these toxins areonly now beginning to be understood on a species by species basis. However, the effects on ecosystemshave not been studied in any detail. There are several gaps in the scientific knowledge base. It is recognized

Contaminants

ClimateChange

RegionalDevelopment

EconomicDevelopment

Huntingand Bycatch

HabitatFragmentation

Over-harvesting

Natural ResourceExtraction

ARCTIC ECOSYSTEMS

HABITATS

SPECIES

9

that the stresses are there, and they are havingan impact – but the full extent of the damageis not known. Polar bears are being threatenednow because they hunt exclusively on the edgeof disappearing sea ice. As the ice retreats ordisappears, the polar bears are finding it harderand harder to hunt. Some individuals are showingsigns of starvation during the summer monthswhen they are supposed to be accumulatingthe majority of their body fat to see them throughthe winter. To what extent they are beingthreatened as a species, and at the habitat andecosystem level, is still largely unknown.

Polar bear. Photo courtesy of MMS Alaska Office

The added stresses from anthropogenic forcesare not just putting species under threat butincreasing the pressure and are in some casescausing biodiversity loss. In the case of polarbears, some scientific reports suggest that withthe continued melting of the sea ice, polar bearswill be extinct by the end of this century. Theyare among the best studied species, while majordata gaps still exist for many other Arctic species.Monitoring is an essential tool to determine ifthis is the trend, and if there are measures thatcan be taken to mitigate this trend. For protectedareas, to what extent areas that are currentlyunder protection are contributing to the halt inbiodiversity loss is for the most part unknown.These protected areas may or may not beprotecting critical biodiversity functions.Economic scenarios suggest increasedinvestments in the exploitation of both renewableand non-renewable natural resources, and withincreased shipping, this will increase considerablyin the Arctic in the near future, presenting greaterchallenges for ensuring sustainable use of theArctic environment.

4. Monitoring and an Ecosystem-based Approach to Conservation

4.1 Biodiversity monitoring

Environmental monitoring can be divided intotwo main fields: environmental quality (abiotic,or physical and chemical monitoring) andbiological monitoring (biotic or biodiversity).Biodiversity monitoring follows the changes inplants and animals, their habitats, ecosystemsand the stressors on ecosystem functions. Thisincludes identifying status and trends of speciespopulations and their distributions; habitatchanges; and given the appropriate research,the underlying factors affecting these. Throughmonitoring, the status of a given biotic elementis quantified, allowing quantitative analyses ofthe extent of biotic changes, which lays thefoundation for identifying their causes. Further,monitoring acts as an early-warning system forstressors that are causing critical shifts in thebalance of food webs, and ecosystem integrity;which can then prompt actions towardmitigation. Monitoring, and the associatedresearch, is also important for focusing issues,as has been e.g. identified in responsible fisheriesfor a long time, in order to develop theappropriate conservation and resource usepolicies. Monitoring is essential for maintaining

the pristine state ofthe Arctic and toensure a sustainableenvironment for theresidents of theArctic. This is theo n l y w a y t oe v a l u a t e t h ec o n t i n u o u s l yongoing naturaland human-relatedchanges in theArctic and mitigatet h e n e g a t i v eimpacts.

ITEX research area, Barrow, Alaska.Photo courtesy of ITEX

10

4 A widely used international definition: ‘Sustainable developmentis development that meets the needs of the present withoutcompromising the ability of future generations to meet their ownneeds’.

Naturally poor in species, Arctic ecosystems aredelicately balanced. Contending with the naturalforces of extreme conditions including cold anddarkness, they are now also experiencing severestresses from many anthropogenic impacts.These stress factors are threatening the integrityof the Arctic ecosystems to such a degree, thatentire food webs will collapse if nothing is doneto prevent misbalances. Without comprehensiveand thorough biodiversity monitoring, scientistscannot detect the problems in time, or see thewarning signs requiring intervention. Due to thefact that the Arctic has such low biodiversity tobegin with, the ecosystems are not as resilientto stress as in other parts of the globe. So, ifbalance is disrupted in one or two species, orspecies become threatened or endangered, thishas the potential to undermine entire systems.The effects will be felt immediately in all threedimensions of sustainable development:environmental, socio-cultural, and economic.Losses of biological diversity are primarily beingdriven by unsustainable patterns of resourceconsumption and habitat loss. The economicand socio-cultural stability of Arctic societies areclosely linked to the biological resources as food(either wild or cultivated species), fibers andmaterials for clothing and housing, pharma-ceuticals, income, etc. It is for this reason thatinternational agreements and conventions allstress the necessity to protect biodiversity.Regional sustainable use practices cannot beachieved without balancing the biologicalresources of a region.

5. Regional and Global Perspectives

5.1 Arctic Climate Impact Assessment – ACIA

The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA)was formally adopted at the MinisterialConference of the Arctic Council at Point Barrow,Alaska, in 2000. CAFF and AMAP, in associationwith the International Arctic Science Committee(IASC), were given the task by the Ministers toconduct the ACIA.

4.2 Ecosystem-based approach to conservation

Physical boundaries, functions, and food webstie the plants and animals of the variousecosystems together. Ecosystems can beconsidered in relatively small terms, such aswatersheds, or in large terms, such as an entiresea. The ecosystem-based approach toconservation considers the integrity of entireecosystems, and their interaction with otherecosystems, rather than just looking at individualspecies or functions separately withoutassociations. This is a highly complex way tostudy biodiversity, and requires extensive datagathering and analyses to identify the majorlinkages, and find out where linkages are understress, or have broken down completely. Thinkingin terms of ecosystems is to approachconservation and resource use from theperspective of ecological relationships throughconsidering the many factors that contribute tothe health of the species that comprise thesystem. Ecosystems interact in many ways, andthese interactions are only now beginning to beunderstood through scientific monitoring. Inmost cases, biodiversity is closely linked withsocio-cultural and economic stability. This is whybiodiversity is now internationally recognized asvital to sustainable use. It is through biodiversitymonitoring that scientists can detect in timewhen there is a misbalance to the system.

Arctic poppy, Kap Brewster, East Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten EgevangARC-PIC.COM

4

Harlequin duck, Jokulfirdi, Iceland. Photo courtesy of Ævar Petersen

As specified in the Barrow Declaration, the goalof the ACIA was to

“evaluate and synthesize knowledge on climatevariability and change and increased ultravioletradiation, and support policy-making processesand the work of the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change.” The assessment addresses“environmental, human health, social, culturaland economic impacts and consequences,including policy recommendations.”

The key findings of the ACIA research indicatethat the Arctic is extremely vulnerable to observedand projected climate change and its impacts.Over the next 100 years, climate change isexpected to accelerate, contributing to majorphysical, ecological, social and economic changes,many of which have already begun. The ten keyfindings of ACIA are:

• Arctic climate is now warming rapidly and much larger changes are projected.

• Arctic warming and its consequences have worldwide implications.

• Arctic vegetation zones are very likely to shift,causing wide-ranging impacts.

• Animal species’ diversity, ranges and distributions will change.

• Many coastal communities and facilities faceincreasing exposure to storms.

11

• Reduced sea ice is very likely to increase marine transport and access to resources.

• Thawing ground will disrupt transportation,buildings, and other infrastructure.

• Indigenous communities are facing major economic and cultural impacts.

• Elevated ultraviolet radiation levels will affectpeople, plants and animals.

• Multiple influences interact to cause impactsto people and ecosystems.

Uncertainties in the ACIA findings call for furtherresearch, observations, monitoring and modelingto substantiate ACIA findings and clarify gapsin current knowledge. Responding to the findingswill require two types of actions: mitigation, toslow the speed and amount of climate change;and adaptation, to attempt to limit the adverseimpacts and increase resilience to climate change.

The CBMP addresses several directions of theACIA results. It will provide the further research,observations and monitoring required for athorough biodiversity assessment called for bythe ACIA report; it will fill gaps in informationneeded for policy direction for both mitigationand adaptation; and will serve as the vehiclethrough which national, regional, andinternational scientific biodiversity monitoringfindings can be coordinated, analyzed andcommunicated to all stakeholders.

Lovosero Lake, Kola Peninsula. Photo courtesy of RAIPON

12

Congress of Reindeer Herders of Russia 2002, Salekhard, Yamalo - NentesAutonomus Okrug, Russia. Photo courtesy of RAIPON

5.2 International Founding Principles forthe CBMP

5.2.1 The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD),at its 7th Conference of the Parties in KualaLumpur 18-19 February 2004, declared:

“We, the Ministers responsible for the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and of the CartagenaProtocol on Biosafety…reconfirm our commitment to more effectively and coherently implement the three objectivesof the Convention and achieve by 2010a significant reduction of the current rateof biodiversity loss.”

“Urge our Governments to take an effective role in the review of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment during2004, and establish a mechanism for continuing scientific assessment input into the Convention on Biological Diversity.”

“Reaffirming the significant role of indigenous and local communities in theconservation and sustainable use of biological resources”

“Commit our Governments to the establishment of networks of protectedareas both marine and terrestrial and tothe development of indicators and incentives to meet the 2010 target to reduce biodiversity loss.”

The CBD COP7 meeting also adopted the GlobalIndicators to Assess Progress to the 2010 Targets,the Global Biodiversity Outlook for 2006 (amechanism for reporting achievements to the2010 targets), the Global Plant Strategy forConservation, information requirements forcoastal and marine protected areas forassessments, and a commitment to develop aWorld Database on Protected Areas.

The CBD GlobalI nd i c a to r s t oAssess Progress to2010 are particul-arly relevant toArct ic conser-vation and consis-tent with theCBMP.These indicatorsinclude trends inabundance anddistribution ofselected species,t rends in theextent of selectedhabitats (arctic

desert, tundra, boreal forest) and ecosystems(freshwater, marine and terrestrial), coverage ofprotected areas, and traditional knowledge (seealso Appendix I).

5.2.2 The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands

The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands declares:“We, the Contracting Parties, Recognizing the interdependence of Man and his environment

Considering the fundamental ecologicalfunctions of wetlands as regulators ofwater regimes and as habitats supporting a characteristic flora and fauna, especially waterfowl

Thick-billed Murre, CoatsIsland, Nunavut, Canada. Photo courtesyof Grant Gilchrist

Being convinced that wetlands constitutea resource of great economic, cultural, scientific, and recreational value, the lossof which would be irreparable;

Desiring to stem the progressive encroachment on and loss of wetlands now and in the future;

Recognizing that waterfowl in their seasonal migrations may transcend frontiers and so should be regarded as an international resource;

Being confident that the conservation ofwetlands and their flora and fauna can be ensured by combining far-sighted national policies with co-coordinated international actions…

Countries, which have joined this Convention,are enlisting in an international effort to ensurethe conservation and wise use of wetlands.The Treaty includes four main commitments thatContracting Parties have agreed to: (1) Listedsites; (2) Wise use; (3) Reserves and training; (4)International cooperation. The RamsarConvention has four International OrganizationPartners: BirdLife International; IUCN–the WorldConservation Union; Wetlands International;and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Nenets Autonomus Okrug, Russia. Photo courtesy of Association ofNenets people of "Yasavey"

The CBMP is consistent with the RamsarConvention on Wetlands. There are a highpercentage of Arctic wetlands, which areimportant habitats and ecosystems, and whichare crucial to migratory and non-migratory

13

species in the Arctic. With a large proportion ofwetland habitats and the majority of all water-birds breeding in the Arctic region (> over 70%of all geese and almost 90% of all sandpipers),the Arctic region is highly relevant for the RamsarConvention, which every AC member has ratified.Many Ramsar sites have been designated in theArctic.

5.2.3 The Convention on Migratory Species

The Convention on the Conservation ofMigratory Species of Wild Animals (also knownas CMS or the Bonn Convention) declares:

“Recognizing that wild animals in their innumerable forms are an irreplaceable part of the earth’s natural system whichmust be conserved for the good of mankind;

Aware that each generation of man holdsthe resources of the earth for future generations and has an obligation to ensure that this legacy is conserved and,where utilized, is used wisely;

Conscious of the ever-growing value of wild animals from environmental, ecological, genetic, scientific, aesthetic, recreational, cultural, educational, socialand economic points of view;

Concerned particularly with those speciesof wild animals that migrate across or outside national jurisdictional boundaries;

Recognizing that the States are and mustbe the protectors of the migratory speciesof wild animals that live within or pass through their national jurisdictional boundaries;

5 For the purpose of this Convention, wetlands are areas of marsh,fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent ortemporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish orsalt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tidedoes not exceed six meters.

5

Convinced that conservation and effectivemanagement of migratory species of wildanimals require the concerted action of all States within the national jurisdictionalboundaries of which such species spendany part of their life cycle…”

The CMS aims to conserve terrestrial, marineand avian migratory species throughout theirrange. It is an intergovernmental treaty,concluded under the aegis of the United NationsEnvironment Programme, concerned with theconservation of wildlife and habitats ona global scale.

The Arctic has the highest proportion ofmigratory species compared to all other areasof the globe. These species - such as birds, fish,whales and insects - connect the Arctic to everycorner of the globe with their flyway andmigration routes.

Swans. Photo courtesy of Daniel Bergmann

With these many migratory species, the Arcticregion is highly dependant on conservationunder specific agreements and strategies likethe African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement(AEWA), an agreement under CMS, relevant tothe Arctic. Activities with a similar relevance tothe Arctic are organized by other organizations,often in cooperation with CMS. The East Asian– Australasian flyway is governed by the Asia-Pacific Migratory Waterbird ConservationStrategy: 2001-2005 – a strategy consistent withthe CMS, and again relevant to the Arctic andcoordinated by Wetlands International. Also,the Central Asian Flyway initiative has relevanceto the Arctic and is currently being developed

Long-tailed Jaegar or Skua migrates to the southern hemisphere. Photo takenat Savoonga, St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. Photo courtesy of Adrian Gall

by Wetlands International in cooperation withCMS. In the Americas, the Western HemisphereShorebird Reserve Network exists and anAmerican Flyway Agreement is being promotedby Wetlands International.

There are also many important but informalagreements and memorandums of under-standing for Arctic migratory species sharedbetween 2 or more countries.

The goals of the CBMP strongly support theglobal goals put forth by the CMS. A thoroughbiodiversity assessment of migratory speciesinvolves international cooperation and linkagesof monitoring programs that allows for thecollection and analysis of data all along themigratory routes, for the species themselves andtheir habitats. With migratory species, theirsurvival depends not only on ecosystem integritywithin the Arctic region, but all along theirmigratory routes. This monitoring work also tiesinto the CAFF efforts for circumpolar protectedarea networks. The monitoring efforts of theCBMP will help ensure that vital areas of theArctic environment, used by migratory speciesfor breeding are protected.

14

15

5.2.4 The UNESCO World Heritage Convention

The UNESCO World Heritage Convention seeksto encourage the identification, protection andpreservation of cultural and natural heritagearound the world considered to be ofoutstanding value to humanity. This is embodiedin an international treaty called the Conventionconcerning the Protection of the World Culturaland Natural Heritage, adopted by UNESCOin 1972.

UNESCO's World Heritage mission is to:

“encourage countries to sign the 1972 Convention and to ensure the protection of their natural and cultural heritage;

encourage States Parties to the Convention to nominate properties within their national territory for inclusion on the World Heritage List;

encourage States Parties to set up reporting systems on the state of conservation of World Heritage properties;

help States Parties safeguard World Heritage properties by providing technical assistance and professional training;

provide emergency assistance for World Heritage properties in immediate danger;support States Parties' public awareness-building activities for World Heritage conservation;

encourage participation of the local population in the preservation of their cultural and natural heritage;

encourage international co-operation in conservation of cultural and natural heritage.”

Natural heritage refers to outstanding physical,biological and geological formations, habitatsof threatened species of animals and plants andareas with scientific, conservation or aestheticvalue.

5.2.5 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)

The 2002 World Summit on SustainableDevelopment committed the world’s countriesto achieving a significant reduction in the rateof loss of biodiversity by 2010. In the resultingMinisterial Declaration of the WSSD (theJohannesburg Declaration), the Ministersresolved to:

"strengthen … efforts to put in place measures to halt biodiversity loss ... at the global, regional, sub-regional and national levels by the year 2010”;

and asked WSSD to

"reconfirm the commitment to have instruments in place to stop and reverse the current alarming biodiversity loss at the global, regional, sub-regional and national levels by the year 2010”.

Black-tailed Godwit. Photo courtesy of Daniel Bergmann

The goals of the CBMP are nested in theintegrated ecosystem-based approach tomanagement, as accepted at the WSSD:

Ilulissat icefjord, Greenland. This area became a World Heritage sitein June 2004. Photo courtesy of Mette Astrid L. Jessen

5.3 CAFF and the Arctic Council

For over a decade now, CAFF has beenaddressing biodiversity issues in the Arcticenvironment, and providing information forbetter and wiser policy-making decisionsregarding the sustainable use of the Arctic’sliving resources.

Little Auk colony, Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang, ARC-PIC.COM

The present CBMP Framework Document wasdeveloped in response to directives from theArctic Ministers. CAFF will strive to coordinatethe CBMP, in cooperation with all national,regional and international stakeholders. TheCBMP will improve understanding of changesin circumpolar biodiversity through harmonizationof current monitoring programs; identify and fillin the obvious gaps in monitoring activities;promote the sharing of collective information;and encourage common analyses. As a WorkingGroup to the Arctic Council, CAFF will compileand present the collected information throughregular reporting, providing the Arctic Ministerswith the information necessary to supportobligations to international conventions andagreements, as related to biodiversityconservation issues.

In addition, CAFF and AMAP will coordinate themonitoring results of their respective programsto produce an overall picture on the state of theArctic environment, biodiversity, and humanhealth. The CBMP is a holistic, integratedecosystem-based approach to conservation andsustainable use of the Arctic’s living resources.

16

“The comprehensive integrated management of human activities basedon best available scientific knowledge about the ecosystem and its dynamics, in order to identify and take action on influences, which are critical to the health of the ecosystems, thereby achieving sustainable use of ecosystem goods and services and maintenance of ecosystem integrity.”

5.2.6 United Nations Millennium Declaration

The United Nations Millennium Declarationstates:

“Respect for nature. Prudence must be shown in the management of all living species and natural resources, in accordance with the precepts of sustainable development. Only in this waycan the immeasurable riches provided tous by nature be preserved and passed onto our descendants. The current unsustainable patterns of production andconsumption must be changed in the interest of our future welfare and that ofour descendants.”

And further, under Section IV. Protecting ourCommon Environment:

“We must spare no effort to free all of humanity, and above all our children and

grandchildren,from the threat ofliving on a planeti r r e d e e m a b l yspoilt by human activit ies, andwhose resourceswould no longerbe sufficient fortheir needs.”

Nenets Autonomus Okrug, Russia.Photo courtesy of Association of Nenetspeople of "Yasavey"

17

outside the Arctic with the information necessary for formulating policies, and adaptation and mitigation strategies.

• CAFF and AMAP will work together to coordinate the joint analyses and reporting of results between their two monitoring programs, and develop new monitoring initiatives where needed.

• CAFF will establish a web-based portal, withthe assistance of UNEP-WCMC and other organizations, to bring together collected Arctic biodiversity monitoring data, making it available to scientists, researchers and all other stakeholders.

It is hoped that the CBMP will achieve thefollowing through its execution:

• Increase the understanding of Arctic biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and the interaction with regional and global processes,and in particular climate change.

• Detect changes and causes of change in Arcticbiodiversity, on spatial and temporal scales.

• Enhance the potential for the analyses of threats to biodiversity and human well-being,in and outside the Arctic.

• Provide an early warning system, which couldtrigger more specific research and policy response for mitigation and conservation measures.

• Contribute to the development and evaluationof national and circumpolar conservation, mitigation, and adaptation programsand policies.

• Network relevant research institutes, programs,and organizations, covering different aspectsof Arctic biodiversity to reduce overlap and optimize scientific, logistical and financial resources.

• Ensure the effective transfer of information between research institutes, organizations and communities, and link circumpolar Arcticbiodiversity data depositories with Europeanand Global observatory systems.

• Enable the development of regional and circumpolar models to predict future impactsof global changes on Arctic biodiversity andthe development of integrated managementstrategies to conserve and use Arctic biodiversity in a sustainable way.

6. Development of the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP)

6.1 Goals and Objectives

The goal of the CBMP is to coordinate currentlyexisting Arctic biodiversity monitoring programs;facilitate common methodologies for datacollection and analyses; identify gaps anddeficiencies in the current knowledge base andinitiate new monitoring programs where needed;in order to facilitate a circumpolar understandingof the current and future status and trends ofArctic biodiversity.

Knots, Dunlins and Arctic Terns at Flatey, Breiðafjörður, Iceland. Photo courtesyof Ævar Petersen

Primary objectives of the CBMP can besummarized as follows:

• CAFF, through the CBMP, will establish collaboration with countries and organizationsthat are willing to provide access to currentlyexisting biodiversity monitoring data.

• CAFF, in cooperation with experts conductingbiodiversity monitoring throughout the Arctic,will identify gaps and deficiencies in the current knowledge base, and launch new cooperative monitoring initiatives where needed.

• CAFF, in cooperation with experts conductingbiodiversity monitoring throughout the Arctic,will compile and present collected monitoringinformation through regularly published reports, providing AC governments, Indigenous People and other local Arctic residents, and all stakeholders inside and

18

Arctic Gentian / Whitish Gentian / White Gentian (Gentiana algida), Hot Springs, Lavrentia, Chukotka Autonomous Okrug, Russia (Beringia).Photo courtesy of Bjørn Frantzen

Figure 3: Development of monitoring plan based on global, national, regionaland management objectives

Identification of globalobjectives

(if applicable)

Identification of national and regionalenvironmental, social and economic objectives

Identification of management objectives (e.g. ensuring humanhealth, restoring a disturbed area, maintaining species viability)

Development of monitoring plans,and monitoring methods to achieve these objectives

6.2 Current monitoring programs

Current monitoring programs in the Arctic countries will form the foundation of the CBMP, and as thedata comes together and is analyzed, gaps in the current monitoring efforts will be identified, and initiativesdeveloped to address these data gaps.

Although many research and monitoring programs are carried out in the Arctic countries, they vary greatlyin focus and extent, both nationally and between countries.

19

Some address local hot spot issues, others arebroader in scope, some national, some short-term, others long-term, some countries havecoordinated national programs as part of theirconservation policies, other do not have suchprograms. Certain species and habitats are betterresearched than others, and there are gaps inthe scientific knowledge base within eachcountry. The CBMP will allow for the circumpolarcoordination of these regional, national, andlocal programs, bringing together current datafor common analyses at the circumpolar level.

Jokulfirdi, Iceland. Photo courtesy of Ævar Petersen

To date, the interaction and coordination ofArctic monitoring programs have been rare,insufficient to form an overview of the statusand trends of biodiversity in the entire Arcticregion. Many research projects are coordinatedby the International Arctic Science Committee(IASC), or funded through domestic andinternational funding agencies (such as BESIS,CONGASS, LTER, TUNDRA, ITEX, AASER,MOLAR, BERI, DART, PACE, CONGAS, SCANNET,EMAN, ENVINET, and ARTERI). These have beendesigned to answer specific research ormonitoring questions and enhance cross-disciplinary or physical linkages and continue tosignificantly improve the overall knowledge baseof Arctic biodiversity.

The CBMP will focus on bringing these resultstogether into one central web-based locationwith coordinated efforts toward commonanalyses and data integration. A complete listingof existing monitoring programs will be compiled,and a gap analysis performed on areas where

significant data are lacking, providing cleardirection for the launch of new monitoringefforts that do not duplicate existing activitiesand data.

6.3 Biodiversity indicators

Indicators are specifically chosen, objective andconsistent, measurable parameters thatdefinitively mark progress towards or away fromspecified goals. Indicators provide evidence thata certain condition exists or certain results haveor have not been achieved.

They describe and quantify phenomenaeffectively and efficiently in simple terms. In thecontext of the CBMP, these phenomena primarilyreflect changes and shifts in the status, trends,abundance and distribution of Arctic species,habitats, and ecosystems. Choosing effectiveindicators is crucial to identify changes on alllevels of Arctic biodiversity, efficiently reflectingin simple terms the complexity and settings ofthe different phenomena.

Eider, South Hampton Island, Nunavut, Canada. Photo courtesy of GrantGilchrist

The indicators are chosen to monitor progresstowards regional and global targets to enhanceconservation, monitor resource use, and reducesignificant losses of biodiversity. Ideally, well-chosen indicators convey information aboutmore than just themselves, as it is impossible tomonitor all potential features of the complexityof Arctic biodiversity. Indicators should be:

20

• Scientifically valid• Based on easily available data• Responsive to change• Easily understandable• Relevant to focal issues and user needs• Subject to target and threshold settings

Moreover, they should enable further analysesand interpretation into the root causes of themain impacts. A number of relevant criteriahave been identified as important for selectingpossible indicators in the Arctic region:

• National and international programs alreadyin place

• Ecological relevance as environmental indicators

• Circumpolar relevance• Definite Arctic responsibility for a species,

biotype, or habitat• International commitments or responsibility

through agreements and conventions• Endangered species and protected areas• Key species for measuring climate change,

habitat fragmentation, over exploitation, hunting, etc.

• Joint interests in monitoring components, such as the AMAP list of species

• Economic, scientific or cultural importance• Historical data available• Representatives of different trophic levels or

ecological importance.

Ideally, indicators for Arctic biodiversity shouldbe adopted from those chosen for the CBD,Ramsar and other global processes, which alreadysynthesize much of the above thinking, and thenadjusted to the Arctic environment.

Appendix I summarizes the main global indicatorsas decided by the CBD COP7, and in progresswithin the Ramsar Convention being discussedby CMS and the key findings from the ACIAprocess as some guidance to choose indicatorsfor Arctic biodiversity. COP agreed on eightindicators for immediate testing (listed in columnB of annex 1 of decision VII/30 and reproducedin Appendix I of this document). Another 13indicators require further develop-ment (listedin column C of annex 1 of decision VII/30 andreproduced in Appendix I of this document).The EU developed a set of headline indicatorsin close alliance with the CBD indicators. Inaddition, the EU also developed policy andstructural indicators. All of them very closelyrelate to the CBD and other global processesand have relevance for the CBMP. The indicatorsfor the Ramsar Convention are still in process.From 19 indicators suggested by the Scientificand Technical Review Panel (STRP) working groupin early 2004 for the Standing Committee ofthe Convention, those with relevance for theCBD and the CBMP are listed in Appendix 1.CMS is in the process of discussing indicators inits Scientific Council and Standing Committee.

6.4 Cooperation, partnerships, andcapacity building

Through the CBMP, CAFF will cooperate, establishpartnerships, and build capacity for biodiversitymonitoring between AC Member States,Permanent Participants, Observers, other ACWorking Groups and other stakeholders. Dueto its cooperative and partnership approach, theCBMP aims for capacity building for biodiversitymonitoring both within and outside the Arctic.CAFF will facilitate active participation in theimplementation of the program by allstakeholders, including the academic andscientific communities within and beyond theArctic, and cooperation with the University ofthe Arctic will be strongly encouraged.

Arctic Fox with Murre egg, Coburg Island, Canada.Photo courtesy of Grant Gilchrist

State Department, is in partnership with collegesand universities, state and local school systems,and non-government organ izat ions .Internationally, GLOBE is a partnership betweenthe United States and over 100 other countries,including some Arctic countries. Over one millionprimary and secondary students in more than14,000 schools have taken part in the program,taking measurements on atmospheric andclimatic parameters, soils, hydrology, land cover,biology, and phenology. There are more than24,000 GLOBE-trained teachers globally. Thisprogram lends itself for cooperation with theCBMP, and the concerted efforts of CAFF towardsestablishing community-based monitoring withthe Indigenous Peoples and other local residentsof the Arctic.

Chukchi woman gathering plants for drying, Anadyr region,Chukotka Autonous Okrug, August 2002. Photo courtesy of Bjørn Frantzen

CAFF will establish partnerships with countriesand organizations that can provide access tobiodiversity monitoring data. This includes theArctic countries, the countries of France,Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and theUnited Kingdom; and organizations such asBirdLife International, IASC, the WorldConservation Union (IUCN), UNEP WorldConservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC),Wetlands International (WI), and the WorldWildlife Fund (WWF). UNEP-WCMC is submittinga discussion paper on the data management,methods of communication,

21

Parakeet Auklet and Horned Puffin, Savoonga, St. Lawrence Island, Alaska.Photo courtesy of Lisa Sheffield

CAFF will cooperate with other AC WorkingGroups, in particular AMAP, in coordinating thejoint analyses and reporting of the respectivemonitoring programs. To this end, a Strategyfor Coordination of Monitoring Activitiesbetween CAFF and AMAP has been written, andserves as one of the supporting documents tothis CBMP Framework Document.

The CBMP will provide the basis for activeinvolvement with the International Polar Year(IPY) initiative, strongly supported by the ArcticCouncil, and will have far-reaching benefits inestablishing linkages with the results ofmonitoring programs in the southern polarregion. The CBMP, and the cooperation betweenCAFF and AMAP on their respective monitoringprograms, sets the stage for a dynamic, northern-southern polar cooperation project in monitoringand assessment of climate change, variousanthropogenic impacts, and polar biodiversity.

With guidance from Permanent Participants andassistance of the Indigenous Peoples Secretariat(IPS), CAFF will develop approaches tocommunity-based biodiversity monitoring, andthe means to include Traditional EcologicalKnowledge (TEK) and the participation ofIndigenous Peoples and local communities intobiodiversity monitoring. To this end, thePermanent Participants will submit discussionpapers on community-based monitoring insupport of cooperation with the CBMP.

GLOBE, a cooperative effort of schools, led inthe United States by a Federal interagencyprogram supported by NASA, NSF and the U.S.

Semi-palmated Plover (Charadrius semipalmatus), Barrow, Alaska. Photo courtesyof Toru Mano.

data management, methods of communicationand development of a web-based portal insupport of the CBMP. WI is submitting adiscussion paper as well on global and flyway-scale monitoring and conservation programs formigratory waterbirds of the Arctic in cooperationwith the CBMP. These discussion papers serveas supporting documents to this Framework.

CAFF will cooperate with monitoring stationsand other research platforms, such as CEON –the Circum-Arctic Environmental ObservatoriesNetwork; CAT-B – the Circum-Arctic TerrestrialBiodiversity Initiative addressing causes andconsequences of changing biodiversity in Arcticand Alpine terrestrial ecosystems; ENVINET – aninfrastructure co-operation network ofresearchers focusing on multidisciplinaryenvironmental research in Northern Europe; andalso with earth observation efforts, using satelliteimagery and remote sensing, such as throughNASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), GOOS,GTOS, Northern View, and UNEP/GRID-Arendal.CBMP cooperation is not limited to this list buthere are named just a few of the manyopportunities for collaboration on biodiversitymonitoring.

GTOS is a UN programme for observations,modeling, and analysis of terrestrial ecosystemsto support sustainable development. GTOSfacilitates access to information on terrestrialecosystems so that researchers and policy makerscan detect and manage global and regional

environmental change. GOOS is a permanentglobal system for observations, modeling andanalysis of marine and ocean variables to supportoperational ocean services worldwide. GOOSwill provide accurate descriptions of the presentstate of the oceans, including living resources;continuous forecasts of the future conditions ofthe sea for as far ahead as possible; and thebasis for forecasts of climate change.

Linking with other regional and global programsis of critical importance to the success of theCBMP. These efforts will ensure that the CBMPmaximizes existing resources, builds on networksalready in place, avoids duplication of efforts,and pools logistical, scientific and financialresources for the mutual benefit of all involvedin Arctic biodiversity monitoring.

Lovosero Lake, Kola Peninsula. Photo courtesy of RAIPON

6.5 Network structureThe CBMP is designed to integrate Arcticbiodiversity monitoring, and the associatedresearch needs, across four distinct levels: 1)species; 2) sites; 3) ecosystems; and 4)community-based networks.

1. Species networks. CAFF (2001) highlightedthe gaps and the need for the harmonizationof species information. Several expert networkswith experience in particular species or taxonomicgroups have been established to developcoordinated observations and research. The initialexperience of the networks, which focus on asample of marine, freshwater and terrestrialvertebrates and higher plants, will build the basisfor additional networks and linkages withongoing species- or ecosystem-based initiatives.

22

The following are some initial components ofthe species networks:

• Monitoring of selected key indicator speciesfrom different ecosystems for following general ecosystem health.

• Monitoring of harvested biota and of necessary parameters for interpretation of population changes, such as commercial fishand invertebrates, plankton, game species, etc. and associated biological and physical parameters.

• Monitoring of rare and endangered species of plants and animals.

• Development of aggregated indicators for different monitoring purposes.

• Maintaining lists of species recorded and species established (“local floras and faunas”)

Kamchatka Rhododendron (Therorhodion glandulosum) (Rhododendroncamtschaticum ssp. glandulosum), Russia. Photo courtesy of Bjørn Frantzen

The following species monitoring networks haveinitially been established within the CBMP:Caribou/Reindeer, ITEX (International TundraExperiment), Shorebirds and Seabirds. Thesewere selected as initial networks at the 2000CAFF/AMAP monitoring workshop (CAFF/AMAP2000). Each of these networks has written anExpert Network Monitoring Plan which serve assupporting publications to this FrameworkDocument. A general charter was drawn upfor these networks, which are led by acoordinator or joint coordinators.

23

Their primary task, which is presently voluntary,is to reach out to the experts in their respectivefields, willing to take part and put togethersuggestions for key monitoring parametersrelevant to that species or group, and a list ofpriority species. What parameters need to becollected apart from numbers vary from onegroup to the other, but are primarily importantin terms of population dynamics of the givenspecies. Supporting materials are also needed,i.e. weather parameters, oceanographicinformation and other physical data, but willvary widely according to the type of monitoring,data handling, and analysis carried out.

2. Site networks. Monitoring and research isoften site-based. Identification of existing dataand harmonization of methods is beingdeveloped across marine, freshwater andterrestrial sites through programs such asENVINET (www.envinet.npolar.no); SCANNET(http://194.218.66.194/scannet/Scannet); LTER( L o n g Te r m E c o s y s t e m R e s e a r c h(http://lternet.edu/); and EMAN EcologicalMonitoring and Assessment Network(http://www.eman-rese.ca/eman/). It is at indi-vidual field sites that long-term observations orexperiments are strongest. However, commonobservations or analyses across the circumpolarregion are very limited, with but few exceptions,such as the plant-warming experiments of ITEX(www.systbot.gu.se/research/itex/itex.html).A Circumpolar Protected Areas Network (CPAN)Strategy and Action Plan has been developedthrough CAFF. This includes provisions forbiodiversity inventories and monitoring systemsto be established within protected areas, if notalready in place. The CBMP will work toencourage cooperation between these networks.

ITEX research site, Toolik Lake, Alaska where it is combined with a snowmanipulation experiment. Photo courtesy of Philip A. Wookey

24

3. Ecosystem networks. Increasingly, it isrecognized that issues of global change andsustainability of natural resources require a holisticperspective in which the connectivity within andbetween systems is recognized. The Arctic, withits dominant physical characteristics, relativelylimited species diversity, and good palaeologicalinformation, provides good opportunities foranalyses of ecosystems and responses ofbiodiversity to climate change. The plannedstrategy for such an approach could be toestablish a small number of initial networks,which focus on selected Arctic ecosystems suchas ice-edge food webs, wetlands, and tree lineforest systems. These are in the future expectedto show large responses, positive or negative,to climate change.

The integration of Arctic biodiversity data andinformation across species, sites and systemswill provide for the development of mathematicalmodels to predict responses of Arctic biodiversityto global change processes. These will also beimportant in the formulation of scenarios foruse in future regional and global assessments,comparable with those developed in the UN-ECE Integrated Monitoring Programme.Knowledge of the dynamics of species andecosystems will also improve the informationbase on the biological effects of chemicalcontaminants, combined with AMAPobservations on contaminants. Components ofecosystem networks could also be land-use andsoil degradation monitoring using remote-sensingtechniques.

4. Community-based monitoring. The Arcticis inhabited by a number of Indigenous andother local peoples. Most of these communitiesrely heavily on natural resources, and havedeveloped strong ties and a deep understandingfor nature. Traditional Ecological Knowledge(TEK) can support, complement, and beintegrated into more modern (“western”)research. Several Permanent Participants (ArcticAthabaskan Council, Aleut InternationalAssociation, RAIPON, Saami Council, Gwich’inCouncil International) have expressed interestin the development of an indigenous monitoringnetwork in a quest to protect the environment,

health, and natural resources of theircommunities. In North America, there issubstantial experience in cooperation between“western” scientists and indigenous community-based organizations in monitoring. One of thesuccessful examples is monitoring forcontaminants in traditional foods. Such effortsare often piecemeal and in this regard, theyrequire the same approach as other types ofexisting monitoring: development of standardizedmethods, common indicators, better coordinationand communication.

Nenets Autonomus Okrug, Russia. Photo courtesy of Association of Nenetspeople of "Yasavey"

The CBMP will involve local communities inspecies, site and system observations, asappropriate, such as those associated withspecific phenologies, of which the migration ofspecies is one example. Community-basedmonitoring programs (sometimes called citizen-based monitoring), can be looked upon in twoways, as a separate network or as an integratedpart of all networks. Such community networkobservations fulfill primarily a dual function ofallowing for widely distributed data collection;and encouraging local education, understanding,and participation. One form of involvement isin hunters providing information and supplyingspecimens for analyses, such as through harvest-report systems. The community involvementmay possibly want to center more on economicspecies, such as Caribou, but the validity of theirinvolvement is no way contingent on these. Theestablishment of the University of the Arcticprovides a particular communication route tothe wider public, and

• Colony monitoring, including cataloguing thewhereabouts of colonies, conducting total colony bird counts, or partial counts (on plotsor transects)

• At-sea surveys of the species and numbers of birds at different times of year

• Compiling harvest statistics

• Updating national lists of breeding and non-breeding species

• Maintaining national endangered species lists

• Parameters important for survival of populations, such as productivity, survival, diets, etc.

• Banding, as a technique, used for survival and other population dynamics analyses

In order to interpret the resulting monitoringdata, information on a number of physicalparameters are needed. These data includeclimate variables and models, oceanographicinformation, plankton distributions, contaminantlevels, etc. It is clear that these information needto be supplied by diverse sources, and here liesone element where CAFF and AMAP can joinefforts - in the identification of which speciesand sites to monitor; and where obtaining datacan be a combined effort, though the twoprograms are collecting different information.

25

the success of their advanced training coursesis already proven. In general, this kind ofinvolvement in monitoring activities enhancescapacity building in the often highly distributedrural areas of the Arctic. Community involvementalso increases credibility of other scientific workcarried out in their region.

Alaska Native Science Commission meeting. From left to right: Aleutrepresentatives from Nikolskoye, The Commander Islands, Kamchatka region,Russian Federation - Vera Belobrova, Tatiana Grigorieva (AIA coordinator), andIrinana Timonkina; Susan King, Program Manager U.S. - RFE Partnership Activity;Patricia Cochran, Alaska Native Science Commission Executive Director; LarryMerculieff, Coordinator, Bering Sea Council of Elders and Deputy Director AlaskaNative Science Commission. Photo courtesy of Victoria Gofman, Aleut InternationalAssociation

An example of a biodiversity monitoringnetwork: When the current CBMP monitoringnetworks were established, it was recognizedthat these only served as examples of how tobuild on current activities and promotecooperation. It was further noted that thesenetworks were by no means the entire CBMP,since many important facets were not included.Other similar networks need to be set up as theCBMP develops further, and gap analysescompleted. In the identification and final selectionof these networks, it is important to keep inmind the links between networks, such as thelinkage of Polar Bears and Ringed Seals.

Seabirds are used here as an example of theparameters needed for an integrated monitoringprogram of one component of the Arcticecosystem. The Seabird Expert Group (CBird)within CAFF has identified the following elementsas important and necessary for a circumpolarseabird monitoring network, some of which maybe common to other networks:

Eiders sitting on the edge of a polynya in the Belcher Islands, Canada.Photo courtesy of Grant Gilchrist

• Representative of different trophic levels, orecological importance

Some of these criteria inherently cover the fullcomplement of seabird biodiversity, i.e. all species,while others need to be based on a selection ofspecies, which upon decision, are to be included.The species selection may be best, and withleast subjectivity, approached by using a matrixsystem, whereby the different criteria are scoredusing both de facto information, best judgment,process of stratification, and representativeness.

Puffin in West Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang, ARC-PIC.COM

6.6 Data management and communication

6.6.1 Data integration

There is already a considerable body ofinformation on Arctic biodiversity. Government-sponsored research in the AC Member States isthe primary source of this information, whileAC observers and individual researchers, bothwithin and outside the Arctic countries, alsopossess much relevant information. AMAP hascollected data on contaminants; the InternationalArctic Science Committee (IASC) keeps web-searchable summaries of Arctic research; and

26

Murres at sea near Coburg Island, Canada. Photo courtesy of Grant Gilchrist

The Arctic seabird species number over 60, soa specific circumpolar monitoring programcannot be realistically developed for each oneof them. The challenge, as with all other floraand fauna species groups, will be to identify thekey indicator species. The following aspects needto be considered as criteria for finding the mostrelevant seabird species:

• Circumpolar distribution and relevance

• Arctic responsibility, i.e. % of the world population breeding in the Arctic

• National responsibility, i.e. % of population breeding in respective countries

• Current national and international programs

• International commitments, i.e. species mentioned in international conventions, strategies, treaties, etc.

• National lists of Birds of Arctic ConservationConcern (including endangered species lists)

• Species used by AMAP’s contaminants program

• Economic, cultural and/or scientific importance

• Imminent threats, e.g. oil pollution, hunting,bycatch, climate change

• Relevance as environmental indicators

development of this understanding through theuse of relevant indicators.

In order to make full use of existing and futureinformation, it may be helpful if, in the future,the CBMP facilitates common approaches orprotocols for data and information collectionand research, especially of new projects. Theseapproaches and protoco l s may becomplementary to those available for theAntarctic. The CBMP also facilitates circumpolaror regional analyses, in order to understandbetter changes in Arctic biodiversity and requiredconservation measures. Such an assessment ispartly taking place in respect to climate changeunder the ACIA Scientific Report.

Based on existing and future monitoring,modeling efforts and responses could beundertaken for species, habitat and ecosystemsin relation to climate change and other regionaland global processes, both natural and human-related.

6.6.2 Web-based portal

The CBMP will create a distributed anddecentralized geo-referenced web-based portalfor communications, data and informationexchange between the AC Member States,Permanent Participants, networks, researchers,and other stakeholders. This approach allows

27

France, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, andthe United Kingdom have significant repositoriesof Arctic biodiversity research and monitoringinformation. Terrestrial and marine researchstations and platforms, and their associatednetworks, have summaries of research at theirfacilities.

Scoresbysund, Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang, ARC-PIC.COM

Despite appreciable existing monitoringinformation, it is recognized that there aredeficiencies and gaps in Arctic biodiversitymonitoring. There are deficiencies in taxonomic,geographical and temporal coverage of species.There are also deficiencies with regard to overallunderstanding of interactions of species, theirhabitats and ecosystems in a circumpolar context.

Only a few Arctic species have been monitoredto date. Therefore, many species have not beensubject to any research and monitoring. Even inspecies that are monitored, not all aspects oftheir biology are monitored, but these couldinclude, among others, biometric measurements,reproductive success, abundance and distribution,harvesting data, species’ spatial, geographicaland temporal coverage, analyzed together withvarious physical and chemical parameters. Somespecies have not yet been fully classified, witha lack of knowledge of their internal geneticand taxonomic diversity.

Gap analyses are necessary to determinedeficiencies and information needs, and topropose means to address these deficienciesand information needs. The CBMP is intendedto facilitate a circumpolar understanding of thecurrent and future status and trends of Arcticbiodiversity. This can be done, for instance, with

Looking south from the top of a Northern Fulmar colonyat Cape Vera, Devon Island, Nunavut, Canada. Photo courtesy of Mark Mallory,Canadian Wildlife Service

for data and information integration andexchange. It acts as the major gateway for CAFFon biodiversity information and also provides acommon user platform for accessing availablemonitoring data and information in combinationwith other relevant information, such asprotected areas, habitat changes and satelliteimagery. In addition, other environmental dataand information (i.e. climate, ice conditions,plankton distributions) could be accessed throughthe common portal.

This approach to data and informationmanagement will allow for inputs from theCBMP into current and future global and regionalassessment reports (i.e. the Millennium EcosystemAssessment, the Global Biodiversity Outlook),and existing and future AC assessments,including the Arctic Human Development Report.These data will assist Arctic Member States, andObservers in monitoring their progress towardsand reporting for national, regional and globaltargets.

Bog Bilberry / Alpine Blueberry (Vaccinium uliginosum), Hot Springs, Lavrentia,Chukotka Autonome Okrug, Russia (Beringia). Photo courtesy of Bjørn Frantzen

With relatively few species and comparativelyfewer human impacts than in industrialized partsof the world, the Arctic region is uniquelypositioned as a prototype to reveal the rootcauses of changes in species and habitats.Physical, chemical and biological data will beneeded for whatever analyses are to be carriedout on monitoring data and information.

28

Monitoring data and associated information,needs to be stored in a way that is acceptableand accessible to all contributing partners, andmanageable with easy access and exchangewhere necessary. Modern technologies allowdata compilation and maintenance on the onehand, and data management and controlledaccess for analyses and assessments by de-centralized and distributed databases.

Nenets Autonomus Okrug, Russia. Photo courtesy of Association of Nenetspeople of "Yasavey"

The general approach is to disseminatemonitoring data and information through acommon geo-referenced (GIS) web-based portal.That way the core databases can be securedand maintained, under the control of the datacustodians, and data ownerships are fullyaccounted for. The web interface also providesunique opportunities for geo-referenced trendanalyses.

6.6.3 Harmonization of data standards

Harmonization of the data standards andtechniques is desirable, though it may be difficultto achieve in practice, except for new programsthat may be designed with this intent. Differentmethods for collecting data and information arenot necessarily a deterrent for pooling andutilizing data for analysis.

Modern tools, including GIS analysis andtechniques, allow data and information to betransformed and harmonized, so it supportscomparison and analyses. For example, GIS-coding of compiled monitoring data on species,

White-fronted geese, Þykkvibær, Iceland. Photo courtesy of Daniel Bergmann

habitats and protected areas could enhance thedissemination and comparability to users of thedata for a geographically defined region or achosen time period. In addition, it would alloweasier inclusion into global and other regionalassessments outside the Arctic region, e.g. inregard to migratory species.

Data will also be collected on different spatialand temporal scales and this will be incorporatedinto the functioning web-based portal. In thisway, requested graphics can be selected to showchanges over time and space. This will be oneof the most significant advantages to establishinga web-based portal, as the ultimate goal is tobe able to graphically view status and trends ofArctic biodiversity, as well as distinguishingbetween spatial, temporal and taxonomic levels.

6.7 Communication

The web-based portal will be the main gatewayand prime entry point for CAFF and its partnersto obtain up-to-date information on trends inbiodiversity. Presentation of the results of theCBMP can be generated from the web-baseddatabase, but will also be summarized accordingto themes, regions, and impact issues. It is theintention of CAFF to publish reports in supportof the CBMP. One of the primary products ofthe CBMP will be a series of reports titled ArcticBiodiversity Status and Trends. These reports willbe produced for species, habitats, ecosystems,and protected areas; and will span terrestrial,freshwater, marine (pelagic), and coastalecosystems in the Arctic environment. In addition,updates on any joint initiatives, that will be

developed between CAFF and AMAP, will bereported.

Between the published reports and the web-based portal, and the joint cooperation ofcommunicating monitoring results with AMAP,the Arctic Council is filling one of its primaryobjectives in informing the Arctic communitieson the State of the Arctic Environment, andproviding the necessary information topolicymakers for effective decision making insustainable use of the Arctic environment andits living resources.

Arctic hare (Lepus arcticus), distributed throughout Greenland. Photo courtesyof Carsten Egevang, ARC-PIC.COM

7. Value of Cooperation with the CBMP andthe Integrated Monitoring Approach

The CBMP has a clear user value for severalsectors of society:

• Communities

• Scientific / Academic Sectors

• Government / Policymakers

• Financial / Economic Sectors

Cooperation with CAFF benefits all stakeholders,either directly or indirectly. It is clear that the nationaland regional programs, networks, organizations,and scientists, with whom cooperation will besought, have their own goals and objectivesindependent of the CBMP. However, there is anadded value in the CBMP circumpolar cooperationnot present in individual efforts.

29

30

Myvatn, Iceland. Photo courtesy of Daniel Bergmann

Some of the added values for societal sectorsinclude:

• Arctic resident communities for the development and implementation of local and regional conservation strategies, mitigation plans, and action plans for adaptingto the various impacts facing the Arctic environment, and the animals and plants onwhich their livelihoods depend.

• Policymakers for integration of best availableknowledge into conservation policies and sustainable use strategies.

• Resource managers (fisheries, forestry, agriculture, tourism, etc.) for integration intogeneral resource-use policies to ensure sustainability of their operations.

• Scientific and academic communities, throughparticipation in monitoring efforts and cooperative efforts in the analyses of circumpolar data, allowing for better understanding of the dynamics of Arctic species, habitats, and ecosystems; their interactions in a changing environment; andto predict and assess circumpolar and globalimpacts. In addition, the sharing of valuablefinancial, logistical and scientific resources allow for the acquisition of monitoring datanot previously attainable.

The Arctic, in its own right, is a region of immenseecological and socio-economic importance inthe global picture. It is also becoming increasinglyobvious that the circumpolar Arctic, more than

any of the World’s ecosystems, is a single, highlyintegrated system. The stratosphere, atmosphere,land and water are intimately linked throughe.g. chemical transport, stratospheric ozonedepletion and enhanced UVB radiation affectingsurface biota. Food web transfer takes placewith materials from marine and freshwater toterrestrial systems and vice versa, extending tohuman populations. Biological links exist betweenhigh and low latitudes through extensive animalmigrations and through continuous distributionswith lower latitude biota and east-west linkages.And exceptionally large freshwater input comesfrom continental rivers to the extensive andhighly productive continental shelf areas andthe Arctic Ocean.

Little Auk, Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang, ARC-PIC.COM

Thus the Arctic can be regarded as a singleextensive ecosystem with large-scale latitudinal,longitudinal and vertical gradients, overlying finescale environmental and biological variability. Theimportance of the Arctic has been highlightedby the adoption of various policies e.g. throughthe Northern Dimension action plans of theEuropean Community and with the incorporationof Russia into European collaboration. Theestablishment of the Arctic Council as a high levelintergovernmental forum of the eight Arcticnations to work for environmental protection andsustainable use is also a political manifestationof this fact. Its existence not only greatly adds tofurther the opportunities of collaborativemonitoring and research, as well as sensiblemanagement of the natural resources, but it isthe only vehicle that has the potential to establishand implement such efforts.

dissemination of information, are of fundamentalimportance.

• Underlying strength of environmental researchand national monitoring programs contributedby many different institutions, combined withthe increasing culture and experience of collaboration.

• Results of the ACIA assessment and furthermonitoring through identification of the gapanalysis, providing an in-depth analysis and forecast of global changes.

• Analyses by CAFF, AMAP, European Environmental Agency (EEA) and others of the status and trends in the environment andbiodiversity, and the capacity of these organizations to promote and apply long-term observations.

• The newly established University of the Arcticas a circumpolar structure for higher educationand distributed research.

This type of cooperation proposed through theCBMP is unique, and has never been attemptedbefore. No one national program or monitoringeffort can answer the circumpolar questions thatwill be answered through the CBMP. All datafrom the CBMP will be incorporated into nationalprograms and vice versa to complete acircumpolar picture. This will produce answersto questions not previously possible. Throughcommon tools and standards, through commonanalyses, and integration of data from multiplesources, the value added extends far beyondthe circumpolar Arctic region to enhancing theglobal perspective.

Eider drake, South Hampton Island, Nunavut, Canada. Photo courtesy of GrantGilchrist

The proposed CBMP and its outputs will enablemeaningful circumpolar, as well as north-southlinkages, and collaboration. Cooperation withinthe CBMP will:

• Assist all stakeholders in contributing to international conventions and global targetsfor sustainability of resources.

• Provide all participants and stakeholders withthe information needed for adaptive and mitigate measures through the reports and web-based portal.

• Create a much clearer understanding of circumpolar processes, ecosystem functionsand the large-scale effects of impacts to theArctic environment such as climate change through the international cooperation on pooling scientific knowledge and analyses forphysical, chemical and biological parameters.International cooperative efforts in this regardare currently non-existent but are immeasurably more effective than any nationalor regional monitoring program by itself.

• Save on logistical, financial and scientific resources through cooperative efforts.

Sustainable use, global change and conservationof ecosystems are central to the biodiversityresearch priorities in the Arctic in general. RecentArctic developments provide new opportunitiesand momentum to focus and enhancemonitoring and research efforts. Four keyelements, with their respective functions ofgeneration, integration, implementation, and

31

Long-tailed Ducks, Cheyne Islands, Nunavut, Canada.Photo courtesy of Mark Mallory, Canadian Wildlife Service

32

8.1.2 Creation of Work Plan

The CBMP SC will create a Work Plan onmonitoring which will tie into the CAFF 2004-2006 Work Plan, and subsequent Work Plans.

8.1.3 Discussion Papers

Discussion papers in support of the CBMP are:

Topic 1: Community-based monitoring. This isa series of papers prepared by the PermanentParticipants in cooperation with the IndigenousPeople’s Secretariat (IPS). These papers reflecthow the Indigenous Peoples can contribute toand support the monitoring efforts of the CBMPat the community level. These papers will furtheraddress the contributions of traditional ecologicalknowledge to the CBMP.

Topic 2: Wetlands International CooperationStrategy. This paper was prepared by WetlandsInternational and focuses on how WI cancontribute to and support the monitoring effortsof the CBMP. It examines the global and flyway-scale monitoring and conservation programs formigratory waterbirds of the Arctic. This paperalso includes contributions to the RamsarConvention.

Golden Plover, Kelduhverfi, Iceland. Photo courtesy of Daniel Bergmann

Nenets Autonomus Okrug, Russia. Photo courtesy of Association of Nenetspeople of "Yasavey"

8. Action Plan

8.1 Initial Actions

8.1.1 Establishment of CBMP Steering Committee

CAFF will establish a CBMP Steering Committee(CBMP SC) to implement the various elementsof the CBMP over the next six years, culminatingin 2010, in conjunction with the CBD globaltarget to significantly reduce the rate ofbiodiversity loss by 2010.

The CBMP SC will work with AMAP in developinga workshop in 2005 to begin the process ofcooperation between the two monitoringprograms; and work to establish the short-termand long-term goals for this cooperative effort.

One of the initial responsibilities of the CBMPSC will be to raise funds for the operation ofthe CBMP and collection of monitoring data ona circumpolar scale. This Framework Documentmay serve, in part, as a grant proposal for theseefforts. The CBMP SC will also coordinate theimplementation of the networks that will beproviding the monitoring data.

33

Topic 3: UNEP-WCMC Cooperation Strategy onData Management and Communications. Thispaper, prepared by the World ConservationMonitoring Center, focuses on how WCMC cancontribute to the CBMP for data management,communications, meta-data and web-basedportals, and other areas of monitoring expertise.

Topic 4: Remote Sensing Cooperation Strategies.This will be a series of papers, which will berequested from UNEP/GRID-Arendal; USGSAlaska Geographic Science Office, USA; NorutIT, Norway; and others. These discussion paperswill address the possibilities for incorporation ofearth observations, remote sensing and GIS intothe monitoring strategy of the CBMP to facilitatethe acquisition of data that is on too broad ascale to be acquired through regular, land-basedmonitoring activities. Some examples, whichcould be visually illustrated, could be sea ice andice edge variations and impacts on migratorymarine and coastal species; marine plankton(changes in abundance and distribution); fishstocks; wetland type and extent; permafrost,snow cover and glaciers; changes in tree lineand tundra interfaces; fragmentation of theArctic through road development; andmonitoring of protected areas.

Topic 5: Cooperation strategies from earthobservations via terrestrial monitoring networks.Networks such as CEON, Scannet and Envinetwill be requested to submit discussion paperson how it might be possible to cooperate withthe CBMP, and how observations by govern-mental, scientific and academic users of theirresearch platforms can contribute to the CBMPmonitoring efforts.

All supporting documentation to this Framework,such as these discussion papers reinforce theinternational significance and timeliness of theCBMP, and will serve to assist CAFF in buildinginternational financial support. These discussionpapers are being published separately to thisdocument.

8.1.4 Creation of a pilot project

In the development of a pilot project, anecosystem-based approach will be applied. CAFFand AMAP will work jointly to create a strategyfor species and site selections, as well as othershared parameters for monitoring. This processwill begin in 2005 with a joint CAFF/AMAPworkshop. Such a pilot project woulddemonstrate how the CBMP would work in itsentirety at a specific site, or sites, and theeffectiveness of combining biological monitoringdata from the CBMP with AMAP contaminantsmonitoring data.

This pilot project will further incorporate nationalmonitoring initiatives in the chosen country.Indicator species will be selected such thatmonitoring will show status and trend effectson spatial and temporal scales, for impacts listedin Section 3 of this Framework Document.

Jokulfirdi, Iceland. Photo courtesy of Ævar Petersen

Remote sensing and GIS data, which provideinformation on large-scale physical and chemicalparameters, will be incorporated with traditionalland-based monitoring initiatives.

The analysis of the functioning and integrity ofan entire food web would be a critical componentin the pilot project. One example of a food webthat could be monitored both by CAFF and AMAPmonitoring methods, might be as presented inFigure 4. This type of food web represents severaltrophic levels, and impacts to humans can beassessed from three different food sources, bothfrom ecological and contaminants perspectives.

34

Figure 4: One possible example of a food web for monitoring

The biodiversity monitoring data, combined with the contaminants data of AMAP and other physical andchemical parameter monitoring will be combined in a database as a web-based portal with metadata,carrying the pilot project to its conclusion with the interactive communication of findings to all interestedstakeholders.

The objectives of a web-based portal for the pilot project are to:

• Develop a prototype GIS-based interface to facilitate the management, dissemination and analyses of biodiversity monitoring data. UNEP-WCMC has the mandate from the UNEP Governing Council to monitor the 2010 target. In this context, the proposed web interface for the pilot project can thenbe extended to the Arctic region.

• Facilitate CAFF to serve as a clearing-house for facilitating remote sensing, climate and other physicaldata access e.g. through UNEP-WCMC and a common website.

Humans

Humans

Humans

Polarbears

Seabirds

Fish Seals

Zooplankton

Phytoplankton

understanding of the processes in force, betteruse of limited resources, and ensure bettercoordination for targeting questions posed bydecision-makers.

8.1.7 CAFF reports on status and trends ofbiodiversity

One of the primary products of the CBMP willbe a series of reports titled Arctic BiodiversityStatus and Trends. These reports will be producedfor species, habitats, ecosystems, and protectedareas; and will span terrestrial, freshwater, marine(pelagic) and coastal ecosystems in the Arcticenvironment.

35

ITEX research area, Finse, Norway.Photo courtesy of ITEX

8.1.5 Synthesis of current network data

An analys is isneeded of currentnetworks and datathat are already inex i s tence andready to be in-corporated withefforts from CAFF

on the regional, national and international scales.Networks will submit an analysis of their data,and propose how each can contribute to andbenefit from cooperation with the CBMP.

8.1.6 Gap analysis of monitoring activities,data, and deficiencies

A compilation is needed of what monitoringprograms are currently in existence, what kindof monitoring they are doing, on what scale(e.g. regional, national, multi-national), and whattypes of data are available as a product of thesemonitoring programs. With these data, a gapanalysis can be completed on what groups ofbiodiversity require further study.

In addition to the gap analysis, an analysis hasto be performed on currently existing monitoringlinkages, especially regional and international.As a follow-up to this, a meta-database onexisting national and cross-national biodiversitymonitoring programs can be compiled. Thisalready exists for some taxa, habitats and regions(see for instance Ramsar STRP, and various CBDpapers), but needs to be strengthened andfocused for the Arctic region.

Such an overview is needed for better evaluationof needs and priorities, and choosing the bestindicators of environmental changes. Most ofthese programs have been initiated throughnational needs or importance, but some have abilateral or multilateral focus. Although similarprograms exist in more than one Arctic country,networking them has generally not beenachieved, let alone of biodiversity monitoringprograms in general. Clear benefits will beachieved in networking over wider areas, asregional assessments will allow for better

Roseroot (Rhodiola rosea), Greenland. Photo courtesy of Carsten Egevang,ARC-PIC.COM

36

address impacts of climate change and otherenvironmental factors, conservation measures,management and sustainable use of the Arctic’sliving resources. The CBMP accomplishes thisthrough covering biological processes such asfood webs, reproduction, survival, and migrationsacross all ecosystems – terrestrial, freshwater,marine (pelagic) and coastal – in the Arcticenvironment; and linking this with data fromcontaminants analyses through AMAP, and datafrom other monitoring programs for a completepicture on biological resource integrity in theArctic.

The CBMP fully recognizes and supports thelinkages between conservation of biologicaldiversity and sustainable development for Arcticcommunities. The CBMP will provide thenecessary information for the environmental,economic and socio-cultural stability for theIndigenous Peoples whose very existencedepends on keeping the Arctic’s living resourcesin balance with regional development andeconomic growth.

Inuit standing at polynya edge, Belcher Islands, Canada. Photo courtesy ofGrant Gilchrist

Flock of Black-tailed Godwit , Álftafjörður, Iceland.Photo courtesy of Daniel Bergmann.

8.2 Long-term actions

Publications from the CBMP would consist of:

• Annual updates

• Arctic Biodiversity Status and Trends reportsfor species, habitats and ecosystems(beginning in 2006).

• Joint CAFF/AMAP reports.

These reports will synthesize data from the CBMP,and from joint efforts of CAFF and AMAP. Theywill be presented in a comprehensive format foruse by Senior Arctic Officials, Ministers and otherpolicymakers for the formation of policies thatprovide for the mitigation of, and adaptation toclimate change, pollution, and other seriousimpacts to the Arctic environment.

The series of reports for the CBMP ArcticBiodiversity Status and Trends will culminate ina 2010 publication to commemorate the globaltarget to significantly reduce the rate ofbiodiversity loss by 2010.

9. Conclusions

The CBMP responds to jurisdictions andresponsibilities of the Arctic Council MemberStates for the conservation and managementof species, habitats, and ecosystems in the Arctic,and to the Arctic countries’ internationalcommitments. It is structured to provideappropriate information to policy makers to

8.3 Time line

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Submit CBMP forendorsement bySAOs and Ministers

Establish CBMPSteering Committeeunder CAFF

Publish a jointCAFF/AMAP GapAnalysis report onMonitoring

Establish a pilotproject(CAFF/AMAP)

Submit CBMP forendorsement bySAOs and Ministers

Publish annualupdates on pilotproject(CAFF/AMAP)

Publish a series ofjoint Arctic ImpactAnalyses from PilotProject-CAFF/AMAPmonitoring reports*

Publish a series ofCBMP biodiversitystatus and trendsreports for species,habitats andecosystems

Launch project(s)for IPY (2007-2009)Creation of web-based portal (?)

Publication of IPYproject data

Nov.2004

Jan.2005

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2005 2006

Late2005

Late2006

(Ministerial)

Late2007

Late2008

(Ministerial)

Late2009

Late2010

(Ministerial)

Late2008

(Ministerial)

Late2010

(Ministerial)

Late2006

(Ministerial)

Late2008

(Ministerial)

Late2010

(Ministerial)Final in theSeries for

Global 2010Target

Early2007

Late2009

Late 2010(Ministerial)

*Using the ecosystem-based approach

37

10. Bibliography

ACIA 2004. Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment.Cambridge University Press, 2004. 139 pp. ISBN: 0-521-61778-2

CAFF 2001. Arctic Flora and Fauna (Status and Conservation).Edita, Helsinki. 272 pp.

CAFF 2002. Arctic Flora and Fauna. Recommendations for Conservation. 14 pp.

CAFF/AMAP 1998. AMAP/CAFF Workshop on Climate Change, Rovaniemi,24-25 March 1998 (Summary Report). CAFF Technical Report No. 5 / AMAPReport 3:98, 44 pp.

CAFF/AMAP 2000. CAFF/AMAP Workshop on a Circumpolar BiodiversityMonitoring Program, Reykjavik, 7-9 February 2000 (Summary Report).

CAFF Technical Report No. 6 / AMAP Report 02:00. 21 pp + appendices.Hansen, J.R., R. Hansson & S. Norris (eds) 1996. The State of the European ArcticEnvironment. EEA Environmental Monograph No.3 / Norsk Polarinstitutt Medd.No. 141. 135 pp.

38

AP

PE

ND

IX I

PRO

VIS

ION

AL

IN

DIC

AT

OR

S FO

R G

LO

BA

L A

ND

RE

GIO

NA

L B

IOD

IVE

RSI

TY

MO

NIT

OR

ING

(C

BD

TA

RG

ET,

RA

MSA

R, A

CIA

)

Foc

al a

rea

Stat

us a

nd tr

ends

of

the

com

pone

nts

of b

iolo

gica

ldi

vers

ity

CB

D-

indi

cato

rs f

or I

mm

edia

teTe

stin

g*

Tre

nds

in e

xten

t of

sele

cted

bio

mes

,ec

osys

tem

s an

d ha

bita

ts

Pos

sibl

e C

BD

- in

dica

tors

for

Dev

elop

men

t*

Cha

nge

in s

tatu

s of

thre

aten

edsp

ecie

s

Tre

nds

in g

enet

ic d

iver

sity

of

dom

estic

ated

ani

mal

s, c

ultiv

ated

plan

ts a

nd f

ish

spec

ies

of m

ajor

soci

o-ec

onom

ic im

port

ance

Are

a of

for

est,

agri

cultu

ral a

ndaq

uacu

lture

eco

syst

ems

unde

rsu

stai

nabl

e m

anag

emen

t

Prop

ortio

n of

pro

duct

s de

rive

dfr

om s

usta

inab

le s

ourc

es

Cov

erag

e of

pro

tect

ed a

reas

Sust

aina

ble

Use

Tre

nds

in a

bund

ance

and

dis

trib

utio

nof

sel

ecte

d sp

ecie

s

Pos

sibl

e In

dica

tors

for

Mea

suri

ng th

e E

ffec

tive

ness

of th

e R

amsa

r C

onve

ntio

n**

Seve

ral i

ndic

ator

s ar

e su

gges

ted

refe

rrin

g to

eco

logi

cal c

hara

cter

of li

sted

Ram

sar

site

s; e

xten

t of

wet

land

hab

itats

Ove

rall

popu

latio

n tr

ends

of

wet

land

taxa

Wat

erbi

rd p

op. r

espo

nses

toR

amsa

r si

te d

esig

natio

n

Cha

nge

in th

reat

sta

tus

ofth

reat

ened

wet

land

spe

cies

Cov

erag

e of

thre

aten

ed ta

xa b

yR

amsa

r si

te

Ove

rall

cons

erva

tion

stat

us o

fw

etla

nds

Prop

ortio

n of

eac

h w

etla

nd ty

pe‘e

ffec

tivel

y co

nser

ved’

Prop

ortio

n of

can

dida

te R

amsa

rsi

te d

esig

nate

d

Num

ber

of w

etla

nd r

esto

ratio

nsc

hem

es u

nder

way

.

Eco

nom

ic c

osts

of u

nwan

ted

floo

dsan

d dr

ough

ts

10 K

ey F

indi

ngs

ofth

e A

CIA

***

3. A

rctic

veg

etat

ion

zone

sar

e pr

ojec

ted

to s

hift

,br

ingi

ng w

ide-

rang

ing

impa

cts.

4. A

nim

al s

peci

es’

dive

rsity

, ran

ges

and

dist

ribu

tion

will

chan

ge.

4. A

nim

al s

peci

es’

dive

rsity

, ran

ges

and

dist

ribu

tion

will

cha

nge.

10. M

ultip

le in

flue

nces

inte

ract

to c

ause

impa

cts

to p

eopl

e an

dec

osys

tem

s.

Rel

evan

ce f

orC

AF

F/C

BM

P In

dica

tor

Dev

elop

men

t

CPA

N

Spec

ies

netw

orks

Sele

cted

wat

er b

irds

,se

a bi

rds

CPA

N

Fish

erie

s, I

ndig

enou

s Pe

ople

wha

ling,

wat

erbi

rd h

untin

g

Arc

tic C

har

netw

ork

Thr

eats

to B

iodi

vers

ity

Eco

syst

em in

tegr

ity a

ndec

osys

tem

goo

ds a

ndse

rvic

es

Nitr

ogen

dep

ositi

on

Mar

ine

trop

hic

inde

xA

pplic

atio

n to

fre

shw

ater

and

poss

ibly

oth

erec

osys

tem

s

Num

ber

and

cost

of

alie

nin

vasi

ons

Con

nect

ivity

/Fra

gmen

tatio

nof

eco

syst

ems

Inci

denc

e of

hum

an-i

nduc

edec

osys

tem

fai

lure

Hea

lth a

nd w

ell-

bein

g of

peop

le li

ving

in b

iodi

vers

ity-

base

d-re

sour

ce d

epen

dent

com

mun

ities

Bio

dive

rsity

use

d in

foo

dan

d m

edic

ine

Furt

her

indi

cato

rs to

be

iden

tifie

d by

CB

D W

orki

ngG

roup

Indi

cato

rs to

be

iden

tifie

d by

CB

D W

orki

ng G

roup

Indi

cato

r fo

r te

chno

logy

tran

sfer

Wat

er q

ualit

y in

aqu

atic

eco

syst

ems

Stat

us a

nd tr

ends

of

lingu

istic

div

ersi

tyan

d nu

mbe

rs o

f sp

eake

rs o

f in

dige

nous

lang

uage

s

OD

A p

rovi

ded

in s

uppo

rt o

f th

eC

onve

ntio

n

Stat

us o

f tr

aditi

onal

know

ledg

e, in

nova

tions

and

prac

tices

Stat

us o

f ac

cess

and

bene

fits

sha

ring

Stat

us o

f re

sour

cetr

ansf

ers

Vie

ws

of a

ffec

ted

com

mun

ities

on

rele

vant

Ram

sar

obje

ctiv

es

8. I

ndig

enou

sco

mm

uniti

es a

refa

cing

maj

or e

con.

and

cultu

ral i

mpa

cts

Com

mun

ity b

ased

mon

itori

ng a

ppro

ach

10. M

ultib

lein

flue

nces

inte

ract

toca

use

impa

cts

tope

ople

and

ecos

yste

ms

6. R

educ

ed s

ea ic

e is

very

like

ly to

incr

ease

mar

ine

tran

spor

t and

acce

ss to

res

ourc

es

8. I

ndig

enou

sco

mm

uniti

es a

refa

cing

maj

or e

con.

and

cultu

ral i

mpa

cts

All

spec

ies

netw

orks

,

Site

net

wor

ks

Pola

r B

ear

SG, R

inge

dSe

al n

etw

ork,

CB

ird,

Rem

ote

sens

ing

Pola

r B

ear

SG, R

inge

dSe

al n

etw

ork,

CB

ird,

Rem

ote

sens

ing

Arc

tic C

har

netw

orks

All

spec

ies

netw

ork?

*CB

D/d

ecis

ion

VII

/30

***

AC

IA s

ynth

eses

rep

ort (

2004

)**

Sug

gest

ed R

amsa

r ST

RP

indi

cato

r of

WG

6,d

raft

fro

m)

For further information and additional copies contact:

CAFF INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIATBorgir

Nordurslod600 AkureyriICELAND

Telephone: +354 462 3350Fax: +354 462 3390E-mail: caff@caff.is

Internet: http://www.caff.is

Prentstofan Stell ehf.