Recommendations

Citizen Science

• Engage local communities in monitoring activities through citizen science and incorporate local knowledge as an integral part of future circumpolar monitoring and observational networks.
• Interact with local communities to enhance outreach to the public (youth in particular) and develop common observational tools.
• Provide material for training and educational purposes for local residents at all age levels.

Benthos

• Develop a time- and cost-effective, long-term and standardized monitoring of megabenthic communities in all Arctic regions using regular national groundfish assessment surveys. Expanding monitoring on micro-, meio- and macrobenthic groups is encouraged.
• Gather information from research programs in regions without regular groundfish-shellfish trawl surveys. These are usually short-term and do not guarantee spatial consistency in sampling, but provide valuable information on benthic biodiversity and community patterns.
• Generate information on benthos from little-known regions, such as the Arctic Basin and Arctic Archipelago, on cryptic or difficult taxonomic groups, and on biological “hotspots”.
• Systematic studies of macrobenthos (grab investigations) and megabenthos (trawl bycatch of regular fishery surveys including both annual studies, as in the Atlantic Arctic, and periodic studies as in the Northern Bering and Chukchi Seas) are the most suitable and practical approach to long-term monitoring.
• Standardize methodology, including taxonomic identification, across regions to assist in regional comparisons.
• Recognize and support the use of TLK as an invaluable resource for understanding of changes in Arctic benthic communities.

Vegetation : Monitoring of vegetation is inconsistent, with large gaps in geographical cover. Of the four FECs for monitoring vegetation, the START was able to report on all plants, species of concern, and invasive alien species. Food species were not included as data were too disparate.

• Investigate causality in vegetation change in the context of ecosystem components, including habitat specific drivers, particularly climate, and emphasize ecosystem-based approaches.
• Continue and expand in situ time series.
• Utilize plot-based vegetation surveys to provide insight into vegetation changes and improve the ability to predict environmental change impacts on tundra ecosystems.
• Better consider the expected impacts of biotic and abiotic drivers on vegetation change when developing monitoring programs and conceptual models.
• Use regional and global remote-sensing products with higher spatial and temporal resolution.
• Increase monitoring efforts for all FECs, and target efforts to address data gaps, such as for food species.

Tracking trends in Arctic marine vertebrates.

2.1 The trend for marine fish is very similar to the trend for all marine species, increasing from 1970 to about 1990 and then levelling off. This indicates that the ASTI is strongly influenced by fish trends. Overall, marine mammals also increased, while marine birds showed less change.

2.2 The three ocean regions, Pacific, Atlantic, and Arctic, differed significantly in average population trends with an overall decline in abundance in the Atlantic, a small average increase in the Arctic and a dramatic increase in the Pacific. These differences seem to be largely driven by variation in fish population abundance—there were no significant regional differences for birds or mammals.

2.3 Pelagic fish abundance appears to cycle on a time frame of about 10 years. These cycles showeda strong association with a large-scale climate oscillation.

2.4 The ASTI data set contains population trends for nine sea ice associated species. There were mixed trends among the 36 populations with just over half showing an overall decline.

2.5 The Bering Sea and Aleutian Island (BSAI) region of the Pacific Ocean is well studied, providing an opportunity to examine trends in more detail. Since 1970, BSAI marine fish and mammals showed overall increases, while marine birds declined. However, since the late 1980s, marine mammal abundance has declined while marine fish abundance has largely stabilized.

Setting priorities

Guidelines

• Identify which actions are already being addressed, which actions deserve highest priority for new work, and which of these high priority actions require international collaboration.
• Give high priority to actions likely to reveal the causes of Ivory Gull declines or to reverse such declines.
• Among new work to be initiated under the Strategy, give high priority to helping establish international, national, or regional Ivory Gull monitoring programs.

Difficulty establishing clear processes for engaging Indigenous Peoples and utilizing TK. A need exists to work together with Indigenous communities in a meaningful way that respects and utilizes TK along with science to inform decisions regarding biodiversity (e.g., key research questions informing biotic and abiotic monitoring decisions). There are existing examples of design, operations, and reclamation plans of some mines located in the Arctic region that have been influenced by TK and through consultations with local communities, but there is not a consistent or systematic way for gathering and utilizing TK and science so outcomes are useful, credible and benefit communities and the mining industry to the greatest extent possible.

Government agencies could:

• Ensure that TK is considered as part of data collection needs and other relevant permitting requirements for Arctic mines.
• Facilitate and engage early in co-production processes where TK is valued and used.

Mining industry could:

• Engage early in co-production processes where TK is valued and used.
• Share examples of where industry has engaged with TK holders in a meaningful way and collaborate in developing good practices that can work effectively for all involved.

CAFF could:

• Engage early in co-production processes where TK is valued and used.
• Help facilitate meaningful utilization and understanding of TK at multiple levels (e.g. local, national and international) through guidance from the Permanent Participants.
• Continue work with Permanent Participants to develop good practices on how to implement coproduction of knowledge approaches to planning and decision-making (e.g., publish and share with the mining industry the approach to the co-production of knowledge outlined in the Arctic Coastal Biodiversity Monitoring Plan).

Address environmental pollution issues

4.1 State of knowledge assessment for plastics in wildlife

4.2 Work with Arctic Council countries and Permanent Participants, PAME, and AMAP to begin to address knowledge gaps

Develop guidelines and implement appropriate spatial and temporal measures where necessary to reduce human disturbance to areas critical for sensitive life stages of Arctic species that are outside protected areas, for example along transportation corridors. Such areas include calving grounds, den sites, feeding grounds, migration routes and moulting areas. This also means safeguarding important habitats such as wetlands and polynyas.

6.1. Provide technical information, including mapping areas of high species abundance, unique Arctic diversity and those important for sensitive life stages, at a scale appropriate for use in planning.

6.2. Develop, where needed, guidelines or other tools, for safeguarding sensitive areas for biodiversity (outside protected areas) that are vulnerable to human activity and/or contribute to international processes developing such guidelines, including potential refugia that will maintain multi-year ice.

Protect Arctic ecosystems and human well-being by instituting prevention and early detection/rapid response programs for invasive alien species as a matter of priority.

Priority Action 3.1 Collaborate with industries, such as, tourism, energy, fisheries, mining, and shipping, and other stakeholders, as relevant, to develop and implement a wide range of biosecurity measures for points of entry and along priority pathways to reduce the initial transfer of species.

Priority Action 3.2 Encourage the establishment of new, or strengthen existing, surveillance, monitoring, reporting, and rapid response programs necessary to ensure EDRR at points of entry. Consideration of TLK and community-based monitoring programs should be encouraged.

Priority Action 3.3 Encourage the development and sharing of tools to enable EDRR for invasive alien species that may pose a substantial threat to the Arctic.

Priority Action 3.4 Actively facilitate the eradication of invasive alien species from island ecosystems throughout the Arctic as well as the recovery of native island species and habitats that have been impacted by those invasive alien species.

Priority Action 3.5 Develop guidance for the use and transfer of native and alien species to and throughout the Arctic environment, and identify opportunities to foster ecological resistance and resilience to environmental change.

Priority Action 3.6 Collect information on best practices and assess whether there is a need for International Maritime Organization to develop Arctic specific guidance for minimizing the threat posed by ballast water and biofouling as vectors for the transfer of aquatic invasive alien species from shipping.

Priority Action 3.7 Foster development of the innovative research, tools, and technologies needed to advance invasive alien species prevention and EDRR capacities in the Arctic region, including through support from funding programs.

Implementation Action 3.1: When collaborating with industries to develop and implement biosecurity measures, these measures may be voluntary (e.g. social marketing initiatives, local eradication programs, and codes of conduct) and/or legally binding (for example, national-level implementation of international standards). A Hazards Analysis Critical Control Points approach may be of particular value. Take the outputs of priority Actions 2.1 and 2.2 into consideration.

Implementation Action 3.2: In order to facilitate early detection and rapid response, place emphasis on airports, sea ports, and their surrounding areas, take community based monitoring programs into consideration.

Implementation Action 3.3: In order to facilitate early detection and rapid response, include decision support frameworks, cooperative agreements, flexible funding mechanisms, and technical tools such as watch lists, identification applications, and guides.