Reply to a comment by Watras et al. (2014) on temperature compensation method for field measurements of CDOM fluorescence Submitted as a Comment to Limnology and Oceanography: Methods

Abstract The recent comment by clarifies the calculation of the temperature correction coefficient (q) in Comment In our recently published paper ( We regret that there was misinterpretation in our understanding of the text i

Bright spots as climate-smart marine spatial planning tools for conservation and blue growth

Marine spatial planning that addresses ocean climate-driven change (‘climate-smart MSP’) is a global aspiration to support economic growth, food security and ecosystem sustainability. Ocean climate change (‘CC’) modelling may become a key decision-support tool for MSP, but traditional modelling analysis and communication challenges prevent their broad uptake. We employed MSP-specific ocean climate modelling analyses to inform a real-life MSP process; addressing how nature conservation and fisheries could be adapted to CC. We found that the currently planned distribution of these activities may become unsustainable during the policy's implementation due to CC, leading to a shortfall in its sustainability and blue growth targets. Significant, climate-driven ecosystem-level shifts in ocean components underpinning designated sites and fishing activity were estimated, reflecting different magnitudes of shifts in benthic versus pelagic, and inshore versus offshore habitats. Supporting adaptation, we then identified: CC refugia (areas where the ecosystem remains within the boundaries of its present state); CC hotspots (where climate drives the ecosystem towards a new state, inconsistent with each sectors’ present use distribution); and for the first time, identified bright spots (areas where oceanographic processes drive range expansion opportunities that may support sustainable growth in the medium term). We thus create the means to: identify where sector-relevant ecosystem change is attributable to CC; incorporate resilient delivery of conservation and sustainable ecosystem management aims into MSP; and to harness opportunities for blue growth where they exist. Capturing CC bright spots alongside refugia within protected areas may present important opportunities to meet sustainability targets while helping support the fishing sector in a changing climate. By capitalizing on the natural distribution of climate resilience within ocean ecosystems, such climate-adaptive spatial management strategies could be seen as nature-based solutions to limit the impact of CC on ocean ecosystems and dependent blue economy sectors, paving the way for climate-smart MSP

Bright spots as climate‐smart marine spatial planning tools for conservation and blue growth

publishedVersio

Bright spots as climate‐smart marine spatial planning tools for conservation and blue growth

Marine spatial planning that addresses ocean climate-driven change (‘climate-smart MSP’) is a global aspiration to support economic growth, food security and ecosystem sustainability. Ocean climate change (‘CC’) modelling may become a key decision-support tool for MSP, but traditional modelling analysis and communication challenges prevent their broad uptake. We employed MSP-specific ocean climate modelling analyses to inform a real-life MSP process; addressing how nature conservation and fisheries could be adapted to CC. We found that the currently planned distribution of these activities may become unsustainable during the policy's implementation due to CC, leading to a shortfall in its sustainability and blue growth targets. Significant, climate-driven ecosystem-level shifts in ocean components underpinning designated sites and fishing activity were estimated, reflecting different magnitudes of shifts in benthic versus pelagic, and inshore versus offshore habitats. Supporting adaptation, we then identified: CC refugia (areas where the ecosystem remains within the boundaries of its present state); CC hotspots (where climate drives the ecosystem towards a new state, inconsistent with each sectors’ present use distribution); and for the first time, identified bright spots (areas where oceanographic processes drive range expansion opportunities that may support sustainable growth in the medium term). We thus create the means to: identify where sector-relevant ecosystem change is attributable to CC; incorporate resilient delivery of conservation and sustainable ecosystem management aims into MSP; and to harness opportunities for blue growth where they exist. Capturing CC bright spots alongside refugia within protected areas may present important opportunities to meet sustainability targets while helping support the fishing sector in a changing climate. By capitalizing on the natural distribution of climate resilience within ocean ecosystems, such climate-adaptive spatial management strategies could be seen as nature-based solutions to limit the impact of CC on ocean ecosystems and dependent blue economy sectors, paving the way for climate-smart MSP

Reply to a comment by watras et al. (2014) on temperature compensation method for field measurements of cdom fluorescence

The recent comment by Watras et al. (2014) clarifies the calculation of the temperature correction coefficient (rho) in Watras et al. (2011). Based on this clarification, we accept that the equation to compensate for temperature quenching of chromophoric dissolved organic matter (CDOM) fluorescence presented in Ryder et al. (2012) and the equation proposed in Watras et al. (2011) are mathematically equivalent

Reply to a comment by watras et al. (2014) on temperature compensation method for field measurements of cdom fluorescence

The recent comment by Watras et al. (2014) clarifies the calculation of the temperature correction coefficient (rho) in Watras et al. (2011). Based on this clarification, we accept that the equation to compensate for temperature quenching of chromophoric dissolved organic matter (CDOM) fluorescence presented in Ryder et al. (2012) and the equation proposed in Watras et al. (2011) are mathematically equivalent

Reply to a comment by watras et al. (2014) on temperature compensation method for field measurements of cdom fluorescence

The recent comment by Watras et al. (2014) clarifies the calculation of the temperature correction coefficient (rho) in Watras et al. (2011). Based on this clarification, we accept that the equation to compensate for temperature quenching of chromophoric dissolved organic matter (CDOM) fluorescence presented in Ryder et al. (2012) and the equation proposed in Watras et al. (2011) are mathematically equivalent

From Highs to Lows : Changes in Dissolved Organic Carbon in a Peatland Catchment and Lake Following Extreme Flow Events

The concentration of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in freshwater catchments has implications for carbon availability in downstream lakes and for water supplies. The links between catchment hydrology and stream and lake DOC concentrations are, however, still not fully understood. Much of the literature has been from catchments with organo-mineral soils, with fewer studies from upland peat sites. We used high-frequency fluorescence data, a proxy for DOC, to investigate 1. the relationship between stream discharge and concentration in a blanket peat catchment during extreme high flows and 2. the relationship between inflow and in-lake estimated DOC concentrations. We found that for approximately two thirds of extreme events, there was a decrease in stream DOC concentration (i.e., a dilution) on the rising limb rather than an increase (i.e., a flushing out of DOC from terrestrial stores). Flushing events dominated only in summer when concentrations in the stream were also increasing. In comparison to the stream, concentrations in the downstream lake were less variable, and peaks and troughs were damped and lagged. Replicating these patterns and processes in DOC models would be critical in order to provide appropriate simulations in response to shorter- and longer-term changes in climate, and thus inform future catchment and lake management

Evaluation of marine spatial planning requires fit for purpose monitoring strategies

Marine spatial planning (MSP) has rapidly become the most widely used integrated, place-based management approach in the marine environment. Monitoring and evaluation of MSP is key to inform best practices, adaptive management and plan iteration. While standardised evaluation frameworks cannot be readily applied, accounting for evaluation essentials such as the definition of evaluation objectives, indicators and stakeholder engagement of stakeholders is a prerequisite for meaningful evaluation outcomes. By way of a literature review and eleven practical MSP case studies, we analysed present day trends in evaluation approaches and unravelled the adoption of evaluation essentials for three categories for monitoring and evaluation for plan making, plan outcomes, and policy implementation. We found that at a global scale the focus of MSP evaluation has shifted over the past decade from evaluating predominantly plan outcomes towards the evaluation of plan making. Independent of the scope of the evaluation, evaluation approaches varied greatly from formal and structured processes, building for instance on MSP goals and objectives, to informal processes based on stakeholder interviews. We noted a trend in the adoption of formalised approaches where MSP evaluations have increasingly become linked to MSP policy goals and objectives. However, the enhanced use of MSP objectives and indicators did not result in a more straightforward reporting of outcomes, e.g. such as the achievement of specific MSP objectives. Overall, we found weak linkages between defined MSP objectives, indicators and available monitoring data. While the apparent shift towards a focus on objectives is promising, we highlight the need of fit-for-purpose monitoring data to enable effective evaluation of those objectives. Hence, effective MSP and adaptive management processes require customised and concurrent monitoring and evaluation strategies and procedures. We argue that evaluation processes would also benefit from a better understanding of the general environmental, socio-economic and socio-cultural effects of MSP. Therefore, to understand better environmental effects of MSP, we praise that forthcoming MSP processes need to deepen the understanding and considerations of cause-effect pathways between human activities and changes of ecosystem state through the adoption of targeted cumulative effects assessments