Arctic Council's CAFF Working Group Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program Report - CBMP Partnership Worksho

Arctic Council , Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna Working Group

Arctic Portal Library

Supporting Publication to theCircumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring ProgramFramework DocumentCBMP Partnership Workshop Summary ReportMarch 6-7, 2008Washington, DCCAFF Designated Agencies:Environment Canada, Ottawa, CanadaFinnish Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, FinlandMinistry of the Environment and Nature, Greenland Homerule, Greenland (Kingdom of Denmark)Faroese Museum of Natural History, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands (Kingdom of Denmark)Icelandic Institute of Natural History, Reykjavik, IcelandDirectorate for Nature Management, Trondheim, NorwayRussian Federation Ministry of Natural Resources, Moscow, RussiaSwedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, SwedenUnited States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, AlaskaPhotography by:Carsten Egevang/ARC-PIC.COMFor more information please contact:CAFF International SecretariatBorgir Nordurslod600 AkureyriIcelandPhone: +354 462-3350Fax: +354 462-3390Email: caff@caff.isInternet: http://www.caff.is___  CAFF Designated AreaSupported by:Sponsored by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and hosted by the World Wildlife Fund, with logistical support from the World Conservation UnionTable of ContentsINTRODUCTION 1GUEST SPEAKER PRESENTATIONS 1WORKING GROUP SESSIONS 4PANEL DISCUSSION 5CONCLUSIONS & NEXT STEPS 6APPENDIX 1. LIST OF WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 811. INTRODUCTIONThe workshop, “Towards Enhanced Understanding and Conservation of ArcticBiodiversity: The Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP)” was held onMarch 6-7, 2008 in Washington, DC at the headquarters of the US World Wildlife Fund(WWFUS). The goal of the workshop was “to develop a multi-stakeholder consortiumwith the common objective of advancing our understanding and conservation of theArctic’s biodiversity.”The workshop gathered over 50 participants from a broad spectrum of scientificresearch, natural resource management, and environmental advocacy for a livelydialogue about the CBMP. The following is a summary of the presentations anddiscussions that took place during the two days, as well as the key findings and prioritiesfor action that emerged.2. GUEST SPEAKER PRESENTATIONSGuest speakers provided workshop participants with an overview of the CBMP andinsight into how CBMP partnerships are adding value to monitoring programs currentlyunderway. Bill Eichbaum of WWFUS provided Welcoming Remarks at the start of DayOne.Mike Gill, Chair, CBMP, “Overview of the Circumpolar Biodiversity MonitoringProgram”Mike highlighted the serious challenges facing the Arctic and its globally significantbiodiversity, including climate change, habitat alteration, and development pressures.Despite the $300+ million dollars expended annually on biodiversity monitoring in Arcticregions, the absence of ongoing coordination and long-term commitment results inincomplete coverage, the failure to detect and comprehend changes, and weak ties toboth the public and political process.The CBMP is an international network working to improve detection, understanding andreporting of Arctic biodiversity trends. The program’s goal is to add value to existingmonitoring through the identification of significant biodiversity trends, underlyingcauses, and emerging pressures from a broad circumpolar perspective. Stemming fromthe Arctic Climate Impact Assessment’s (ACIA) recommendation to “expand andenhance long-term Arctic biodiversity monitoring”, CBMP is the cornerstone programfor the Arctic Council’s Conservation on Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) Working Group.The program was established in 2005 and is producing results, but additionalpartnerships and funding will be required to realize the full scope of its vision.2Christoph Zöckler, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) - WorldConservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), “CBMP: A Barometer for the ArcticEnvironment”Citing numerous examples of Arctic bird species where problematic monitoring dataresulted in an incomplete “picture” of changes underway, Christoph spoke to the needfor integrated monitoring and data collection in order to detect and understandpopulation trends and fluctuations. Complete and consistent data sets and monitoringare the necessary precursor to informed management decisions.The Circumpolar Seabird Group’s (CBird) Seabird Information Network (SIN) is a CBMPpilot project working to create an integrated data management system model.Individual monitoring programs will continue to house their own web data servers butwill link to a central server housed at UNEP-WCMC. The central server will integratedata and information to generate circumpolar status and trends assessments and allowfor correlation of the data with other abiotic data. Ideally, the web portal will allow theuser to ‘drill down’ from an indice to a specific indicator to specific information for agiven region or specific wildlife population.Don Russell, CircumArctic Rangifer Monitoring & Assessment (CARMA) NetworkCARMA is building local capacity and integrating and standardizing monitoringapproaches with the objective of sharing data about wild caribou populationsthroughout the circumpolar world. CARMA’s key interests relate to the role of winterareas and seasonal ranges, differences between herds, underlying causes of herdgrowth and decline, the role of predators and human harvest, and mechanisms foradaptation.CARMA focuses on 14 reference herds located across the Arctic. The program hasdeveloped manuals to facilitate standardization of data collection and monitoringprotocols among existing programs. CARMA is engaging local communities through datacollection and interpretation, as well as documenting change through multimedia.CARMA’s pilot project with CBMP involves reconciling its internal data sets anddetermining the best mechanisms to link to CBMP indicators.David Carlson, Director, International Polar Year (IPY) Programme Office, “IPY: AnOpportunity and Urgency for CBMP”The International Polar Year (IPY) presents a unique two year window in which Arcticresearchers can establish long-term initiatives and systems. Circumpolar scientists needthe ability to integrate geophysical data with biological data. They also need to honetheir predictive abilities versus “monitoring for monitoring’s sake”. The key legacy of IPYwill be partnerships: CBMP has a valuable role to play in ensuring that short-termresearch initiatives are brought “into the fold” of scientific and policy discourse.3Mike Gill, Chair, CBMP, “The Way Forward: CBMP Five Year Vision/Plan, CurrentStatus and Outstanding Needs”Mike distilled the long-term vision of the CBMP into four primary goals: coordinated and integrated research and monitoring; community-based monitoring (CBM) utilized and promoted; involvement of Arctic peoples in monitoring and results interpretation; and, current, timely, and accurate information on Arctic biodiversity accessible to all.The CBMP’s Five Year Implementation Plan sets out the specific activities and productsrequired to realize this vision:PROGRAM ELEMENT KEY ACTIVITIES/PRODUCTS (BY 2012)Expert MonitoringGroupsConvene 5 EMGs and complete Integrated Monitoring Plans for eachArctic BiodiversityMonitoring StrategyComplete pan-Arctic monitoring inventory, capacity assessment andfinal strategy to address gapsData Management Create fully operational Web-based data portal and underlying datamanagement structuresCapacity Building Convene CBM Guidance Group and produce CBM ProgramDevelopment and Best Methods manualsCommunications Establish communications links between scientists and communitiesinvolved in monitoringReporting Complete Phase I and II of CBMP indicators and indices and produceongoing “State of the Arctic” report cardsThe CBMP’s implementation milestones will support and inform the activities of otherstrategically linked Arctic biodiversity initiatives and programs where possible. Forexample, the development of the CBMP’s Biodiversity Indicators and Indices will be akey contribution to CAFF’s Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA), forming the foundationof the ABA’s summary report in 2010.D.A. (Skip) Walker, University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), “Monitoring Spatial andTemporal Changes in Arctic Vegetation”Skip provided a compelling case for monitoring arctic vegetation and plant speciesdiversity, citing the profound impacts climate-related vegetation changes could have forevery key aspect of the Arctic system. Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) –a satellite derived measure of plant biomass - has generally increased across the Arctic,but there is insufficient ground data for scientists to establish a strong causalrelationship. Poor biomass data, cover data, inconsistent sampling methods and4incomplete plant inventories common to Arctic monitoring efforts limit the usefulnessof research efforts at the decision making level.There is a serious need for standardized protocols for baseline time-series observationsof biomass and species diversity at a network of sites. Observations should be madealong the complete climate gradient and at several relevant scales (from plot to planet).Vegetation monitoring should be closely coordinated with other terrestrial monitoringprograms. Programs such as the Global Observation Research Initiative in AlpineEnvironments (GLORIA) and the CBMP are excellent examples of how monitoring effortscan be designed and/or streamlined to better meet these objectives.3. WORKING GROUP SESSIONSDuring the afternoon of Day One, participants broke into working groups modelled afterthe CBMP’s proposed EMGs: Coastal, Marine, Terrestrial Vegetation, Terrestrial Fauna,and Freshwater. The working groups discussed and brainstormed around the followingthemes:User Needs: What are the key priority actions/needs to be addressed by CBMP?Partnerships: Who needs to be involved in these priority actions/needs?Action Plans: What steps are required to link these needs with potential partners?Other Products/Activities: What products/activities might CBMP be missing?Sustainability: How do we sustain the CBMP and the programs underpinning it?The major points that emerged from the working group presentations on the morning ofDay Two are summarized below.USER NEEDS Develop overarching conceptual frameworks that identify what is to bemonitored Improve scientific community’s predictive capacity Create harmonized monitoring standards and protocols Tackle challenges posed by proprietary data and existing data portals i.e. avoidredundancy and capture connectivity of systems in Web portal Establish the links between scientific monitoring results and human systems tobetter inform adaptation and mitigation strategiesPARTNERSHIPS Industry sectors and Northern communities Key conventions Appropriate age7ncies, NGOs and responsible countries5 Observatory networks i.e. Global Earth Observation System of Systems,CircumArctic Environmental Observatories Network, Global ObservationResearch Initiative in Alpine Environments, etc. Agencies with mapping capabilities Communications and media “specialists” i.e. National GeographicACTION PLANS Develop accessible informationaround what CBMPpartnerships entail andbenefits and incentives on asector-specific basisOTHER PRODUCTS/ACTIVITIES Accessible, end user-focusedcommunications products thattell a compelling story i.e.videos, web cams, “state of”publications, etc.SUSTAINABILITY Develop clear strategy to link CBMP with individual country priorities andmandates Choose indicators with circumpolar relevance and resonance Expand concern about the Arctic beyond the Arctic itself Lack of binding country-level commitments is a limiting factor Enlist “champions” of the program Differences in conceptual approaches to monitoring biodiversity will pose achallenge i.e. population approaches versus Valued Ecosystem Components(VECs)4. PANEL DISCUSSIONA panel consisting of David Carlson (IPY), Fae Korsmo (National Science Foundation),Craig Fleener (Gwich’in Council International), and Skip Walker (UAF) elaborated on howbest to expand CBMP targeted partnerships and sustain the CBMP and its relatedmonitoring networks.David Carlson – Think “accelerate”. The pace of change in the Arctic necessitates actionon these long-standing issues. IPY should be utilized as much as possible. Effectivecommunications are key: putting out useful products will enable the program to expand6and do its work. CBMP needs to think in predictive mode, even if problems are decadalin nature. CBMP needs to think in terms of trophic levels, from “biomes to genomes”.Craig Fleener – Human biodiversity is as important as flora and fauna. The CBMP shouldthink beyond individual stakeholders to large groups being impacted. Northerncommunities need thetools to adapt and theability to access resources.The CBMP needs a visionthat others can see,imagine, and sign on to.Sell the message, getpeople excited, takemanageable steps andcreate useful, scientific,and “popular” products.Skip Walker – The CBMPneeds to encourage youngscientists to be champions,encourage more dialogue between disciplines through its EMGs, and address theimportant issues outside and beyond the framework of biodiversity for maximumresonance with the public and decision makers.Fae Korsmo – There are three primary needs that the CBMP must address: theintegration of projects, people, and process; the standardization of methodology tocreate easy, useful tools for people; and the dissemination of compelling stories aidedby effective branding and communications.The major points raised by the workshop participants during the ensuing discussionincluded: Communications are key: make issues relevant, keep the science accessible,piggyback on existing initiatives, create a space for storytelling Arctic residents should understand the “pros” of change as well as “cons” CBMP can be a catalyst for sharing between and within disciplines CBMP needs to adapt in response to where the funding/research emphasis is5. CONCLUSIONS & NEXT STEPSThe CBMP Partnership Workshop assembled over 50 participants for a multi-disciplinaryand lively dialogue about the program’s opportunities and challenges as it transitions7towards implementation. During two days of structured discussions, the group’s focusshifted from the urgency of the “internal” programming functions that the CBMP isproposing (i.e., EMGs and data portal) to the importance of “external” activities that willultimately enable the CBMP to deliver on these goals: strategic partnerships, targetedand compelling communications, and long-term funding commitments from countriesand key organizations.The short and mid-term direction of the CBMP, as envisioned by workshop participants,could be described by the flow chart below:Participants repeatedly stressed the importance of demonstrating value andprogramming relevance to CBMP’s existing and potential partners in the short-term. Inthe coming months, CBMP staff will endeavour to integrate this direction into itsactivities and expand the dialogue through new partnerships as it begins to deliver on itsvision of harmonized, enhanced Arctic biodiversity monitoring.8Appendix 1. List of Workshop ParticipantsWorkshop Steering Committee ChairJanet Hohn US Fish and Wildlife ServiceWorkshop Facilitator Workshop OrganizerElizabeth De Santo IUCN Megan Hansen IUCNRapporteursMichael Svoboda Environment Canada Danielle Rappaport IUCNJane Koepke Jane of all Trades Consulting Nirmal Bhagabati IUCNBlake Audsley IUCN Sheila Van Der Maas IUCNKira Goetschius IUCNParticipantsAnn Gordon US Department of State Joseph Culp, Dr. Environment CanadaAnne Bolen SeaWeb Lisa A. Monzon National GeographicChristoph Zockler UNEP – WCMC Marie Karlberg David and Lucile PackardFoundationCraig Fleener Gwich’in Council International Michael Baffrey Exxon Valdez Oil Spill TrusteeCouncilDag Von Graven Norwegian Polar Institute Mikaila Milton National Science FoundationDave Carlson IPO Mike Gill Environment CanadaDon Russell CARMA Mike Simpkins US Marine Mammal CommissionDonald McLennan Parks Canada Paul Geissler US Geological SurveyEarl Saxon IUCN Peter Ward US Fish and Wildlife ServiceFalk Huettman University of Alaska Fairbanks Randy Hagenstein The Nature ConservancyFae Korsmo National Science Foundation Reidar Hindrum Norwegian Directorate for NatureManagementFlemming Merkel, Dr. Greenland Institute of NaturalResourcesRisa Smith Environment CanadaFred Munson 444S Foundation Robin Tuttle NOAA National Marine FisheriesServiceFred Wrona University of Victoria Skip Walker Institute of Arctic Biology, UAFGary Allport IUCN/Bird LifeInternational/AudobonStanislav EgorovichBelikovAll-Russian Research Institute forNature ProtectionGreg Butcher Audobon Society Tatiana Minaeva Wetlands International RussiaProgrammeGreg Susanke EPA Thomas Barry CAFFHans Meltofte Department of ArcticEnvironment (DE)Timothy Johnson UNEP – WCMCHarlan Cohen IUCN Global MarineProgrammeToral Patel-Weynand,Dr.US Geological SurveyJen Palmer IUCN Torre Stockard National GeographicJim Reist, Dr. Fisheries and Oceans Canada Vida Amor de paz Tropical Rainforest Foundation,Planeta Verde TelevisionJohn Calder NOAA Climate Program Office William Eichbaum World Wildlife FundJohn Kermond, Dr. NOAASpecial thanks to Workshop Steering Committee members Robert Winfree (NationalPark Service), Maeve Taylor (US Fish and Wildlife Service), and Nick Kulibaba (IUCN-US).

CAFF CBMP Report --- CBMP Partnership Workshop

http://library.arcticportal.org/464/1/CAFF_CBMP_Report_---_CBMP_Partnership_Workshop.pdf

CAFF CBMP Report --- CBMP Partnership Workshop

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Arctic Portal Library