Recommendations

Project	Type	Outcome	Report	Year
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Arctic freshwater ecosystems are highly threatened by climate change and human development which can alter the distribution and abundance of species and affect biodiversity and the ecosystem services on which many Arctic peoples depend.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	In countries where routine government monitoring is limited or does not occur, data must come from other sources (e.g., academic research), where unsecure funding often leads to single-event sampling, meaning that change over time cannot be examined.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Patterns of biodiversity vary across the Arctic, but ecoregions that have historically warmer temperatures and connections to the mainland generally have higher biodiversity than those with cold temperatures (high latitude or altitude) or on remote islands.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Temperature is the overriding and predominant driver for most FECs, but climate, geographical connectivity, geology, and smaller-scale environmental parameters such as water chemistry are all key drivers of Arctic freshwater biodiversity.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Traditional Knowledge (TK) Engage with Indigenous communities to work towards identifying and integrating their TK into efforts to assess Arctic freshwater biodiversity, including change over time. Incorporate TK as an integral part of circumpolar monitoring and observational networks.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	All countries have data sets that allow for identification of baseline levels for most FECs, but only a few countries (such as Finland and Sweden) have an extensive spatial coverage and very few countries have long time series. Data collection was not exhaustive, and there are likely additional data that exist for each country that may contribute to the assessment of freshwater biodiversity; however, significant gaps will remain even with a more extensive search of existing data sources.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Monitoring Design and Assessment Establish a circumpolar monitoring network based on a hub-and-spoke model in remote areas. Increase focus on the response of biotic communities to environmental changes by designing monitoring to address impact hypotheses developed in the CBMP-Freshwater Plan. Ensure that the CBMP Freshwater group continues to serve as the focal point for the development and implementation of Arctic, freshwater biodiversity monitoring. Provide resources to maintain and build the CBMP freshwater database for future assessments in order to maximize the benefits of this database. Efforts should be made to document and preserve data from short-term research projects, research expeditions, industrial, university and government programs and to make these data accessible to the public. Status assessments of Arctic lakes and rivers must explore the close association of biodiversity with spatial patterns of physical and chemical quality of aquatic habitats that can drive biological systems. CBMP-Freshwater database allows the identification of predominant sampling approaches across the Arctic and should be used to inform the development of harmonized monitoring approaches. Where valuable long-term data series exist, these should be given high priority in monitoring programs, to continue to provide data for the detection of long-term trends and changes in biodiversity.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Available long-term monitoring records and research data indicate that freshwater biodiversity has changed over the last 200 years, with shifts in species composition being less dramatic in areas where temperatures have been more stable.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Instruments such as the European Water Framework Directive promote routine monitoring of lake and river FECs. But where a country, ecoregion, or FEC is not covered by such instruments, monitoring is irregular, has poor spatial coverage, or is absent.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Sea ice biota Establish an annual monitoring programme from land fast sea ice at selected Arctic field stations in Canada (Resolute, Cambridge Bay), Greenland (Kobbefjord, Disko Bay, Zackenberg), Norway (Kongsfjorden, Billefjorden, Van Mijenfjorden), and the U.S. (Barrow). Establish a standardized monitoring protocol, including sample collection, preservation, microscopic and genetic analyses, taxonomic harmonization, and data sharing. Establish opportunistic monitoring from drifting sea ice during cruises of opportunity. Collect macrofauna samples in drifting sea ice via ship-based activities, scuba diving, electrical suction pumps, under-ice trawl nets, and remotely operated vehicles.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Arctic marine species and ecosystems are undergoing pressure from cumulative changes in their physical, chemical and biological environment.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	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.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Coordination: Better coordination allows for increased value for investment in monitoring programs, better opportunity to compare results, and more ability to draw meaningful conclusions from data: Strategically locate Arctic research stations and monitoring vessels, and use all collected specimens, to allow the collection and analysis of as many CBMP FECs as possible. Ensure research stations operate all year to better study FECs year round. Combine national monitoring with collaborative approaches that allow for sufficient integration and standardization to conduct syntheses across the circumpolar region. Standardize how data are collected, managed and made available. This is a key component in ensuring circumpolar Arctic comparability and should be an important consideration in the implementation of monitoring plans. Encourage states to increase the implementation of existing internationally coordinated monitoring plans. Connect monitoring initiatives and report across scales so that results are meaningful for local, sub-national, national, regional and global decision-makers. Continue to increase coordination between CBMP and other regional and global monitoring initiatives e.g., the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEOBON), International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Service (IPBES).	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Food resources are being lost for many Arctic species in Arctic marine environments. Many species have to travel further and expend more energy to feed, leading to concerns about individual health and potential effects at the population level	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Seabirds Develop methods for assessing diet to increase our understanding of changes in the ecosystem and how they affect seabird populations. When selecting sites for new monitoring, consider proximity to hotspots for marine activities, access to the sea, and inclusion of plankton monitoring. Expand colony-based monitoring and strive to include a more complete array of parameters, in particular, diet and measures of survival. Consider a higher frequency of monitoring as current levels make it difficult to identify mechanisms or causes of change in populations. Conduct targeted surveys and individual tracking studies of seabird interactions at sea to improve our understanding of seabird interactions at sea, where seabirds spend most of their time. Continue to conduct at sea surveys on an opportunistic basis.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Traditional and Local Knowledge (TLK): Utilizing Traditional and Local Knowledge and involvement of TK holders allows for increased understanding of relationships and changes underway in Arctic ecosystems, current and historical trends, and serves to build valuable partnerships on the ground in Arctic communities. Use Traditional and Local Knowledge within the design and implementation of monitoring plans. The Traditional and Local Knowledge of people living along and off the Arctic Ocean is an invaluable resource for understanding changes in Arctic marine ecosystems and its inclusion should be supported by national governments. Increase engagement and partnerships with local residents and easy to access technology in monitoring programs. Indigenous communities are important ‘first responders’ to catastrophic events. More importantly, their knowledge systems provide a wealth of knowledge that should be involved in the analysis of collected data for increased understanding of current trends and filling historical gaps. There is a need for TLK on a range of FECs and to engage networks of TLK holders and Indigenous organisations. Use both TLK and scientific information on the analysis of harvest levels and status when evaluating overall population health and managing hunts.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Northward movement is easier for more mobile openwater species. Open water species such as polar cod, are more mobile compared to those linked to shelf regions, such as benthic species including some fishes for which suitable habitat may be unavailable if they move northward.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Community-based monitoring networks and community relationship building: Increase the span of networks in the CBMP to include Community-based monitoring networks. Communicate information on changes and the results of monitoring between scientists and the public in both directions. This is crucial to the development of effective management strategies and human activities.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Current trends indicate that species reliant on sea ice for reproduction, resting or foraging will experience range reductions as sea ice retreat occurs earlier and the open water season is prolonged.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017
CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring	Advice	Plankton• Follow standardized protocols for monitoring plankton, including sample collection and preservation, microscopic and genetic analyses with taxonomic harmonization.• Ensure that full data sharing occurs between scientists, and is deposited in publicly-accessible nationaldata centers. Continue to consolidate older data.• Train highly qualified personnel to perform plankton sampling and species-level analyses, including theuse of molecular techniques.• Establish long-term funded annual monitoring programmes of plankton from selected Arctic field stations or Arctic campaigns/cruises in Canada, the U.S. and Russia, which together with the ongoing monitoring in Greenland, Iceland and Norway will secure a pan-Arctic coverage. • Develop species indexes and if possible, identify indicator taxa for monitoring.	State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2017