Recommendations

Project Type # Outcome Report Year FEC
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingThis audit suggests that there are between 39.0 and 39.2 million wild geese in the northern hemisphere belonging to 68 populations of 15 species.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingAll but one of the populations number between 1000 and 10 million individuals. Only the Western Palearctic population of the Lesser White-fronted Goose lies on the brink of extinction with just over 100 individuals, and only the midcontinent population of lesser snow geese in North America exceeds 10 million adults.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey finding“White” geese (Chen) are most numerous (17.2 million individuals of 3 species) and all 6 populations have increased in the last 10 years.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey finding“Black” geese (Branta) number c. 13.7 million individuals of 27 populations from 5 species, of which 19 populations show stable or increasing trends over the last 10 years.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey finding“Grey” geese (Anser) comprise 35 populations of 8.1-8.4 million individuals, of which 15 have declined in the last 10 years, especially in East Asia.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingMost estimates derive from total counts of all individuals, 8 populations combine some form of capture-mark-recapture approach (almost exclusively in North America) but 15 populations are based upon expert opinion, mostly in East and Central Asia. Less than half of the estimates for all populations were thought to fall within 10% of the true totals.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingMost populations showed increasing or stable trends over the last 10 years, but our ability to truly judge these trends is highly variable among populations.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingIn North America, population estimates are good; trends are generally of the best quality and most populations are increasing or stable.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingMost European populations are increasing or stable, yet several populations lack effective count coordination networks to generate annual assessments of total population size and trends.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingIn Central and Eastern Asia, where the greatest declines are suspected, good population estimates and count data series over sufficient long time horizons to offer a robust basis for generating trends are generally lacking, with the notable exception of excellent count data from Korea and Japan. However, the situation is rapidly improving in China, where count networks and coordination with flyway partners are being established.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingMany populations with the poorest population information are those which we suspect are showing the greatest declines.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey finding

The most urgent priorities for the future are to

(i) improve our knowledge of population distributions to better inform our definitions of discrete flyway populations;

(ii) implement effective mechanisms to at least periodically measure abundance for all northern hemisphere goose populations to assess trends over time;

(iii) initiate research to identify factors responsible for declining trends in populations of concern, and

(iv) evaluate potential negative effects of overabundant goose populations on habitat and sympatric species.

A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingTo interpret changes in population size, there is an increasing need to understand whether these are due to shifts in range, changes in reproductive success or changes in annual survival.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingFor this reason we urge wider gathering of age ratio data, and marking programmes to provide annual assessments of reproductive success and survival, particularly amongst populations showing declines.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingThere is a very clear need to establish or expand annual reporting on population size and demographic trends to make such information accessible to decision makers and stakeholders in a timely fashion.A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations2018
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingTemperature 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 Monitoring2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingThe vast expanse of the Arctic region in some countries (e.g., Canada, Russia) and the high monetary cost and logistical constraints associated with sampling in some regions (e.g., northern Canada and Russia, Greenland, Svalbard, Faroe Islands) limits the possibility of routine monitoring. This leads to sparse sample coverage in space and time, particularly where funds are not secure.State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingAll 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 Monitoring2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingArctic 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 Monitoring2016
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity MonitoringKey findingAvailable 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 Monitoring2016