Recommendations

Project	Type	Outcome	Report	Year
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Most 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	In 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Most 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	In 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	Many 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	To 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	For 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 Populations	2018
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring	Key finding	There 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 Populations	2018
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	Key finding	The 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 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	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	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	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	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 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	Advice	Monitoring Methods Harmonize sampling approaches among countries and select appropriate sampling methods andequipment to balance between maintaining consistency and comparability with historical data andalignment with common methods used across the Arctic. Use a regionalized approach based on ecoregions to guide the spatial distribution of sample stations and, ultimately, provide better assessments. Ensure spatial coverage of sampled ecoregions is sufficient to address the overarching monitoring questions of the CBMP across the Arctic and provide sufficient replication. Maintain time series at key locations, and fill gaps where monitoring data are sparse. Develop supplementary monitoring methods that provide better standardized estimates of biodiversity to maximize the likelihood of detecting new and/or invasive species. Make use of recent advances in emerging technologies, including environmental DNA (eDNA) methods and remote sensing approaches. Standardize data storage practices and provide access through a common data source like GBIF.	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	Advice	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.	State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring	2016