Recommendations

Advance the protection of large areas of ecologically important marine, terrestrial and freshwater habitats, taking into account ecological resilience in a changing climate.

a. Build upon existing and on-going domestic and international processes to complete the identification of ecologically and biologically important marine areas and implement appropriate measures for their conservation.

b. Build upon existing networks of terrestrial protected areas, filling geographic gaps, including under represented areas, rare or unique habitats, particularly productive areas such as large river deltas, biodiversity hotspots, and areas with large aggregations of animals such as bird breeding colonies, seal whelping areas and caribou calving grounds.

5.1. Provide input and assist with international processes underway to complete the identification of ecologically and biologically important Arctic areas and promote measures for their conservation as appropriate.

5.2. Develop and follow-up on a framework for a Pan-Arctic Network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that sets out a common vision for regional cooperation in MPA network development and management.

5.3. Analyse existing Arctic protected areas data to identify gaps and priorities, including identification of the most climate-change resilient Arctic areas, connectivity gaps, and missing buffer zones, making use of new information and new analytical tools.

c. Promote the active involvement of indigenous peoples in the management and sustainable use ofprotected areas.

5.4. Develop guidelines for including Arctic indigenous and community values into protected areas planning and management, including exploring how best to promote and facilitate multiple values.

5.5. Analyse the results of ICC’s review of global protected areas schemes that promoteindigenous management practices, strong co-management schemes and supportindigenous food security for consideration by CAFF.

Improve the capacity of the Arctic Council and its partners to make well-informed decisions on the needs, priorities, and options for preventing, eradicating, and controlling invasive alien species in the Arctic by improving the knowledge base.

Priority Action 2.1 Identify and assess:

a) the invasive alien species and pathways that pose the greatest risk of biological invasion into, within, and out of Arctic ecosystems;

b) the Arctic ecosystems, livelihoods, and cultural resources most vulnerable to biological invasion; and

c) the current and projected patterns and trends of introduction and impacts of invasive alien species in the Arctic.

Priority Action 2.2 Produce a series of topic-specific assessments of invasive alien species issues in the Arctic considering scientific, TLK, technical, environmental, economic, socio-cultural, legal, and institutional perspectives.

Priority Action 2.3 Improve the collection of information on the occurrence and impacts of Arctic invasive alien species, taking advantage of new technologies for early detection, and integrate this information into circumpolar, regional, and community-based observing networks, monitoring programs, (in particular the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Programme), and associated information systems such as (the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service).

Priority Action 2.4 Facilitate full, timely, and open sharing of data and other information relevant to Arctic invasive alien speciesprevention and management through the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service and the CAFF Web portal.

Implementation Action 2.1: Use tools such as risk analysis, horizon scanning, and site-based prioritization in identifying and assessing pathways that pose the greatest risk of biological invasions.

Implementation Action 2.2: Priorities for topic-specific assessments of invasive alien species include assessments of: the current status, projected trends, and impacts of alien species in the Arctic region; pathways of biological invasion; legal and institutional frameworks for addressing invasive alien species in the Arctic (including for border controls and importation); regional prevention and EDRR capacities; and the relationship between invasive alien species and indigenous peoples/local communities in the Arctic. These assessments should utilize both TLK and science, as appropriate, including the outputs of priority Action 2.1.

Implementation Action 2.3: The portal for information relevant to Arctic invasive alien species would include example scientific and technical information, best practices and tools, institutional and legal frameworks, and education/outreach materials. Utilize the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service (ABDS) and the CAFF website.

Policy inconsistencies and practical difficulties with implementation are obstacles in wetland management or restoration efforts. Goal conflicts or gaps in policies undermine successful implementation of good wetland management or restoration practices.

Key challenges include:

(i) inconsistencies or conflicts between different national-level policies or between national and sub-national policies,

(ii) the organization of responsibility between multiple agencies with differing mandates, and

(iii) challenges in ensuring effective coordination and communication between agencies and the public.

Broadening Research Priorities: Pursuing critical knowledge gaps may bridge both Indigenous and conservation priorities.

a) Conduct Research on Indigenous Knowledge of Wetland Ecosystems,

b) Examine the Intersection of Wetland Biodiversity and Arctic Food Security,

c) Prioritize Species of Conservation and Subsistence Interest.

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.

Marine fishes

• Conduct pan-Arctic taxonomic analyses to clarify zoogeographic patterns that are important for detecting and understanding change.
• Establish and conduct a monitoring plan that is independent of fisheries-related programs to assess changes in fish abundance and distributions. Use information from non-commercial fish species caught in groundfish surveys to provide a first step in this direction.
• Use information from TK holders for monitoring marine fishes.
• Connect monitoring initiatives across scales.
• Conduct laboratory studies to examine the possible effects of abiotic and biotic changes (e.g. temperature, salinity, acidity and diseases) on fish species
• Ensure that data on fisheries (commercial as well as artisanal) are accurate and registered in catch databases (such as the Food Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations). Information from logbooks is also relevant as it can be used to estimate the bycatch and the effects of fisheries.

Arthropods : Arthropods are highly diverse and under-studied. They serve as important connections between trophic levels and several are important indicators of changing environments. The START reports on six FECs: pollinators, decomposers, herbivores, prey for vertebrates, blood-feeding insects, and predators and parasitoids. Only a few localized trends are provided due to high variability and lack of monitoring.

• Implement long-term sampling programs at strategic sites with rigorous standardized trapping protocols.
• Collect baseline data, including structured inventories, using standardized protocols for FECs and key attributes.
• Work with Indigenous Knowledge holders, Local Knowledge holders, and/or citizen science to identify regionally important species to monitor, and key locations for long-term monitoring activities.
• Focus monitoring efforts on taxa that: (a) are well-studied with existing data; (b) respond to, or are vulnerable to, change; and/or (c) have possible range shifts. • Monitor dominant habitats at a variety of sites at both small and large geographic scales.
• Monitor relevant microhabitat environmental parameters, in addition to climatological variables, and connect to biological trends at relevant scale.
• Focus on critical FEC attributes, including ecosystem processes such as pollination, decomposition, and herbivory.
• Continue specimen sorting, identification and reporting and construct a complete trait database.
• Complete molecular sequence libraries, increase international collaboration to collate, analyze, archive, and make data accessible.

Tracking trends through space and time.

3.1 Spatial analysis of the full ASTI data set (1951 to 2010) started with an evaluation of vertebrate population trend data from around the Arctic. The maps produced from this analysis provide information useful for identifying gaps and setting priorities for biodiversity monitoring programs.

3.2 Mapping trends in vertebrate populations provides information on patterns of biodiversity change over space and time, especially when examined at regional scales.

3.3 Understanding of the causes of Arctic vertebrate population change can be improved by expanding the spatial analysis of ASTI data to include spatial data on variables that represent driversof biodiversity change.

Reduce the threat of anthropogenic pollution.

2.6.1. Reduce marine litter and plastics by raising public awareness, and through facilitation of environment-friendly handling of garbage etc.

2.6.2. Reduce the risk of local oil spills close to breeding colonies by regulating nearby human activities.