IAB6: Nomadic herders: Enhancing the resilience of pastoral ecosystems and livelihoods of nomadic herders

Date: Friday October 12, 2018

Location: Saivo, Lappia Hall

Time: 8:30-10:00

The Arctic and sub-Arctic environment, climate and biodiversity is changing in ways unprecedented in our long histories in the north, challenging traditional ways of life, wellbeing, and food security. These changes constitutes a legitimate concern for traditional indigenous livelihoods, therefore the objective with this session is: to present and discuss reduction of land degradation, improve biodiversity conservation and increase community resilience by enhancing the capacity of Indigenous peoples to protect the environment through sustainable use. The session discuss indigenous knowledge and governance of protected areas.

Chairs: Svein Mathiesen, Association of World Reindeer Herders; Kathrine Johnsen, GRID-Arendal; Ole Anders Turi, Saami Council

Format: Series of presentations followed by panel discussion

Presentations and panelists:

• Concept of Nomadic Herders - Indigenous knowledge, biodiversity and land degradation: Svein Mathiesen, UEI at International Centre for Reindeer Husbandry 
• Actions for mitigation of cumulative impact - from a reindeer husbandry perspective: Anna Skarin, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Mikael Kuhmonen, Sirges sameby 
• Protection of nature through sustainable use by reindeer herders in Russia: Gregory Ledkov, RAIPON 
• Territory of traditional Nature and reindeer husbandry use the experience from Republic of Sakha Yakutia: Mikhail Pogodaev, Assocoation of World Reindeer Herders  
• The Local Environmental Observer (LEO) Network: A Tool for Participatory Collection of Environmental Observations: Mike Brook, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium  
• Indigenous Peoples governance of land in Alaska: TBC, Aleut International Association  
• Moderated discussion: Anders Oskal, International Centre for Reindeer Husbandry

Abstracts:

Actions for mitigation of cumulative impact - from a reindeer husbandry perspective

Anna Skarin, SLU (SE), Per Sandström SLU (SE), Stefan Sandström SLU (SE), Kaisa Raitio SLU (SE), Marita Stinnerbom and Jonas Stinnerbom Vilhelmina reindeer herding community, Mikael Kuhmunen, Jonas Vannar, Jakob Nygård, Sirges reindeerherding community, and Rasmus Kløcker-Larsen SEI (SE)

In the Arctic, there is a growing concern over the cumulative impacts of multiple land uses on landscape functionality. Sami reindeer husbandry often bears the brunt of these impacts since it relies on interconnected landscapes where the reindeer can move, by itself or facilitated by the herders during both smaller and larger migrations. Barriers and obstacles caused by human activities may result in making important grazing lands inaccessible or with the reindeer ending up in the wrong grazing area at the wrong time. Most often, the only source of knowledge on these impacts are the herders themselves, i.e. those who experience and navigate the consequences in their everyday lives. However, while recent years have seen growing interest, globally, in how indigenous communities can lead impact assessments on their own lands little research has yet explored how cumulative effects assessment can be undertaken based on the knowledge of Sami reindeer herders. In fact, impact assessment, especially in the European North, remains one of the arenas most entrenched in colonial practices that privilege ‘foreign’ and expert led research, invariably silencing herders’ knowledge. In this paper, we present insights from a long-term study wherein two Sami reindeer herding communities, namely Sirges and Vilhelmina Norra, with support from researchers have developed their own approach to cumulative effects assessment. The question we ask is how an impact assessment would look if conducted with genuine Sami leadership and how the results would differ from those generated by standard impact assessments. The assessment combined a wealth of both qualitative and quantitative methods but were all based on herders’ knowledge about their current and historical land use in. Moreover, we compiled current and historic geographical data on all other land use activities to show the progression of land use development. We demonstrate how the assessment differed from standard project-based assessments, as a retrospective and landscape-scale study supporting and benefiting from strategic visioning within the Sami communities. With this design, it provided novel understanding of the impacts of piecemeal developments both in space and in time on reindeer grazing ranges. It also allowed the herders to propose plans to improve the conditions and to remove known bottlenecks in the landscape, i.e. to repair old or enhance existing migration routes. Discussing these findings and methods, the study allows us to reflect on the role of research partnerships for the future development of cumulative effects assessment.\\

The Local Environmental Observer (LEO) Network: A Tool for Participatory Collection of Environmental Observations

Michael Y. Brubaker and Michael J. Brook, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium

Alaskans live close to the land, and the health of communities is closely related to the conditions of the environment. Many Alaska Natives possess intimate knowledge of the weather, seasons, land, and natural resources; and this equates to superb skills in detecting subtle environmental changes and their impacts. The Local Environmental Observer (LEO) Network was originally designed as a tool to help collect and share the increasing number and wide range of unusual events witnessed by residents in rural Alaska communities. In recent years, these events have been captured in social media, like Facebook, which is very popular across Alaska. But Facebook focuses on immediate events rather than on ways to achieve long term learning and understanding. LEO Network focuses on creating a safe and respectful place for sharing knowledge, protection of privacy, archiving content for long term use, and providing technical assistance by connecting observers with topic experts.

LEO Network is part environmental observation field tool, part publishing platform, and part social network. It was developed by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium in 2012, for the primary use of people in or working with rural Alaska communities. With the relaunch of the platform in 2015, enrollment was open to anyone; this has resulted in rapid growth in use and membership. To date there are 2,528 members in 588 communities and 50 countries around the world. The platform contains event-related local observations (1017) and news articles (1682) that are geo-coded, date-coded, tagged by topic, and linked to other content in the system. Examples include observations about unusual weather, seasonal change, wildlife, plants, infrastructure, invasive species and erosion.

LEO Network is not focused on being a quantitative monitoring system, but rather as a way for members to share qualitative, media-rich information about their changing environments. Where monitoring systems, citizen science projects, or research partners are available, LEO Network assists in connecting members with topic-relevant programs and participatory science opportunities.

Some of the guiding principles behind LEO Network include respect and engagement of different knowledge systems, including indigenous, local and scientific knowledge. LEO posts are permanently available to LEO members, and the original observer is attributed as lead author. Consultants, secondary observers, and other subject-matter experts are attributed as co-authors. All authors of an individual post are given the opportunity to review and provide final comment prior to publication. Recognition of participants in the system is emphasized with profiles and maps for every member and community, and the ability to apply the content in the system towards personal projects. Direct communication between members is encouraged and facilitated by the system, but in a way that protects the privacy of the members.

The LEO Network is designed with an emphasis on ease-of-use, availability everywhere, and language that is accessible to all. Translation of the platform into Arctic languages has encouraged growth and the potential of a broader dialog between members. A mobile application is available for Apple and Android for posting observations in the field, and the LEO Network website provides features both for posting observations as well as exploring the observations and individuals that make up the Network.

The value of the LEO Network is based on the quality and usefulness of the information for its members. As such, an important principal of LEO is to be highly responsive to the questions and information shared by the observers. LEO Network has a specific workflow design that supports timely editorial and consultative services to support the contributions of the members.

LEO Network has been successful in Alaska, and as a platform is experiencing circumpolar and global expansion. Through this platform, sharing between knowledge systems has increased, as has community involvement, and awareness among service providers and researchers about current events that are shaping activities and lives at the community level. 

IAB7: Bowhead whale conservation and future research cooperation

Date: Wednesday October 10, 2018

Location: Saivo, Lappia Hall

Time: 10:30-12:00

This session facilitates cooperation on bowhead whale research, which has been identified as a knowledge gap in the CAFF State of Arctic Marine Biodiversity Report (2017). This session explores recent developments and partnerships, including monitoring techniques and tools such as acoustics, vessel designs, tagging and aerial surveys to help identify critical areas and calving grounds and further conservation and protection of this important and iconic Arctic species.

Chairs: Gert Polet, World Wide Fund for Nature; Erik van de Linde, Ice Whale Foundation

Format: Series of presentations followed by discussion

Presentations:

• Spitsbergen’s bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) – a summary of new findings: Kit Kovacs, Norwegian Polar Institute 
• Proposed inventories of Bowhead whale distribution and behavior in the dynamic drift ice zone in the Fram Strait during the polar winter: Herman Sips, Ice Whale Foundation 
• Bowhead whale acoustic occurrence and vocal behavior in Fram Strait: Karolin Thomisch, Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research 
• You can’t always go back: bowhead whales, over-exploitation, global warming, and orca predation: Steven Ferguson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada 
• Abundance and distribution of bowhead whales during winter and summer in the Greenland Sea: Rikke Guldborg Hansen, Greenland Institute for Natural Resources 
• Okhotsk Sea bowhead whales as a live model on how climate change may affect the species in the polar regions: Olga Shpak, A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution 
• Application of environmental DNA for monitoring abundance and diversity of bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus): Morten Tange Olsen, Natural History Museum of Denmark

Abstracts:

Spitsbergen’s bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) – a summary of new findings

Kit M. Kovacs1, Jon Aars1, Heidi Ahonen1, Dmitry Glazov2, Mads Peter Heide-Jørgensen3, Olga Shpak2, Kathleen Stafford4, Jade Vacquie Garcia1 and Christian Lydersen1
1 Norwegian Polar Institute, Fram Centre, N-9296, Tromsø, Norway.
2 A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
3 Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, Box 570, 3900 Nuuk, Greenland
4 Applied Physics Lab., University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98115, USA

The Spitsbergen bowhead whale population was the first cetacean population in the world to be driven to the brink of extinction by commercial whaling. Despite many decades of protection from harvesting, this population remains Critically Endangered. However, Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) in the northwestern Fram Strait has revealed significant amounts of vocal activity by bowheads on a year-round basis. Singing by the bowheads in this area is most intense during periods of heavy ice-cover in the winter months, when breeding likely takes place. The song diversity recorded at this PAM site (with more than 184 different songs recorded in a 3-year period) is unique among wild mammals, being “bird-like” in its complexity. A combined ship-based and aerial survey in the Marginal Ice Zone (MIZ) north of Svalbard, conducted in August 2015, estimated that 343 (CI 136-862) bowhead whales were present in the 52,000 km2 study area. All whales were observed from the air, well within the MIZ; none were seen during the ship transects. The results of the PAM efforts and the survey led to a trilateral tagging effort (Norway-Russia-Greenland) that took place in 2017, during which 16 satellite transmitters were deployed on bowhead whales in the Spitsbergen population. The whales were tagged in a small area in the middle of the Fram Strait, but spread throughout the whole distributional range of this stock over the following year (from East Greenland through to Franz Josef Land). These studies in combination reveal that the status of the Spitsbergen stock of bowhead whales is much better than previously thought. However, this extremely ice-affiliated population faces many challenges in the coming decades associated with a warming Arctic, and warrants directed conservation action.

Proposed inventories of Bowhead whale distribution and behavior in the dynamic drift ice zone in the Fram Strait during the polar winter

Herman Sips, Ice Whale Foundation; Fleur Visser, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research

The Ice Whale Project is a private initiative aimed at scientific research on and public promotion of the Bowhead Whale Balaena mysticetus, in connection to its rapidly changing Arctic sea-ice environment. The Ice Whale Foundation's goals are: a) To assess the presumed breeding population, mating grounds and mating behavior of the Ice Whale in the Fram Strait and the species' vulnerability to sea-ice reduction and increased shipping and exploration. b) To turn the distinctive, but to the larger public unknown Bowhead Whale into the 'Icon of the Arctic' and simultaneously raise awareness to conserve the sea-ice ecosystem. Supported by several Dutch knowledge institutes, we are preparing a series of scientific polar winter expeditions, for which a dedicated compact and robust research vessel is now being designed. The first Arctic winter expedition is scheduled for the polar winter 2020-2021. The principal goal of the winter expeditions is to assess the assumed mating grounds and mating behavior of the Bowhead Whale along the East Greenland shelf and to understand the species' ecological as well as behavioral dependency on Arctic sea-ice and its vulnerability to changes in sea ice conditions and human activities. The first objective is to validate the presence of an active breeding population in the Fram Strait, and if so, to define how big this population is and how far this breeding area extends over latitudes from north to south. The research initiative builds largely on recent publications of Kathleen Stafford, Kit Kovacs, Heidi Ahonen and others who describe recordings of complex Bowhead whale songs at unexpected high latitudes in dense sea-ice, indicating mating areas. To assess the distribution, gatherings and mating behavior of Bowhead whales deep into the drift ice zone, each winter expedition will consist of a series of passive drift tracks in silent mode from different starting positions, applying passive acoustical triangulation techniques and UAV-based IR-observation and eDNA-sampling. We intend to carefully tune the Ice Whale project with the research programs of relevant international institutes such as the Norwegian Polar Institute, the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, the Alfred Wegener Institute and the Danish Arctic Research Centre, among others. We welcome the critical discussion of our project with experienced scientists from these and other organizations.

Bowhead whale acoustic occurrence and vocal behavior in Fram Strait

Karolin Thomisch1, Olaf Boebel1, Svenja Neumann1, Stefanie Spiesecke1, Ilse Van Opzeeland1,2
1 Ocean Acoustics Lab, Alfred-Wegener-Institut Helmholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und Meeresforschung, 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany
2 Helmholtz-Institute for Functional Marine Biodiversity at the University of Oldenburg [HIFMB], 26129 Oldenburg, Germany

Passive acoustic monitoring enables data collection on marine mammals over large temporal and spatial scales and in remote areas such as the Arctic Ocean. Passive acoustic data are collected at different recording sites in eastern and central Fram Strait since 2012, contributing to the Arctic Observatory FRAM (FRontiers in Arctic Marine Monitoring). Here, data recorded at 78°50 N, 0°E from July to November 2012 were analyzed for the daily acoustic presence of marine mammals. Bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) were acoustically present during 12 days in October and during 16 days in November, but acoustically absent from July to September. Downsweep song (three types) was present both in October and November, while upsweep song (one type) was only present in October. Besides bowhead whales, blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus), fin whales (B. physalus), narwhals (Monodon monoceros), sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) and harp seals (Pagophilus groenlandicus) were recorded. Acoustic species interactions regarding the overlap of species-specific sounds in time and frequency range were explored. In this context, temporal and spectral overlap of biophonic (blue and fin whale vocalizations) and anthrophonic (airgun) signals were detected in the low-frequency (<100 Hz) spectrum. Our results emphasize the importance of Fram Strait as marine mammal habitat, possibly providing (summer) feeding opportunities for blue and fin whales and an overwintering ground for bowhead whales and narwhals. Understanding the spatio-temporal patterns in the distribution and acoustic behavior of marine mammals considerably benefits the development of effective conservation and management strategies for critical habitats in the Arctic Ocean.

You can’t always go back: bowhead whales, over-exploitation, global warming, and orca predation

Steven Ferguson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) distribution has waxed and waned with geological changes in circumpolar sea ice extent, and Inuit hunting for subsistence occurred at low levels for millennia. However, all three recognized bowhead populations declined to very low numbers following over 500 years of commercial harvesting from European and American whalers that ended ca 1915. The Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort population has returned to historic numbers and the Svalbard-Barents Sea population has recently shown some population increase, whereas the Eastern Canada-West Greenland (ECWG) population growth appears stalled mid-way towards its original pristine numbers. The ECWG population has a small co-managed subsistence harvest in Canada and Greenland that is not responsible for this stalled growth. To understand why this population has not shown the same exponential growth observed elsewhere, we explore three possible explanations: (1) carrying capacity has changed due to environmental effects of global warming; (2) killer whale (Orcinus orca) predation is greatest in this region; and (3) the ecosystem has been severely altered due to over-harvesting and cannot return to the original system equilibrium. First, we used a model to estimate pre-exploitation abundance to approximate carrying capacity, developed reference points and management zones, and found that the population is likely to be within the healthy (N50 to N70) zone. However, the population does not seem to have grown at the expected exponential rate or be approaching pristine carrying capacity. Large uncertainty about demographic variables argues for the need for research to monitor this population in the context of climate change. Second, bowhead whales have evolved successful tactics to minimize predation from killer whales, including seeking refuge in shallow inlets and fjords with summer sea ice. Traditional ecological knowledge and sighting records from the ECWG bowhead range have suggested that killer whale predation occurs frequently on bowhead whales – largely on vulnerable calves. Approximately 10% of ECWG bowhead whales display rake marks from killer whale attacks, a rate higher than found for other bowhead whale populations and higher than typical of baleen whale populations generally. Third, the marine environment may have undergone a transformation due to novel species combinations and relative abundances that have not occurred previously. Key changes in ecosystem functioning due to human overharvesting may have inadvertently degraded the original native or 'wild' ecosystem making it very difficult to return to its previous state. Although conclusions are elusive, history reminds us that over-exploitation can have large-scale, unintended, and sometimes irreversible consequences.

Abundance and distribution of bowhead whales during winter and summer in the Greenland Sea

Rikke Guldborg Hansen* and Mads Peter Heide-Jørgensen*
*Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, Post box 570, 3900 Nuuk, Greenland

We investigate the abundance and spatial distribution of bowhead whales’ (Balaena mysticetus) use of the Northeast Water polynya in winter (NEW) and summer (NEW and south to Scoresby Sound covering the shelf break). To determine the abundance of marine mammals in the polynya, visual aerial surveys involving double observer platforms were conducted in April 2017 and August/September 2017. Bowhead whale abundance will be estimated using strip-census estimation of abundance corrected for perception- and availability bias and presented for the first time at the CAFF conference.

Okhotsk Sea bowhead whales as a live model on how climate change may affect the species in the polar regions

Olga Shpak, A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution

Okhotsk Sea population of bowhead whales in summer occupies coastal waters of the western Okhotsk Sea (so called Shantar region, latitudes 53˚-54˚N. Ice period in this region may last up to 250 days, but during several months, when the area is completely ice-free, killer whales present a serious threat to bowheads. Killer whale predation seem to be growing in recent years, probably due to orcas having polished their hunting techniques, and is affecting bowhead whale behavior and distribution. At present, bowhead mortality due to killer whale predation is likely at the level when it can be compared to the speed of bowhead reproduction. Most important, killer whales hunt not only calves but also independent juveniles of ca. 2-5 years of age. The external look of Okhotsk Sea bowheads is quite different from the whales from northern populations due to intensive molt (probably, seasonal and stimulated by warm temperatures and low salinity), high ectoparasitic infestation and scarring of unknown etiology (but probably not only of traumatic nature). In summer, juvenile whales are pushed by killer whales close to shore and into the shallow warm bottoms of the bays. Close proximity to shore, tens of meters, where whales hide from killer whales, increases entanglement risks (there are confirmed cases of entanglement in salmon fishery nets and a trap). Quickly developing tourist industry has already recognized the benefits of such distribution: videos from tourist sites with apparent whale harassment are available. Current (as per 2016) abundance estimate for the Shantar summer aggregation, which is thought to constitute the major part, if not the entire population, is 218 (CV=0.22). This number means, the Okhotsk population is likely the smallest isolated population of the bowhead whale. There are no signs of recovery, and if declining trend is confirmed, the population will be assigned a CR category under IUCN Red List. Environmental conditions, in which resides the bowhead population in the Okhotsk Sea, resemble (except for the amount of light) what is expected to be happening in the summer ice-free Arctic in few decades.

Application of environmental DNA for monitoring abundance and diversity of bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus)

Natasja Lykke Corfixen1#, Louise Mørch1#, Mads Peter Heide-Jørgensen2, Morten Tange Olsen1*
1Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen
2Greenland Institute of Natural Resources
#Equal contribution
*Presenter

One of the major obstacles in assessing the effects of climate change on Arctic ecosystem is the logistical and methodological challenges associated with data collection in remote, harsh environments. Thus information on the status and pressures affecting e.g. Arctic marine mammals is often restricted to certain species and/or geographical regions. Here we tested the applicability of environmental DNA (eDNA) as a simple, non-invasive and cost-effective tool for monitoring the distribution, abundance and diversity of bowhead whales in Disko Bay, Western Greenland. First, we extracted DNA from 150 water samples collected during May 2017 and 2018 from the “footprints” of diving whales or along random transects. Next, using novel bowhead whale qPCR probes we obtained an eDNA-based relative estimate of bowhead whale distribution and abundance, nicely correlating with the visually observed occurrence of whales. Moreover, we show that haplotypes obtained from footprints of individual whales match the haplotypes obtained from skin biopsies. Thus, by sequencing all water samples with presence of bowhead DNA we were able to reconstruct the mtDNA haplotype distribution and frequencies estimated through more than a decade of biopsy sampling and genetic profiling of bowhead whales in Western Greenland. As such, our study demonstrates the large potential for routine eDNA monitoring and population genetic inference of not just bowhead whales, but also other Arctic marine fauna.

IAB5: Transboundary management of Arctic biodiversity

Date: Thursday October 11, 2018

Location: Saivo, Lappia Hall

Time: 8:30-10:00

The ranges of migratory species, dispersal of persistent contaminants, movement of commerce, invasion of non-native species and impacts of development-decisions do not follow political boundaries. International cooperation is therefore increasingly essential to fully address the challenges facing Arctic biodiversity now and in the decades to come. This session provides some examples of approaches to transboundary cooperation to help safeguard habitat and protect species.

Chairs: Kristiina Nikkonen, Ministry of the Environment, Finland; Trish Hayes, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Format: Series of presentations followed by discussion

Presentations:

• Intergovernmental cooperation safeguarding Arctic biodiversity: Finnish-Russian Working Group on Nature Conservation since 1985: Aimo Saano, Metsähallitus Parks & Wildlife Finland / The Finnish-Russian Working Group on Nature Conservation 
• Transboundary cooperation between Norway, Russia and Finland in Pasvik-Inari Trilateral Park: Riina Tervo, Metsähallitus, Parks & Wildlife Finland 
• The Wadden Sea Flyway Initiative for connecting and inspiring people: Conservation of migratory birds from the Arctic to Africa on the East-Atlantic Flyway: Gregor Scheiffarth, Lower Saxon Wadden Sea National Park Authority 
• Trans-boundary management of Arctic fox: Tom Arnbom, WWF 
• Industrial development in the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd in Alaska: At what cost? Craig Machtans, Environment and Climate Change Canada 
• International Cooperation for Successful Conservation of Threatened Migratory Species in the Arctic and Beyond - the Story of the Lesser White-fronted Goose: Nina Mikander, UNEP/AEWA Secretariat 

Abstracts:

Intergovernmental cooperation safeguarding Arctic biodiversity: Finnish-Russian Working Group on Nature Conservation since 1985

Aimo Saano, Metsähallitus Parks & Wildlife Finland / The Finnish-Russian Working Group on Nature Conservation; Tapio Lindholm, Finnish Environment Institute / The Finnish-Russian Working Group on Nature Conservation

The Finnish-Russian Working Group on Nature Conservation (WGNC) promotes the establishment of protected areas and the conservation of endangered species and habitats in Finland and north-western Russia. WGNC has existed since 1985, currently mandated under the 1992 Finnish-Russian Intergovernmental Agreement on Protection of Environment. WGNC engages experts from scientific institutions, administrative bodies, NGOs and protected area managing organisations from the two countries. It initiates, organizes, assists, co-finances or takes part in Finnish-Russian nature conservation projects, seminars, expeditions, meetings both in Finland and in Murmansk and Arkhangelsk regions, Republics of Komi and Karelia and the adjacent Leningrad and Vologda regions. Activities are prepared on bilateral basis, coordinated at regular meetings every second year. Over the years of cooperation numerous forests, mires, their complexes, alpine, coastal or archipelago areas have obtained their official name, status and borders as new protected areas, both in Finland and in north-west Russia. The new protected areas safeguard, piece by piece, the necessary continuum of boreal and alpine ecosystems from the Urals to the Norwegian coastline and from the Barents Sea to the Baltics and to the northernmost sources of river Volga.

Transboundary cooperation between Norway, Russia and Finland in Pasvik-Inari Trilateral Park

Riina Tervo, Metsähallitus, Parks & Wildlife Finland

This presentation addresses the theme of identifying and safeguarding important areas for biodiversity through international cooperation taking place on nature protection areas located in Norway, Russia and Finland. This international cooperation dates back to beginning of 1990s. Pasvik-Inari Trilateral Park is an excellent example of transboundary nature protection cooperation on the operative level. The cooperation has been certified in EUROPARC’s Transboundary Parks -programme, which provides the international work with high-standards, criteria and tools for maintaining a long-lasting, high quality cooperation for management of nature protection areas. The key partners are managers of nature protection areas complemented with municipalities and regional governmental organisations. The specific characters of the Pasvik-Inari Trilateral Park are based on the northernmost boreal pine forests, Lake Inarijärvi and the Pasvik River system. The Trilateral Park is a wilderness-like area close to national borders. The unique history of the area created by the connections between Sámi, Finnish, Russian and Norwegian cultures contribute to the richness of the area. Joint plan for research and monitoring of brown bear population has been developed. The bears have been monitored trilaterally every fourth year since 2007. Bear feaces and hair samples are collected for DNA-analyses at Nibio Svanhovd DNA-laboratory in Norway. The analyses make it possible to identify individual bears, get information about kinship between the bears and to get a more precise picture of the total bear population in the region.

The Wadden Sea Flyway Initiative for connecting and inspiring people: Conservation of migratory birds from the Arctic to Africa on the East-Atlantic Flyway

Gregor Scheiffarth, Lower Saxon Wadden Sea National Park Authority; Gerold Lüerßen, Common Wadden Sea Secretariat

The European Wadden Sea of The Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark is the most important stop-over site for migratory birds on the East-Atlantic Flyway between the Arctic and West-Africa. The site is of critical importance to the survival of migratory birds on a worldwide scale, which was one of the reasons for its nomination as a world heritage site. The three Wadden Sea countries have therefore taken responsibility to strengthen cooperation with other parties for the conservation of migratory birds, especially along the East-Atlantic Flyway. To this end, the Wadden Sea Flyway Initiative (WSFI) was launched in 2012, to operate a network with the purpose of implementing flyway-wide monitoring of coastal birds, as well as building capacity in several African countries along the Atlantic coast. Further, the network strengthens regional cooperation between different parties involved in the conservation of these birds and collaborates with several international organisations acting in the same area, namely BirdLife International, Wetlands International, AEWA, and AMBI. The WSFI acts as an umbrella for many organisation active in the field of bird conservation along the East-Atlantic Flyway. Major achievements are a series of capacity building workshops along the East-Atlantic seaboard of Africa, enhancing collaboration between different parties in Africa, and the coordination of simultaneous counts of all key sites along the coast from Norway to South-Africa in 2014 and 2017. With these actions, the WSFI contributes to the reduction of stressors on migratory species range-wide, including habitat degradation and overharvesting on wintering and staging areas and along the flyway. Furthermore, the monitoring of arctic breeding birds in their wintering habitats increases the knowledge and understanding of trends in these species.

Trans-boundary management of Arctic fox

Tom Arnbom, World Wildlife Fund

The Arctic fox in Scandinavia drastically decreased in numbers due to over harvesting in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Despite strict protection for over 50 years, the population dwindled in the 1980s to about 30 individuals in Sweden. Factors responsible for this include the disappearance for almost 20 years of rodent (Scandinavian lemming) peaks, upon which Arctic foxes are heavily dependent for reproduction. On top of this, competition from the red fox increased due to climate change and less hunting effort towards red foxes. Since 2000, the lemming cycle has returned, with peaks every 3-4 years. Because the Scandinavian Arctic fox moves back and forth between Norway and Sweden and national management measures are relatively similar, the two governments have agreed on a joint trans-boundary management plan. The Interreg project Felles Fjellrev II is designed to enable collaboration between the two countries on conservation measures, science and communication for Arctic fox. The number of Arctic foxes in this sub-population has increased dramatically due to active conservation measures but also peaks of rodents which enable the them to have larger litter sizes. This project is a collaboration among many different partners including governmental authorities, scientific institutions and NGOs.

Industrial development in the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd in Alaska: At what cost?

Craig Machtans, Environment and Climate Change Canada; Basile van Havre, Environment and Climate Change Canada

Canada and the United States jointly manage a medium sized (population 218,000) barren ground caribou herd that annually ranges between northeastern Alaska and northern Yukon and western Northwest Territories. The herd tightly congregates for calving and post-calving on the coastal plain, usually in a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge known as the “1002 lands”. The two countries signed a treaty in 1987 outlining the shared goal of conserving the herd and its habitat, minimizing irreversible damage or long term adverse effects to the caribou, and to ensure continued customary and traditional use of the herd by Indigenous people. Canada has permanently protected almost all of the areas used for calving in Canada, as well as protecting and managing other portions of the herd’s annual range and implementing a rigorous domestic management structure to ensure sustained use of the herd. In late 2017, after decades of attempts by right-leaning administrations, the United States codified in law the mandated sale of oil and gas leases in ~50% of the critical calving area in the 1002 lands. The Porcupine Caribou herd is the only large caribou herd in North America that is at high population levels and growing. The apparent success of the herd is tied to the herd’s access to a diverse range of habitats/conditions across all critical time windows, resulting in favorable cow and calf survival, but with relatively low productivity. Population modeling predicts that development in the 1002 lands will decrease calf survival and, given the relatively low productivity of the herd and lack of other high quality calving areas, could lead directly to population declines. Canadian governments and Indigenous organizations are united in their opposition to development in the 1002 lands. The herd is hugely significant for cultural, spiritual and subsistence reasons. This talk will describe how balancing the legitimate need for economic development with conservation under international treaty obligations may be difficult in this circumstance.

International Cooperation for Successful Conservation of Threatened Migratory Species in the Arctic and Beyond - the Story of the Lesser White-fronted Goose

Nina Mikander, UNEP/AEWA Secretariat

The globally threatened Lesser White-fronted Goose (LWfG) undertakes epic annual migrations from its Arctic breeding grounds to wintering areas stretching from south-eastern Europe to China. Following decades of severe declines due to overharvest and habitat loss, the species remains acutely at risk. But there is hope: conservation action for the LWfG is slowly bearing fruit within the African-Eurasian flyways. The decline of the species has been halted thanks to the efforts of an ever-expanding and dedicated network of governments, species’ experts, conservation organizations and practitioners, local communities and other stakeholders. By combining a wide range of approaches, such as combating illegal killing, identifying and protecting critical sites, implementing predator control, assessing climate change effects as well as carrying out education and awareness-raising action, we are turning the tide. LWfG conservation within the flyway is carried out under the AEWA International Single Species Action Plan and is coordinated by the AEWA LWfG International Working Group. These activities contribute directly to the implementation of the Arctic Migratory Bird Initiative (AMBI), in which the LWfG is prioritized as a flagship species. AMBI, in turn, is one of the key tools under CAFF delivering against policy recommendation 8 of the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment.