BSEP116B Biodiversity in the Baltic Sea - Helcom

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The strategic goal of the BSAP to have “maritime activities in the Baltic Sea carried out in an environmentally friendly way” requires actions to reduce bird mortality related to illegal or accidental discharges of oil, hazardous substances, and other wastes. In order to reduce killing of birds by oil spills, the routing of ships must be improved, i.e., major resting and wintering sites of seabirds should be declared by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) as ‘areas to be avoided’. Conflicts between birds and offshore installations (e.g., wind parks) should be minimized by adequate spatial planning. Furthermore, more research is needed in order to improve the knowledge about bird behaviour at sea and possible interactions between birds and offshore installations. The assessment of the conservation status and population development of birds in the Baltic Sea area needs continuous monitoring of: i) the range and size of breeding populations of bird species, ii) the distribution and numbers of wintering populations of birds, iii) the conservation and management status of breeding sites and areas, iv) anthropogenic mortality (hunting, oil spills, fishery bycatch), and v) reproductive parameters of indicator species for the impact of hazardous substances. Since 2002, HELCOM has been preparing for the official launch of a ‘HELCOM Baltic waterbird mo nitoring programme’. After finalization of the pilot project in 2003 and 2004, the plan for the design of the Waterbird Monitoring Programme was produced in 2005 and 2006 followed by coordinated censuses, trend analyses and indicator development within the framework of the SOWBAS (Status of wintering Waterbird populations in the Baltic Sea) project in 2007–2008. The results from SOWBAS, due for publication in 2009, will form a basis for a Baltic-wide compilation and assessment of the waterbird data. Therefore, it is recommended to launch the ‘HELCOM Baltic waterbird monitoring programme’. 82 Great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis)
5 TOWARDS AN INDICATOR-BASED ASSESS- MENT OF THE BALTIC SEA BIODIVERSITY This chapter presents the results of testing an indicator-based approach to assessing Baltic marine biodiversity based on a set of 22 national case studies and an overall assessment of the Baltic Proper sub-basin. According to the new HELCOM Monitoring and Assessment Strategy (HELCOM 2005a), the entire HELCOM system of assessments will be based on indicators, compiled in regular thematic assessments, such as this one on biodiversity, and eventually in overall regional holistic assessments covering the whole Baltic Sea and all relevant topics. It is clear that to be measurable, the HELCOM goals and especially the three objectives for biodiversity (HELCOM 2007a, Backer & Leppänen 2008) must be further defined in quantitative terms. The status of a selection of indicators can be evaluated by comparing the desired, or historically observed, situations with the present status (Andersen & Backer 2008). This allows, at least in principle, a more exact definition of goals such as ’favourable conservation status’ and a better possibility to monitor the progress towards these goals (Backer 2008). Another advantage of such quantitative approaches is that they enable explicit links to ecosystem models for estimating, for example, the distribution of habitats (see Chapter 3.2) and in some cases even exploring available policy options (e.g., Wulff et al. 2007). This kind of explicit indicator-based approach is already in use in the recently published assessment of eutrophication status in the Baltic Sea (HELCOM 2009a). Exact definitions of the status and targets of these issues are particularly politically sensitive. Owing to such challenges, the overall aim of this chapter is mainly to provide a case study of, and with it initiate further discussion on, the role and functions of indicators in HELCOM marine biodiversity assessments. The aim is not to conclude on an established method, indicators or a definite assessment of the areas covered. Hopefully, the material presented will serve not only to develop HELCOM biodiversity assessments and indicators but also as a source of inspiration for other organizations and regions that are working with similar issues. Compared to the well-defined topic of eutrophication, ‘marine biodiversity’ is a complex concept covering a wide range of issues and ecosystem components. The selection of concrete indicators required to represent biodiversity involves some inevitably arbitrary choices. Another complicating factor is the fact that many of the characteristic features commonly associated with marine biodiversity, such as habitats or marine mammals, are difficult and costly to monitor. Overall, this has resulted in fewer data available to produce indicators for the topic, both for defining a desired or target level, but also for assessing current status. In the case of economically exploited or hunted species, for example, fish and marine mammals, Macrophyte meadows and beds (shallow Fucus, red algae reef) 5.1 Assessing the status of biodiversity with indicators Using the terminology of Pressure, State, Response (PSR; OECD 1993) or Driver, Pressure, State, Impact, Response (DPSIR), mainly status indicators have been assessed in this trial. Assessing the status of marine biodiversity within a given area requires that a number of challenges be addressed. The first is to gather data for a sufficient number of indicators, describing a sufficiently broad array of biodiversity components data certainly exist but there are other difficulties. 83
Page 1:
Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings
Page 4 and 5:
Published by: Helsinki Commission K
Page 6 and 7:
TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE . . . . .
Page 8 and 9:
6.6 Hazardous substances . . . . .
Page 10 and 11:
1 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 An integrated
Page 12 and 13:
Box 1.1. Biodiversity The term biod
Page 14 and 15:
of saline water from the North Sea
Page 16 and 17:
14 On a global scale, marine ecosys
Page 18 and 19:
Box 1.2. Regime shifts in the Balti
Page 20 and 21:
2 MARINE LANDSCAPES AND HABITATS 18
Page 22 and 23:
From an ecological point of view, a
Page 24 and 25:
Box 2.1.2. The Baltic marine landsc
Page 26 and 27:
• A coherent data set on benthic
Page 28 and 29:
Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Lat
Page 30 and 31:
Mud-sandflat, Greifswald Lagoon, Ge
Page 32 and 33:
3 COMMUNITIES Communities are assem
Page 34 and 35: 32 Spring bloom index 1200 1000 800
Page 36 and 37: 34 Unusual events and new species i
Page 38 and 39: 36 Depth limit (m) the Gulf of Both
Page 40 and 41: Number of species 16 14 12 10 8 6 4
Page 42 and 43: Figure 3.2.7. Left panel shows pred
Page 44 and 45: Implications for the Baltic Sea Act
Page 46 and 47: Biomass (wet weight, mg per m 2 ) B
Page 48 and 49: the other hand, is not selected by
Page 50 and 51: iomass can be used to assess enviro
Page 52 and 53: Average number of species 20 15 10
Page 54 and 55: 52 Macoma baltica where the influen
Page 56 and 57: the total BT identified for each ma
Page 58 and 59: Recruitment (thousands) 8000000 700
Page 60 and 61: Alien species Several alien fish sp
Page 62 and 63: 4 SPECIES The number of species in
Page 64 and 65: Table 4.1.1. Results of dedicated a
Page 66 and 67: Number of stranded porpoises 180 16
Page 68 and 69: is recommended to survey harbour po
Page 70 and 71: Number of individuals 12000 10000 8
Page 72 and 73: Mean blubber thickness (mm) 40 35 3
Page 74 and 75: Breeding pairs 60000 50000 40000 30
Page 76 and 77: predation on nests and nesting adul
Page 78 and 79: sites outside the Baltic, decreased
Page 80 and 81: Table 4.3.1. Development of the pop
Page 82 and 83: 80 Number of breeding pairs 3000 25
Page 86 and 87: for a given site or area. The secon
Page 88 and 89: Mussel bed reef community, Jasmund,
Page 90 and 91: Table 5.3. Assessment results of th
Page 92 and 93: Aerial photo of harbours seals (Pho
Page 94 and 95: 6 HUMAN PRESSURES ON BIODIVERSITY A
Page 96 and 97: Table 6.1.1. Catch range during the
Page 98 and 99: Baltic herring trawling, Bothnian B
Page 100 and 101: 6.1.3 Major international framework
Page 102 and 103: 100 Oil turnover (millions of tonne
Page 104 and 105: NOx emissions and sewage Macrophyte
Page 106 and 107: Communication links There are a num
Page 108 and 109: Figure 6.3.3. Left: concrete-stone
Page 110 and 111: ecommendations would contribute to
Page 112 and 113: Tourist fishing 110 cial fishery fo
Page 114 and 115: 112 Figure 6.5.1. Integrated classi
Page 116 and 117: can be considered as having been a
Page 118 and 119: Although no direct, dramatic mass m
Page 120 and 121: Bearing in mind the complex hydrogr
Page 122 and 123: Box 6.7.1. Invasion status of the B
Page 124 and 125: Table 6.7.1. Examples of ecological
Page 126 and 127: munities that formerly consisted of
Page 128 and 129: 6.8.2 Activities generating noise i
Page 130 and 131: 128 and fish in the Baltic Sea area
Page 132 and 133: 800 700 600 bag of the two German B
Page 134 and 135:
Fish swarm on kelp (Laminaria sp.)
Page 136 and 137:
tion of ice cover, either through r
Page 138 and 139:
7 STATUS OF THE NETWORK OF MARINE A
Page 140 and 141:
Box 7.1. Natura 2000 network of pro
Page 142 and 143:
25 20 on how the criteria on ecolog
Page 144 and 145:
estrial, nearshore marine, and offs
Page 146 and 147:
144 >30 psu 18-30 psu 11-18 psu 7.5
Page 148 and 149:
Permission needed Restricted Forbid
Page 150 and 151:
Figure 7.8.a. MARXAN ’best portfo
Page 152 and 153:
The BSPA network is relatively well
Page 154 and 155:
Mammals. Among the mammals, the pop
Page 156 and 157:
154 taxonomic groups and communitie
Page 158 and 159:
156 provided by an ecosystem. Use o
Page 160 and 161:
158 Reduction of human pressures Wh
Page 162 and 163:
160 fishing on fish population dyna
Page 164 and 165:
162 Baden, S., Boström, C. (2001).
Page 166 and 167:
164 Season 2001-2002. Acta Zoologic
Page 168 and 169:
166 Gasiūnaitė, Z.R., Cardoso, A.
Page 170 and 171:
168 HELCOM & OSPAR (2003): Joint HE
Page 172 and 173:
170 ICES (2008c). Report of the Bal
Page 174 and 175:
172 area: density-dependent effects
Page 176 and 177:
174 Noer, H., Clausager, I., Asferg
Page 178 and 179:
176 Scheffer M., Carpenter S.R., Fo
Page 180 and 181:
178 by passive acoustic monitoring.
Page 182 and 183:
180 Warzaw, Poland Vilhunen, Jarmo,
Page 184 and 185:
182 6.7 Alien speices Authors: Lepp
Page 186 and 187:
ANNEX III: CONSERVATION STATUS OF T
Page 188 and 189:
ANNEX IV: HABITAT OR SPECIES DISTRI
Page 190:
ANNEX V: STATUS OF BREEDING AND WIN
show all

BSEP116B Biodiversity in the Baltic Sea - Helcom

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?