Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

More documents

Recommendations

Info

158 Zooplankton-phytoplankton biomass ratio Long-term means + expert judgement. Phytoplankton diversity Long-term means + expert judgement. Seasonal succession of functional phytoplankton group Long-term means + expert judgement. Alkylphenols Environmental Quality Standards for nonyl- and octylphenol Vitellogenin induction A level not showing feminization of male fi sh AChE inhibition BAC established and EAC estimated. EROD/CYP1A induction BAC is under development. 4.1. Distribution of harbour porpoise 1. Working team: Marine Mammals Author: Stefan Braeger 2. Name of candidate indicator Geographical distribution of the critically endangered Baltic Proper harbour porpoise 3. Unit of the candidate indicator Presence as indicated by the frequency of registrations per area in a year (e.g., >10 registrations/1000km 2 ) 4. Description of proposed indicator The current population size of the Baltic harbour porpoise is extremely small and due to its low abundance no longer reliably quantifi able. Therefore, it appears impracticable to propose the abundance of harbour porpoise as a state indicator or a quantitative target for abundance as a conservation goal. At extremely low densities, such target would be almost impossible and very costly to monitor. The Baltic porpoise population has not only dwindled in numbers to less than 250 reproducing adults (IUCN 2008) but also evacuated large parts of its historic range throughout the Baltic Proper. Therefore, the extent of the distribution range appears to be a suitable proxy for population size assuming that an increasing population would also be likely to expand its range. Annecdotal information on (pre-industrial) porpoise distribution indicates a probably continuous distribution throughout the Baltic Proper, possibly also covering the entire Gulf of Bothnia as well. Therefore, a regular basin-wide presence could serve as proxy for successful population recovery. 5. Functional group or habitat type Harbour Porpoise (a piscivorous top predator) 6. Policy relevance Habitats Directive, Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and national obligations under a number of IGO resolutions (e.g., HELCOM, OSPAR, CMS, ASCOBANS etc.). MSFD Descriptor 1, criterion 1.1 Species distribution. The Baltic Sea Action Plan calls for “Abundance, trends, and distribution of Baltic harbour porpoise” as preliminary indicator for nature conservation and biodiversity. To achieve a viable population of this species, it provides the following targets: “By 2012 spatial/temporal and permanent closures of fi sheries of suffi cient size/duration are established thorough the Baltic Sea area” and “By 2015 by-catch of harbour porpoise, seals, water birds and non-target fi sh species has been signifi cantly reduced with the aim to reach by-catch rates close to zero” 7. Use of the indicator in previous assessments ASCOBANS, e.g. in the Jastarnia Plan (2002 & 2009). 8. Link to anthropogenic pressures Directly linked to gillnet fi sheries, persistant organic pollutants, underwater noise (e.g., from pile-driving, underwater explosions, seismic surveys, military sonar), disturbance from shipping, and habitat destruction (e.g. from gravel extraction, offshore structures, coastal development) among others.
9. Pressure(s) that the indicator refl ect Selective extraction of species, including incidental non-target catches, as well as others mentioned and point 8. 10. Spatial considerations Since harbour porpoises are highly migratory mammals, the spatial considerations would be determined by the desired species distribution, e.g. Baltic Proper. 11. Temporal considerations Harbour porpoises live in the Baltic Sea year-round, but have to avoid complete ice cover. The recolonisation of the entire Baltic Proper cannot rely on immigration from other populations and will thus depend on intrinsic population growth from a very low abundance. Therefore, it is likely to take several decades at best. 12. Current monitoring Two aerial surveys of the southwestern part of the Baltic Proper (between southern Sweden and the coast from Darss Ridge to Gdansk) in 1995 and 2002 resulted in best estimates of 599 and 93 porpoises, respectively. Currently, porpoise densities are regarded as too low to make visual surveys any longer viable. Therefore, an ongoing international research project (“SAMBAH”) uses static acoustic monitoring in 300 locations in the Baltic Proper in water depth between 5 and 80 metres and fi rst results regarding the geographical distribution are expected to become available in the year 2014 (www.sambah.org). 13. Proposed or perceived target setting approach with a short justifi cation. To measure the success of conservation measures that results in an increase of porpoise distribution range (and by analogy in porpoise numbers), a SAMBAH-like survey should be periodically repeated e.g. every ten years. Additionally, the number of sighted and locally stranded porpoises may provide a useful indicator for the regular presence of porpoises as well as insights into population health. Such information could be based on promotion of new or already existing voluntary reporting schemes such as provided in Poland (http://www.morswin.pl/index_base.php?Screen_Option=1&Page_ID=72), Germany (http://www.meeresmuseum.de/de/wissenschaft/sichtungen.html), Sweden (http://www.nrm.se/sv/ meny/forskningochsamlingar/enheter/miljogiftsforskning/rapporteringavdjur.445.html), and Finland (http://www.environment.fi /default.asp?contentid=190711&lan=EN). Ultimately their entire historical range throughout the Baltic Proper should be recolonised by Baltic harbour porpoises. By then porpoises densities should have recovered suffi ciently to allow reliable abundance estimation and the setting of alternative conservation targets. The Baltic Sea Action Plan, for example, also recommends pregnancy rate, fecundity rate, and the occurrence of pathological fi ndings as indicators and targets for the ecological objective. 159
Page 1:
Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings
Page 4 and 5:
2 Helsinki Commission Katajanokanla
Page 6 and 7:
4 4.16. Cumulative impact on benthi
Page 8 and 9:
6 descriptions of the indicators. T
Page 10 and 11:
8 The CORESET expert group on biodi
Page 12 and 13:
10 fi sh stocks and change in diet,
Page 14 and 15:
12 Figure 2.3. The prevalence of pr
Page 16 and 17:
14 Seasonal changes in blubber thic
Page 18 and 19:
16 Blubber thickness suggestions Bl
Page 20 and 21:
18 Weaknesses/gaps Monitoring of th
Page 22 and 23:
20 2.3. Population growth rate of m
Page 24 and 25:
22 Annual adult survival 1 0,95 0,9
Page 26 and 27:
24 Existing monitoring data Informa
Page 28 and 29:
26 References Bäcklin, B. M. 2011.
Page 30 and 31:
28 Reproduction in the Baltic eagle
Page 32 and 33:
30 Breeding success The proportion
Page 34 and 35:
32 of the real number of nestlings
Page 36 and 37:
34 Gaps and weaknesses Minimum dete
Page 38 and 39:
36 2.5. Abundance of wintering popu
Page 40 and 41:
38 Table 2.10. Pressures affecting
Page 42 and 43:
40 Refrences Skov et al. (2000) Bir
Page 44 and 45:
42 termined by application of the 7
Page 46 and 47:
44 Approach for defi ning GES All s
Page 48 and 49:
46 Sampling It is suggested to incl
Page 50 and 51:
48 2.7. Fish population abundance 2
Page 52 and 53:
50 Coastal Fish - Community Abundan
Page 54 and 55:
52 When a reference data set cannot
Page 56 and 57:
54 well, but were not included in t
Page 58 and 59:
56 Weighting For Nordic Costal mult
Page 60 and 61:
58 12. Current monitoring Monitored
Page 62 and 63:
60 Błeńska M., Osowiecki A., Kra
Page 64 and 65:
62 10. Spatial considerations Fucus
Page 66 and 67:
64 2.15. Trend in the arrival of ne
Page 68 and 69:
66 jectives is to reach “No intro
Page 70 and 71:
68 Sweden Figure 2.23 shows the rat
Page 72 and 73:
70 Strengths and weaknesses of data
Page 74 and 75:
72 need to be revisited in light of
Page 76 and 77:
74 Considering the data set availab
Page 78 and 79:
76 In Denmark, the highest contamin
Page 80 and 81:
78 Status of a compound on internat
Page 82 and 83:
80 A temporal analysis (EU-RAR 2006
Page 84 and 85:
82 Pathways of PFOS to the Baltic e
Page 86 and 87:
84 In regions less affected by anth
Page 88 and 89:
86 3.4. Polychlorinated biphenyls a
Page 90 and 91:
88 actions related to the environme
Page 92 and 93:
90 The CORESET expert group decided
Page 94 and 95:
92 pheric deposition pattern (lowes
Page 96 and 97:
94 3.5. Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (
Page 98 and 99:
96 GES boundaries and matrix Existi
Page 100 and 101:
98 Quality Assurance of PAH metabol
Page 102 and 103:
100 Ariese F, Burgers I, Oudhoff K,
Page 104 and 105:
102 GES boundaries and matrices Exi
Page 106 and 107:
104 3.7. Cesium-137 Authors: Jürge
Page 108 and 109:
106 Figure 3.5. Average surface lev
Page 110 and 111: 108 Temporal trends in concentratio
Page 112 and 113: 110 Other important sources are glo
Page 114 and 115: 112 Conceptual model of the sources
Page 116 and 117: 114 3.8 Tributyltin (TBT) and the i
Page 118 and 119: 116 GES boundaries and matrix Exist
Page 120 and 121: 118 Monitoring the compound Status
Page 122 and 123: 120 Recommendation TBT measurements
Page 124 and 125: 122 3. Frogs have been shown to app
Page 126 and 127: 124 not fi sh (Köhler et al. 2002;
Page 128 and 129: 126 The use of different fi sh spec
Page 130 and 131: 128 Kirchin, M.A. Moore, M.N. Dean,
Page 132 and 133: 130 3.11. Fish Disease Index: Exter
Page 134 and 135: 132 Confounding factors The multifa
Page 136 and 137: 134 analyses ICES data from various
Page 138 and 139: 136 An EAC is the threshold beyond
Page 140 and 141: 138 3.12. Micronucleus test Authors
Page 142 and 143: 140 main nuclei were not counted as
Page 144 and 145: 142 ing national data sets. Note: t
Page 146 and 147: 144 Baršienė J. Rybakovas A. 2006
Page 148 and 149: 146 3.13 A. Reproductive disorders
Page 150 and 151: 148 dead larvae can be induced by s
Page 152 and 153: 150 Strand, J, Dahllöf, I. (2005).
Page 154 and 155: 152 of contaminants in sediments wi
Page 156 and 157: 154 Eriksson Wiklund, A-K., and Sun
Page 158 and 159: 156 4. Candidate indicators for bio
Page 162 and 163: 160 4.2. By-catch of marine mammals
Page 164 and 165: 162 4.3. Impacts of anthropogenic u
Page 166 and 167: 164 4.4. Fatty-acid composition of
Page 168 and 169: 166 7. Use of the indicator in prev
Page 170 and 171: 168 10. Spatial considerations Balt
Page 172 and 173: 170 4.10. Large fi sh individuals f
Page 174 and 175: 172 11. Temporal considerations Sam
Page 180 and 181: 178 A proposal for an approach to a
Page 182 and 183: 180 Technical data Metadata This is
Page 184 and 185: 182 F igure 4.1. Map showing the cu
Page 186 and 187: 184 4.17. Biomass of copepods 1. Wo
Page 188 and 189: 186 4.19. Zooplankton species diver
Page 190 and 191: 188 indirectly impacted by eutrophi
Page 192 and 193: 190 Notes for the GES boundary The
Page 194 and 195: 192 Step 3: Prepare a list of speci
Page 196 and 197: 194 4.22. Phytoplankton diversity 1
Page 198 and 199: 196 4. Policy relevance Nonylphenol
Page 200 and 201: 198 among different studies/measure
Page 202 and 203: 200 4.27. EROD/CYP1A induction The
Page 204 and 205: 202 5.1. Summary of all supplementa
Page 206 and 207: 204 Table 5.1. (continues) Suppleme
Page 208 and 209: 206 5.5. Biopollution level index 1
Page 210 and 211:
208 NIS for aquaculture purposes. O
Page 212 and 213:
210 Balanus improvisus Baltic Katte
Page 214 and 215:
212 Figure 5.3. The scheme for asse
Page 216 and 217:
214 5.6. Organochlorine compounds G
Page 218 and 219:
216 EU Directive 2008/105/ EC Daugh
Page 220 and 221:
218 Table 5.4. Monitoring of HCB, H
Page 222:
www.helcom.fi
show all

Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?