Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

More documents

Recommendations

Info

40 Refrences Skov et al. (2000) BirdLife International, Cambridge. Skov et al. (2007) Biological conservation 136: 362-371. Skov et al. (2011) Waterbird Populations and Pressures in the Baltic Sea. TemaNord 2011:550. Available at: http://www.norden.org/en/publications/publikationer/2011-550 2.6. Distribution of wintering seabirds 1. Working team: Seabirds Authors: Henrik Skov, Susanne Ranft, Martti Hario 2. Name of core indicator Distribution of wintering seabirds 3. Unit of the core indicator Quantitative changes in the main distribution area of seabird species determined from density surface models developed on the basis of line transect survey data in consideration of species specifi c habitat suitability and sensitivity towards anthropogenic pressures 4. Description of proposed indicator Changes in the main distribution area determined from density surface models like GAMs or GLMs (higher end of the distribution e.g. the 75th or 90th percentile of all the sampled densities during the reference situation) are analysed. The indicator consists of well-known species of high numerical and environmental importance only, for which suffi cient coverage by line transect data is available, such as Common Eider, Velvet Scoter, Common Scoter and Long-tailed Duck. Time series data can provide information on changes over time and reveal reoccurring spatio-temporal patterns. In combination with data on anthropogenic pressures, naturally driven patterns can then be distinguished from pressure based changes. Pressure based changes in distribution may occur due to changes in resource quality and availability, habitat loss and disturbances or barriers. 5. Functional group or habitat type For the time being the indicator is species specifi c. 6. Policy relevance Descriptor 1 GES criteria 1.1.1 distributional range and 1.1.2 distributional pattern of species Biodiversity segment of the BSAP: Objective of natural landscapes and seascapes. 7. Use of the indicator in previous assessments None 8. Link to anthropogenic pressures Directly impacted by: resource depletion (selective extraction of species), habitat loss or deterioration (destructive fi shing techniques, construction of artifi cial structures), temporal or permanent displacement by constructions and ship traffi c. Indirectly impacted by: changes in species composition and consequently e.g. resource competition with other bird or non-bird species, changes in resource quality and availability due to contamination by hazardous substances and eutrophication. 9. Pressure(s) that the indicator refl ect selective extraction of species, shipping and other physical disturbances, physical damage through dredging and sand/gravel/boulder extraction, nutrient and organic matter enrichment 10. Spatial considerations Areas of suitable habitat to be examined, need to be defi ned / modelled for each species separately, thereby keeping in mind the naturally occurring spatio-temporal variation, areas at times of sea ice coverage and oxygen depletion should be avoided 11. Temporal considerations Times of highest occurrence, high naturally occurring spatio-temporal variation has to be considered, combination of several observations at varying weather and hydrographical conditions. For waterbirds this would typically mean mid winter.
12. Current monitoring SOWBAS, national monitoring for the identifi cation of SPAs and IBAs, to be included in the HELCOM Waterbird Monitoring 13. Proposed or perceived target setting approach with a short justifi cation. Deviation from favourable reference value (higher distribution) or deviation from reference state at the beginning of the assessment (the target would be resettlement of areas where anthropogenic pressures lead to avoidance behaviour and no further loss of habitat). Maybe a combination of both approaches. Introduction Seabirds are found across the world’s oceans in many different habitats with aggregations occurring over a wide range of spatial and temporal scales (O’Driscoll 1998). The structure and occurrence of aggregations is thereby related to a number of environmental factors, including water temperature and salinity, fl uid dynamics, meteorological conditions, food availability and the presence of other marine predators (see e.g. Lewis et al. 2001, Markones et al. 2008). The species-specifi c effects of these parameters precipitate explicit environmental requirements and dependencies which in combination with the distinct behaviour and biology of the diverse seabird species shape their distributional range and pattern. Thereby, the different species reveal varying distribution patterns ranging from very wide spread to locally concentrated and unpredictable short-term to regular long-term aggregations (BfN 2006, Garthe 2003, Markones et al. 2010, Sonntag et al. 2007). Especially for species with regular long-term aggregations in habituated and predefi ned localities of specifi c environmental conditions frequented for breeding, resting or feeding, the availability of suitable and undisturbed habitats is a key factor for the well-being of their population. Anthropogenic pressures, however, decrease the extent of suitable seabird habitats or effect seabird distribution in various other direct or indirect ways (see e.g. Garthe 2003). Human activities such as dredging, sand or gravel extraction as well as the use of destructive fi shing techniques or the construction of artifi cial structures destroy habitats or reduce habitat quality. The latter, in line with shipping, marine wind farms, infrastructure and other physical disturbances, also lead to habitat displacement (Bellebaum et al. 2006, Garthe & Hüppop 2004, Garthe et al. 2004, 2008, Pettersson 2005, Petersen et al. 2006, Sonntag et al. 2007). Marine infrastructures may also act as barriers altering the distributional patterns of bird species at sea (Mendel & Garthe 2010). Fishing or other selective extraction of species infl uence seabird distribution as resources are being depleted or the species compositions altered leading for example to resource competition with other marine predators (Garthe 1997, Siebert et al., 2009). Furthermore, contamination by hazardous substances and nutrient and organic matter may modify resource availability and quality, therefore indirectly infl uencing seabird distribution (BfN 2006). With its distinct oceanographic and geographical characteristics the Baltic Sea holds important and unique habitats for breeding and wintering seabird species. The importance of the Baltic as a wintering ground for example can be underlined by the fact that during mild winters over 90% of west-palearctic Long-tailed Ducks and Velvet Scoters overwinter here (Mendel et al. 2008). Changes in distributional patterns of species tied to specifi c habitats analysed with respect to habitat suitability and anthropogenic pressures should provide information on the environmental status of the species as well as on pressures causing a decline or change in distributional pattern. The authors of the document at hand believe changes in distribution of seabirds to be a suitable indicator for the state of the Baltic Sea marine ecosystem in general and Baltic Sea seabirds in particular. Description of the indicator The indicator is defi ned as quantitative changes in the main distribution or concentration area of selected species. The main distribution area thereby refers to the higher end of the species specifi c distribution that is the 75th percentile. Calculations should be based on time series of line transect data (e.g. 6 yrs) to reduce sample bias which is likely to occur due to e.g. weather conditions. Area of main distribution is de- 41
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 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 160 and 161:
158 Zooplankton-phytoplankton bioma
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 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?