A quick overview

Third Meeting November 28-30, 2006 CARMA Network (Circum-Arctic Rangifer Monitoring & Assessment Network) Network Third Meeting November 28-30, 2006

CARMA Rationale Mission History Structure Activities Goals

New and more difficult challenges: High uncertainty Global Process Regional decision making Local well being New and more difficult challenges: High uncertainty Rapid directional change Increased complexity Considerable heterogeneity

The Mission of CARMA “To monitor and assess the impacts of global change on the Human-Rangifer System across the Arctic through cooperation, both geographically and across disciplines.”

1998 - The Arctic Council directed CAFF to “identify elements of a program to monitor circumpolar biodiversity” and to “assess the effects of climate change on Arctic ecosystems”.

1999 -“The Human Role in Reindeer/Caribou Systems” Workshop

Its “Research Plan” Anticipating and responding to change Understanding the resilience of Human-Rangifer Systems Developing new methods for comparative studies Facilitating communication among players Organizing into a network Reframing the paradigm to include hunters and herders

Background: February, 2000: CAFF responds to Arctic Council recommendation by establishing the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program

CARMA official Launch, Vancouver Oct 31 – Nov 1 2004 Representatives from Russia, Finland, Norway, Greenland, Canada, and the U.S. at the official launch of CARMA Network

Second Meeting of the CARMA Network Nov 15-16 Linked with IPY Identified research questions: What is the resilience of Human-Rangifer Systems to global change? What are the vulnerabilities of these systems? Organized into focus areas Initiated funding proposal planning

Three sources of information… Remote sensing understandin ghow to make this happen is in its nacsent stages of development. Mick Fergonson has made some valuable contrituions. More work is needed. Field studies Local knowledge

Where do we want to be one year from now? Protocols for monitoring established Monitoring data collection in full swing Co-management boards engaged in the process and their involvement well defined Sub-questions for research well defined Funding in place

Where do we want to be at the end of IPY (March 2009)? Strong arctic network established Intensive monitoring completed Dataset from different sources types compiled Decision-support tools for co-managers developed and pre-tested.

Preparing for change