Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP) Approach for Designing Pan-Arctic Biodiversity Monitoring Plans Mike Gill: CBMP Program Officer, Environment Canada McMurdo Dry Valleys Terrestrial Observation Network: An NSF Workshop

Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Programme (CBMP) Arctic Council (CAFF) Program; Led by Canada International network improving detection, understanding and reporting of Arctic biodiversity trends Focal point for current and credible Arctic biodiversity information Bridging the information-policy gap

CBMP Objectives: Adding Value Monitoring networks coordinated, harmonized and cost- effective Best monitoring practices utilized and promoted Existing data rescued and utilized Arctic people involved in monitoring Current, timely and accurate information on Arctic biodiversity accessible to decision-makers, including the public

UNEP Biodiversity Indicator Partnership Global Earth Observation: Biodiversity Observation Network Convention on Biological Diversity Other AC Working Groups International and Strategic linkages

Overall Program Design & Organization

Expert Monitoring Groups (EMGs): – Marine, Coastal, Freshwater, Terrestrial – Ecosystem-based, network of networks – Forum for scientists and community experts – Pan-Arctic, integrated monitoring plans CBMP Key Initiatives: Coordinated Monitoring

CBMP Monitoring Plans Based on clear monitoring questions & user needs Core set of circumpolar, plus regionally specific metrics & indicators Ecosystem-based: Linked to relevant & multiple drivers Scaled monitoring (e.g. intensive-extensive) Simple & realistic: based on existing capacity & data Optimal sampling & partners identified Adaptive: able to adjust parameters & indicators during start-up phase Establish baselines & assessments

CBMP-Terrestrial Plan Co-led by Kingdom of Denmark and USA Background Paper and two workshops completed Plan is being drafted Release date Jan ‘13

Process for Developing a Pan-Arctic Plan – Background Paper 1.Identify objectives of the monitoring plan – What are the: – Key science questions to address? – Management objectives for this region? – Reporting mandates? 2.Conduct an inventory/analysis of what existing research & monitoring efforts & data exist & how well they can serve objectives.

Process for Developing a Pan-Arctic Plan – Background Paper 3. Define scope (spatial & thematic) - where relevant, define focal areas for focused monitoring & reporting 4. Develop and agree upon criteria for choosing attributes, parameters, & indicators 5. Develop conceptual model(s) for the ecosystem in question

Process for Developing a Pan-Arctic Plan – First Workshop Goals: identify focal ecosystem components (FECs), parameters (metrics) & indicators Using a scoping process (Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management) – Form breakout groups – based on discipline themes (e.g. vegetation, invertebrates, mammals, birds) – Develop impact hypotheses (IH) and cause effect charts for these focal ecosystem components – Using the criteria & based on the IH & cause-effect charts, choose the key attributes for each FEC to measure & determine the most suitable parameters.

Examples: Conceptual Scenarios

Examples: Cause-Effect Charts

Examples: Conceptual Visualization of Arctic Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring Scheme

Process for Developing a Pan-Arctic Plan – Second Workshop Goals: identify sampling scheme, partners & implementation plan. – Using the inventory/metadata in Background Paper, come to agreements on sampling methods (spatial and temporal) – Using the inventory/metadata determine existing networks/groups that can implement – Develop implementation plan (organizational structure, budget, reporting timelines, data management, etc.)

Example: Pan-Arctic Sampling Design

Spatial distribution of marine population data collected. The size of the circle denotes the number of population time series from that location. CBMP Output: Indices and Indicators

CBMP Output Examples: Arctic Biodiversity Data Service

CBMP Output Examples: Arctic Report Cards (Ecosystem Chapters)

CBMP Output Examples: Multi-Authored Publications

CBMP Output Examples: Assessments

CBMP Output Examples: Predictive Models Figure 12. Comparison of observed (A) and predicted (B) population trends expressed as average rates of change, for terrestrial data only. The term lambda means rate of change.

Be relevant - Clearly articulate objectives, questions & reporting mandates & design plan around these Art of the Possible: build a simple plan based on existing/anticipated capacity & data (don’t forget existing data!) & start small Budget for Data Management, Analysis & Reporting: plan & agree on data management approach early in process & use new technologies (distributed data networks) Lessons Learned

Meet annually (at least) to ensure implementation is happening, allow for adjustments to the plan & have performance measures Build flexibility and adapt – remember you are guessing on what are the key elements of the system to monitor (time will tell) Involve managers & funders in the development Show value of integration through early results: – Develop early, targeted products for policy makers, scientists and the public

Photos by Carsten Egevang/ ARC-PIC.com Shutterstock.com/Larry Mauer Shutterstock.com/Oksana Perkins Shutterstock.com/Erkki & Hanna U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Thank you For more information please visit:

Questions To Focus On With our ‘clients’ in mind… – In 10 Years, what do we want to be able to say about Antarctic Terrestrial Ecosystems? What elements of the system should we be tracking? – Therefore, what are the priority indicators to develop? – What data will we need (e.g. What parameters to measure?) – What driver data is needed to allow us to interpret these trends? – What conceptual framework should we use to ensure the system is well covered?

Questions To Focus On What existing data and networks do we have that can help us begin to report? What new networks (filling gaps) would we need? What trends may the plan be unable to detect?

Questions to Focus On Where should we be sampling? How frequently? (e.g. power analysis) What organizational structure will we need to organise the relevant networks and stations to form and implement an integrated Arctic biodiversity monitoring plan? What resources will be required to implement the monitoring plan? What critical gaps remain, and what approaches should be considered to fill these?