Arctic Species Trend Index 2010library.arcticportal.org/1306/1/asti_report_april_20_low... ·...
39
2010 discover the arctic species trend index: www.asti.is Tracking Trends in Arctic Wildlife Arctic Species Trend Index CAFF CBMP Report No. 20 ARCTIC COUNCIL
Transcript of Arctic Species Trend Index 2010library.arcticportal.org/1306/1/asti_report_april_20_low... ·...
2010
discover the arctic species trend index: www.asti.is
Tracking Trends in Arctic Wildlife
Arctic Species Trend Index
CAFF CBMP Report No. 20
ARCTIC COUNCIL
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x CAFF Designated Agencies:
• DirectorateforNatureManagement,Trondheim,Norway• EnvironmentCanada,Ottawa,Canada• FaroeseMuseumof NaturalHistory,Tórshavn,FaroeIslands(Kingdomof Denmark)• FinnishMinistryof theEnvironment,Helsinki,Finland• IcelandicInstituteof NaturalHistory,Reykjavik,Iceland• TheMinistryof InfrastructureandEnvironment,theEnvironmentalAgency,theGovernmentof
Greenland• RussianFederationMinistryof NaturalResources,Moscow,Russia• SwedishEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,Stockholm,Sweden• UnitedStatesDepartmentof theInterior,FishandWildlifeService,Anchorage,Alaska
CAFF Permanent Participant Organisations:
• AleutInternationalAssociation(AIA)• ArcticAthabaskanCouncil(AAC)• Gwich’inCouncilInternational(GCI)• InuitCircumpolarConference(ICC)Greenland,AlaskaandCanada• RussianIndigenousPeoplesof theNorth(RAIPON)• TheSaamiCouncil
Thispublicationshouldbecitedas:LouiseMcRae,ChristophZöckler,MichaelGill,JonathanLoh,JuliaLatham,NicolaHarrison,JennyMartinandBenCollen.2010. Arctic Species Trend Index 2010: Tracking Trends in Arctic Wildlife. CAFFCBMPReportNo.20,CAFFInternationalSecretariat,Akureyri,Iceland.
Formoreinformationpleasecontact:
CAFFInternationalSecretariat
Borgir,Nordurslod
600Akureyri,Iceland
Phone:+354462-3350
Fax:+354462-3390
Email:[email protected]
Website:www.caff.is
Design&Layout:LilyGontard
Coverphotocourtesyof JoelleTaillon.
March2010
Report Authors:LouiseMcRae,ChristophZöckler,MichaelGill,JonathanLoh,JuliaLatham,NicolaHarrison,JennyMartinandBenCollen
ThisreportwascommissionedbytheCircumpolarBiodiversityMonitoringProgram(CBMP)withfundingprovidedbytheGovernmentof Canada.The2010BiodiversityIndicatorsPartnershippro-videdfundingtoassistintheprintingof thereport.
Acknowledgements
___ CAFFDesignatedArea
3
Content5 Foreword
6 Summary
7 Introduction7 Monitoring Arctic biodiversity
8 Figure 1: Arctic boundaries
9 Data Coverage9 Figure 2: Data Coverage by Taxonomic Class
9 Trends in sample populations of selected species
10 Figure 3: Sample Populations
15 Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI)15 Figure 4: Arctic Species Trend Index for all species
16 Regional results: Arctic boundaries
16 Figure 5: Arctic Species Trend Index for all Arctic species disaggregated into High Arctic species, Low Arctic species and Sub Arctic species
17 Figure 6: Trends in Arctic summer sea-ice extent
18 Box 1: Sea-ice-associated species
18 Figure 7: Trends in the Western Hudson Bay Polar Bear populations
19 System Results 19 Overview
19 Figure 8: Index of terrestrial species disaggregated by Arctic boundary
20 Figure 9: Overall index of marine species and index of north Pacific Ocean species
20 Trophic Level21 Figure 10: Indices of all herbivore species and all herbivores excluding
the waterbird species
21 Box 2: Caribou/reindeer
22 Figure 11: Indices for all Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) populations, disag-gregated into North American and European populations
22 Taxonomic Results22 Overview
23 Figure 12: Index of ASTI species disaggregated by taxonomic class
23 Birds
23 Figure 13: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of freshwa-ter, marine and terrestrial birds
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 424 Figure 14: Index of all terrestrial birds disaggregated into an index with-
out goose species and an index of goose species alone
24 Box 3: Terrestrial birds
24 Migratory birds
25 Figure 15: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of migrant and non-migrant bird populations
26 ASTI in the Global Context 26 Figure 16: Global Living Planet Index (LPI) disaggregated into temperate
and tropical indices and the Arctic Species Trend Index
27 Discussion
29 Acknowledgements
30 References
34 Appendix I: Technical Notes34 Arctic Species Trend Index
34 Data tagging
34 Figure 17: Hierarchy of indices within the Arctic Species Trend Index
35 Appendix II: Species and Population Numbers in the ASTI Dataset35 CAFF boundary
35 High/Low/Sub Arctic boundaries combined
36 High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by class
36 High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by system
36 Marine oceans by class
37 Regions (Greenland and North America)
35 Appendix III: Index and Confidence Interval Values for Each of the Indices
5
ForewordManypeopleviewtheArcticasavastandbarrenexpanse—anintimidatingandhostileenvironmentdevoidof wildlifeandpeople.Fortunatelythismythisbeingdispelledwiththegrowingvoiceof Arcticindigenouspeoplesandotherresidents,andthegrowingfocusonsuchissuesasclimatechangeanditsdisproportionateimpactonhigh-latituderegions.TheArcticnotonlyisahighlyproductivesys-temthatplayshosttoavastarrayandabundanceof uniquewildlife,butitactsasacriticalcomponentintheEarth’sphysical,chemicalandbiologicalregulatorysystem.PerturbationstothissystemareexpectedtonotonlyhaveconsequencesfortheArcticitself,butwillbefeltglobally.
Arcticresidentsinparticular,butalsotheworldatlarge,havebeenincreasinglydemandingtimelyandaccurateinformationonhowtheArcticisrespondingtopressuressuchasclimatechange.Untilnow,thesedemandshavelargelybeenmetwithsilence.Todate,wehavemostlyreliedonclimateinformationandsea-iceextentasindicatorsof howtheArcticischanging.Butwhatof thewildlifethatinhabitstheArctic?Howaretheyrespondingtothesepressures?
WiththeArcticSpeciesTrendIndex(ASTI)wecannowbegintotrackhowtheArctic’secosystemsandthelivingresourcesdependentuponthemarerespondingtochange.Almost1,000datasetsforthepastfourdecadesrepresenting35%of allknownArcticvertebratespeciesarefoundintheASTI—asignificantaccomplishmentandrecognitionof thesustainedeffortanddedicationof Arcticre-searchersandcommunitieswhohavebeentrackingwildlifepopula-tionsinaremoteandchallengingenvironment.
WhilethedatafoundintheASTIareimpressive,moreareneededtounderstandhowtheArctic’secosystemsandthelivingresourcestheysupportarerespondingandwillrespondtogrowingandcumulativepressures.Informationoninvertebratesisparticularlyscarce,asisthetrackingof large-scalevegetationchanges.Agrowingawarenessthatchangesareoccurringfasterthanmodelledpredic-tionsremindsusthatminimaldatasetscanhavelimitedvalue.AnenhancedeffortisneededfromallArcticcountriestofurtherinvestinmonitoringandassociatedresearch.Theresultshavetobeef-fectivelydeliveredtoArcticresidents,governmentsandtheworldinordertohelpusconservetheArctic’slivingresourcesandadapttochangestotheseresourcesinachangingworld.
Dr.AevarPetersen
Chair,ArcticCouncilConservationof ArcticFloraandFauna(CAFF)WorkingGroup
tom barry
We can now begin to track how the Arctic’s ecosystems and the living resources dependent upon them are responding to change
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 6
SummaryThecontributionof Arcticwildlifetoglobalbiodiversityissub-stantial.Theregionsupportsgloballysignificantpopulationsof birds,mammalsandfish.Forexample,overhalf of theworld’sshorebirdsand80%of theglobalgoosepopulationbreedinArcticandSubArcticregions.Dramaticchanges(e.g.,sea-iceloss)intheArctic’secosystemsarepredictedtooccuroverthenextcentury.Arcticspeciesthathaveadaptedtotheseextremeenvironmentsareexpectedtobedisplacedbytheencroachmentof moresoutherly(SubArctic)speciesandecosystems.Continued,rapidchangeintheArcticecosystemswillhaveglobalrepercussionsaffectingtheplanet’sbiodiversityasawhole.UnderstandinghowtheArctic’slivingresources,includingitsvertebratespecies,arerespondingtothesechangesisessentialinordertodevelopeffectiveconservationandadaptationstrategies.
Inthisreport,vertebratepopulation-abundancedatawereusedtoproduceanindicatorof thetrendsinArcticbiodiversityoverthepast34years(1970asthebaseline1).Thisindextracks965popu-lationsof 306species,representing35%of allknownvertebratespeciesfoundintheArctic.VertebrateabundanceinHighArcticspeciesdeclined26%between1970and2004.LowandSubArcticspecieshavefaredbetteroverthistimeperiod:LowArcticspeciesexperiencedincreasingabundanceandSubArcticspeciesshowedadeclinesincethemid-1980s,butnooverallchangeoverthe34-yearperiod.Theseobservedtrendsarelargelyconsistentwithcurrentpredictionsregardingtheresponseof Arcticwildlifetoclimatechangeandexpectedincreasesinpreviouslyover-harvestedspecies,andsuggestthathuman-inducedchangesinArcticecosystemsarealreadyresultinginwinnersandlosers.Dramaticgrowthof certainpopulationsof migratoryArctic-nestinggeesespecies,forinstance,showsacontrastwithasteadydeclineinotherherbivorousspecies,mostof whicharenotmigratory.
Whilethisreporthighlightstrendsseenover34years,furtherworkisneededtoproduceamorerobustindexthatadequatelyrep-resentsalltaxa,biomesandregionsandtodevelopabetterunder-standingof howtheArctic’swildlifeisrespondingtobothnaturalandhuman-inducedchanges.Theremotenessof theregionmeanscertainspeciesandpopulations(e.g.,fishpopulationsandHighArcticpopulations)havelimiteddatacoverage.Currentresearchandmonitoringeffortsareinsufficient,limitingourabilitytodetectandunderstandchangesinpopulationabundance.Betterdesigned,morewidelydistributedandmoreintegratedresearchandmonitor-ingschemesneedtobeimplemented.Theresultinginformationmustbedeliveredusingeffectiveformatstodecision-makersatalllevels(national,regionalandlocalauthorities)inordertofacilitatemoreeffectiveandtimelyconservationandadaptationresponsesinarapidlychangingsystem.
joelle taillon
1. 1970 was used as the baseline as pre-1970 data in the ASTI was limited making trend results uncertain for years preceding 1970. Likewise, 2004 was used as the cut-off year as sample size declined dramatically after 2004 due to recent, updated datasets not yet being available.
7
Introduction
Monitoring Arctic biodiversityThisyear,allsignatorynationswillbereportingtotheConventiononBiologicalDiversity(CBD)ontheirprogresstowardsthe2010targetof reducingtherateof biodiversityloss.Biodiversityindica-torshavebeendevelopedtoassesswhetherornotthistargethasbeenmetandtodemonstratethechangingstateof natureovertime.TotrackstatusandtrendsinArcticbiodiversityforthe2010target,theCircumpolarBiodiversityMonitoringProgram(CBMP)hasidentifiedanumberof indicesandindicators,oneof whichistheArcticSpeciesTrendIndex(ASTI).Thisindex,liketheglobalLivingPlanetIndex(LPI),illustratesoverallvertebratepopulationtrendsbyintegratingvertebratepopulationtrenddataof anappropriatestandard[1]fromacrosstheArcticandoverthelast34years.Anincreasingindexindicatesthat,overall,morevertebratepopulationsintheArcticareincreasingthandecreasing.Whereasadecreasingindex,indicatestheoppositesituation.Thisindexnotonlyallowsforacompositemeasureof theoveralltrajectoryof Arcticvertebratepopulations,butcanbedisaggregatedtodisplaytrendsbasedontaxonomy,ecosystem,region,timeperiodandothercategories.
MeasuringchangeinArcticbiodiversityisallthemorepertinentgivenevidenceemergingof Arcticecosystemsalreadyresponding,insomecasesquitedramatically,toclimaticchanges[2,3].Predictionsareof substantialshiftsinthisenvironmentinthenearfuture(e.g.,encroachmentof moresoutherlyspeciesandecosystems)[4,5]andrecentchangesinphysicalelementssuchasseaicehaveoutpacedpredictedchanges[6].LimitedfunctionalredundancyinArcticecosystemsposesaparticularriskasthelossof asinglespeciescouldhavedramaticandcascadingeffectsonanecosystem’sstateandfunction[3].Ourcurrent,mostly,single-speciesapproachtomonitoringwithabiastowardscharismaticspeciesoverfunctionalspecieslimitsourabilitytodetectandunderstandcriticalchangesintheArctic’secosystems.Abroaderandmoreintegratedapproachisneededtofacilitateabetterunderstandingof howtheArctic’slivingresources,includingitsvertebratespecies,arerespondingtoachang-ingArcticandhowthesechangesmightreflectorcounterglobalbiodiversitytrends.Thisinformationisessentialinordertodevelopeffectiveconservationandadaptationstrategies.
Resultspresentedinthisreportfromtheanalysisof Arcticverte-bratepopulationdataareusedtoexamineoveralltrendsinpopula-tionabundanceinachangingArcticecosystem.AnoverallASTIispresentedasanindicatorof Arcticbiodiversityattheecosystemlevel,followedbyanumberof species-andsystem-basedthemesillustratedtorevealtrendsinabundanceatsmallerscales.Thesedis-aggregationsidentifypatternsinArcticvertebratepopulationtrends,
carsten egevang
This information is essential in order to develop effective conservation and adaptation strategies.
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 8
therebyfacilitatingagreaterunderstandingof thepotentialdriv-ersof thesetrends.Overtime,trackingthisindexwillhelprevealpatternsinArcticwildliferesponsetogrowingpressures,therebyfacilitatingabetterpredictiveabilityonthetrajectoryof Arcticecosystems.
Figure 1: Arctic boundaries The Arctic as defined by the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna [7] and the High, Low and Sub Arctic regions according to floristic boundaries [8]. The red dots represent vertebrate populations included in the ASTI data analysis.
carsten egevang
9
Data CoverageThedelineationof theHigh,LowandSubArcticboundarieswasusedtoclassifyArcticpopulations(Figure1)givingatotalof 965timeseriesfor306speciesof birds,mammalsandfish.Thetotalnumberof speciesintheASTIrepresents35%of theknownArcticvertebratespeciesandtheproportionof eachtaxonomicclassrep-resentedisshowninFigure2.Representativecoveragewasgoodforbirdspecies,moderateformammalsandpoorforfish.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Birds Mammals Fishes
Taxonomic class
Figure 2: Data Coverage by Taxonomic Class. The coverage of species represented in the ASTI. Black bars represent proportion of Arctic species in each class for which there are population data available. White bars are the proportion of Arctic species with no available population-trend data.
DatawerecollatedfromacrosstheArcticrepresentingcontributionsfromvariousindividualsandorganizations(seeAcknowledgements)inalleightArcticnationsandfrommarine,terrestrialandfreshwatersystems(seeAppendixII).Afewexamplesof thecompositionof theASTIdatasetareonthefollowingpages.Thetrendsinabundanceineachsubsetof datawereaveragedtoproducetheresultsthatfollow.
Trends in sample populations of selected speciesThepopulationtrendsforthe10terrestrial,marineandfreshwaterspeciesshowninFigure3illustratethekindsof datathathavebeenusedtocalculatetheArcticSpeciesTrendIndex.Theexamplesetspansarangeof classes,locationsandArcticregionstoillustratehowdifferentpopulationsarefaringacrosstheArcticregion,butdoesnotnecessarilyrepresentthepictureforanentirespeciesorregion.
Somepopulationsareeitherstableorincreasing,representingconservationsuccessessuchastheAlaskanBowheadWhalepopulationthatisbenefittingfromtheremovalof huntingpressure.Green-landCodthatdeclinedtoaverylowlevelbytheearly1990sduetodeteriorationof theenvironmentalconditionsandhighfishingmortality,showsindicationsof improving,withinfluxof codfromIcelan-dicwatersasonecontributingfactor.
peter e. steenstra/usfws
10
0
12000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
No.
of I
ndiv
idua
ls
0
1200000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Spa
wni
ng s
tock
Bio
mas
s (T
)
Bowhead Whale (Balaena mysticetus)
Pollock (Pollachius virens)
susan daly
ansgar walk
Figure 3: Sample Populations
11
0
3
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Thou
sand
indi
vidu
als
0
25
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Trac
ks p
er k
m2
Wolverine (Gulo gulo)
Arctic Hare (Lepus timidus)
matthias hillebrand
carsten egevang
12
0
250
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Est
. no.
of o
ccup
ied
nest
s
0
400000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
No.
of F
ish
Atlantic Puffin (Fratercula artica)
Chum Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta)
carsten egevang
ruth foster
Continued ... Figure 3: Sample Populations
13
0
80
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Bre
edin
g pa
irs
0
500000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Spa
wni
ng s
tock
Bio
mas
s (T
)
White-Tailed Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla)
Greenland Cod (Gadus morhua)
mike brown
hans-petter fjeld/wikipedia
14
0
8
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Thou
sand
indi
vidu
als
0
80
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Indi
vidu
als
pr 1
00m
2
Brown Bear (Ursus arctos)
Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar)
malene thyssen/wikipedia
peter e. steenstra/usfws
Continued ... Figure 3: Sample Populations
15
Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI)Theaveragetrendin965populationsof 306Arcticvertebratespeciesindicatesanincreaseinabundancefrom1970until1984,thenthein-dexremainsrelativelystableupto2004(Figure4).Overall,theindexhasincreasedby16%overthetimeperiod(1970-2004).Theconfi-denceintervals2 showthattheoverallincreaseinvertebrateabundancewasbetween2and32%.Thenumberof Arcticpopulationscontribut-ingtotheindexoverthe34yearsrangedfrom266to666timeseriesforasingleyear.Thenumberof populationshasincreasedsteadilyupuntil1998indicatingthatdataavailabilityhasimprovedeitherasaresultof moremonitoringschemes,orbydatabecomingmorewidelyavailable,orboth.Declinesinsamplesizeinrecentyearsisthoughttobeduetonewdatanotyetbeingavailable,ratherthanrepresentingareductioninmonitoringeffort.PopulationtrendswithintheArcticboundaryasdefinedbyCAFF(seeFigure1)werealmostidenticaltothoseof theArcticboundariesusedinthisanalysis.AlthoughtheCAFFdatasetcontains133fewerpopulations,therewasonlyonespeciesdifferencebetweenthetwoindices,sotheyarequalitativelyverysimilar(seeAppendixIIandIII).
AlthoughtheoverallASTIisincreasing,thefollowingsub-indicesrevealthatthesametrendisnotconsistentamongallregions,systemsorgroupsof species.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Num
ber o
f pop
ulat
ions
Arctic Species TrendIndexN Values
Figure 4: Arctic Species Trend Index (with 95% confidence intervals) for all species within the Arctic boundaries and total population (N) values for that year, for the period 1970-2004. (ASTI, n=306 species, 965 populations).
2. Confidence intervals were generated for each index and the values are found in Appendix III of this report. They are not displayed in most figures in order to maintain the clarity of the graphs.
usfws
16Regional results: Arctic boundariesPopulationsintheHigh,LowandSubArcticboundariesshowmarkedlydifferenttrends(Figure5).HighArcticspeciesshowanoveralldeclineinabundanceof 26%withpopulationslevellingoff inthemid-1990s.Similarly,afteraninitialgrowthperiod,SubArcticspeciesappeartohavedeclinedinabundancefromaroundthemid1980s(overalldeclineof 3%).LowArcticspeciesontheotherhandhaveincreasedbyanaverageof 46%overthesametimeperiod.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x Va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
High ArcticLow ArcticSub ArcticASTI
Figure 5: Arctic Species Trend Index for all Arctic species (black line) disaggregated into High Arctic species, Low Arctic species and Sub Arctic species for the period 1970-2005. (All species, n =306 species, 965 populations; High Arctic, n =47 species, 114 populations; Low Arctic, n=194 species, 545 populations; Sub Arctic n=155 species, 306 populations.)
TheHighArcticindexcombinestrendsin47speciesandincludessea-ice-associatedspecies,suchasnarwhalandpolarbear.Thisregionof theArctichasexperiencedthelargestincreaseintemperaturechangetodate[5]andhasalreadyexperienceddramaticreductionsinsea-iceextent(Figure6)withfur-thercontractionof seaicepredictedinthenearfuture[9].Reductioninsea-iceextentlimitsthehabitatavailableformanysea-icedependentHighArcticspeciesandthesespeciesareexpectedtodeclinewithdecliningsea-icecover[10].However,weareunabletoascertaintheextenttowhichsea-iceassociatedspecies,suchaspolarbear,havealreadybeenaffectedbythesechanges.ThetrenddataformostHighArcticspeciesareavailableforonlyafewselectedpopulations(seeBox1)andthereareotherfactorsinfluencingspeciesabundance(e.g.,naturalcycles)thatneedtobeconsidered.Forexample,someter-restrialmammalpopulationsareknowntocyclenaturallyandsomeof thesepopulationshaverecentlybeenexperiencingaperiodof decline(e.g.,BrownandCollaredLemmingpopulationsinGreenlandandCanada;CariboupopulationsfromthenorthernterritoriesinCanada).Theserecentdeclinesarethoughttobepartof anaturalcycleandarecontributingtothedecreasingHighArcticindex.
usfws
17TheSubArcticareapredominantlycoversterrestrialandfresh-
watersystemswithveryfewcoastalandnomarinepopulations.ThisisthemostaccessibleregionintheArctic,andconsequentlyhu-manimpactandland-usechangehavebeengreaterthanintheHighArctic,althoughstillrelativelylowcomparedtonon-Arcticregions.Withclimatechangeandincreasedresourcedevelopmentcoupledwithinvasivespecies,contaminantsandpossibleoverharvesting,theSubArcticmayfaceincreasing,cumulativepressuresthatresultinnegativeimpactsonwildlifepopulations.However,itisunclearatthistimewhatmightbedrivingthesteadydeclineinvertebrateabundancesince1986.
Theindexof LowArcticspeciesispredominantlyareflectionof themarineenvironmentandshowsanaverageincreaseinabundanceoverthetimeperiod.Thespeciesincludedinthisdatasetareprimarilymarinefish,someof which(suchasPollock)changeinabundanceinaccordancewithsea-temperaturefluctuations[11],andmarinemammalspecies(manyof whichhaveshownrecoveriesfrompreviouslyhighlevelsof exploitation[12]).TheseincreasesarelargelyfoundinthePacificwatersof theLowArcticintheEasternBeringSea,thusdemonstratingtheneedforcare-ful interpretationof theLowArcticindex.Theyalsorevealtheshortcomingsthatarestrictedtimelineof biodiversitychangepresents.If populationshadbeenmonitoredsincetheearly1900s,thesmallrecoveryinsomeof thelargemarine-mammalspeciesoverthepastfewdecadeswouldbedwarfedbytheextensivedeclinesthatmarkedthedecadespreceding1970.
Figure 6: Trends in Arctic summer sea-ice extent. Comparison between 1979 to 2000 average, 2007 and 2009 (up to August 31). Source: National Snow and Ice Data Center. Digital media.
usfws
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 18Box 1: Sea-ice-associated speciesArcticsummersea-iceextentreachedarecordminimum(seeFigure6)in2007(39%belowthe1979to2000average)and2008wasthesecond-lowestrecord(reaching34%belowaverage).Inconjunctionwiththesesurprisinglossesinsea-iceextentisthelossof multi-yearicewhichmakesthecurrentthinner,single-yearicemuchmorevulnerabletofurtherreductionsinextent.Itiswellestab-lishedthatfurtherlossesinsea-iceextentaretobeexpectedoverthecomingdecades[9].Howthislossof seaicewillimpactmarinespeciesislessclear.NotallHighArcticspeciesareequallyreliantonthisrapidlychanginghabitat,sothestrengthof thisrelationshipandtheplasticityof thespecieswilldictatetheabilityof anygivenspeciestoadapttofuturechangesinthedistributionof seaice[10].Theicerepresentsahabitatthatmanyspeciesdependon,fromPolarBearstoRingedSeals,sea-birdstofish,andevenalgaeandinvertebratesdirectlyassociatedwithmulti-yearice.SpeciessuchasthePolarBear,NarwhalandRingedSealarehighlyadaptedtothishabitatforforaging,birthingorpredatorevasion[13].PolarBears,forexample,relyalmostentirelyonthemarinesea-iceenvironmentfortheirsurvival,thereforelarge-scalechangesintheirhabitatareexpectedtohavedramaticimpactsonpopulationsizes[14].Inthecaseof theWesternHudsonBayPolarBearpopulation,theincreas-inglylongice-freeseasonisdirectlycorrelatedwithreducedbodyconditionof PolarBearsinthispopulation,therebyinitiatingtheobservedpopulationdeclines[14,15].However,thelackof alinearrelationshipbetweenthischanginghabitatandpopulationabundancemakesitdifficulttopredictex-acteffects.Theextenttowhichthemajorityof speciescanadapttothelossof seaiceandassociatedpreyspeciesremainslargelyunclear[10].Thereisgreatuncertaintyinhowspeciesinteractionswillbeaffectedbythesedramaticchangesandevenbaselinedataonpopulationsizeinsea-ice-dependentspeciesislargelylacking.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Indi
vidu
als
Figure 7: Trends in the Western Hudson Bay Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus)populations [15].
19
System Results
OverviewDivergentpatternsarealsoobservedbetweenthedifferentsystems(marine,freshwaterandterrestrial).Whereasthefreshwaterandmarineindicesincreaseoverthetimeperiod(52%and53%respec-tively),theterrestrialindexshowsanoveralldeclineof 10%,despiteincreasinginthelate1970stomid-1980s(Figure8).However,thedatabehindthefreshwaterindexiscurrentlytoosparse(51species;132populations)tofullyreflectthecircumpolarfreshwatersitua-tion.Themarineindexisrobust(107species;390populations),butitislargelydriven,asistheLowArcticindex,byanoverweightingof populationdatafromtheeasternBeringSea.Morerobustandbalanceddatasetsareneededforthesesystems.Theterrestrialindex,however,doeshaverelativelybalancedanddecentdataanditcomprisesthelargestdatasetwith46%of thetotalnumberof ASTIpopulationscomparedtomarine(40%)andfreshwaterwithonly14%.
Figure 8: Index of terrestrial species disaggregated by Arctic boundary for the period 1970-2004 (High Arctic, n=25 species, 73 populations; Low Arctic, n=66 species, 166 populations; Sub Arctic, n=102 species, 204 populations.)
Theterrestrialindexisfairlystableuntiltheearly1990s,afterwhichthereisasteadydecline,despiteanoveralldramaticincreaseingoosepopulationsoverthesametimeperiod(Figure8).Theoverallmoderatedeclineintheterrestrialindexislargelyareflectionof declines(-28%)interrestrialHighArcticpopula-tions(mostlyherbivores,e.g.,caribou,lemmings),whereasterrestrialLowArcticpopulations(e.g.,LesserSnowGeese[16])haveincreasedby7%andSubArcticpopulationshavedeclined(-5%)slightly(Figure8).TheincreaseintheLowArcticis,inpart,duetothestrongincreaseof goosepopulations.Itcouldalsoreflectecologicalresponsestoclimaticchangeswherebyspecieswithmoresoutherlydistributionshavemovednorthandarenowthriving,whilethenorthernmosttypicalHighArcticspecieshavenowheretomoveto.However,evidenceforthisisnotconclusiveandcumulativefactorsmightbeinvolved.
hannes grobe/awi/wikipedia
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 20
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
Marine
Pacific ocean
Figure 9: Overall index of marine species and index of north Pacific Ocean species for the period 1970-2004. (Marine, n=107 species, 390 populations; Pacific, n=69 species, 176 populations.)
Asmentioned,themarineindexwasoverweightedbypopulationdatafromtheeasternBeringSea.TheincreasingtrendfoundinFigure9forPacificmarinepopulations,islargelydrivenbymammalandfishpopulations.Thisdramaticallyincreasingtrendislargelydrivingtheoverallmarineindex.Manymarinevertebratepopulations(e.g.,marinemammals)intheBeringSeaarerecoveringfromhistoricaloverharvesting[17],aswellasfromrecentchangesinenvironmentalconditions(e.g.,BeringSeaPollock[18])resultingindramaticincreasesinsomespecies’populations.
Furtheranalysiswasconductedfortheterrestrialsystemduetothelargerdatacollections.Thesesmallerscaleindicesthatresultrevealintriguingunderlyingtrendswithintheterrestrialsystem.
Trophic LevelAllspeciesintheASTIwereassignedacategoryaccordingtotheirtrophiclevel:primaryconsumer(herbivores),secondaryconsumer(carnivorespreyingoninvertebrates,fish,smallbirdsand/ormam-mals)ortertiaryconsumers(toppredators).Figure10illustratesthetrendsinabundancefortheprima-ryconsumers,85%of whichareterrestrial.Substantialincreasesinsomepopulationsof theAnatidaefamily(geese,ducksandswans)havebeenobserved[19],sotrendsinprimaryconsumerswereanalysedwithandwithoutspeciesfromtheAnatidaefamily.Whileherbivoresasawholeincreasedslowlyinabundancefrom1970to1990,mostof theincreasewasduetolargeincreasesinAnatidaepopulations.Byremovingtheducks,geeseandswansitcanbeseenthattherewasanoveralldownwardtrendinotherprimaryconsumersby30%between1984and2004.Thereasonsforthisdeclinearenotknownandmaybedue,inpart,tothecyclicalnatureof somespeciesandpopulations(e.g.,BarrenGroundCari-bou).Itmay,however,bealsoattributedtochangingconditionsintundravegetationandmorevariablespringweatherconditions.Inmanypartsof theArctic,shrubshaveincreasedinabundanceandcoverintundrasystemsastheclimatehaswarmedandtheadjacentsea-icecoverhasdeclined[20][21][22].Experimentalwarmingof vegetationplotsintundrasystemshasshownthesameeffectwithacorre-
21spondingdecreaseinlichenandbryophytebiomass[23].ThesechangesareexpectedtobeunfavourableformanyexistingtundraherbivorousspeciessuchasBarrenGroundCaribou[24].Also,theincidenceof icingeventsduetospringrainfallorincreasedfreeze-thawcyclesarethoughttobeontheriseandrepresentanegativeimpactonArcticherbivoresastheicemakesitmoredifficultforgrazerstoaccessforagewithpotentiallycatastrophicresults.Forexample,duringtwowintersinthe1990s,thePearyCariboupopulationinthewesternQueenElizabethIslandswasreducedbymorethan95%.Thiswasduetoheavysnowconditionsandthepresenceof icelayersinthesnowthatmadeitdifficultfortheCariboutoreachgroundforage[25].
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
Herbivores
Herbivores (minus Anatidae)
Figure 10: Indices of all herbivore species and all herbivores excluding the water-bird species (ducks, geese and swans) for the period 1970-2004. (All herbivores, n=66 species, 220 populations; herbivores minus waterbird species, n=55 species, 182 populations.)
Box 2: Caribou/reindeer HumanshavehadarelationshipwithCariboustretchingbacktoUpperPalaeolithictimes,asthe20,000-year-oldcavepaintingsinCantabria,northernSpain,testify.Europewasinthegripof thelastglacialperiod,thelandscapeof northernSpainandsouthernFrancewasborealtundra,MammothsandWoollyRhinoceroswereabundant,andReindeerwereamongthemostimportantfoodspeciesfortheCro-Magnonhunter-gathererpeoplewholivedthere.TodaythatrelationshipcontinuesintheArcticandSubArcticregions,whereindigenouspeoplessuchastheSaamiof ScandinaviaandtheInuitinCanadadependondomesticatedandwildherdsformeat,milkandhides.
Figure11showsaveragetrendsin25NorthAmericanand21EurasianCaribou/Reindeerpopula-tions,andtheaveragetrendacrossall46populations.Thetotalpopulationof wildherdspeakedatabout5.6millionintheearly1990sand2000s,andsincethendeclinedbyaboutathirdoverall[26].ThelargestherdinRussia,theTaimyr,peakedataroundonemillionanimalsin2000.Althoughrecentdeclinesarepartof anaturalcycle,thereisgrowingconcernaboutthecurrentimpactsof globalchangeonRangiferpopulations[27].Threefactorsdifferentiatetherecentperiodof lowabundancefrompreviousdeclinesinpopulations:climatechange,increasedindustrialdevelopmentandmoreefficientharvesting.Geographicallyvariableclimate-changetrendsandcharacteristicextremesinweatherpat-ternshavedirectimpacts,bothpositiveandnegative,onbirthandsurvivalrates,andultimatelyonherd
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 22
productivity.IncreasedindustrialdevelopmentintheNorthaltersactivityanddistributionpatterns.Greateraccesstocaribouandimprovedmobilityof huntersresultsinconsistentlyhighharvestsevenwhenpopulationnumbersarelow.Allthreefactorshavethepotentialtoaffectcurrentdeclinesandprolongrecoverytimes.Itwillbeimportanttounderstandwhatdriversareresponsibleforpopulationdeclinesandtomonitortheoutcomeof recoverystrate-gies[27].
ThepopulationtrendsshowninFigure11areclearlycycli-calandalsoshowstrikingsimilaritiesbetweenEurasiaandNorthAmerica,suggestingthattheremaybecircumpolarfactorsun-derlyingthesetrends.Althoughthecyclicalpatternshavebeen
attributedtoclimaticpatternsinsomepopulations[28],therelationshipbetweenclimateandRangiferabundanceiscomplex.Ratherthanhavingadirectcausaleffect,decadalvariationinclimateislikelytohaveacumulativeinfluenceonabundancethroughsuccessivegenerationsbyaffectingextrinsicandintrinsicfactorssuchasforageavailabilityandfecundity[29].Recentadvancesinestimatinglong-termtrendsinBarrenGroundCaribouabundance[30]mayhelptoshedsomemorelightonthesecomplexinteractions.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
Caribou - allCaribou - North America (25 pops)Caribou - Scandinavia and Russia (21 pops)
Figure 11: Indices for all Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) populations, disaggre-gated into North American and European populations. (All Caribou populations=46, North America=25, Scandinavia and Russia=21).
Taxonomic Results
OverviewLikethesystems,theanalysisof theASTIbytaxonomicclassalsorevealscontrastingtrendsbetweeneachspeciesgroup.Birdscomprise52%of theASTIpopulationsandshowaflattrendoverallwithaslightdeclineinlateryears,until2004.Mammalpopulationsincreased,onaverage,overthe34-yearperiod.Thefluctuationsduringthemid-1980sareduetorapidchangesinabundanceof asmallsetof marine-mammalpopulationsintheArcticOcean(Killer,Sperm,FinandHumpbackwhales).Thisismostlyareflectionof alimitednumberof datasetswithlimitedtime-seriesdataratherthananaccu-ratedepictionaslarge-bodiedmarinemammalsgenerallydon’texhibitsuchmarkedannualchangesinpopulationsize.ThefishindexisnotshownasitisheavilyskewedbymarinefishpopulationsfromtheBeringSea,aneffectwhichhasbeendiscussedinthesystemssection(p.19)of thisreport.
joelle taillon
23
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
Birds
Mammals
Figure 12: Index of ASTI species disaggregated by taxonomic class for the period 1970-2004. (Birds, n=190 species, 503 populations; mammals, n=53 species, 275 populations.)
Birdsarethebeststudiedof thetaxonomicclasses,coveringalargenumberof species,populationsandgeographicareasoverrelativelylongtimeperiods,thusallowingformoredetailedanalysestobeconducted.
Birds
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
BirdsFreshwater birdsMarine birdsTerrestrial birds
Figure 13: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of freshwater, marine and terrestrial birds for the period 1970-2004. (All birds, n=190 species, 503 popu-lations; freshwater, n=35 species, 54 populations; marine, n=37 species, 214 populations; terrestrial, n=118 species, 235 populations.)
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 24Ananalysisof Arcticbirdtrendsbybiome(Figure13)showsthattherelativelystablepatternis
somewhatconsistentinbothmarine-andterrestrial-birdpopulationstherebyreinforcingthetrendseenintheoverallArcticbirdindex.Freshwater-birdpopulationshaveincreasedoverallbetween1970and2004.Thispositivetrendinabundanceinmanyof thefreshwater-birdpopulations,andparticularlyinthecaseof someduckspecies,couldreflecttheimplementationof stricterhuntingregulationsandmore-abundantwintering-groundfoodsourcesthathaveallowedthesespeciestoincreaseinnumber[19].
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x Va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
Geese
All other birds
Terrestrial birds
Figure 14: Index of all terrestrial birds disaggregated into an index without goose species and an index of goose species alone. (All terrestrial birds, n=122 species, 236 populations; Anatidae only, n=13 species, 46 populations; non-Anatidae, n=109 species, 190.)
Box 3: Terrestrial birds Figure 14 shows trends in geese compared to other terrestrial birds. Many goose populations have benefited from both a reduction in the level of hunting and also land-use changes on over-wintering sites which has provided better forage.
These sometimes rapidly increasing populations are driving the goose index in Figure 14. However, this is not a uniform trend across all species of geese. A recent synthesis of Arctic-breeding geese monitoring suggests that 23% of these populations are actually in decline [19].
Migratory birdsMillionsof birdsmigratefromaroundtheEarthtobreedintheArcticeachyear.Atotalof over450birdspeciesareknowntobreedinArcticandSubArcticareas.Of these,395speciesregularlymigrateoutsidetheArcticandSubArctic,linkingtheseregionswithalmostallareasof theplanet(exceptin-landAntarctica)viatheirmigratoryroute.Fourspeciesmigratewithintheregion[31].Morethanhalf of theworld’sshorebirdsandalmost80%of theworld’sgeesebreedintheArcticandSubArctic[32][19].Theindicesabove(Figure15)indicateanoverallincreaseinnon-migrantpopulations,whereasmigratorypopulationsslightlydecreased(-6%).Butthereisnosignificantdifferencebetweenthetrendsinthetwogroups(seeAppendixIII).Thedeclineinmigratorybirdpopulationswouldbemore
25pronouncedif theincreasinggeeseshowninFigure14arenotincluded.Aswell,long-termmonitoringof ArcticmigrantstakesplaceacrosstheEarthatwinteringandstagingsites.Althoughthemigratoryindexinvolves170speciescomprising424populations,manyshorebirddatafrommonitoringstationsoutsidetheArctic(themajorityof whicharedeclining[33])havenotyetbeenincluded.
Unlikeresidentspecies,populationsizesof migratoryspeciescanbeinfluencedbyconditionsatanystageof migrationwithimpactsonlybecomingapparentaftermonitoringatsubsequentstages[34].Manywadersorshorebirdsareindecline,butthereasonsarenotfullyunder-stood([35][36][33]).AlthoughchangesintheArctic,suchassnowcover,humidityandincreasingshrubcovermayimpactshorebirds[37],therearemanyotherfactorsinside(e.g.,changingdistributionandextentof tundrawetlands)andoutsidetheArctictoconsiderinexplainingthetrends.Forexample,pre-nestingandegg-layingperiodsaremajorenergeticbottlenecksacrosstheentireArcticregion[38].Warmertemperaturesinspringandsummeroverlargepartsof theArctictundracanbelargelybeneficialforshorebirdpopulations,however,therecentobserveddeclinesaremostlyattributedtothreatsoutsidetheArcticregion.Changesinhabitatandfoodavailabilityonkeystopoversitesarecrucialforthesurvivalof shorebirdpopulations.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Inde
x Va
lue
(mea
n an
nual
rate
of c
hang
e)
Migrant birds
Nonmigrant birds
Figure 15: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of migrant and non-migrant bird populations for the period 1970-2004. (All birds, n=190 species, 503 populations; migrants, n=170 species, 424 populations; non-migrants, n=29 species, 79 populations.)
donna dewhurst/usfws
Arc
tic
Spec
ies T
rend
Inde
x 26
ASTI in the Global Context TheLivingPlanetIndex(LPI),whichprovidesameasureof thetrendsinvertebrateabundanceacrosstheglobe,hasbeensteadilydecliningsincetheearly1980s.ThedifferencebetweentheGlobalLPIandtheASTIislargelyduetorecentdeclinesinthetropics.ThetemperateLPIshowsaverysimilartrendtotheArcticSpeciesTrendIndexwithanoverallincreaseof almost20%since1970.Thesevaryingregionaltrajectoriesarethoughttobeareflectionof recenthuman-useanddevelopmentpatterns.Tropicalregionspriorto1970experiencedrelativelylittledevelopmentpressures.Sincetheearly1960s,thisregionhasexperiencedrapidlyincreas-ingdevelopmentpressureslargelyresultinginlarge-scalehabitat
conversionandloss.Incontrast,themajorityof large-scalehabitatlossandconversionintemperateregionstookplacepriorto1950,withconversiontoagricultureamongthemaindrivers.TheincreasingtrendinthetemperateLPIislikelytoreflectrecoveryof sometemperatevertebratespeciesfromthesehistoricalpressuresandincreasingabundanceof speciesbenefittingfromtheseland-usechanges.Whilemostof theArctichasnotexperiencedlarge-scalehabitatconversionorloss,theincreaseintheASTIisthoughttobepartlyduetotherecoveryof somevertebratepopulations(e.g.,marinemammalsandgeese)fromhistoricaloverharvesting,aswellasincreasesinsomefishpopulations,particularlyintheBeringSea.ThedeclineintheHighArcticindex,wheredevelopmentandharvestingpressuresarevirtu-allynon-existentisaconcernandcouldbeanearlyindicationof theresponseof HighArcticvertebratepopulationstoachangingclimateanditsconsequentchanges,suchasinthephysicalstructureof HighArctichabitats(e.g.,seaice).
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year
Inde
x Va
lue
Arctic Species Trend IndexGlobal LPITemperate LPITropical LPI
Figure 16: Global Living Planet Index (LPI) disaggregated into temperate and tropical indices and the Arctic Species Trend Index for the period 1970-2004. (Global LPI, n=2093 species, 6,433 populations; temperate LPI, n=1,329 species, 4,638 populations; tropical LPI, n=858 spe-cies, 1,795 populations; ASTI, n=306 species, 965 populations.)
usfws
27
DiscussionThisreportdescribestheaveragetrendsin965populationsof 306vertebratespeciestogiveaninitialindicatorof changesinArcticbiodiversityover34years.Therewasameanoverallincreaseinabundancebetween1970and2004.Thisincreasingtrend,however,isnotconsistentacrossallspecies,systemsorregions.DeclineswereevidentintheHighArcticamongterrestrialpopulationsandherbi-vores(excludingwaterbirds).
Thetaxonomicspreadof dataintheASTI(formammalsandbirds)setsaverygoodbaselinewithpopulationsfrom35%of allknownArcticvertebratespeciesrepresented.However,spatialandtemporalcoveragevarieswidelyandamorecomprehensivedatasetisneededinordertoreducebiasandtoallowforfiner-scaleanalysis.Wherethereisanimbalanceincoverageinasubsetof data,theresultingtrendsmaybedrivenbythedominantregionorspecies.Forexample,theincreaseinthemarineindexisskewedtowardstrendsfromAlaskanwaterswheremonitor-ingeffortshaveyieldedfarmoredatathaninotherArcticseas.Therefore,cautiousinterpretationof theresultsisrequired.Itisanticipatedthat,withgreaterdatacontributions,futureASTIreportswillbeabletoprovideamorerobustandaccuratedepictionof overallandregionaltrends.
Theseinitialresultssuggestthatimpactsof changinglanduse,climatechange,invasivespeciesandexploitationhavenotnegativelyimpactedoverallvertebrateabundanceintheArcticduringthepast34years.However,theoverallincreaseinvertebrateabundancemasksunderlyingtrendswheresomespeciesandpopulationsduringthisperiodhavethrivedorremainedrelativelyflatwhileothershavedeclined,possiblyinresponsetohuman-inducedchanges.Inparticular,theHighArcticandterrestrialtrendsareof concernastheymayreflectearlyresponsetoexpectedchangesintheseecosystems.Indeed,theobserveddecliningtrendsinthesesystemsarebroadlyconsistentwithpredictedecosystemandwildliferesponsetoclimatechange.Thesepredictionsincludereductionsinabundanceof HighArcticspeciesdependentonseaice,reductionsinextentof HighArcticterrestrialecosystems(e.g.,tundra)andin-creasedoverallabundanceof SubArcticwildlifeasmoresoutherlydistributedspeciesmovenorthwards[5].Futureanalysesmustpaycloseattentiontothesesystems.Despitethisoveralltrend,acceleratingchangesintheArctic’sphysicalsystemlargelyattributedtoclimatechangeareexpectedtocausefunda-mentalchangestotheArctic’secosystemsandthebiodiversitythesesupport.Increasingandaccelerat-ingpressureshighlighttheimportanceof enhancingcurrentmonitoringprograms,integratingtheseprogramstoresearchandexpandingcoveragetolesswell-coveredspeciesandregions.Certainregions,suchastheHighArctic,areshowingpopulationsalreadyindecline.ClimaticchangesalreadyoccurringintheArcticarelikelytobeoneof theprocessesbehindthesedeclines,butfurtherresearchisneededtoestablishtheprecisemechanismormechanismsinforceandtheirrelativeinfluenceonthesedecliningtrends.MonitoringspeciesabundanceintheremoteArcticenvironmentpresentsanumberof logisti-calobstaclesthatneedtobeovercome.Thisiscriticalforgroupssuchassea-ice-associatedspecies,forwhichobtainingregularpopulation-trenddatawillbeof paramountimportanceastheregionwarms[39].
TheArcticisanenvironmentwherepronounced,prolongedandoftensynchronouspopulationcy-clesareanaturalphenomena—insomecasesassociatedwithnaturalclimatefluctuations[28].Thiscanmakedirectinterpretationdifficultwhenlookingattrendsamonggroupsof speciesandoveralimitedtime-frame(34years).Butwithacomprehensivedatasetthatisbroadintaxonomic,geographicandtemporalscope,theindexcanbedisaggregatedtohelpelucidatepatternsoutsideof naturalvariation.Thesepatternscanshedlightuponpossiblecasualmechanismsandtheirrelativeinfluence.Thisreporthasillustratedmanyof thesepatternsandhighlightstheopportunitiesforenhancedunderstandingthatfutureanalysiscanprovide.
usfws
28AswithotherArcticenvironmentalindices(e.g.,sea-icecover),theASTIrepresentsanimportant
indicatorof thestateof theArctic.Withincreasingdatacoverage,itisexpectedtoprovideanearlywarningsystemfortheworldwithregardtotheimpactsof climatechangeandotherhumanstress-orsonbiodiversity.ArobustASTIwillbeabletodepictatanearlystagesystemresponses,ecologicalregimeshiftsandsubtlechangesintheArcticenvironmentthatwouldotherwisenotbenoticed.Itsabilitytoserveasanearlywarningsystemverymuchdependsonthenumberof participatingmonitor-ingnetworksandadequatedatacoverage.
29
AcknowledgementsWewouldliketothankForeignAffairsandInternationalTradeCanadaandEnvironmentCanadaforprovidingthefundingforthisproject.We’dalsoliketothankallCAFFcountryrepresentativesfortheirhelpinfacilitatingthedeliveryof datatomaketheArcticSpeciesTrendIndexmorerobust.Inparticu-larwe’dliketothankTomBarryfromtheCAFFsecretariat,AevarPetersen(Iceland)andSuneSohlberg(Sweden)fortheiractiveroleinprovidingdatafortheASTI.Thisreportandtheindexwouldnothavebeenpossibletocompilewithoutnumerouscontributors.Weareextremelygratefultothefollowingorganizationsandindividualsthathelpedandcontributedwithpublishedandunpublisheddataandinmanycasescommentsonthedraftreport.
UnitedStates:SueMoore,TimRagen,ScottSchliebe,SimonTokumine,VernonByrd,JenniferBoldt,DonDragoo,DavidIronsandRichardLanctot
Canada:VillyChristensen,KathyDickson,GillesGauthier,GrantGilchrist,AnneGunn,TrishHayes,CharlesKrebs,GuyMorrison,DaveMossop,JimReist,DonRussell,RickWardandDirkZeller
Russia:AlexanderKondratiev,ElenaLappo,MikhailSolovievandVassilySpiridonov
Greenland:JannikHansen,FlemmingMerkelandHansMeltofte
Norway:PerArneberg,SteinNilsen,KnutSunnanaaandDagVongraven
Sweden:JohanBodegardandRobertFranzen
Finland:JaakoErkinaro
Germany:HelmutKruckenberg
30
References1. Collen,B.,J.Loh,S.Whitmee,L.McRae,R.Amin,andJ.E.M.Baillie.“Monitoring
changeinvertebrateabundance:theLivingPlanetIndex”.ConservationBiology23(2)2009:p.317-327.
2. Hinzman,L.D.,NeilD.Bettez,W.RobertBolton,F.StuartChapin,MarkB.Dyurgerov,ChrisL.Fastie,BradGriffith,RobertD.Hollister,AllenHope,HenryP.Huntington,AnneM.Jensen,GensuoJ.Jia,TorreJorgenson,DouglasL.Kane,DavidR.Klein,GaryKofinas,AmandaH.Lynch,AndreaH.Lloyd,A.DavidMcguire,FrederickE.Nelson,WalterC.Oechel,ThomasE.Osterkamp,CharlesH.Racine,VladimirE.Romanovsky,RobertS.Stone,DouglasA.Stow,MatthewSturm,CraigE.Tweedie,GeorgeL.Vourlitis,MarilynD.Walker,DonaldA.Walker,PatrickJ.Webber,J.M.Welker,K.S.Winker,andK.Yoshikawa.“EvidenceAndImplicationsOf RecentClimateChangeInNorthernAlaskaAndOtherArcticRegions”.ClimateChange722005:p.251-298.
3. Post,E.,M.C.Forchhammer,M.S.Bret-Harte,T.V.Callaghan,T.R.Christensen,B.Elber-ling,A.D.Fox,O.Gilg,D.S.Hik,T.T.Hoye,R.A.Ims,E.Jeppesen,D.R.Klein,J.Mad-sen,A.D.McGuire,S.Rysgaard,D.E.Schindler,I.Stirling,M.P.Tamstorf,N.J.C.Tyler,R.vanderWal,J.Welker,P.A.Wookey,N.M.Schmidt,andP.Aastrup.“EcologicaldynamicsacrosstheArcticassociatedwithrecentclimatechange”.Science3252009:p.1355-1358.
4. IPCC.CambridgeUniversityPress,Ed.“FourthAssessmentReportof theIntergovern-mentalPanelonClimateChange,IPCC(WGI&II)”.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2007.
5. ACIA.ArcticClimateImpactAssessment.Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress:,2005.Page1042.
6. Stroeve,J.,M.M.Holland,W.Meier,T.Scambos,andM.Serreze,“ArcticSeaIceDecline:Fasterthan forecast”.GeophysicalResearchLetters34(L09501)2007.
7. CAFFInternationalSecretariat.“ArcticFloraandFauna:StatusandConservation”inChapter9StatusandTrendsinSpeciesandPopulations.2005.
8. AMAP.“AMAPAssessmentReport:ArcticPollutionIssues”.ArcticMonitoringandAs-sessmentProgramme(AMAP):Oslo,Norway.1998.Pages.Xii+859.
9. Holland,M.M.,C.M.Bitz,andB.Tremblay.“FutureAbruptReductionsintheSummerArcticSeaIce”.GeophysicalResearchLetters33(L23503)2006.
10. Moore,S.E.andH.P.Huntington.“ArcticMarineMammalsandClimateChange:Im-pactsandResilience”.EcologicalApplications.200818(sp2).PagesS157-S165.
11. NPFMC.“NorthPacificFisheryManagementCounci,EcosystemConsiderationsfor2009”.JointInstitutefortheStudyof theAtmosphereandOcean(JISAO)andtheSchoolof AquaticandFishery2008.Pages77-80.
12. Reeves,R.R.,B.D.Smith,E.A.Crespo,andG.NotarbartolodiSciara.I.S.C.S.Group,ed.Dolphins,WhalesandPorpoises:2002–2010ConservationActionPlanfortheWorld’sCetaceans.Gland,Switzerland&Cambridge,UK,2003.Pagesix+139.
13. Laidre,K.L.,I.Stirling,L.F.Lowry,O.Wiig,M.P.Heide-Jorgensen,andS.H.Ferguson,“QuantifyingTheSensitivityof ArcticMarineMammalstoClimate-InducedHabitatChange”.EcologicalApplications.18.2(2008):S97-S125.
3114. Stirling,I.,N.J.Lunn,andJ.Iacozza,“Long-TermTrendsinthePopulationEcologyof
PolarBearsinWesternHudsonBayinRelationtoClimaticChange”.Arctic,1999.52(3):p.294-306.
15. Aars,J.,N.J.Lunn,andA.E.Derocher.“PolarBears:Proceedingsof the14thWorkingMeetingof theIUCN/SSCPolarBearSpecialistGroup”.2005.Seattle,Washington,USA:IUCN,Gland,SwitzerlandandCambridge,UK.
16. Abraham,K.F.andR.L.Jefferies.1997.“HighGoosePopulations:Causes,ImpactsandImplications”.Batt,B.(Ed.),“ArcticEcosystemsinPeril:Reportof theArcticGooseHabitatWorkingGroup”,ArcticGooseJointVentureSpecialPublication,U.S.FishandWildlifeService,WashingtonDCandCanadianWildlifeService,Ottawa,Ontario,pp.7–72.
17. George,J.C.,J.Zeh,R.Suydam,andC.Clark.“AbundanceandPopulationTrendof WesternArcticBowheadWhalesSurveyedNearBarrow,Alaska”.2006.MarineMammalScience.20(4):p.755-773.
18. Overland,J.2008.“FisheriesintheBeringSea”.InJ.Richter-Menge,J.Overland,M.Svoboda,J.Box,M.J.J.E.Loonen,A.Proshutinsky,V.Romanovsky,D.Russell,C.D.Sawatzky,M.Simpkins,R.Armstrong,I.Ashik,L.-S.Bai,D.Bromwich,J.Cappelen,E.Carmack,J.Comiso,B.Ebbinge,I.Frolov,J.C.Gascard,M.Itoh,G.J.Jia,R.Krishfield,F.McLaughlin,W.Meier,N.Mikkelsen,J.Morison,T.Mote,S.Nghiem,D.Perovich,I.Polyakov,J.D.Reist,B.Rudels,U.Schauer,A.Shiklomanov,K.Shimada,V.Sokolov,M.Steele,M.-L.Timmermans,J.Toole,B.Veenhuis,D.Walker,J.Walsh,M.Wang,A.Wei-dick,C.Zöckler(2008).“ArcticReportCard2008”.
19. Zöckler,C.,“TheRoleof theGooseSpecialistGroupintheCircumpolarBiodiversityMonitoringProgramme(CBMP)”.Vogelwelt,2008.129:p.127-130.
20. Lantz,T.C.andS.V.Kokelj,“IncreasingRatesof RetrogressiveThawSlumpActivityintheMackenzieDeltaRegion,NWT,Canada”.GeophysicalResearchLetters,2008.35.
21. Sturm,M.,CharlesRacine,andK.Tape,“ClimateChange:IncreasingShrubAbundanceintheArctic”.Nature,2001.411:p.546-547.
22. Wahren,C.-H.A.,M.D.Walker,andM.S.Bret-Harte,VegetationResponsesinAlaskanArcticTundraAfter8Yearsof aSummerWarmingandWinterSnowManipulationEx-periment.GlobalChangeBiology,2005.11:p.537–552.
23. Arft,A.M.,M.D.Walker,J.Gurevitch,J.M.Alatalo,M.S.Bret-Harte,M.Dale,M.Di-emer,F.Gugerli,G.H.R.Henry,M.H.Jones,R.D.Hollister,I.S.Jonsdottir,K.Laine,E.Levesque,G.M.Marion,U.Molau,P.Molgaard,U.Nordenhall,V.Raszhivin,C.H.Rob-inson,G.Starr,A.Stenstrom,M.Stenstrom,O.Totland,P.L.Turner,L.J.Walker,P.J.Web-ber,J.M.Welker,andP.A.Wookey,Responsesof TundraPlantstoExperimentalWarming:Meta-Analysisof theInternationalTundraExperiment.EcologicalMonographs,1999.69(4):p.491-511.
24. Rees,W.G.,F.M.Stammler,F.S.Danks,andP.Vitebsky,Vulnerabilityof EuropeanRein-deerHusbandrytoGlobalChange.ClimateChange,2007.87(1-2):p.199-217.
25. Miller,F.L.andA.Gunn,“CatastrophicDie-off of PearyCaribouontheWesternQueenElizabethIslands,CanadianHighArctic”.Arctic,2003.56:p.686-702.
26. Russell,D.andA.Gunn,“2010BiodiversityIndicator—WildReindeerandCaribou.2009:CoordinatorCircumArcticRangiferMonitoringandAssessmentNetwork(CAR-MA)”,NorthernResearchInstitute,YukonCollege,Yukon,Canada.
3227. Gunn,A.,DonRussell,RobertG.WhiteandGaryKofinas.2009.“Facingafutureof
change:Wildmigratorycaribouandreindeer”.Arctic.Vol.62,No.3(September2009)P.iii–vi.
28. Aanes,R.,B.-E.Saether,F.M.Smith,E.J.Cooper,P.A.Wookey,andN.A.Oritsland,“TheArcticOscillationPredictsEffectsof ClimateChangeinTwoTrophicLevelsinaHighArcticEcosystem”.EcologyLetters,2002.5(3):p.445-453.
29. Gunn,A.,“Voles,LemmingsandCaribou—PopulationCyclesRevisited?”Rangifer,2003.14:p.105-111.
30. Zalatan,R.,A.Gunn,andG.H.R.Henry,“Long-TermAbundancePatternsof Barren-GroundCaribouUsingTramplingScarsonRootsof PiceaMarianaintheNorthwestTerritories,Canada”.Arctic,AntArctic,andAlpineResearch,2006.38(4):p.624-630.
31. Scott,D.,“GlobalOverviewof theConservationof MigratoryArcticBreedingBirdsOutsidetheArctic”,in“CAFFTechRep.No.4”.1998.p.133p.
32. Delany,S.andD.Scott,WaterbirdPopulationEstimatesFourthEdition.2006:WetlandsInternational,Wageningen.239p.
33. Stroud,D.A.,A.Baker,D.E.Blanco,N.C.Davidson,S.Delany,B.Ganter,R.Gill,P.González,L.Haanstra,R.I.G.Morrison,T.Piersma,D.A.Scott,O.Thorup,R.West,J.Wilson,andC.Zöckler,“TheConservationandPopulationStatusof theWorld’sWad -ersattheTurnof theMillennium”,inWaterbirdsAroundtheWorld,G.C.Boere,C.A.Galbraith,andD.A.Stroud,Editors.2006,TheStationeryOffice,Edinburgh,UK.p.pp.643-648.
34. Newton,I.,“PopulationLimitationinMigrants”.Ibis,2004.146:p.197-226.
35. Morrison,G.R.I.,Y.Aubry,R.W.Butler,G.W.Beyresbergen,G.M.Donaldson,C.L.Gratto-Trevor,P.W.Hicklin,V.H.Johnston,andR.K.Ross,“DeclinesinNorthAmericanShorebirdPopulations”.“WaderStudyGroupBulletin”,2001.94:p.34-38.
36. Zöckler,C.,S.Delany,andW.Hagemeijer,“WaderPopulationsAreDeclining—HowWillWeElucidatetheReasons?”.“WaderStudyGroupBulletin”,2003.100:p.202-211.
37. Johnson,J.A.,R.B.Lanctot,B.A.Andres,J.R.Bart,S.C.Brown,S.J.Kendall,andD.C.Payer,“Distributionof BreedingShorebirdsontheArcticCoastalPlainof Alaska”.Arc-tic,2007.60(3):p.277-293.
38. Meltofte,H.,T.Piersma,H.Boyd,B.Mccaffery,B.Ganter,V.V.Golovnyuk,K.Graham,T.Gratto-,C.L,R.I.G.Morrison,E.Nol,H.-U.Rösner,D.Schamel,H.Schekkerman,M.Y.Soloviev,P.S.Tomkovich,D.M.Tracy,I.Tulp,andL.Wennerberg,“Effectsof Cli-mateVariationintheBreedingEcologyof ArcticShorebirds”.MoGBioscience,2007.59:p.48p.
39. Simpkins,M.,K.M.Kovacs,K.Laidre,andL.Lowry,“AFrameworkforMonitoringArcticMarineMammals—Findingsof aWorkshopSponsoredbytheU.S.MarineMam-malCommissionandU.S.FishandWildlifeService”,Valencia,March2007,in“CAFFCBMPReportNo.16”.2007,CAFFInternationalSecretariat.
40. Loh,J.,R.E.Green,T.Ricketts,J.F.Lamoreux,M.Jenkins,V.Kapos,andJ.Randers,“TheLivingPlanetIndex:UsingSpeciesPopulationTimeSeriesToTrackTrendsinBiodiver-sity”.PhilosophicalTransactionsof theRoyalSocietyof LondonB,2005.360:p.289-295.
3341. InternationalHydrographicOrganisation,Limitsof theOceansandSeas,3rdEdition,in
SpecialPublicationno.23.1953,InternationalHydrographicorganization:Monte-Carlo.p.1-42.
42. FisheriesCentre,“SeaAroundUs,2009.Aglobaldatabaseonmarinefisheriesandeco-systems”.2009,FisheriesCentre,Universityof BritishColumbia,Vancouver.
34
Appendix I: Technical Notes
Arctic Species Trend IndexThespeciespopulationdatausedtocalculatetheArcticindicesaregatheredfromavarietyof sourcesprimarilypublishedinscientificjournals,butalsofromgreyliteraturewherestudiesmeettheappropri-atestandard[1].Alldatausedinconstructingtheindicesaretimeseriesof eitherpopulationsize,den-sity,abundanceoraproxyof abundance.Theperiodcoveredbythedatarunsbetween1950and2004.Annualdatapointswereinterpolatedfortimeserieswithsixormoredatapointsusingageneralizedadditivemodellingframeworkorbyassumingaconstantannualrateof changefortimeserieswithlessthansixdatapoints[1][40].Theaveragerateof changeineachyearacrossallspecieswascalculated.Theaverageannualratesof changeinsuccessiveyearswerechainedtogethertomakeanindex,withtheindexvaluein1970setto1.Weusedabootstrapre-samplingtechniquetogenerateconfidencelimitsaroundtheindexvalues;thesearenotshowntoavoidover-complicatingthefigure.Theindiceswereaggregatedaccordingtothehierarchyof indicesshowninFigure17.MethodsaredescribedindetailedinCollenetal.(2009)[1]andLohetal.(2005)[40].
Data tagging
ArcticlocationEach species population was assigned to a division of the Arctic system depending on its geo-graphic location. The Arctic system was classified into two divisions: CAFF boundary and Arctic boundaries (see Figure 1). The Arctic region was subdivided into three further divisions of High, Low and Sub Arctic based on floristic boundaries [8]. A species population could be assigned to a single division or both, i.e., a species population may be present within an Arctic boundary and the CAFF boundary or in one or the other. Arctic division indices were calculated giving equal weight to each species.
SystemEach species population was classified as being terrestrial, freshwater or marine, according to which system it is most dependent on for survival and reproduction. Populations were divided by the ocean basin (Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific) they inhabit for the marine analysis. The divisions for these were based on the boundary of the Arctic Ocean [41].
Trophic levelEach species was assigned to a trophic level: primary consumers, secondary consumers and ter-tiary consumers. Marine fish species were categorised based on the trophic level assigned for the Marine Trophic Index [42].
Figure 17: Hierarchy of indices within the Arctic Species Trend Index. Eachpopulation carries equal weight within each species and each species carries equal weight within the Arctic Species Trend Index.
Arctic Species Trend Index
Species 1 Species 2 Species 3
Population 1 Population 2
35
Appendix II: Species and Population Numbers in the ASTI Dataset
CAFF boundary1. Populations
FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL
FISH 60 94 154
AMPHIBIAN 3 3
BIRD 57 188 233 478MAMMAL 3 54 140 197TOTAL 123 336 373 832
2. SpeciesFRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL
FISH 13 48 61AMPHIBIAN 2 2BIRD 34 37 118 189MAMMAL 1 22 30 53TOTAL 50 107 148 305
High/Low/Sub Arctic boundaries combined3. Populations
FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL
FISH 72 112 184AMPHIBIAN 3 3BIRD 54 214 235 503MAMMAL 3 64 208 275TOTAL 132 390 443 965
4. Species
FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL
FISH 13 48 61AMPHIBIAN 2 2BIRD 35 37 118 190MAMMAL 1 22 30 53TOTAL 51 107 148 306
36High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by class5. Populations
HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC
FISH 3 158 23AMPHIBIAN 1 2BIRD 81 243 179MAMMAL 30 143 102TOTAL 114 545 306
6. SpeciesHIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC
FISH 3 58 10AMPHIBIAN 1 1BIRD 36 88 122MAMMAL 8 47 22TOTAL 47 194 155
High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by system7. Populations
HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC
FRESHWATER 8 68 56MARINE 33 311 46TERRESTRIAL 73 166 204TOTAL 114 545 306
8. Species
HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC
FRESHWATER 6 27 35MARINE 16 101 18TERRESTRIAL 25 66 102TOTAL 47 194 155
37Marine oceans by class 9. Populations
ARCTIC ATLANTIC PACIFIC TOTAL
FISH 18 21 73 112BIRD 112 31 71 214MAMMAL 29 3 32 64TOTAL 159 55 176 390
10. SpeciesARCTIC ATLANTIC PACIFIC TOTAL
FISH 11 7 37 55BIRD 28 13 18 59MAMMAL 16 2 14 32TOTAL 55 22 69 146
Regions (Greenland and North America)11. Populations
NORTH AMERICA EUROPE/ASIA
HIGH ARCTIC 98 16LOW ARCTIC 282 263SUB ARCTIC 112 194TOTAL 492 473
12. Species
NORTH AMERICA EUROPE/ASIA
HIGH ARCTIC 45 10LOW ARCTIC 118 117SUB ARCTIC 88 72TOTAL 251 199
38
Appendix III: Index and Confidence Interval Values for Each of the Indices
Index 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004ASTI Index 1.00 1.04 1.13 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.14 1.16 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.98 1.05 1.10 1.08 1.07 1.01 1.02 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.11 1.22 1.31 1.33 1.35 1.28 1.32CAFF Boundary Index 1.00 1.04 1.13 1.18 1.18 1.19 1.14 1.17 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.98 1.05 1.08 1.06 1.07 1.01 1.03 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.11 1.21 1.29 1.31 1.34 1.29 1.33High Arctic Index 1.00 0.91 0.87 0.77 0.74 0.72 0.73 0.74 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.80 0.76 0.65 0.60 0.58 0.57 0.57 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.01 0.98 0.89 0.90 0.91 0.94 0.96Low Arctic Index 1.00 1.04 1.18 1.31 1.35 1.45 1.33 1.46 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.93 1.03 1.11 1.12 1.16 1.07 1.15 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.17 1.35 1.53 1.62 1.78 1.66 1.83Sub Arctic Index 1.00 1.04 1.11 1.17 1.12 1.05 1.00 0.97 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.98 1.02 1.06 1.00 0.93 0.89 0.85 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.13 1.22 1.29 1.25 1.18 1.14 1.11Marine Index 1.00 1.06 1.23 1.45 1.50 1.60 1.51 1.53 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.94 1.06 1.21 1.23 1.27 1.19 1.19 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.20 1.45 1.75 1.86 2.00 1.89 1.96Terrestrial Index 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.06 1.03 0.97 0.93 0.90 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.94 0.97 0.96 0.92 0.85 0.81 0.78 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.07 1.14 1.17 1.15 1.11 1.08 1.05Freshwater Index 1.00 1.19 1.28 1.31 1.31 1.43 1.25 1.52 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.91 0.95 0.96 0.95 1.02 0.87 1.03 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.60 1.76 1.81 1.85 2.07 1.83 2.26Birds Index 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.08 1.07 1.04 0.99 0.98 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.93 0.88 0.86 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.05 1.13 1.18 1.17 1.17 1.12 1.11Fishes Index 1.00 1.16 1.35 1.70 1.88 1.93 1.68 1.96 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.87 0.99 1.20 1.30 1.32 1.12 1.28 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.59 1.89 2.44 2.77 2.86 2.56 3.01Mammals Index 1.00 1.05 1.18 1.29 1.23 1.33 1.31 1.33 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.84 0.90 0.96 0.87 0.93 0.90 0.91 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.28 1.53 1.71 1.74 1.92 1.90 1.93Arctic Ocean Index 1.00 1.10 1.07 0.94 0.89 1.03 1.07 1.07 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.99 0.91 0.77 0.67 0.76 0.78 0.77 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.23 1.23 1.13 1.16 1.39 1.47 1.48Atlantic Ocean Index 1.00 1.22 1.15 1.13 1.04 1.00 0.97 0.96 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.85 0.77 0.74 0.67 0.64 0.61 0.60 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.83 1.83 1.81 1.66 1.62 1.59 1.58Pacific Ocean Index 1.00 0.93 1.24 1.77 2.01 1.98 1.67 1.66 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.79 1.01 1.39 1.53 1.50 1.24 1.19 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.10 1.54 2.26 2.63 2.65 2.30 2.30Terrestrial Birds Index 1.00 1.00 1.07 1.05 1.02 0.98 0.94 0.90 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.94 0.99 0.96 0.91 0.84 0.80 0.76 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.07 1.15 1.17 1.17 1.14 1.11 1.07Terrestrial Mammals Index 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.09 1.08 0.94 0.94 0.98 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.75 0.69 0.76 0.75 0.65 0.64 0.66 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.30 1.31 1.52 1.51 1.33 1.38 1.44Terrestrial High Arctic Index 1.00 0.93 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.79 0.73 0.72 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.80 0.79 0.78 0.77 0.66 0.60 0.58 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.04 0.93 0.88 0.87
39
Terrestrial Low Arctic Index 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.02 1.03 1.09 1.01 1.07 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.78 0.79 0.72 0.66 0.64 0.57 0.59 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.14 1.28 1.44 1.62 1.86 1.76 1.87Terrestrial Sub Arctic Index 1.00 1.04 1.08 1.10 1.07 0.99 1.01 0.95 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 0.96 0.89 0.89 0.84 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.11 1.17 1.20 1.18 1.10 1.14 1.09Herbivores Index 1.00 1.03 1.11 1.17 1.17 1.08 1.08 1.08 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.94 1.02 1.06 1.04 0.94 0.93 0.92 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.12 1.23 1.32 1.33 1.25 1.27 1.28Herbivores (Minus Anatidae) Index 1.00 1.03 1.02 1.04 0.97 0.83 0.78 0.75 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.95 0.93 0.94 0.85 0.72 0.66 0.63 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.12 1.13 1.17 1.10 0.97 0.92 0.90Freshwater Birds Index 1.00 1.03 1.07 1.13 1.23 1.28 1.22 1.43 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.81 0.82 0.84 0.91 0.93 0.88 0.99 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.33 1.39 1.55 1.71 1.80 1.72 2.06Marine Birds Index 1.00 0.99 1.04 1.15 1.09 1.11 1.03 0.96 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.92 0.94 1.00 0.93 0.88 0.81 0.72 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.06 1.15 1.32 1.32 1.40 1.34 1.27Terrestrial Birds Index 1.00 1.00 1.07 1.05 1.02 0.98 0.94 0.90 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.94 0.99 0.96 0.91 0.84 0.80 0.76 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.07 1.15 1.17 1.17 1.14 1.11 1.07Terrestrial Geese Index 1.00 0.87 1.24 1.49 1.80 1.92 2.47 2.12 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.60 0.82 0.99 1.15 1.26 1.55 1.30 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.19 1.78 2.11 2.66 2.92 4.02 3.53Terrestrial Birds (Minus Geese) Index 1.00 1.02 1.05 1.02 0.97 0.93 0.87 0.85 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.92 0.86 0.79 0.74 0.71 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.07 1.12 1.13 1.10 1.09 1.03 1.01Migrant Birds Index 1.00 0.98 1.04 1.06 1.02 0.98 0.94 0.94 Lower C.L. 1.00 0.93 0.97 0.97 0.92 0.86 0.82 0.81 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.04 1.12 1.16 1.14 1.12 1.08 1.09Non-Migrant Birds Index 1.00 1.08 1.14 1.19 1.30 1.34 1.25 1.20 Lower C.L. 1.00 1.01 1.06 1.09 1.16 1.11 1.03 0.96 Upper C.L. 1.00 1.15 1.23 1.30 1.47 1.64 1.56 1.51Caribou Index 1.00 0.71 0.91 1.37 1.64 1.56 1.29 0.90 Lower C.L. Upper C.L.Nearctic Caribou Index 1.00 0.63 0.80 1.25 1.52 1.48 1.05 0.68 Lower C.L. Upper C.L.Palearctic Caribou Index 1.00 0.82 1.05 1.51 1.75 1.59 1.66 1.20 Lower C.L. Upper C.L.
