Transcript Towards developing ecosystem-based assessments of marine and

Scientific tools for ecosystembased management (other than
modeling): EcoQO, Indicators and
Background values
Eugeniusz Andrulewicz
Sea Fisheries Institute, Gdynia
Department of Fisheries Oceanography
and Marine Ecology
Political background for
the ecosystem-based management
• Rio Summit Meeting, 1992
• OSPAR (Bergen Declaration, 2002)
• OSPAR/HELCOM (Bremervaven Declaration,
2004)
• Mediterranean Sea – MED POL
• Black Sea – Bucharest Convention
• EU Marine Strategy, 2005
ICES – scientific advisory body for the ecosystembased management for the North Sea and oter
Northern Atlantic Seas
Environmental concerns/problems;
case: Baltic Sea
• Excessive eutrophication: decrease of visibility,
toxic blooms, oxygen problems, demersl fish decline
• Contamination of ecosystem by harmful
substances: water, sediments, biota
• Ovefishing: commercial fish stock depletetion
• Biodiversity loss: loss of some macrophytes and
som fish species
• Oil pollution: contamination by PAHs
• Other concerns: invasive species, dumping of
dredge spoils, chemical weapon
Ecosystem-based management
tools
• An Ecological Quality Objective (EcoQO): is the
desired level of an ecological quality (EcoQ).
Such a level may be set in relation to a reference
level.
• Ecological Quality Elements (Indicators): are the
individual aspects of overall Ecological Quality
Definitions taken from: OSPAR
(Bergen Declaration, 2002)
Definition of indicator
“A
parameter, or a value derived from
parameters,
which points to / provides information
about /describes the state of a phenomenon
/ environment / area with a significance
extending
beyond that directly associated with a
parameter value (OECD, 1993)”.
Information pyramide
Integrating and reducing information
Indicator frameworks
”S”
State
”P-S-R”
Pressure-State-Response
”D-P-S-I-R”
Driving force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response
EcoOs for Eutrophication
General EcoQO/ Vision:
Reduce eutrophication in order to restore ecological
balance around historical reference values within the
Baltic Sea
Specific EcoQOs
• Restore Water clarity levels to those of 50s of the 20th
Century
• No oxygen depletion where it should not occur naturally
• Depth range of perennial vegetation returned to
regionally defined historical levels
• No massive HABs (harmful algal blooms)
• Restoring historic nutrient levels and N/P ratios
• P, N loadings at historical levels
Eutrophication State (S) indicators
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Secchi depth
Depth distribution of macroalgae
Frequency of hypoxia and annoxia
Frequency of harmful algal blooms
Chlorophyll a
Frequency of macroalgal mats occurrence
(Winter) nutrient concentrations
Eutrophication: Driving forces
(D) indicators
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fertilizer use per ha
NOx emission from sationary sources
NOx emission from mobile sources
Supply or sale of mineral fertilizers
Livestock density
Manure tanks/reservoirs
Eutrophication: Pressure
(P)indicators
• Land based discharges of N & P
compounds
• Atmospheric fallout of NOx, POx
• Direct discharges of wastes
Eutrophication: Response (R)
indicators
• Reduction of nutrient discharges from point
sources
• Construction of waste water treatment facilities
• Reduction of nutrient discharges from diffuse
sources
• Reduction of the use of fertilizers and
detergents containing phosphorous
• Buffer strips trapping nutrients for preventing
eutrophication
• Adoption of better agricultural practices
(sustainable agriculture)
EcoQOs for contamination
General EcoQO/Vision: Concentrations of hazardous
substances near background values for naturally
occurring substances and close to zero for manmade substances
Specific EcoQOs
• All fish caught in the Baltic Sea shall be suitable for
human consumption
• Toxic substances shall not cause reproductive
disturbances
• Attain pre-Chernobyl concentrations of man made
radioactivity
• No illegal oil discharges
• No oiled birds
• Other
Contamination: Driving force-D
indicators
• Generation of industrial hazardous wastes
• Generation of industrial and municipal solid
waste
• Hausehold waste/garbage disposal
• Import/export of hazardous wastes
• Use of mineral fuels for energy production
• Use of agricultural pesticides
• Use of cars
Contamination State (S) indicators
•
•
•
•
•
•
Trace metals in sea water/suspended matter
POPs in sea water/suspended matter
Oil hydrocarbons in seawater/sediments
Radionuclides in seawater
Hg, Cu, Cd, Pb, Zn, DDT and metabolites
CBs, HCB, a-HCH, g-HCH, organotin compounds, dioxins
and furans, brominated flame retardants, toxaphene in
biota
• Radioactive substances (g-emitters K-40 and Cs-137; Sr90, Tc-99, Pu-239/240, Am-241 natural radionuclides) in
biota
Effects of fishing: Society
response (R) indicators
• Reduce fleet capacity
• Reduce fishing effort
• Increase/maintain spawning stock biomass of key
retained species
• Decrease/maintain the level of fishing mortality for
key retained species
• Reduce fish discards to the extent practical
• Reduce number of deaths of vulnerable and/or
protected species
• Decrease same areas of the fishery impacted by gear
• Increase amount of habitat protected areas (MPAs)
• Increase ratio of large fish in the community
Effects of fishing: driving forces
(D) indicators
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Number of fishing vessels per country
Number of full time fishermen engaged per country
Landings per country
Average engine power per country
Fish consumption per capita per country
Fishing subsidies and market failure
Fishing gear modernisation
Privatisation in former socialist countries
Inappropriate assessment methods
Inadequate fishery control
Biased fishing statistics
Fishery: state (S) indicators




















 
 
 
Target fish community size/age and length/weight distribution
Average size age and size at first maturity
Sex ratio
Ratio of pelagic/demersal fish in catches or landings
Ratio between occurrence of fishing sensitive and fishing
insensitive species
Ratio between catch and effort
Frequency with which an area is trawled
Frequency and persistence of trawl tracks
Average trophhic level of the catch
Proportion (abundance or biomass) of piscivorous fish in fish
community
Trends in abundance of sensitive benthos species
Area coverage and location of highly sensitive habitats
Indicator(s) for the impact of bottom trawling on benthic
environment
Fishery: Pressure (P)-indicators
•
•
•
•
•
Fishing effort of different fleets
Fleet capacity
Fish landings by major species by area
Fish consumption per capita
Level of fishing mortality for key retained
species
• Area of the fishery impacted by gear
EcoQOs for biodiversity loss
General EcoQO/Vision: A Baltic marine environment with
maintained natural biodiversity at all levels
• A sufficient number, size and network of coastal and
marine BSPA, to ensure the preservation of natural
coastal landscapes within the Baltic Sea
• Restore species supporting climax communities in areas
where they have disappeared, especially:
- Eel grass meadows (Zostera);
- Bladder wrack beds (Fucus);
- Mussel beds (Mytilus edulis);
- Baltic Sea relict species.
• Maintain the integrity of habitats and their key functions
that allow existence of healthy and viable populations of
top-predators: mammals, seabirds, fish (salmon, trout,
cod).
Driving forces (D) indicators
for biodiversity loss
• Excessive nutrient load
• Harmful substances load - contamination of
food chain
• Fishing activities
• Population growth rate in coastal areas
• Habituated coastal line
• Change of coastal line usage
• Destruction/drainage of coastal wetlands
• Coastal constructions
• River damming
• Marine habitat change or alterations
Biodiversity: State (S) indicators
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Percent of BSPA
Percent of shorelines habitats damaged
Percent of coastal habitats restored
Percent of man induced key habitats loss
Percent of the specific habitat area that received
restoration treatment
Percent of the area of specific habitat that is protected
Reduction of functional groups diversity
Percent of alien species, in local communities (and their
share in biomass)
Ratio between native and alien key stone species
Percent of ships and harbours with facilities for ballast
load treatment.
Ongoing international activities on
developing indicator- based
assessments:
• HELCOM (EcoQOs & Indicators, Reference values
through WGs, Workshops, Projects)
• OSPAR ((EcoQOs & Indicators, Reference values
through WGs, Workshops, Projects)
• EU-EEA (DPSIR framework development)
• EU WFD (indicators and reference values under
establishment)
• GIWA (DPSIR framework applied)
• MED POL (?); Bucharest (?)
• US EPA (idices approach)
ICES scientific advise: SGs, WGs, ACE, ACME,
The use of indicators in management
Reduce/structurise the no.of indicators to realistic number,
e.g. according to following pinciples (US EPA)
• 1)
Regionally Responsive – The indicator
must reflect changes in ecosystem condition within the region
• 2)
Unambiguously Interpretable –
Indicator must be related unambiguously to an assessment endpoint
• 3)
Simply Quantifiable – Indicator can be
quantified by all participants in the monitoring survey
• 4)
Stable over the Sampling Period –
Indicator exhibits low measurement error and stability
• 5)
Low Year-to-Year Variability – Indicator
must have sufficiently low natural year-to-year variation
• 6)
Environmental Impact – Sampling for the
indicator should have minimal environmental impact
Towards ecosystem-based
assessment and management
(EU-WFD/Annex 5)
Quality assessment
• Phytoplankton
• Macrophytes
• Inverteberata
• Ichthyophauna
Ecological status:
Supporting elements
•Hydromorphological
•Physical-chemical
US EPA approach towards assessing
US coastal conditions
Division for regions:
• Northeast coastal conditions
• Southeast coastal conditions
• Gulf of Mexico
• West coast
• Great Lakes
• Alaska, Hawaii and Island Terrirories
US National Coastal Condition
Report I, 2001
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Water clarity
Dissolved oxygen
Coastal wetlands loss
Eutrophication condition
Sediment contaminants
Benthic condition
Fish tissue contaminants
US EPA Indices Approach
National Coastal Condition Report II, 2005
1. Water quality index (oxygen, water
clarity)
2.
3.
4.
5.
Benthic health index
Fish tissue contaminants
Sediment quality index
Habitat (coastal wetlands) loss
traffic lights approach
Reference environmental
levles/conditions
• Ongoing discussion on reference
conditions
• Lack of pristine areas
• Lack of historical data
• Modelling approches for assessing
historical conditions
Thank you for your attention