DEPARTMENT OF BIOSCIENCE AARHUS UNIVERSITY DENMARK Getting started with adaptive management of migratory waterbirds in Europe: The challenge of multifaceted interests Jesper Madsen Aarhus University, Denmark Photo: Magnus Elander Photo: Jari Peltomäki
AEWA Strategic Plan 2009-2017 Target 2.5 Adaptive harvest management of quarry populations is ensured at international level. Indicator International harvest management plans for two quarry populations are developed and implemented
Adaptive Management Framework From: Williams, B.K., and E.D. Brown. 2012. Adaptive Management. The U.S. Department of the Interior Applications Guide.
Adaptive management: reducing uncertainties as you go along Action (t) Controllability Action (t+1) Action (t+2) Uncertainty about the dynamics of the system System state (t) System state (t+1) System state (t+2) System state (T) Outcome (t) Observability Outcome (t+1) Environmental Outcome (t+2) variation Outcome (T) Maximise sum of outcomes
First step: Pink-footed Goose Anser brachyrhynchus (Svalbard population) First international workshop 2010 Implementation 2012 Revision 2022
Pink-footed Goose: Two almost discrete populations 450,000+ increasing 75,000 increasing N (FI) DK (S) NL B Photo: Magnus Elander
Development Svalbard population of Pink-footed Goose 90000 Global warming effects Population size 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 Closure spring shooting Denmark Protection Netherlands Protection Belgium Improved winter food conditions 30000 20000 10000 0 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Photo: Magnus Elander
Conflicts with agricultural interests
Signs of grazing impacts on tundra vegetation
Why an adaptive approach? The population processes as well as the environmental and political-administrative settings are highly dynamic The present situation constitutes a management dilemma which calls for careful treatment and stakeholder consensus A flyway plan must therefore in a structured way - be able to predict effects of management and efficiently react to the response by the system Uncertainties exist regarding population dynamics, responses to management actions and their controllability and observability International adaptive management will enhance exchange of knowledge, coordination and possibilities to make adjustments in a concerted way
Objectives hierarchy for ISMP Maintain favourable population status at flyway level while taking into account biodiversity, economic and recreational interests Maintain population range and ecological integrity Minimize agricultural conflicts Maintain sustainable and stable population Avoid increase in tundra vegetation degradation Allow recreational use not jeopardizing social acceptance Improve habitat management Optimise compensation and subsidy systems Improve recreational values of geese Increase habitats where geese make no damage Maintain a population of around 60,000 individuals Minimise crippling of birds due to hunting Increase information Increase goose tourism Restore grasslands Adapt and optimise harvest regulations and practices Increase hunting opportunities Decrease disturbance
Objectives hierarchy for ISMP Maintain favourable population status at flyway level while taking into account biodiversity, economic and recreational interests Maintain population range and ecological integrity Minimize agricultural conflicts Maintain sustainable and stable population Avoid increase in tundra vegetation degradation Allow recreational use not jeopardizing population or social acceptance Improve habitat management Optimise compensation and subsidy systems Improve recreational values of geese Increase habitats where geese make no damage Maintain a population of around 60,000 individuals Minimise crippling of birds due to hunting Increase information Increase goose tourism Restore grasslands Adapt and optimise harvest regulations and practices Increase hunting opportunities Decrease disturbance
Population size 90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 Setting a population target: A way to distill multiple objectives A social construct achieving least mutual dissatisfaction Upper target: Reduce damage (agriculture and tundra) Population target Lower target: Safety net under the population 0 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year
Justification for population target: Does size matter? Subsidy paid (mill.nok) 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 Population size?
Balancing multiple and seemingly conflicting objectives: Shoot more geese Reduce disturbance Reduce crippling
Predictions, if hunters are willing to participate and change behaviour: Spatial organisation in local parcels Intermittent shooting (3+ days) Use of blinds, decoys, goose calls, retrieving dog Hunting in teams (2+ hunters) Shoot more geese Reduce disturbance + + + + Reduce crippling + + + +
Actions taken: Develop understanding of hunters behaviour and motivations Engage and train hunters in effective goose shooting (experimental, adaptive voluntary demonstration projects in Norway and Denmark, 2010-2015) Develop practical and tailored training courses in goose shooting Local and national dissemination of outcomes Exchange of experiences internationally Engage local ambassaders in ISMP Working Groups nationally and internationally Continued awareness campaigns
Outcomes from experiments and monitoring of progress in ISMP, backed by agent-based simulations: Shoot more geese Reduce disturbance Reduce crippling yes yes yes
Development in harvest and population size Svalbard Pink-footed Geese
Second step: Taiga Bean Goose Anser fabalis fabalis First international workshop 2013 Implementation 2016 Revision 2026
Taiga Bean Goose: Four management units with some overlap
Taiga Bean Goose: Four management units with some overlap + overlapping subspecies Tundra Bean Goose A. f. rossicus Photo: Dorte & Flemming Sørensen
Goals and objectives of Taiga Bean Goose ISSAP To restore and maintain the population at a favourable conservation status (population targets agreed for each of the management units) Increase survival rate of adults Increase reproductive rates Legal harvest does not jeopardise an increase of adult survival rates Development and implementation of an international Adaptive Harvest Management (AHM) framework to adjust harvest levels to reflect the current status of the population
Balancing multiple and seemingly conflicting objectives: Recovery of population Maintain hunting opportunities
Next steps: Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis (3 populations) Greylag Goose Anser anser (NW-SW European population) First international workshops 2017 Implementation?
Increasing biological and management complexity, scale, legislative constraints, cultural differences, longer communication lines.
Some first lessons learnt An adaptive management process is a way forward to unlock a fixed position but requires investment, capacity building, thorough organisation Get stakeholders onboard throughout => mutual understanding, responsibility, trust-building, willingness to find joint solutions Process shall be nationally and locally anchored Integrated collaboration between authorities, stakeholders and scientists => learning Clear communication and lines of command Keep the momentum and focus Long-term commitment is essential Going from single-species, single-objective to multispecies and multiple objectives is a bit of a mouthful
Thanks to collaborators: Fred A. Johnson, James H. Williams, Sergey Dereliev, Ingunn Tombre, Eckhart Kuijken, Ove Martin Gundersen, Gitte Høj Jensen, Kevin K. Clausen, Niels-Erik Jørgensen, Iben H. Sørensen, Anthony D. Fox, Mikko Alhainen and many others Thanks to funding agencies (2010-2016): Environmental Protection Agency, Denmark Environment Agency, Norway Vlaamse Overheid, Agentschap Natuur & Bos, Belgium Finnish Wildlife Agency Swedish Nature Protection Agency Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs Dutch Faunafonds US Geological Surveys Aarhus University