Download EBSA`s: Concepts and Metrics - Centre for Marine Biodiversity

INSHORE ECOSYSTEM AND
SIGNIFICANT AREAS
OF THE SCOTIAN SHELF
Biological Interactions and Biodiversity
EBSA’s:
Concepts and Metrics
DFO Workshop on the Inshore Ecosystem
and Significant Areas of the Scotian Shelf
Jan 2006 John Roff
EBSA’s should NOT be the only agenda item
This may be where we START
management and conservation planning,
but it does NOT complete the task under
Oceans Act or Oceans Action Plan
An EBSA agenda, driven by Delphic approach
largely ignores the whole Biodiversity spectrum
A comprehensive framework is required to
classify ALL ecosystem components,
so that EBSA’s can be LESS
ARBITRARILY recognized and defined.
Critique and suggestions
1.
2.
EBSA’s capture only a small part of the Biodiversity
Spectrum. Emphasis on commercial fisheries.
This is ‘Natural History’ NOT Science.
1.
2.
3.
3.
Table # 1
1.
2.
4.
Delphic process – value judgments
Existing knowledge, surveys, “my favorite species / location”
NO predictive capacity
Applies almost entirely to commercial fish species and marine
mammals
Redundancy of concepts – Aggregation & Fitness Consequences
Table # 2
1.
2.
3.
(a) Confuses Structures and Processes
(b) Arbitrary. Selected Community types – biological structures
(c) Arbitrary. Completely misses Biodiversity concepts
Metrics for EBSA’s
PARAMETER
CONCEPTS CAPTURED
Uniqueness
Rarity, Irreplaceability, Isolation, ‘Special features’
Aggregation
Density, Production, Biomass
Fitness
consequences
Reproductive/ bottleneck areas (for SELECTED SPECIES only)
Resilience
Vulnerability, Recovery potential, Degree of threat, Protection level,
Dependency
Naturalness
Decline, Impacts, Disturbance
DRIVING
CONCEPTS
ECONOMIC INTERESTS, FISHERIES
MANAGEMENT OF INDIVIDUAL AREAS
CONCEPTS
NOT
CAPTURED
WHOLE BIODIVERSITY SPECTRUM
Ecosystem functioning
ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT
Biogeography, Extent of habitat types
REPRESENTATIVENESS
ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY, CONNECTIVITY
PROPORTIONAL IMPORTANCE - Perspective
REGIONAL, NATIONAL, INTERNATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
Metrics for EBSA criteria
METRIC
DATA SOURCE
POTENTIAL
STRENGTHS
LIMITATIONS
UNIQUENESS
Delphic,
SEK and TEK,
Geophysical
Can apply to all levels of
biodiversity hierarchy.
Context may be: Regional,
National, International
Depends on good survey data
My favorite species / place
Can use GIS remote sensing
data ?
AGGREGATION
(sensu EBSA)
SEK and TEK
Important commercial
fishing areas?
Depends on survey data
Applies to selected species only
AGGREGATION
Retention Areas
Gyres, Eddies etc.
Production/ Biomass
SEK and TEK,
Geophysical Remote
sensing
Integrates species and
habitat levels.
Prediction of Structures
and Processes ?
Requires sophisticated GIS
surveys
FITNESS
CONSEQUENCES
Delphic
Guesswork?
Highly subjective
Data for commercial species
Applies to selected species only
Repetitive of Aggregation
RESILIENCE
Value judgement
??
Not an Inherent Value ?
Depends on disturbance regime
& severity
NATURALNESS
Value judgement
Obvious criterion.
Describes Actual status
Not an Inherent Value
Metrics poorly developed for
marine environments
Many Types of EBSA’s
1.
Larger entirely marine, seasonally migrant species
(Distinctive)
2. Mobile marine species referenced to the land environment
(Distinctive)
3. Rare / endangered or isolated populations and communities of
benthic species, including areas of high local species diversity
of some taxon (Distinctive)
4. Specific habitats and associated communities of the wider
marine environment (Representative)
5. Sustainable management of natural marine resources such as
fisheries (and fishing / spawning areas)
6. Some combination of one or more or these types of areas
7. Areas of anthropological / archaeological / sociological interest
8. Local ‘beauty spots’ and recreation areas (generally land
referenced)
9. High production / upwelling / retention areas
10. Other purposes
TWO MAIN TYPES OF EBSA’s ?
ƒ Areas that supply
– ‘ECOSYSTEM
SERVICES’
– I.E. EXPLOITABLE
RESOURCES
HOW DO WE EQUATE
SUCH DIFFERENT AREAS ?
DIFFERENT
‘SOCIO-ECONOMIC ROUTING’
MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
ƒ Areas that exhibit
– ‘NATURAL CAPITAL
VALUE’
– BUT ARE NOT
EXPLOITED FOR
RESOURCES
– THESE ARE STILL
‘ECOSYSTEM
SERVICES’ BUT
ECONOMIC VALUE
NOT DEFINED
Determination of size of EBSA’s
Type of Area
Size determined by:
Seasonally migrant species
1.
2.
Natural geophysical anomalies
Local knowledge (SEK / TEK)
Land-referenced species
1.
2.
Historic usage area (from SEK & TEK)
Boundary of forage areas
Rare / Endangered / Species diversity
1.
2.
Natural geophysical anomalies including topography
Local knowledge (SEK / TEK)
Representative habitats
1.
2.
3.
4.
Mapping habitat types
Community indicators
Species – Area Curves
Disturbance regime
Resource management
[Size of fisheries habitat / stocks / spawning /
recruitment areas]
1.Habitat Suitability Indices (HSI)
2.SEK TEK on stock sustainability
3.SEK of spawning areas
4.Minimum Viable Population and Home Range of species
5.Stock-Recruitment relationships of target species
6.Species-Area (S-A) curves
Combination of above
Combinations of strategies - MARXAN
Anthropology / Sociology
Arbitrary, public opinion
Beauty spots (land referenced)
Aesthetics, arbitrary, public interest
High production / Retention / Upwelling
Geophysical anomalies
Other
Seasonal closures ?
The components of marine biodiversity:
GENETIC
SPECIES/ POPULATION
COMMUNITY
Structure Process
Structure
Process
Structure Process
ECOSYSTEM
Structure Process
Structure
Mutation
Structure
Migration
Structure
Succession
Watermass
Currents
Genotypes
Differentiat.
Differentiat.
Abundance
Dispersion
S.Diversity
Predation
Temp
Tides
Fitness
Drift
Distribut
Retention
S. Richness
Competit.
Competit.
Salinity
Disturban.
Disturban.
Haplotype D
Flow
Focal Spp
Mig/
Mig/ Drift
S. Evenness
Parasitism
Properties
Gyres
Stocks
Nat. Select
Keystone
Growth
Abundance
Mutualism
Boundaries
Retention
Inbreeding
Ind.
Ind. Cond.
Cond.
Reprod.
Reprod.
Represent.
Disease
Depth/Pres
P-B couple
Mating
Ind.
Ind. Comp.
Recruit
Distinctive
Production
Light
Entrain.
Dir. Select
Umbrella
Biomes
Decomp.
Decomp.
Stratificat.
Stratificat.
B-G cycles
Stab. select
Charismat.
Charismat.
Biocoenos.
Biocoenos.
Topograph
Seasonal.
Dis. select
Vulnerable
S-A relns.
relns.
Substrate
Product.
Micro. Evol.
Evol.
Economic
Transitions
Represent.
H-A equil.
equil.
Erosion
Phenotypes
Fun.groups
Distinctive
H-L equil.
equil.
Speciation
Fragments
Heterog.
Heterog.
Anomalies
Turbulence
Macro. Evol
MetaMeta-pops
Endemism
Exposure
Mixing
Alt. S.Stats
Patchiness
Upwelling
Symbioses
Nutrients
Divergence
Biomass
Dis. Gases
Ecol.Integ.
Ecol.Integ.
Anoxia
Erosion
Expanded from Zacharias and Roff 2000
Desiccation
How the elements of biodiversity are ‘captured’ by various conservation approaches
GENETIC
Eco. level
POPUL./ SPECIES
COMMUNITY
ECOSYSTEM
Structure
Process
Structure
Process
Structure
Process
Structure
Process
Distinctive
Habitats
‘EBSA’s’
1,2,3,4
Inferred
from
4,5,6A,
6B,7,8,9,
10,11
1,3,4,5,6,
7
1,2,3,5,
6B,12,
13,16
Assumed
5,11,13,1
8
1,2,3,4,5,
6,7,8,9,1
0,15,16,1
8
Represent.
Habitats
1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3,5,6A
,6B,9,10,
11
5,6,7,
1,2,3,4,5,6
A,7,8,9,
10,11,13,1
4,15,16
Assumed
or N/A,
7,8
1,2,3,4,5,6,
7,8,9,10,12
,14,15,16,1
7
10,11,12,1
3,14,18,19
1,2,3,4,5,
6,7 fish
only
6A,6B,9,
16 fish
only
Assumed
N/A
N/A
Approach
↓
Fisheries
EBSA’s
Conserv.
structures
Inferred
from
structures
or N/A
1,2,3,4,5
fish
only
Inferred
from
structures
1,2,3,6B,
10 fish
only
Coastal
Zone
Manag.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2,3,4,5,6,
9,10,
12,14
2,3,4,5,7,
8,9,10,18
Sets of
MPA’s.
1,2,4,5
Inferred
from
1,2,3,5
,6A,6B,
12
1,2,3,4,5,
6,7
6A,6B,7,
8,13,14
Assumed
1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3,4,5,
6,7,8,9,1
7
3,11,12,1
3
1,2,3,4,5,
6,7
10,14
Assumed
N/A
1,2,4,5,7,
17
structures
Redundancy
Networks
of MPA’s.
Connectivity
1,2,4,5
Inferred
from
structures
or N/A
or N/A,1
or N/A
A suggested planning process (Derous, Roff et al.)
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Applying the EBSA “TOOL”
To the whole
Produces results that :
– Have considered ALL options
– Have considered ALL available information
– Are still Selective, BUT :
– Are NON - ARBITRARY
Criteria-assessment scheme for levels of biodiversity
Level of
biodiversity
Genetic
level structure
Rarity
(Uniqueness)
Aggregation
- Is there a high diversity of gene
pools/genetic stocks present in the
subarea? = Are there genetically
variable individuals occurring in
the subarea?
Fitness
consequences
Naturalness
- Is there a high diversity of gene
pools/genetic stocks present in
the subarea? = Are there
genetically variable individuals
occurring in the subarea?
Proportional
importance
REGIONAL
NATIONAL
INTERNATIONAL
Genetic
level processes
- Is a high percentage of a
species population located within
the subarea?
- Is the abundance of a certain
species very high in the subarea (=
is there a
concentration/aggregation of the
species in the subarea)?
- Is the subarea characterised by high
counts of rare species?
Species/
population
level structure
- Are there habitats formed by
keystone species present in the
subarea?
- Are there ecological significant
(keystone) species with a controlling
influence on the community present
in the subarea?
- Are there indicator compositionspecies present in the subarea?
- Is a species (with an otherwise
restricted distribution within the
study area or wider region) present
in high densities within the
subarea?
- Is the subarea characterised by
high counts of many species?
- Is the abundance of focal species
(as a surrogate for biodiversity in
general?) high in the subarea?
- Is the abundance of focal species
(as a surrogate for biodiversity in
general?) high in the subarea?
- Are there habitats formed by
keystone species present in the
subarea?
- Are there habitats formed by
keystone species present in the
subarea?
- Are there ecological significant
(keystone) species with a
controlling influence on the
community present in the subarea?
- Are there habitats formed by
keystone species present in the
subarea?
- Are there critical sites for the
preservation of certain indicator
species present in the subarea?
- Is species diversity in the area
dominated by native species?
- Are there indicator
composition-species present in
the subarea?
Criteria cont.
Level of
biodiversity
Rarity
(Uniqueness)
Species/
population
level processes
Aggregation
Fitness
consequences
- Are there important migration
routes for certain species located
within the subarea?
- Are there important migration
routes for certain species located
within the subarea?
- Are there sites present in the
subarea that provide refuge during
adverse conditions?
- Are there wintering/resting/
feeding sites located in the subarea?
- Are there sites present in the
subarea that provide refuge
during adverse conditions?
- Are there wintering/resting/
feeding sites located in the
subarea?
- Are there critical (key) sites for
reproduction (spawning/breeding)
present in the subarea?
- Are there critical (key) sites for
reproduction
(spawning/breeding) present in
the subarea?
Naturalness
- Are there critical (key) sites for
recruitment (nursery/rearing)
present in the subarea?
- Is the species richness in the subarea
high?
- Is the species richness in the
subarea high?
- Is the species richness in the
subarea high?
- Are there distinctive/unique
communities present in the subarea?
Community
level structure
- Are there endemic species present in
the subarea?
- Are there invasive species
present in the subarea?
- Is the subarea’s species diversity
dominated by invasive (and/or
cultured) species?
Community
level processes
Proportional
importance
Criteria cont.
Level of
biodiversity
Rarity
(Uniqueness)
Aggregation
- Is the subarea characterized by a complex
topography or seabed morphology?
Ecosystem
level Structure
Ecosystem
level Structure
- Is the substrate diversity in the subarea high?
- Is the subarea an outstanding example
representing significant geological processes in
the development of landforms?
- Are there distinctive/unique ecosystems
located in the subarea?
- Are there sites present in the subarea which are
critical for nutrient cycling?
- Are there sites present in the subarea
which are critical for nutrient
cycling?
- Are there sites present in the subarea where
nutrient retention occurs?
- Are there sites present in the subarea
where nutrient retention occurs?
- Are there any unique/distinctive
oceanographic features/processes located in the
subarea?
Fitness
consequences
Naturalness
Proportional
importance
Criteria cont.
Level of
biodiversity
Ecosystem
Level
processes
Rarity
(Uniqueness)
Fitness
consequences
- Is the subarea highly (naturally)
productive?
- Is the subarea highly
(naturally)
productive?
- Are there structural habitat
features present in the
subarea?
- Are there structural habitat
features present in the
subarea?
Naturalness
Proportional
importance
Are there upwelling sites located in
the subarea?
- Is the habitat richness in the
subarea high?
- Is the habitat complexity in the
subarea high?
- Is the habitat, located in the
subarea, restricted in its
distribution within the study
area or wider region?
- Are there structural habitat
features present in the
subarea?
Habitat level
Aggregation
- Is the habitat richness in
the subarea high?
- Is the habitat complexity
in the subarea high?
- Are there structural
habitat features
present in the
subarea?
- Are there subareas where
no human
disturbance takes
place or where no
habitat
degradation has
taken place?
- Are there pristine areas or
reference areas for
the natural
condition of the
habitat(s) present in
the subarea?
- Is the habitat, located in the
subarea, restricted in its
distribution within the
study area or wider region?
A suggested planning process (Derous, Roff et al.)
UNIQUENESS
√√
XXX
PRIMARY METRICS
MODIFYING METRICS
VALUE JUDGEMENT
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ‘ROUTING’
MANAGEMENT PURPOSE
MANAGEMENT PRACTICE
Recall some words “QUOTED” from the DFO 2004 document
“Identification of Ecologically and Biologically
Significant Areas”
ƒ “A TOOL” … “NOT A GENERAL STRATEGY”
–
–
–
–
“enhanced protection”
“integrated management”
“while allowing sustainable activities”
“must specify clearly what management measures will be
used at the various sites”
– “a habitat classification system may facilitiate using this
framework” (how else can we achieve PERSPECTIVE?)
ƒ What IS the GENERAL STRATEGY ?
– Conservation of Canada’s Oceans and their Resources, as
mandated to Federal Agencies: DFO, Environment, Parks, CWS
SUMMARY OF THIS TALK
1.
2.
3.
4.
EBSA document NOT a systematic approach to recognize and map
components of Biodiversity. A broader framework is required.
Does NOT complete responsibilities or fulfill mandate under: Oceans Act;
Oceans Action Plan
Emphasis for management and conservation should not be on EBSAs
alone. Representative Areas actually MORE important (e.g. LOMA’s &
CMA’s for ESSIM)
EBSAs (as proposed) are a mix of areas:
1.
2.
5.
EBSA document has heavy fisheries bias, e.g.
1.
6.
7.
That supply ‘Ecosystem Services’ (resources)
That contain ‘Natural Capital Value’
‘Fitness Consequences’ confounded with ‘Aggregation’
Concepts of Ecological Integrity and Connectivity not defined
Management objectives / strategies for each TYPE of EBSA need
definition
8.
Assemble the list of impacts / disturbances (to assess Resilience)
9.
Define the indices of impacts (to judge Naturalness)
10. GAP analysis of what remains for Marine Conservation
THIS APPROACH
TO ‘DEFINE’
EBSA’s MAY NOT
BE PERFECT,
BUT:
IT MAY HELP US
DISTINGUISH
WHAT WE CAN
ACTUALLY DO
FROM WHAT WE
JUST IMAGINE!