Agreement on the conservation of african-eurasian migratory waterbirds
|
|  Yüklə 158 Kb.
|
DRAFT RESOLUTION 6.131AEWA INTERNATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION TASKS FOR 2016-2018 Recalling Resolution 5.3 on International Implementation Tasks (IITs) for the Agreement for the period 2012-2015, Noting the limited support provided by Contracting Parties, inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations for the implementation of the International Implementation Tasks 2012-2015, Expressing concern about the low level of implementation of International Implementation Tasks in the three triennia since 2006, Noting the conclusions and recommendations of the Report on the Conservation Status of Migratory Waterbirds within the Agreement Area – 6th Edition (document AEWA/MOP 6.XX), the Review of the stage of preparation and implementation of Single Species Action Plans - 2nd Edition (document AEWA/MOP 6.XX), the update of the Review of the status of introduced non-native waterbird species (document AEWA/MOP 6.XX) and the Review of the occurrence and magnitude of the conflict between migratory animals of all taxa and renewable technologies deployment (document AEWA/MOP 6.XX), Noting again the contribution these International Implementation Tasks will make to the objectives of AEWA’s Strategic Plan, Taking into account the AEWA Plan of Action for Africa adopted by Resolution 5.9, Recalling the need for proactive and targeted conservation measures in order to achieve the CBD Aichi Biodiversity Targets 2020 as outlined by Resolution 5.23, Aware of the Technical Committee’s recommendation of the benefits of having a shorter, more focussed list of projects, which is better aligned with the priorities of AEWA’s Strategic Plan, and which identifies small, more fundable modules of large projects, Reaffirming the particular importance of:
The Meeting of the Parties: 1. Adopts the International Implementation Tasks for 2016-2018 appended to this Resolution, which are updated and amended on the basis of the International Implementation Tasks adopted for 2012-2015 as the medium-term priorities for international cooperation activities for implementation of the Agreement; 2. Urges Contracting Parties and specialised international organisations to support ongoing projects and, where appropriate, to develop new international cooperation projects for the implementation of the Agreement, according to the priorities outlined in the Strategic Plan and the Plan of Action for Africa, to keep the Agreement Secretariat fully informed of progress, and to report conclusions at future sessions of the Meeting of the Parties; 3. Further urges Contracting Parties, instructs the Agreement Secretariat and invites specialised international organisations to seek innovative mechanisms and partnerships, including with the business sector, to enable implementation of the priorities listed in the Appendix, including joint ventures, twinning arrangements, secondments and exchange programmes, corporate sector sponsorships and species adoption programmes; 4. Requests bilateral and multilateral donors to provide financial assistance to developing countries for the implementation of the Agreement, by supporting implementation of the priorities listed in the Appendix; 5. Instructs the Agreement Secretariat to disseminate the International Implementation Tasks for 2016-2018, to coordinate closely with related conventions and international organisations for their implementation, and to seek appropriate donors; and 6. Agrees that future lists of International Implementation Priorities be more closely aligned to the strategic priorities of the Agreement, more limited in extent and presented as projects that are more feasible to fund, and requests that the Priorities for the period 2019-2021 be developed accordingly as part of the process to draft AEWA’s next Strategic Plan [DR 6.14]. AEWA INTERNATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION TASKS (IIT) FOR 2016-2018 Introduction
Order and format of presentation
Collaboration
The benefits of such joint and harmonised working include potential cost-sharing, wider inputs to technical work and greater outreach to a wider range of interested parties and stakeholders. In planning the implementation of each IIT, active collaboration with other relevant MEAs will be sought as appropriate and possible. A. Species Conservation
Prior to the entry into force of the Agreement, a number of international single species action plans relevant to Paragraph 2.2.1 of the Agreement’s Action Plan had already been developed (by BirdLife International, Wetlands International and the International Crane Foundation). These include action plans for: Microcarbo pygmaeus, Pelecanus crispus, Botaurus stellaris, Marmaronetta angustirostris, Polysticta stellerii, Leucogeranus, Fulica cristata, Numenius tenuirostris, Larus audouinii, and Sterna dougallii. (NB: Several of these action plans cover the European part of the range of the species only, and a priority is to extend them to cover their full range within the Agreement area (see next item)). More than 20 international single species action plans and one multi-species action plan were also adopted by the MOP, as well as a Species Management Plan for Anser brachyrhynchus (Svalbard population). Whilst many of the actions identified for these species will have to be undertaken and financed at national or local level, a budget is required for international coordination and promotion, and to provide small grants for national and local initiatives. Indicative budget: € 60,000 min./species/year (for coordination/grants) Duration: Annual, ongoing Activities: Coordination, small grants, evaluation, reporting
New International Single Species Action Plans need to be developed as a priority for the populations listed in category 1, column A, Table 1 to the Agreement Action Plan, and for those species listed with an asterisk in column A of Table 1. Production and format of the action plans should follow the recommendations given in the MOP-approved guidelines. Following the example of the first multi-species action plan under AEWA for Benguela upwelling system coastal seabirds further multi-species action plans can be considered for development where deemed feasible and appropriate. With the successful pilot management plan for the Svalbard population of the Pink-footed Goose other species/populations will be prioritised for planning of management actions. As soon as the new action and management plans are completed, implementation should begin. It is recommended that individual Range States agree to take the lead on development of individual action and management plans (as an in-kind contribution to the Agreement), in close cooperation with the other Range States of each species (coordination of plan development including workshops, drafting, consultation and publication of each plan). Plans should be submitted to the Technical Committee in draft form for consultation, to ensure harmonisation and quality control. Indicative budget: € 50,000 max. /per species for action plan preparation Duration: 12 months per plan Activities: Coordination, workshop, planning, publication
A vital piece of information for the conservation of any migratory species is an understanding of the network of key sites required to sustain their populations throughout the year. The Critical Site Network Tool web-portal, developed under the framework of the Wings Over Wetlands – African-Eurasian Flyway Project, has brought together the already existing information concerning key sites for migratory waterbirds that meet recognised criteria of being internationally important building primarily on the data collected through the International Waterbird Census of Wetlands International and through the Important Bird Areas programme of BirdLife International. The web-portal already provides access to information on site networks by species and populations and highlights the internationally important populations of any internationally important sites. The members of the WOW Partnership (i.e. the AEWA and Ramsar Secretariats, BirdLife International and Wetlands International) have committed themselves to continue updating the parent datasets and making the information accessible through the CSN Tool. However, the CSN Tool in its current form is getting technologically obsolete seven years after its launch. It will be necessary to redevelop the portal focusing on improving interoperability between individual datasets and enabling – in future – routine updating of relevant data to ensure that the data presented is always the most recent available.. Indicative budget: € 150,000 Duration: 2 years Activities: Redevelopment, database update and maintenance, web site maintenance
Climate change vulnerability is an important element of the assessment of the sufficiency of the international network of sites for the protection of migratory waterbirds. While the first edition of the AEWA International Site Review, as required by the AEWA Action Plan paragraph 7.4, submitted to MOP5 have assessed the protection and management status of the internationally important sites identified by the Critical Site Network Tool, the climate change vulnerability of the network has not been estimated. Such an assessment can be undertaken through a flyway-scale approach using the available CSN data and other existing information and overlaying spatial data to identify the vulnerability of individual sites. Despite some limitations, such an exercise will be a useful guidance on the priority sites for climate adaptation action. Indicative budget: € 350,000 Duration: 3 years Activities: Desk study
Waterbirds are harvested widely throughout the Agreement area for recreation, trade and livelihoods. Little is known of the scale of such harvesting, nor of the impacts that such harvesting has on waterbird populations. The development of a programme aiming at accurately evaluating the harvest of waterbirds at the scale of the AEWA range is a huge task that would require a consequent amount of financial resources and would also require setting up a mechanism for regular monitoring of waterbird harvest. It will be critical to work with and through organisations and networks which have involvement with this issue including Wetland International’s Hunting Specialist Group and relevant representative organisations. It is therefore proposed to run a series of sub-regional projects, which amongst other things should:
Indicative budget: € 100,000 per sub-region Duration: 1-2 years per sub-region Activities: Reviews, research, survey, publications
In line with the developments brought about through the process of the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) process there is a need to evaluate the consumptive and non-consumptive use of waterbirds. These values have the potential to contribute substantially to sustainable rural development throughout the Agreement area. Yet very little is known of these values in different regions and their potential contribution to species and habitat conservation. Given the enormous scope of this work and the need for generating resource efficiency, it is proposed that this work is conducted through offering placements to students studying for masters or PhD degrees, supported by an active Technical Committee expert on rural development and economics. The results should be presented as case studies at appropriate workshops (e.g. IUGB, EAERE etc.) and published to advise future sustainable rural development initiatives. The work should be conducted in line with methodologies developed by the TEEB process and thus feed into policy decisions.Indicative budget: € 20,000 p/a Duration: Ongoing Activities: Research, socio-economic surveys, workshop, publication D. RESEARCH AND MONITORING Integrated Waterbird Monitoring
The International Waterbird Census, organised by Wetlands International, and conducted in most countries within the Agreement area, is one of the key tools for monitoring the conservation status of the populations covered by AEWA. It is based on annual non-breeding season surveys at a sample of sites, by an extensive network of, mainly, volunteer counters. Unfortunately, the financial and technical capacity to coordinate and to implement the national surveys is very unevenly distributed across the Agreement area. Experience shows that most developing countries in the Agreement area are not able to regularly cover the key sites without some basic support to cover travel costs. These constraints present a major limitation to understanding the conservation status of AEWA populations. Indicative budget: € 66,000 p.a. regional coordination + € 80,000 p.a. for January counts Duration: Annual Activities: Coordination, field surveys, publication of national totals annually
Although the International Waterbird Census can cover a significant proportion of the waterbird populations, the adequate monitoring of certain species would require special counts to cover their specific habitats which are usually not well covered during the regular IWC counts. These groups include geese and swans, seaducks, non-wetland waders and the poorly covered large tidal wetlands in Africa and South-west Asia. Indicative budget: Goose and swan counts: € 50,000 p.a. Seaduck counts: € 14,000 p.a. + € 85,000 p. 3 years to cover the Black Sea and Caspian Sea Tidal wetlands in Africa and South-west Asia: € 93,000 p. 3 years Non-wetland waders: € 10,000 p. 3 years Duration: 3 years with annual activities Activities: Coordination, field surveys, publication of results
A large proportion of the migratory water- and seabird species covered by the Agreement nest in colonies (particularly of the families: Spheniscidae, Phaethontidae, Pelecanidae, Sulidae, Phalacrocoracidae, Fregatidae, Ardeidae, Ciconiidae, Threskiornithidae, Phoenicopteridae, Laridae, Sternidae, Alcidae). Colonial waterbirds can be best monitored during the breeding season because a very significant proportion of the population of a species may be concentrating on a few localities at one time. In the meantime, many of these species are not adequately covered by the existing International Waterbird Census, which is based on non-breeding season surveys partly because they are widely distributed in areas that are difficult to access such as open sea. Good information about the colonies is also fundamental to identify and address factors that may threaten their populations. Although some national programmes already exist and even some international coordination takes place in certain subregions of the Agreement area, the Conservation Status Report has highlighted the need for more adequate international coordination of the monitoring of colonial water- and seabirds. Therefore, a desk study shall produce an overview of on-going initiatives, explore options, priorities and costing for coordinated international monitoring of colonial waterbirds during the breeding season. Indicative budget: € 25,000 (monitoring study) Duration: 2 years Activities: Review, analysis, consultation, recommendations
Indicative budget: € 50,000 Duration: per year Activities: Review, analysis, consultation, publication Research
Indicative budget: € 50,000 p.a. (€ 2-10,000 per survey depending on location, size, accessibility) Duration: Ongoing Activities: Field survey, training, publication. E. EDUCATION AND INFORMATION
Indicative budget: € 40,000 p.a. for small grants to support national capacity building schemes Duration: 5 years in total, 2-3 years per country, depending on the needs Activities: Fieldwork, training, supply of equipment (first year)
Indicative budget: € 175,000 per year, per regional programme Duration: 5 years Activities: Coordination, training courses, materials, follow-up
Indicative budget: € 100,000 for training per workshop (two workshops in Africa and two in Eurasia) Duration: 5 years Activities: Coordination, training courses, materials, follow-up
Indicative budget: € 35,000 per group (average) Duration: 1 year Activities: Training
Indicative budget: € 75,000 per regional workshop Duration: 1 per year Activities: Regional workshop and follow-up
Indicative budget: € 5,000 per guidance document/language Duration: ongoing Activities: Translation and dissemination of documents 1 The numbering of draft resolutions presented to MOP6 may change. | |||||||||
