Search results

The harvesting of bait through digging in coastal mudflats is practiced for recreational and commercial purposes in European coastal systems including the Ria de Aveiro coastal lagoon on the northwest Atlantic coast of Portugal. The scale of harvesting in the Ria de Aveiro has recently increased due to the current economic climate in Portugal, with targeting of the polychaete, Diopatra neapolitana species or "casulo" as it is widely known in the Aveiro region. The national authorities have attempted to control casulo digging by issuing a regulation (Ordinance) in 2014 on the maximum daily catch limit to be caught by each individual. The daily catch limit is intended to represent the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) for casulo beyond which overfishing will occur. The monitoring of the regulatory measures is expected to be conducted through on-site inspections in the digging areas. However, weak law enforcement was noticed, while there is also controversy over the daily catch limit (quota) stipulated by the Ordinance. To this end, the current study attempted to assess digging activities through remote monitoring and random inspections for a better policy enforcement of the national regulation. In addition, different harvesting scenarios were employed through a simplified bioeconomic model to attribute the current and future harvesting trends of bait digging in Aveiro coastal lagoon. The study findings indicate that remote monitoring coupled with some onsite interviews could be a more effective approach for the implementation of the current bait digging policy. Further, the results point to a distinctive discrepancy between the daily catch amount (MSY) introduced by the national legislation and the study findings which should be further scrutinized. The diggers seem to have reached the sustainable harvest identified by the present research. The current economic hardship in Portugal and the low profitability in similar employment sectors will possibly attract more diggers and increase harvesting in the near future. An increased harvest would likely trigger overfishing of D. neapolitana with unknown consequences for the population of the species as well as the aquatic ecosystem. The socio-economic and environmental effects are yet to be further clarified with more detailed data and advanced modeling techniques to ensure the sustainability of the activity.

Plans are currently being drafted for the next decade of action on biodiversity-both the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Biodiversity Strategy of the European Union (EU). Freshwater biodiversity is disproportionately threatened and underprioritized relative to the marine and terrestrial biota, despite supporting a richness of species and ecosystems with their own intrinsic value and providing multiple essential ecosystem services. Future policies and strategies must have a greater focus on the unique ecology of freshwater life and its multiple threats, and now is a critical time to reflect on how this may be achieved. We identify priority topics including environmental flows, water quality, invasive species, integrated water resources management, strategic conservation planning, and emerging technologies for freshwater ecosystem monitoring. We synthesize these topics with decades of first-hand experience and recent literature into 14 special recommendations for global freshwater biodiversity conservation based on the successes and setbacks of European policy, management, and research. Applying and following these recommendations will inform and enhance the ability of global and European post-2020 biodiversity agreements to halt and reverse the rapid global decline of freshwater biodiversity.

Plans are currently being drafted for the next decade of action on biodiversity—both the post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Biodiversity Strategy of the European Union (EU). Freshwater biodiversity is disproportionately threatened and underprioritized relative to the marine and terrestrial biota, despite supporting a richness of species and ecosystems with their own intrinsic value and providing multiple essential ecosystem services. Future policies and strategies must have a greater focus on the unique ecology of freshwater life and its multiple threats, and now is a critical time to reflect on how this may be achieved. We identify priority topics including environmental flows, water quality, invasive species, integrated water resources management, strategic conservation planning, and emerging technologies for freshwater ecosystem monitoring. We synthesize these topics with decades of first‐hand experience and recent literature into 14 special recommendations for global freshwater biodiversity conservation based on the successes and setbacks of European policy, management, and research. Applying and following these recommendations will inform and enhance the ability of global and European post‐2020 biodiversity agreements to halt and reverse the rapid global decline of freshwater biodiversity.

Plans are currently being drafted for the next decade of action on biodiversity—both the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Biodiversity Strategy of the European Union (EU). Freshwater biodiversity is disproportionately threatened and underprioritized relative to the marine and terrestrial biota, despite supporting a richness of species and ecosystems with their own intrinsic value and providing multiple essential ecosystem services. Future policies and strategies must have a greater focus on the unique ecology of freshwater life and its multiple threats, and now is a critical time to reflect on how this may be achieved. We identify priority topics including environmental flows, water quality, invasive species, integrated water resources management, strategic conservation planning, and emerging technologies for freshwater ecosystem monitoring. We synthesize these topics with decades of first-hand experience and recent literature into 14 special recommendations for global freshwater biodiversity conservation based on the successes and setbacks of European policy, management, and research. Applying and following these recommendations will inform and enhance the ability of global and European post-2020 biodiversity agreements to halt and reverse the rapid global decline of freshwater biodiversity.

Plans are currently being drafted for the next decade of action on biodiversity—both the post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Biodiversity Strategy of the European Union (EU). Freshwater biodiversity is disproportionately threatened and underprioritized relative to the marine and terrestrial biota, despite supporting a richness of species and ecosystems with their own intrinsic value and providing multiple essential ecosystem services. Future policies and strategies must have a greater focus on the unique ecology of freshwater life and its multiple threats, and now is a critical time to reflect on how this may be achieved. We identify priority topics including environmental flows, water quality, invasive species, integrated water resources management, strategic conservation planning, and emerging technologies for freshwater ecosystem monitoring. We synthesize these topics with decades of first‐hand experience and recent literature into 14 special recommendations for global freshwater biodiversity conservation based on the successes and setbacks of European policy, management, and research. Applying and following these recommendations will inform and enhance the ability of global and European post‐2020 biodiversity agreements to halt and reverse the rapid global decline of freshwater biodiversity. ; We thank the organizers of the ALTER‐Net/EKLIPSE Post‐2020 Biodiversity Workshop for discussions that led to this collaboration. CBvR was supported by a Fulbright Early Career Scholar Award from the Fulbright Spain Commission, SJT by the NERC Highlight Topic "Hydroscape" (NE/N006437/1), SCJ and GK by the "GLANCE" project (01LN1320A) from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), HPG by the BMBF "BIBS" project (01LC1501G1), KAW by the Rural & Environment Science & Analytical Services Division of the Scottish Government (2016–2021 Strategic Research programme), SD by the Leibniz Competition (J45/2018), AIL by FCT (CESAM; UID/AMB/50017/2019), IJ by the J. E. Purkyně Fellowship of the Czech Academy of Science, and VH by a Ramon y Cajal Contract (RYC‐2013‐13979).

This article shares the experiences, observations, and discussions that occurred during the completing of an ecosystem services (ES) indicator framework to be used at European Union (EU) and Member States' level. The experience base was drawn from 3 European research projects and 14 associated case study sites that include 13 transitional-water bodies (specifically 8 coastal lagoons, 4 riverine estuaries, and 1 fjord) and 1 coastal-water ecosystem. The ES pertinent to each case study site were identified along with indicators of these ES and data sources that could be used for mapping. During the process, several questions and uncertainties arose, followed by discussion, leading to these main lessons learned: 1) ES identification: Some ES that do not seem important at the European scale emerge as relevant at regional or local scales; 2) ES indicators: When direct indicators are not available, proxies for indicators (indirect indicators) might be used, including combined data on monitoring requirements imposed by EU legislation and international agreements; 3) ES mapping: Boundaries and appropriate data spatial resolution must be established because ES can be mapped at different temporal and spatial scales. We also acknowledge that mapping and assessment of ES supports the dialogue between human well-being and ecological status. From an evidence-based marine planning-process point of view, mapping and assessment of marine ES are of paramount importance to sustainable use of marine natural capital and to halt the loss of marine biodiversity. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:726-734. © 2016 SETAC.

We compared and contrasted 11 European case studies to identify challenges and opportunities toward the operationalization of marine and coastal ecosystem service (MCES) assessments in Europe. This work is the output of a panel convened by the Marine Working Group of the Ecosystem Services Partnership in September 2016. The MCES assessments were used to (1) address multiple policy objectives simultaneously, (2) interpret EU-wide policies to smaller scales and (3) inform local decision-making. Most of the studies did inform decision makers, but only in a few cases, the outputs were applied or informed decision-making. Significant limitations among the 11 assessments were the absence of shared understanding of the ES concept, data and knowledge gaps, difficulties in accounting for marine social-ecological systems complexity and partial stakeholder involvement. The findings of the expert panel call for continuous involvement of MCES 'end users', integrated knowledge on marine social-ecological systems, defining thresholds to MCES use and raising awareness to the general public. Such improvements at the intersection of science, policy and practice are essential starting points toward building a stronger science foundation supporting management of European marine ecosystems. © 2017 The Author(s).