6 Assessment of cumulative environmental effects and progress towards goals

6.1 Ecosystem-based management and cumulative environmental effects

Chapters 3 and 4 give an account of the Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem and environmental pressures and impacts associated with human activity. In this chapter, cumulative environmental effects on the ecosystem as a whole are assessed as far as possible.

What are cumulative environmental effects?

Any pressure on an ecosystem must be assessed on the basis of the cumulative environmental effects on the ecosystem now or in the future, taking into account the structure and functioning of the ecosystem. Cumulative effects must be assessed for each ecosystem component, for species and habitats, and for the ecosystem as a whole. If a habitat type is under a great deal of pressure in the area in question, one important consideration is whether this is the only area of the habitat type in the country, or whether it is relatively widespread. This approach is in accordance with the requirement to assess cumulative environmental effects and apply the precautionary principle, as set out in the Nature Diversity Act.

Many different pressures and impacts on the Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem are discussed earlier in this white paper. Some are associated with human activities in the management plan area, such as fisheries, maritime transport and oil and gas activities. In such cases, the Norwegian authorities are in a good position to implement national measures or take the initiative for international measures to regulate environmental pressures. There are also external pressures, such as climate change and the accompanying rise in sea temperature and melting of the sea ice, ocean acidification and long-range transport of pollutants. In such cases Norway alone is less able to control developments. It is therefore considerably more difficult to predict how important such external pressures will be when assessing cumulative environmental effects at some point in the future.

In addition, the risk of accidents and releases of pollution, which is discussed in Chapter 5, is an important part of the overall picture.

It is difficult to assess cumulative environmental effects when considering a large and complex ecosystem, subject to many different pressures that have impacts on a variety of ecosystem components, which in turn interact with each other. The Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem is just such a system. Our understanding of the types of mechanisms involved has improved from 2005 to 2010, but is still not nearly good enough to enable us to understand the entire complex system.

In this chapter, the different components of the Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem are considered. The chapter gives an account of the role of each component in the ecosystem and of pressures and impacts associated with human activities in the management plan area (see the discussion of the different industrial sectors in Chapter 4). There is also an account of how the ecosystem is being affected by external anthropogenic pressures such as climate change, ocean acidification and long-range transport of pollutants. As far as possible, the way different pressures affect individual species and habitat types and the ecosystem as a whole has also been evaluated.

At present, we lack sufficient knowledge and good enough methods to make a reliable and complete analysis of all these relationships. The precautionary principle (as set out for example in the Nature Diversity Act) must therefore be included as a consideration in assessments of how the Barents Sea–Lofoten area is to be managed under the relevant legislation.

6.2 Cumulative environmental effects on different ecosystem components

Phytoplankton and zooplankton

The phytoplankton is of fundamental importance to marine ecosystems. These organisms are responsible for primary production, which is the first stage in energy transfer to higher trophic levels (later stages in the food chain). Transport of zooplankton from the Norwegian Sea is of crucial importance for zooplankton production in the Barents Sea during the spring and summer. The zooplankton biomass available in the Barents Sea in autumn influences the growing conditions for species at higher trophic levels in the following year.

There are wide variations between seasons and between years in the species composition and biomass of phytoplankton. Important natural factors that influence and regulate the phytoplankton include nutrients, light, temperature, salinity, sea ice, mixing of the water masses, grazing and sedimentation. Climate change could influence several of these factors and thus result in changes that propagate upwards in food chains. If climate change influences water and heat transport into the Barents Sea, it will also have an effect on the zooplankton biomass in the area, both because it will influence zooplankton transport and because temperature is an important factor for the development of different life stages of the zooplankton.

Planktonic organisms with calcareous skeletons and shells will be particularly vulnerable to ocean acidification. Zooplankton, for example the copepod Calanus finmarchicus, have been shown to be sensitive to long-term exposure to even moderate acidification of seawater, which influences both physiology and reproduction. Warming of the oceans may result in less uptake of carbon dioxide, but the surface waters in northern waters will still be colder than further south; CO₂ uptake will therefore be higher in these areas, resulting in acidification of the seawater.

At present, human activity only has indirect effects on plankton biomass, through exploitation of species further up the food chain. In future, direct harvesting of zooplankton, for example Calanus finmarchicus, could alter the situation.

An oil spill in the marginal ice zone would probably affect biological production locally. It is unlikely that the quantity of plankton in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area as a whole will be negatively affected by pollution, but pollutants could be transferred from plankton to higher trophic levels.

At present, the cumulative environmental effects on plankton are not believed to be having a negative impact on plankton biomass in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area. However, a continuation of current trends – increasing acidification, rising temperature and shrinking ice cover – may have impacts on plankton production, species composition and distribution in the longer term.

Projections for 2025

Cumulative environmental effects on plankton in the future will depend on other environmental trends. Continuing ocean acidification is expected to have negative impacts on calcifying planktonic organisms and on Calanus finmarchicus. Changes in temperature and ice cover will also affect the species composition and distribution of planktonic organisms, and trends in stocks of plankton-feeding fish will be an important factor for plankton biomass. If large-scale harvesting of zooplankton is permitted, this will be a new anthropogenic pressure on the plankton biomass, which could have significant effects on the ecosystem. Any harvesting must be based on scientific advice. If adequate information is not available in a specific case, or if there is doubt about the impacts on the environment, decisions must be made in accordance with the precautionary principle.

The seabed and benthic fauna

Most benthic species are stationary and are mainly of local importance for the ecosystem. The benthic species composition reflects local conditions and can therefore be used as an important indicator of environmental quality. Many demersal fish and other animal groups feed on benthic species. Changes in the species composition of benthic communities can affect biological production and thus the food supplies available.

Source MAREANO/Norwegian Mapping Authority

Cold-water coral reefs are large, spatially complex biological structures, which makes them suitable habitats for many sessile and free-swimming organisms. Coral reefs offer a wide variety of microhabitats and thus support high biodiversity. There is also reason to believe that sponge communities are important both for fish and for many invertebrates, but little work has been done on their ecological importance.

Important processes that take place on the seabed include decomposition of organic particulate matter and nutrient regeneration. These processes are crucial for production in the ecosystem. Enzyme activity in microbial processes, and thus the speed of such processes, is influenced among other things by the temperature on the seabed.

Benthic animals are particularly vulnerable to damage and disturbance caused by fishing gear that is towed along the sea bed. The fauna in relatively fine sediments will be more severely affected than fauna in coarser, more unstable sediments. Pressure from bottom fishing has been reduced from 2005 to 2009. Bottom trawling can kill motile species that live among the sessile species or affect them indirectly by damaging their protective surroundings and exposing them to predators. Bottom trawling also increases the particulate content of the water. This particulate matter settles on benthic communities and results in an increase in sediment-cleansing activities and energy use.

Source MAREANO/Institute of Marine Research

Rising temperatures can result in the expansion of the range of various species northwards. It is uncertain how much impact this will have on the benthic fauna.

An increase in runoff from land and a rise in inputs of sediments from Svalbard’s glaciers will have most impact near the river mouths and glacier terminuses.

Pollutants have been detected in benthic animals, but only in low concentrations. There are stable low levels of organic pollutants in sediments and organisms.

Benthic communities are affected by the presence of red king crabs, since these feed on benthic animals. Recent investigations in the Varangerfjorden (2008/09) have shown that the species is causing substantial changes in soft-bottom benthic communities. A comparison with the situation before the red king crab became abundant in the areas studied (1995) shows a dramatic decline both in the number of species and in biomass. In addition, the investigations confirm that large individuals of bivalves, echinoderms and polychaetes are more or less absent. It is unclear whether these are permanent effects. The Varangerfjorden studies indicate that when the crabs remove the dominant benthic organisms, oxygenation in the sediments is reduced.

There have been no registered changes in pressures and impacts associated with maritime transport.

Expansion of oil and gas activities affects benthic communities and species, but to a limited extent. Studies show that the impacts of deposition of cuttings from drilling with water-based mud are generally limited. Deposition of drill cuttings from tophole sections of wells in the Barents Sea is very local, and the seabed will normally return to its normal state within a few years.

Benthic trawling results in bycatches of various groups of the benthic fauna, which in addition to corals and sponges include arthropods, bivalves, gastropods, polychaetes, echinoderms and sea anemones. More than 400 species belonging to 14 different groups are affected, but the impacts on the ecosystem are not known.

Harvesting of benthic invertebrates such as shrimps and red king crab also has impacts on benthic communities. The shrimp stock is considered to be healthy and is being harvested sustainably. In the past 10 years, the fisheries management authorities have focused increasingly on impacts on benthic communities, and a number of measures have been introduced. Further measures will probably be introduced, and the pressure from the fisheries is therefore expected to be reduced.

A number of different factors with impacts on benthic animals and habitats have been identified. However, no surveys or research have been carried out that provide information on the cumulative effects of all these factors on populations and their distribution.

All in all, climate change and the fisheries are the factors that will have the greatest effects on the species composition and distribution of benthic communities and biological production by such communities. We know little about the importance of the impacts of bottom gear for the status of individual species in the management plan area or in Norwegian waters as a whole. There has been trawling in a number of areas for some decades. In the areas mapped by the MAREANO programme, damage to certain habitat types (coral reefs and gorgonian forests) has been revealed. The programme has also revealed damage to sponge communities, but the scale is uncertain. We know that continued ocean acidification will have a negative impact on corals because they will grow poorly, and this may make them more vulnerable to other pressures such as sediment deposition.

It is difficult to draw conclusions about the cumulative environmental effects on the benthic fauna and habitats. In areas where the seabed has been mapped, there is considerable damage from bottom fishing gear, and more damage than could be documented in 2005. However, we know that bottom trawling has been restricted since 2005. In geographical areas that have not been mapped, we lack sufficient information to draw conclusions about cumulative environmental effects and their significance for the ecosystem.

Source MAREANO/ Institute of Marine Research

Fish stocks

Different fish species play different roles and are of differing importance in the ecosystem, some as prey and others as predators. Different species may compete for the same food resources. Current knowledge indicates that cod, herring and capelin are the three key fish stocks in the production system harvested in the Barents Sea. Capelin is the most important prey species for cod, and is also important for a number of other predators, including several species of seals, whales and seabirds (see Chapter 3.3.4 for a description of ecological relationships between herring and capelin). In northern parts of the Barents Sea, polar cod is particularly important for many predators.

Many different environmental pressures act on fish stocks, but fishing is the human activity that has the greatest impact. This applies both to species that are targeted by the fisheries and to those that are taken as bycatches. The indicators used for fish stocks in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area are Northeast Arctic cod, capelin, Greenland halibut, golden redfish, beaked redfish, juvenile herring and blue whiting.

One of the objectives of the management of living marine resources is to ensure a high long-term yield. However, European eel, blue skate, spiny dogfish, basking shark, blue ling, golden redfish, porbeagle and beaked redfish are all listed as threatened (in the categories critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable) on the 2010 Norwegian Red List (see Chapter 3.3.7). There is no directed fishery for eel, blue skate, blue ling, porbeagle or beaked redfish in the management plan area. The stocks of golden and beaked redfish and blue ling are at low levels because of earlier overfishing. Management measures have been introduced for all these species, and beaked redfish and Greenland halibut have shown better recruitment and signs of a positive trend in stock size in recent years. There is a directed fishery for beaked redfish in international waters, which is cause for concern, and Norway has repeatedly urged the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) to halt this fishery. It is too soon to evaluate the effect of the management measures introduced for coastal cod.

Oil and gas activities can also put pressure on fish stocks, and seismic surveys have been shown to affect fish behaviour. Fish show increased swimming activity, which can be a sign of stress. Fish are also affected by underwater noise from various sources and by operational discharges of pollutants, even at low concentrations. In addition, chronic exposure of fish to low levels of oil components in produced water may result in damage to genetic material, slower maturation and poorer growth. It is uncertain to what extent the levels registered in the environment can result in long-term effects.

Long-range transport of pollutants also has impacts on individual stocks. Studies show that levels of hazardous substances and radioactive substances in the environment are generally low. Species at the highest levels of food chains, such as seals, are an exception to this, as are long-lived deepwater fish species.

Climate change has already resulted in changes in physical conditions and ice cover in the management plan area. These factors will have an increasing impact on the distribution of fish stocks.

Harvesting is a deliberate and managed pressure on fish stocks. Harvest levels are based on advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), but negotiations with other countries and other public interests may result in departures from the recommended quotas. In some case, for instance, the fisheries authorities may plan for rebuilding of certain stocks to proceed more slowly, in order to take account of other public interests. This may result in somewhat higher fishing pressure on some stocks than recommended by ICES.

Climate change may cause changes in physical conditions and ice cover, which will have a considerable impact on the distribution of fish species. In the short to medium term, rising temperatures are expected to result in an increase in quantities of fish in the Barents Sea, particularly in northern and northeastern parts. In addition, any pressure that results in changes in the biomass or species composition of the zooplankton may have impacts on fish stocks. It is unclear how ocean acidification will affect lower trophic levels and what effects this may have on other ecosystem components, including fish. The cumulative effects are therefore uncertain.

At present, cumulative environmental effects are not believed to be having a negative impact on the most important fish stocks in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area. However, the cumulative effects on certain smaller but important stocks, such as the two redfish species and Greenland halibut, are too great. The fisheries are putting most pressure on these stocks. However, a continuation of current trends – increasing acidification, rising temperature and shrinking ice cover – may have impacts on the production, species composition and distribution of fish stocks in the longer term.

Seabirds

In the past 10 years, an alarming number of seabird populations in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area have been declining rapidly. The cumulative environmental effects (from climate change and other anthropogenic pressures) today are too great. Seabirds are long-lived, have low reproductive rates and are highly mobile. Most species are closely adapted to the availability of specific food organisms that are directly or indirectly affected by harvesting strategies and climate change. At certain stages of their life cycle, seabirds are also closely tied to their habitats, and are particularly sensitive to a wide range of human pressures, including habitat loss, disturbance, pollution (oil and hazardous substances) and hunting.

Seabirds that migrate away from the Barents Sea–Lofoten area for part of the year or part of their life cycle will also be exposed to various environmental pressures outside this area. Seabirds are a link between marine and terrestrial ecosystems, and this factor becomes increasingly important at higher latitudes. It is therefore particularly important in Svalbard, where biological production on land is highly dependent on the marine ecosystem.

Seabirds are exposed to environmental pressures that act both through the physical environment and through their food supplies. The decline in populations and in breeding success has mainly been linked to changes in food supplies. The observed changes in zooplankton biomass and in the migration patterns of important fish stocks may reduce the food supplies available to seabirds within range of their breeding sites. The ivory gull is sensitive to changes in sea ice distribution and is particularly vulnerable.

Source Photo: Hallvard Strøm

Climatic conditions affect seabirds both directly and indirectly, for example through changes in food supplies and exposure to hazardous substances. Changes in these conditions that alter the distribution patterns of prey organisms will affect seabird populations, but the effects will vary according to where the different species breed. Seabird populations that are already declining are also particularly vulnerable to any other environmental pressures. The situation has become more serious since 2005. Even low levels of hazardous substances may have negative impacts if other conditions (including food supplies) are unfavourable. However, the extent to which such interactions have had impacts at population level is uncertain. Levels of organic pollutants in glaucous gulls are still alarmingly high.

Activities in many sectors put pressure on seabirds. The fisheries can have an impact on food supplies for seabirds and seabirds may be taken as a bycatch in fishing gear, while oil spills, marine litter and pollutants all have negative impacts on species and habitats. In the near future, offshore energy production may result in further mortality and habitat loss. In addition, climate change may result in changes in the distribution of prey species on which seabirds are dependent. The role of seabirds in marine ecosystems means that they are one of the most vulnerable groups of marine organisms.

Despite considerable improvements in the knowledge base on seabirds, there is still a lack of quantitative information on the causal relationships behind the decline in populations. Poorer food supplies are one explanation, but a lack of knowledge about which pressures result in poorer food supplies means that any assessment of cumulative effects on seabirds and their habitats today and in the future is uncertain.

Many of the clearest trends for Norwegian seabirds in recent decades appear to be a result of a reduction in the amounts of important prey available, particularly small schooling fish species. Many of the challenges we are facing in this area can only be resolved through closer scientific cooperation between seabird ecologists, fisheries biologists and oceanographers.

Nordic report

In 2010, the Nordic Council of Ministers published the report Action plan for Seabirds in Western-Nordic areas. In addition to the action plan, the report contains a review and assessment of pressures and impacts on seabirds in the Northeast Atlantic, based on information from national and international experts. The report highlights three pressures that are important for many seabird species in large parts of the study area. These are climate change/rising sea temperatures, competition with fisheries and oil pollution. The report identifies food shortages caused by competition between seabirds and fisheries as an important cause of the problems many seabird populations are experiencing in areas where fisheries and seabirds compete for the same species . These problems are also apparent in the Barents Sea. However, seabirds and fisheries do not necessarily compete for the same fish resources at the same time and in the same place. There is often a time lag, and competition may be indirect. We still need more knowledge to understand the mechanisms involved and quantify the relationships.

The Nordic report also points out that all seabird species are vulnerable to oil spills, particularly because the waterproofing of their plumage is affected by even very small amounts of oil. Oil pollution may also have toxic effects on birds, especially when they preen and ingest oil, and also through ingestion of contaminated prey. Bycatches and pollutants other than oil are also identified as specific pressures that are of importance for fewer species and/or locally in the Western Nordic area, including Norwegian areas.

Projections for 2025

The expected continuation of climate change will continue to have impacts on seabirds, in the period up to 2025 as well. Pressure from hazardous substances is expected to remain more or less unchanged from today, and seabirds will be under pressure from several other human activities. Bycatches of seabirds are expected to decrease as new technology is taken into use, and closer cooperation between seabird experts and marine scientists will result in better knowledge of seabirds and their food supplies. In the longer term, climate change and perhaps ocean acidification may nevertheless result in an increase in the cumulative environmental effects on seabirds as a result of human activity. Ocean acidification will not be a direct threat to seabirds, but will have indirect effects because of its impacts on food supplies for seabirds.

Marine mammals and polar bears

Various species of whales and seals, in addition to polar bears, are part of the Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem. Seals dominate in numbers and whales in biomass. Some whale species spend part of the year in the management plan area, migrating between feeding grounds in polar waters and mating and calving areas in more temperate waters (for example minke whale, fin whale and humpback whale), while others may remain in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area all year round (for example beluga whale, narwhal and bowhead whale). Most of them are top predators, but some baleen whales are secondary consumers, feeding on krill and other larger plankton organisms. Between them, whales feed on organisms that make up a large part of the ecosystem (the sea snail Limacina helicina, krill, shrimps, crabs and other crustaceans, various fish species, bivalves, gastropods, cephalopods and seals). Polar bears are top predators in the Arctic ecosystem. The remains of their prey, such as seals, provide an important food supply for animals such as Arctic foxes, ivory gull and glaucous gull.

Marine mammals are subject to various types of environmental pressures. The bowhead whale, narwhal, hooded seal and common seal are all listed as threatened (in the categories critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable) on the 2010 Norwegian Red List. The Svalbard populations of walrus, common seal and polar bear are listed as vulnerable. None of these populations is hunted in the management plan area or Svalbard, but there is some hunting of common seal along the mainland coast of Norway.

In 2005, the catch of minke whales was limited and the impact on the stock was small. In 2009, the catch was further reduced. The harp seal catch in 2005 was limited and had little impact on the stock. Sealing activity was further reduced in 2009, partly because of a decline in pup production in the White Sea in recent years. A hooded seal catch is taken in the West Ice.

Recent data show more definitely that in some areas, the bycatch of common porpoise is so high that it puts considerable pressure on the population. In these areas, the local population of porpoises is only maintained by migration of animals from other areas. The bycatch and harvest of common seals have not been sustainable, and a management plan has now been drawn up for the species. The management regime for the coastal seals has recently been changed, and in future more sustainable management is expected, based on how much of each population can be harvested.

The report from the advisory groups mentions that studies from other sea areas have shown that noise can have impacts on marine mammals. New knowledge means that noise, particularly especially from propellers, is now considered to be a greater problem for marine mammals than was previously believed.

Rising activity levels in maritime transport and the oil and gas industry may also put more pressure on marine mammals, for example through an increase in noise levels and the risk of collisions. Pressure from fisheries and hunting is expected to remain unchanged or decline.

In general, changes in ice cover or the position of front zones where biological production is high may have a considerable impact on the populations of species that are strongly dependent on these areas for breeding or feeding. Species that are already affected by climate change, such as the polar bear, will be particularly vulnerable if pressure from pollutants increases. Climate change will have a direct impact on the availability of suitable habitat for ice-dependent species (Arctic seals, ringed seal, polar bear). For other species, it may result in changes in the availability of prey.

Since 2005, the first possible impacts of climate change on ice-dependent marine mammals have become apparent in the Barents Sea. These impacts are expected to become more marked in the period up to 2025.

Ice-dependent and other species have to be considered separately when cumulative environmental effects on marine mammals today are being assessed. The cumulative effects on ringed seal, harp seal, hooded seal and polar bear are too great, and appear to be primarily a result of rising temperatures. For species that are not ice-dependent, such as the large whale species in the area, there are no apparent adverse effects at present. However, hunting and bycatches respectively are having local negative impacts on the common seal and porpoise populations. A continuation of current trends – increasing acidification, rising temperature and shrinking ice cover – is expected to have increasing impacts on the production, species composition and distribution of marine mammals in the period up to 2025. The scale of these effects will depend on the pace of climate change, and particularly trends in sea ice extent and quality. The impacts of climate change will be additional to those of a rising volume of shipping and an increase in oil and gas activity.

Threatened species

The above review shows that a number of species in different components of the Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem are threatened. These are listed in Box 3.6 in Chapter 3.3.7.

The cumulative environmental effects on these populations in the management plan area are discussed under the different ecosystem components. The main distribution area of several of these species coincides with the management plan area. The cumulative effects in this area will therefore be very important for the status of these species in Norway as a whole.

6.3 Cumulative environmental effects on the Barents Sea–Lofoten area

It is a complex and difficult task to make an assessment of the combined effects of all human pressures on the ecosystem as a whole. It involves evaluating human pressure on each ecosystem component and taking into account how impacts in one area may have domino effects on other ecosystem components. Domino effects may increase the vulnerability of species and habitats. In a larger area such as the whole management plan area, it is also necessary to take into consideration the fact that pressures and impacts may vary from one part of the area to another.

When assessing the cumulative effects on parts of an ecosystem, it is therefore important to consider their implications for other parts of the same system. In the present context, it is particularly important to assess the effects on key species in the Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem. If the cumulative effects on a particular species group or an area have negative impacts on populations of key species such as the copepod Calanus finmarchicus, herring or capelin, this will be far more significant for other species in the ecosystem than if less central species are affected.

Many different factors have already been mentioned that make it a challenging task to assess cumulative environmental effects on the entire Barents Sea–Lofoten ecosystem today and in the future. The lack of reliable information means that the precautionary principle will have to be applied to a varying degree as a guideline for management of the area.

Experience from the fisheries sector shows that a management regime based on the precautionary principle is needed, as set out in the Marine Resources Act, to take into account that there may be synergistic interactions between factors that we do not know about. Climate change will have impacts on both ecosystems and human society. The possible effects of the large-scale climate change we are currently witnessing will be additional to other pressures on an area, and there will be geographical variations in how this affects vulnerability.

In the management plan area, cumulative environmental effects are considered to be greatest for the following elements of the ecosystem: corals, sponges and sea pen communities, seabirds, ice-dependent seal species and those fish stocks that are in poor condition. The decline in common guillemot and kittiwake populations is particularly worrying.

Some trends in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area suggest that the ecosystem is changing. The reasons for the decline in seabird populations are complex, but a reduction in the amount of important prey species available has been advanced as one of the most important explanations. Populations of pelagic species such as common guillemot, puffin and kittiwake have been declining for a long time.

The major fish stocks are in good condition and are being harvested sustainably, but certain smaller stocks are still at low levels. Bottom trawling also has impacts on the benthic fauna. Substantial damage to coral reefs and sponge communities has been documented in several areas. These organisms have functions that are important for other ecosystem components, for example as nursery areas for fish, but we know too little about the relationships. Damage to the benthic fauna may have serious domino effects on other parts of the ecosystem.

In recent years there has been a decline in the extent of sea ice in the Barents Sea and surrounding areas as a result of climate change. A considerable decline in breeding success in ice-dependent seal species is one of the first clear effects of climate change on the ecosystem in the Barents Sea and surrounding areas.

Given normal circumstances and the current level of activity, harvesting is expected to have the greatest impact on fish stocks of all the activities in the management plan area, while maritime transport and oil and gas activities are expected to have little impact (Table 6.1). However, activity in these sectors is growing and may result in increasing pressure.

In the years ahead, the cumulative effects of climate change, ocean acidification and long-range transport of pollutants will probably increase and have more serious implications than the impacts of different human activities in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area. Because of uncertainties and poor documentation of several factors, it is not possible to draw definite conclusions on the cumulative effects on the ecosystem of all human activities combined. However, a combination of several significant environmental pressures in the same area at the same time increases the risk of negative impacts. For example, a permanent change in sea temperature (see Figure 6.5) and pH could result in change on such a scale that the ecosystem reaches a tipping point and there is an irreversible regime shift. This means that there are major, permanent changes in the structure, functioning and productivity of the ecosystem. The consequences of such changes are difficult to predict, but may be far-reaching.

Source Institute of Marine Research

Pressure on one ecosystem component will often have implications for other parts of the system as well. For example, direct physical damage to coral reefs can result in poorer ecological conditions for other organisms that depend on the coral reef as their habitat, such as demersal fish species and crustaceans. This can reduce the value of a coral reef and its role for the biodiversity and ecological functioning of the area.

Ocean acidification as a result of a higher concentration of CO₂ in seawater may result in damage to calcium-dependent species. This would affect phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthic animals such as corals, crustaceans, echinoderms and molluscs. Coral reefs are key habitats for fish and invertebrates, and planktonic organisms are essential food for fish, seabirds and whales. Harm to these plant and animal groups may result in major changes in the ecosystem.

There are indications that the distribution of plankton in the management plan area may alter as a result of climate change, which could have important effects on other ecosystem components. Fish and other organisms that feed on plankton will move to follow their food supplies. The implications will be more serious for species groups such as seabirds, which are more closely tied to their habitats at certain times of year. Seabirds may experience food shortages because their prey organisms move too far away from the colonies, which means that the adults are unable to provide enough food for their young, and seabird populations decline.

In an ecosystem-based management regime, management of human activities must be based on the limits within which ecosystem structure, functioning and productivity can be maintained. The examples above show that a pressure or impact on one part of the ecosystem may have domino effects on others, and that the mechanisms involved may be very complex. Such effects will be particularly important if environmental pressures result in changes in the population or distribution of key species such as Calanus finmarchicus, herring or capelin. Some of the mechanisms involved are known, for example interactions between different fish stocks. However, there are still gaps in our knowledge of important aspects of ecosystem functioning that are needed in the development of an ecosystem-based management regime, and these must be taken into account in management of the ecosystem.

Priority should therefore be given to cooperation across sectors in systematic studies of synergistic effects on the ecosystem. For example, more knowledge is needed about how ocean acidification and climate change will affect the transport of hazardous substances, their metabolism and uptake, and their effects on species, food chains and ecosystems. Another area that needs to be studied is how climate change will influence fishing patterns through changes in the distribution of fish stocks or expansion of the areas accessible to fishing vessels as the extent of the sea ice shrinks. And we need to know more about the possible direct impacts of climate change and ocean acidification on fish stocks and their prey and predators, and how it will be necessary to adjust the harvest.

As described in Chapter 3, the state of the environment in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area today is generally good. However, the cumulative effects on the ecosystem will probably increase in the years ahead, and it is important to monitor developments closely.

The particularly valuable and vulnerable areas that have been identified fulfil key functions for the entire ecosystem of the management plan area. It is especially important to prevent the cumulative environmental effects from becoming too great in these areas, where this could have major consequences. Several of the particularly valuable and vulnerable areas are relatively close to the coast and support rich fish stocks and high biodiversity. There is therefore considerable human activity in these areas, particularly fishing and other harvesting. Special caution should therefore be exercised in establishing new activities in these areas.

6.4 Progress towards objectives and targets

The management plan is a tool for both facilitating value creation and maintaining the high environmental value of the area. The Government’s overall objectives are as follows:

• management of the Barents Sea–Lofoten area will promote sustainable use of the area and its resources to the benefit of the region and the country in general;

• the management regime will ensure that activities in the area do not threaten the natural resource base and thus jeopardise opportunities for future value creation;

• the management regime will facilitate economically viable commercial activities and as far as possible promote value creation and employment in the region;

• management of commercial activities in the area will be coordinated to ensure that the various industries are able to coexist and that the overall level of activity is adjusted to take account of environmental considerations;

• harvesting of living marine resources will promote value creation and secure welfare and business development to the benefit of the country as a whole;

• living marine resources will be managed sustainably through the ecosystem approach;

• petroleum activities will promote value creation and secure welfare and business development to the benefit of the country as a whole;

• steps will be taken to facilitate the profitable production of oil and gas on the basis of health, environment and safety requirements and standards that are adapted to environmental considerations and the needs of other industries;

• favourable conditions will be provided for safe, secure and effective maritime transport that takes account of environmental considerations and promotes value creation in the region.

In the 2006 management plan, the Government set objectives and targets for the period up to 2020 for various issues, including hazardous substances and radioactive substances, operational discharges, litter, safe seafood, management of the risk of acute pollution, management of particularly valuable and vulnerable areas and habitats, species management and conservation of marine habitat types.

The objectives and targets in the management plan are intended to express its purpose in more specific terms. A number of them will also give substance to the management objectives for species and habitat types in the Nature Diversity Act for activities and measures in specific sectors, and the management principle and fundamental considerations set out in the Marine Resources Act .

The 2006 management plan set out the objectives and targets listed below as a basis for management of the Barents Sea–Lofoten area up to 2020. In addition, relevant national goals will apply. The rest of this chapter lists the objectives and targets and provides a brief account of progress towards them.

6.4.1 Biodiversity

The Government has set the following objective for biodiversity in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area:

Management of the Barents Sea–Lofoten area will ensure that diversity at ecosystem, habitat, species and genetic levels, and the productivity of ecosystems, are maintained. Human activity in the area will not damage the structure, functioning, productivity or dynamics of ecosystems.

Under this objective there are targets for specific areas, which are discussed below.

Management of particularly valuable and vulnerable areas and habitats

Activities in particularly valuable and vulnerable areas will be conducted in such a way that the ecological functioning and biodiversity of such areas are not threatened.

Damage to marine habitats that are considered to be threatened or vulnerable will be avoided.

In marine habitats that are particularly important for the structure, functioning, productivity and dynamics of ecosystems, activities will be conducted in such a way that all ecological functions are maintained.

The target of conducting activities in particularly valuable and vulnerable areas in such a way that their ecological functioning and biodiversity are not threatened has been achieved for some of these areas (marginal ice zone, polar front, waters around Svalbard). In other areas (area off the Lofoten Islands to the Tromsøflaket, the Tromsøflaket, Eggakanten, the 50-km zone along the coast of Finnmark) it is uncertain whether the target has been achieved. Some smaller fish stocks are at low levels because of earlier overfishing. However, even when rebuilt, these smaller stocks will only make up a small proportion of the fish resources in these areas measured as biomass. In addition, trawling has caused damage to coral reefs, sponge communities and sea pens. The target of avoiding damage to marine habitats that are considered to be endangered or vulnerable has not been achieved, but a considerable reduction in the number of trawl hours has been registered, which means that the physical impacts of fisheries have been reduced since 2005. In autumn 2009, an area called «Korallen» northwest of Sørøya island in Finnmark was protected against bottom trawling under the Marine Resources Act. It is unclear whether human activity in particularly valuable and vulnerable areas also explains the severe decline that has been observed in a number of seabird populations.

Species management

Naturally occurring species will exist in viable populations and genetic diversity will be maintained.

Harvested species will be managed within safe biological limits so that their spawning stocks have good reproductive capacity.

Species that are essential to the structure, functioning, productivity and dynamics of ecosystems will be managed in such a way that they are able to maintain their role as key species in the ecosystem concerned.

Populations of endangered and vulnerable species and species for which Norway has a special responsibility will be maintained or restored to viable levels as soon as possible. Unintentional negative pressures on such species as a result of activity in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area will be reduced as much as possible by 2010.

The introduction of alien organisms through human activity will be avoided.

The target that naturally occurring species will exist in viable populations has been achieved for cod, haddock, saithe, capelin, herring and marine mammals. Other fish stocks (golden redfish, beaked redfish, Greenland halibut and coastal cod) have been at low levels and have therefore not reached their full reproductive potential. This target has not been achieved for seabird populations. In 2005, there was extensive illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing of Northeast Arctic cod. Norway took the initiative for cooperation with other countries to reduce fishing pressure. This was successful, and IUU fishing has been greatly reduced. Norway has well-established arrangements for cooperation with Russian fisheries authorities on the management of Northeast Arctic cod through the Joint Norwegian–Russian Fisheries Commission. This includes everything from determining total allowable catches to setting gear restrictions. In 2006, the Commission adopted a harvest control rule to ensure sustainable management of the cod stock, which has been evaluated by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) as being in accordance with the precautionary approach and the goal of maintaining a high long-term yield. In 2010, ICES found that the size of the spawning stock was satisfactory and that it was being harvested sustainably. Thus, as of 2010 the management regime appears to be successful.

Given the condition of the stocks and on the advice of the Institute of Marine Research and ICES, protection measures have been introduced for coastal cod to limit both commercial and recreational fishing. The first of these were introduced in May 2004, and they have since been expanded and adjusted. ICES has recommended that no coastal cod should be harvested until a plan for rebuilding the stocks has been established. As one step in the establishment of a sound management regime for cod in coastal areas, the Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs adopted a plan for rebuilding coastal cod stocks north of 62°N in spring 2010. This sets out changes in conservation measures to take effect from 2011.

The target of managing species that are essential to the structure, functioning, productivity and dynamics of ecosystems in such a way that they are able to maintain their role as key species in the ecosystem is considered to have been achieved for capelin, cod and juvenile herring (these are defined as key species).

The target of maintaining populations of threatened species and species for which Norway has a special responsibility or restoring them to viable levels as soon as possible has not been achieved. Populations of many such species are not considered to be viable at present. The target of avoiding the introduction of alien species through human activity has not been achieved. The Ballast Water Convention has not entered into force, and rules have not yet been drawn up to prevent the spread of organisms on ships’ hulls. Regulations for the management of ballast water in Norwegian waters have been adopted. There is uncertainty as regards the nature and level of risk associated with alien species and which species are in fact being introduced to the management plan area. Norway is managing the red king crab in accordance with a white paper on the subject (Report No. 40 (2006–2007) to the Storting). The current management regime is to be evaluated to see whether it is preventing further spread of the species. The snow crab is expanding its range in the Barents Sea, but it is uncertain whether this species is introduced or has spread naturally to the area.

Conservation of marine habitat types

A representative network of protected marine areas will be established in Norwegian waters, at the latest by 2012. This will include the southern parts of the Barents Sea–Lofoten area.

Norway’s network of marine protected areas will consist of marine protected areas that are included in the marine protection plan and other relevant processes.

6.4.2 Pollution

The Government has set the following objective for preventing and combating pollution in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area:

Releases and inputs of pollutants to the Barents Sea–Lofoten area will not result in injury to health or damage the productivity of the natural environment and its capacity for self-renewal. Activities in the area will not result in higher levels of pollutants.

Under this objective there are targets for specific areas, which are discussed below.

Hazardous substances and radioactive substances

Environmental concentrations of hazardous and radioactive substances will not exceed the background levels for naturally occurring substances and will be close to zero for man-made synthetic substances. Releases and inputs of hazardous or radioactive substances from activity in the area will not cause these levels to be exceeded.

Levels of hazardous substances and radioactive substances, including various man-made substances, measured in the management plan area are generally low. However, some animal species at the top of food chains have accumulated high levels of pollutants. The target that concentrations of these substances will not exceed the background levels for naturally occurring substances and will be close to zero for man-made synthetic substances has not been achieved so far.

Operational discharges

Operational discharges from activities in the area will not result in damage to the environment or elevated background levels of oil or other environmentally hazardous substances over the long term.

Environmental monitoring shows that there are generally no elevated concentrations of hydrocarbons or metals in sediments, and that the benthic fauna at all measuring stations is undisturbed. There should be no discharges to the sea from oil and gas activities. The rules on operational discharges from ships are so strict that no observable damage is expected as long as the rules are followed. However, illegal releases of pollutants from ships do occur. The possibility of damage from such incidents cannot be excluded, but the scale of such releases and their impacts are unknown.

Litter

Litter and other environmental damage caused by waste from activities in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area will be avoided.

In the management plan area, marine litter is at present only systematically registered on selected beaches in Svalbard. There have been no systematic observations of marine litter on the shoreline of mainland Norway in the period 2005–09. Litter is still a problem along the coast in the management plan area. This target has not yet been achieved.

6.4.3 Safe seafood

The Government has set the following objective for safe seafood in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area:

Fish and other seafood will be safe and will be perceived as safe by consumers in the various markets.

Levels of various hazardous substances in polar cod, shrimps and capelin, and in muscle meat of cod are not a problem, but average values for the sum of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs in cod liver in samples from certain localities are close to the statutory maximum level for human consumption set by the EU and Norway. These maximum limits came into effect after 2005. Measurements show that levels are close to the maximum permitted concentrations in both coastal and non-coastal areas of the Barents Sea. Reliable documentation is required to assess progress towards the objective for safe seafood. At present the data are insufficient, but sampling over time and baseline studies of the different food species will provide the necessary documentation. Documentation has already been obtained for Norwegian spring-spawning herring, Greenland halibut and mackerel and will shortly be available for cod and saithe north of 62°N. At present, there is considered to be a risk that maximum permitted levels of contaminants in fish for human consumption may be exceeded in several species and products, including Greenland halibut and cod liver.

6.4.4 Risk of acute pollution

The Government has set the following objectives for management of the risk of acute pollution in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area:

The risk of damage to the environment and living marine resources from acute pollution will be kept at a low level and continuous efforts will be made to reduce it further. Activity that involves a risk of acute pollution will be managed with this objective in mind.

Maritime safety measures and the oil spill preparedness and response will be designed and dimensioned to effectively keep the risk of damage to the environment and living marine resources at a low level.

In 2005, the risk of incidents that might result in acute pollution from oil and gas activities was assessed as low in the management plan area. In the period 2005–10, a range of processes and projects that can reduce the risk level have been identified. However, risk management in certain areas needs to be improved, and some factors have been identified that could result in a higher risk level. All in all, however, no information has been obtained during the period that indicates that the 2005 assessment should be changed. Maritime traffic in the area has increased, but at the same time various measures have been introduced to reduce the probability of accidents that could result in acute pollution. Various measures have been introduced to strengthen preparedness and response to acute pollution from petroleum activities and shipping, but further work is needed to achieve the objectives.

An increase in traffic of nuclear-powered vessels and the possibility of new activity in connection with floating nuclear power plants has resulted in a higher probability of an incident leading to releases of radioactivity. On the other hand, various risk-reduction measures have been initiated or completed by Russia. Norway has played an active role in and supported this work. In addition, Norway’s nuclear emergency response system has been strengthened and expanded to include Svalbard and Jan Mayen. The probability of an accident is low, and this will continue to be the case. However, the environmental consequences of an accident would be serious.