Common use of Implementation of Action Plan activities Clause in Contracts

Implementation of Action Plan activities. 5.1. Objective 1 - Maintain a sustainable and stable Pink-footed Goose population and its range Activity Implementation rate 1.1 Overall management of the population is effective across the flyway to maintain a stable and sustainable population at the agreed population target. 100% 1.2 Ensure that the current Adaptive Harvest Management strategy provides clear guidance (e.g. an optimal harvest quota) to achieve the agreed population target. 75% 1.3 Diminish influence of human activities on overall natural migration pattern, behaviour and seasonal distribution of the Pink-footed Goose. 25% 1.4 Key sites for the Pink-footed Goose are afforded appropriate protected area status at national and international levels. 75% 1.5 Key sites for the Pink-footed Goose have management plans that address their conservation requirements. 75% 1.6 No key sites, historically used by Pink-footed Geese in your country, are lost as a result of agricultural, industrial, urban, conservation or other land developments. 75% 1.7 No specific national or regional land use or agricultural policies / practices that have a negative impact / influence the ecological requirements of Pink-footed Geese. 50% 1.8 Measures are being taken to restore and/or rehabilitate Pink-footed Goose roosting and / or feeding habitats. 33% 1.9 Have there been any management actions taken to prevent pink-footed geese breeding on the mainland of Norway? 0% 1.10 Sufficient human and financial resources have been allocated for monitoring, reporting of harvest levels and continued implementation of the Adaptive Harvest Management strategy. 50% 5.2. Objective 2 - Keep agricultural conflicts to an acceptable level 5.3. Objective 3 - Avoid increase in tundra vegetation degradation in the breeding range Action 3.1 concerns the gathering of sufficient knowledge on the extent and impact of arctic tundra degradation caused by Pink-footed Geese. Norway detailed that a monitoring programme has been established in the western part of Spitsbergen but that information from eastern and northern Svalbard is currently lacking. With respect to Action 3.2, Norway reported the level of arctic tundra degradation to partially be at an acceptable level. Norway further reported that in the breeding colonies at western Spitsbergen the grubbing consequences are increasing, yet at the spring staging sites the trend apparently varies with the yearly spring conditions (delayed snow cover can protect the tundra from early grubbing). Information from east and north of Svalbard is currently lacking. Regarding action 3.3, Norway reported that sufficient human and financial resources have been allocated for monitoring the extent and impact of arctic tundra degradation by Pink-footed Geese, but not for the implementation of preemptive/remedial action. Until now, funding for monitoring has been raised by The Svalbard Environmental Protection Fund, Aarhus University and The Fram Centre in Tromsø ("The Terrestrial Flagship"). Funding has been raised on a yearly basis, and future funding will depend on new applications from researchers and funding from various sources. In general, there is strong competition for research funding and these activities have not been prioritized for funding by the responsible managing institutions on Svalbard. 5.4. Objective 4 - Allow for recreational use that does not jeopardize the population Activity Implementation rate 4.1 The harvest level of Pink-footed Geese is sufficient to achieve the required harvest quota, in order to maintain the population at the agreed target. (Denmark, Norway) 100%* 4.2 The hunting of Pink-footed Geese is sustainable. (Denmark, Norway) 100% 4.3 An ‘Emergency Hunting Season Closure’ contingency plan has been adopted and distributed amongst relevant organizations. (Denmark, Norway) 0% 4.4 National or regional campaigns / training programmes / management activities carried out to promote wise use hunting practices, information on how to lower the crippling rates etc. (Denmark, Norway) 50% 4.5 Current trend for the ‘crippling rate’ considered acceptable. 0%

Implementation of Action Plan activities. 5.1. Objective 1 - Maintain a sustainable and stable Pink-footed Goose population and its range Activity Implementation rate 1.1 Overall management of the population is effective across the flyway to maintain a stable and sustainable population at the agreed population target. 100% 1.2 Ensure that the current Adaptive Harvest Management strategy provides clear guidance (e.g. an optimal harvest quota) to achieve the agreed population target. 75% 1.3 Diminish influence of human activities on overall natural migration pattern, behaviour and seasonal distribution of the Pink-footed Goose. 25% 1.4 Key sites for the Pink-footed Goose are afforded appropriate protected area status at national and international levels. 75% 1.5 Key sites for the Pink-footed Goose have management plans that address their conservation requirements. 75% 1.6 No key sites, historically used by Pink-footed Geese in your country, are lost as a result of agricultural, industrial, urban, conservation or other land developments. 75% 1.7 No specific national or regional land use or agricultural policies / practices that have a negative impact / influence the ecological requirements of Pink-Pink- footed Geese. 50% 1.8 Measures are being taken to restore and/or rehabilitate Pink-footed Goose roosting and / or feeding habitats. 33% 1.9 Have there been any management actions taken to prevent pink-footed geese breeding on the mainland of Norway? 0% 1.10 Sufficient human and financial resources have been allocated for monitoring, reporting of harvest levels and continued implementation of the Adaptive Harvest Management strategy. 50% 5.2. Objective 2 - Keep agricultural conflicts to an acceptable level 5.3. Objective 3 - Avoid increase in tundra vegetation degradation in the breeding range Action 3.1 concerns the gathering of sufficient knowledge on the extent and impact of arctic tundra degradation caused by Pink-footed Geese. Norway detailed that a monitoring programme has been established in the western part of Spitsbergen but that information from eastern and northern Svalbard is currently lacking. With respect to Action 3.2, Norway reported the level of arctic tundra degradation to partially be at an acceptable level. Norway further reported that in the breeding colonies at western Spitsbergen the grubbing consequences are increasing, yet at the spring staging sites the trend apparently varies with the yearly spring conditions (delayed snow cover can protect the tundra from early grubbing). Information from east and north of Svalbard is currently lacking. Regarding action 3.3, Norway reported that sufficient human and financial resources have been allocated for monitoring the extent and impact of arctic tundra degradation by Pink-footed Geese, but not for the Average implementation of preemptive/remedial action. Until now, funding for monitoring has been raised by The Svalbard Environmental Protection Fund, Aarhus University and The Fram Centre in Tromsø ("The Terrestrial Flagship"). Funding has been raised on a yearly basis, and future funding will depend on new applications from researchers and funding from various sources. In general, there is strong competition for research funding and these activities have not been prioritized for funding by the responsible managing institutions on Svalbard.rate: 0% 5.4. Objective 4 - Allow for recreational use that does not jeopardize the population Activity Implementation rate 4.1 The harvest level of Pink-footed Geese is sufficient to achieve the required harvest quota, in order to maintain the population at the agreed target. (Denmark, Norway) 100%* 4.2 The hunting of Pink-footed Geese is sustainable. (Denmark, Norway) 100% 4.3 An ‘Emergency Hunting Season Closure’ contingency plan has been adopted and distributed amongst relevant organizations. (Denmark, Norway) 0% 4.4 National or regional campaigns / training programmes / management activities carried out to promote wise use hunting practices, information on how to lower the crippling rates etc. (Denmark, Norway) 50% 4.5 Current trend for the ‘crippling rate’ considered acceptable. 0%