The Agreement on the Conservation of
Albatrosses and Petrels: International Efforts
to Improve the Conservation Status of
Threatened Species
On behalf of: Marco Favero1, Warren Papworth2,
1 ACAP Advisory Committee2 ACAP Secretariat
Interrnational Seabird Bycatch Workshop
Vigo Spain
October 28th 2014
“The objective of the Agreement is to achieve and maintain a
favourable conservation status for albatrosses and petrels” (Art. II.1).
Apply to albatrosses and petrels listed in Annex 1 (30 spp)
Meeting of the Parties: decision-making body of the Agreement
Advisory Committee (AC): expert scientific and technical advice
Taxonomy Working Group
Population and Conservation Status Working Group
Seabird Bycatch Working Group
Executive Secretary: execute decisions, organise meetings,
administer funds, promote and coordinate actions, etc.Chatham albatross
© Tui De Roy
AC (and WGs) meet twice every three years: review
of work programme and development/ refinement of advice.
A substantial amount of work is being done by
ACAP Parties to implement the Agreement
(adoption / implementation of NPOA-S, recovery
plans, strategy documents, marine protected
areas and feral pest eradication programmes).
Parties meet every three years: review of the degree to which
the Agreement’s Action Plan is implemented by the Parties
(MoP4 conducted in early 2012).
Significant contribution of Non-Party Range States and NGOs to the work of the
Agreement
Three official languages: English, French and Spanish
© Juan Seco Pon
10
100
1.000
10.000
100.000
1.000.000
Tris
tan
alb
atro
ss
Bal
eari
c Sh
earw
ater
Bla
ck-b
row
ed a
lbat
ross
An
tip
od
ean
alb
atro
ss
Wav
ed a
lbat
ross
No
rth
ern
ro
yal a
lbat
ross
Atl
anti
c ye
llow
-no
sed
alb
atro
ss
Ind
ian
yel
low
-no
sed
alb
atro
ss
Bla
ck p
etre
l
Wes
tlan
d p
etre
l
Ch
ath
am a
lbat
ross
Sou
ther
n r
oya
l alb
atro
ss
Spec
tacl
ed p
etre
l
Cam
pb
ell a
lbat
ross
Salv
in's
alb
atro
ss
Wh
ite-
chin
ned
pet
rel
Bu
ller'
s al
bat
ross
Wh
ite-
cap
ped
alb
atro
ss
Gre
y p
etre
l
Soo
ty a
lbat
ross
Wan
der
ing
alb
atro
ss
Gre
y-h
ead
ed a
lbat
ross
Ligh
t-m
antl
ed a
lbat
ross
Shy
alb
atro
ss
No
rth
ern
gia
nt
pet
rel
Sou
ther
n g
ian
t p
etre
l
Am
ster
dam
alb
atro
ss
Bla
ck-f
oo
ted
alb
atro
ss
Sho
rt-t
aile
d a
lbat
ross
Lays
an a
lbat
ross
??
Agreement’s Annex 1
30 species: 22 albatrosses + 8 petrels
[4 CR , 6 EN , 12 VU , 6 NT , 2 LC ]
*
**
*
*
Trends 2001 - 2010
Increasing ( ), decreasing ( ), unknown ( )
Single Country endemic ( ) ?
*
*
*
**
*
*
**
*
*
*
*
An
nu
alb
ree
din
gp
airs
B BB BB BB B B?A AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA A
(?)(?) ( )
Action/ Process Products
Review taxonomy ACAP spp Advice other fora (e.g. CMS)
Evaluation of spp conservation status Species assessments
Development of conservation guidelines Biosecurity guidelines
Erradication guidelines
Review / development of mitigation Mitigation rev document
Brief mitigation advice
Mitigation factsheets
Development/ implementation of RFMO
engagement strategy
Advice documents on seabird CM
Advice documents on data collection and
observer protocols
Collection/ storing/ organisation of data ACAP database
Identification of conservation priorities Land based Conservation priorities
At sea Conservation priorities
Strategy on capacity building ACAP secondments
Funds AC work programme
Development of performance indicators Breeding sites, status and trends
Seabird bycatch
In early 2010 ACAP responded to the Convention for
Migratory Species (CMS) query on taxonomy of albatrosses
and further adopted the recommended taxonomic approach.
Three species added to Annex 1: since 2004, three
northern hemisphere albatrosses and the Balearic
shearwater recently listed in Annex 1 after proposal tabled
by Spain.
Action/ Process Products
Review taxonomy ACAP spp Advice other fora (e.g. CMS)
© SEO/BirdLife
Action/ Process Products
Evaluation of spp conservation status Species assessments
Process started in 2007
29 species assessments finalised by 2010
Assessments translated into the three ACAP languages by 2011
Assessments are updated as new data becomes available
• Conservation status
• Taxonomy
• Conservation plans
• Breeding biology
• Breeding sites
• Population trends
• Foraging ecology
• At-sea distribution
• Threats
• Information gaps
Available at http://www.acap.aq/acap-species
Large body of research has been undertaken in recent years on
seabird bycatch mitigation. Effective mitigation measures
have been identified and best practice advice developed for
pelagic LL, demersal LL and trawl fisheries
Action/ Process Products
Review / development of mitigation Mitigation rev document (EN, FR, SP)
Brief mitigation advice (EN, FR, SP)
Mitigation factsheets (EN, FR, SP, POR, JAP, MAN, KOR)
Co-branded with BirdLife International
Advice generated to be used at
different fora (Governments, RFMOs,
observer programmes, fishermen, etc)
• Complexity of fisheries and Agencies (e.g. artisanal fisheries)
• Progress in adoption of Conservation Measures and NPOA-S
• Observer programmes and data
availability/ quality issues
Available at http://www.acap.aq/bycatch-mitigation
Waved Albatross
© R. Medina-ATF
• ACAP’s strategy to engage with RFMOs has been
developed to assist with the development and
implementation of CM in high seas fisheries.
• Line weighting – Bird Scaring Line – Night setting
package for pelagic LL fisheries
• Key challenge is to ensure that the knowledge is
applied and mitigation measures are implemented
widely and effectively in fisheries where incidental
mortality is occurring.
Action/ Process Products
Development/ implementation of RFMO
engagement strategy
Advice documents on seabird CM
Advice documents on data collection and
observer protocols
• Observer programmes and data availability (resource implications)
• Electronic monitoring, a way forward?
Action/ Process Products
Development of strategy on capacity
building
ACAP secondments
Funds AC work programme
• Parties (2006) identified Capacity Building as an
issue of high priority for the Agreement.
• Objective: to improve the capacity of Parties and
other relevant stakeholders in areas such as research,
administration, training and monitoring.
• Significant resources spent by ACAP to increase
capacities of Parties and Range States (e.g.
secondment programme, grant scheme).
• Since 2008: 15 (out of 28) conservation projects funded by the AC comprised capacity
building aspects in research, education, training and outreach (some 60% of AUD$
461,000 granted during 2008-2012).
Salaverry © Pro-Delphinus
KEY CHALLENGES
• Non-Party States holding breeding areas
• Number of other fishing Range States need to be engaged (e.g. high seas fleets)
• Full engagement/ participation by Parties
High turnover rate at decision maker level
• Major data gaps in population status, by-catch, etc.
Collection of relevant data
• More traction in RFMOs, implementation and data gathering issues
Slow progress/ temporal scale issues in some areas/ arenas
• Size and complexity of some fisheries (artisanal/ semi-industrial)
• Limited resources (e.g. eradication programmes)
•Widespread adoption/implementation of ACAP’ best practice mitigation advise’
Top Related