Fish species observations from Traditional Knowledge (TK ) literature, plotted in the approximate geographic location of observed record, with symbol colour indicating the number of fish species recorded and shape indicating the approximate time period of observation. Results are from a systematic literature search of TK sources from Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Fennoscandia, and Russia. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 75- Figure 4-37

Table 3.1. Summary of historical population estimates for 22 circumpolar caribou and wild reindeer herds. Data courtesy of Circum-Arctic Rangifer Monitoring Assessment Network (CARMA) and D.E. Russell & A. Gunn; www.carmanetwork.com/display/ public/home. Data vary substantially among herds and over time in accuracy and precision, and represent only general patterns of abundance. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, CAFF 2013 - Akureyri . Arctic Biodiversity Assessment. Status and Trends in Arctic biodiversity. - Mammals(Chapter 3) page 91

Regional differences are more pronounced in the insectivore guild (Figure 3-24). Although diversity of waders was moderate in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway, 88% (15 of 17) of taxa with known trends were declining—the largest proportion of any group. Both short-term (the last 15 years) and long-term (more than 30 years) trends were available for 157 taxa. Trends were unchanged over the two time periods for 80% of taxa, improved for 11% and worsened for 9%.. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 56 - Figure 3.24

Routes used for hunting polar bear in Ittoqqoortoormiit, East Greenland before 1999 (red line), and in 2012 (yellow), 2013 (blue) and 2014 (green). STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/marine-mammals" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 159 - Box figure 3.6.1

A total of 95 areas of heightened ecological significance have been identified within the Arctic LMEs. The areas were identified primarily on the basis of their ecological importance to fish, birds and/or mammals, as these species are the most widely studied Arctic groups. The majority of areas identified are used by birds (85) and marine mammals (81), with a lower number used by fish (40, most of them spawning areas). About 70 areas are used both by birds and mammals, and only two of the areas identified are used only by fish.The areas of heightened ecological significance comprise a total area of about 12 million km2, or more than half the total area of the ice-covered part of the marine Arctic. The areas are generally not homogenous but comprise subareas used by fish, birds or mammals. Based on the approach used, subareas were identified separately for fish, birds, and mammals, or information on the use of the larger areas by these groupswas summarized. The subareas often overlap and are also often used by two or more species of birds or mammals, such as for breeding in seabird colonies or for staging by waterfowl and shorebirds. Information on species present and the times and purposes of use are given in summary tables for each LME. Thus, while the areas identified as being of heightened ecological significance cover a large total area, this is the aggregate area used over all seasons throughout the year. The area used at any one time is lower due to the strong seasonal pattern in the annual migratory cycles of fish, birds and mammals.

Cumulative scores of various environmental and anthropogenic drivers of change of the benthic ecosystem across the eight Arctic Marine Areas (AMA). A cumulative score is the median score of sub-regions per AMA (Table 3.3.1). Median score for the whole Arctic is given in the centre. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/benthos" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 100 - Figure 3.3.7

Changes expected or underway in the of energy flow in the High Arctic marine environment STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/marine" target="_blank">Chapter 2</a> - Page 23 - Figure 2.2b

Although the circumpolar countries endeavor to support monitoring programs that provide good coverage of Arctic and subarctic regions, this ideal is constrained by the high costs associated with repeated sampling of a large set of lakes and rivers in areas that often are very remote. Consequently, freshwater monitoring has sparse, spatial coverage in large parts of the Arctic, with only Fennoscandia and Iceland having extensive monitoring coverage of lakes and streams Figure 6-1 Current state of monitoring for lake FECs in each Arctic country. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 6 - Page 93 - Figure 6-1

Distribution of polar cod (Boreogadus saida) based on participation in research sampling, examination of museum voucher collections and the literature (Mecklenburg et al. 2011, 2014, 2016; Mecklenburg and Steinke 2015). Map shows the maximum distribution observed from point data and includes both common and rare locations. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/marine-fishes" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 114 - Figure 3.4.2

Distributions of all capelin species (light green) and Pacific capelin (Mallotus catervarius; dark green pattern) based on participation in research sampling, examination of museum voucher collections, the literature and molecular genetic analysis (Mecklenburg and Steinke 2015, Mecklenburg et al. 2016). Map shows the maximum distribution observed from point data and includes both common and rare locations STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/marine-fishes" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 117 - Figure 3.4.5