This report attempts to review the abundance, status and distribution of natural wild goose populations in the northern hemisphere. The report comprises three parts that 1) summarise key findings from the study and the methodology and analysis applied; 2) contain the individual accounts for each of the 68 populations included in this report; and 3) provide the datasets compiled for this study which will be made accessible on the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service.

The Arctic terrestrial food web includes the exchange of energy and nutrients. Arrows to and from the driver boxes indicate the relative effect and counter effect of different types of drivers on the ecosystem. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 2 - Page 26- Figure 2.4

Geographic area covered by the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment and the CBMP–Terrestrial Plan. Subzones A to E are depicted as defined in the Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map (CAVM Team 2003). Subzones A, B and C are the high Arctic while subzones D and E are the low Arctic. Definition of high Arctic, low Arctic, and sub-Arctic follow Hohn & Jaakkola 2010. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 1 - Page 14 - Figure 1.2

Temporal trends of arthropod abundance for three habitat types at Zackenberg Research Station, Greenland, 1996–2016. Data are grouped as the FEC ‘arthropod prey for vertebrates’ and separated by habitat type. Solid lines indicate significant regression lines at the p<0.05. Modified from Gillespie et al. 2020a. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 39 - Figure 3.9

Circumpolar trends in primary productivity as indicated by the maximum Normalised Difference Vegetation Index, 1982–2017. (a) Brown shading indicates negative MaxNDVI trends, green shading indicates positive MaxNDVI trends. (b) Chart of trends for the circumpolar Arctic, Eurasia, and North America. Modified from Frost et al. 2020. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 30 - Figure 3.1

Conceptual model of Arctic terrestrial mammals, showing FECs, interactions with other biotic groups and examples of drivers and attributes relevant at various spatial scales. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 67 - Figure 3.28

Population estimates and trends for Rangifer populations of the migratory tundra, Arctic island, mountain, and forest ecotypes where their circumpolar distribution intersects the CAFF boundary. Population trends (Increasing, Stable, Decreasing, or Unknown) are indicated by shading. Data sources for each population are indicated as footnotes. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 70 - Table 3.4

Many population counts of gregarious migrant species, such as waders and geese, take place along the flyways and at wintering grounds outside the Arctic which stresses the importance of continued development of movement ecology studies. Monitoring of FEC attributes related to breeding success and links to environmental drivers within the Arctic takes place in a wide network of research sites across the Arctic, although with low coverage of the high Arctic zone (Figure 3-25) STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 58 - Figure 3.25

The CBMP–Terrestrial Plan identifies five FECs for monitoring terrestrial birds; herbivores, insectivores, carnivores, omnivores and piscivores. Due to their migratory nature, a wider range of drivers, from both within and outside the Arctic, affect birds and their associated FEC attributes compared to other terrestrial FECs. Figure 3-21 illustrates a conceptual model for Arctic terrestrial birds that includes examples of FECs and key drivers. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 46 - Figure 3.21

Trend quality categories are: (1) data are lacking such that trends are unknown, (2) regional and site-specific monitoring allow for assumptions of trend, (3) international monitoring allows estimation of trend direction, and (4) rigorously designed international monitoring programmes yield estimates of precision. Modified from Smith et al. 2020. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapte31 - Page 59 - Figure 3.26