Synthesizing expert opinion to assess the at-sea risks to seabirds in the western North Atlantic

Abstract

Marine environments are subject to a range of human disturbances. Identifying effective conservation strategies, in order to manage or mitigate the negative impacts of human activities, requires a way to first identify and evaluate the impact of activities on ecosystem components. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) techniques such as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) offer a way to systematically evaluate and integrate stakeholder opinion in order to set priorities and make decisions. With a goal to synthesize current knowledge of the potential impacts of human activity on breeding and non-breeding seabirds in the western North Atlantic Ocean, we present a case study involving the use of AHP to assess sensitivity of species to such hazards as: fisheries bycatch, oiling, light pollution, vessel traffic, marine debris, and offshore wind turbines. Based on responses from ten North Atlantic seabird experts, fisheries bycatch (particularly when involving suspended gill nets) was identified as the greatest risk across a wide range of species, with an overall relative value of 0.47±SE 0.026. Oiling risk was the second most highly ranked (0.26±0.026, of which 0.214 corresponded with surface oil, 0.044 with oil and gas platform interactions), and was considered to have the greatest potential impact on alcids (Common and Thick-billed Murre, Atlantic Puffin, Razorbill, Dovekie). Offshore wind turbines (0.097±0.022), marine debris (0.08±0.016), light pollution (0.058±0.0077), and traffic (0.042±0.0053) were considered to be less serious risks for seabirds than fisheries bycatch and oiling. In addition to demonstrating how relative risk can be quantified using a multicriteria decision analysis technique such as AHP, we summarize the sensitivities of fourteen seabirds and suggest ways in which multicriteria decision analysis can enhance conservation planning.