Ecosystems impacts, interpretation

Critical load exceedances may serve as the basis for interpreting ecological impacts as ecological risks (or rather changes in the level of current risk to ecosystem health ). This would refer to the process of ecological risk characterization. 

In the common case, indicator reflects the level of complexity of the Okhotsk Sea ecosystem. A change in is realized as a consequence of migration processes and of variability in nutritive interactions. Sub-system B2o plays the role in these processes of an external source of change in other components. These changes are interpreted in terms of fishing and other impacts causing variations in component biomasses. 

The issue is how to interpret results from highly refined in vitro systems to ecological relevance . The leap is probably not as big as it seems in a first glance. We should not be blinded by some kind of ecological fundamentalism . The ecosystem is built up by individuals. If the survival and fitness of the individuals is compromised the whole system will suffer. The current in vitro methods and particularly and hopefully the future methods have the full potential to assess impacts on, and through relevant legislation, protect the individuals. In this way we also achieve a safe protection of the environment and the ecosystem. 

PEPAT does not contain a definition of adverse impacts on the Antarctic environment and its dependent and associated ecosystems (Art. 3, para. 2 a). Impact and transboundary impact are defined in the Espoo Convention in Art. 1, sub-paras, vii and via (28). The environmental principles that according to Art. 3 must be fundamental considerations in the planning and conduct of all activities in the Antarctic Treaty area are very wide in their scope. PEPAT does not supply a list of mandatory and non-mandatory projects to ensure that the most dangerous activities will always be subject to lEE or CEE (28, 29), nor does it provide guidance for a uniform interpretation of the terms minor and transitory impact contained in Arts. 1, 2 and 3 of Annex I. 

The relative significance of different effects may require further interpretation, especially when changes in several assessment or measurement endpoints are observed or predicted. For example, if a risk assessment is concerned with the effects of stressors on several ecosystems in an area (such as a forest, stream, and wetland), it is important to discuss the types of effects associated with each ecosystem and where the greatest impact is likely to occur. 

---