{"id":2190710,"date":"2026-04-13T18:00:44","date_gmt":"2026-04-13T16:00:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/focusingonwildlife.com\/news\/?p=2190710"},"modified":"2026-04-10T14:13:48","modified_gmt":"2026-04-10T12:13:48","slug":"half-of-seabirds-are-declining-protecting-marine-flyways-could-help-save-them","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/focusingonwildlife.com\/news\/half-of-seabirds-are-declining-protecting-marine-flyways-could-help-save-them\/","title":{"rendered":"Half of seabirds are declining. Protecting marine flyways could help save them"},"content":{"rendered":"

Animals that cross borders often encounter conservation systems that stop at them. Migratory species move through jurisdictions with little regard for political boundaries, relying on habitats spread across large distances and governed by different rules. The result is patchy protection, overlapping threats, and declining populations.<\/p>\n

Seabirds make this problem clear. They range across entire ocean basins, breeding on remote islands, feeding in distant waters, and passing through multiple national zones along the way. Nearly half of migratory species are in decline, and seabirds are among the most threatened groups. Their conservation requires coordination across places and seasons,\u00a0which has been difficult to sustain.<\/p>\n

On land, one organizing idea has helped. The concept of \u201cflyways\u201d groups migration into broad, recurring routes. It has been used to align governments, focus research, and guide investment. Over time,\u00a0it has helped coordinate conservation efforts, especially for waterbirds.\u00a0A policy paper, published last month in the British Ecological Society\u2019s\u00a0Journal of Applied Ecology<\/i>, applies the same framework to the ocean.<\/p>\n

\n
\"Overlap<\/a>
Overlap of the marine flyways and national waters (Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) in dark blue lines). Purple colored national waters denote CMS Parties and green represent Non-\u00ad Party states. Maps are in Robinson projection, with (a) centered at 0\u00b0 and (b) centered at 140\u00b0 W. From Morten et al (2026)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Recent advances in tracking have made this possible. By analyzing the movements of long-distance pelagic species, a team of researchers from BirdLife International, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), and multiple universities identified six marine flyways that span the world\u2019s oceans, covering the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, and Southern basins. These routes simplify migration, but they show where species move and where responsibility falls.<\/figure>\n

The identified flyways overlap with the waters of 54 countries, including many that are already parties to international agreements on migratory species. Some countries, by virtue of overseas territories, are linked to several flyways at once. France, for example, touches all six. This overlap means many of the relevant jurisdictions are already linked through existing policy frameworks, notably the\u00a0Convention on Migratory Species.<\/p>\n

The species data tell a similar story. The authors identify 151 seabird species that use these marine flyways, representing about 40% of all seabirds. Of these, roughly 42% are globally threatened, a higher share than for seabirds overall. Many populations are declining, in some regions sharply. A majority of species are associated with a single flyway, while others move across several, linking distant parts of the ocean.<\/p>\n

\n

\"Albatross<\/a>
Albatross chick. Photo by Rhett Ayers Butler<\/figcaption><\/figure>
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The approach does not aim to protect entire ocean basins. Instead, it focuses on connectivity. Migratory species depend on a chain of sites\u2014breeding grounds, feeding areas, and stopovers\u2014that must all remain viable. The paper points to an existing network of more than\u00a01,300 Key Biodiversity Areas\u00a0that are important for these seabirds. These sites provide a basis for conservation, though coverage varies. Some species are associated with only a handful of sites, and a few with none that meet current criteria.<\/p>\n

Threats occur across this network. Invasive species on breeding islands, bycatch in fisheries, and climate change are\u00a0the most significant pressures. Their distribution varies by region. In parts of the Pacific and Indian Oceans, invasive species affect a large share of populations. In the Southern Ocean, bycatch is the dominant risk. Climate change adds another pressure, altering food availability and breeding conditions. Many species face more than one of these pressures at once, which complicates coordination.<\/p>\n

These threats are well known, and in many cases the tools to address them are also known.\u00a0Eradication of invasive mammals\u00a0on islands\u00a0has become standard practice\u00a0in conservation.\u00a0Measures to reduce bycatch\u00a0in longline fisheries\u00a0can be highly effective\u00a0when applied. There are also\u00a0efforts to help seabirds adapt\u00a0to changing conditions, including the establishment of new colonies in more suitable locations. What remains difficult is applying these measures consistently across a species\u2019 full range.<\/p>\n

The value of the flyways concept lies here. At the scale of an ocean basin, it encourages coordination across jurisdictions and sectors. It can also align existing agreements, from regional fisheries bodies to global biodiversity targets. The authors suggest that formal recognition of marine flyways, under consideration by the Convention on Migratory Species, could support this process.<\/p>\n

There is precedent. On land, flyway-based agreements have created forums for cooperation, data sharing, and joint planning. They have also helped sustain funding and attention over time. At sea, a similar approach would involve a mix of binding and voluntary arrangements, supported by partnerships among governments, scientists, industry, and conservation groups.<\/p>\n

\n

\"Swallow-tailed<\/a>
Swallow-tailed gull (Creagrus furcatus). Photo by Rhett Ayers Butler<\/figcaption><\/figure>
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Global targets now emphasize on both the extent of protected areas and how they connect. Marine flyways offer a way to link site-based protection into a broader network. They may also be relevant\u00a0in areas beyond national jurisdiction,\u00a0where governance has historically been fragmented\u00a0but is beginning to coalesce\u00a0under new agreements.<\/p>\n

Key gaps remain. Data gaps persist, particularly for less-studied life stages such as juveniles. The spatial overlap between threats and species distributions is not fully understood. Coordination, even with a shared framework, depends on political will.<\/p>\n

The proposal is limited. It does not resolve the broader challenges of ocean governance, but it organizes how they are addressed. For species that move across vast ranges, this may be a necessary starting point.<\/p>\n

Citations<\/b>:<\/h2>\n