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.

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, which has been difficult to sustain.

On land, one organizing idea has helped. The concept of “flyways” groups migration into broad, recurring routes. It has been used to align governments, focus research, and guide investment. Over time, it has helped coordinate conservation efforts, especially for waterbirds. A policy paper, published last month in the British Ecological Society’s Journal of Applied Ecology, applies the same framework to the ocean.

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’s oceans, covering the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, and Southern basins. These routes simplify migration, but they show where species move and where responsibility falls.

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 Convention on Migratory Species.

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.

The approach does not aim to protect entire ocean basins. Instead, it focuses on connectivity. Migratory species depend on a chain of sites—breeding grounds, feeding areas, and stopovers—that must all remain viable. The paper points to an existing network of more than 1,300 Key Biodiversity Areas that 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.

Threats occur across this network. Invasive species on breeding islands, bycatch in fisheries, and climate change are the 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.

These threats are well known, and in many cases the tools to address them are also known. Eradication of invasive mammals on islands has become standard practice in conservation. Measures to reduce bycatch in longline fisheries can be highly effective when applied. There are also efforts to help seabirds adapt to changing conditions, including the establishment of new colonies in more suitable locations. What remains difficult is applying these measures consistently across a species’ full range.

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.

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.

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 in areas beyond national jurisdiction, where governance has historically been fragmented but is beginning to coalesce under new agreements.

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.

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.

Banner image: Waved albatross (Phoebastria irrorata). Photo by Rhett Ayers Butler.

Citations:

• Dunn, D. C., Harrison, A.-­ L., Curtice, C., DeLand, S., Donnelly, B., Fujioka, E., Heywood, E., Kot, C. Y., Poulin, S., Whitten, M., Åkesson, S., Alberini, A., Appeltans, W., Arcos, J. M., Bailey, H., Ballance, L. T., Block, B., Blondin, H., Boustany, A. M., … Halpin, P. N. (2019). The importance of migratory connectivity for global ocean policy. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 286(1911), 20191472. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1472
• Boere, G. C., & Stroud, D. A. (2006). The flyway concept: What it is and what it isn’t. In G. C. Boere, C. A. Galbraith, & D. A. Stroud (Eds.), Waterbirds around the World (pp. 40–47). The Stationery Office.
• Oppel, S., Dobrev, V., Arkumarev, V., Saravia-­ Mullin, V., Bashmili, K., Bino, T., Bounas, A., Chardin, A., Dobrev, D., Duro, K., Kapsalis, E., Kret, E., Marchant, M.-­ P., Nakev, S., Petrovski, N., Papaioannou, H., Popgeorgiev, G., Selgjekaj, L., Skartsi, T., … Nikolov, S. C. (2023). Long-­ term conservation efforts at flyway scale can halt the pop- ulation decline in a globally endangered migratory raptor. Animal
• Conservation, 27, 374–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12917 Border, J. A., Pearce-­ Higgins, J. W., Hewson, C. M., Howard, C., Stephens, P. A., Willis, S. G., Fuller, R. A., Hanson, J. O., Sierdsema, H., Foppen, R. P. B., Brotons, L., Gargallo, G., Fink, D., & Baillie, S. R. (2025). Expanding protected area coverage for migratory birds could im- prove long-­ term population trends. Nature Communications, 16(1), 1813. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-57019-x
• Dias, M. P., Martin, R., Pearmain, E. J., Burfield, I. J., Small, C., Phillips, R. A., Yates, O., Lascelles, B., Borboroglu, P. G., & Croxall, J. P. (2019). Threats to seabirds: A global assessment. Biological Conservation, 237, 525–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.06.033
• Jones, H. P., Holmes, N. D., Butchart, S. H. M., Tershy, B. R., Kappes, P. J., Corkery, I., Aguirre-­ Muñoz, A., Armstrong, D. P., Bonnaud, E., Burbidge, A. A., Campbell, K., Courchamp, F., Cowan, P. E., Cuthbert, R. J., Ebbert, S., Genovesi, P., Howald, G. R., Keitt, B. S., Kress, S. W., … Croll, D. A. (2016). Invasive mammal eradication on islands results in substantial conservation gains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(15), 4033–4038. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1521179113
• Spatz, D. R., Holmes, N. D., Will, D. J., Hein, S., Carter, Z. T., Fewster, R. M., Keitt, B., Genovesi, P., Samaniego, A., Croll, D. A., Tershy, B. R., & Russell, J. C. (2022). The global contribution of invasive verte- brate eradication as a key Island restoration tool. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 13391. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14982-5
• Bell, J. B., Fischer, J. H., Carneiro, A. P. B., Griffiths, S., Bielli, A., Jiménez, S., Oppel, S., Phillips, R. A., Wade, H. M., Yates, O., & Reeves, S. A. (2025). Evaluating the effectiveness of seabird bycatch mitiga- tion measures for pelagic longlines in the South Atlantic. Biological Conservation, 302, 110981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.110981
• Da Rocha, N., Oppel, S., Prince, S., Matjila, S., Shaanika, T. M., Naomab, C., Yates, O., Paterson, J. R. B., Shimooshili, K., Frans, E., Kashava, S., & Crawford, R. (2021). Reduction in seabird mortality in Namibian fisheries following the introduction of bycatch regulation. Biological Conservation, 253, 108915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108915
• Häkkinen, H., Petrovan, S. O., Taylor, N. G., Sutherland, W. J., & Pettorelli, N. (2023). Seabirds in the North-­ East Atlantic: Climate Change Vulnerability and Potential Conservation Actions (1st ed.). Open Book Publishers. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0343
• Beal, M., Dias, M. P., Phillips, R. A., Oppel, S., Hazin, C., Pearmain, E. J., Adams, J., Anderson, D. J., Antolos, M., Arata, J. A., Arcos, J. M., Arnould, J. P. Y., Awkerman, J., Bell, E., Bell, M., Carey, M., Carle, R., Clay, T. A., Cleeland, J., … Catry, P. (2021). Global political re- sponsibility for the conservation of albatrosses and large petrels. Science Advances, 7(10), eabd7225. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd7225

Credits

Rhett Butler Editor

Topics

AnimalsBiodiversityBirdsBycatchClimate Change And BiodiversityConservationEndangered SpeciesIslandsMarineMarine AnimalsMigrationOceansSeabirdsGlobal

See Topics