Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ph5wq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T11:05:04.729Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The biodiversity implications of changes in coastal tourism due to climate change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

EMMA G. COOMBES
Affiliation:
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
ANDY P. JONES*
Affiliation:
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
WILLIAM J. SUTHERLAND
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
*
*Correspondence: Dr Andy Jones Tel: +44 1603 593127 Fax: +44 1603 591327 e-mail: a.p.jones@uea.ac.uk

Summary

Nature-based recreation can have deleterious impacts on biodiversity, even at low levels of habitat use. Such impacts can arise from a variety of sources such as trampling of vegetation or disturbance of nesting birds. Sensitive, yet highly visited, environments such as the coast are particularly vulnerable. It is predicted that levels of coastal recreation may increase in some areas as a result of climate change, but little is known about the potential implications for flora and fauna. This study is based on a case study of two beaches, Holkham and Cley, on the coast of East Anglia, UK. Visitor surveys were undertaken across a year to obtain information on visitors' habitat use at these sites, including an analysis of the routes they walked. From this, estimates of their current impacts on vegetation cover, vegetation species richness and ringed plover populations were made by applying known relationships between visitor passes and disturbance. Future changes in levels of recreation were modelled under two climate change scenarios, and the biodiversity implications were estimated. This study finds that overall levels of vegetation cover and diversity are likely to decline, although only by a small amount, if future visitor numbers increase due to warmer and drier weather conditions. However, these declines will be differential with dunes and areas close to entrances receiving the strongest magnitude impacts. Disturbance from visitors is found to already strongly restrict the distribution of ringed plovers at the study beaches, yet the few remaining areas of suitable habitat may disappear if tourism levels increase. Management strategies which limit the spatial extent of visitor impacts, possibly by the use of beach zoning, may help to minimize any additional reductions in biodiversity that accompany changes in recreation.

Type
Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, U.V. (1995) Resistance of Danish coastal vegetation types to human trampling. Biological Conservation 71: 223230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellan, G.L. & Bellan-Santini, D.R. (2001) A review of littoral tourism, sport and leisure activities: consequences on marine flora and fauna. Aquatic Conservation-Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 11: 325333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumstein, D.T., Anthony, L.L., Harcourt, R. & Ross, G. (2003) Testing a key assumption of wildlife buffer zones: is flight initiation distance a species-specific trait? Biological Conservation 110: 97100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boorman, L.A. & Fuller, R.M. (1977) Studies on the impact of paths on the dune vegetation at Winterton, Norfolk, England. Biological Conservation 12: 203216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, J.M. & Maun, M.A. (1982) A study of the effects of trampling on the vegetation of Lake Huron sand dunes at Pinery Provincial Park. Biological Conservation 24: 273283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, O.L., Lohmann, M., Maksimovic, O., Meyer, M., Merkovic, A., Messerschmidt, E., Riedel, A. & Turner, M. (1999) Potential impact of climate change effects on preferences for tourism destinations. A psychological pilot study. Climatic Research 11: 247254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A.C. & McLachlan, A. (2002) Sandy shore ecosystems and the threats facing them: some predictions for the year 2025. Environmental Conservation 29: 6277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruun, P. (1962) Sea level rise as a cause of shore erosion. Journal of Waterways Harbors Division, American Society of Civil Engineers 88: 117130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buerger, R., Hill, J. & Herstine, J. (2003) Re-emerging recreational use patterns on an undeveloped barrier island following the impact of hurricanes: a North Carolina case study. Society and Natural Resources 16: 527539.Google Scholar
Burger, J. (1991) Foraging behaviour and the effect of human disturbance on the piping plover (Charadrius-Melodus). Journal of Coastal Research 7: 3952.Google Scholar
Burger, J., Gochfeld, M. & Niles, L.J. (1995) Ecotourism and birds in coastal New-Jersey: contrasting responses of birds, tourists, and managers. Environmental Conservation 22: 5665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coombes, E.G. (2007) The effects of climate change on coastal recreation and biodiversity. Ph.D. thesis, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.Google Scholar
Durell, S.E., Stillman, R.A., Triplet, P., Aulert, C., Bio, D.O., Bouchet, A., Duhamel, S., Mayot, S. & Goss-Custard, J.D. (2005) Modelling the efficacy of proposed mitigation areas for shorebirds: a case study on the Seine estuary, France. Biological Conservation 123: 6777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durell, S.E., Stillman, R.A., Caldow, R.W.G., McGrorty, S., West, A.D & Humphreys, J. (2006) Modelling the effect of environmental change on shorebirds: a case study on Poole Harbour, UK.Biological Conservation 131: 459473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
English Nature (2003) National Nature Reserves in Norfolk. Report, English Nature, Norwich, UK: 28 pp.Google Scholar
English Nature & Environment Agency (2003) North Norfolk Coastal Habitat Management Plan. Report, English Nature, Norwich, UK: 103 pp.Google Scholar
Fernández-Juricic, E., Venier, M.P., Renison, D. & Blumstein, D.T. (2005) Sensitivity of wildlife to spatial patterns of recreationist behaviour: a critical assessment of minimum approaching distances and buffer areas for grassland birds. Biological Conservation 125: 225235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallet, S. & Roze, F. (2001) Resistance of Atlantic heathlands to trampling in Brittany (France): influence of vegetation type, season and weather conditions. Biological Conservation 97: 189198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, J.A. (2007) Approaches to measuring the effects of human disturbance on birds. IBIS 149: 914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, J.A., Norris, K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2001) Why behavioural responses may not reflect the population consequences of human disturbance. Biological Conservation 97: 265268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goss-Custard, J.D., Triplet, P., Sueur, F. & West, A.D. (2006) Critical thresholds of disturbance by people and raptors in foraging wading birds. Biological Conservation 127: 8897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, Q. (2003) Disturbance, life history, and optimal management for biodiversity. Ambio 32: 428430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hulme, M., Jenkins, G.J., Lu, X., Turnpenny, J.R., Mitchell, T.D., Jones, R.G., Lowe, J., Murphy, J.M., Hassell, D., Boorman, P., McDonald, R. & Hill, S. (2002) Climate Change Scenarios for the United Kingdom: The UKCIP02 Scientific Report. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK: 120 pp.Google Scholar
Huston, M.A. (1979) A general hypothesis of species diversity. American Naturalist 113: 81101.Google Scholar
Hylgaard, T. (1980) Recovery of plant-communities on coastal sand-dunes disturbed by human trampling. Biological Conservation 19: 1525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hylgaard, T. & Liddle, M.J. (1981) The effect of human trampling on a sand dune ecosystem dominated by Empetrum-Nigrum. Journal of Applied Ecology 18: 559569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikuta, L.A. & Blumstein, D.T. (2003) Do fences protect birds from human disturbance? Biological Conservation 112: 447452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2000) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios: a Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, R.J.T. & Bateman, I.J. (1998) The recreational value of Cley Marshes nature reserve: an argument against managed retreat? Journal of the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management 12: 280285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutiel, P., Eden, E. & Zhevelev, Y. (2000) Effect of experimental trampling and off-road motorcycle traffic on soil and vegetation of stabilized coastal dunes, Israel. Environmental Conservation 27: 1423.Google Scholar
Kutiel, P., Zhevelev, H. & Harrison, R. (1999) The effect of recreational impacts on soil and vegetation of stabilised coastal dunes in the Sharon Park, Israel. Ocean and Coastal Management 42: 10411060.Google Scholar
Lafferty, K.D. (2001) Birds at a Southern California beach: seasonality, habitat use and disturbance by human activity. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 19491962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemauviel, S. & Roze, F. (2003) Response of three plant communities to trampling in a sand dune system in Brittany (France). Environmental Management 31: 227235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liddle, M.J. & Greig-Smith, P. (1975) A survey of tracks and paths in a sand dune ecosystem, II Vegetation. Journal of Applied Ecology 12: 909930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lise, W. & Tol, R.S.J. (2002) Impact of climate on tourist demand. Climatic Change 55: 429449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonnell, M.J. (1981) Trampling effects on coastal dune vegetation in the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, Massachusetts, USA. Biological Conservation 21: 289301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norfolk Coast Partnership (2006) Tourism Benefit and Impacts Analysis in the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Report, Scott Wilson Ltd, London, UK: 140 pp.Google Scholar
Priskin, J. (2003) Tourist perceptions of degradation caused by coastal nature-based recreation. Environmental Management 32: 189204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rickard, C.A., McLachlan, A. & Kerley, G.I.H. (1994) The effects of vehicular and pedestrian traffic on dune vegetation in South-Africa. Ocean and Coastal Management 23: 225247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, D., Jones, B. & Konopek, J. (2007) Implications of climate and environmental change for nature-based tourism in the Canadian Rocky Mountains: a case study of Waterton Lakes National Park. Tourism Management 28: 570579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, C. & Visser, G.J.M. (1993) Effects of disturbance on shorebirds: a summary of existing knowledge from the Dutch Wadden Sea and Delta area. Wader Study Group Bulletin 68: 619.Google Scholar
Stillman, R.A., West, A.D., Goss-Custard, J.D., McGrorty, S., Frost, N.J., Morrisey, D.J., Kenny, A.J. & Drewitt, A. (2005) Predicting site quality for shorebird communities: a case study on the Humber estuary. UK. Marine Ecology Progress Series A 305: 203217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stillman, R.A., West, A.D., Caldow, R.W.G., Le, S.E.A. & Durell, V.D. (2007) Predicting the effect of disturbance on coastal birds. IBIS 149: 7381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stive, M.J.F. (2004) How important is global warming for coastal erosion? Climate Change, 64: 2739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tratalos, J.A., Gill, J.A., Jones, A., Showler, D., Bateman, I., Watkinson, A., Sugden, R. & Sutherland, W. (2005) Interactions between tourism, breeding birds and climate change across a regional scale. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research Technical Report 36, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.Google Scholar
Tudor, D.T. & Williams, A.T. (2006) A rationale for beach selection by the public on the coast of Wales, UK. Area 38: 153164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, N.V. & Blumstein, D.T. (2005) Variation in human disturbance differentially affects predation risk assessment in western gulls. The Condor 107: 178181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Coombes et al. supplementary material

Supplementary figures

Download Coombes et al. supplementary material(File)
File 237.6 KB