a case study analysis of horse riding and its … · 2018. 10. 29. · title: a case study analysis...

A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF HORSE RIDING AND ITS MANAGEMENT IN A PERI-URBAN SETTING

Eloise Abbott, David Newsome and Sarah Palmer


Disclaimer The technical reports present data and its analysis, meta-studies and conceptual studies, and are considered to be of value to industry, government or other researchers. Unlike the Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre’s (STCRC’s) Monograph series, these reports have not been subjected to an external peer review process. As such, the scientific accuracy and merit of the research reported here is the responsibility of the authors, who should be contacted for clarification of any content. Author contact details are at the back of this report. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the reports or by the authors if you contact them do not necessarily state or reflect those of the STCRC.

While all reasonable efforts have been made to gather the most current and appropriate information, the STCRC does not give any warranty as to the correctness, completeness or suitability of the information, and disclaims all responsibility for and shall in no event be liable for any errors or for any loss or damage that might be suffered as a consequence of any person acting or refraining from acting or otherwise relying on this information.

We’d love to know what you think of our new research titles. If you have five minutes to spare, please visit

our website or click on the link below to complete our online survey. STCRC Tech Report Feedback

National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Entry Title: A case study analysis of horse riding and its management in a peri-urban setting / Eloise Abbott, David Newsome and Sarah Palmer. ISBNs: 9781921658877 (pbk.) 9781921658372 (pdf) Subjects: Trails—Australia—Management. Trails—Environmental aspects—Australia. Horses—Control—Environmental aspects—Australia. National parks and reserves—Australia—Management. Other Authors/Contributors: Newsome, David, 1951-. Palmer, Sarah Elizabeth, 1969-. CRC for Sustainable Tourism. Dewey Number: 333.780994

Copyright © CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd 2010 All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this book may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the publisher. Any enquiries should be directed to: General Manager, Communications and Industry Extension or Publishing Manager, [email protected] First published in Australia in 2010 by CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd Cover images courtesy of Tourism Australia, Tourism WA (Margaret River), Tourism NT and SATC Printed in Australia (Gold Coast, Queensland)

Acknowledgements Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre, established and supported under the Australian Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program, funded this research. The authors wish to thank Paul Udinga and colleagues at John Forrest National Park, Chris Pontlock of the Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale, and Wayne Van Lieven of Gosnells City Council, who provided essential information on the bridle trails within their area and provided maps.

ii

http://sustainabletourismcrc.cmail3.com/l/424209/s4i6d21/www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=cCMy_2fyZbjAjkr2Vy5LopCg_3d_3d

http://sustainabletourismcrc.cmail3.com/l/424209/s4i6d21/www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=cCMy_2fyZbjAjkr2Vy5LopCg_3d_3d

mailto:[email protected]


CONTENTS

SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................................................V

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY........................................................................................................................................ V METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................. V KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................................... V FUTURE ACTION ................................................................................................................................................. V

CHAPTER 1 .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 2 .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................................................................................... 3

IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH HORSE RIDING ....................................................................................................... 3 MANAGEMENT OF HORSE RIDING ....................................................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER 3 .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................................ 6

STUDY AREA....................................................................................................................................................... 6 METHODS............................................................................................................................................................ 6

Trail Assessment Methods ............................................................................................................................. 7 Limitations..................................................................................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER 4 .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 8

Assessment of trail condition and management........................................................................................... 14 Assessment of trail condition and management........................................................................................... 20

CHAPTER 5 ........................................................................................................................................................ 22 DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................................................... 22

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TRAILS ................................................................................... 22 SUSTAINABLE TRAIL MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................ 23

CHAPTER 6 ........................................................................................................................................................ 25 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 25

CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................................... 25 RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................................................................... 25 FURTHER WORK ............................................................................................................................................... 26

APPENDIX A: GUIDE USED FOR ASSESSING THE CONDITION OF MANAGEMENT FEATURES ........................ 27 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................... 28 AUTHORS........................................................................................................................................................... 31

iii


List of Tables Table 1: Key principles for horse riding in Canberra National Park______________________________________ 4 Table 2: Summary of trail condition indicators for Gosnells Bridle Trail _________________________________ 11 Table 3: Summary table of the management features and their condition on Gosnells Bridle Trail. _____________ 11 Table 4: Summary table of condition indicators for John Forrest Bridle Trail _____________________________ 16 Table 5: Summary table of John Forrest Bridle Trail management features and their condition. _______________ 17 Table 6: Summary of the trail condition indicators for Rowley Road Bridle Trail. __________________________ 20 Table 7: Summary of the management features and their condition observed along Rowley Road Bridle Trail. ___ 21 Table 8: Comparison table of trail condition indicators for all three case studies. __________________________ 22 Table 9: Recommendations for all three bridle trails to improve sustainable trail management________________ 24 Table 10: Suggested bridle trail monitoring program with key performance indicators ______________________ 24

List of Figures Figure 1: Location of the three case study trails in relation to Perth. _____________________________________ 6 Figure 2: Map of Gosnells bridle trail Source: MBA (1998) ____________________________________________ 8 Figure 3: Map of Gosnells Bridle Trail showing location of slopes, entry points, weed communities and sandy soil substrate. Photo (a): A community of Watsonia; Photo (b): Cavaletti gate at Hardinge Park; Photo (c): entry point Stephen Street. Photo (d): A slope greater than six degrees. ___________________________________ 9 Figure 4: Signage at the beginning of the trail. Figure 5: A water bar along the trail. ___________________________________________________ 10 Figure 6: Large incisions at the side and the centre of Gosnells Bridle Trail.______________________________ 11 Figure 7: A cavaletti gate in need of repair Figure 8: A degraded water bar. _______________________________________________________ 12 Figure 9: A section of the trail without signage. Figure 10: Water movement along the trail.________________________________________________________ 12 Figure 11: Evidence of trail bikes being ridden on the Gosnells trail.____________________________________ 12 Figure 12: Map of the trail taken through John Forrest National Park. __________________________________ 13 Figure 13: Map of John Forrest National Park bridle trail showing location of signage, slopes, weed communities, and changes in trail surface substrate. Photo (a): One of the steepest slopes on the trail. Photo (b): Rocky and gravelly surface; Photo (c): A more level section of the trail. Photo (d): A Watsonia infestation. Photo (e): Signage used on the trail.___________________________________________________________________ 15 Figure 14: Examples of incisions along the trail. ____________________________________________________ 16 Figure 15: Sign missing from the John Forrest Bridle Trail. ___________________________________________ 17 Figure 16: Map showing the course of Rowley Road Bridle Trail (blue dashes). ___________________________ 18 Figure 17: Map of Rowley Road Bridle Trail with signage, entry points and use of the road verge indicated. Photo (a): The track made with trotting fines, and the gate to reach Rowley Road. Photo (b): The trail passes behind residential land. Photo (c): A sign indicating the two circuit routes. Photo (d): Rowley Road, which has no crossing or fenced area for riders. Photo (e): Hitching rails at the parking area at the start of the trail. ______ 19 Figure 18: Bridge over the creek along the course of the trail. _________________________________________ 20 Figure 19: Which way? Lack of signage on the trail. Figure 20: The re-entry onto the trail from Rowley Road is not marked in any way. ________________________ 21

iv


SUMMARY The demand for different recreational activities in national parks and peri-urban reserves – including horse riding – has increased. Horse riding has been found to be more damaging to the surrounding environment than other recreational activities such as walking. Typical impacts include trampling of vegetation, deepening and widening of trails, spread of weeds and pathogens, and compaction of the soil. Common management techniques include site management and visitor management, but there is little knowledge about the success of these management techniques or if they are being implemented at all. This report documents a case study analysis of bridle trail management undertaken in peri-urban settings near Perth, Western Australia. It provides a simple, rapid assessment of trail condition, and makes recommendations for the ongoing sustainability of the trails.

Objectives of Study Few studies have investigated the effectiveness of management, and the applicability of assessment techniques in bridle trail systems. This is an important consideration in the success of a management scheme and central to deciding if horse riding in conservation areas is a sustainable activity. This study set out to address this by investigating:

• the extent of horse riding activity and bridle trail usage in the peri-urban setting around Perth • the effectiveness of bridle trail management • the possibility of developing a simple rapid monitoring system that is able to set key performance

indicators for auditing purposes.

Methodology A case study approach was employed, with three peri-urban sites selected: Gosnells Bridle Trail, John Forrest Bridle Trail and Rowley Road Bridle Trail. A combination of desk-based research and fieldwork was used to obtain data. The desk-based research involved a targeted literature review and liaison with government bodies who provided information on trail management. A rapid assessment method was used for the fieldwork, which involved walking each trail and making one-off qualitative observations of trail conditions and management features. Quantitative data, such as measurements of trail incisions, was also collected. The quantitative and qualitative data was analysed together to provide a comprehensive assessment of each trail.

Key Findings The assessment showed that Gosnells Bridle Trail is unsustainable and in need of maintenance. Many of its management features were in disrepair and the trail was being used by trail bike riders. There is currently no comprehensive management plan in place. John Forrest Bridle Trail was found to be well managed and sustainable. Although there are some deep incisions to sections of the trail, these were unlikely to have been a result of horse riding. Rather, the inappropriate siting of the trail (i.e. on steep slopes) was more likely to be responsible for the erosion. The purpose-built Rowley Road Bridle Trail is very well managed and sustainable. It benefits from being located on flat terrain and from the application of trotting fines (metal dust) to the surface of the trail. The trail is maintained by the local council and by a community group.

Future Action Recommendations for each of the trails to improve their sustainability have been suggested, and key performance indicators identified to enable monitoring of bridle trails. Recommendations for future bridle trails included:

• purpose-built to suit the characteristics of the location (e.g. wider trails designed for horse riders, use of trail hardening material);

• management of trail impacts or degradation problems (e.g. management of erosion); • use of a monitoring program and key performance indicators (such as trail surface soils, slope degrees,

incision depths, and management features) to identify management issues and sections in need of maintenance;

• use of a targeted maintenance program to repair any problem sections and to prevent degradation; • community involvement of local horse riders to maintain and manage the trail (similar to the committee

involved with the Rowley Road Bridle Trail).

v


vi


Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Nature-based recreation and tourism activities have increased in popularity due to increases in population size, leisure time, and private vehicle ownership (Sun &Walsh 1998; Page & Dowling 2002). As a result the demand for commercial and private recreational use of national parks, conservation reserves and fragile environments has also increased (Sun & Walsh 1998; Newsome, Moore & Dowling 2002b). Peri-urban reserves - which include national parks and nature reserves located within the margins of urban areas – experience high visitor numbers due to their proximity to large populations. These reserves host activities such as horse riding, hiking, bird watching, mountain biking, sightseeing, camping, nature appreciation and dog walking (Davies 2004; Conservation and Land Management 1994; Pickering, Hill, Newsome & Leung 2010). The increase in nature-based recreation in the peri-urban reserve system around Australian cities has brought about an increase in environmental and social impacts such as erosion and user conflict (Newsome, Phillips, Milewskii & Annear 2002a; Newsome, Smith & Moore 2008). Issues, impacts and management actions have been comprehensively explored and reported in previous STCRC reports and journal articles. The focus of attention in this previous work has been on a wide range of protected areas including the peri-urban environment. A list of these reports follows:

• Mountain Bike Activity in Natural Areas: Impacts, Assessment and Implications for Management: A case study from John Forrest National Park, Western Australia: by Claire Davies and David Newsome

• Evaluation of Impacts and Methods for the Assessment of Walking Tracks in Protected Areas by Wendy Hill and Catherine Pickering

• Manual for Assessing Walking Tracks in Protected Areas: by Wendy Hill and Catherine Pickering • High Impact Activities in Parks: Best management practice and future research by Carl Cater, Ralf

Buckley, Robert Hales, David Newsome, Catherine Pickering and Amanda Smith • Ecologically Sustainable Visitor Use of Australia’s World Heritage Areas: by Wendy Hill and

Catherine Pickering • An Integrated Framework for Developing Ecological Indicators of Visitor Use of Protected Areas:

by Guy Castley, Wendy Hill, Catherine Pickering, Wade Hadwen and Graeme Worboys

Horse riding is a popular activity in Australia and peri-urban areas experience high levels of use by horse riders (Landsberg, Logan & Shorthouse 2001). Horse riding can be more damaging to the surrounding environment than other recreational activities such as hiking because of the horse’s size and the distribution of its weight through four relatively small points (Cole & Spildie 1998; Landsberg et al. 2001; Pickering et al. 2010). The high pressure the horses put on the trail means that even horse riding at low levels shows measurable impacts (Phillips & Newsome 2002). Typical impacts of horse riding on trails include:

• soil erosion • compaction • trampling • loss of vegetation cover • spread of plant disease and weed species (Newsome et al. 2008; Pickering et al. 2010).

There are also social impacts, such as user conflict between different recreational activities (Newsome et al.

2008). For instance, some walkers dislike the damage caused to the trail by horse riding and the presence of horse faeces. Walkers have also stated that horse riding interferes with their sense of solitude and wilderness (Cubit 1990; Newsome et al. 2008). This is an important consideration, since the main objectives of protected natural areas in Australia are to not only protect flora, fauna and representative ecosystems, but to accommodate different recreational users (Newsome et al. 2002a).

Managers must ensure that impacts from recreational activities do not cause significant environmental damage to protected areas whilst also ensuring that recreational users enjoy the park or reserve. While some management bodies choose to ban horse riding completely from recreational areas, others employ management techniques such as zoning (restricting horse riders to areas of lower conservation value), designated trails (which guide horse riders to the edges of a reserved area) and visitor management (such as permits and codes of conduct) (Newsome et al. 2008). Sustainable trail management can be achieved by good planning. A trail specifically designed for its particular users and for the physical characteristics of the land will suffer fewer impacts and will be more sustainable than a poorly designed trail (Marion & Leung 2004). However, very little

1

http://www.crctourism.com.au/BookShop/BookDetail.aspx?d=676






A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF HORSE RIDING AND ITS MANAGEMENT IN A PERI-URBAN SETTING is known about the sustainability of horse riding and trail management in the peri-urban setting of Perth. Hence, this study set out to investigate:

• the extent of horse riding activity and bridle trail usage in selected peri-urban settings around Perth • the effectiveness of bridle trail management in the selected areas • the possibility of developing a rapid monitoring system that sets key performance indicators for

auditing purposes.

Three peri-urban sites were selected for case analysis: a bridle trail in John Forrest National Park east of Perth, a bridle trail in Orange Grove in the City of Gosnells south-east of Perth, and the Rowley Road Bridle Trail in Darling Downs, south-east of Perth. The next chapter provides some background to the issues associated with horse-riding in natural areas and reviews existing studies of horse-riding impacts. Chapter Three presents the methods employed in the study, and the results for each of the three case studies are presented in Chapter Four. The case study results are discussed jointly in Chapter Five. Conclusions are drawn and recommendations made in Chapter Six.

2


Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Impacts Associated with Horse Riding The distribution of a horse’s weight through four relatively small points means that the hooves dig into the soil, pushing soil particles across the surface of the trail and causing compaction as the horse moves. This leads to loose soil on the trail which can easily be eroded away by surface run-off (Newsome, Cole & Marion 2004). The biophysical impacts of horse riding are further exacerbated by the fragility and low resilience of Australian ecosystems, characterised by natural drought cycles and nutrient-poor soils (Newsome et al. 2002a). These conditions produce vegetation which is brittle and slow to grow making it more susceptible to damage from trampling (Newsome et al. 2002a).

Royce’s (1983) study on horse riding trails in John Forrest National Park in Western Australia identified impacts such as soil degradation, loss of health in vegetation alongside trails, considerable weed invasion, and death of plants due to the root-rotting fungus Phytopthora cinnamomi. The study showed a significant link between localised environmental problems and the use of the horse riding trail. In contrast, however, Whinam and Comfort (1996) recorded no introduced weeds in their study of the impacts of commercial horse riding at Cradle Mountain, Tasmania. A possible explanation was that the constant use of the trail disrupted seedling growth, and grazing marsupials prevented weed establishment (Whinam & Comfort 1996). Impacts such as soil degradation, an increase in bare ground and decrease in live plant cover were common to both studies; however the impacts differed according to the intensity of usage, type of vegetation, soil type and drainage capacity.

Weaver and Dale (1978) recorded similar results in their study of the trampling effects of hikers, motorcycles, and horses in meadows and forests, with horse riding reducing the vegetation, increasing trail width and depth, and increasing soil compaction. The study also showed that grasses were more resistant to trampling than shrubs, and that horses caused more damage on downhill slopes.

In a recent review comparing horse riding impacts with hiking and mountain biking, it was concluded that while many of the impacts of horse riding are similar to hiking impacts, it is the severity of horse riding impacts that stand out. There are also impacts specific to horse riding, such as the production of large quantities of waste, the high potential for the transport of weed propagules and the grazing effects of horses (Pickering et al. 2010).

Management of Horse Riding Reserve managers need to consider the potential impacts of horse riding and whether these impacts are acceptable, as well as ensure social equity (Vollbon 1990; Dehring & Mazzatti 1997). However, a lack of data regarding the impacts of horse riding (Landsberg et al. 2001; Newsome et al. 2002b, 2008; Whinam & Comfort 1996; Pickering et al. 2010) has meant that trail management plans have been formulated without the benefit of significant research (Newsome et al. 2002b; Newsome et al. 2008).

A sustainable trail management plan should provide guidance and support to decision making. This is ensured by addressing four areas:

(i) management guidance, such as goals and objectives (ii) a decision-making framework with indicators, standards, and monitoring methods (iii) evaluation of current trail resources (iv) a description of the actions necessary to develop and manage the trail (Marion & Leung 2004).

Good planning ensures that the trail is designed to meet the requirements of its users and is suitable for the

characteristics of the land (Marion & Leung 2004). The location, design and construction of the trail are important since many impacts are a result of poor siting of a trail. For example, a trail located off the contour of a slope will suffer from erosion, whilst a trail constructed along the contour with a high slope alignment angle with tread hardening will suffer less from erosion (Marion & Leung 2004). Tread hardening techniques involve the use of materials such as gravel, earth and crushed stone to cap the trail surface, making it able to withstand heavy horse use and natural processes such as heavy rainfall (Marion & Leung 2004; Newsome et al. 2008). However, this can lead to very high costs, particularly if rehabilitating an already degraded area (Whinam &

3

A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF HORSE RIDING AND ITS MANAGEMENT IN A PERI-URBAN SETTING Comfort 1996). Over time the trail will tend to degrade through use, weathering and natural erosion; hence, routine maintenance is necessary to ensure the trail remains sustainable and that any severe problems such as surface water on the trail are managed (Marion & Leung 2004). Regular surveys of the condition of the trail will give a good indication of areas in need of maintenance.

Whilst banning horse riding in natural areas would not be equitable, greater restrictions on horse riding relative to less damaging recreational activities is appropriate in some situations (Landsberg et al. 2001). Some of the principles required for the management of horse riding in Canberra National Park in the Australian Capital Territory include the exclusion of endurance riders and the siting of trails away from areas of ecological significance (Landsberg et al. 2001). Key principles outlined by Landsberg et al. (2001) are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Key principles for horse riding in Canberra National Park

Principle Details Provision only for recreational horse riding. Activities such as endurance riding or cross-country

will not be provided for. Horse riding will confined to specified trails. Specified trails will be maintained and signed. Bridle trails will be located near the perimeter of reserves and in zones that are already modified.

Reduce the potential of horse riding impacts in sensitive conservation areas.

Trails will be constructed and maintained for horse riders.

Trails will be hardened, adequately drained, and with plenty of width to enable passing.

Horses will be zoned away from sites of scientific, ecological, or cultural significance.

Achieved by trail location or the use of barriers.

Explanation of horse trails already in use will be required in areas where there is conflict with conservation requirements.

Re-routing of the trail may be necessary or management of impacts to confine them to the trails if there is no alternative route.

Full compliance to code of conduct. Guidelines on feeds, keeping to trails, and adhering to regulations.

Programme of monitoring. Investigate levels of use, compliance to regulations, and experience of other users.

Source: Landsberg et al.. (2001)

Typical management techniques for horse riding in the peri-urban reserve network around Perth (e.g. Bold Park Nature Reserve, John Forrest National Park, and Forrestdale Lake Nature Reserve) involve zoning, trail use and maintenance, visitor management and education. Zoning involves locating bridle trails to the perimeter of the natural area where the conservation value has already been significantly modified (Landsberg et al. 2001; Newsome et al. 2008). The use of zoning can reduce user conflict and also help to prevent horse riding parties from accessing areas of high conservation value. For example, in John Forrest National Park horse riding is restricted to specific, durable bridle trails in the park. Likewise, at Forestdale Lake horse riding is restricted to a bridle trail in the fire break on the perimeter of the reserve (Conservation and Land Management 1987).

Trail maintenance is also important as a poorly maintained trail can lead to increased erosion and deviation from the path to avoid unstable areas. Part of the Bold Park management plan is to reinforce the surface of the existing bridle trail to reduce erosion and prevent unearthing tree roots which could trip horses (Davies 2004).

Visitor management involves the use of permits, codes of conduct, and education. For example, John Forrest National Park uses permits which require all riders (from commercial groups or the general community) to be registered. The use of a permit also discourages flouting of regulations, which would lead to permit disqualification and the loss of the right to enter the park (Conservation and Land Management 1994). A code of conduct is used in Bold Park, John Forrest National Park, and Forestdale Lake. It includes directives such as to stay on the designated trails, what to feed horses prior to entering the park, and to keep horses away from water sources. Such codes aim to combat trampling of sensitive areas, weed spread, and the contamination of water sources. However, visitor compliance cannot be guaranteed as there is the risk that a small number of people will choose to ignore the code (Newsome et al. 2002). Despite this, codes of practice are more often than not used by governmental agencies, possibly because they are more cost effective and less controversial (Sun & Walsh 1998). Visitor management through education is an important long term management strategy and can lead to better understanding and tolerance (Beeton 1999). Establishing appropriate behaviour and attitudes in visitors before they enter the park may produce less conflict in multi-use areas (Beeton 1999). For example, visitors

4


could be provided with information about the location of horse riding parties if they wished to avoid them. Input into management techniques by regular visitors is also beneficial as they can provide perspectives on both tourism and land management (Beeton 1999).

One controversial management strategy is to ban horse riding from natural conservation areas. Royce (1983) recommended that horse riding trails not already approved should be prohibited from all national parks in Western Australia, and that existing trails should be phased out. However this may not be socially or politically acceptable, particularly where horse riding is seen as part of the natural heritage of the area (Landsberg et al. 2001).

To monitor the effectiveness of management and ensure that impacts are being mitigated, trail assessment must be employed. It is not unusual for management agencies to set conditions and rules for horse riding without the capacity to enforce or monitor them (Newsome et al. 2002). This makes it difficult to evaluate the success of the management and to ensure that the conditions are enforced. The development and trialling of a simple and cost effective rapid monitoring system, therefore, would be a welcome step forward in understanding impacts and managing horse riding activity in the peri-urban system of reserves around Perth.

5


Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

Study Area A case study approach was employed, with the three selected riding trails providing a snapshot account of the events, relationships, or processes involved in riding trail use. The three trails - John Forrest Bridle Trail, Rowley Road Bridle Trail, and Gosnells Bridle Trail – were chosen because their proximity to Perth means they are classified as peri-urban (see Fig.1).

John Forrest NP

Perth

Gosnells

Darling Downs

Figure 1: Location of the three case study trails in relation to Perth. (Source: Google Earth, 2008)

The City of Gosnells, approximately 17km south-east of Perth, has a variety of multi-use walk trails and picnic spots, and a wildlife sanctuary for outdoor recreation (Gosnells City Council 2008). John Forrest National Park, approximately 26km from Perth in the Darling Ranges, provides for a range of activities such as sightseeing, picnicking, bushwalking, wildlife observation, photography, mountain biking, and horse riding (Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) 2008). The Rowley Road Bridle Trail is located in Darling Downs in the Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale, approximately 45km south-east of Perth. The shire has many different walking and bridle trails for recreation (e.g. within Serpentine National Park). Langford Park in Jarrahdale has picnic areas with bridle trails and mountain bike trails (Serpentine- Jarrahdale Shire 2008).

Methods A combination of desk-based research and fieldwork was used to collect data. The desk-based methods consisted of a literature review to investigate previous studies, and liaison with government bodies (e.g. Department of Environment and Conservation and local councils) to identify horse riding activities, potential impacts and current management techniques. The fieldwork involved the rapid assessment of the trails to identify problem areas and to evaluate management practices. Fieldwork was conducted in August 2008.

6


Trail Assessment Methods A rapid assessment of the trails was undertaken. This is a common technique in ecosystem and conservation studies and was suited to this project because it enabled a rapid and easy evaluation to be conducted in a short amount of time (Denscombe 1998). A 7m section of track was considered a sufficient length to provide a good indication of trail condition. In the case of the Gosnells and the Darling Downs trails, this constituted the entire length. Each trail was walked and assessed with the collected data consisting of global positioning system (GPS) data, trail measurements, observation of condition and management and photographic records.

The location of the entry points was noted using a GPS to enable accurate measurement (Mende & Newsome 2006). Trail length was measured using a trail wheel. The slope and the width of the trails was measured every 0.5km, providing point values on trail properties and condition. Steeper slopes increase the velocity of water flowing along the trail, and a slope with a gradient of more than six degrees can play an important role in erosion processes (Scherrer et al. 2008). Slope (greater than five degrees) was measured using a clinometer. Width is a good indicator of surface condition, since width will increase in areas where the surface is boggy or uneven as riders bypass the problem area. Width was measured with a tape measure. Trail incisions more than 5cm deep were measured as an indication of erosion. The depth of the incisions was measured with a tape measure and the length of the incised trail surface with a trail wheel.

The frequency and extent of the following trail properties was also noted: water on the trail or crossing the trail; boggy sections; sections with weed communities; and the surface substrate characteristics. These factors can arise as a result of the impacts of horse riding on the trail or influence degradation of the trail. Management features were also mapped according to their location along the trail, and a visual assessment made to determine their condition and their effectiveness (cf. Leung & Marion 1999). Management features were assessed according to the condition of their construction material and the extent of degradation (see Appendix A for assessment guide).

Limitations The use of qualitative methods to assess the condition and effectiveness of management features may be considered a limitation if future studies wished to compare results. The subjective nature of the assessment process means that different people may have different views on the severity of impacts on the trail and condition of management features (Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism 2008). The point recording of all slopes greater than five degrees as an aggregate provides rapid indicative data, but such data would be more usefully applied if split in to several slope categories (e.g. 0°, 1-5°, 6-17°, > 18°) and the incidence of each category documented along the trail network. For example, see Randall and Newsome (2008).

The lack of data on the extent of other users, non-approved activity, horse riding activity and bridle trail usage in the peri-urban setting around Perth also constrained what could be explored in the analysis phase of this study.

7


Chapter 4

RESULTS

The results for each case study will be presented individually and then analysed collectively in Chapter 5. Results of the Gosnells Bridle Trail study will be presented first, followed by the John Forrest Bridle Trail and the Rowley Road Bridle Trail.

Gosnells Bridle Trail The Gosnells bridle trail is approximately 7.1km long and is located along the Darling Scarp in the foothills of the Orange Grove/Martin localities. The trail, which provides a link between the Ellis Brook Valley area and the Water Corporation’s Bickley Valley interim bridle trail, was designed to allow local horse riders to access the Bickley bridle trails without transporting their horses to a trailhead (Maher Brampton and Associates (MBA) (1998). It is a multi-use point-to-point trail for walkers and horse riders. Its northern terminus can be found at the end of Hardinge Road, with the southern terminus in Ellis Brook Valley (Fig. 2).

Figure 2: Map of Gosnells bridle trail Source: MBA (1998)

8


a)

Figure 3: Map of Gosnells Bridle Trail showing location of slopes, entry points, weed communities and sandy soil substrate. Photo (a): A community of Watsonia; Photo (b): Cavaletti gate at Hardinge Park;

Photo (c): entry point Stephen Street. Photo (d): A slope greater than six degrees.

The trail crosses through a variety of tenures: the Water Authority catchment reserve, the Boral Quarry

freehold, the Ellis Brook Park and Recreation Reserve, Stephen Street road reserve, Reservoir Road, a public

9°

8°

11°

10°

b)

c)

12°

d)

Hillside Farm

KEY Cavaletti gates/entry points Weed communities Slope > 6 degrees

Sandy trail surface

9

A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF HORSE RIDING AND ITS MANAGEMENT IN A PERI-URBAN SETTING right of way, Grant Street, Hillside Farm, the Western Australian Planning Commission reserve, Rushton Road, and the Crown reserve vested in the City of Gosnells (MBA 1998) (Fig. 2).

There are several entry points to the trail: • Ellis Brook Reserve (via Rushton Road) • Hillside Farm (via Hayward Road) • Gosnells Road East (trail head) • Grant Street (from the pony club) • Reservoir Road • Stephen Street

The trail is designed for use by horse riders and walkers (MBA 1998), but criteria relating to trail planning

and routig are not available. While there is no data on the numbers of horse riders or walkers using the trail, anecdotal evidence suggests the trail is not used very often due to its short length.

There is no management plan for the trail but a feasibility plan, prepared by Maher Brampton and Associates (1998), states the need for a clear management plan with particular emphasis on ongoing trail maintenance to tackle erosion issues. This would be facilitated by the use of a formal hazard inspection program with minor issues being fixed regularly and a major maintenance works program bi-annually (MBA, 1998).

The trail assessment began from the northern terminus at Hardinge Road (see Fig.2). The surface soils evident along the trail were rocky lateritic gravels with some sections with higher proportions of sand and clay (see Fig. 3). Weed communities were common along the trail corridor, particularly Watsonia (Watsonia meriana) and Patterson’s Curse (Echium plantagineum). There were at least five slope measurements exceeding six degrees.

Trail design indicators such as cavaletti gates, the width of the trail and road crossings were noted and assessed. The starting point of the trail at Hardinge Park was judged to be in good condition as the cavaletti gate to prevent vehicles from entering the trail was undamaged and functional (Fig. 3, photo b). The maximum trail width encountered was 5.1m with a minimum width of 0.8m. There were also few secondary trails for bypassing problem areas caused by unstable or boggy conditions.

Trail management features such as water bars and signage were found at the beginning and end of the trail and at various points along the trail. Signs were designed to inform users of the rules and the route of the trail (Fig. 4). They were readable and undamaged. A water bar on a fairly steep slope was deemed to be functional with water being diverted from the trail to the edge (Fig. 5).

Figure 4: Signage at the beginning of the trail. Figure 5: A water bar along the trail.

Assessment of trail condition and management A summary of trail condition indicators and management features is shown in tables 2 and 3 respectively. Trail incisions were common, with a minimum depth of 5cm and a maximum of 29cm (see Fig. 6). They varied in length from 4m to 26.5m. Several management features were found to be in poor condition and were ineffective. In one open section there was no signage and little evidence of a formal trail, making it very difficult to locate

10


the direction of the trail (see Fig. 9). At the northern end of the trail a large amount of water was present (see Fig. 10). Water crossing the trail not only causes erosion but deposits top soil from beyond the trail in the path of horse riders.

Trail bikers were also using the trail, even though they are not permitted (as stated on the sign at the beginning of the trail). Trail bikes disturb the surface soil and water collects and moves along the wheel ruts (see Fig. 11). One cavaletti gate was in poor condition with overgrown weeds and broken bars (Fig 7), and a water bar had not been maintained and was no longer effective at diverting water (Fig 8).

Figure 6: Large incisions at the side and the centre of Gosnells Bridle Trail.

Table 2: Summary of trail condition indicators for Gosnells Bridle Trail .

Length of trail (km) 7

General description Residential area. Fire access tracks, paddock boundaries, road reserves.

Soils Mostly rocky lateritic gravels, some sandy sections

Vegetation Weed infestation e.g. Watsonia

Average trail width (m) 3.2

Number of slopes > 5° 12

% of trail affected by incisions 9.06

Average incision depth (cm) 11.8

Total bifurcations of the trail 5

% of trail with water crossing 1.62

Table 3: Summary table of the management features and their condition on Gosnells Bridle Trail

Condition

Management feature Good Poor

Entry points 4 4

Water bars 7 9

Signage 5 1

Hitching posts 1 0

11


Figure 7: A cavaletti gate in need of repair Figure 8: A degraded water bar.

Figure 9: A section of the trail without signage. Figure 10: Water movement along the trail.

Figure 11: Evidence of trail bikes being ridden on the Gosnells trail.

John Forrest Bridle Trail John Forrest National Park was established as an ‘A’ Class reserve in 1898 and became John Forrest National Park in 1947 (DEC 2008). It has a trail network for horse riders, walkers, and mountain bike riders and can be accessed from Pechey Road in Swan View and the main park entrances off Great Eastern Highway. Other access points are management access tracks accessible to walkers, with some designated as horse riding tracks (Conservation and Land Management 1994). In some sections the bridle trail is also used as a fire access route.

12


13

John Forrest National Park

(Pechey Road)

HoveaFalls

Figure 12: Map of the trail taken through John Forrest National Park.

John Forrest National Park contains many trails and management tracks that reflect a long and complex history of recreational use and fire management access routes. Many of the existing “trails” are management access tracks that have become walk trails due to increasing recreational usage of the park over the last 20 years. The present trail networks therefore comprise fire control access tracks, park management tracks, an old railway line and, more recently, designated walking, mountain biking and horse riding trails.

The trail assessment began at the Pechey Road entrance and finished near Hovea Falls (Fig. 12). The start of the trail appears to be designed as a management access track, but towards the centre of the park where use is greatest the trail appeared to be designed specifically for recreation. There is currently no data available on the number of horse riders or other recreational users using the trail.


The John Forrest National Park Management Plan 1994-2004 proposed the following aims for the provision of recreation within the park:

• fulfill the recreation requirements of visitors to the extent that the Park’s natural and cultural values are protected and maintained;

• provide quality recreation opportunities for all visitors including those with special needs; • ensure that the experience of visitors is not impaired by over-use or conflicting uses; • maintain the natural qualities of the Park’s recreation settings.

With regard to horse riding the management plan states that the objective is to assist enjoyment of the park

by horse riders by providing trails designated for horse riders and through minimising any negative impacts which may result from horse riding within the park (Conservation and Land Management, 1994). The management plan also states that research and monitoring programs will be developed to determine the effectiveness of the park’s management practices, and identify visitor needs (Conservation and Land Management, 1994).

The trail surface soil was very rocky and gravelly for the first half of the 7km section. Further along, towards the centre of the park, the trail surface soil became sandier and less rocky. At the start of the trail there was a large infestation of the weed Watsonia, which extended significantly beyond the trail corridor. There were very steep slopes, particularly along the sections which were also used for management access (Fig 13a). The steepest slope was measured at 26 degrees. Towards the centre of the park the trail became more level. The width varied, ranging from a maximum of 4.2m at the beginning of the trail (Fig. 13a), to a minimum of 2.5m (Fig 13c).

Trail management features observed were: water bars, signage, trail hardening, and water culverts. Water culverts used for creek crossings were well maintained, with horse riders unable to reach the water. Signs and water bars to divert water off the trail were in good condition.

Assessment of trail condition and management A summary of trail condition indicators and management features is shown in tables 4 and 5 respectively. Approximately four per cent of the trail was affected by incisions, with an average depth of 10cm. The deepest were more than 15cm. This is related to the frequency of slopes and their steepness along the assessed segment of trail.

14


7°15°

d)

e)

a)

b)

11°

13°

c)

Figure 13: Map of John Forrest National Park bridle trail showing location of signage, slopes, weed communities, and changes in trail surface substrate. Photo (a): One of the steepest slopes on the trail.

Photo (b): Rocky and gravelly surface; Photo (c): A more level section of the trail. Photo (d): A Watsonia infestation. Photo (e): Signage used on the trail.

15


Table 4: Summary table of condition indicators for John Forrest Bridle Trail

Length of trail (km) 7

General description Fire access tracks and multi-use trails through natural bushland.

Trail surface soil Rocky gravelly soils; sandy

Vegetation Native species, extensive weed coverage e.g. Watsonia


Number of slopes > 5° 16

% of trail affected by incisions 4.09

Average incision depth (cm) 10.2

Trail bifurcations 8

% of trail with water crossing 0.17

Figure 14: Examples of incisions along the trail

16


Table 5: Summary table of John Forrest Bridle Trail management features and their condition

Condition Management feature

Good Poor

Water bars 18 3

Signage 6 0

Bridge 1 0

Although three of the water barriers were degraded and in need of maintenance, overall, the condition of trail management features was good. Of the signs that were in place, all were in good condition. However, in some sections signs were missing or were needed (Fig.15). On the management access trails in particular, the surface was found to be uneven and rocky and in need of resurfacing to maintain safe travelling conditions.

Figure 15: Sign missing from the John Forrest Bridle Trail

Rowley Road Bridle Trail The Rowley Road Bridle Trail is located in Darling Downs within a network of trails bordered by Thomas Road, Rowley Road and Hopkinson Road. It is a council reserve managed by the Shire of Serpentine and Jarrahdale. The trail is approximately 7km and runs off the local trotting circuit, which is provided for harness-racing riders. It is used heavily by local horse riders and harness racers. The trail has been designed specifically for horse use and works as a safe passageway from the local residences to the trotting circuit and as a small trail around the local area for recreational rides. The trail can be accessed from seven entry points, either from other circuits which intersect the trail, or from the surrounding roads (Fig. 16). The trail is used by horse riders, walkers and harness riders but there is currently no data regarding numbers.

17


Figure 16: Map showing the course of Rowley Road Bridle Trail (blue dashes)

Although there is no management plan available, the trail is managed and maintained by the shire of

Serpentine-Jarrahdale and the local bridle trail committee. The committee members meet regularly to remove weeds, repair trail damage and generally monitor the condition of the trail (Darling Downs Management Committee 2008).

The surface of the trail is constructed from trotting fines (metal dust) so that it can be used all year round (Fig 17a). The only section of the trail without this surface is along Rowley Road where the road verge is used (Fig. 17d).

18


a) c) b)

Figure 17: Map of Rowley Road Bridle Trail with signage, entry points and use of the road verge indicated. Photo (a): The track made with trotting fines, and the gate to reach Rowley Road. Photo (b): The trail passes behind residential land. Photo (c): A sign indicating the two circuit routes. Photo (d): Rowley Road, which has no crossing or fenced area for riders. Photo (e): Hitching rails at the parking

area at the start of the trail.

d) e)

19


Vegetation consisted mostly of weeds and some hardy exotic species, as the trail passes behind residential gardens and fields, which are a common source of weed species such as Watsonia and Ehrharta (Fig. 17b). There were no slopes - the bridle trail is located in a flat area of landscape.

The trail was relatively wide along its entire length, with a maximum width of 5m and a minimum of 2.8m. There is no formal crossing point at Rowley Road, and no fence along the verge to act as a barrier to the road. Due to the volume of traffic, the section of trail on the road verge is not often used, except to access safer sections of the trail. Few management features were needed due to the good design of the trail, which followed well-drained and flat areas. Features recorded were: signage, trail surface management and a bridge over a small creek. The signage is in good condition and directs riders to different sections of the trail network. The trail surface material - trotting fines - prevents degradation of the trail surface and enables the trail to be used all year. A bridge built to cross the creek and prevent horse riders gaining access to the water and damaging the banks is in good condition (Fig. 18).

Figure 18: Bridge over the creek along the course of the trail.

Assessment of trail condition and management A summary of trail condition indicators and management features is shown in tables 6 and 7 respectively. There were no slopes greater than five degrees, incisions were not present and there was no surface water on the trail. While the management measures were mostly in good condition, there were a couple of areas in need of signage or where the signage may have been removed or lost. For example there is no sign at a point of bifurcation (Fig. 19), and there is no sign to indicate that horse riders are re-entering the trail from Rowley Road, and no formal gateway (Fig. 20).

Table 6: Summary of the trail condition indicators for Rowley Road Bridle Trail

Length of the trail (km) 6.99

General description Residential area and roadside.

Trail surface soil Trotting fines (metal dust)

Vegetation Trail backs on to residential gardens, some weeds alongside road verge.


Number of slopes Nil

% of trail affected by incisions Nil

Frequency of incision depth (cm) N/A

Trail bifurcations 7

Water crossing trail Nil

20


Table 7: Summary of the management features and their condition observed along Rowley Road Bridle Trail

Condition Management feature

Good Poor

Water culverts 2 0

Entry points 4 1

Signage 2 0

Bridge 1 0

Figure 19: Which way? Lack of signage on the trail Figure 20: The re-entry onto the trail from Rowley Road is not marked in any way

21


Chapter 5

DISCUSSION

The quantitative data, such as incision measurements, was analysed in tandem with the qualitative data, such as descriptive observations. The case studies were compared with each other and with the literature to evaluate the effectiveness of the management techniques and assess their sustainability.

Similarities and Differences between the Trails The results of the rapid assessment of the three trails have revealed similarities and differences in trail condition and management. For ease of comparison, the trail condition indicators for the three case studies have been combined into one table (Table 8). The John Forrest Bridle Trail and the Gosnells Bridle Trail both have sections which are not designed specifically for horse riding. Both use fire access or management tracks for sections of the trail, resulting in trails which are not properly designed for recreational use. Both have steep slopes which increase susceptibility to erosion by increasing the velocity of water movement along the trail, which leads to the formation of the deep incisions (Scherrer et al. 2008). John Forrest Bridle Trail had three slopes of more than 10 degrees within the first half of the trail, with incisions well over 5cm deep. Gosnells also had a high number of slopes greater than five degrees contributing to the risk of erosion, as evidenced by 9 per cent of the trail being affected by incisions at least 15cm deep. It is likely that the trail incisions and overall damage to the trail in these areas is due to the poor location and design of the trail rather than to horse use. On the John Forrest trail in particular there was little evidence of horse use in these steep areas. Muddy soils and erosion are primarily a result of poor locations of the trail. Muddy soils and erosion are primarily a result of poor location of the trail through wet soils or up or down steep slopes. This is clearly demonstrated on both the Gosnells and John Forrest trails. The Rowley Road Bridle Trail, which has been designed specifically for horse riders, has no steep slopes or incisions. John Forrest and Gosnells both have rocky lateritic surface soils, which are more subject to erosion. Rowley Road’s surface substrate of trotting fines protects it well from damage.

Table 8: Comparison table of trail condition indicators for all three case studies

Trail Name Gosnells Bridle Trail John Forrest Bridle Trail Rowley Road Bridle Trail

Length of trail (km) 7 7 6.99

General description Residential area. Fire

access tracks, paddock boundaries, road reserves

Fire access tracks and multi-use trails through

natural bushland

Residential area and roadside

Soil surface Mostly rocky lateritic gravels, some sandy

sections

Rocky gravelly soils, sandy sections Trotting fines (metal dust)

Vegetation Weed infestation e.g. Watsonia

Native species, extensive weed coverage e.g.

Watsonia

Trail backs on to residential gardens, some weeds alongside road verge

Average trail width (m) 3.2 3.05 3.68

Number of slopes > 5° 12 16 Nil

% of trail affected by incisions 9.06 4.09 Nil

Average incision depth (cm) 11.8 10.2 N/A

Number of trail bifurcations 5 8 7

% of trail with water crossing 1.62 0.17 Nil

22


The trails are similar in width – all an average of three to four metres. This is consistent with trail design conventions which specify that trails should be wide and clear to ensure the safety of the riders (Marion & Leung 2004). There is little additional widening as a result of riders making alternative routes around problem areas.

All of the trails had weed communities, with significant Watsonia infestations along the John Forrest and Gosnells bridle trails. Rowley Road had fewer weeds due to the annual spraying program by the council and the weeding activities of the local bridle trail committee. John Forrest National Park also had a weed strategy in place which was yet to be implemented along the bridle trail.

John Forrest and Rowley Road had the same scores for condition and effectiveness of management features. Ninety per cent of management features, such as water bars, signage, and water culverts, were in good condition and functioning well. This indicates that both trails are well managed and maintained. This is a result of the management plan and management staff at John Forrest National Park and the bridle trail committee and shire council at Rowley Road. Conversely, more than half of the management features on the Gosnells Bridle Trail were in poor condition with about one-third not functioning. For example, several of the water bars were no longer diverting water from the trail. These results suggest that the techniques put in place by the council to manage erosion are ineffective and or poorly maintained. In Western Australia, Mende and Newsome (2006) and Randall and Newsome (2008) found trail management and ongoing maintenance to be critical in reducing trail degradation and ensuring sustainable trail conditions.

Gosnells Bridle Trail had considerably more water on the trail and crossing the trail than the John Forrest and Rowley Road. Two of the worst trail problems - soil erosion and muddiness - are caused by water on the trail, with surface run-off accelerating erosion rates (Newsome et al. 2008; Marion & Leung 2004). This indicates the need for drainage and maintenance of the water bars, to intercept and drain water from the trail treads.

The trails all have a different management framework. John Forrest Bridle Trail has a formal management plan with goals and action points written by the Department of Environment and Conservation, and Rowley Road is managed by the Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale and a bridle trail committee. Gosnells bridle trail is managed by Gosnells Shire Council but does not seem to have a formal management plan, despite a recommendation for one in the feasibility plan. This may explain why its management compares less favourably with the other two trails. Measures to combat unapproved use would also appear to be less effective at the Gosnells trail, where several trail bikes were seen using the trail and bike tracks were found along the course of the trail.

Sustainable Trail Management Sustainable management of a trail involves:

• good planning; • design and construction which takes account of recreational use and the landscape characteristics; • regular maintenance and monitoring (Marion & Leung 2004).

As the three trails had already been constructed and had a history of use, recommendations revolve around

maintenance and future monitoring. However, where trail degradation is taking place it may be necessary to divert sections of badly designed trail or increase the management of a trail segment to ensure that the condition of the trail remains stable. Recommendations for the management of the three trails are presented in Table 9. Management strategies to reduce the risk of unapproved usage of trails (by trail bikes, for example) might include signage, policing and penalties.

23


Table 9: Recommendations for all three bridle trails to improve sustainable trail management

Trail Management Reasoning Recommendations Gosnells Bridle Trail Unsustainable Poor trail design

Lack of maintenance leading to degradation. Unapproved use of the trail.

Relocation of sections of the trail to remain on the contour of the slope. Maintenance and repair of management features. Establishment of drainage. Trail surface hardening. Establishment of a regular weeding strategy. Establishment of a monitoring program.

John Forrest Bridle Trail

Sustainable Despite steep slopes and resulting incisions the trail is managed and maintained, particularly in multi-use areas.

Reconsider use of management tracks as the bride trails. Establishment of a monitoring program.

Rowley Road Bridle Trail

Sustainable Trail is designed for horse use. Well managed and maintained by the council and the community.

Reconsider use of Rowley Road verge. Traffic volume means it is only used to access the trail. Establishment of a monitoring program.

A program designed to monitor the effectiveness of management techniques and trail condition would enable managers to identify areas in need of repair and tackle degradation issues. Table 10 shows a hypothetical monitoring program with associated key performance indicators. Assessment against these indicators would give a good indication of the condition of a trail and the effectiveness of management strategies. The information provided by the monitoring program would document changes to the trail over time, enabling managers to tailor management actions to segments of a trail which are particularly vulnerable to erosion.

Table 10: Suggested bridle trail monitoring program with key performance indicators

Objective Evaluate the effectiveness of management techniques on trails and to provide data on how the condition of the trail changes over time.

Key Performance Indicators

Environmental: Vegetation community, trail surface soil, slope (degrees) Degradation: Depth and lineal extent of incisions, trail width, exposed roots, trail proliferation Management Features: bridges, signs, water bars, and hitching posts.

Methods Length of trail measured using a trail wheel. Trail problem assessment method to document the data.

Analysis Comparative analysis to baseline data and set standards, such as minimal lineal extent of trail incisions and control of water on trail surface.

Management Actions Inform managers of any management techniques which are ineffective or are in need of maintenance, allowing staff to improve the management features or to change the management strategy. Identification of degraded sections of trail will enable managers to focus and maintain the problem section.

Source: Randall and Newsome (2008); Leung and Marion (1999).

24


Chapter 6

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusion The literature indicate that horse-riding activity in natural areas can lead to negative biophysical impacts, such as loss of vegetation, trail widening, spread of weeds and plant disease, and increased erosion. There are also social impacts, such as potential conflicts between different user groups.

Because little is known about bridle trail management in peri-urban settings, this study investigated the condition and management of three trails (Rowley Road Bridle Trail, Gosnells Bridle Trail, John Forrest Bridle Trail) less than an hour’s drive from Perth. The trail in the best condition was Rowley Road, since it is specially designated for horse-riding and is built on flat terrain. Gosnells Bridle Trail had significant erosion problems, whilst John Forrest Bridle Trail was well managed but its condition compromised by the fact that sections of the trail were originally designed as management access tracks and not designed for recreational activity.

Lack of management and maintenance has led to trail degradation at Gosnells and John Forrest, highlighting the importance of sustainable trail management. Gosnells was found to be unsustainable due to poor design and lack of maintenance. John Forrest was considered sustainable despite trail incisions along some sections of the trail. This was because management features were found to be effective and the overall condition of the trail was good. Rowley Road was by far the best example of sustainable trail management of the three case studies.

Recommendations The main recommendations to improve the sustainable management of the trails studied and for other bridle trails in the future are outlined below.

Gosnells Bridle Trail: • Relocation of problem sections of the trail such as those that are routed through muddy soils or up

slopes. • Refurbishment and repair of degraded management features. • Establishment of drainage along the trail. • Hardening of the trail surface to reduce the effect of erosion. • The design of a monitoring program to highlight areas in need of maintenance.

John Forrest Bridle Trail: • Relocation of the sections of the bridle trail located on management or fire access tracks to more level

areas.

Rowley Road Bridle Trail: • Relocation of the section of the bridle trail along Rowley Road so that the road verge is not part of the

trail.

Future bridle trails: • where reserve integrity is an important consideration trails to be preferentially located on the periphery

of reserves, for example along fire management tracks; • purpose-built to suit the characteristics of the location (e.g. flat areas or situated on-contour with

appropriate slope alignment angle where there is steep ground, wider trails designed for horse riders, use of trail hardening material);

• management of trail impacts or degradation problems (e.g. management of erosion); • use of a monitoring program and key performance indicators (such as trail surface soils, slope degrees,

incision depths, and management features) to identify management issues and sections in need of maintenance;

• use of a targeted maintenance program to repair any problem sections and to prevent degradation;

25


• community involvement of local horse riders to maintain and manage the trail (similar to the committee involved with the Rowley Road Bridle Trail).

Further Work A survey of recreational use of trails would provide visitor number data on the investigated trails. A complete census of the trails would provide the baseline data required to enable accurate comparison and to record trail condition change over time. Further development and trailing of standards for the key performance indicators such as identified in this study would enable managers to make a quick and reliable judgment on the condition of a trail and its management features.

The nature and extent of illegal/inappropriate trail use also needs to be assessed along with an exploration of suitable strategies to manage non-bonafide trail users such as off-road vehicles and trail bikes.

26


APPENDIX A: GUIDE USED FOR ASSESSING THE CONDITION OF MANAGEMENT FEATURES

Management Features Condition Rating

Entry points Good: Well signed, cavaletti gates intact, clear entry point. Average: Poorly signed, cavaletti gates intact but poorly maintained. Poor: No signage, cavaletti gates broken or rotted away, entry point overgrown.

Water Bars Good: Water bar is intact with no degradation from recreational use or erosion. Diverts water from the trail. Average: Some degradation of the water bar but still effective. Poor: Water bar severely degraded, no longer diverts water from the trail, vegetation growing on the water bar.

Signage Good: Undamaged, good placement, self explanatory. Average: Slightly damaged through weathering but still readable, poorly placed for horse riders (below their eye level). Poor: Not present, unreadable, confusing.

Hitching Post Good: Intact, safe to tie horses to. Poor: Damaged and unsafe.

Bridge Good: Well maintained, prevents horse riders from reaching the water, safe to use. Average: Mild degradation of the construction material. Poor: Unsafe, severely degraded.

27

A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF HORSE RIDING AND ITS MANAGEMENT IN A PERI-URBAN SETTING REFERENCES Beavis, S. (2000) ‘Horse Riding in Canberra Nature Park’, consultancy report to the ACT Equestrian

Association Inc. and Duntroon Paddocks Landcare Group, Water Research Foundation of Australia, ANU, Canberra.

Beeton, S. (1999) ‘Hoofing it- On Four or Two Feet? Managing Multi-Use Trails and Sites’, Current Issues in

Tourism 2: 211-225. Cater, C., Buckley, R., Hales, R., Newsome, D., Pickering, C. and Smith, A. J., (2008) High-impact activities in

parks: Best practice management and future research. Technical Report. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. The Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.

Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism ST (2008) ‘Methods and Indicators for Assessing Walking

Tracks’, Fact Sheet Series. . Cole, D. N. & Spildie, D. R., (1998) ‘Hiker, Horse and Llama Trampling Effects on Native Vegetation in

Montana, USA’, Journal of Environmental Management. 53: 61-71. Cresswell, J.W. (1994) The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process,

Allen and Unwin, NSW. Cubit, S. (1990) ‘Horse Riding in National Parks: Some Critical Issues’, Australian Parks and Recreation 26 (4):

24-28. Darling Downs Management Committee and Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahadale (2008) ‘Bridle Trails in the

Serpentine-Jarrahdale Shire & the Peel Region’, Brochure No.1. Davies, O. (2004) ‘Managing Recreation in Peri-Urban Nature Reserves: The Case of Bold Park’, Honours

Thesis, School of Environmental Science, Murdoch University, Western Australia. Davies, C. and Newsome, D. (2008) Assessing the impact of mountain bike activity in John Forrest National

Park, Western Australia. Technical Report. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. The Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.

Department of Environment and Conservation. (2008) ‘John Forrest National Park’, viewed 14 October 2008,

http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/hotproperty/property/national-parks/john-forrest-national-park.html. Dehring, J. F. & Mazzatti, J. F. (1997) ‘Impacts of Equestrian Trails on Natural Areas’, WEC-I22, Wildlife

Ecology and Conservation Department, Florida; Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida.

Denscombe, M. (1998) The Good Research Guide for Small Scale Social Research Projects. Open University

Press, Buckingham.

Conservation and Land Management ( Department of) (1987) ‘Forrestdale Lake Nature Reserve Management Plan 1987-1992’, No.2, Perth, Western Australia.

Conservation and Land Management (Department of) & National Parks and Nature Conservation Authority

(1994) ‘John Forrest National Park Management Plan 1994-2004’, No.26, Perth, Western Australia. Gosnells City Council (2008) ‘Welcome to our city’, viewed 14 October 2008,

http://www.gosnells.wa.gov.au/scripts/viewarticle.asp?NID=130. Accessed 14.10.2008.

28

http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/hotproperty/property/national-parks/john-forrest-national-park.html

http://www.gosnells.wa.gov.au/scripts/viewarticle.asp?NID=130


Landsberg, J., Logan, B. & Shorthouse, D. (2001) ‘Horse Riding in Urban Conservation Areas: Reviewing

Scientific Evidence to Guide Management’, Ecological Management and Restoration, 2, (1): 36-46. Leung, Y.F. & Marion, J. L. (1999) ‘The Influence of Sampling Interval on the Accuracy of Trail Impact

Assessment’, Landscape and Urban Planning. 43: 167-169. Marion, J. L. & Leung,Y. (2004) ‘Environmentally Sustainable Trail Management’ in: Buckley R. (Ed.).

Environment Impacts of Ecotourism,.CABI International, New York. pp 229-243. Maher Brampton and Associates (1998) ‘Gosnells Bridle Trail Feasibility Report: Assessment, Design and

Costing’. Mende, P. & Newsome, D. (2006) ‘The Assessment, Monitoring, and Management of Hiking Trails: A Case

Study from the Stirling Range National Park, Western Australia’, Conservation Science W.Aust. 5 (3): 285-295.

Newsome, D., Phillips, N., Milewskii, A. & Annear, R., (2002a) ‘Effects of Horse Riding on National Parks and

Other Natural Ecosystems in Australia: Implications for Management’, Journal of Ecotourism, 1, (1): 52-74.

Newsome, D., Moore, S., & Dowling, R., (2002b) Natural Area Tourism: Ecology, Impacts and Management,

Channel View Publications, Clevedon, UK. Newsome, D., Cole, D.N. & Marion, J.L. (2004) ‘Environmental Impacts Associated with Recreational Horse

Riding’ in: Buckley R. (ed.). Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism. CABI International, New York, pp. 61-82.

Newsome, D., Smith, A. & Moore, S. (2008) Horse Riding in Protected Areas: A Critical Review and

Implications for Research and Management, Current Issues in Tourism, 11, (2): 144-166. Newsome, D. and Davies, C. (2009) A case study in estimating the area of informal trail development and

associated impacts caused by mountain bike activity in John Forrest National Park, Western Australia. Journal of Ecotourism 8: 237-253.

Page, S.J. & Dowling, R.K. (2002) Ecotourism, Prentice-Hall, Harlow, England. Phillips, N. & Newsome, D. (2002) ‘Understanding the Impacts of Recreation in Australian Protected Areas:

Quantifying Damage Caused by Those Riding in D’Entrecasteaux National Park, Western Australia’, Pacific Conservation Biology, 7, (4): 255-275

Pickering, C., Hill, W., Newsome, D. & Leung, Y. (2010) ‘Comparing hiking, mountain biking and horse riding

impacts on vegetation and soils in Australia and the United State of America’, Journal of Environmental Management, 91: 551-562

Randall, M. & Newsome, D. (2008) ‘Assessment, evaluation and a comparison of planned and unplanned walk

trails in coastal south-western Australia’, Conservation Science Western Australia 7: 19-34. Royce, P. (1983) ‘Horse Riding Trails in John Forrest National Park: An Environmental Assessment’, National

Parks Authority: Perth. Serpentine and Jarrahdale Shire (2008) ‘Parks Tracks and Trails’, viewed 14 October 2008,

http://www.sjshire.wa.gov.au/template.asp?Main=aboutsj&Parent=parkstracksandtrails.

29

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V5X-4BBVVV8-4&_user=917906&_coverDate=09%2F30%2F2004&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1268431102&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000047999&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=917906&md5=4bd4455e380a8ccd0a8429317cbf1585#bbib17

http://www.sjshire.wa.gov.au/template.asp?Main=aboutsj&Parent=parkstracksandtrails

A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF HORSE RIDING AND ITS MANAGEMENT IN A PERI-URBAN SETTING Scherrer, P., Smith, A. & Dowling, R. (2008) ‘Tourism and the Kimberley Coastal Waterways Environmental

and Cultural Aspects of Expedition Cruising’, CRC for Sustainable Tourism report. Sun, D. & Walsh, D. (1998) ‘Review of Studies on Environmental Impacts of Recreation and Tourism in

Australia’, Journal of Environmental Management 53: 323-338. Upitis A. I. (1980) ‘An integrated study of tracks in Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park with implications for

management’, BSc (Hons) Thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney. Vollbon, T. (1990) ‘Horse Riding in National Parks: A Management View’, Australian Parks and Recreation 26

(4): 45-47. Weaver, T. & Dale, D. (1978) ‘Trampling Effects of Hikers, Motorcycles and Horses in Meadows and Forests’,

Journal of Applied Ecology 15: 451-457. Whinam, J. & Comfort, M. (1996) ‘The Impact of Commercial Horse Riding on Sub-Alpine Environments at

Cradle Mountain, Tasmania, Australia’, Journal of Environmental Management 47 (1): 61-70. Worboys, G.L., Lockwood, M. & De Lacy, T. (2005) Protected Area Management: Principles and Practice,

Oxford University Press, South Melbourne, Australia.

30


31

AUTHORS

Eloise Abbott Eloise Abbott has a Master of Science in Environmental Science from Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia. This project was completed as part of that degree.

Assoc. Prof. David Newsome Dr Newsome is an Associate Professor in the School of Environmental Science at Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia. His teaching and research interests span many areas of natural area tourism including wildlife tourism, the biophysical impacts of recreation in protected areas, evaluation of the quality of ecotourism operations, sustainable trail management and geotourism. David has coordinated several significant research projects for the Australian Government funded Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre including projects relating to understanding the importance of wildlife icons, investigating the nature of impact creep and the development of a wildlife tourism auditing framework.

Significant publications include the books Natural Area Tourism: ecology, impacts and management and Wildlife Tourism. He is co-editor of Geotourism, a book that has set the scene for the emergence of geotourism as a distinct discipline within the area of natural area tourism. He played a key role in setting the agenda and content for the Inaugural Global Geotourism Conference in Australia in 2008. Recently David has co-edited two more books Geotourism: the tourism of geology and landscape and Global Geotourism Perspectives. These books define and inform the direction of geotourism research and development in a global context well into the future.

David is also a member of the Conservation Commission of Western Australia and in that role chairs the Commission’s National Park Management Planning Committee. He is also a member of the Shark Bay advisory Committee and Coral Coast Advisory Committee in Western Australia. He sits on the Queensland Government Horse Trails Scientific Advisory Committee and is a member of the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas. David has experience of ecotourism development in Southeast Asia and was an invited speaker and advisor at the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity Regional Training on Ecotourism Workshop for Protected Area Managers in Malaysia in 2009. He is on the Editorial Boards of the Journal of Ecotourism and Tourism in Marine Environments. Email: [email protected]

Dr Sarah Palmer Dr Sarah Palmer has a PhD in Sociology from Murdoch University, Western Australia. She is employed part-time as a lecturer and research associate at Murdoch University. Her research interests are in rural and environmental sociology, public understanding of science, social dimensions of agricultural and natural resource management and qualitative research methods. Email: [email protected]

COMMERCIALISE

RESEARCHAND

DEVELOPMENT

EDUCATIONAND

TRAINING

UTILISE

COLLABORATION

COM

MU

NI C A T I O N

I NN

OV

ATI

ON

• Travel and tourism industry• Academic researchers• Government policy makers

• New products, services and technologies• Uptake of research finding by business, government and academe• Improved business productivity• Industry-ready post-graduate students• Public good benefits for tourism destinations

I N D U S T R Y P A R T N E R S U N I V E R S I T Y P A R T N E R S C O M M E R C I A L I S A T I O N

TOURISM NT NORTHERN TERRITORYAUSTRALIA

EC3, a wholly-owned subsidiary company, takes the outcomes from the relevant STCRC research; develops them for market; and delivers them to industry as products and services. EC3 delivers significant benefits to the STCRC through the provision of a wide range of business services both nationally and internationally.

K E Y E C 3 P R O D U C T S

Chairman: Stephen GreggChief Executive: Ian KeanDirector of Research: Prof. David Simmons

CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty LtdGold Coast Campus Griffith University Queensland 4222 Australia ABN 53 077 407 286

Telephone: +61 7 5552 8172 Facsimile: +61 7 5552 8171Website: www.crctourism.com.auBookshop: www.crctourism.com.au/bookshopEmail: [email protected]

2009_Tech report Cover 26.6.09.indd 2 23/11/2009 10:45:21 AM

Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre (STCRC) is established under the Australian Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program.

STCRC is the world’s leading scientific institution delivering research to support the sustainability of travel and tourism—one of the world’s largest and fastest growing industries.

IntroductionSTCRC has grown to be the largest dedicated tourism research organisation in the world, with $187 million invested in tourism research programs, commercialisation and education since 1997.

STCRC was established in July 2003 under the Commonwealth Government’s CRC program and is an extension of the previous Tourism CRC, which operated from 1997 to 2003.

Role and responsibilitiesThe Commonwealth CRC program aims to turn research outcomes into successful new products, services and technologies. This enables Australian industries to be more efficient, productive and competitive.

The program emphasises collaboration between businesses and researchers to maximise the benefits of research through utilisation, commercialisation and technology transfer.

An education component focuses on producing graduates with skills relevant to industry needs.

STCRC’s objectives are to enhance:the contribution of long-term scientific and • technological research and innovation to Australia’s sustainable economic and social development;

the transfer of research outputs into • outcomes of economic, environmental or social benefit to Australia;

the value of graduate researchers to • Australia;

collaboration among researchers, • between searchers and industry or other users; and

efficiency in the use of intellectual and • other research outcomes.

a case study analysis of horse riding and its … · 2018. 10. 29. · title: a case study analysis...

Documents